jahbonas Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Its almost a foregone conclusion that Clements will play this year out and hit bigtime $$$ in free agency and he will be gone like Winfield. Trade Clements to some team for a #1. We could draft a CB with that #1. The question is this....would you trade 1 year with Clements for 6 years (typical 1st rd contract) with a corner drafted in rd1??? YESSSSS Obviously we could sign a lesser CB in Freeagency and use the pick on another position like LT. Our CB's would be Mcghee & #1 pick...we could easily live with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poeticlaw Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Its almost a foregone conclusion that Clements will play this year out and hit bigtime $$$ in free agency and he will be gone like Winfield.Trade Clements to some team for a #1. We could draft a CB with that #1. The question is this....would you trade 1 year with Clements for 6 years (typical 1st rd contract) with a corner drafted in rd1??? YESSSSS Obviously we could sign a lesser CB in Freeagency and use the pick on another position like LT. Our CB's would be Mcghee & #1 pick...we could easily live with this. 264079[/snapback] Im glad you could live with this, I could not. First off mcgee is nowhere near being a FT starter yet, and second off how do we know if the player we bring in is going to be an improvement over clements a proven starter. As far as thw winfield comparison he wasnt that good in the first place all he could do was tackle that was it and he wasnt worht the money he wanted. On the other hand Clements is worth a good contract for the next 5-6 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahbonas Posted March 5, 2005 Author Share Posted March 5, 2005 Im glad you could live with this, I could not. First off mcgee is nowhere near being a FT starter yet, and second off how do we know if the player we bring in is going to be an improvement over clements a proven starter. As far as thw winfield comparison he wasnt that good in the first place all he could do was tackle that was it and he wasnt worht the money he wanted. On the other hand Clements is worth a good contract for the next 5-6 years. 264092[/snapback] You really think there is any possibility the Bills will sign Clements?? That we would offer him the type of signing bonus and contract that would take???? Lets establish that this is most likely....and then move accordingly...which is to acquire a #1 pick that will contribute to this team for a 6 year contract. Also..you say Winfield was not as good as Clements....ok...but look at the money Winfield was able to get....Clements likely will get more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Its almost a foregone conclusion that Clements will play this year out and hit bigtime $$$ in free agency and he will be gone like Winfield.Trade Clements to some team for a #1. We could draft a CB with that #1. The question is this....would you trade 1 year with Clements for 6 years (typical 1st rd contract) with a corner drafted in rd1??? YESSSSS Obviously we could sign a lesser CB in Freeagency and use the pick on another position like LT. Our CB's would be Mcghee & #1 pick...we could easily live with this. 264079[/snapback] this is a suggestion I would have expected in the early 90's when free agency was new to football fans, not today. clearly you still haven't adjusted to free agency yet... you don't trade a pro bowl corner who's still cheap just because he's in the last year of his contract... there's something called a franchise tag... get another pro bowl season out of him, and if needed, tag him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 better off letting him play and then franchise him next year. someone will pay. especially if he gets another 6+ Ints this year. Nobody his size is as fast as clements at that position in the entire league. He'll get his, sure. But we might get ours in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snorom Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 We can play the franchise card... and who knows maybe Nate gives the Bills the hometown discount Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVJ Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 If we sign him....by next year the franchise tag price will be a tad higher than this. http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c...SPGGTBIBOT1.DTL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 better off letting him play and then franchise him next year. someone will pay. especially if he gets another 6+ Ints this year. Nobody his size is as fast as clements at that position in the entire league. He'll get his, sure. But we might get ours in the process. 264146[/snapback] That's exactly right. Tag him, try to sign him long-term. If we're gonna trade him, do it when he's locked up with a tag and we'll get a #1 in return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVJ Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 The recent emphasis on limiting contact with receivers and the effectiveness of the cover-two defense has changed the game. It's not that cornerbacks are no longer valuable. But the days of them being the highest-paid defensive players might be over. Ask Mike Shanahan. The Denver Broncos coach traded running back Clinton Portis to the Washington Redskins for Champ Bailey, the league's top cornerback, before last season. Anybody who watched the Raiders' 25-24 win in Denver last season saw Moss' new wingman, Jerry Porter, torch Bailey repeatedly, which wasn't as uncommon a sight this year as it has been in the past. The New England Patriots stymied potent Peyton Manning and the Indianapolis Colts and went on to win their third Super Bowl in four years with starting cornerbacks Ty Law and Tyrone Poole on the bench and two rookie cornerbacks in the starting lineup. http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctime...ts/11039463.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 First off mcgee is nowhere near being a FT starter yet, 264092[/snapback] McGee isn't a FT starter yet? Didn't he start the majority of games at CB last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poeticlaw Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 McGee isn't a FT starter yet? Didn't he start the majority of games at CB last year? 264167[/snapback] Just because a player fills in for an injured player doesnt make him a ft CB. He got burned alot, im not saying he wont be a FT CB just not this upcoming year hes still not ready. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahbonas Posted March 5, 2005 Author Share Posted March 5, 2005 That's exactly right. Tag him, try to sign him long-term. If we're gonna trade him, do it when he's locked up with a tag and we'll get a #1 in return. 264156[/snapback] Its not so easy to do...otherwise we would have tagged & traded Winfield....or tagged and traded Jonas jennings....we received ZERO in both those players leaving. I'm trying to avoid that and in doing so replace Clements with a 1st round pick. You also need salary cap space to tag & trade......tagging Clements likely puts him at $11million in cap space....you assure us that we will have that space??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fla Bills Fan Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Its not so easy to do...otherwise we would have tagged & traded Winfield....or tagged and traded Jonas jennings....we received ZERO in both those players leaving. I'm trying to avoid that and in doing so replace Clements with a 1st round pick.You also need salary cap space to tag & trade......tagging Clements likely puts him at $11million in cap space....you assure us that we will have that space??? 264220[/snapback] We did not tag Winfield or Jennings because neither is a top 5 player at his position - the price it would have cost to tag them. Tagging a player can bite you in the ass if you are not prepared to keep him - ask the Raiders. I think we would be happy to keep Nate for the average of the top 5 which is what the tag would cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jahbonas Posted March 5, 2005 Author Share Posted March 5, 2005 We did not tag Winfield or Jennings because neither is a top 5 player at his position - the price it would have cost to tag them. Tagging a player can bite you in the ass if you are not prepared to keep him - ask the Raiders. I think we would be happy to keep Nate for the average of the top 5 which is what the tag would cost. 264244[/snapback] We'd be happy to pay Nate Clements $11million next year eating up 15% of the cap??? And Nate is top 5 CB in this league now?? We differ on this...no way we are happy to pay that...not with all the Bills players we will have hitting free agency next year. Look at TD's past in Pittsburgh...he typically does not thro 15% of his cap at 1 player....thats why i am saying...deal Clements when he has very high value...right now... I think Nate got to the probowl as an alternate...how does that make him top 5?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVJ Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Why not have a top ten pick and a top corner. You can sign Ty Law cheaper than Clements and then trade Clements for a first. Then you still have a top corner and a first round pick to boot. or trade Travis for Woodsen then trade Clements for a first round pick. or If the Raiders release Woodsen outright...sign either him or Law then trade Clements for a first round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fla Bills Fan Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 We'd be happy to pay Nate Clements $11million next year eating up 15% of the cap??? And Nate is top 5 CB in this league now??We differ on this...no way we are happy to pay that...not with all the Bills players we will have hitting free agency next year. Look at TD's past in Pittsburgh...he typically does not thro 15% of his cap at 1 player....thats why i am saying...deal Clements when he has very high value...right now... I think Nate got to the probowl as an alternate...how does that make him top 5?? 264259[/snapback] I'm saying we would be happy to keep him even with the tag & hope to get him to sign a long term deal. I think he is a top 10 corner + he is a probowl type punt returner which you neglect to mention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 I'm saying we would be happy to keep him even with the tag & hope to get him to sign a long term deal. I think he is a top 10 corner + he is a probowl type punt returner which you neglect to mention. 264294[/snapback] I really hope we put McGee or Fast Freddy back for punts this year, with Nate only handling a few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 better off letting him play and then franchise him next year. 264146[/snapback] Exactly. Nate is going nowhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fla Bills Fan Posted March 5, 2005 Share Posted March 5, 2005 Why not have a top ten pick and a top corner.You can sign Ty Law cheaper than Clements and then trade Clements for a first. Then you still have a top corner and a first round pick to boot. or trade Travis for Woodsen then trade Clements for a first round pick. or If the Raiders release Woodsen outright...sign either him or Law then trade Clements for a first round pick. 264292[/snapback] Woodson signed his offer sheet and is guaranteed $10 million. Law is still in a wheelchair, who knows how he will recover? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts