BillsNYC Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Wasn't sure what to title the thread to not make it sound like there was a deal. http://www.buffalorumblings.com/2009/3/31/...ion-talks-jason Great breakdown and feedback from the Eagles bloggers. In short - no concrete evidence the Eagles have interest in Peters, the Eagles have depth they can use at LT if needed, if a trade were to go down a first and a third would be likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuyInMalta Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 If the Eagles offered me a 1st and a 3rd for Peters right now, I'd take it. I'd then draft in the first three rounds: 1a) Brandon Pettigrew, TE out of Oklahoma State 1b) Andre Smith, OT out of Alabama 2) Clint Sintim, OLB out of Virginia 3a) Herman Johnson, OG out of LSU 3b) Lawrence Sidbury, DE out of Richmond Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBlood Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 If the Eagles offered me a 1st and a 3rd for Peters right now, I'd take it. I'd then draft in the first three rounds: 1a) Brandon Pettigrew, TE out of Oklahoma State 1b) Andre Smith, OT out of Alabama 2) Clint Sintim, OLB out of Virginia 3a) Herman Johnson, OG out of LSU 3b) Lawrence Sidbury, DE out of Richmond So if you were offered Andre Smith and Lawrence Sidbury for Jason Peters you would jump on it? I think thats a terrible idea. You trade a proven LT for a rookie LT and a 3rd round DE prospect. If Philly wants Peters bad enough they would swing a deal that would give us both there firsts. How about Peters and a 3rd for both of Phillys 1sts. Some may say that is a ridiculous price but to me thats what a top tier LT should bring you. If you cant get that then jsut sign the guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 If the Eagles offered me a 1st and a 3rd for Peters right now, I'd take it. I'd then draft in the first three rounds: 1a) Brandon Pettigrew, TE out of Oklahoma State 1b) Andre Smith, OT out of Alabama 2) Clint Sintim, OLB out of Virginia 3a) Herman Johnson, OG out of LSU 3b) Lawrence Sidbury, DE out of Richmond Then you must be satisfied with a non-dominant defense. (I don't the defense was THE problem last year, let alone A problem, at least not to the extent that most posters would have you believe) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kota Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 i don't understand why the Bills don't pay him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuyInMalta Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 So if you were offered Andre Smith and Lawrence Sidbury for Jason Peters you would jump on it? I think thats a terrible idea. You trade a proven LT for a rookie LT and a 3rd round DE prospect. If Philly wants Peters bad enough they would swing a deal that would give us both there firsts. How about Peters and a 3rd for both of Phillys 1sts. Some may say that is a ridiculous price but to me thats what a top tier LT should bring you. If you cant get that then jsut sign the guy. Absolutely I would take that deal with those players involved. This whole Peters deal is just getting insane. The guy isnt going to budge from this asking price, he's made that clear. His agent has made that clear. I'm actually a very big Jason Peters fan but I can also read the writing on the wall. He wants somewhere in the neighborhood of 12 million dollars a year, and the Bills just cant sacrifice that much money to one player. Thats what got us into salary cap hell all those years ago and started this wonderful drought. What scares me the most is what I unfortunately think is going to happen. The Bills WONT trade him before the draft, but they'll draft his replacement anyway (thereby wasting a draft pick) and then go into training camp with him holding out and a rookie at Tackle. Maybe Peters shows up Week 1. Maybe he shows up Week 10. Either way, he'll play sloppy (either because he's out of shape for missing camp or because he just doesnt care until he gets his money) and we'll end up going through ALL of this again in 2010 offseason. If Philly is willing to take on this headache right now, I say hand him over. I am beyond frustrated with Peters at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuyInMalta Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Then you must be satisfied with a non-dominant defense. (I don't the defense was THE problem last year, let alone A problem, at least not to the extent that most posters would have you believe) I was just trying to be realistic with the draft. I dont think Brown, Orakpo, Raji or Curry will be available when we pick at #11, so I went with players who should be around at that point. Trust me, if any of those guys make it to 11, the whole mock changes pretty quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsNYC Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 i don't understand why the Bills don't pay him. 1) He had a down year last year 2) He sabotaged the team by not only holding out, but refusing to even talk about the situation 3) He's missed games the last two years due to injury 4) Allowed 11.5 sacks last season 5) Appears to be driven by money, not winning 6) Is an undrafted TE 7) The Bills are more than one player away from playoffs 8) Only one good season 9) Bills got