Reopening the WR Trade Market?

by jri111 on Apr 15, 2008 11:26 AM EDT

[editor's note, by Brian Galliford] Bumped from the diaries. Excellent points brought up as usual by jri111. End Note

From Saturday's Buffalo News:

Give us your thoughts on our Buffalo Bills pick -- Tennessee State CB Dominique Rogers-Cromartie. You might be surprised I didn't give the Bills a wide receiver. Don't be. Word is the Bills don't have a receiver rated high enough to warrant the 11th overall selection. I sense that the Bills might try to trade for a veteran wideout before the draft.

There are two major roadblocks to such a thought, however. First, the WR trade market is nearly non-existent. Other teams like Philly have tried unsuccessfully to trade for big names such as Roy Williams and Larry Fitzgerald without much luck, and there is little chance that other teams would have better luck. Second, issue of money. Money, of course is always a concern when it involves the Bills. Any WR Buffalo trades for would most likely require a large contract. That's hard to justify when your own star receiver is entering his contract year without a new deal. So why am I wasting my time with this if it can't be done? Because it can be done.

Of course, it would not be easy. Buffalo would simply have to "make an offer they can't refuse" to teams such as Detroit or Arizona for the likes of Roy Williams or Anquan Boldin. What is that offer? Well, most players are not traded for very high draft picks anymore because of the overly large contracts. The highest draft pick given up is usually a second rounder or some combination of a second round pick and a later or future pick. So to get over this, Buffalo would have to offer a higher pick than normal: how's the 11th overall pick sound? They would also have to pony up the big money for whoever they trade for. That's a lot to give up. Many would say too much. I would say they were wrong.

Buffalo is a a young team with some vets entering the prime of their careers (Evans, McGee, Crowell, etc.). Their window is starting to open. However, in today's NFL, the window is smaller than ever. Can the Bills afford to wait three seasons for a guy like Devin Thomas or Malcolm Kelly to develop into the receiver they need to be successful? With the exception of CB, the defense is in place. A young QB with potential is entering his second year in the league and a star running back is about to be born. They have one star WR locked up for at least two more seasons (considering the franchise tag) and are one or two weapons away on offense from having a contender.

So why not? Trade the 11th pick! We all agree that there is not good value for Buffalo there anyways. Turn it into value. Pay the money. And reap the rewards. If the Bills want to pro actively get better, they may have to look at other ways of doing so at the WR position aside from the draft. The trade market is currently non-existent for wideouts. If they want it, they'll have to create it. They create a market by making a hard and solid offer. Make teams like Detroit or Arizona at least think long and hard about it before they reject it.

The Bills are in a quandary at the 11th pick this year. They have a dire need at WR, but no player worth taking at that pick. The worst thing about this, however, is not the value of the players - that can be argued - it's the overall talent. The top end talent is just not there and taking one of those players would require taking on a lot of question marks. Admittedly, this is a far reaching and fantastical idea. However, sometimes it requires great ideas to achieve great things. We all dream of the Bills achieving great things. They now need a great idea to get them there.

This FanPost created by a registered user of Buffalo Rumblings.

0 recs | Comment 24 comments

Story-email Email | Print |

Comments

I think

The Cards CAN'T trade Fitz anymore. If AZ traded him they would still be responsible for a 15 mil signing bonus they just gave him. I don't think Boldin is available, not even for the 11th pick. Roy Williams could maybe be had, but he would need a new contract. Chad Johnson is probably the only big name that the Bills could really acquire.

Also I wouldn't want to trade for one of those guys anyways.

"Can the Bills afford to wait three seasons for a guy like Devin Thomas or Malcolm Kelly to develop in the receiver they need to be successful?"

ABSOLUTELY the Bills can wait. It is going to take Edwards that long to develop into a top QB anyways. And what happens if Edwards doesn't develop like the team hopes he will? You get stuck with an aging and overpaid WR on your roster instead of a 25 year old player in his prime. The Bills need to take care of the future and hope Edwards develops. I've never seen so many people thinking a 7-9 team is just a few moves away from super bowl contention.

by kaisertown on Apr 14, 2008 9:40 PM EDT 0 recs

WR Trade

The only receiver that I would consider trading the #11 overall draft pick for would be Roy Williams. Not only is Williams one of the most talented (arguably more talented than Fitzgerald, Boldin, and Chad Johnson) WR's in the league (Williams can do it all), he is only 26 years old and still has room to improve his game. In my opinion, the biggest hurdle might be getting the Lions to change their mind and to part ways with Williams. Financially, aren't many first-round rookies getting paid more than proven veterans these days anyway?

For me, it's not about a lack of patience. Roy Williams is a rare and young talent, and he is better than any wide receiver that's available in this draft.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 14, 2008 10:48 PM EDT up 0 recs

Come on now

I don't disagree with most of what you said but I do take issue with:

"I've never seen so many people thinking a 7-9 team is just a few moves away from super bowl contention."

There is a difference between being excited about the Bills being a playoff contender then thinking they are in Super Bowl contention. The Bills should fight for a playoff spot next year and the way you build a Super Bowl contender is by getting into the playoffs first, you will build confidence, big game experience, and team morale among a young nucleus like we have. Philip Rivers has developed fast because he learned through losing the big games and by getting playoff experience, so did Eli Manning. 8 years and counting without a playoff birth won't do anything to help Edwards or Lynch develop that killer instinct and edge that playoff contenders get. I also have more faith in Edwards I guess but that is a conversation for another discussion. Building for the future is smart, sensible and obviously the route to go. Now I am not advocating for trading the 11th pick but eventually you have to decide when its time to make your run because in six years time we will be discussing whether or not Marshawn is running on tired old legs. Consider that the Colts run took them four-five years before they got their ring and the Chargers are about three years into their run and they're still without one. I think we are a potential playoff team and if we can get there next year we will definitely be a Super Bowl contender within the Lynch/Edwards/Whitner/Poz era for many years, maybe starting our own Super Bowl run in two-three seasons. Sorry for the long post but in short we are a few moves away from the playoffs, once you are in the playoffs you will see the gap to becoming a Super Bowl contender narrow noticeably fast.

It's not delivery, It's DiGiorgio!

by poz on Apr 14, 2008 11:02 PM EDT up 0 recs

I generally agree but

it can be done. Plenty of teams go from 4-12 to 12-4 in one year, like TB or NO.

by Joe P. on Apr 14, 2008 11:30 PM EDT up 0 recs

some thoughts

Sorry if my post came off as too harsh. It wasn't my intent, I guess I just try to not get too excited about things that probably won't happen or are a long time away.

"we will definitely be a Super Bowl contender within the Lynch/Edwards/Whitner/Poz era for many years, maybe starting our own Super Bowl run in two-three seasons."

You did it too. I like Edwards, I think he should make some strides this year and prove to be an average starting QB in a couple seasons with the potential to develop into a top 10 QB down the road. But to assume that he is going to develop any sooner than that is ignoring the entire history of the QB position. The Bills are not a super bowl contender, nor will they be next year. Maybe in 2010 they can be a dark horse candidate like the Browns will be this year. I know that will sound pessimistic to some and I realize that a quick development from Trent isn't impossible. The Pats are still loaded and they will be a great team as long as Tom Brady stays at the top of his game. Same goes for Manning and the Colts. If David Garrard is the QB that he looked like last year than they are contenders for the next 3 years at least. The Chargers have a great young core on defense and an improving Philip Rivers on offense. Buffalo simply isn't in the same class as those teams; in fact, they aren't even close. I can't stress enough how important QB play is and the Bills have a second year starter who will probably throw a similiar number of INTs as he does TDs.

"eventually you have to decide when its time to make your run"

I don't think that you do. I think the way to stay in contention for long stretches is to ignore the immediate future while drafting and ALWAYS take the player who you think will have the best career. You draft guys and sign them for 5 years and hope that you can resign them and keep them around for another 3-5 years. New England just drafted a raw WR a couple seasons ago in the first round. The Chargers and Colts just took a WR last year too. I doubt New England was thinking about a super bowl when they traded out of the first round last year. Antonio Cromartie was surrounded by question marks when SD took him.

by kaisertown on Apr 15, 2008 12:06 AM EDT up 0 recs

couple of more thoughts

First off don't worry about sounding too harsh, you didn't. I have a couple more thoughts about the Bills and playoff potential. You wrote:

"The Bills are not a super bowl contender, nor will they be next year"

The point I was arguing is that nobody is saying they will be next year, simply that if we can reach the playoffs we may be seasons from now. As I said in my earlier post and as you noted me saying in yours:

""we will definitely be a Super Bowl contender within the Lynch/Edwards/Whitner/Poz era for many years, maybe starting our own Super Bowl run in two-three seasons."

The key word there is in that ERA. And I also don't believe it is too far-fetched to think Edwards could be the QB to take us into contention in a few years time. You write:

"I like Edwards, I think he should make some strides this year and prove to be an average starting QB in a couple seasons with the potential to develop into a top 10 QB down the road. But to assume that he is going to develop any sooner than that is ignoring the entire history of the QB position"

A couple of stats from some young QBs show that development for a rookie QB, especially one who gets playing time early, comes to fruition around year three or four. I think Edwards can easily be better than an average QB in a couple of seasons. Take a look at these young QBs and their development.

Eli Manning, Year 3: 57.7%- 3,244 - 24 TD 18 INT
Philip Rivers, Year 3: 61.7%- 3,388 - 22 TD 9 INT
Ben Roethlisberger, Year 3: 59.7%- 3,513- 18 TD 23 INT
Marc Bulger, Year 3: 63.2%- 3,845 - 22 TD 22 INT
Jay Cutler, Year 2: 63.6%- 3,497 - 20 TD 14 INT

So I don't agree that Edwards shouldn't develop at a similar pace. I reiterate, no one thinks we're going to the Super Bowl this year but to think we don't deserve to believe the playoffs are realistic now and title contention can be three to four years from now is being pessimistic. Our defense will get better, especially if we add a young DE like sireric has been advocating and our offense has nowhere to go but up and its very very young. Finally, we may not be close to the Pats and Colts right now but by the time Edwards develops, Marshawn hits his prime and the defense is ready in three to four seasons those teams will be very much past the days of their respective dynasties. Marvin Harrison might be done already and Peyton is getting older while the Pats are simply old at every position.

I agree with you that in 2010 we may be a dark horse but I just don't think anyone believes our time is now but it can certainly be our time to start tasting the playoffs again. Once again, I don't think your post was harsh or anything. We're simply enjoying a good discussion that I think should be had because I know Bills fans are split about this.

It's not delivery, It's DiGiorgio!

by poz on Apr 15, 2008 12:43 AM EDT up 0 recs

reopening WR

John, you might have made the greatest (or at least best post of the offseason). That showed incredible insight and forethought. I like everything that you stated. Excellent analysis.

by btk0930 on Apr 14, 2008 10:09 PM EDT 0 recs

Steep price

I think #11 is a bit steep for a WR. Plus, only Chad seems to really want out of his current situation and I wouldn't give up anything more than a 3rd rounder for him.

I don't think Roy W is worth the #11 pick. He's way too inconsistent and always seems to be nicked up in some way.

Fitzgerald is pretty much the only WR worth the #11 pick IMO and he isn't going anywhere.

I wonder if there are any other vet WR's who will be on the block that wouldn't cost a 1st round pick and could come in and start across from Evans...

by Kurupt on Apr 14, 2008 10:56 PM EDT 0 recs

It shouldn't take much

to claim the starting WR position opposite Evans in Buffalo. The position is open by default. We know that Parrish and Reed are purely slot guys.

How about a 6th round draft pick to Tampa Bay for Michael Clayton?

