Jamie Nails Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 http://www.freep.com/article/20090228/SPORTS01/90228037/1048 it was a seventh rounder in 2010. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 I mentioned that in the other thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Nails Posted February 28, 2009 Author Share Posted February 28, 2009 my bad. so many darn threads to keep track off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Read Mark Gaughn's blog and everyone will realize this is a non-issue. Please move-on people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-Gun10 Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 A 7th rounder thats it i thought it was a 4th nevermind i dont care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Nails Posted February 28, 2009 Author Share Posted February 28, 2009 Please move-on people My sentiment exactly. The FO, although not overly active in FA thus far isn't as inept as people think. I still have faith that this will be a productive FA period that will fill a lot of gaps. Hope I'm right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC in St. Louis Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Right. I'm glad the guy is gone. And the Lions are the big losers. They wanted him, they stalled and lost him. They outbid the Skins and still managed to lose him. How many of us would turn down a deal that paid 3.5 million more than another. On the other hand, this shows that Dockery has no faith that he will play out the deal with the Skins. He'll probably be mediocre there, and after he collects all his signing bonus, sign elsewhere. He's a ding dong who is not worth the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 this was a last stab at something trade -- no way would we be shopping a guy and be willing to pay the roster bone, so our counterparties knew he would be available without a trade, so it would only be for small value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fewell733 Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 http://blogs.buffalonews.com/billboard/200...ls-on-dock.html February 28, 2009 No fault by Bills on Dock Here's the clarification on the potential trade of Derrick Dockery to Detroit that never came down. The Bills planned to release Dockery on Thursday. About two hours before the 4 p.m. deadline to make cuts, the Bills heard from Detroit, which was interested in acquiring Dockery. Talks ensued. Dockery was due a roster bonus at 12:01 a.m. Friday of $1.75 million. If the Bills were going to make a trade, Dockery would have to agree to push back the bonus and he would have to get a physical in Detroit and agree to the deal before it could be official. So the Bills would have to file paperwork to push back the roster bonus to the fifth day of the league year. That paperwork would have to be filed by 4 p.m. Talks between the Bills and Lions ensued and there was no deal as of 3:30 p.m. The Bills might have been able to acquire Jon Kitna, a league source reports, but the Bills already had targeted Ryan Fitzpatrick of the Bengals and wanted him instead. By the time the Bills and Lions finally came to an agreement on what they would deal in return for Dockery - it was a seventh-round pick in 2010 - it was within minutes of the 4 p.m. deadline, and the Bills determined that there was no way they could get all the paperwork required done in time to make it happen. The Bills filed the paperwork to release Dockery. They never even filed any of the paperwork required to push the bonus back five days. Dockery was free to pursue free agency, which he did. ---Mark Gaughan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 I hope the negative Nellies at least see this as Buffalo trying to make a deal no matter how slight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Funny how none of the "FO is a joke" posters are over here on this thread.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson from Gamehendge Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 This was smart...if they waited to trade him, they would have had to pay him a $1.75 million bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Right. I'm glad the guy is gone. And the Lions are the big losers. They wanted him, they stalled and lost him. Considering how bad Dockery is, the Lions ended-up winners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson from Gamehendge Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 is this true? i have not heard this anywhere! The Bills released Dockery not b/c he's a bad Guard but b/c their new line coach wants more Denver-esque types of O-linemen (smaller, quicker guys), Dockery is the big road grater type. Dockery was a player the Skins didn't want to let go but did b/c of the crazy contract Buffalo threw out there (amazing somebody out bid the skins, right?) and now he comes back knowing the system and wanting to be in DC. Thanks Buffalo for letting him go and thanks Detroit for not getting the deal done. -from a poster on nbcsports.com *langston walker, brad butler AND jason peters...ALL certainly don't fit the mold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My Friends Call Me Tebucky Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Uhh..yeah. It doesn't matter what the compensation was. Whether it was a 7th rounder in 2025 or a first round pick this March, they released a guy that another team would have traded for. They didn't touch all of their bases here. It's pretty simple. You release a player that has trade value, no matter how small or large it is, it's inept management of an asset. Darwin Walker, John McCargo, Derrick Dockery- three botched trades in 3 years. This is a trend and there's no excuse for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 is this true? i have not heard this anywhere! The Bills released Dockery not b/c he's a bad Guard but b/c their new line coach wants more Denver-esque types of O-linemen (smaller, quicker guys), Dockery is the big road grater type. Dockery was a player the Skins didn't want to let go but did b/c of the crazy contract Buffalo threw out there (amazing somebody out bid the skins, right?) and now he comes back knowing the system and wanting to be in DC. Thanks Buffalo for letting him go and thanks Detroit for not getting the deal done. -from a poster on nbcsports.com *langston walker, brad butler AND jason peters...ALL certainly don't fit the mold. Consider the source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Uhh..yeah. It doesn't matter what the compensation was. Whether it was a 7th rounder in 2025 or a first round pick this March, they released a guy that another team would have traded for. They didn't touch all of their bases here. It's pretty simple. You release a player that has trade value, no matter how small or large it is, it's inept management of an asset. Darwin Walker, John McCargo, Derrick Dockery- three botched trades in 3 years. This is a trend and there's no excuse for it. LOL! They didn't "botch" any of those trades, least of all the Walker trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 I'm glad the Bills are so good they can leave draft picks on the table- who knows maybe we won't pick at 11th when we let time expire for a while so we can pick 14th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cantstopbeastmode Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 Read Mark Gaughn's blog and everyone will realize this is a non-issue. Please move-on people Don't we all agree Steve Johnson is a player? I understand that 7th rounders might not have the most value, but even a minimal gain is a gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 1, 2009 Share Posted March 1, 2009 Now more comes out. This says it was the Bills that screwed up, and it would explain some of the earlier incongruous reports. It's really difficult, at this point, with ten different stories and reports, to know who exactly screwed up the most. BILLS, NOT LIONS, BLEW THE DOCKERY DEALPosted by Mike Florio: Saturday, February 28, 2009 5:41 PM Though it's easy to criticize the Lions (and fun, too) whenever something involving the team goes wrong, it's only fair to point out that, as it relates to the failed trade for former Bills (and now Redskins) guard Derrick Dockery, the Lions didn't screw it up. Our buddy Howard Balzer of The Sports Xchange explained the situation to us. To facilitate the trade, Dockery was going to delay by five days a $4.5 million roster bonus due on February 27, the first day of the 2009 league year. But the Bills failed to get the paperwork regarding the roster bonus -- not regarding the trade -- submitted by 4:00 p.m. EST on February 26. As we pointed out earlier, the trade couldn't have occurred until the next day at the earliest. If the roster bonus had been delayed by five days, then the two sides would have had ample time to get the trade accomplished. So, in this case, the Lions didn't screw the thing up. For a change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts