thewildrabbit Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I have read the pros and cons of trading Evans and right now I can't agree with trading him. I don't understand it. Saves money, maybe get a OT in return? But yea, in my mind it was Evans drawing more coverage that got Johnson open more often, what happens this year when they roll coverages to Johnson.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 We will be 10 to 20 $Million below floor of cap and then have to give bonus money by end of season to guys like Kelsay, etc to reach minimum floor. If the NFL palyers union were smart they would tack on $5 million per year to cap allowance for Bills as they should be foprcede to put back their Canada money back into the team snce the "sold a home game" for money. we are a friggin joke. We sign three bench players and lose two starters every free agency it seems. we mearly drfat to replace guys we lose in tthir prime. we are only trying to catch up and stay where we are. we never seem to reward good players, only mediocre. [/quote Maybe premature but Kyle Williams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkady Renko Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 There's no salary cap floor this year. Not until 2013. League wide, however, 99% of the salary cap must be paid to the players. If that is not paid, it is unclear as to who makes up the difference. Those below the salary cap might have to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Said this in another thread, but this is why you don't trade Evans unless we get the equivalent starter as a position of need like RT or TE or RG... Lets just say Evans is our #1 (which Gailey would say, Steve Johnson said, Andre Reed just said, etc). Steve Johnson makes a great #2, Roscoe makes a very good #3, David Nelson makes a very nice #4, and Donald Jones or Naaman have NFL talent and for a #5 possess some skills. If you take away Evans, suddenly Stevie is a #1 who can't really go deep, Roscoe is a very questionable #2, David Nelson could still be a good #3 and Donald Jones and Naaman have NFL talent and still possess some skills, but have to produce on the field. To me, Roscoe is much better going against a #3 CB than a #2, and David Nelson is a complete mismatch for almost any #4 DB. It doesn't look nearly as good when those guys are bumped up a slot. Easley is the wildcard. if he's the real deal and can stay healthy (which we won't know for months), he can be the deep threat. Otherwise we have none. I really hope that Nix doesn't think Buster Davis can replace Evans just because Nix likes him and drafted him. That's possible that is what is behind this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackFlutie Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Said this in another thread, but this is why you don't trade Evans unless we get the equivalent starter as a position of need like RT or TE or RG... Lets just say Evans is our #1 (which Gailey would say, Steve Johnson said, Andre Reed just said, etc). Steve Johnson makes a great #2, Roscoe makes a very good #3, David Nelson makes a very nice #4, and Donald Jones or Naaman have NFL talent and for a #5 possess some skills. If you take away Evans, suddenly Stevie is a #1 who can't really go deep, Roscoe is a very questionable #2, David Nelson could still be a good #3 and Donald Jones and Naaman have NFL talent and still possess some skills, but have to produce on the field. To me, Roscoe is much better going against a #3 CB than a #2, and David Nelson is a complete mismatch for almost any #4 DB. It doesn't look nearly as good when those guys are bumped up a slot. Easley is the wildcard. if he's the real deal and can stay healthy (which we won't know for months), he can be the deep threat. Otherwise we have none. I really hope that Nix doesn't think Buster Davis can replace Evans just because Nix likes him and drafted him. That's possible that is what is behind this. ...seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Said this in another thread, but this is why you don't trade Evans unless we get the equivalent starter as a position of need like RT or TE or RG... Lets just say Evans is our #1 (which Gailey would say, Steve Johnson said, Andre Reed just said, etc). Steve Johnson makes a great #2, Roscoe makes a very good #3, David Nelson makes a very nice #4, and Donald Jones or Naaman have NFL talent and for a #5 possess some skills. If you take away Evans, suddenly Stevie is a #1 who can't really go deep, Roscoe is a very questionable #2, David Nelson could still be a good #3 and Donald Jones and Naaman have NFL talent and still possess some skills, but have to produce on the field. To me, Roscoe is much better going against a #3 CB than a #2, and David Nelson is a complete mismatch for almost any #4 DB. It doesn't look nearly as good when those guys are bumped up a slot. Easley is the wildcard. if he's the real deal and can stay healthy (which we won't know for months), he can be the deep threat. Otherwise we have none. I really hope that Nix doesn't think Buster Davis can replace Evans just because Nix likes him and drafted him. That's possible that is what is behind this. Only problem with that take is that Evans has proved to be a weak #1. Nevertheless, I sure as hell would not give him away for nothing right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Only problem with that take is that Evans has proved to be a weak #1. No, he hasn't. He didn't have a good year statistically last year but was very valuable to this offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsguy Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Can you say "salary dump" or how about "two steps forward, three steps back"..... Can you say "one step backward, three steps forward"? This is an excellent idea and I would greatly raise my opinion of Buddy Nix if he pulls it off. Lee Evans has only short term value for the Bills. He will be gone when his current deal expires. In the very short term, this deal would slightly hurt the Bills, but they are trying to rebuild the team and Lee Evans won't be around long enough to see the "new" Bills. The Bills are still two or three years away from being rebuilt to the point where they can contend. If they dump Evans now they can get some value for the rebuilding. It makes perfect sense. They aren't going to win anything this year with him anyway. If Bills fans look at the big picture, this is a great idea. By the way, the cap savings might be re-invested in getting a couple of quality free agents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 No, he hasn't. He didn't have a good year statistically last year but was very valuable to this offense. Oh, I definitely think he has value all right... but as a #2 WR. Still one of the scariest deep threats in the league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 There must be a rule that says that every year the Bills have to trade one of their best players for a bag of magic beans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Apparently someone missed the sarcasm in my post. I don't mind people criticizing the Bills because they have sucked for awhile, but at least have some clue of what you are talking about. Because he is 30 and just came off the worst year of his career. Chan Gailey's offense doesn't utilize his strength, but is better suited to players who can come over the middle which Evans is not good at. There are only two years left on Evans deal and he will be gone then. Da Joker, David Nelson, Donald Jones, Marcus Easly, Roscoe Parrish and Naaman Roosevelt, which one are you releasing for nothing instead? Plus we just might get something for him. I'm am for this for various reasons and I really don't think it hurts the team that much. Fair enough. We do have some good young receivers who played well last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep2evans Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 what a !@#$ing joke. if we deal evans, expect stevie's numbers to plummet. this would be an awful, awful move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Oh, I definitely think he has value all right... but as a #2 WR. Still one of the scariest deep threats in the league It has no bearing on this team whether you or me or anyone considers SJ #1 or LE #1 if they are both on the field as starters. The numbers are mythical and mean nothing. If SJ is #1 then Evans makes a great #2, and vice versa. SJ will get more passes because he is a better route runner, and has slightly better hands and ball skills (although he drops more, too) and Fitz doesn't have time to look downfield as much to Evans. But they are a solid 1-2 punch. SJ and Parrish, not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8-8 Forever? Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I see Nelson and Stevie outside with Parrish (if healthy) in the slot...looks like a roster spot is opening up for Naaman. if Easley is the real deal, then Evans is probably available if the offer is right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 Can you say "one step backward, three steps forward"? This is an excellent idea and I would greatly raise my opinion of Buddy Nix if he pulls it off. Lee Evans has only short term value for the Bills. He will be gone when his current deal expires. In the very short term, this deal would slightly hurt the Bills, but they are trying to rebuild the team and Lee Evans won't be around long enough to see the "new" Bills. The Bills are still two or three years away from being rebuilt to the point where they can contend. If they dump Evans now they can get some value for the rebuilding. It makes perfect sense. They aren't going to win anything this year with him anyway. If Bills fans look at the big picture, this is a great idea. By the way, the cap savings might be re-invested in getting a couple of quality free agents. Like who? There's no one left on the open market. I might have agreed with you if they'd made this move 2 weeks ago, but now it just looks like a salary dump to me. How are you supposed to keep fans engaged if you dump your better players? By the team this team is ready to win, they'll be in LA..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MRW Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I am indifferent on the Evans trade but maybe I am wrong with the following: For the last 2 or 3 years most on Two Bills Drive have **** on Lee Evans saying he's not worth the contract, he's over rated, not a #1, etc. Why is it when there is potential for us to get something for him the Bills front office is clueless and this is a dumb move? Look you can't have it both ways. I truly wonder how some people call themselves fans when they just go to which ever side of the fence gives them a chance to call Ralph cheap, the front office dumb, etc. Like I said I am indifferent. I would have to see what we get in return. I just don't understand how there are so many people in love with Evans now. Perhaps the people arguing that Evans isn't worth his contract aren't the same people who are against trading him now. If people actually are contradicting themselves then you have a good point but I don't see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I am a big Evans fan can understand the deal if we can get a third or better for him. Some team might even give up their second for Evans. Naaman is tearing up and there is a logjam at WR. Evans would fetch the most, and he is the oldest and most expensive. And no way could we keep 6 WR this year. Someone has to go- might as well get something of value for Evans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 It makes no sense to take away a true leader on offense to help the other young receivers. His salary isn't that much, plus they have a salary floor to be at next season...If he does leave, I at least hope he gets to go to a contender. Add him to the list of names you will recognize as playing very well for other teams after they left Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 If this were any other team, people would be talking about the shrewd move to deal an aging veteran near the end of his contract. There are teams interested in him. I unfortunately dont see him going for better than a 4th, but its better than the nothing we would get in two years. People act like we're loaded to make a serious playoff run in our division this year. Cmon. Lets see how this plays out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deep2evans Posted August 12, 2011 Share Posted August 12, 2011 I'd also like to point out, as the Patriots have so aptly demonstrated, the NFL has gotten to a point whereupon its laughable just how much teams overrate late round draft picks. Like, what is the positive of trading Lee at this point? Naaman Roosevelt gets to stay on the roster and we can draft another Chris Hairston? Give me a break. Let's give this offense a fighting chance and not put it in the hands of unproven 2nd year players or 1st round busts (Buster Davis). And even if Lee has lost a step, what kind of message does this send to the rest of the team? no. !@#$ing. kidding. it's an absolute joke. a 4th round pick? what the hell is the success of that player even making an NFL tackle or catch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts