The Senator Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 I'm guessing he has plenty to live on. I haven't heard him compared to Travis Henry, yet. It's pretty easy to live and die above your means, to be a 'millionaire pauper'. You're sure he doesn't spend like you and I do?
The Dean Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 It's pretty easy to live and die above your means, to be a 'millionaire pauper'. You're sure he doesn't spend like you and I do? You and I would be dead, with that kind of cash.
DazedandConfused Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 We've got the better cards. We shouldn't fold and take it to the River if need be. My guess is he'll fold and by folding that means he'll get somewhere in the ballpark of $10 Million a year. I thnik Magox is right IF the team's goal is merely to run a solid business. However, if the Bills goal is to instead put a significant effort into winning now rather than simply to build a solid business as long as we can, then there is likely a far higher premium on getting Peters into camp quickly to maximize the Bills chances of winning now. I agree completely that the "smart" business goal dictates using the leverage of having Peters under contract for a couple of more years at relative bargain basement rates for a two time Pro bowl achieving LT. We not only have the leverage of the signed contract, but if we choose under the current CBA we can franchise Peters a couple of times and only then pay him near the top rate for an LT and hold him for a couple of more years under the rules. However, if instead the goal is to win now, Peters has a lot more leverage under these scenarios as within the rules as they exist (he can skip voluntary workouts and even the mandatory OTAs and pre-season if he is willing to pay the substantial but relatively small in the big picture $600K fine. If Peters is willing to holdout, he has shown it will effect his play (and thus the team and his teammates success at winning) substanitially if he is willing to hold out. Eventually this will piss off his teammates (though apparently not now as his teammates are pretty sympathetic to a fellow player who is playing for far less money than he would command if the NFL ran on a truly free market basis with Peters being able to command his market value on a more regular basis). However, the NFL governed by the CBA is pretty far from a classic free market as the NFL and NFLPA have by agreement approved by our law and courts joined together to restrict salaries in a non-free market manner in order to yield much higher profits for these two parties as they have a far more stable and arguably better product than a free market would be able to produce. Big wildcards are that with the Bills O for this millennium in terms of even making the playoffs and there being no guarantee actuarily of Ralph living to see a long term strategy even work that the goal of this team is to win and win now. The Bills leverage is lessened greatly by its major OL investment Dockery simply not working out (his cut makes is way more difficult to fill a Peters gap we would choose to create while at the same time we fill a LG gap while dealing with the uncertainties at C, Butler's consistent injured status and the possibility of us relying on our next TE starter being a big part of the blocking scheme. Add to this that the LT is going to play a significant role in protecting our significant investment in Edwards, and also play a significant role in making the best use of the guaranteed one year of TO and overall I think that Peters has tremendous leverage in this situation. This is true IMHO unless the Bills are used by Ralph as merely a good business and not as a TEAM committed to winning on timeline that really makes the future now. If the Bills instead are more interested in making the playoffs in 2011 or later then by all means they should cut Peters lose for being a jerk and instead roll the dice big time in the hopes that their #11 (or even worse if the cost for trading Peters is we get multiple draft picks which have us selecting our new LT from the later third of the first day ifwe got for example 2 picks from Philly for Peters. The strategy to reach the goal of making the playoffs while Ralph is alive, TO is around and TE is alive is that despite Peters flaws is clearly to show him the money and get him to camp as quickly as possible.
billsfreak Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 That's right. So, unless the Bills trade him, sign him, or prepare for his absence by drafting (or signing) another very good LT, they can expect to suck again, this year, and go through it all again, next year. The only way the Bills have REAL leverage, and not simply contract leverage, is if they have another LT. And, in response to your question "if someone is trying to screw Peters, isn't that karma"? No, that's not Karma. Stupid people call stuff like that "karma", but purposefully screwing someone because they screwed you, couldn't be further from "Karma". Now, go study Eastern philosophy and then come back for further instructions. It's you again? Do you ever post anything on here besides slamming other peoples posts? Or criticizing other people? Why don't you post something worth reading. Every other posts on TBD, turns into a pissing contest between you and someone else, give it a break please. If the Bills have another left tackle, how does that give them leverage? If they already have Peters replacement, then the leverage crosses over to Peters, since he would know they have to trade him for whatever they can get.
billsfreak Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 I GUARANTEE you, that if the Bills trade Peters he will sign a huge contract that won't be based on his performance in 2008. Only a moron would consider his performance in 2008 his normal performance. So, you are suggesting the Bills shouldn't pay him, even though if they trade him he will get the money...right? Is this because the Bills are so much smarter than other teams Or simply because they have so much depth at LT? Lets see, he has had one good year and one terrible year, so how do u determine which is his normal year? It seems to me like holding out and whining for more money is becoming his normal year. Notice I didn't drop to your level and start name calling, i.e. Moron.
The Dean Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 It's you again? Do you ever post anything on here besides slamming other peoples posts? Or criticizing other people? Why don't you post something worth reading. Every other posts on TBD, turns into a pissing contest between you and someone else, give it a break please. If the Bills have another left tackle, how does that give them leverage? If they already have Peters replacement, then the leverage crosses over to Peters, since he would know they have to trade him for whatever they can get. Amazing that you decided to get personal, and snippy, when we were having a perfectly reasonable disagreement. That was uncalled for. There was no pissing contest here, until you decided to start one. Still, I won't take your bait. Peters wants a BIG payday. If he gets traded he gets it. That's a huge win for Peters. Do you know what "leverage" means?
Fingon Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Amazing that you decided to get personal, and snippy, when we were having a perfectly reasonable disagreement. That was uncalled for. There was no pissing contest here, until you decided to start one. Still, I won't take your bait. Peters wants a BIG payday. If he gets traded he gets it. That's a huge win for Peters. Do you know what "leverage" means? If he holds out again, no team will give him a huge deal.
The Dean Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Lets see, he has had one good year and one terrible year, so how do u determine which is his normal year? It seems to me like holding out and whining for more money is becoming his normal year. Notice I didn't drop to your level and start name calling, i.e. Moron. I don't feel like retyping these: http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1373146 http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1373205 One good year? Preposterous.
billsfreak Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Amazing that you decided to get personal, and snippy, when we were having a perfectly reasonable disagreement. That was uncalled for. There was no pissing contest here, until you decided to start one. Still, I won't take your bait. Peters wants a BIG payday. If he gets traded he gets it. That's a huge win for Peters. Do you know what "leverage" means? Whatever, I am not kneeling to your level with petty arguments again, I fell for it once a few weeks ago. I didn't throw the word "moron" out there, you did.
The Dean Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 If he holds out again, no team will give him a huge deal. Maybe. Maybe not. If he has moments of brilliance after returning (after skipping the first half of the season), I think he will get a fine contract, elsewhere. Nobody expects Peters to play LT at his current contract...not even the Bills. I think some teams might just believe the Bills were cheap, in the wrong, or just plain stupid, if they can't get the deal done.
billsfreak Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Almost everyone agrees Peters should get a raise, but unless he lowers his asking price, he shouldn't get it. There is no way that anyone is going to make him the highest paid lineman in the NFL, unless they are really clueless. This deal will get done if and when a compromise is made between Peters agent and the FO. Both sides need to give a little, which I really think the Bills will, but the question will be if Peters lowers his demands.
The Senator Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Maybe. Maybe not. If he has moments of brilliance after returning (after skipping the first half of the season), I think he will get a fine contract, elsewhere. Nobody expects Peters to play LT at his current contract...not even the Bills. I think some teams might just believe the Bills were cheap, in the wrong, or just plain stupid, if they can't get the deal done. Not sure about that Deano - if he shows flashes of brilliance after holding out, we might just make him play out his contract, then slap the franchise tag on him.
The Dean Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Not sure about that Deano - if he shows flashes of brilliance after holding out, we might just make him play out his contract, then slap the franchise tag on him. Care to wager?
The Senator Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 Care to wager? IF they don't strike a deal, IF he's not traded, IF he holds out, IF he comes back, IF he shows flashes of brilliance... too many variables
Magox Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 The Bills in my view should: 1) communicate to Peters that he is "Their guy". That in no way, shape or form is he going to be traded, and make sure that the message is received loud and clear! 2) offer him a contract, somewhere in the middle of what both sides are asking and offering. I would assume somewhere in the $10 Million range, offer him incentives for showing up to mandatory camp, probowl, sacks allowed etc. to bump it up as high as the highest payed Tackle if he reaches his bonus requirements. 3) Give him a deadline up until the Mandatory June camps. If Peters hasn't accepted the offer and he misses mandatory camp in June, that the deal will be taken off the table. Make sure that he receives that message loud and clear! After all, the Peters Camp should know that Russ Brandon and the Bills FO didn't play games with them last year, and therefore what we say has more meaning than it did last year, and that he will get fined for every single mandatory practice or camp that he doesn't attend, and that there will be NO reprieval for the fines that are levied against him. This should work. If Eugene Parker advises his client to not sign, and the Bills pull the offer off the table, then I would imagine that Peters would have to be very pissed in the prospects of losing out on anywhere from $6 -$8 Million this year, not to mention his future contract value will be diminished as well. He would have a lot to lose over a couple million dollars.
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 I don't feel like retyping these: http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1373146 http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?s=&am...t&p=1373205 One good year? Preposterous. You just don't get it. He held out on my team!
The Dean Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 IF they don't strike a deal, IF he's not traded, IF he holds out, IF he comes back, IF he shows flashes of brilliance... too many variables But, think about it. Under your "possible" scenario, the Bills would be paying Peters about $3.8 Million to not show up, this year (pro-rated for missed games), $3.4 Mill to not show up or contribute next year, and then reward him with the average of the top five LTs in the game ($12-$13 Million, by then?), the following year. Hell, if you or I were Peters, that would be our dream deal.
stuckincincy Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 The Bills need to draft the best T on board at #11 (Smith or Oher) . Then the Bills will have all the leverage they will need. Peters can hold out, or he can sign the deal already offered by the Bills at 8.5 mil per season or he can play this year on his existing deal. If peters holds out we have enough personel on the roster to deal wit hit. If Peters signs his contract or decides to play on his old deal we have our LT and we would have a LG because both Smith or Oher can play G. Having a possible OL of Peters - (Smith or Oher) - Hargartner - Butler - Walker would represent an upgrade over last year. The Bills need to find a decent OL coach. Someday.
billsfreak Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 But, think about it. Under your "possible" scenario, the Bills would be paying Peters about $3.8 Million to not show up, this year (pro-rated for missed games), $3.4 Mill to not show up or contribute next year, and then reward him with the average of the top five LTs in the game ($12-$13 Million, by then?), the following year. Hell, if you or I were Peters, that would be our dream deal. I might be wrong, but I don't believe he will get paid if he is holding out.
The Dean Posted April 2, 2009 Posted April 2, 2009 I might be wrong, but I don't believe he will get paid if he is holding out. If he reports by game 10, he gets paid (pro rated) for the year, and it counts as a year of service.. He would also. likely be fined for missing camp and such. The whole thing is ridiculous, of course, but was in response to this: Not sure about that Deano - if he shows flashes of brilliance after holding out, we might just make him play out his contract, then slap the franchise tag on him. I was simply pointing out some of the realities in that scenario.
Recommended Posts