I'm not saying that Clayton is the answer, but he could start in Buffalo immediately. Whether or not he is starting-caliber is a different story. He is still young and has some upside. I know Clayton is one big, tough dude. I think he could benefit from a change of scenary.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 14, 2008 11:10 PM EDT up 0 recs

Clayton

We've floated that idea before and I tend to like it. It's a rather low risk and high reward kind of move. Clayton really needs a change of scenery, though I'm not sure if his confidence is totally shot. He's kind of like the Chuck Knoblauch of WR's, a few mistakes led to downright pathetic play after a while. If the Bills pulled a trade like this, I wouldn't complain.

I wonder what the chances of TB releasing him are...

by Kurupt on Apr 14, 2008 11:25 PM EDT up 0 recs

Releasing Clayton

If they do, the sooner the better. If he doesn't get cut until training camp, he won't have much time to learn a new system and get acclimated to a new team prior to the start of the season. Either way, he could still be a nice addition with potential and long-term benefit.

How good do you want the Bills to be?

by Fort Worth on Apr 15, 2008 12:06 AM EDT up 0 recs

Clayton

He could be one of those guys that gets released after the draft based on who his team selects. If the Bucs are able to find a good WR early on, or even select 2 WR's, Clayton could (and maybe should) be on his way out.

I'd offer them no more than a 6th and may even try to get him for a 7th or 2009 6th rounder...

by Kurupt on Apr 15, 2008 12:27 AM EDT up 0 recs

Re: Releasing Clayton.

Good point about when he could be released; after the draft. I'd take a flier on him. Sometimes, a guy just needs a change of scenery.

by krytime on Apr 15, 2008 1:47 AM EDT up 0 recs

#11 for Williams

K, I respect your opinion, so I am surprised that you would not do the deal. I would do that in a second! And sign him to a long term contract. I realize that would be difficult with Evan's doing his contract at the same time, but Williams, big, tall, and dominant would be the absolute perfect complement to Evans' speed. It actually is attractive to Detroit as well, who has to deal with losing Roy Williams after this year, his last contract year, for nothing. Evans and Williams complement each other, while Detroit knows that Williams and Calvin Johnson are more like having the same WR and take receptions from each other (McDonald and Furrey really compliment the big receivers). It makes our Offense instantly awesome (and still young).

by labill on Apr 15, 2008 12:08 PM EDT up 0 recs

Roy W

I just don't see the trade being a great fit for both sides. First, Detroit trades him and they are left with Calvin Johnson and a bunch of slot WR's. Why trade the only WR who's actually panned out? Johnson should be a star, but it's not a guarentee that he'll turn into one or stay healthy. Williams and Johnson are a great combo for them and I'm not sure they'd want to create another hole at the position. Plus, Detroit can tag Roy next year if they don't agree to a long term deal.

For us, if we trade for him, we'd have to give him a big contract. With that in place, would we have enough money to resign Evans (and some other players)? It seems a little much to sign 2 WR's to big contracts in the same year. I would expect the Bills not to sign Evans if Williams was acquired, and I'm not sure Evans would sign here when he knows he could likely get a bigger deal elsewhere as a #1 WR. We'd be left in the same position next year as we're in now except we'd have Roy instead of Lee.

They would be a nice pairing, but I think it'd be too much money and too high a pick for Williams. I really see a trade like that simply opening another can of worms next offseason. Roy's been overhyped since he's gotten to the NFL. He'll have a monster game here and there, but disappear for lengthy stretches of time. He really should be a dominant WR in this league, but hasn't been that yet.

by Kurupt on Apr 15, 2008 1:18 PM EDT up 0 recs

how about...

Vincent Jackson from the Chargers. Now there has been absolutely no talk from San Diego about trading Jackson, but they have the depth to do so. Jackson is currently the number 2 man in SD behind Chris Chambers. The number 3 man is Davis, the 30th overall selection in the 2007 draft. AJ Smith is real high on Davis and expects him to be a starter eventually, which may make Jackson qusi-expendable-for the right price of course.

Jackson, 6-5, 241 pounds is only 25 years old and would fit the Bill. I'm sure he would like a pay raise as well, considering he is only making $520,000 in '08 and $545,000 in '09.

Also, the Chargers have Eric Parker and Legedu Naanee, so they wouldn't be short of a man to take Davis' spot in the slot.

what do you think it would take for the Chargers to deal him?

John I.

by jri111 on Apr 14, 2008 11:45 PM EDT 0 recs

Jackson

WHY would SD trade him? He is arguably their best WR (obviously behind Gates at TE) and has proved to be a very quality player in the playoffs this year. Craig Davis did very little for SD and Chambers has always been a hot and cold type WR. Plus, with his great size, he makes for a great red zone threat. And I wouldn't consider Eric Parker and Legedu Naanee quality depth. Naanee has some potential, but Parker is nothing special (and is always injured).

SD would be dumb to trade Jackson for anything less than a 1st rounder. He's just starting to come into his own and could really be a stud for SD this year. I'd love to have him on the Bills, but it's not possible unless we foolishly trade away a high pick or multiple picks.

by Kurupt on Apr 15, 2008 12:31 AM EDT up 0 recs

Sorry boss....

there's no way SD is trading Vincent Jackson, he's a budding star.

by Harris on Apr 15, 2008 8:38 AM EDT up 0 recs

Good idea though

Jackson would've been perfect for us... you gotta like the guy's size and hands and with that 39" vertical --> holy cow! Plus he prob would take a contract like 4yrs/12m. But I agree with the guys... can't really see that trade happening unless there were off-field issues with management (a possibility).

We should've gotten Barrien (CHI) before he went to the Vikes... is he worth 6yrs/40mil?... maybe, but he was a proven commodity.

by osmanBAE on Apr 15, 2008 3:06 PM EDT up 0 recs

I would do this

I mean for a WR, when WR is a huge need I would want to do this badly. But here are the two main points that would come up if you traded #11 for R. Williams or Boldin, or any top 15 WR.

You will have to pay that guy with a new deal
You will have to pay Evans with a new deal or trade him, cuz he will NOT be happy to see some other guy come in and get big $ while he has worked his butt off for 4 years and not received what he think he fairly deserves.

I'm hoping someone falls to #11 and that forces a team to move up and get him. I think Mendenhall is such a stud I hope someone moves up to get him at #11.

MARVelous

by MARVelous on Apr 15, 2008 11:39 AM EDT 0 recs

Team to watch for a Value WR

Jacksonville Jaguars:
Signed D. Northcutt last yr
Signed J. Porter this yr
Traded for T. Williamson this yr

What about M. Jones or R. Williams? Both former 1st rd picks who haven't lived up to expectations. R Williams had a decent 07 campaign, but with the signing of Porter where does williams fit in? M. Jones is just a flat out disappointment, but has great size at 6"6 230lbs for the endzone.

Williamson could be a training camp cut, but he is the only Deep Threat that the Jags have. So they have a surplus of 6" WRs. I wouldn't want to go into 2008 hoping one of these guys is our hope for #2 WR spot, but they have experience and fit what the Bills need.

As I see it, if one of these WR's become the odd man out. I think it is a good option to explore for less or nothing depending on swinging a late rd pick before 1 is cut or picking one up after getting cut.

Would you rather win one superbowl or Lose four in a row? Which defines your teams place in history more ... 1yr wonder or Perennially 2nd best?

by Rudy916 on Apr 15, 2008 12:49 PM EDT 0 recs

Jags WR's

They also have Mike Walker, a 3rd round pick last year, who was having a great preseason camp but got hurt and didn't play last year. He's going to be a good player for them, IMO. The only WR I'd take is Reggie Williams and even then, he's not that great. He would give us an option across from Evans and would be a nice red zone option. I doubt Jax would part with him though.

by Kurupt on Apr 15, 2008 1:10 PM EDT up 0 recs