Jason Peters vs Andre Smith

[dave mcbride]

Well, no argument there. I just don't see Peters as a resounding answer to the question that some people do, not after last year.

 

 

 

 

I really think Beatty from UConn would be a solid pick there at RT. Andre Smith terrifies me as a huge potential bust. Langston Walker proved he can play LT. People are making this position out to be impossible - it's not. It's important, but it's not impossible. Walker got a 5/$25M deal for a reason; the guy can play.

 

 

 

 

You're citing the Cleveland game??? Cleveland was tied for 30th in sacks last year!!

 

 

 

 

That doesn't make any sense at all. That's not even apples and oranges, that's apples and t-bone steaks. All WR's drop passes. The more you get thrown the more you drop. There's a reason elite WR's always lead the league in drops. Elite tackles NEVER lead the league in sacks. They have the opportunity to give up a sack every play; the same cannot be said for WR's. There's a reason you'll never see CJ Hawthorne lead the league in drops.

 

 

 

 

Hmm...you could sign three Matt Lights. Right now I'd take one over Peters.

I noted that some receivers drop more than others. Yes, they all drop some; some just happen to drop more than others and are therefore more "inconsistent" (which is ultimately everyone's beef with Peters). Some have higher drop percentagas too -- Donald Driver probably drops far fewer than Braylon Edwards percentage wise, but there aren't many teams whold take Driver over Edwards. Brett Favre threw a higher percentage of INTs than Jeff Garcia and far more than McNabb. Who is the better QB? As for the Cleveland game, I mentioned it because it was on national television and players watched it. I watched every game pretty closely last year, and in at least half the games - both Jets' games (please don't expect him to pick up a blitzing safety; watch the run blocking instead), the SD game, the Browns game, the Arizona game, the Niners' game, the Dolphins games (look to Peters' right if you want to start assigning sacks), the Chiefs game, and the first NE game - he was their best lineman. If you can name anyone who played better in any of those games, by all means go for it.

 

btw, I'm not sure why you think Walker can play LT. He looked bad at it last year, and with another year he'll be even slower than he is now. He'd be a disaster.

[Trader]

http://www.buffalorumblings.com/

 

I'm not into college football, but I do watch the draft to see who we get. How good is Andre Smith and would he available at the #11 spot?

 

IMO, DE should be top priority, but if we trade Peters, then LT is just as important.

 

No thanks I will take the Britton kid though. Gil Brandt thinks he is good enough to go in the top half of the draft

[Trader]

It is also universally known that the dirtiest word in all of Professional Sports, the word that gets more coaches and GMs fired than any other, is POTENTIAL.

 

Potential doesnt mean squat. A wise green man once said "Do, or do not."

 

You don't pay players based on what they may POTENTIALLY become. He is either a top LT, or he isn't. And given the fact that this whole saga was brought on by Peters' camp over his performance in ONE season, then based on LAST season he OWES us money.

 

Exactly

[Beerball]

No thanks I will take the Britton kid though. Gil Brandt thinks he is good enough to go in the top half of the draft

I didn't realize the Bills had talked to him. Did he visit OBD?

 

link

[Magox]

It is also universally known that the dirtiest word in all of Professional Sports, the word that gets more coaches and GMs fired than any other, is POTENTIAL.

 

Potential doesnt mean squat. A wise green man once said "Do, or do not."

 

You don't pay players based on what they may POTENTIALLY become. He is either a top LT, or he isn't. And given the fact that this whole saga was brought on by Peters' camp over his performance in ONE season, then based on LAST season he OWES us money.

Potential is a precursor for success if evaluated correctly.

 

That is not to say that you don't consider work ethic, intelligence and character. But let's be real here, the NFL is a league of massive sized, athletically gifted players. Peters is just that and has shown that he can do the job, not just ONE season as you incorrectly stated, but he has given us high level Tackle play for 2 1/2 years. I find it funny how people seem to conveniently forget his 1 1/2 years at RT before he became LT and seem to discount it as if it never happened.

 

So yes, POTENTIAL is important, but what is even more important is that he has Realized his potential more often then not, and the only year he didn't was the hold out year. Gee I wonder if that had anything to do with it?

 

I'd much rather take my chances with Peters then a Rookie who has never played the game at the next level and the only thing we can go by is his POTENTIAL that he showed in college.

[spartacus]

I noted that some receivers drop more than others. Yes, they all drop some; some just happen to drop more than others and are therefore more "inconsistent" (which is ultimately everyone's beef with Peters). Some have higher drop percentagas too -- Donald Driver probably drops far fewer than Braylon Edwards percentage wise, but there aren't many teams whold take Driver over Edwards. Brett Favre threw a higher percentage of INTs than Jeff Garcia and far more than McNabb. Who is the better QB? As for the Cleveland game, I mentioned it because it was on national television and players watched it. I watched every game pretty closely last year, and in at least half the games - both Jets' games (please don't expect him to pick up a blitzing safety; watch the run blocking instead), the SD game, the Browns game, the Arizona game, the Niners' game, the Dolphins games (look to Peters' right if you want to start assigning sacks), the Chiefs game, and the first NE game - he was their best lineman. If you can name anyone who played better in any of those games, by all means go for it.

 

btw, I'm not sure why you think Walker can play LT. He looked bad at it last year, and with another year he'll be even slower than he is now. He'd be a disaster.

 

Walker can't pass block effectively on the right side against inferior DEs, without continuous TE help.

 

He should be playing G

[The Dean]

It is also universally known that the dirtiest word in all of Professional Sports, the word that gets more coaches and GMs fired than any other, is POTENTIAL.

 

Potential doesnt mean squat. A wise green man once said "Do, or do not."

 

You don't pay players based on what they may POTENTIALLY become.

 

 

Except, of course, for the fact that EVERY draft pick is paid on potential. The next Mike Williams will make more than Jason Peters.

 

 

He is either a top LT, or he isn't. And given the fact that this whole saga was brought on by Peters' camp over his performance in ONE season, then based on LAST season he OWES us money.

 

 

Sounds good, other that the fact that it is bulls#it. Peters has overproduced EVERY season, except for last year.

 

As an UDFA TE, who was considered a major project, with major talent, Peters actually saw action in five games that season, and started one. UDFA's get cut, or are put on the PS, as a rule. The very fact that Peters contributed anything in his rookie season has to count as achievement.

 

In 2005, Peters went from being a UDFA to a regular contributor, starting 10 games, playing in 16 and making some of the better ST hits I have seen in my life.

 

By 2006, Peters was probably the best Offensive Lineman on the Bills. Peters became the Bills starting LT because he earned it, by producing wherever he was asked to play.

 

In 2007, Peters had a spectacular year at LT. Nobody disputes that, at least nobody with any credibility.

 

Only in 2008, did Peters have a down year. This after missing all of TC and preseason.

 

One would have to be chugging Skooby's stupid juice to assert that Peters only produced for one season. And, anyone who can't understand why his performance might not have been at it's best last year, isn't really trying.

 

Peters is far more than "potential". He is a proven producer.

[The Big Cat]

Peters is far more than "potential". He is a proven producer.

 

You're right, he caught JP's first professional TD.

 

Proven producer? As a football player, yes. As a LT, not so much. He has proven he can produce, sure. But in 2008 he also proved he has the potential to NOT produce.

 

He is a proven producer/non-producer.

[The Dean]

You're right, he caught JP's first professional TD.

 

Proven producer? As a football player, yes. As a LT, not so much. He has proven he can produce, sure. But in 2008 he also proved he has the potential to NOT produce.

 

He is a proven producer/non-producer.

 

Which of these things is not like the other, which of these things doesn't belong:

 

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2004

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2005

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2006

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2007

 

Didn't attend TC and didn't play in Preseason and didn't produce (at a high level) in 2008.

 

Even Big Bird would be able to see the only time Peters didn't produce, is when he held out. Trying to make any point that he might not produce, based on that year, is simply silly, if you assume he comes to TC and plays in the Preseason.

 

As far as showing he couldn't produce, one year. One could say that about any player that had a sub-par season, due to injury. I understand your position from a negotiating point of view...but, you honestly believe that clap-trap you post?

 

It is absurd to conclude Peters only had one good year for the Bills...it is wrong. He proved he had the talent to play LT in 2007...that's not potential, and it isn't a guess. He did it. Last year he showed, that like many players, if he doesn't attend the camp and games in the summer, his play suffers. Wow...what a discovery.

[The Big Cat]

Which of these things is not like the other, which of these things doesn't belong:

 

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2004

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2005

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2006

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2007

 

Didn't attend TC and didn't play in Preseason and didn't produce (at a high level) in 2008.

 

Even Big Bird would be able to see the only time Peters didn't produce, is when he held out. Trying to make any point that he might not produce, based on that year, is simply silly, if you assume he comes to TC and plays in the Preseason.

 

As far as showing he couldn't produce, one year. One could say that about any player that had a sub-par season, due to injury. I understand your position from a negotiating point of view...but, you honestly believe that clap-trap you post?

 

It is absurd to conclude Peters only had one good year for the Bills...it is wrong. He proved he had the talent to play LT in 2007...that's not potential, and it isn't a guess. He did it. Last year he showed, that like many players, if he doesn't attend the camp and games in the summer, his play suffers. Wow...what a discovery.

 

Do I believe it? No. I don't buy my own implication that 2007 was somehow a fluke. And until workouts begin, this conversation is moot. BUT, if it was my job to make the case against Peters, I would argue that paying Peters based on elite LT contracts is a gamble given the odds him being good/bad at the position are 50/50 (as he has thusly proven).

 

That's what I'd insist UNTIL Peters shows up to work out. At that point, he gets the benefit of the doubt, and let's dance. If we make it all the way to day 1 of TC, and still no Peters, suddenly his good/bad odds slip to 33/67, and I have no qualms of letting the f-cker rot. That's right, I rounded to benefit my point.

[Guest dog14787]

Which of these things is not like the other, which of these things doesn't belong:

 

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2004

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2005

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2006

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2007

 

Didn't attend TC and didn't play in Preseason and didn't produce (at a high level) in 2008.

 

Even Big Bird would be able to see the only time Peters didn't produce, is when he held out. Trying to make any point that he might not produce, based on that year, is simply silly, if you assume he comes to TC and plays in the Preseason.

 

As far as showing he couldn't produce, one year. One could say that about any player that had a sub-par season, due to injury. I understand your position from a negotiating point of view...but, you honestly believe that clap-trap you post?

 

It is absurd to conclude Peters only had one good year for the Bills...it is wrong. He proved he had the talent to play LT in 2007...that's not potential, and it isn't a guess. He did it. Last year he showed, that like many players, if he doesn't attend the camp and games in the summer, his play suffers. Wow...what a discovery.

 

 

but its a what have you done for me lately world that /non producing fool is living in

[DrDawkinstein]

Do I believe it? No. I don't buy my own implication that 2007 was somehow a fluke. And until workouts begin, this conversation is moot. BUT, if it was my job to make the case against Peters, I would argue that paying Peters based on elite LT contracts is a gamble given the odds him being good/bad at the position are 50/50 (as he has thusly proven).

 

That's what I'd insist UNTIL Peters shows up to work out. At that point, he gets the benefit of the doubt, and let's dance. If we make it all the way to day 1 of TC, and still no Peters, suddenly his good/bad odds slip to 33/67, and I have no qualms of letting the f-cker rot. That's right, I rounded to benefit my point.

 

couldnt have said it better myself. (obviously not since ive said a lot in here, and not as well )

[Alphadawg7]

Which of these things is not like the other, which of these things doesn't belong:

 

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2004

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2005

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2006

Attended TC and played in Preseason and produced in 2007

 

Didn't attend TC and didn't play in Preseason and didn't produce (at a high level) in 2008.

 

Even Big Bird would be able to see the only time Peters didn't produce, is when he held out. Trying to make any point that he might not produce, based on that year, is simply silly, if you assume he comes to TC and plays in the Preseason.

 

As far as showing he couldn't produce, one year. One could say that about any player that had a sub-par season, due to injury. I understand your position from a negotiating point of view...but, you honestly believe that clap-trap you post?

 

It is absurd to conclude Peters only had one good year for the Bills...it is wrong. He proved he had the talent to play LT in 2007...that's not potential, and it isn't a guess. He did it. Last year he showed, that like many players, if he doesn't attend the camp and games in the summer, his play suffers. Wow...what a discovery.

 

Hey Dean, the problem I have with your post here is this...the ONLY year he produced at a level worthy of the contract he wants was in 2007. In all the others years, he didnt produce at a level even worth HALF the contract he wants. The debate here is not about whether he has talent or not, its whether he is worth what he wants. My problem with JP is this:

 

1. He went about getting a new contract in a horrible fashion and forced the FO into a standoff (which they handled 100% correctly.

2. While he was pouting about his contract (that was one year old), he cut off communication and didnt stay in shape. What that tells me is that he cared ONLY about the money and could care less if he was in shape to LIVE UP to that contract once he got it.

3. Because he wasted the entire off season and didnt work out hard on his own to be fully prepared for the season, his play suffered. Thats is NOT the fault of the FO or any of his teammates, that falls squarely on his shoulders and is NO excuse. He is a professional, and his body is his payday. HE, and only HE squandered his argument at that pay day.

4. Now, after showing that only the money mattered even at the expense of his own performance, he wants even more money after putting up a terrible year. That is ludicris.

5. He should realize, he played his way OUT of that monster contract and now can either take the very good raise the FO is offering currently, or play this next season full out and earn that big contract back.

 

The hold out is just an excuse...I played football through college and I have seen many players miss most of the offseason because of injuries and come in during the season and get back to top form within a couple games. As a professional athlete, there is NO excuse for not being able to put it together after a few games especially for one that has spent his whole career with that team. He struggled all season. So the "missed traing camp and preseason" factor became irrelevant by the third or fourth game back. Payton Manning missed all preseason and TC and was pedestrian to start the season, but found his groove shortly into the season. Thats what ELITE players do, Peters did not...period.

 

So, there are big question marks on whether his level of play will be able to be that of 2007 or more like one of the other 4 years he has played...and with all the clear indications that money is all that matters, there is a big question mark about how motivated he will be after he gets the contract of his dreams and a monster pay day.

 

Just my two cents...

[The Dean]

Hey Dean, the problem I have with your post here is this...the ONLY year he produced at a level worthy of the contract he wants was in 2007.

 

 

Which is one more year that any OL in this draft and more than Jake Long had played before his giant contract, etc. As I said, no matter what Peters eventually gets, the next Mike Williams will make more, coming out of college.

 

1. He went about getting a new contract in a horrible fashion and forced the FO into a standoff (which they handled 100% correctly.

2. While he was pouting about his contract (that was one year old), he cut off communication and didnt stay in shape. What that tells me is that he cared ONLY about the money and could care less if he was in shape to LIVE UP to that contract once he got it.

3. Because he wasted the entire off season and didnt work out hard on his own to be fully prepared for the season, his play suffered. Thats is NOT the fault of the FO or any of his teammates, that falls squarely on his shoulders and is NO excuse. He is a professional, and his body is his payday. HE, and only HE squandered his argument at that pay day.

4. Now, after showing that only the money mattered even at the expense of his own performance, he wants even more money after putting up a terrible year. That is ludicris.

