Thoughts on this trade proposal

**Kerr** · 03-29-2005, 12:30 AM

Originally posted by clumping platelets

trade proposal at end of rant

I've seen many people believe that it's all but over with respects to the prospect of re-signing Nate Clements. It ignores the fact that Bills GM Tom Donahoe is willing to re-sign or sign "elite" players to market value contracts. Cases in point: WR Eric Moulds, LB Takeo Spikes, and DE Aaron Schobel. All 3 players were young and widely recognized as among the best at thier respective positions when they were signed. Moulds rec'd a $12 million signing bonus plus other $1 million reporting bonuses. Spikes rec's $10.5 million in guaranteed money over hgis 1st 2 yrs here. Schobel has rec'd $9 million in guaranteed money over 2 yrs.

The criticisms obviously stem from the inactivity this off-season and the loss of both OT Jonas Jennings and DT Pat Williams. Clearly, Jennings was not even close to "elite" status but still rec'd $12 million bonus. Bills offered P. Williams a contract before 2004 season that was a couple of million less than what he signed with Minnesota. Bills made a competitive offer to Williams but he chose a bit more money, contradicting his previous comments of taking less to stay.

Who else has he passed up re-signing? DE Marcellus Wiley.....nuff said; WR Peerless Price....grossly overpaid by the Falcons and we rec'd a 1st rd pick used to draft some RB named Willis. CB Winfield....good CB who rec'd elite CB money....the defense was better without him.

I advance the hypothesis that Nate Clements is near elite status and TD will make a very competitive offer because he recognizes that Nate fits in the same mold as Moulds, etc. Will he re-sign? That remains to be seen.

This being said, how would y'all feel about this proposal:

Cardinals have been rumored to be interested in CB Antrel Rolle at #8 if they can add Travis Henry. However, I wonder if they would consider.....

CB Nate Clements, RB Travis Henry, cond 2006 to Arizona for OL L. J. Shelton, RB Marcel Shipp, 1st rd 05 (#8), cond 06.

Bills then select CB Antrel Rolle at #8, add a capable veteran RB in Shipp to back-up McGahee, and upgrade LT from what we presently have. Cards get a #1 RB and #1 CB. Let them worry about re-signing both.

Cond 06 based on production and if Cards re-sign one or both

Bills could also add a veteran CB after the draft for depth. We have "Fast Freddie" Smith to handle PR duties.

Not bad. I kind of like it. T-Mcgee is also capable of handling punt duties.

**SABURZFAN** · 03-29-2005, 12:43 AM

it may work since arizona is always trying to free up as much money as possible.

**clumping platelets** · 03-29-2005, 12:47 AM

I believe Rolle will be represented by Drew Rosenhaus

**Kerr** · 03-29-2005, 12:51 AM

It's possible Tennessee could go after Rolle since they lost Samari Rolle.

**clumping platelets** · 03-29-2005, 12:55 AM

Originally posted by Johnny Utah

It's possible Tennessee could go after Rolle since they lost Samari Rolle.

Rumblings have them interested in WR Mike Williams

**clumping platelets** · 03-29-2005, 12:55 AM

Original post edited to include cap angle

**Kerr** · 03-29-2005, 12:59 AM

Originally posted by clumping platelets

Rumblings have them interested in WR Mike Williams

That's possible too. Mason is a raven and Calico has shown flashes only, while Bennet is nothing more than a #2 receiver. At least we know if rolle is on the board by the time 'Zona picks, we can try to pull off the trade.

**Sportsuser101** · 03-29-2005, 01:20 AM

I like Rolle alot and I think that would be a nice deal for us. Even though Nate is my favorite player I would think we would have to do that if that we're offered. It would be tough to have a rookie and a 2nd year starter starting at corner though. I think if we were to do that we would have to sign Ty Law and put either Rolle or McGee at nickle.

**clumping platelets** · 03-29-2005, 02:19 AM

Ty law is too expensive......I was thinking about Chad Scott. Besides, Troy Vincent could also play some CB at times. There could be other vet CB's available as well.

**LifetimeBillsFan** · 03-29-2005, 05:54 AM

It sounds good to me, but I don't think that TD would do it--t least, not without a "sweetener", like a swap of 2nd Round picks in this year's draft--or that Arizona would consider it.

Here's why: We know that TD does not think that getting LJ Shelton straight up for T.Henry is enough for the Bills and wants a swap of 2nd round picks as well as Shelton for Henry, while Arizona feels that Henry is only worth giving up Shelton at this point. We also know that KC is balking at giving Miami a 3rd Round pick for P.Surtain.

While one can argue whether N.Clements is better than P.Surtain or vice versa, the two of them are generally considered to be pretty much in the same category in terms of quality--with Clements being younger and Surtain having already accomplished what Clements is on the verge of accomplishing. If Miami cannot get a 2nd Round pick for Surtain, why should Arizona give up that much, let alone the #8 pick in the 1st Round, for Clements, who has not yet achieved as much as Surtain, when they might be able to get Surtain for their 3rd Round pick or, at most, their 2nd Rounder?

On the other hand, why would TD trade N.Clements, who is on the verge of being a Pro Bowler and the Bills' best CB, for an unproven rookie--no matter how high he is taken in the draft--without getting something more in return--at least the swap of 2nd Round picks that he wants included in the deal for T.Henry? As much potential as A.Rolle may have, at this stage, he is still totally unproven on the professional level and there is no guarantee that he will develop to be as good as N.Clements has already demonstrated that he is. So, why essentially swap them straight up for one another without getting something else that will help the Bills to win this season or, at the latest, next year? Conditional picks won't do it: the Bills wouldn't get any return for what they have given up until next year at the very soonest--and it is important to TD's future with the Bills that they win now, not later on down the road.

While you can argue that M.Shipp would fill an immediate need for the Bills and it is true that Shipp has played well in the past, Shipp is coming off of a broken leg that caused him to miss all of last season and this is a draft that is very deep at the RB position. Why take a RB from Arizona that is "damaged goods"--even if Shipp has recovered, there are still going to be effects from the injury and the resultant layoff--when the Bills can get a fresh, young RB in the middle rounds of the draft who has the potential to step in and be just as good if not better than Shipp? Or, pick up a cheap veteran RB, like T.Wheatley, etc., who can do the same job for the team for nothing?

I just don't think that Arizona would want to pay more for Clements and Henry than they are willing to pay for Henry and would have to pay to get Surtain. And, I don't think that TD would be willing to give up Henry and the Bills best CB, Clements, for Shelton, an unproven rookie CB, Shipp and some conditional future picks--not when the Bills are entering a season where the team is going to be starting a rookie QB and he is already going to be "on the hot seat" as far as his job is concerned.

While I think you have come up with a trade that makes a lot of sense--for a lot of reasons--to us as fans, I just don't think that it is a deal that the GMs of either team would be willing to make.

**feelthepain** · 03-29-2005, 06:27 AM

The biggest problem I see with your trade to Arizona is you are putting too much value on Henry, not that Henry isn't a good back but the depth at RB this year is so deep your boys value isn't what it would be if the class weren't so deep. Unfortunately for you Henrey just doesn't have much value this year. So for a team to part with #8 it will take more then a very good RB. I know you include Clements but the problem is not him, your also asking for a starting LT. Arizona could trade down and land a better deal then you proposed. It will be tough to move Henry. Like I said not because of his talent but because of the depth in the draft and if you think about it Arizona could just make a deal with either Indy for James or Seattle for Alexander both better backs then Henry or they could just draft a back at #8 they could have one of the best RB coming out of college football. So there are just too many directions for Arizona to go if they were to trade the #8 pick. IMO, Arizona won't trade the #8 for the deal above you would have to sweeten the pot.

**ryjam282** · 03-29-2005, 06:52 AM

Originally posted by feelthepain

The biggest problem I see with your trade to Arizona is you are putting too much value on Henry, not that Henry isn't a good back but the depth at RB this year is so deep your boys value isn't what it would be if the class weren't so deep. Unfortunately for you Henrey just doesn't have much value this year. So for a team to part with #8 it will take more then a very good RB. I know you include Clements but the problem is not him, your also asking for a starting LT. Arizona could trade down and land a better deal then you proposed. It will be tough to move Henry. Like I said not because of his talent but because of the depth in the draft and if you think about it Arizona could just make a deal with either Indy for James or Seattle for Alexander both better backs then Henry or they could just draft a back at #8 they could have one of the best RB coming out of college football. So there are just too many directions for Arizona to go if they were to trade the #8 pick. IMO, Arizona won't trade the #8 for the deal above you would have to sweeten the pot.

According to everyone's draft board, all of those big RB's coming out will be gone by the 8th pick so that is why we all believe that Henry will still have some worth by the time the Cards pick.

Clump, I like your offer very much. Being a Canes fan, I can tell you, Rolle is the real deal. He has all the skills and is a very solid tackler. I would do the deal but one thing, it would leave us without a true #1 CB. How about we possibly move Vincent back to CB as the #1 guy and move Rolle to #2 or 3 and move McGee to the other one. Give Baker a shot at FS and go from there. What do you think about that? But, I love Rolle, he was a great player for the U and will be tough to replace.

**G. Host** · 03-29-2005, 07:33 AM

Originally posted by clumping platelets

I advance the hypothesis that Nate Clements is near elite status and TD will make a very competitive offer because he recognizes that Nate fits in the same mold as Moulds, etc. Will he re-sign? That remains to be seen.

I think the reason Clements will not sign is because Tom Donahoe will recognize his flaws (i.e. boneheaded play against Jaguars) cost us games and unless he is penalized for it which is very hard to do in NFL he needs to offer less money hence Nate will make more boneheaded plays trying to get more recognition and more bonuses. It is a vicious cycle.

Originally posted by clumping platelets

Bills then select CB Antrel Rolle at #8 (Rolle must be available at #8 to make deal), add a capable veteran RB in Shipp to back-up McGahee, and upgrade LT from what we presently have. Cards get a #1 RB and #1 CB. Let them worry about re-signing both.

Nope. Top 10 picks get paid far too much. Too often such players are either overhyped or plain just not worth the money. If he was available and Bills had a trading partner to mid part of round maybe.

Originally posted by clumping platelets

I believe Rolle will be represented by Drew Rosenhaus

That makes it another reason to not target that player. If enough teams did that then maybe players would go to other agents.

**BuffaloRanger** · 03-29-2005, 08:15 AM

It's not that I think TD won't make Clements a good offer. I think Clements will want to test his value on the FA market. Some team with bigger national recognition (that Clements would crave), will pay him more than the Bills.

This is the guy that had "Playmaker" over his locker instead of his name. Think about that. I know CBs have to be confident, but that's a little much. That is excessive ego. He played in the Pro Bowl last year, becasue of injury to the starting CB, but that still has to inflate his sense of self worth. The way CBs have been getting paid, if he has a Pro-Bowl season, he's going to want to be a Top 3 guy. Some fans want TD to use the Patriots model. (I think it's the coaching that makes the model work.) Well, signing Clements for big money wouldn't be using that model. They win SBs with young, aggressive, inexpensive CBs - and converted WRs.

Drafting a CB in the 2nd or 3rd and grooming him may be the way to go. If TD drafts a CB that early, I think it shows his plans for Nate.

Clump, I do like the trade. Ironically it seems that fans think the Cards would want more, and the Bills would be giving up to much already. I agree with G Host that a #8 pick would be costly, especially with Drew "Mr Miami "Rosenbag. If the Bills could trade that 8th pick back in the first and still pick up a great CB that would be a great option. But it takes 2 to tango, and it's unlikely a team would pay TDs price to trade up.

Thoughts on this trade proposal

Thoughts on this trade proposal

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment