I hope Clements is not traded

[jahnyc]

Why would you trade Nate for a #9 pick? Signing a #9 pick will be very expensive and we need Nate next year. He is a proven player. Who knows what you will get over the long term with the #9 pick. In addition, if we trade Nate, Vincent may be too old to play corner and while McGee played well last year, he is still relatively unproven.

 

I understand that Nate will be a free agent after next season, but if we are serious about making every effort to make the playoffs, we need him here for this season. Assuming we can make enough cap room after this season, we can worry about trading him or signing him later (of course I would prefer if the Bills would sign him now to a long term deal).

 

You need to pay market for some of your key players at key positions. We did it for Moulds and Spikes and we should do it for Nate. He is an excellent corner and is in the middle of his prime. I think it would be really tough to recover from losing Winfield and Clements in consecutive years.

[Tipster19]

I totally agree with you jahnyc. It's not even about his replacement. He's just a good, flat-out player. Why don't we just keep him? Teams want a great Cb, we got one. Add in the fact that this guy is even a great STer. What else would you want from a CB? He needs to stay a Bill. I don't care what the compensation is for him.

 

I LOVE trades and speculating, but there's not a pick or player in this draft that would tempt me to trade Nate. I know I posted a speculation about him being involved in a trade but it wasn't my desire for him. It was a reflection on rumors that were being said.

 

As far as Winfield is concern, I wasn't crazy about him being traded but the guy really didn't want to be here. I don't think this is the case with Nate. For the sake of just rooting for a player and a team, let's hope that Buffalo does the right thing and keep Nate in Bills country for a long time.

[Ray]

AW did not want to be here. Clements likes the area and speaks very well of the people and Buffalo. He wants to stay. I agree with you that you sign proven players over unknowns. I think you can probably sign him for about 5M/year. Which if he has a great year is worth it! Especially as your punt returner as well!

[kasper13]

You are all dreaming if you think Nate Clements will be a Bill in 2006. As soon as some desperate team offers him 6 years/$38 million with a big signing bonus, he is gone. Bills could franchise him but they have alot of free agents to sign after 2005. There isn't alot of cap space after this year. Clements will be too expensive just like Winfield was and just like Jennings was. Best thing to do is trade him now for a 1st round pick, draft a top OL and then draft a CB in the 2nd round.

[MrLocke]

I do not think it is so much that he is not worth the big bucks. I just do not know if we will have the cap room to keep him around next year.

[The Jokeman]

I do not think it is so much that he is not worth the big bucks. I just do not know if we will have the cap room to keep him around next year.

307598[/snapback]

Then keep him around for the season, franchise him and then trade him. No reason to give him away a year ahead of time. Yet personally, I think he's worth top 5 CB money as think he's the true definition of a franchise CB.

[Kelly the Dog]

You are all dreaming if you think Nate Clements will be a Bill in 2006. As soon as some desperate team offers him 6 years/$38 million with a big signing bonus, he is gone. Bills could franchise him but they have alot of free agents to sign after 2005. There isn't alot of cap space after this year. Clements will be too expensive just like Winfield was and just like Jennings was. Best thing to do is trade him now for a 1st round pick, draft a top OL and then draft a CB in the 2nd round.

307595[/snapback]

Big difference between too expensive, not worth the money, and deserves to be paid. The Bills will have the money to sign Clements if they want him, it's just a matter of whether they think he is worth what some other team is willing to overpay him. Frankly, I think we sign him. I have read somewhere that the cap is supposed to go up 6-7 mil perhaps this coming year because of the percentage formula the league uses combined with the new TV contracts recently and about to be signed. People complain that TD doesn't resign his top FA but I contend that only Moulds was worth the money to resign and he resigned him. I expect him to try to resign Clements if he has another good year.

[MrLocke]

Then keep him around for the season, franchise him and then trade him. No reason to give him away a year ahead of time. Yet personally, I think he's worth top 5 CB money as think he's the true definition of a franchise CB.

