MadBuffaloDisease Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 As far as Travis Henry is concerned, my information is that the Bills want the compensation in a trade for him to be conditional. My information is they want the compensation to be upgraded to a second-round pick if Henry achieves a designated level of production. I think that's the stumbling block in a trade to Jacksonville. A second-round pick starts to get a little pricey. I have no problem with a third-round pick. As far as I'm concerned, if the price is a third-round pick, pull the trigger.--Jaguars.com Like I've been saying, it should be a 3rd that conditionally becomes a 2nd or higher, at least as far as the Jags are concerned. They'll be a good team, and Taylor likely won't be healthy for most of the season, so they'll need Travis a lot, and the 3rd rounder would probably be a late one. As for the Titans, Travis won't help them as much as they need, so a 3rd would be fine. IMHO. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/scor....nfl/index.html
ch19079 Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Like I've been saying, it should be a 3rd that conditionally becomes a 2nd or higher, at least as far as the Jags are concerned. They'll be a good team, and Taylor likely won't be healthy for most of the season, so they'll need Travis a lot, and the 3rd rounder would probably be a late one. As for the Titans, Travis won't help them as much as they need, so a 3rd would be fine. IMHO. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/scor....nfl/index.html 376690[/snapback] i liek the 3rd that could be a 2nd. but im sure the requierments for it to become a 2nd round pick would be set at a point that Henry would have to be the starter all season to achieve. 1300 yards im guessing.
brihs2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Who knows if it will actually happen, but is TD trying to accumulate picks to try and swap a first with someone and pick up a tackle early in the draft?
Pete Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 but Travis has zero trade value according to BillNYC and VABills
Bear Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 376709[/snapback] Still thinking about those Shelton predictions?
SouthernMan Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Like I've been saying, it should be a 3rd that conditionally becomes a 2nd or higher, at least as far as the Jags are concerned. They'll be a good team, and Taylor likely won't be healthy for most of the season, so they'll need Travis a lot, and the 3rd rounder would probably be a late one. As for the Titans, Travis won't help them as much as they need, so a 3rd would be fine. IMHO. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/scor....nfl/index.html 376690[/snapback] The major hurdle with a TH trade or anyone in his stage of contractual obligation is that a team is reluctant to give up very much for what, under current conditions, amounts to a one year player. If he should get hurt a season ending injury in training camp or early on, the team would have given up a pick or other compensation and gotten a whole lot of nothing in return. A second rounder is a bit of a steep price for this kind of gamble. If he were contractually bound for 2 or 3 years, at least they'd have a chance to recoup some value, even if there was a major injury. If a contract extension could be excuted concurently with a trade, mayber the Bills would have a chance to get something better than a 3rd rounder in the next draft. Right now, that's not a bad value for a player who will be a free agent next year.
smokinandjokin Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 The major hurdle with a TH trade or anyone in his stage of contractual obligation is that a team is reluctant to give up very much for what, under current conditions, amounts to a one year player. If he should get hurt a season ending injury in training camp or early on, the team would have given up a pick or other compensation and gotten a whole lot of nothing in return. A second rounder is a bit of a steep price for this kind of gamble. If he were contractually bound for 2 or 3 years, at least they'd have a chance to recoup some value, even if there was a major injury. If a contract extension could be excuted concurently with a trade, mayber the Bills would have a chance to get something better than a 3rd rounder in the next draft. Right now, that's not a bad value for a player who will be a free agent next year. 376781[/snapback] The only way a trade goes through is if the team receiving Henry signs him to a long term (3+ years) contract. There will be nobody trading for him without first signing him to an extension.
Typical TBD Guy Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Here's what I think would be fair for both parties, the Bills and the other team: Trade Henry for a 4th next year, which can conditionally escalate to either a 3rd (if Henry leads his team in rushing) or a 2nd (if Henry rushes for over 1,000 yds) or a 1st (if Henry makes the Pro Bowl). I'm especially interested to see what VABills and Bill from NYC have to say on such a trade. If Henry is as bad as they say, and if all other 31 GM's agree with these two, one still has to admit that losing a 4th rounder in next year's draft (a draft pick that couldn't contribute to THIS season) is a perfectly acceptable risk for a team that may be very desperate to replace an injured starting RB in August/September (and that may not be able to afford more expensive RB's like James or Alexander).
OBXBILLSFAN Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Travis was a 2nd round pick, a two time 1300+ yard runner, and a warrior. I think a conditional 2nd rounder is a fair asking price. If we can't get it, we should keep him as an excellent backup and insurance policy for WM. I think the whole disgruntled, clubhouse cancer thing is about as overrated as Michael Vick, particularly when it concerns a guy who is not a team leader. Who on the Bills is going to care if he is unhappy?
/dev/null Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 I think the whole disgruntled, clubhouse cancer thing is about as overrated as Michael Vick, particularly when it concerns a guy who is not a team leader. Who on the Bills is going to care if he is unhappy? 376820[/snapback] Travis being a clubhouse cancer is one thing. But Vick's presence in the locker room brings another disease :doh:
Ron Mexico Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Vick's presence in the locker room brings another disease :doh: 376862[/snapback] Hey! I resemble that remark!
UConn James Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Who knows if it will actually happen, but is TD trying to accumulate picks to try and swap a first with someone and pick up a tackle early in the draft? 376722[/snapback] I think Jim McNally showed this year that he doesn't need the big name prospects to mold a good player. If JM wanted a highly rated OT in the 2nd or 3rd, I think TD would've gotten him one instead of nabbing a WR and TE. I also think TD knew beforehand and learned even more from the MW pick that picking high up in the draft doesn't guarantee a single thing other than that you'll be paying up the nose for someone who's got a 1/3 chance of being any good as a pro.
FTW_BillsFan Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Still thinking about those Shelton predictions? 376735[/snapback] TD just throws that stuff out there so we have something to talk about over the offseason. What a good man he is.
LabattBlue Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Travis was a 2nd round pick, a two time 1300+ yard runner, and a warrior. I think a conditional 2nd rounder is a fair asking price. 376820[/snapback] Where a player was drafted is irrelevant in regard to determining his worth in a trade.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Who knows if it will actually happen, but is TD trying to accumulate picks to try and swap a first with someone and pick up a tackle early in the draft? 376722[/snapback] Well if this is the case. Next year is the year to take a ot such as D'brickashaw ferguson, Eric Winston, Jonathan Scott, Marcus McNeill, Andrew Whitworth, jeremy trueblood
Buftex Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Travis was a 2nd round pick, a two time 1300+ yard runner, and a warrior. I think a conditional 2nd rounder is a fair asking price. If we can't get it, we should keep him as an excellent backup and insurance policy for WM. I think the whole disgruntled, clubhouse cancer thing is about as overrated as Michael Vick, particularly when it concerns a guy who is not a team leader. Who on the Bills is going to care if he is unhappy? 376820[/snapback] Ditto! Why should we get less than we paid (a second round pick), for a player that has been very productive. His value, if anything, should rise, not diminish, all defference to Bill in NYC, and VA BILLS. Unless the Bills are positive that Rashard Lee (who I really think was a terrific pick up!) is ready to step in should McGahee go down, I don't see that keeping Henry around for another year, if we can't get what we should, would ultimately hurt anything. If Henry is pissed and does not report, he won't be around to be a "lockerroom cancer" as so many "in the know" seem to insist he is. If he reports, he will be ready to play. His attitude isn't going to hold this team back. Our coaching staff is too good to let that happen.
bobblehead Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Here's what I think would be fair for both parties, the Bills and the other team: Trade Henry for a 4th next year, which can conditionally escalate to either a 3rd (if Henry leads his team in rushing) or a 2nd (if Henry rushes for over 1,000 yds) or a 1st (if Henry makes the Pro Bowl). I'm especially interested to see what VABills and Bill from NYC have to say on such a trade. If Henry is as bad as they say, and if all other 31 GM's agree with these two, one still has to admit that losing a 4th rounder in next year's draft (a draft pick that couldn't contribute to THIS season) is a perfectly acceptable risk for a team that may be very desperate to replace an injured starting RB in August/September (and that may not be able to afford more expensive RB's like James or Alexander). 376819[/snapback] I would cut the 1st/pro bowl option out of it, but the rest sounds reasonable. It's funny to think that I read on this board a while back that someone thought we should give up a draft pick as well just so someone would take Henry from us.
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 Ditto! Why should we get less than we paid (a second round pick), for a player that has been very productive. His value, if anything, should rise, not diminish, all defference to Bill in NYC, and VA BILLS. Unless the Bills are positive that Rashard Lee (who I really think was a terrific pick up!) is ready to step in should McGahee go down, I don't see that keeping Henry around for another year, if we can't get what we should, would ultimately hurt anything. If Henry is pissed and does not report, he won't be around to be a "lockerroom cancer" as so many "in the know" seem to insist he is. If he reports, he will be ready to play. His attitude isn't going to hold this team back. Our coaching staff is too good to let that happen. 376929[/snapback] Because trade value is determined by the market you are trading in and not the market when the player was selected. Add to that a player is traded or selected based on an estimation of what he can or can't do and that estimation changes from person to person and in reality as the college game is not the pro game and as players get mileage, it is perfectly reasonable that a player commands more or less today than was spent to acquire him earlier. I see little logic in people feeling that there is some static immutable value a player has which can be expressed in the round of a particular draft pick. Rven with the simple discounting due to time which compares one year's draft pick to another year's pick level, A 5th roung pick in one year at one position may have no relationship in terms of value to a 5th round pick in another year, or a 5th round pick at a different position in the same year.
stuckincincy Posted July 7, 2005 Posted July 7, 2005 If the trigger is pulled, hope they have a plan "B". A rookie and a youngster as the rb back-up's is less than heartening. Unless the FB corps will strike fear into the opposition..
Recommended Posts