burned by Dockery 10) No guarantee he'll return to form Not saying they shouldn't pay him, but those reasons are enough to make the Bills not want to make him the highest paid tackle and spend 70 million dollars on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 So we deal Peters for a rookie OL who has his own troubles? No thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I said it before I'll say it again Unless Philly is trading us Trent Cole, no way in hell should the Bills give them Peters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 1) He had a down year last year 2) He sabotaged the team by not only holding out, but refusing to even talk about the situation 3) He's missed games the last two years due to injury 4) Allowed 11.5 sacks last season 5) Appears to be driven by money, not winning 6) Is an undrafted TE 7) The Bills are more than one player away from playoffs 8) Only one good season 9) Bills got burned by Dockery 10) No guarantee he'll return to form Not saying they shouldn't pay him, but those reasons are enough to make the Bills not want to make him the highest paid tackle and spend 70 million dollars on him. ........and he's phat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I doubt teams are lining up for Peters and not too many will pay him $11M per year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuyInMalta Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 So we deal Peters for a rookie OL who has his own troubles?No thanks I just dont think keeping Peters on the roster while he holds out again and we end up using a backup 6th round journeyman protecting our QB's blindside is a much better idea. I would imagine we all would like to keep Peters, but 12 million a year? Come on. If he accepts 9 million with incentives, then I'm all for it...but I doubt that happens. Time to make plans for life without Jason if he continues to be this stubborn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Yeah because keeping Peters on the roster while he holds out again and we end up using a backup 6th round journeyman protecting our QB's blindside is a much better idea. I would imagine we all would like to keep Peters, but 12 million a year? Come on. If he accepts 9 million with incentives, then I'm all for it...but I doubt that happens. Time to make plans for life without Jason if he continues to be this stubborn. At what point do the Bills stop and actually pay someone who's a good player? We trade Peters for draft pick, then waste draft pick to fill another self created hole, when we could've drafted ya know a defensive end, te, olb etc etc? Oh and the whole 1st rd LT's are gonna wanna be paid money. So when Andre Smiths contract runs out do we then get rid of him? He'll surely want to be paid. sh-- he'll surely wanna be paid as a rookie. It's this bad strategizing that has the Bills where they are. Isn't it about time the Bills actually held onto the talent they had, at key positions, instead of letting them walk out the door? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsNYC Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 At what point do the Bills stop and actually pay someone who's a good player? Lee Evans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 At what point do the Bills stop and actually pay someone who's a good player? Isn't it about time the Bills actually held onto the talent they had, at key positions, instead of letting them walk out the door? You're right, that NEVER happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 I like Peters as our LT and all, but I seem to recall there was some serious character problems when he was drafted. Most had him going in the first 4 rounds at the latest- and he slipped to us. It seems every year he pulls this sh--, and I have read on this board that he was a douche in person. Where there is smoke and fire. If all the above is true trade him and get the most we can for him. Of course this is all conjecture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornerville Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 You're right, that NEVER happens. So that justifies NOT bringing back a player at one of the most vital positions on the football field? Guess LT < Smallish very fast WR's who are paid like a 1 but its closer to a 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 You're right, that NEVER happens. He said good player not a #2 WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted March 31, 2009 Share Posted March 31, 2009 Lee Evans That's nice he's a receiver. Signing Eric Moulds back in the day was great as well. You dont build a team around a receiver. We've still let far too many good players go. You realize we went from having a defense consisting of Spikes/Fletcher/Crowell/Nate Clements/Antoine Winfield/Pat Williams/Sam Adams/Ron Edwards/Jabari Greer. Granted I realize Winfield didnt play with all these people, and Spikes injury. Although one could argue he'd still be an upgrade to what we currently have. We let all these people go and did nothing but fill self created holes. The DT position wasnt filled until trading for Stroud who's on the wrong side of 30, with no depth to speak of. LB is a mess, and countless picks spent on secondary players, but hey "We kept Lee Evans" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts