What do you think of the outcome of the Peters trade?

[Thurman#1]

Wood = HEART, PASSION for the game and a never ending motor with atheticism. And is better for the cap than 11 mill per. This is someone one you can build the team/line around, especially if he gets moved to C.

 

 

 

I like Wood's heart and passion too. But right now, he's below average. Still young, though, so he could easily develop and become an excellent player. But he's far from there yet. Far from it.

[Cynical]

I don't disagree at all that the Bills should have taken Oher with their #1 pick last April - but that WOULD NOT have been giving up a 1st-round pick, it would have been using our 1st round pick to draft a player.

 

A matter of semantics. Doesn't matter if you call it 'giving up' or 'use', it still means the same thing: spending a resource (a/k/a "cost"). In this case, the resource is a draft pick.

 

If we draft a QB in April, are we 'giving up' a first round pick for that QB? By your way of explanation, we're 'giving up' all of our draft picks on the players we select!

 

Yes we are. To both your question and and your attempt at a sarcastic statement. To acquire that player, it is costing the Bills a draft pick resource.

 

Are you really that dense, or do you just have an overwhelming need to be right about your inexplicable love for Peters?

 

Actually, it is simplified basic economics.

 

The Bills had a starting caliber LT. The Eagles wanted said LT. Monetary units aside, to acquire said LT, it cost the Eagles numerous draft picks.

 

In exchange for the draft picks, the Bills gave the Eagles the LT. To compensate for this 'loss', the Bills moved their RT to LT, and moved their RG to RT.

 

Theoretically, the Bills needed to only address the hole at the RG position to fulfill the final 'cost' of the trade.

Unfortunately, since the organization grossly overestimated the abilities of Walker and Tinker Bell, the Bills did not realize the 2 holes to fill.

 

Up to this point, this is what trading Peters has done:

They had to spend a draft resource on a RG

They have gone through two players in attempt to find Peters replacement.

And they still have no viable LT.

 

In the long term, the Bills will probably find a LT (ask yourself how many resources will be spent in finding that guy).

But there is no denying, in the short term, the Peters trade has been an absolute disaster for the Bills.

 

And that assumes Butler works out at RT. If he fails at the position, then the Bills will be spending additional resources to fill that position.

 

So, just by trading one unmotivated, fat, lazy, LT to the Eagles, it is possible the Bills will spend more resources (than they acquired in the trade) in finding his replacement.

[MRW]

The fallacy here is that you're argument consists of two separate arguments and ones that seem to concur with my own thoughts. It's a really bad idea not to have a plan in place for left tackle. You need to have a solution there. However, Peters was not that solution for the Bills. If you're paying 11 million, he better be more than "good" at his position.

I think we do agree on some stuff. If the Bills manage to come up with an adequate replacement for Peters at a reasonable cost, then the trade starts to look a lot better. I think the difference between us is I'm much more skeptical of the team's ability to do that. Peters can be maddeningly inconsistent, but he has a lot of talent, and I also think the price tag of a decent LT will be higher than you think.

[Flbillsfan#1]

I think we do agree on some stuff. If the Bills manage to come up with an adequate replacement for Peters at a reasonable cost, then the trade starts to look a lot better. I think the difference between us is I'm much more skeptical of the team's ability to do that. Peters can be maddeningly inconsistent, but he has a lot of talent, and I also think the price tag of a decent LT will be higher than you think.

The Bucs drafted two very good Tackles in the 2nd & 3rd rnd, Jeremy Trueblood & JeremyZutah. I just hope the Bills Draft a SMART guy with the same kind of attitude as Wood for LT.

[PDaDdy]

I'm curious about this opinion. Peters was under contract. They redid his contract for a significant pay raise. Then Peters wanted the contract re-done *again*. How is this reasonable? It's not like he was even saying, "Hey, give me a moderate increase and we'll tack on a couple years at 6-8 million so I get an immediate raise and the team gets a couple years."

 

He wanted 10 million a year. He's got it. We'll see how it ends up for the Eagles, but for the Bills it was a much worse move.

 

 

 

Also, Pro Bowls have nothing to do with performance.

 

 

You do realize he changed positions twice right? TE -> RT -> LT. Usually when I get promoted I want a raise sometime within a year of taking on the additional responsibility. How about you?

[PDaDdy]

Reasonable - Peters came in as an undrafted free agent, worked his way onto the line at RT, and got paid like a good RT. When he was switched over to LT and hailed as already a great player and one of the most promising young players at that position, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect to be paid like one. I think people are lying to themselves if they think they'd just accept a situation where they were not paid the going rate for the job they're doing. You can dislike how Peters conducted himself, but the truth is that's the only leverage he had. And he got every damn thing he wanted out of it - I guess the only question is was it the Bills or the Eagles who were played for suckers? Personally I think it's the Bills. They had an opportunity to earn his goodwill but instead chose to play hardball and burn their bridges.

 

As far as Pro Bowls? They're not perfectly tied to performance, but I think it's more wrong to say they have nothing to do with performance than that they are solely based on performance.

 

 

Another point was Peters actually came in as a TE his first year. He switched from TE -> RT -> LT.

[PDaDdy]

You seem to have missed/ignore the point. We'll bypass the argument hat because the Bills drafted him as a tight end, paid him, converted him to the right tackle, groomed him at it and put him in a position to make more money that they should expect that he'd play out a contract. I don't mean two contracts...just one.

 

As it stands, Jason Peters has not played out (completed) *one* contract in the NFL.

 

As it stands, Jason Peters has not played out (completed) *one* contract in the NFL.

 

In case you missed it, Jason Peters has not completed any contract he has ever signed in the NFL (cell phone contract for his phone information is still pending).

 

However, back to my point. He wasn't demanding a raise which was in order. He wasn't demanded to be the highest paid lineman / player on the team. He was demanding to be the highest paid Left Tackle in the entire league.

 

He got it, good for him. His contract is now nearly three million more per year than a five time pro bowler at the same position who's the next highest paid. That's five pro-bowls. Jason Peters makes 11 million a season. The next highest paid person at his position is makes 7.1 million (last I knew, it may have changed this season).

 

He's a good tackle, but hardly a game changer. Three million more would get you Peyton Manning. Peters makes more than Tom Brady.

 

He's a once in a lifetime talent that's not all too interested in using it. Yes, he's a big upgrade over what the Bills have, but one of the things they have going for them is that they're not saddled with a lot of dead money from ridiculous contracts. Peters contract was not worth his production on a team not going anywhere.

 

The Eagles felt he was worth it. The Eagles feel they're close to being a contender. They're wrong, but they felt strongly enough about it tp get him. He's there's for another six years. Maybe it will work out for them, but there's a lot you can do with 11 million dollars a year. I'd get a journeyman LT and Tom Brady for that price.

 

The Bills have a horrible situation on their line. Peter's can't get motivated in Philly and you think Dick Jauron was gonna get him going? Seriously? You thought Dick Jauron was going to motivate someone not taking massive amount of speed?

 

 

So it's his fault that he improved and started to play at such a high, probowl, level so quickly? Perhaps he should have refused the coaching staffs promotion to LT and stayed happily at his RT position and pay grade and finished out his contract as you put it. Whatever. You bought into the front offices time tested rouse. We RARELY ever pay elite talent elite money. You might be too young to remember but look back at what Thurman Thomas, Bruce Smith, Pat Williams, Antowaine Winfield and some other guys had to go through contract wise

 

You'll start to see a pattern and Peters is just the latest victim.

[PDaDdy]

Two future o-line studs for an overpaid, fat, lazy, injury-prone, washed-up LT with no heart and a big attitude problem? Are you freaking crazy??? I'll bet the Eagles would jump at that trade!

 

No doubt. Our STUD filled offensive line is the talk of the league and the pride of Buffalo!!!!! Funny thing about supposed potential, can't really tell what you are going to get until you get it. Future STUDS are Jake Long of the Dolphins, the guy that went to Cleveland 2, 3 years ago. Nick Mangold of the Jets. These guy came out of the gate and stepped up. At least one of them made a probowl their rookie year.

 

WHAT WE HAVE....are two rookies that were forced into a starting roll and the biggest thing they have going for them is that neither of their names are Jason Peters. They play on a TERRIBLE offensive line. TERRIBLE!!!! The only people propping these guys up as guaranteed future STUDS are the Peters haters.

 

Stop letting your bias cloud your vision!!!

 

They may turn out to be good or great players. Right now we know NOTHING!!! Please tell me what it is on the field you see that tells you these guys are going to be studs? Don't bother telling me that Woods occasionally when he does make a good block continues to push the defender to the ground and man hugs him instead of picking up another defender to block after he has taken care of his primary blocking assignment.

[PDaDdy]

No one is denying Peters was a very good LT. But, he wanted to be paid over $12 million a year and that wasn't gonna happen.

 

If we get 2 good tackles either draft or via free agency, then will will have a solid offensive line. I like the drafts of Wood, Levitre & Nelson and think they will be good NFL players for a long time. I had no problem with the trade of Peters, I didn't like the boneheaded decisions of switching our RT to LT, then cutting him 10 days before the start of the season. They should have put Walker back at RT. If Levitre pans out at LT, maybe they could give Bell a shot at guard (when he's healthy).

 

How much did he sign for?......Ya......thought so!

[PDaDdy]

The fallacy here is that you're argument consists of two separate arguments and ones that seem to concur with my own thoughts. It's a really bad idea not to have a plan in place for left tackle. You need to have a solution there. However, Peters was not that solution for the Bills. If you're paying 11 million, he better be more than "good" at his position.

 

 

AT TEN million he WAS better than good. It's called elite probowl level.

[PDaDdy]

A matter of semantics. Doesn't matter if you call it 'giving up' or 'use', it still means the same thing: spending a resource (a/k/a "cost"). In this case, the resource is a draft pick.

 

 

 

Yes we are. To both your question and and your attempt at a sarcastic statement. To acquire that player, it is costing the Bills a draft pick resource.

 

 

 

Actually, it is simplified basic economics.

 

The Bills had a starting caliber LT. The Eagles wanted said LT. Monetary units aside, to acquire said LT, it cost the Eagles numerous draft picks.

 

In exchange for the draft picks, the Bills gave the Eagles the LT. To compensate for this 'loss', the Bills moved their RT to LT, and moved their RG to RT.

 

Theoretically, the Bills needed to only address the hole at the RG position to fulfill the final 'cost' of the trade.

Unfortunately, since the organization grossly overestimated the abilities of Walker and Tinker Bell, the Bills did not realize the 2 holes to fill.

 

Up to this point, this is what trading Peters has done:

They had to spend a draft resource on a RG

They have gone through two players in attempt to find Peters replacement.

And they still have no viable LT.

 

In the long term, the Bills will probably find a LT (ask yourself how many resources will be spent in finding that guy).

But there is no denying, in the short term, the Peters trade has been an absolute disaster for the Bills.

 

And that assumes Butler works out at RT. If he fails at the position, then the Bills will be spending additional resources to fill that position.

 

So, just by trading one unmotivated, fat, lazy, LT to the Eagles, it is possible the Bills will spend more resources (than they acquired in the trade) in finding his replacement.

 

 

It takes some vision beyond blind hatred for Peters to see those points you make. People who cut off their nose to spite their face rarely are able to see it so clearly.

[Flbillsfan#1]

It takes some vision beyond blind hatred for Peters to see those points you make. People who cut off their nose to spite their face rarely are able to see it so clearly.

I don't understand why some people don't get the FACT that Peters did not want to be in Buffalo any longer? You can not force a player to stay & play well when they don't want to. Even if the Bills caved in to Peters demands there is no way to know how he would have played after that. Would he give his all or stand on the sideline with the slightest injury........like he is doing in Philly.

[PDaDdy]

I don't understand why some people don't get the FACT that Peters did not want to be in Buffalo any longer? You can not force a player to stay & play well when they don't want to. Even if the Bills caved in to Peters demands there is no way to know how he would have played after that. Would he give his all or stand on the sideline with the slightest injury........like he is doing in Philly.

 

 

That's just silly. Please don't state hear say as fact which NOBODY can actually prove!!!!! I can state that I also heard he wanted to stay in Buffalo but wanted to be paid as an elite LT not as a RT which was his level of compensation before he was promoted.

 

Players get hurt. Live with it. Just because he has has a bit of the injury bug doesn't mean he is no good. By those standards 50% of our team is sidelined by slightest of injuries but somehow you don't question their heart. Sounds like you are attempting to judge Peters by a different set of rules.

 

Again don't let blind hatred of the mans business acumen cloud your vision.

[billsfan89]

I am not saying this trade is a win for Buffalo at all. BUT its looking pretty good for us so far I mean Wood looks like he is going to be a good guard for a long time if not a pro-bowl caliber guy. As for Nelson he has potential to be a good player and was a good value in the draft at the time.

 

Now look at Peters the guy has played horrid at times this season and he continues to struggle with injuries for the third year in a row. You also have to look at how much he is being paid I mean 10 million for mid level LT production or a good young guard and a young tight end with potential? To me its looking good for Buffalo.

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

Peters was one man of 5 linemen.

 

There have been numerous injuries to the line and TE position. No way keeping would have made a difference. What made a difference ... was losing Fine in week in September

[Jerry Jabber]

How much did he sign for?......Ya......thought so!

 

He signed with Philly for $10 mil, but wanted $12+ million from us and wasn't going to get it. Guess you got short-term memory.

[PDaDdy]

I am not saying this trade is a win for Buffalo at all. BUT its looking pretty good for us so far I mean Wood looks like he is going to be a good guard for a long time if not a pro-bowl caliber guy. As for Nelson he has potential to be a good player and was a good value in the draft at the time.

 

Now look at Peters the guy has played horrid at times this season and he continues to struggle with injuries for the third year in a row. You also have to look at how much he is being paid I mean 10 million for mid level LT production or a good young guard and a young tight end with potential? To me its looking good for Buffalo.

 

 

MID LEVEL.....ROFLOL. When we people finally remember that he is a two time probowler and people are elected to the probowl in LARGE part due to their actual peers the players, the coaches who have to game plan against them and scouts with a bit of fan vote thrown in there as an after thought?

 

Let me guess your another one of these guys that thinks their armchair talent opinion is correct and the actual professionals that get paid MILLIONS are actually wrong. Can't wait to see what team hires you as the next GM. "

 

Superbowl here we come!!!!"

 

I asked this of the Senator I think and I am still looking for someone with the stones to answer. WHY DO PEOPLE THINK WOOD IS A GUARANTEED STUD AND WE GOT THE BETTER OF THE TRADE!?!?!?!??

 

Seriously. He and Levire were thrust into starting roles on a line that cleared house. He plays RG on a terrible.....repeat TERRIBLE o-line? Other than occasionally pushing a defender to the ground and wrestling with him instead of picking up another defender to block at taking care of his primary blocking assignment what has he done to earn his STUD title? Our line is BAAAAAAADDDD!! What has he been doing to keep Trent or Fitz upright? What has he done to open holes on his side of the line in the running game?

 

Before you go calling someone a STUD please look at their ACTUAL PLAY!!!!!

[PDaDdy]

He signed with Philly for $10 mil, but wanted $12+ million from us and wasn't going to get it. Guess you got short-term memory.

 

 

Nope....what I have is an understanding of "BARGAINING TACTICS"....look it up sometime. Usual when people negotiate each side asks for a better deal than they are actually willing to accept. Perhaps the basis of all capitalism. Might give you some insight to his "asking price" of $12 mil......Oh wait.....if you just hate the guy I guess you just throw that kind of logic out the door and come up with cockamamie explanations of his asking price like he would only stay with the Bills for $12 mil.

 

Why not make up some more crap you can't in anyway shape or form prove or substantiate?

[Flbillsfan#1]

That's just silly. Please don't state hear say as fact which NOBODY can actually prove!!!!! I can state that I also heard he wanted to stay in Buffalo but wanted to be paid as an elite LT not as a RT which was his level of compensation before he was promoted.

 

Players get hurt. Live with it. Just because he has has a bit of the injury bug doesn't mean he is no good. By those standards 50% of our team is sidelined by slightest of injuries but somehow you don't question their heart. Sounds like you are attempting to judge Peters by a different set of rules.

 

Again don't let blind hatred of the mans business acumen cloud your vision.

Any player can be injured at any time, but if you read through my posts, you will see that I do question the VALUE to a team of players that are injury prone. I would rather have a VERY GOOD IRON MAN that never gets injured than an elite INJURY PRONE player that can't be counted on to stay healthy at ANY position on the team.

 

Peters said himself that he could have returned to play in a game the Eagles LOST, but he stood there on the sideline. I would question his heart based on that FACT.

 

I don't hate Peters, & wanted the Bills to resign him, but like the Bills, I have moved on.

[Orton's Arm]

I don't disagree at all that the Bills should have taken Oher with their #1 pick last April - but that WOULD NOT have been giving up a 1st-round pick, it would have been using our 1st round pick to draft a player.

 

If we draft a QB in April, are we 'giving up' a first round pick for that QB? By your way of explanation, we're 'giving up' all of our draft picks on the players we select!

 

Are you really that dense, or do you just have an overwhelming need to be right about your inexplicable love for Peters?

Um . . . it looks like your post is a response to things that people other than me have written. I didn't make the "giving up a first round pick for Peters' replacement" argument--an argument with which you've (correctly) disagreed in your post. Nor do I feel any overwhelming love for Peters, whether "inexplicable" or otherwise!

 

The way I look at the Peters trade is this: we traded away a player for a first and fourth round pick. Sure, I would have loved it if that first round pick could have been a top-15 pick or even a top 10 pick. Based on Peters' talent level, that's clearly what his trade value would have been worth. But his passion for football, or lack thereof, brings down his trade value. A pick in the lower part of the first round seems about right, value-wise.