Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

[OpIv37]

There are several indications that the Bills are finally pursuing a LG to replace Dockery. Right now, this is arguably the biggest hole on the team, and signing a vet LG is necessary to allow Trent, TO and Lee to be productive.

But at the same time, the Peters trade talk has resurfaced. If we trade Peters, then we just added a hole at LT to replace the one we are presumably about to fill at LG. Kirk Chambers was adequate filling in at RT last year (with Walker holding his own at LT), but this is a much stronger line with Peters at LT and Walker at RT.

It seems like it's always 1 step forward, two steps backwards for the Bills. Trading Peters is a BAD idea, especially if we fail to acquire a LG.

[The Jokeman]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

It seems like it's always 1 step forward, two steps backwards for the Bills. Trading Peters is a BAD idea, especially if we fail to acquire a LG.

I agree with you, as it seems like we like creating holes in the roster with no real plans on fixing them. I admit I don't follow the cap religiously but would it have killed us to keep Dockery and/or Royal until secured a quality replacement before cutting either one?

[Nighthawk]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

Very true and the reason that I would hate to see them trade Peters. You can't build a good team if you're always getting rid of your best players.

[Jan Reimers]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

No More Holes!

[methos4ever]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

The talk is coming from the media, who also didn't think we'd have Lee Evans after there was a gulf around this time with his contract last year. And team(s) like the Eagles that would love for the rift to allow them to trade for him.

Unless a general manager pulls a Reese ala McGahee, I wouldn't worry about it Op.

[X-Era]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

There are several indications that the Bills are finally pursuing a LG to replace Dockery. Right now, this is arguably the biggest hole on the team, and signing a vet LG is necessary to allow Trent, TO and Lee to be productive.

But at the same time, the Peters trade talk has resurfaced. If we trade Peters, then we just added a hole at LT to replace the one we are presumably about to fill at LG. Kirk Chambers was adequate filling in at RT last year (with Walker holding his own at LT), but this is a much stronger line with Peters at LT and Walker at RT.

It seems like it's always 1 step forward, two steps backwards for the Bills. Trading Peters is a BAD idea, especially if we fail to acquire a LG.

What indications?

Maybe Kugler called Russ from Ok.

Maybe it went like this:

"Hey Sean is Duke worth the 11 pick?"

"Nope, I dont think so Russ"

And then Russ realized he better get a starting LG for the next year at least.

[Michael82]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

The talk is coming from the media, who also didn't think we'd have Lee Evans after there was a gulf around this time with his contract last year. And team(s) like the Eagles that would love for the rift to allow them to trade for him.

Unless a general manager pulls a Reese ala McGahee, I wouldn't worry about it Op.

The key is Peters. With Lee Evans, he still stayed with the team during OTAs, Mini-Camps, and Training Camp. He quietly worked out a new, expensive contract after he showed that he's a team first guy. So far Jason Peters hasn't done that last year. Now if they are serious about giving him what he's worth or maybe even overpaying for him like they did with Lee, they need something from him. He needs to show them and us fans that he will come to camp and the OTAs and not be a distraction. If he does that, I bet that he will get his money...just like Lee did.

[DynaPaul]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

I say pay him some money but right now it looks like Peters might want TOO much money especially after his spotty performance last year.

[dasaybz]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

Trading Peters is NOT a bad idea if he costs us $11 million/year.

Hell, what ****ing difference has he made when he's been on the field? Our offense has been pathetic since he's been on the team. What's the point in spending all that money on him? It's pretty obvious that an all pro left tackle just doesn't matter that much to our team.

[OpIv37]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

Trading Peters is NOT a bad idea if he costs us $11 million/year.

Hell, what ****ing difference has he made when he's been on the field? Our offense has been pathetic since he's been on the team. What's the point in spending all that money on him? It's pretty obvious that an all pro left tackle just doesn't matter that much to our team.

Put Chambers in for 16 games and you'll see what difference it makes. And if we trade Peters and Walker or Chambers gets injured, then you'll REALLY see what difference it makes.

It's not Peters' fault that Parrish can't get open. It's not Peters' fault that our centers last year were both turnstyles who got manhandled by 3-4 NT's. It's not Peters' fault that we don't have a real receiving threat at TE. It's not Peters' fault that Lee can't beat a double team. It's not Peters' fault that Trent Edwards can't deliver the ball consistently. Trust me, Peters was NOT the problem with the offense last year.

And I'm really ****ing sick of the money excuse. Every year, we let good players walk and we fail to pursue big-name free agents, but every year we're $10-15 million below the cap. **** that noise. Spending money just to spend money like Dallas and Washington doesn't work, but letting Pro Bowl players walk over a couple of million clearly doesn't work either.

[ddaryl]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

Paying Peters 11.5 million a season with 30 + million guarenteed and only to see him repeat last years on field performance makes me just as ill as the thought of trading him and creating that hole

[mikemac2001]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

Put Chambers in for 16 games and you'll see what difference it makes. And if we trade Peters and Walker or Chambers gets injured, then you'll REALLY see what difference it makes.

It's not Peters' fault that Parrish can't get open. It's not Peters' fault that our centers last year were both turnstyles who got manhandled by 3-4 NT's. It's not Peters' fault that we don't have a real receiving threat at TE. It's not Peters' fault that Lee can't beat a double team. It's not Peters' fault that Trent Edwards can't deliver the ball consistently. Trust me, Peters was NOT the problem with the offense last year.

And I'm really ****ing sick of the money excuse. Every year, we let good players walk and we fail to pursue big-name free agents, but every year we're $10-15 million below the cap. **** that noise. Spending money just to spend money like Dallas and Washington doesn't work, but letting Pro Bowl players walk over a couple of million clearly doesn't work either.

Dont really like how you kinda turned all the blame away from peters because he really ****ed himself by holding out ruined unity on the O-line and set himself back

he didnt perform like he should have

but i agree we pay him and cant let him walk

[Michael82]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

Paying Peters 11.5 million a season with 30 + million guarenteed and only to see him repeat last years on field performance makes me just as ill as the thought of trading him and creating that hole

Agreed, especially when he has already shown us that he puts himself before the team and is a greedy bastard, who has no problem holding out for the whole entire season, even when it hurts the team.

[Night Train]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

Pissing away roster bonus $$ isn't smart, if your going to replace him anyhow before opening day.

There is no "good timing" in dumping a subpar player. There is plenty of time to replace any of them. Last I checked, we kick off in 6 months.

[TacklingDummy]

Re: Are the Bills about to trade one problem for another?

It seems like it's always 1 step forward, two steps backwards for the Bills. Trading Peters is a BAD idea, especially if we fail to acquire a LG.

There is no reason to trade a player who has 2 years left on his contract. If the Bills want to trade Peters they should do it after this season.