krazykat Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 Which one would you trade? Which team would you trade with? What would you want in return? When? Now, or after the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted July 19, 2008 Share Posted July 19, 2008 When? Now, or after the season. Now is after the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 What do you suppose Hardy would get you? Evans has value, Hardy not so much. So, yes, I would trade Evans before Hardy in this hopothetical world we're living in. Ah, ok, you were basing it mostly on what kind of return you could get for them. Thats understandable then. I was thinking of it more on who is the most expendable to the offence Going by what you could get in return Evans - you could get the most for, but they have no one yet who has shown they can take his spot. Its not like with moulds where he became expendable due to age and having Evans ready to play for the #1 spot Parrish - As a WR you could probably get a decent return cause he is still young with potential to be a playmaker with his speed, but it would be a tough sell to a team unless they feel they can maximise his potential. But factor in his value as a return man on ST's and he does have value out on the market. Hardy - He has yet to play a down, but could get a return because he was a high draft choice this year Reed - He is a decent 3rd/4th WR and is a tough player, but I don't know if he will ever amount to much more then that and would probably bring in very little in return Going by expendability Reed - Letting him go would hurt a little because he is good depth, but he is no way untouchable Parrish - As a WR he has potential, but has yet to show it. With the Bills drafting McKelvin and McGee still here, the Bills can afford to move one of their return guys on ST's Hardy - He has yet to prove anything in the NFL, so he is expendable, but only because he hasn't proved anything in the league yet Evans - with no solid proven depth behind him, and the bills still having question marks at #2 WR until Hardy shows something, they would be creating a huge hole on the Reciving corps by dealing away their #1 WR, and not having someone capable enough to step in and be the #1 guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 Ah, ok, you were basing it mostly on what kind of return you could get for them. Thats understandable then. I was thinking of it more on who is the most expendable to the offence Going by what you could get in return [ Reed - He is a decent 3rd/4th WR and is a tough player, but I don't know if he will ever amount to much more then that and would probably bring in very little in return Reed - Letting him go would hurt a little because he is good depth, but he is no way untouchable [. Reed is the Bills most consistent WR and best blocker. They would be stupid to let him go until Hardy proves over the course of a season that he is up to the challenge. Even if figures out how to beat the jam, run better patterns and pick up the hot reads on blitzes - he still can't block. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 Reed is the Bills most consistent WR and best blocker. They would be stupid to let him go until Hardy proves over the course of a season that he is up to the challenge. Even if figures out how to beat the jam, run better patterns and pick up the hot reads on blitzes - he still can't block. He might be consistent and the best blocker, but he is in no way irreplaceable if hypothetically, the Bills needed to trade away one of their top 4 WR's. Personally, I wouldn't deal him away (or any of the 4) because he does have value to the team, but out of the 4, he would bring the lowest return and out of the 4 has been given the most chances to move up and has not been able to secure himself a high spot then a #3/#4. Obviously they would be stupid to let any of their WR's go until Hardy proves he is up to the challenge over the course of the year, and even then, Hardy is already pretty much penciled in as the #2, above Reed on the depth chart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted July 21, 2008 Share Posted July 21, 2008 He might be consistent and the best blocker, but he is in no way irreplaceable if hypothetically, the Bills needed to trade away one of their top 4 WR's. Personally, I wouldn't deal him away (or any of the 4) because he does have value to the team, but out of the 4, he would bring the lowest return and out of the 4 has been given the most chances to move up and has not been able to secure himself a high spot then a #3/#4. Obviously they would be stupid to let any of their WR's go until Hardy proves he is up to the challenge over the course of the year, and even then, Hardy is already pretty much penciled in as the #2, above Reed on the depth chart. We will see. My bet is that Reed will be on the field more than Hardy in 2008. Hardy may start in game #1 to save face, but Reed will get significantly more snaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts