VOR Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 Correct. It is possible to trade for a player and then try to negotiate the contract (eg. Bills/Darwin Walker) but it is rare, and typically the player gets a raise, not a cut in salary, I believe. Walker got more money from the Bears than he was scheduled to make with the Bills, at least for the 2007 season, which is what the Bills offered and the Bears ended-up keeping him for.
The Dean Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 Walker got more money from the Bears than he was scheduled to make with the Bills, at least for the 2007 season, which is what the Bills offered and the Bears ended-up keeping him for. That's right. But he was traded and then the negotiations began (which was my point). Actually, he was traded twice to teams that had to renegotiate his salary. Unusual, but not unheard of...and typically the contract is bigger, not smaller, than the current deal. I think we are in agreement here.
spartacus Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 When you trade for a player, you acknowledge that he has an existing contract and that you're fine with assuming it. No one makes a trade expecting the player to reduce his contract. It also signals that a team is fine with surrendering something for that player. No one, outside of the Lions, was interested in trading for Dockery, which means assuming his contract and giving-up something for him. And the Lions themselves gave a half-hearted attempt at it, figuring that Dockery was theirs for the taking. But that's why they just came off the first-ever winless season in the NFL. They should have offered a 2009 7th rounder at least, instead of a laughable conditional 2010 7th rounder. here we go again - you stating as fact that no other team wanted to trade tough to assess when the Bills forgot to ask the rest of the league since they started the process so late on the contrary, it is likely the Redskins would have traded for him since they wanted him and did sign him to a big deal.
The Dean Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 here we go again - you stating as fact that no other team wanted to trade tough to assess when the Bills forgot to ask the rest of the league since they started the process so late on the contrary, it is likely the Redskins would have traded for him since they wanted him and did sign him to a big deal. here we go again- You seem to assume the Bills FO didn't do any work evaluating who was interested, and who wasn't. Why would you make that assumption? There is plenty of experience at One Bills Drive, even if Brandon doesn't have a lot. I suspect they knew their immediate options, before releasing DD.
In-A-Gadda-Levitre Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 here we go again - you stating as fact that no other team wanted to trade tough to assess when the Bills forgot to ask the rest of the league since they started the process so late on the contrary, it is likely the Redskins would have traded for him since they wanted him and did sign him to a big deal. ... at this point more of the "if we repeat it often enough, eventually it'll be true" mentality. You keep spewing the same bullcrap and no proof whatsoever to base it on. You don't know who they talked to, when they talked to them, or have any clue what was said. Neither does any of the media, so give it up!
VOR Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 That's right. But he was traded and then the negotiations began (which was my point). Actually, he was traded twice to teams that had to renegotiate his salary. Unusual, but not unheard of...and typically the contract is bigger, not smaller, than the current deal. I think we are in agreement here. We're in violent agreement here overall, WRT players being traded and rarely taking less. My point was that Walker was traded to a team that actually paid him more than the Bills were offering. I thought you were saying that Walker was a case of trading a player and the player taking less from the new team.
The Dean Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 We're in violent agreement here overall, WRT players being traded and rarely taking less. My point was that Walker was traded to a team that actually paid him more than the Bills were offering. I thought you were saying that Walker was a case of trading a player and the player taking less from the new team. No, we are in complete agreement.
spartacus Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 You keep spewing the same bullcrap and no proof whatsoever to base it on. You don't know who they talked to, when they talked to them, or have any clue what was said. Neither does any of the media, so give it up! you are absolutely correct. there is no proof whatsoever that Detroit was the only possible trade partner. in fact, there is no proof that if the front office wasn't conducting a circle jerk, that they would have been able to generate some interest in Dockery so they could have traded him. the mere fact that Dockery signed the day after the Bills cut him indicates his services were valued quite highly by the Redskins and the Lions - and who knows how many others. keep up the good work!!
VOR Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 you are absolutely correct. there is no proof whatsoever that Detroit was the only possible trade partner. in fact, there is no proof that if the front office wasn't conducting a circle jerk, that they would have been able to generate some interest in Dockery so they could have traded him. the mere fact that Dockery signed the day after the Bills cut him indicates his services were valued quite highly by the Redskins and the Lions - and who knows how many others. keep up the good work!! Valued highly? LOL! The Lions offered the lowest pick possible, for the following year, when they presumably felt they wouldn't be the worst team in the league amd thus it wouldn't be the first pick in the round. And as a result, they lost this valued prize. The Redskins only entered when he became a FA and wouldn't cost a draft pick, and they ended up giving a deal that pays him half of.what he was going to make with the Bills.
nucci Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 you are absolutely correct. there is no proof whatsoever that Detroit was the only possible trade partner. in fact, there is no proof that if the front office wasn't conducting a circle jerk, that they would have been able to generate some interest in Dockery so they could have traded him. the mere fact that Dockery signed the day after the Bills cut him indicates his services were valued quite highly by the Redskins and the Lions - and who knows how many others. keep up the good work!! Yep, we are going to miss that 7th round pick in 2010. Please get back to us after the draft to tell us who it is.
oak tree 12 Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 Hold on hold on...! This is not about whether he was good or not. I'm asking if anyone knows why we released him instead of trading him. mike Lombardi(ex GM and NFL analyst for NFL network and scout.com) graded all the afc guards after last year and dockery came out with the worst grades and had the worst year of all the guards in the entire afc. people dont trade for players like that they have film to you know. rumors abounded that Detroit offered a seventh rounder but the paperwork was not filed in time so whats that tell you. the guy sucked.
Bill from NYC Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 mike Lombardi(ex GM and NFL analyst for NFL network and scout.com) graded all the afc guards after last year and dockery came out with the worst grades and had the worst year of all the guards in the entire afc. people dont trade for players like that they have film to you know. rumors abounded that Detroit offered a seventh rounder but the paperwork was not filed in time so whats that tell you. the guy sucked. That's about right ot12. He played like a 7th round pick with a lackluster effort and was paid like a hall of fame guard. No loss; no big deal; time to move on with our promising young OGs.
VOR Posted July 6, 2009 Posted July 6, 2009 That's about right ot12. He played like a 7th round pick with a lackluster effort and was paid like a hall of fame guard. No loss; no big deal; time to move on with our promising young OGs. Yeah, but the Bills missed out on a 2010 7th rounder! Nevermind the deals they've swung for Price, Peters, McGahee, Spikes, and Walker. It was the lack of trading Dockery for that 2010 7th rounder that proves their incompetence!
Recommended Posts