Jason Peters, Buffalo's front office and the power of choice
by jri111 on Apr 7, 2009 1:18 PM EDT
Email
Print"There is always choice. We say there is no choice only to comfort ourselves with the decisions we have already made." - B5
Mistakes made
There has been a lot of discussion of late about Jason Peters and a potential trade within the next few weeks that would end his contentious tenure in Buffalo. The line has been drawn and sides have been taken. Some say "trade him!" Others yell "pay him!" One of the two camps will apparently get their wish in the next couple of weeks.
Some, who are privy to knowledge of the situation at One Bills Drive, say that a resolution is imminent. Either Buffalo caves into Peters demands and makes him the highest paid left tackle in football or Peters is traded. That's it; those are the only two remaining options. Valid arguments have been made to support this position. Buffalo is in "win now" mode, everyone's job is on the line this year. The signing of T.O. was a public acknowledgement by the front office and coaching staff that anything short of a playoff appearance will not suffice. They do not want another distraction caused by a lengthy holdout - nor do they want Peter's absence to hinder the performance of the offensive line. They simply can not afford to play 2009 with a short-deck.
It has also been hinted that Peter's hard-line position - he refuses to negotiate down from his demand to be the highest paid left tackle - forces Buffalo to make a decision: Pay him, trade him, or suffer the consequences of a holdout. Because it is evident that Buffalo will not tolerate a holdout, their choice has been reduced to the two options that have already been enumerated: Trade him or pay him.
I am here to argue that there are, or at the very least, should be, more than those two options. Buffalo should not put itself in position to be forced to make a false choice between unfavorable outcomes. The circumstances surrounding the negotiations do not dictate a need to be forced into such a position. In poker terms, at the beginning of the off-season, the Bills held all of the cards. They had a 27-year old, two-time Pro Bowl left tackle under contract for two more seasons. They would have the exclusive option of keeping him for a third season, thanks to the franchise tag. By then, Peters would be a disgruntled lineman on the wrong side of 30. In contrast, the only real card Peters held was the threat of a holdout. But Peters had to know that, ultimately, that was not a good option. The Bills, if they were patient (and maybe slightly vindictive) could make him play out the remaining 3 years in Buffalo and he couldn't do much about it. Financially, Peters couldn't afford another pedestrian season or two.
Unfortunately, in poker terms - and in negotiations - Buffalo has done something that it should never have done, they showed their hand. Peters now knows pretty definitively that Buffalo will do everything in their power to avoid a holdout. He knows that the front office and coaching staff must win now and that they are unwilling to ride out the effects of a holdout. All of a sudden, Peter's sole card went from a three of diamonds to an ace of spades. If he knows Buffalo will do everything in their power to avoid a holdout (including trading their Pro Bowl, 27 year old franchise left tackle), than a holdout he will give them. Peters is playing his card. He up'd the ante.
Changing the game
Buffalo committed the ultimate mistake in negotiations 101: They voluntarily gave up something they were not required to. By taking the hard-line approach off the table (not giving in to the potential of a holdout), they kicked the door wide open for Peters to play his card and force Buffalo into a decision they ultimately did not want to have to make: Pay him the money he is demanding or trade him to avoid the holdout.
Unfortunately, for Buffalo, they can not pick up their cards after they put them on the table. They are out there. They have already been seen. The damage has already been done. But, I'm here to tell you something: Although the Bills are not in the position they would like to be in, they are not restricted to the two self-imposed options.
The quote at the beginning of this piece is something I heard years ago and it has been something that has affected every aspect of my life. Sometimes we say there is no choice, not because there really isn't, but because we refuse to acknowledge the other choices out there. We have made our decision and we look to justify it by saying that there is no choice. But we always have other choices, even if we don't see them or refuse to recognize them.
The Bills have other choices, aside from trading Peters or paying him. They can call Peter's bluff. They can up the ante. They can go all-in. Peters knows Buffalo is not willing for a holdout because losing him would harm the team's performance. Quite frankly, the team does not have someone that could step in Peter's shoes and play at a high-level.
But what if Buffalo did? What if Buffalo drafted an offensive tackle in one of the first two rounds of this year's draft and did not trade Peters. Almost instantly, Peter's value to the team that he is committed to for the next three years has been drastically reduced. Peters can still hold out, and in the mean time, his replacement can get all the reps he desires during mini-camp, training camp, pre-season and, if it comes to it, the regular season. The better the rookie performs, the more Peter's value diminishes. Peters will have a decision to make, continue the hold out and lose millions of dollars each game he misses, or get into camp, play good solider and hopefully put together a dominate season on his resume for future negotiations.
Will it work?
Now, of course there are a lot of potential pitfalls. I tried to briefly address a few of the more common questions that would arise.
What if the rookie doesn't pan out?
If the rookie fails, Peters would likely have even more power in negotiations than he does now. But the same "urgency" that has forced the coaching staff to rule out the hard-line approach can be used to justify it. The rookie fails and Peters is in a better position, so what. If the Bills trade Peters, they'd likely have a rookie starting in his place anyways. If that rookie failed, the coaching staff is likely gone anyways. Why not do something that will help you immediately (keeping Peters on the roster) and long term (getting him signed long-term at less than what he's asking for now - or alternatively, find his replacement).
Can the Bills afford to use a high pick on an offensive tackle with Peters still on the roster?
Maybe not, but there are ways to get creative. The Bills coaching staff values offensive linemen with versatility. They also have a hole at left guard. Why not draft a guy (someone like Michael Oher) that can play guard and left tackle. If Peters doesn't show up to camp, Oher is your left tackle. If Peters sees that Buffalo has called his bluff and shows up, then Oher is your left guard. Either way, the Bills front-line is all the better.
Are the Bills willing to put up with the "distraction" caused by a potentially contentious hold out?
Therein lies the question. They have not shown that they are willing to and that's what got them into this mess. But the good thing about life is that it gives you opportunities to correct the mistakes of your past. Will Buffalo take advantage of their opportunity?
Conclusion
The organization has been aggressive this off-season, something that has been lacking in years past. They have shown a spine, and for that, I salute them. I implore them to use that new-found backbone. Call Peter's bluff. Go all in.
Just another great fan opinion shared on the pages of BuffaloRumblings.com.
143 comments
|
13 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So basically you’re saying you want the Bills to do nothing with Peters and draft a LT on Day 1?
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
not doing nothing...
It’s a negotiation. Right now Peters is playing hardball, just becuse he won’t budge from his position doesn’t mean the negotiations are over, it means you have to do something to change the game. The end game should be to get Peters to sign long term. Drafting a Day 1 LT helps get you to that goal. And if you can’t meet that goal it helps you prepare for a future without Peters. The Bills have been too quick to dismiss other options out of the desire to get themselves out of the situation, and in doing so, have harmed their position.
John I.
I don’t necessarily disagree with that. I like the logic behind it, in fact. I just don’t think it’ll happen that way.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Fair point.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 1:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Brian, as an Eagles fan I want the Bills to decide to trade Peters, but as a Bills fan I can see some serious mojo to drafting Smith and keeping Peters. Smith cound be an awesome OG and immediately turns a weak position into a strong one.
I saw your FanPost at BGN about it.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 2:42 PM EDT up reply actions
This is what I've been saying all along!
Albeith with a somewhat different angle and a lot less words… Draft Andre Smith and Keep Peters
Basically my point at the time was that by drafting a LT we not only call his bluff, we give ourselves leverage over renegotiating his contract and the cost of not being able to come to a deal won’t be that much because the player will loose so much value by choosing the hard ball approach. Sure he could choose to hold out and yes his trade value would go down in year 2 but so would his value on the market. The only option that he would really have would be to show up in camp and outplay the rookie to get a new deal.
If the Bills choose this approach I will be extremely impressed.
Your ability to control the LOS is directly linked to your ability to win football games!
FEED the BEAST!
This would take a serious set of cojones John. I agree about drafting Oher, and if the Bills did this it could very well blow up in their face. But it would show lots of guts and I know Joe would love it.
The time has come for someone to put his foot down. And that foot is me.
Hold onto that thought for another 8 minutes or so on Oher…
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 1:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Absolutley.......this is exactly what I have been taking about....John, I love you! rec'd
How important does a person have to be before they are considered assassinated instead of just murdered?
Rec'd
nice post – we were just talking about this and a lot of people are just A or B. Well I hate just A or B – thats not thinking outside of the box.
they definately have more options than what most perceive – good job
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
Sure there are more options than A and B
but can the FO afford to go with one of those other options? That’s the biggest problem, how risky it could be to do nothing w/Peters and draft a lineman at #11.
~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"
but can the FO afford to go with one of those other options?
maybe – maybe not – depends on how they perceive Chambers or whoever.
If they think Chambers can fill in or draft a tackle/guard in oher – then why not go after C or D?
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 7, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions
Cost of Oher/Smith at #11
While I’ve been a huge Bills fan all my life, I haven’t any insights into the ‘business’ side of the sport – especially Draft economics. Can anyone ballpark what a contract for Oher/Smith would cost us at the 11th pick (by salary and guarantee) in the draft?
I assume it would be much cheaper than the $12 million a year and huge guarantee ($30mil) that Peters is after??
Jri111 – Great post! This is certainly the key issue/question regarding our draft this year and its refreshing to see other options being discussed.
MRW covered this a week or two ago. :)
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions
and I wasn’t even talking about the actual financial cost of the move. We’ve covered that before. I’m wondering if the team can absorb the risk of a move like this….
~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"
Get Value or Force Peter's Hand
Thanks Brian – this site is addicting and has decreased my productivity at work, but don’t tell anyone that :)
Here’s a couple thoughts, but I’m not necessarily advocating once choice over the other because I would prefer to have Peters signed before the draft like most foks here.
Oher Contract – Based upon those numbers we could have Oher for $4-5mill a year, 10 guaranteed- which is about 1/3 of the price that Peters demands – $12mil, 30mil guaranteed. If we play hard ball, we would also be keeping Peters existing salary ($3.5 mil) and we’re near the $8-9 mil figure that OBD offered Peters – but in this case we have both lineman.
Market Value – If only we knew the true market value of Peters (we may soon) – but if we could get a 1st rounder or a 2nd and 3rd, I can’t not see OBD pulling the trigger. But if we can’t get great value, then I would think twice and hope the Bills would consider "going all in" as mentioned in the original article. Either way – we are at the mercy of Peters or the mercy of what the market (Philly, Detroit, etc.) is willing trade for him.
Peters Holding Out – Maybe he does until the 10th game, but then that’s more money left on the table for the Bills to recoup. I’d have a hard time believing he would hold out that long since (1) he’d have to hold off the rookie from starting in his spot and it would (2) diminish his ‘perceived value’ further to lose his starting role and/or suffer another ‘off’ season.
Best case scenario – You have your starting LG (or RG if you switch Butler) and LT in camp and sign Peters during the middle of the season to an extension on the Bills terms. This would not only solidify the line, but also send a strong message to our young guys with star potential (Edwards, Poz, Lynch) on how to not go about contract negotiations.
Worst case scenario – Peters really despises playing in Buffalo and is willing to sit out till the 10th game. Buffalo loses any potential value it could have gotten via trade in the draft to address other needs (DE, OLB, TE) early in the draft. Then Chambers is the starting LG with Oher as the LT – Not ideal, but hopefully serviceable.
Poker is a great analogy in this situation and it’s not for the faint of heart. The Bills either extract maximum value from Peters (at the expense of another team) or force him to show up because you shouldn’t ‘bite the hand that feeds you!’
‘bite the hand that feeds you!’
nice NIN reference – one of my top 3 bands – saw them 3 times
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 8, 2009 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Sorry to burst your bubble, J2, but “biting the hand that feeds you” has been a popular expression since long before NIN.
by thefourwinds on Apr 8, 2009 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions
lol – obvously – give me a little credit there 4winds – it was the exclamation point that made me think NIN reference
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 8, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions
The only problem is you didn’t take into account the fact that Peters may not even want to play for Buffalo anymore. If it was as simple as Peters wanting to be paid, then you may have nailed it.
I’m not sure Buffalo erred in terms of the negotiation tactics. If Peters refuses to budge, the team has to make it known that they won’t put up with it any longer. If Peters wants to threaten a holdout, that has to hurt his value and has to hurt his chances for getting paid top dollar, either here or elsewhere.
I will agree that drafting someone like Oher who could play Tackle or Guard may be a kick in the pants for Peters, but we don’t know if it would be. He still wants to be paid a gazillion dollars, so the situation could get even uglier. And it could also be tougher to trade him at that point if the teams in need of an OT address it in the draft.
The biggest issue I’d have with drafting a G/T at #11 is that it inhibits the rest of our draft to a certain degree. With all the holes we have, can we afford a Guard at #11???
This whole situation sucks. For the most part, it’s a lose-lose situation for us, IMO. Unless we can trade him for multiple high picks and find a good replacement that will play immediately, we are looking at trouble.
Good post and rec’d.
~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"
K...if the Bills call his bluff, what Peters wants become irrelevant for 3 years.
How important does a person have to be before they are considered assassinated instead of just murdered?
If they call his bluff, I’m guessing he won’t be seen until mid-fall….
~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"
Exactly
Because if not, he looks silly for saying he needs more money.
"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"
"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 8, 2009 12:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Which doesn’t really do the Bills much good. I think management has thought about all of the possibilities. They have NOT shown their cards, except the “We’re in it to win it this year” card, which wouldn’t take a rocket scientist to see anyway. They may surprise us, but the reason we’ve come to the conclusions that we have is that they are the only options that get us some value for Peters. An NFL team can’t afford to have a single player on the roster during the season who just isn’t available to play. Is keeping an unhappy, holding out Jason Peters worth keeping a contributor, whether offensive, defensive, or special teams, off the field? Is it worth the loss of focus on the goal of winning? You can’t want the Bills to be wheeling and dealing on draft day and want them to keep an unhappy Peters as that would seriously limit what they could do. Keeping Peters also could affect how much attention is spent on Fred Jackson and other guys we love. Is keeping Peters worth not keeping Jackson happy?
he could be on PUP for six weeks.
by then someone should be on IR right?
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 6:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Fantastic idea with drafting Oher and calling Peters' bluff.
However, if Oher succeeds, then very likely, Peters has played his last game as a Bill and the team won’t get much for him in return. They may even just release him! Or, they could just move him to a different position, and then maybe the 3 mil a season wouldn’t look so bad to him.
"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"
"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 7, 2009 2:00 PM EDT reply actions
if Oher were to pan out they just wouldn’t release him – he’s got 2 years here whether he likes it or not if thats the route OBD decides to go.
we’d get something – at absolute minimum a 2nd or 3rd.
I really like his idea – force Peters’ hand – hopefully he’ll stop being a moron about these things
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 7, 2009 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions
hopefully he’ll stop being a moron about these things
I’m not sure it’s a good idea to formulate any negotiation tactics around that particular hope…
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 2:09 PM EDT up reply actions
na – that wasn’t negotiation tactics – that was just a general statement.
I think JR explained why this would be a good idea
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 7, 2009 2:16 PM EDT up reply actions
I should have added that they’d possibly release him after the 2 year period. i don’t know why, but i’m nervous the front office is going to find a way to get shafted. Bringing in Oher and scaring Peters would help change some of my feelings on the matter.
"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"
"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 7, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions
If Oher pans out, why not just stick Peters in on RT? then you can stick Walker on RG and Butler on LG, you’d have a better line for it I would think.
by CanadianBillsFan on Apr 7, 2009 2:17 PM EDT up reply actions
That's not how it works.
You can’t just stick any guy into any hole. Walker is just too large a man to really do well in the interior positions. Peters would make a much better guard than Walker. Plus, shifting Peters wouldn’t make him happy to be here all of a sudden. People need to back up and look at this with business sense, not poker sense. Take emotion out of it. Does it make sense to pay money to someone who doesn’t share your vision, and is actively trying to disrupt it? We have talked these situations over and over to no end. John here is upset because the Bills have committed themselves to choice A or choice B. (They haven’t really, we have) If they have, it’s not through ignorance. It just doesn’t make sense to hold an asset whose value (should you not put another quarter in) will shrink to 0 in 19 days. Drafting a tackle won’t change Peters’ mind at all, not that we know what his real goal is. I think he wants out of here, doesn’t like the snow, or something. If this was about money, there would be give and take in a negotiation going on. There is none of that. If you take Peters wanting to get paid out of it, you end up with Peters being worth nothing to the Bills if not traded by / on draft day.
Take emotion out of it.
I think you are 100% confused, this has nothing to do with emotion (If it did, i’d take time off from my busy life to fly to Buffalo to help the ungratful as* pack his bags – there is nothing about Peter’s that I like). No, this is about trying to do what’s best the for team by finding a way to keep your best player. I think Peters is overrated – vastly overrated, but he is still a top 5 or 10 LT in the NFL. They don’t grow on trees. I am 100% with the front office in terms of not overpaying for his services, but at the same time, i’m not willing to say “oh well, we gave it our best shot – lets trade him.” They have other options. I articulated one that I would like to seem them pursue.
It just doesn’t make sense to hold an asset whose value (should you not put another quarter in) will shrink to 0 in 19 days.
Now that’s just not true. Peters value will go down after the draft from where it is now, but that doesn’t mean it will stay down there. Teams are still going to need good LTs. Nor is it even close to say that Peter’s value will be ‘0.’ Also, there is more in terms of value than just “trade value.” To me, Peters has the most value – not in the trade market, but on the Bills roster.
I’m not saying that I would be against a trade, but it has to be for the right value.
John I.
That's what she said....
You can’t just stick any guy into any hole
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 6:51 PM EDT up reply actions
good piece
I think that the key piece here is He is signed under contract for 2 more years. I know the Bills want to avoid a hold out, or trade him as you mentioned but if YOU CANNOT get the value you want and YOU CANNOT pay him what you think is fair, then YOU ARE FORCED to look at alternative options. I’m a big believer, that Peters trade value is very poor right now. In fact, I would bet that they can’t get much more than a 3rd and a 5th at this point. Who the hell wants to trade for Jason Peters and pay him $10 million a year?
At this point, if Oher or Smith is available at #11, I think the BILLS MUST draft one of them, and then do their best to trade Peters to a team in desperate need of a LT.
Peters stock will continue to drop if he skips OTA’s, Mini camps and Training camp. No team will be offering what they may offer now in the next two weeks. So The fallback of letting Peters sit and holdout, is his value depreciates so fast if he isn’t participating. So if Peters is a Bill after the draft, the Bills are virtually royally screwed.
MARVelous - "I went from America's team to North America's Team" Terrell Owens
You do have to wonder how many teams are going to give up high draft picks and good money for a guy who (if it happens again) has already sat out 2 offseasons of a 5 year deal. He will have shown very little commitment to a team’s philosophy and to their program.
"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"
"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 7, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Why woud value drop?
How does his value drop? He is a probowl LT, a team will think they can change him. Why else do 1st draft busts last in this league for 5 or more years? Because each Coaching staff thinks they can change the mentality of a player and get the most out of them. For that reason his value will not keep dropping with time missed. He actually will lose the chance for a new deal when he gets traded. In reality the only “value” lost is in peters pocket. Cincinatti was offered 2 1st rd picks for Ocho Cinco with his antics? Why wouldnt a probowl caliber LT at least fetch a 1st rd?
How many years can we go without making the playoffs...eventually the odds go in your favor.........right?!?!?
I love the Poker analogie and think that your absolutly right
In my eyes, the option that you propose is the best one for the Bills. Sure it will mean that they also adress one less need at the draft, but the team might also come up the better for it. I’m licking this better than trading Peters away.
by CanadianBillsFan on Apr 7, 2009 2:11 PM EDT reply actions
If they grab Scheffler away from Denver, then they can really breathe a bit easier. Well, that’s assuming they view TE as a necessity.
"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"
"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 7, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions
If they're as big on Pettigrew as everyone says they are, then they view TE as a necessity
My concern is that they view the offence as needing more help then the deffence, which would be a HUGE mistake.
by CanadianBillsFan on Apr 7, 2009 2:19 PM EDT up reply actions
To me, the entire lead-up to the draft is one big smoke screen.
"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"
"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 7, 2009 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Peters
Draft a LT. Hold on to Peters. If the rookie LT works out , when Peters last year comes, you already have a second year LT, so make Peters a TE again, and when his contract comes up franchise him as a TE. Wouldn’t that piss him off.
Haaaa....Make him a TE.....love it....Take that Peters
How important does a person have to be before they are considered assassinated instead of just murdered?
what about the other needs?
It would work in theory for negotiations, but now not only did we draft Peters’ replacement, we didn’t get any compensation to go after any of our other needs like DE, LB, or TE. Because of that, I really don’t think the Bills can take this stance. We either have to pay him or get tools in return to fill the multiple needs we have.
Don't forget to pay the troll toll...
I disagree
This could work, and while we would be sacrifying needs on other positions (for now), I do believe that the Bills would still be the better for it. Bottum line is no matter how many holes we have, if we can’t get the offence going, we’re not going to win games, and at the point where the Bills are, theyhave a much better chance of winning games by relying on their offence then on their deffence. This approch would make the Bills take the approach that the Colts have taken for the last decade: get on side of the ball to be one of the best in the league and hope the otherside of the ball doesn’t lose games for you. NowI’m not going to start comparing the Bills to the Colts, but the strategy itself might actually work for our team… as long as Trent has a good year.
by CanadianBillsFan on Apr 7, 2009 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Peters Hold Out
Thing about it is, he will only hold out until just before the season starts (or whatever the cutoff day is in his contract where if he doesn’t report, he won’t get paid). I think he did this exact same thing last year.
So, you draft Oher at 11. Put him at LT through workouts, preseason, etc. until JP comes back last minute. Now you have two LT and nobody playing LG.
What do you do there?
Where else would you rather be...
Thing about it is, he will only hold out until just before the season starts (or whatever the cutoff day is in his contract where if he doesn’t report, he won’t get paid). I think he did this exact same thing last year.
He won’t do that if his motivating factor is getting out of Buffalo. If that’s the case – and who’s to say it isn’t? – he’d sit out until Week 10, report, and then no matter what the Bills decide to do, he gets his accrued year toward free agency.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions
he’d be losing out on a lot of cash too!
say he didn’t report until week 10 this year and next year. obviously not playing in either of those years – how much money would he make on another team when no one has seen him play in the last 2 years?
i’m willing to bet he’d lose a ton of money by doing this instead of just re-upping with buffalo for 8-10 mil a year
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 7, 2009 3:26 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, he gave up half a mil last year without blinking an eye…
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions
well thats half a mil compared to many multiple millions – not really apples to apples
he would be losing far more than half a million if he sat out 10 games this year and then 10 more nexrt year and then his next contract would obviously be far less than what’s being offered to day. thats not really the same situation – unless you see it that way – but i don’t
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 7, 2009 3:50 PM EDT up reply actions
Of course it isn’t apples to apples. Wasn’t saying that it was a sure sign he’d leave the $ on the table. It was just to point out that he’s cool with leaving significant chunks of change on the table.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
yes he is
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 7, 2009 3:57 PM EDT up reply actions
Step back, think over this whole situation
I’m with Brian on this. This “negotiation” hasn’t been rational at all, unless it’s just Peters’ way of begging out of Buffalo. It’s not like the Bills gave him an insultingly low contract offer. This would be different if the Bills had low balled him, but they didn’t. I think this reeks of “I’m still angry my good faith contract extension wasn’t extended last year so I’m going to ask to leave without asking to leave”.
He is sore at the Bills management and is pouting, and that won’t stop until he is not our problem anymore. He’ll probably take a lesser contract wherever he’s traded, play a year, and pull the same business with his new team. (Hopefully wherever we trade him thinks he’ll be happy there, so it doesn’t damage his trade value)
If Peters just wanted money, negotiations never would have stopped for more than a couple of days. I want A, we’ll give you Z , I’ll take B, we’ll give you Y, etc.
I bet if the Bills agreed to pay him his demand, he’d say “Too late, trade me.” or he’d take the money, show up to camp out of shape for the next few years, and play like last season.
Trade him, get what you can get in the draft, and weigh your options between rookies and guys on the roster like Bell and Chambers. I doubt a rookie or Bell (? never seen him play much ?) or Chambers wouldn’t give up 11.5 sacks with a guard next to him playing hard (instead of mailing it in). You’d like the guy to just be happy, but that’s obviously not the case.
yes but everythning your saying is just speculation.
i’m just putting options out there on the table that the bills could use. i’m not sure what the best plan is…well because we have zero idea about the whole scope of whats going on. we know pieces – but certainly not enough.
i just hear pay him or trade him – when i can think of different ways we can work somehting out in a positive way for the buffalo bills. my comments were made to get people to think out of the box or think about it in a different way – and i’m certainly not necessarily right
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 9, 2009 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions
The only issue I have with thinking players willfully play out of shape is that it opens them up more to injury, and greater ones at that.
"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"
"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 9, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions
can’t they put clauses in their contracts for being in shape and whatnot? i think they can
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 9, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions
They can base it on weight....
a lot of linemen have that which is why the Williams guys in Minnesota got popped for a banned substance. It’s a diuretic designed to flush out your system and lose weight quickly.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:04 PM EDT up reply actions
He won’t do that if his motivating factor is getting out of Buffalo
I think his motivating factor is clearly money. He’ll hold out until he starts losing paychecks then report. I’m not sure about the numbers here but how many training camp days does he need to miss and be fined for before it equals one game check?
Where else would you rather be...
I think his motivating factor is clearly money.
I disagree. I think we’re looking at a Manny Ramirez level oddball here. His motivation is getting the hell out of here. I think if they hold onto him, he might show up, but he’ll make the Bills’ wish they’d sent him packing.
Where is hte support for that claim?
I keep hearing that Peters doesn’t want to play in buffalo, but I haven not seen one shred of evidence to support this. Not even a rumor, just pure speculation.
On the other hand, we know he requested that his contract be re-negoiated last year. We know that he held out all of last off-seaon becuase of the contract dispute. We know that he’s unhappy with his current salary. We know that he wants to be the highest paid LT in football.
I can’t say for sure (none of us can), but it seems almost certain that this is about money, not him wanting out of Bufflao. If we hear different, that obviously changes the game… but until then it’s pure speculation.
John I.
Not even a rumor, just pure speculation.
There’s a difference?
I don’t think he wants to be here, either – unless he’s the highest-paid LT in the game. His strange negotiation tactics (not talking to anyone last year, refusing to budge even a hair this year) are at the center of my belief. Then again, I could just be full of it. But I believe firmly that it’s more than just money that is motivating Peters right now.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 9, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions
I think the reasoning at that point would be to get a guard in the 2nd or 3rd round. The prevailing thought now seems to be that the earliest a guard is going to be taken is in the second guys like Andy Levtrite and Duke Robinson and the third has some nice options like Kraig Urbik.
Or you could take a center and shift Geoff Hangartner over (it’s been mentioned here on the blog.) There are a lot of good centers that should be available in the second like Alex Mack or Unger. If the Bills waited to the third to take a center they could go after Antoine Caldwell or A.Q Shipley.
Finally a third option would be to do what the Bills said their going to and let Kirk Chambers and Demetirus Bell battle out for the Guard spot.
by MichiganBillsFan84 on Apr 7, 2009 4:34 PM EDT up reply actions
my only problem
is the passing up of other talent to get a 1st round LT…other than that i like the hardball stance
The Bills CAN win every game
That's where I come down on the issue
Let’s say the Bills play hardball and take a LT at #11. Obviously, the #11 pick can’t then be used on a front 7 defender or traded for other picks. Oher, or any other LT taken at #11 isn’t likely to do better at LT than Peters did last season so the #11 pick really wouldn’t have been used to upgrade a position. At best, it’s a lateral move—not the kind of impact the Bills need from that pick.
I don't get where people think we have a choice?
After we agree that Peters is not worth what he is asking, what are the options? We have to draft a LT, who might start at RT this year.
If corn oil is made from corn, and vegetable oil is made from vegetables, what is baby oil made from?
Trade him
That’s the only option that allows Buffalo to have a first round pick that helps some position other than LT….unless OBD is comfortable starting Chambers at LT all season. Sitting on Peters AND using the #11 pick on a LT doesn’t help the Bills this season.
Or...
you could attempt to trade down from number 11 to the late teens/early twentys, grab your LT there and then you can use your extra pick(s) to get the positions of need (whether it’s two second torund additions and a thrid, or using a combination of those picks to move back into the first).
John I.
This is getting way out of hand
The main focus of the Peters situation should be what is best for the teams performance next season. Peters should be offered a contract that makes him one of the top two highest paid LT’s in the League. If he refuses a contract of that magnitude then he should be traded. We need to get ready for next year and stop messing around.
The main focus of the Peters situation should be what is best for the teams performance next season.
THANK YOU. This is the perspective everyone should be keeping.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 5:52 PM EDT up reply actions
Aaaaaaa....the cry of those who don't have the guts to go "all in". I will play poker with you guys anytime :-)
How important does a person have to be before they are considered assassinated instead of just murdered?
I’d rather win football games than play poker. But that’s just me. :)
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 6:56 PM EDT up reply actions
They have a lot in common......
football contract negotiating strategy doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Plus, you probably don’t play poker much because you get “cleaned out” :-)
How important does a person have to be before they are considered assassinated instead of just murdered?
I’m more of a euchre guy.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 7, 2009 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions
me as well there brian
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 8, 2009 8:56 AM EDT up reply actions
I love that game. Stopped trying to teach my friends years ago…they aren’t bright…
Penn Staters belong at Penn State. The problem with a lot of kids is they just don’t know they are Penn Staters yet.
Noli nothis permittere te terere.
by TheK-GunNeedsReloaded on Apr 9, 2009 12:10 AM EDT up reply actions
WHAAAA?
I found two great friends who knew how to play and we taught another friend. We sat around drinking beer for four months and playing cards before graduation. At college that was my favorite semester.
I never get to play. Maybe at a training camp gathering.
Of course I love poker too. If it has cards and money involved, I am there. :-)
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions
I wonder if we could all find a way to play online together some random night. I’ll admit that it’s pretty nerdy, but I LOVE euchre and I would be down for something like that.
They have it on our partner, yahoo.
It’s under games….
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions
Find us a fourth and I’m in.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 9, 2009 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions
i play yahoo all the time – let me know
The rest of you go get the goods on Stan. His mom grounded him once for setting something on fire. Let's find out what that something was and then lie and say it was a puppy.
by J2 on Apr 10, 2009 8:41 AM EDT up reply actions
yep - yahoo site isn't bad.
I play there sometimes to keep up my skills b/c my family plays after holiday meals and I can’t stand losing!
by Blind Faith on Apr 10, 2009 12:57 AM EDT up reply actions
What gave you the impression this was any sort of "negotiation"
And the Bills’ doing what they feel is best for next season and beyond has nothing to do with their collective manliness. If being “manly” was what they were interested in, instead of what’s best for the team, I would call on them to fold their tents and move on. I would be terribly upset if this situation ends up with an unhappy Peters hanging around anywhere. Even if he takes a max contract with Buffalo, I contend he will still be an unhappy shadow of himself.
As far as bluffing and calling bluffs, the Bills could call Peters’ bluff by actually putting that max contract on the table and seeing what Peters does. Maybe he’d walk away. That would be too much of a gamble for the Bills to take though. This isn’t about gambling, this is about running a winning (possibly) football team. Making that move would tie up too many resources in someone who isn’t worth that kind of money, if he took it. It certainly would be a better gamble than keeping him on the roster at his current salary.
poker analogy
You’re getting too caught up in the poker analogy. It was meant highlight the negotiations that are (or should) be going on at One Bills Drive. Negotiations to do what’s best for the team: Keeping your Pro Bowl Left Tackle and doing it on your terms.
John I.
Reports are 9M a year.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Not a good way to play it for the Bills
Let’s say the Bills play tough here and let Peters hold-out.
We:
1 – Diminish his trade value even more than it already is if he sits through week 10 and comes back to play poorly.
2 – Hurt ourselves by not having a capable left tackle, or at the very least having to replace him with a high draft pick
3 – Are kept captive by his decision, whatever that may be… Do we move forward and draft a tackle and not address other glaring needs (DE/LB/TE) or do we fill other needs and assume he will show up?
Either way, Peters holds the upper hand here. I truly beleive we either sign him or trade him while he still has value.
When I say “sign him” I mean that we offer him a fair market contract. We don’t have to bow to his demands necessarily, I think he will cave when he realizes that the contract he would get at the end of the year, if he holds out, will be less than what we are offering.
"It's that time of the year where all teams are involved in making some, to a degree, painful decisions." - Marv Levy
by Jason from OH-IO on Apr 7, 2009 5:44 PM EDT reply actions
one thing is certain
OBD will NOT make Peters the leagues’ highest paid LT.
I’d guess that a certain Bill with initials T.O. may have something interesting to say to Peters, if he does hold out. T.O. may actually be a very useful tool in this respect. Nobody wants to be plastered all over the sports media as the selfish person who is preventing Edward’s from having the chance to get the ball to T.O.
Why do you say Peters is being selfish? The NFL is a business and a player should try and get as much as he can while he can.
by gjv on Apr 7, 2009 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions
To further gjv’s view, Peters played for less than half of his market value last year.
"It's that time of the year where all teams are involved in making some, to a degree, painful decisions." - Marv Levy
by Jason from OH-IO on Apr 7, 2009 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions
I’m saying that I could see Owen’s putting forth that opinion to his media minions. Personally, I don’t think Peters has any interest in playing for Buffalo. Trying to get a decent pay raise is one thing, if he’s insisting on nothing less than being the leagues highest paid LT, well that’s beyond ludicrous IMO.
TO should keep his mouth shut, and I’m sure he will. He doesn’t know Peters and probably only knows the situation second or third hand. One thing that players never want to do is talk about another’s contract situation, you can bet on that.
~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"
TO should keep his mouth shut, and I’m sure he will.
Because that is what TO does best…..riiiiight!!!!!! We can only pray that nobody asks TO about it.
If corn oil is made from corn, and vegetable oil is made from vegetables, what is baby oil made from?
Even T.O. knows it's a business....
remember Walker last year talking about it. He kept repeating it’s a business.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:12 PM EDT up reply actions
Great Post Jr
I’ve been been convinced for weeks now that we shouldn’t let ourselves get bullied out of a fair trade. We didn’t just tip our hand to Peters we also tipped it with every other team! I have been very active at promoting this idea the past few weeks every time I see someone suggesting that anything less than a high first rounder (or the equivalent) in exchange for Peters. I am blown away when I see Rumblers suggesting to take a far inferior trade for Peters just so that the problem goes away! Who cares about Peters? This is a business and you are absolutely right in your analogy of poker, we need to gain back the leverage here and by drafting a LT we could do just that.
By drafting a LT we basically add 3 options:
a) He realizes the position that he is now in and accepts a reasonable offer (unlikely but possible)
b) He realizes the position that he is now in and decides to outplay the rookie and not accept any extension (demanding a trade in 2010) – a very acceptable outcome, because we could get better value for him
c) He decides to be an idiot and sit out the first 10 games (no problem, we save the money) + he tarnishes his value big time
d) Any of the above could happen and we decide to trade Peters after the draft (if another team looses their LT to injury)
Either way you look at it, drafting a LT and keeping the options open is way better than caving in or accepting anything less than fair value in a trade. At $3M/y we are sitting in the drivers seat.
Your ability to control the LOS is directly linked to your ability to win football games!
FEED the BEAST!
by keysh67 on Apr 8, 2009 7:12 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
OK
but the problem is, this team needs to win now! What happens when we draft that LT and then Peters sits out the summer? Fine, we have his replacement in place, but then we avoid addressing other positions of need. We then get him back in his crappy form. Worst case scenario if you ask me.
This situation affects more than just the LT position, it affects the entire teams. And it hurts the entire team if we do nothing with Peters and draft a possible replacement.
~K
"I’m Kurupt with Buffalo Rumblings. I am worth hundreds!"
Again, how can any of that be avoided if Peters will not sign a reasonable contract with the Bills?
We have to address the LT in ALL scenarios except the Bills making Peters the highest paid LT in the NFL.
If corn oil is made from corn, and vegetable oil is made from vegetables, what is baby oil made from?
How??? If he is traded, we still start a rookie at LT or RT.
Granted we could have filled one more hole somewhere, but LT is a pretty big hole.
If corn oil is made from corn, and vegetable oil is made from vegetables, what is baby oil made from?
LT is a big hole
Peters is a very good tackle, though not as good as he likes to think. Replacing him will not be easy but it can be done—particularly if the new LT (draftee or Chambers/Bell) is supported by Butler to one side and Fine to the other.
Since we know Peters won’t sign a reasonable deal (though I like the extension idea someone—Kurupt?—floated somewhere on Rumblings to make it look like he’s the highest paid but not really making him so) the only option is to trade him.
Here's how that could work....
6 years, 72M dollar contract averages 12M per, highest LT in the league
first five years are worth 50M (same contract numbers as Gross)
He gets a 12M dollar roster bonus before season 6 and 10M salary that year….
The classic poison pill contract.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions
That would kill us. I hte to think that the Bills would pay that much for him, and am thankfull that they wont.
by CanadianBillsFan on Apr 9, 2009 7:21 PM EDT up reply actions
Sorry I didn’t explain…. they would cut him or re-sign him before that cap hit ala Dockery.
Haynesworth’s contract is essentially a 4 year contract with a huge poison pill before year five. It’s all in how the contract is reported by the media.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:22 PM EDT up reply actions
I totally agree with that, and I really hope Buffalo will explore it. It’s probably more agreable to Peters than my extension idea (which I totally stole from Buffalo)
The media reported that Lee Evans got that 4 year, 36 or 37 mil contract and that he would make 9 a year, but it was really an extension. Evans had a voidable year left on his contract that got included into the extension. So instead of getting a 4 year 36 mil deal like people think, he really got a 5 year 40 mil deal.
good point.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions
If there is any way that Buffalo can get Peters under a reasonable contract than they should. Whether it’s an extension or with a huge unguaranteed salary in the final year, the final numbers should only be a concern for the media.
Agreed… but I still don’t think that he’s worth 12M per year.
by CanadianBillsFan on Apr 9, 2009 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions
Good summary keysh67
keep it handy because you will most likely have to post it another 125 times before Peters is traded :-)
If corn oil is made from corn, and vegetable oil is made from vegetables, what is baby oil made from?
Great post
I agree…why not improve our poker hand by adding a young ace at LT? I would certainly go this route IF we don not get a fair oofer for Peters, and that is my present worry. By exposing our hand to Peters, we also have exposed it to Detroit and Philadelphia. We have reduced our leverage in the eyes of other teams.
We do not need to accept the best offer for Peters if the offer doesn’t make us a better team. In that case, let’s call his bluff.
I've been feeling Buffalo ill.
Great write up, but I disagree with it.
Like Kurupt said up top, it’s not that the Bills only have options A or B. It’s just that those options are considerably better than this one. To go back to the poker analogy, what if Peters isn’t bluffing? A better analogy might be that Peters has gone all in and the Bills have two options. They can fold, trade him, and use those chips to draft a couple players and maybe make a splash next offseason. Or they can call, push all their chips into the middle and see who has the better hand.
The problem with calling is that you might lose. What if Peters really isn’t going to accept a new contract here? You simply cannot trade Peters after the draft and get the same value you can right now without getting really, really lucky. Teams that want a LT are going to try to draft one. So you take a really big risk by giving potential Peters suiters an opportunity to find a different solution at LT.
So then what if you can’t trade Peters after the draft, and what if he doesn’t show up until week one? or week ten? It’s simply too risky. What exactly is the best case scenario here? Will Peters really wake up and sign a more team friendly contract because you drafted a LT? Why would that make any difference to him? If anything, I think drafting a LT just pushes Peters further away, makes him more bitter and less likely to sign a contract.
So, if the best possibility doesn’t seem realistic, what exactly is the 2nd best? Is it that Peters shows up week one like last year and we get a great player 9 out of 10 plays like last year? So we get to keep Peters for one more season, use our first round pick at guard and then go through all of this all over again next year, and that is the 2nd best possibility, and the most likely positive outcome? No thanks, let’s just trade him.
Pay him
Why not just pay him? If Buffalo was ever going to make a player the highest paid at their respective position, why not make it this guy? He is a guy you brought in (undrafted FA), changed him from TE to LT and fully developed him to be the best at his position. He is a great building block. Only 27 years old. Some might even call him the “face of your franchise” for years to come.
He has everything you want in your franchise Left Tackle.
Give him his money and lets use this pick to fill another position.
Otherwise, you trade him and get a pick later in the first round. Then, you draft a LT at 11 and Pettigrew with the new first round pick. (yeah, there is probably a third or later thrown in too, but who knows how that will pan out).
So, if you keep him, you have a ProBowl LT (maybe the best in the game) and you can still take Pettigrew at 11 (not my suggestion).
Or you trade him and you have a rookie LT, Pettigrew and a third round “flyer”. Basically, you are trading Peters for a Rookie LT and a third round pick. Not worth it.
Where else would you rather be...
I was trying to get to a Top 10, but have run out of time...
Why not just pay him?
1. He wants more money than his play/trade value dictates he is worth
2. He came into the season after his holdout last year out of shape
3. He didn’t have a good year, despite getting voted to the Pro Bowl on his rep from the year before
4. Given his attitude and work ethic, he will most likely get fatter and lazier after signing his big new contract
5. His me first attitude does not fit with the team concept the Bills are trying to built.
6. He doesn’t want to play for the Bills
7. He is a douchebag!!!
If corn oil is made from corn, and vegetable oil is made from vegetables, what is baby oil made from?
I agree with most of your points. He did get back into form as the year went along so I don’t agree fully with 3—though we both agree he didn’t deserve that Pro Bowl nod. Also, I don’t know that Peters doesn’t want to play for the Bills—-just that he wants to be the highest paid guy at LT.
What's really strange about his Pro Bowl nod
is that voting starts after about game 4, and ends well before the end of the season. In that time frame how did people possibly vote for him enough, unless they just recognized his name from ESPN? Pro Bowl nods for the most part are popularity contests and don’t really indicate whether a player, especially offensive linemen, is any good or not. I don’t really understand the x player is an X time pro bowler as a means of establishing value. In a trade situation, teams know a players performance and watch tape, they don’t really consider how many times they went to the pro bowl. Thats an honor for us and by us, not by insiders. This isn’t really meant for you Ron, I’m pretty sure you get it. It just comes up an awful lot around here!
to be fair...
fans only count for 1/3 of the vote. Coaches and players had to value him as well.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions
Did you feel the same way about him before this last year?
In other words, what was your opinion when he was happy, in camp and productive, as he was widely considered the one of the best LT in football.
Whose to say he won’t be again (I think he still is)?
He is a worker. It isn’t easy to go from undrafted TE to ProBowl LT. But he worked at his trade and improved himself more than just about any player I’ve witnessed.
Where else would you rather be...
by Slick Shifty on Apr 8, 2009 12:11 PM EDT up reply actions
I was against OBD giving him a new contract once he failed to show up for mandatory workouts, etc
Before that, I agreed that Peters deserved a raise. After the season he had last year, I am glad he didn’t get it. I think his attitude is the only thing worse than the way he played last year. I think most people here will back me up that I am not a big Peters fan.
If corn oil is made from corn, and vegetable oil is made from vegetables, what is baby oil made from?
Paying him is definitely an option. Especially if Buffalo can start to cave in a little and then get Peters to negotiate and come down some himself. I really like the idea of giving Peters a contract extension that makes him look like the highest paid offensive lineman in the league, but since it’s an extension and includes the last couple years of his deal, it’s really a fair contract. He has 2 years and about 6 mil left on his contract. So let’s give him a crazy 5 year, 65 mil extension than makes it look like we just gave him a contract that pays him 13 mil a season, but it also includes the remainder of his current contract, so it’s really a 7 year, 71 mil contract (which is still friggin huge). The beauty in this is that you supplement Peters’ modest 3 mil salary with as much of the guaranteed money you promised him as you can over the first couple years. If you do that then the last few years of his deal are all unguaranteed dollars which should keep him pretty motivated.