5. He should realize, he played his way OUT of that monster contract and now can either take the very good raise the FO is offering currently, or play this next season full out and earn that big contract back.

 

There is no question he has caused some of his own trouble. The question I have is, do you REALLY believe that, with a full summer of work, he will play more like he did in 2007 or more like he did in 2008? Honestly?

 

I think most of the BS being thrown around here is based on fans being pissed-off at Peters for what he did, and for hurting the team. They would like to see him suffer, a bit. But, you know what? I don't really give one rat's ass about Peters...I care about the Bills. And Peters suffering does nothing to help the team,

 

Do you think the Head Coaches and the Defensive and Offensive Coordinators around the league believe that Peters might really be the player he was in 2008? IMO, they have totally written off last year, when evaluating Peters, as a player. The GMs may be concerned about his tactics, and whether he will hold out again, in a couple of years...but nobody is questioning this guys ability to play LT at a high level.

 

The only people who can lose here, are the Bills and Peters. Both sides have managed to make a bit of a clusterfu#k of the situation. But, this is an easy situation to settle, if you leave ego out of it. It may mean Peters is overpaid for a year, or two. But, if he is, he will come and he will play. You know how I can say that with such confidence? When paid appropriately to his job, he always has. Maybe he holds out again, after two years, when his $11 Million contract looks like a bargain, compared to what other top LTs make. I'd take that risk.

 

Obviously, the Bills think Peters is a first-rate LT, or they wouldn't be offering him $8 Million, as a starting point in the negotiation. Why would they offer a contract like that, to a guy they aren't convinced is a first-rate player? Nobody is doubting Peters as a player.

 

Of course, the Bills could pay an unknown rookie more than Peters made the last two years combined. Then, if he turns out to be good, they can let that guy walk, because he'll want $15 Million+ to re-sign. Maybe then they will be bad enough, in a few years, to pick in the top 5, and they can pay another rookie LT $10 Million, or more.

 

Now, I don't think much happens until after the draft. I think both sides are playing a high-wire game of negotiation. Both have things to gain, or lose, based on the draft, if no contract is signed, or trade made, before then.

 

-Peters want to see the contracts signed by the top OL draft picks. It''s possible his demands go up, after the draft.

 

-If Peters gets traded on, or after draft day, he will certainly get the huge contract he is asking for. Unfortunately, the Bills probably won't get great trade value for him.

 

-If the teams likely to be most interested in Peters select OTs in the draft, his trade value diminishes, and he might get stuck with the Bills, as they may not pull the trigger on a bad trade.

 

-If the Bills draft a LT early, Peters may get doubly screwed, should the Bills simply allow him to hold out, rather than take a bad trade.

 

I know some of those may overlap a little, and this post a little more scattered than usual, but it's late and I need to go to bed. My point is, either (or both) sides could gain, or get hurt badly, depending on how the draft plays out. It seems both sides are willing to let it play out, though.

 

The best thing for both sides, is to get the deal done, and get to work.

[Guest dog14787]

Which is one more year that any OL in this draft and more than Jake Long had played before his giant contract, etc. As I said, no matter what Peters eventually gets, the next Mike Williams will make more, coming out of college.

 

 

 

There is no question he has caused some of his own trouble. The question I have is, do you REALLY believe that, with a full summer of work, he will play more like he did in 2007 or more like he did in 2008? Honestly?

 

I think most of the BS being thrown around here is based on fans being pissed-off at Peters for what he did, and for hurting the team. They would like to see him suffer, a bit. But, you know what? I don't really give one rat's ass about Peters...I care about the Bills. And Peters suffering does nothing to help the team,

 

Do you think the Head Coaches and the Defensive and Offensive Coordinators around the league believe that Peters might really be the player he was in 2008? IMO, they have totally written off last year, when evaluating Peters, as a player. The GMs may be concerned about his tactics, and whether he will hold out again, in a couple of years...but nobody is questioning this guys ability to play LT at a high level.

 

The only people who can lose here, are the Bills and Peters. Both sides have managed to make a bit of a clusterfu#k of the situation. But, this is an easy situation to settle, if you leave ego out of it. It may mean Peters is overpaid for a year, or two. But, if he is, he will come and he will play. You know how I can say that with such confidence? When paid appropriately to his job, he always has. Maybe he holds out again, after two years, when his $11 Million contract looks like a bargain, compared to what other top LTs make. I'd take that risk.

 

Obviously, the Bills think Peters is a first-rate LT, or they wouldn't be offering him $8 Million, as a starting point in the negotiation. Why would they offer a contract like that, to a guy they aren't convinced is a first-rate player? Nobody is doubting Peters as a player.

 

Of course, the Bills could pay an unknown rookie more than Peters made the last two years combined. Then, if he turns out to be good, they can let that guy walk, because he'll want $15 Million+ to re-sign. Maybe then they will be bad enough, in a few years, to pick in the top 5, and they can pay another rookie LT $10 Million, or more.

 

Now, I don't think much happens until after the draft. I think both sides are playing a high-wire game of negotiation. Both have things to gain, or lose, based on the draft, if no contract is signed, or trade made, before then.

 

-Peters want to see the contracts signed by the top OL draft picks. It''s possible his demands go up, after the draft.

 

-If Peters gets traded on, or after draft day, he will certainly get the huge contract he is asking for. Unfortunately, the Bills probably won't get great trade value for him.

 

-If the teams likely to be most interested in Peters select OTs in the draft, his trade value diminishes, and he might get stuck with the Bills, as they may not pull the trigger on a bad trade.

 

-If the Bills draft a LT early, Peters may get doubly screwed, should the Bills simply allow him to hold out, rather than take a bad trade.

 

I know some of those may overlap a little, and this post a little more scattered than usual, but it's late and I need to go to bed. My point is, either (or both) sides could gain, or get hurt badly, depending on how the draft plays out. It seems both sides are willing to let it play out, though.

 

The best thing for both sides, is to get the deal done, and get to work.

 

 

 

You are right of course, if we don't sign Jason Peters we all lose.

[Alphadawg7]

Which is one more year that any OL in this draft and more than Jake Long had played before his giant contract, etc. As I said, no matter what Peters eventually gets, the next Mike Williams will make more, coming out of college.

 

 

 

There is no question he has caused some of his own trouble. The question I have is, do you REALLY believe that, with a full summer of work, he will play more like he did in 2007 or more like he did in 2008? Honestly?

 

I think most of the BS being thrown around here is based on fans being pissed-off at Peters for what he did, and for hurting the team. They would like to see him suffer, a bit. But, you know what? I don't really give one rat's ass about Peters...I care about the Bills. And Peters suffering does nothing to help the team,

 

Do you think the Head Coaches and the Defensive and Offensive Coordinators around the league believe that Peters might really be the player he was in 2008? IMO, they have totally written off last year, when evaluating Peters, as a player. The GMs may be concerned about his tactics, and whether he will hold out again, in a couple of years...but nobody is questioning this guys ability to play LT at a high level.

 

The only people who can lose here, are the Bills and Peters. Both sides have managed to make a bit of a clusterfu#k of the situation. But, this is an easy situation to settle, if you leave ego out of it. It may mean Peters is overpaid for a year, or two. But, if he is, he will come and he will play. You know how I can say that with such confidence? When paid appropriately to his job, he always has. Maybe he holds out again, after two years, when his $11 Million contract looks like a bargain, compared to what other top LTs make. I'd take that risk.

 

Obviously, the Bills think Peters is a first-rate LT, or they wouldn't be offering him $8 Million, as a starting point in the negotiation. Why would they offer a contract like that, to a guy they aren't convinced is a first-rate player? Nobody is doubting Peters as a player.

 

Of course, the Bills could pay an unknown rookie more than Peters made the last two years combined. Then, if he turns out to be good, they can let that guy walk, because he'll want $15 Million+ to re-sign. Maybe then they will be bad enough, in a few years, to pick in the top 5, and they can pay another rookie LT $10 Million, or more.

 

Now, I don't think much happens until after the draft. I think both sides are playing a high-wire game of negotiation. Both have things to gain, or lose, based on the draft, if no contract is signed, or trade made, before then.

 

-Peters want to see the contracts signed by the top OL draft picks. It''s possible his demands go up, after the draft.

 

-If Peters gets traded on, or after draft day, he will certainly get the huge contract he is asking for. Unfortunately, the Bills probably won't get great trade value for him.

 

-If the teams likely to be most interested in Peters select OTs in the draft, his trade value diminishes, and he might get stuck with the Bills, as they may not pull the trigger on a bad trade.

 

-If the Bills draft a LT early, Peters may get doubly screwed, should the Bills simply allow him to hold out, rather than take a bad trade.

 

I know some of those may overlap a little, and this post a little more scattered than usual, but it's late and I need to go to bed. My point is, either (or both) sides could gain, or get hurt badly, depending on how the draft plays out. It seems both sides are willing to let it play out, though.

 

The best thing for both sides, is to get the deal done, and get to work.

 

 

I agree with some of the stuff you write here, but where I think we are deferring is in one key area. My issue is not whether or not he has the talent to be at least a pretty good LT, but I seriously question if he has the mental make up to be an ELITE LT and worth the contract he wants.

 

I hear what you are saying about the fact he played well after his last contract, but you over look a very important fact...

 

He knew there was still a LOT more money to be made and was playing for that...the contract he signed was just a buffer to get to the bigger one, so he had a lot to play for. Once he gets this monster pay day, I have serious doubts if he will put in the work to remain at an Elite level...my proof is simple...last year when he sat out to get that monster contract, he chose to not work out on his own and be in the best shape he could be in so that way he could live up to the contract once he got it.

 

Further illustration of my concern: Lets say in Week 1, the Bills and Peters reach an agreement to make him the highest paid LT like he wanted. He STILL would have shown up in terrible shape and struggled all year. In fact, because he didnt get the contract he had even MORE to play for and still struggled. So, there is a lot more reason to worry he won't live up to it then to think he will...

[KollegeStudnet]

Andre Smith has mixed reviews from all 32 teams

 

One knock is he's to soft

 

Another knock is he takes plays off

 

For a big guy he can move the pile, but has had trouble against speed rushers

 

One team has expressed intrest in him is the 49ers...Smith needs a fire lit under his a$$ in order to play at the NFL level...Singletary could do just that...

 

 

Smith has the potential to be dominant...However, his pyshical attributes and attitude remind me of a former first round pick Mike Williams

[Magox]

Hey Dean, the problem I have with your post here is this...the ONLY year he produced at a level worthy of the contract he wants was in 2007. In all the others years, he didnt produce at a level even worth HALF the contract he wants. The debate here is not about whether he has talent or not, its whether he is worth what he wants. My problem with JP is this:

 

1. He went about getting a new contract in a horrible fashion and forced the FO into a standoff (which they handled 100% correctly.

2. While he was pouting about his contract (that was one year old), he cut off communication and didnt stay in shape. What that tells me is that he cared ONLY about the money and could care less if he was in shape to LIVE UP to that contract once he got it.

3. Because he wasted the entire off season and didnt work out hard on his own to be fully prepared for the season, his play suffered. Thats is NOT the fault of the FO or any of his teammates, that falls squarely on his shoulders and is NO excuse. He is a professional, and his body is his payday. HE, and only HE squandered his argument at that pay day.

4. Now, after showing that only the money mattered even at the expense of his own performance, he wants even more money after putting up a terrible year. That is ludicris.

5. He should realize, he played his way OUT of that monster contract and now can either take the very good raise the FO is offering currently, or play this next season full out and earn that big contract back.

The hold out is just an excuse...I played football through college and I have seen many players miss most of the offseason because of injuries and come in during the season and get back to top form within a couple games. As a professional athlete, there is NO excuse for not being able to put it together after a few games especially for one that has spent his whole career with that team. He struggled all season. So the "missed traing camp and preseason" factor became irrelevant by the third or fourth game back. Payton Manning missed all preseason and TC and was pedestrian to start the season, but found his groove shortly into the season. Thats what ELITE players do, Peters did not...period.

 

So, there are big question marks on whether his level of play will be able to be that of 2007 or more like one of the other 4 years he has played...and with all the clear indications that money is all that matters, there is a big question mark about how motivated he will be after he gets the contract of his dreams and a monster pay day.

 

Just my two cents...

I'm not sure if I follow what you are saying "like one of the other 4 years he has played". Other than 2008 he has outperformed during the other years. Right?

 

Also, about the issues you have with 1-5, you have a point, other than #2, everything I read was that he came in to the season in good shape but not game shape. Regardless, we can debate that point, it seems pretty obvious to me that the solution is you pay him.

 

You question his motivation after he gets payed the monster contract, well I think that is a legitimate concern, but the same questions were asked about Haynesworth this year. It's a risk that some teams are faced to make. I'd much rather take that risk with a player who we know that can do the job, now it's just a matter of him doing it. I'm not as skeptical as many of you, He's had 2 1/2 years of good tackle play and 1 not so good.

 

I think our chances of having a good LT are much higher with Peters than drafting an unknown out of college.

[Alphadawg7]

I'm not sure if I follow what you are saying "like one of the other 4 years he has played". Other than 2008 he has outperformed during the other years. Right?

 

Also, about the issues you have with 1-5, you have a point, other than #2, everything I read was that he came in to the season in good shape but not game shape. Regardless, we can debate that point, it seems pretty obvious to me that the solution is you pay him.

 

You question his motivation after he gets payed the monster contract, well I think that is a legitimate concern, but the same questions were asked about Haynesworth this year. It's a risk that some teams are faced to make. I'd much rather take that risk with a player who we know that can do the job, now it's just a matter of him doing it. I'm not as skeptical as many of you, He's had 2 1/2 years of good tackle play and 1 not so good.

 

I think our chances of having a good LT are much higher with Peters than drafting an unknown out of college.

 

Let me correct what you wrote that I highlighted in Bold:

 

"He had 1 1/2 years of solid tackle play, 1 great year, and 1 terrible year...in that order"....

 

See my argument is not that his isnt capable of good play, my question is he going to be ELITE because thats what he wants to be paid at. I dont have a problem giving him a raise, I just have a problem giving a guy a raise to the top paid at his position when in his 5 year career he has played at that level just once, and its not even his most recent year.

 

The fact he reported is such bad condition after trying to become the top paid LT in the game tells me he didnt care if he lived up to the contract (if he would have gotten it), he just wanted the contract. So, I dont see how paying him changes that because if we paid him last year he still would have been in just as terrible shape...I just have a problem with a guy wanting to be paid as the best at his position who played (statistically) amongst the worst at his position, especially after showing up here so out of shape last year while trying to get the biggest contract last year.

 

I dont want to lose him, but honestly, I cant see us paying him what he wants, nor do I think we should. I would tell him this...go out and play this year like he did in 2007, and if he does, we will make him the highest paid LT by the end of the year. Or he can take a raise to 8.5 million now...his choice...

 

And for the record, he did this to himself...

[Mr. WEO]

Yes, Peters is known as an overproducer.

 

As for comparing what he wants with what some kid got as the #1 or #2 pick in the draft---what is your point?

 

The top pick is always going to get far more than they deserve and more than anyone else than at the same position----he is being paid the going rate for a top draft pick. There's nothing Peters can do about that.