Jump to content

Roquan Smith has requested a trade


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, FireChans said:

What are you going to pay Edmunds?

Not $18-$20M, I'll tell you that. We also have the Franchise Tag at our disposal for next year with Edmunds if need be and if his play warrants it. Edmunds doesn't deserve any more than he is currently getting under his 5th year option at this point. The whole reason Smith wants out of Chicago is because he wants to get paid NOW and they won't do it. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, FireChans said:

???

 

A good player for a decent player?


see this is what all things considered means. Smith is the better player but he is going to cost more than Edmunds. Smith may get 17 while Edmunds gets 14. There is value in cap savings. 
 

Smith wants out of Chicago while as far as we know, Edmunds has thrown no stink about wanting out of Buffalo. That has value as well considering Smith can holdout, become a locker room problem etc, when Edmunds clearly isn’t that guy. 
 

Yea Smith is better than Edmunds but when you take in ALL FACTORS right now it would be a fairly even trade. 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

The low grade surprised me also. He’s a playmaker. 
 

I get why people want to replace Edmunds but The thing fans don’t understand about Edmunds is he makes a lot of his tackles for no gain. His issue seems to be lack of big plays. He’s much better than fans think. He’s consistent.

He is consistently average. 

  • Disagree 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, gonzo1105 said:


see this is what all things considered means. Smith is the better player but he is going to cost more than Edmunds. Smith may get 17 while Edmunds gets 14. There is value in cap savings. 
 

Smith wants out of Chicago while as far as we know, Edmunds has thrown no stink about wanting out of Buffalo. That has value as well considering Smith can holdout, become a locker room problem etc, when Edmunds clearly isn’t that guy. 
 

Yea Smith is better than Edmunds but when you take in ALL FACTORS right now it would be a fairly even trade. 

Edmunds may not want to be in Chicago either (who would?) and you have no idea what contract demands he would make to stay there (could easily also ask for 17 per).

 

really the Bears would be taking the inferior player who also needs to be paid who they also have no leverage on. 
 

Would be terrible as a straight up trade for them, but I’m all for it. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Eyeroll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Edmunds may not want to be in Chicago either (who would?) and you have no idea what contract demands he would make to stay there (could easily also ask for 17 per).

 

really the Bears would be taking the inferior player who also needs to be paid who they also have no leverage on. 
 

Would be terrible as a straight up trade for them, but I’m all for it. 

I agree. I can't see the Bears making that kind of trade. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Smith was one of the lowest grades ILBs in the NFL last year. 

Bears fan friend of mine say he’s a bit of a head case. Though that could be because he’s plays for the Bears. He also doesn’t have an agent 

Edited by CNY315
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, uninja said:

Man if we could afford it I'd think about it. He's good, really good.

 

But the Bears gonna want picks, prolly a first. Smith is gonna want a bag, a big one.

 

We don't really have either of those to dole out.

 

 

 

Either you have no idea what defensive scheme the Bills play (Roquon, Edmunds, and Milano would never be on the field together) ... or you think trading a 1st round pick for a backup is a good idea.

 

If the Bills made this trade ... and they probably won't because Edmunds is a team captain ... then it would be a player swap plus maybe a late rounder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don’t think Edmunds gets extended for any more than what Milano received. And because I’m sure Edmunds and his agent won’t go for less than what he’s currently making, I don’t know what the Bills plans are for him. Would be silly to just let him walk in free agency without attempting to recoup some assets. If Bernard continues to improve and Edmunds is the same player he’s been, even with an improved DL ahead of him, then I’d expect a move by the trade deadline. If Edmunds is markedly better than what he has shown thus far, then we’re in a jam considering all the other contracts coming up. I think it all has to end in a trade. Can’t pay everyone.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I promised myself no more Edmunds' comments until we see him play week 1.

I'm sticking to that commitment. 

 

That said, I just don't think the team can afford Milano and a top 5 MLB contract. They have to pay Oliver and Knox soon followed by Davis. If they want a high priced MLB they will have to let Poyer leave and probably trade Milano at the end of the year.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...