Should we trade Ed Oliver?

[SectionC3]

16 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That would be a bad move. Trading Oliver for picks in this draft makes no sense. None at all. 

 

If they trade him for a guy who can make a difference on offense now, immediately, I am here for it. Trading him for a pick in a garbage draft is nuts. I'd rather let him play out the year and take the comp pick later.

 

I didn't advocate for it. I think  you missed the point.  

 

There's a lot of interlocking issues with respect to Oliver (and everyone else on the roster, for that matter). If they want to move on from him for whatever reason, or if they think they can replace him in a different way (draft, FA) and use the value acquired from his departure to supplement a different position of need, then it does make sense.  What if they want to beef up at DT?  What if they want Poona Ford (they've been linked) at a price less than Oliver and and are willing to subtract Oliver to make that happen?  What if they want to reallocate Oliver's money and are willing to live with the consequences?  

 

So, respectfully, I disagree that trading Oliver for picks, even in this draft, could never make any sense.  I do not disagree that moving him for a pick or picks in this draft simply for the sake of moving him is a bad idea.  It all depends, however, on what happens in conjunction with any Oliver move, and what that move is designed to accomplish. 

15 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

He doesn't match the $10.7 million dollars his cap hit is this year.  You're pounding the sand for an above average player.  You are in the minority here.

 

Again, why are you just assuming we have no succession plan?  Our defense is going to cripple without an above average DT?

We have a bigger hole at WR and potentially the OL.    

 

I would rather not pay $10.7 million for a "viable" player who we won't resign to a long term extension.

 

What sounds better?  Oliver for Hopkins/Evans/Jeudy or keep Oliver, have him walk next year and get nothing.

What sounds better to you?  I honestly don't know.

 

It all depends on what the plan is to replace Oliver should he leave.  Bottom line.  That's it.  There's about $11m going to Oliver this year.  If they feel like they can use that $11m to pay a relatively comparable DT and add a weapon at a position of need (say, WR), then adios Ed.  His situation can't be viewed in a vacuum or in isolation.  

[Royale with Cheese]

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

It all depends on what the plan is to replace Oliver should he leave.  Bottom line.  That's it.  There's about $11m going to Oliver this year.  If they feel like they can use that $11m to pay a relatively comparable DT and add a weapon at a position of need (say, WR), then adios Ed.  His situation can't be viewed in a vacuum or in isolation.  

 

I agree.  It needs to be a player for player for me...a starter at WR or OL.  

[DCbillsfan]

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

 

It all depends on what the plan is to replace Oliver should he leave.  Bottom line.  That's it.  There's about $11m going to Oliver this year.  If they feel like they can use that $11m to pay a relatively comparable DT and add a weapon at a position of need (say, WR), then adios Ed.  His situation can't be viewed in a vacuum or in isolation.  

If I'm the Bills I'd be hesitant to trade Oliver without having his replacement on the roster.  If they were to draft a DT early, I could see them trading him and freeing up almost $11M for a quality free agent.

[Green Lightning]

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

Just now, DCbillsfan said:

If I'm the Bills I'd be hesitant to trade Oliver without having his replacement on the roster.  If they were to draft a DT early, I could see them trading him and freeing up almost $11M for a quality free agent.

 

I think it's time to move on. He's not producing $11 mil worth and will be gone next year with no compensation in FA.  He did play 62% of the snap counts, which I think is the most by our DL. So, to your point, it would be good to have a replacement lined up, but I still think the time to move on him is now.

[SCBills]

12 minutes ago, DCbillsfan said:

If I'm the Bills I'd be hesitant to trade Oliver without having his replacement on the roster.  If they were to draft a DT early, I could see them trading him and freeing up almost $11M for a quality free agent.

Talbot says there’s mutual interest with Poona Ford.  It’s just about money as it stands.  He could slot right into Oliver’s spot if he’s traded.  Settle rotates in.  Then we could draft a 1 tech on Day 2 to rotate in with Jones. 

Any way you slice it … imo, I’m moving him… if for nothing else, id rather take Oliver’s 10M and give it to someone like Frank Clark. 

[SectionC3]

53 minutes ago, DCbillsfan said:

If I'm the Bills I'd be hesitant to trade Oliver without having his replacement on the roster.  If they were to draft a DT early, I could see them trading him and freeing up almost $11M for a quality free agent.

I don’t disagree with you.  I’m not a proponent of shedding Oliver.  But I can see why the FO would do it if it feels the money can be better allocated. 

[ALF]

It's a contract year for Oliver , he saw what it did for Edmunds.

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

 

I didn't advocate for it. I think  you missed the point.  

 

There's a lot of interlocking issues with respect to Oliver (and everyone else on the roster, for that matter). If they want to move on from him for whatever reason, or if they think they can replace him in a different way (draft, FA) and use the value acquired from his departure to supplement a different position of need, then it does make sense.  What if they want to beef up at DT?  What if they want Poona Ford (they've been linked) at a price less than Oliver and and are willing to subtract Oliver to make that happen?  What if they want to reallocate Oliver's money and are willing to live with the consequences?  

 

So, respectfully, I disagree that trading Oliver for picks, even in this draft, could never make any sense.  I do not disagree that moving him for a pick or picks in this draft simply for the sake of moving him is a bad idea.  It all depends, however, on what happens in conjunction with any Oliver move, and what that move is designed to accomplish. 

 

 

Nope. It's just a bad idea. Selling a good starter on the cheap just to avoid paying salary makes no sense. You only do that with a player you have no use for. The only way I'd support it is if it is like the Sammy Watkins and Ronald Darby trades.... two moves made together (they traded a corner for a receiver and a pick at the same time as trading a receiver for a corner and a pick). If it was two moves made together where, for instance, we traded Ed Oliver to Atlanta for a 3rd round pick and then immediately flipped that 3rd round pick to Arizona for Hopkins - fine. But if they just trade him for a pick with the idea that they will be able to leverage that pick and then get stuck with it.... that's just an awful move. 

 

As for if they want to move on Ed in order to get Poona Ford... that falls in the "voluntarily making your team worse" bucket. And I'm not up for that. 

 

The only sensible way to trade Ed Oliver this offseason is part of a package for an offensive starter who can help you now. 

[SectionC3]

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Nope. It's just a bad idea. Selling a good starter on the cheap just to avoid paying salary makes no sense. You only do that with a player you have no use for. The only way I'd support it is if it is like the Sammy Watkins and Ronald Darby trades.... two moves made together (they traded a corner for a receiver and a pick at the same time as trading a receiver for a corner and a pick). If it was two moves made together where, for instance, we traded Ed Oliver to Atlanta for a 3rd round pick and then immediately flipped that 3rd round pick to Arizona for Hopkins - fine. But if they just trade him for a pick with the idea that they will be able to leverage that pick and then get stuck with it.... that's just an awful move. 

 

As for if they want to move on Ed in order to get Poona Ford... that falls in the "voluntarily making your team worse" bucket. And I'm not up for that. 

 

The only sensible way to trade Ed Oliver this offseason is part of a package for an offensive starter who can help you now. 

 

We don't disagree.  It's about how they view Ed internally, what the plan is for next year, whether he fits, and whether it's worth allocating his money to another place or places.  That's it.  I think the only place where we part ways is with respect to the issue whether it could make sense to move him for a pick or picks in this year's draft.  I can envision a scenario in which it may make sense (essentially, addition by subtraction and dumping his money to use at a different position or positions), and I think you may value Ed more than that.  

 

***

 

Agree with the bold, which has been my point all along.  

Edited March 23, 2023 by SectionC3

[Matt_In_NH]

22 minutes ago, ALF said:

It's a contract year for Oliver , he saw what it did for Edmunds.

This is the main reason to keep him.   If he is going to take a step, this is the year.  Trading him will benefit the cap but the return cannot be expected to be much.  Someone would have to really want him at that price.

[GunnerBill]

13 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

We don't disagree.  It's about how they view Ed internally, what the plan is for next year, whether he fits, and whether it's worth allocating his money to another place or places.  That's it.  I think the only place where we part ways is with respect to the issue whether it could make sense to move him for a pick or picks in this year's draft.  I can envision a scenario in which it may make sense (essentially, addition by subtraction and dumping his money to use at a different position or positions), and I think you may value Ed more than that.  

 

***

 

Agree with the bold, which has been my point all along.  

 

I do. There is NO world in which moving Ed Oliver for a draft pick in this bad draft is addition by subtraction. If the argument is you want to move him just to maximise cap space in case there is someone out there you want to bring in then they should have done that before free agency. To do it now and then simply hope you can swing a trade for someone on offense is bad strategy. 

[Solomon Grundy]

I'd like to say to trading Ed Oliver what the Rams said to their draft picks... 😎

[Motor26]

40 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

This is the main reason to keep him.   If he is going to take a step, this is the year.  Trading him will benefit the cap but the return cannot be expected to be much.  Someone would have to really want him at that price.

 

And when he walks for a potential Comp pick in 2025 after next season?

[SCBills]

40 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I do. There is NO world in which moving Ed Oliver for a draft pick in this bad draft is addition by subtraction. If the argument is you want to move him just to maximise cap space in case there is someone out there you want to bring in then they should have done that before free agency. To do it now and then simply hope you can swing a trade for someone on offense is bad strategy. 

 

Plenty of areas the Bills could use Oliver's 10M.

 

For one, there are still guys like Risner and Clark who I would love on this team.  

 

Two, schematically, if the plan truly is to roll with Bernard vs Dodson at MLB, we likely need bigger bodies at DT.  Undersized DT Oliver, with an undersized MLB in Bernard, on team that plays base Nickel is begging to get run on. 

[Matt_In_NH]

10 minutes ago, Motor26 said:

 

And when he walks for a potential Comp pick in 2025 after next season?

If he walks he walks......You want to commit huge dollars to him?  I dont

[SectionC3]

53 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I do. There is NO world in which moving Ed Oliver for a draft pick in this bad draft is addition by subtraction. If the argument is you want to move him just to maximise cap space in case there is someone out there you want to bring in then they should have done that before free agency. To do it now and then simply hope you can swing a trade for someone on offense is bad strategy. 

Nobody (well, at least not me) is saying that Oliver should be flipped on spec.  And, the maximization of cap space need not have been accomplished prior to free agency if Oliver’s cap space is allocated to a player acquired via trade.   So, I absolutely agree with you that trading a decent starter with no plan to replace said starter is a bad idea.  We seem to part ways with respect to the idea that Oliver could be moved to create the ability to roster a player at a different position (or, I suppose, even at the same position, although I’m not sure who that would be at this point in the offseason) who might help the team more than would Oliver.   

Edited March 23, 2023 by SectionC3

[GunnerBill]

10 minutes ago, SCBills said:

 

Plenty of areas the Bills could use Oliver's 10M.

 

For one, there are still guys like Risner and Clark who I would love on this team.  

 

Two, schematically, if the plan truly is to roll with Bernard vs Dodson at MLB, we likely need bigger bodies at DT.  Undersized DT Oliver, with an undersized MLB in Bernard, on team that plays base Nickel is begging to get run on. 

 

I mean Jordan Phillips is a bigger body than Ed Oliver. But there is zero doubt who is the superior run defender. It ain't Jordan. The question isn't "are there areas that the $10m can be used?" of course there are. The question is who are the guys that make the team legitimately better. Losing Ed to sign Dalton Risner does not. If you are losing Ed for a genuine offensive difference maker then it is a different conversation. 

[FireChans]

The last two pages have been a tour du force by @GunnerBill

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, ALF said:

It's a contract year for Oliver , he saw what it did for Edmunds.

This thinking has always been a tough one for me. Are you saying to keep him for this year because he’s bound to play better with a new contract on the line? I guess it’s a double edged sword. 

[GunnerBill]

13 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Nobody (well, at least not me) is saying that Oliver should be flipped on spec.  And, the maximization of cap space need not have been accomplished prior to free agency if Oliver’s cap space is allocated to a player acquired via trade.   So, I absolutely agree with you that trading a decent starter with no plan to replace said starter is a bad idea.  We seem to part ways with respect to the idea that Oliver could be moved to create the ability to roster a player at a different position (or, I suppose, even at the same position, although I’m not sure who that would be at this point in the offseason) who might help the team more than would Oliver.   

 

Not quite. If you can find a difference maker on offense I am all for trading Ed. What I am not for doing is trading him for a draft pick to dump salary and then scouting about trying to find a way to use that money. If they do it as two simultaneous deals, fine. But dumping Ed's salary for a draft pick in this draft just so you can use that salary on a trade for an offensive player is a) very risky and b) still equates to selling way to low on an asset. 

 

The sensible play is to try and use Ed as a pawn in a deal to get your offensive piece.