On the other side of the argument, you can’t just look at who we would get in the draft this year if we trade him. Because you also save like 8 mil per season (and that’s the low estimate) by trading him. So imagine the player that Buffalo can sign for 8 mil a year next offseason and factor that into equation if you want to see what really happens if Buffalo trades him.
Agree. Which brings me to Option #4 -- sign and trade
We should stop looking at what’s good or not good for Peters. But what’s the best for the Bills. If the Bills sign him, it will seriously hinder what the Bills can do with other players due to the money Peters lock up. And at the same time, the best value the Bills can get for Peters is before the draft. So why can’t the Bills sign Peters to a contract extension first (relieving the “must trade” limitation and re-creating leverage on trade negotiation to get the best deal available), and then trade him on or close to draft day?
Keep in mind:
1)I think the Bills really would like to get rid of Peters due to his attitude; and
2)Worst case scenario where the Bills cannot find the best deal before the draft, they can still keep Peters and trade him next year. This will be a much better option than John’s option #3, where the Bills have to invest on a LT using the #11 pick and possibly not getting Peters to contribute until week#10.
Bills fan half way around the world
Because Peters won’t sign a contract that doesn’t include a signing bonus and if there is an upfront bonus in the contract then Buffalo, no the team that we trade him to, has to pay that signing bonus and have it count against our salary cap. The way the NFL is set up, you really can’t trade or cut a player for the first couple seasons (at the very, very earliest) if they get a deal anywhere near the one Peters is looking for (unless you are Oakland and have no problem eating 10s of millions of dollars after signing DeAngelo Hall).
We’d be stuck with a signing bonus and cap hit.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
And we couldn't afford the cap hit.
we have about 10M in cap space right now. If he signed even a five million dollar signing bonus we’d get the huge cap hit and it would be hard for us to sign our rookies. Dockery’s cap number is substantial even though he’s not on the team.
This is only relevant because of the uncapped year. If somehow the owners agreed on a new CBA in the next week it could be a moot point. Of course, that’s not gonna happen since the owners aren’t meeting in the next week. If that happened, his cap hit would be applied in 2010.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 9, 2009 7:21 PM EDT up reply actions
the best scenario is still a draft-day trade deal. anything after that will be somewhere between bad and worse case scenario. There’s almost zero chance he will sign with the Bills.
Disagree
Best case scenario is him re-signing. I haven’t heard anything about it being “almost zero chance”.
Where else would you rather be...
by Slick Shifty on Apr 8, 2009 12:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Problem is
he wants to be the highest-paid LT in the league, but his play isn’t quite there. I’d be willing to be a Pro Bowl nomination means little to the Bills, when you’re not committed to a team, and you’re not in shape on game days.
"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"
"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 8, 2009 12:18 PM EDT reply actions
He’s a possibility, but they wouldn’t sign him until May or June, probably. He’s definitely an option.
Buffalo Rumblings - all you care to know about the Buffalo Bills and more
by Brian Galliford on Apr 8, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions
interesting, how i asked myself, “will the Bills ever spend the money to keep their free agents or sign a big name free-agent that will help us become contenders?” i mean, i wondered how are you ever going to improve if you keep letting your great players go to other teams who are willing to pay them. winfield, nate clements, now peters. but then, i think to myself that perhaps with the exception of winfield, who is still a little bulldozer, the other two are not worth the kind of money they sought or are seeking. clements got a ridiculous, 81 million dollar contract. i still can’t stop laughing whenever i think about it (which was never until now. and peters, i think i hate him already. whatever the case may be, i think i, too, would have preferred to have kept him and worry about other positions. but as it now appears, we will have to deal him. if the eagles really give us their first round pick, i think we will have gotten a really good deal. maybe we can draft a tackle at number 11 and perhaps pettigrew at 21. i personally, would go for other other positions in the first round, as i dont place much emphasis on the tight end position. i think derek fine can turn into a good player. we can address the tight end via the later rounds of the draft—perhaps cornelius ingram. hec, maybe we can package our two first round selections and ship them to detroit for their first overall pick, and we could take curry or a tackle. i kind of oppose this idea, as i would probably rather having two first round selections than one.
wow
just read this.
great call. I want them to do what you say just to scramble Peters brain and watch him fire Parker
Guards Brad Butler and Brandon Rodd are decent. - Pete Prisco
Brandon Rodd!! Our best player.
I keep going back to that wonderlic score. I don’t think this kid really comprehends a good deal of the business-side of football.
"Buffalo Bills Football 2009 (sponsored by Labatt): A Future as Uncertain as the Beer You’re Drinking"
"It's not delivery, it's DiGiorgio!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Apr 9, 2009 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions
I finally got around to reading this...
sorry but it was big grading time and we got the first two seasons of the Office on Netflix.
I think your analogy is apt. We could raise the ante. I just don’t see how it helps us long term. We’re not the Raiders and paying top tackle money for a guard like Oher (who I like at LT) is not the best move this year or in the future. I think we need to pick one and go with it. If Peters doesn’t accept my offer and tells me he will hold out until week 10, I trade him for a first round pick plus something else. The first round compensation allows me to replace him and the other pick helps me guard against a draft bust by drafting a plan B player. If I don’t get that compensation, I go with the guys on my roster and hope he shows up. If he doesn’t, it’s like he got hurt in preseason. That sucks but it’s how I would deal with it. Expect him to show up and if he doesn’t, deal with it.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
a few thoughts...
some things that got lost in the shuffle:
1. I’m not saying that the OT/OG that the Bills draft has to come from the first round. Nor am I saying that It has to be Oher, just someone that could potentailly play both. I wouldn’t be cool with draft Oher at 11 either to play guard. That just wouldn’t be smart.
2. In my scenario, I like the idea of a trade down. Move back a little where it may be more acceptable to take a OT/G (or in the alternative, take a guy like Matthews or Pettigrew) and then use your two second round picks and your third to fill other needs.
3. I’m not against trading Peter, but it would have to come at the right price. I just don’t see the value in trading him, even for a 1st and 3rd round pick. After using your new-found first on his replacement (who has never played a down of NFL football) all you have left is an extra third. So in the end your team is left with an unproven LT and a third round pick. I’d rather keep Peters in that case. I don’t know exactly what “the right deal” is in my mind, but I know it would be more than most are talking about.
John I.
I know you know this but...
I don’t know exactly what "the right deal" is in my mind, but I know it would be more than most are talking about.
Prepare to be disappointed.
Thanks for the clarifications. I think we pretty much agree on everything here.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008. Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free.
by MattRichWarren on Apr 10, 2009 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