 

Sorry that came out wrong. I do not think we will have the cap room to re-sign him when his deal is up and if we do not have the cap room to re-sign him we will defienetly not have the cap room to franchise him as the first year is the cheapest.

[d_wag]

You are all dreaming if you think Nate Clements will be a Bill in 2006. As soon as some desperate team offers him 6 years/$38 million with a big signing bonus, he is gone. Bills could franchise him but they have alot of free agents to sign after 2005. There isn't alot of cap space after this year. Clements will be too expensive just like Winfield was and just like Jennings was. Best thing to do is trade him now for a 1st round pick, draft a top OL and then draft a CB in the 2nd round.

307595[/snapback]

 

bills have alot of free agents to sign after 2005? i wouldn't call it alot.......clements, teague, edwards -- those are the only starters scheduled for UFA after this season.........

 

there isn't alot of cap space after this year? eric moulds will be cut or his cap hit will be reduced to the same level as this year.......mike williams will see his number go down by 5M, if that doesn't happen this year anyway.......drew bledsoe's +4M in dead cap space will come off the books........and teague (or his replacement) will not be taking up 3.6M in cap space.........the cap looks better for next year (although it wasn't that bad for this year and wasn't the reason the team wasn't active in free agency)........

 

if clements is too expensive to keep, what does that mean for willis when he becomes a free agent? what about evans? what about losman? is there anyone worth keeping? is this how the bills should treat any player who becomes one of the best at his position -- just get rid of them?

 

fact remains that clements is one of the best young players on the team.......good teams find ways to keep their best young players around beyond their rookie deals......why people want to see the bills become a farm team for the rest of the NFL is beyond me.......other teams pay their best young players to stick around -- why can't the bills? what makes them so different? are the other teams stupid for rewarding their best young players with extensions?

[sidbuff]

Where is the source that this NATE CLEMENTS trade is brewing from.....???? Can someone please put up a link so ICan see it for myself.....or is this just some rumor on the board ?

[scribo]

I'm not against trading Nate for the ninth overall pick. I really like the guy, but it may be the best bet.

 

I'd say the Bills' chances of winning it all in 2005 are pretty slim. Sure, we could/should make the playoffs, maybe. That said, if TD determins that all signs point to losing Nate at the end of the year, and he can obtain that #9 pick, I say go for it. A #9 would translate into a late first and another second. That, along with a second for Travis Henry, and we're looking at a draft that could really shape a positive future.

 

The bottomline in my opinion is the Bills need to do what needs to be done to bring a Super Bowl trophy to Buffalo. We're no going to have one in Feb. '06, so why not do what we need to in order to increase our chances for the '06-'07 season?

 

Of course, if TD believes he can bring Nate back without seriously hampering another position, then I say go for it. I would love to see Nate in a Bills uniform for another six years.

[ganesh]

I'm not against trading Nate for the ninth overall pick. I really like the guy, but it may be the best bet.

 

That said, if TD determins that all signs point to losing Nate at the end of the year, and he can obtain that #9 pick, I say go for it. A #9 would translate into a late first and another second. That, along with a second for Travis Henry, and we're looking at a draft that could really shape a positive future.

 

308170[/snapback]

 

You need two hands to clap....You need a trading partner willing to trade

up to that 9th pick....In this draft where teams don't want to pay for the

top 20picks I don't see any one giving up a 1st and 2nd for that 9th pick.

 

But again, strange things have happened.

[LabattBlue]

You need two hands to clap....You need a trading partner willing to trade

up to that 9th pick....In this draft where teams don't want to pay for the

top 20picks I don't see any one giving up a 1st and 2nd for that 9th pick.

 

But again, strange things have happened.

308230[/snapback]

I agree. IF the Bills pull off a trade for NC that brings the #9 overall pick in return, they better have a player targeted at that spot and be ready to commit the money to him, because I don't think there will be many suitors ready to jump up in the draft.