crackur Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 You're forgetting about his major knee injury. Brandon Lloyd is healthy, Walker didn't play and is a major question mark at this point. 642559[/snapback] UHHH re-read............he said IF javon is healthy etc.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikecole1 Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 I like the trade straight up with a pick or two from Green Bay, even if salaries are comparable. I agree with sentiments on here that it's Packers whose' backs are up against a wall. I don't like the deal as it is currently being reported. Marv needs to craft this where we are getting something of value in return if Walker proves to be a flameout - where it's a step up from releasing Moulds outright. Even if Walker doesn't pan out, we can let him go after a year and save the money under the cap. Make it a TO/one-year contract type scenario like Dallas constructed. Two years ago, Walker was among the top five wide receivers in the game statistically speaking, so there may be some upside here. Another bonus is that Walker let go Rosenhaus as his agent during the past season. I'd rather have Marv do something sooner rather than later, avoiding another Donahoe situation where Travis Henry's value declined as the season got closer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 Some of you are overestimating the value of moulds at this point. If you think a str8 up trade moulds for walker you're nuts. Walker is a premier young receiver who has his best years ahead of him. Moulds has declined every season in the last 5 years, and only has a couple of potentially OK seasons left. In the NFL, he's an old man. Brandon Loyd was traded to washington for a 3rd rounder this year and a fourth in 2007 (sound familiar?). Like Walker, Lloyd was also a malcontent in SF and wanted out. That is setting the market for a leading receiver. Walker if healthy is better than Lloyd. So in essence it is that same deal, plus Moulds for a 5th round pick. I think washington, as usual, overpaid for Lloyd...which is hurting us hear. If I was Marv, I would consider it if Javon is healthy. It sounds a little pricey to me. I might argue that Moulds is worth at least a 4th round pick, rather than a 5th. So either they give us their 4th rounder this year, or we give them a 5th rounder instead of a 4th in 2007. 642551[/snapback] You're right, Moulds for Walker isn't equal value by any means. But considering: A)Walker is coming off ACL and may be another year from top form B)He wants a huge contract, probably $8M per season with a $15M+ bonus C)The Bills don't have a NEED at the position. They may not be great, but Evans, Parrish, Reed and Davis are all being paid like guys who are expected to be catching passes, and Reed and Davis were JUST signed. The Bills should have a serious upper hand in any deal that involves the Bills losing draft picks (or value). Sometimes the team with the upper hand gets a much better deal, see Miami trading a lowly second for Culpepper, a young QB one year removed from one of the 5 greatest passing seasons of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turftoe Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 UHHHre-read............he said IF javon is healthy etc.......... 642561[/snapback] You are correct. To me IF he is healthy needs to be the first thing out of your mouth when you talk about trading for Walker. I'll retract my post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 In fact, even without Moulds, wr is probably one of the better units on this team. 642547[/snapback] Yeah, because beyond Lee Evans, we have Josh Reed (everyone's whipping boy the last three years), Sam Aiken (good special teamer, not such a great receiver), Roscoe Parrish (I predict another TD bust- even if he is not, he is not built to be an every down reciever), Freddie Smith (he did return a kick for a td against New England in a Pats romp two years ago!), Charles Wilson (Ralphs' son?)...you are right, this is a powerhouse unit. No sense in getting a fifth year upper echelon reciever, if not injured, entering his prime, for a good vetran on the downside of his career... I agree, maybe the Pack wants a little too much, draft pick wise, but Marv and company would be absolute fools not to explore this. Maybe one of those draft picks could be predicated on Walkers' production for us, this year. This is likely the most tangible value the Bills will ever be offered for Moulds. I think people are getting too caught up in the draft picks...is a fourth round draft pick any more of a gamble than an excellent reciever coming off of a knee injury? Don't forget, we would be getting Jevon Walker too! If the Bills are serious about wanting to give Losman or Nall a chance to develop their skills, having a good receiving corp would seem essential, since we seem to be striking out on solidfying our offensive line. I am kind of shocked that so many are so vehemently opposed to this trade proposal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crackur Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 You're right, Moulds for Walker isn't equal value by any means. But considering: A)Walker is coming off ACL and may be another year from top form B)He wants a huge contract, probably $8M per season with a $15M+ bonus C)The Bills don't have a NEED at the position. They may not be great, but Evans, Parrish, Reed and Davis are all being paid like guys who are expected to be catching passes, and Reed and Davis were JUST signed. The Bills should have a serious upper hand in any deal that involves the Bills losing draft picks (or value). Sometimes the team with the upper hand gets a much better deal, see Miami trading a lowly second for Culpepper, a young QB one year removed from one of the 5 greatest passing seasons of all time. 642564[/snapback] he knows he can't ask for that kind of cash after being hurt.........he will start out avg then go up by playmaking ability.........kinda incentive deal or something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crackur Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 Yeah, because beyond Lee Evans, we have Josh Reed (everyone's whipping boy the last three years), Sam Aiken (good special teamer, not such a great receiver), Roscoe Parrish (I predict another TD bust- even if he is not, he is not built to be an every down reciever), Freddie Smith (he did return a kick for a td against New England in a Pats romp two years ago!), Charles Wilson (Ralphs' son?)...you are right, this is a powerhouse unit. No sense in getting a fifth year upper echelon reciever, if not injured, entering his prime, for a good vetran on the downside of his career... I agree, maybe the Pack wants a little too much, draft pick wise, but Marv and company would be absolute fools not to explore this. This is likely the most tangible value the Bills will ever be offered for Moulds. I think people are getting too caught up in the draft picks...is a fourth round draft pick any more of a gamble than an excellent reciever coming off of a knee injury. Don't forget, we would be getting Jevon Walker too! If the Bills are serious about wanting to give Losman or Nall a chance to develop their skills, having a good receiving corp would seem essential, since we seem to be striking out on solidfying our offensive line. I am kind of shocked that so many are so vehemently opposed to this trade proposal... 642567[/snapback] anything that might be good for the team ........we dont want here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 Walker was one of the top 5, if not top 3 receivers in the League before he got hurt. He is (was?) big, fast and explosive - reminded me a lot of Moulds in his earlier days, but plays even bigger. The big question, as many have said, is what his physical condition is. My biggest fear is that one of two things happen: Walker plays lights-out, and we lose him, or Walker spends the year recovering his ACL on the Bills' dime and time, and we lose him. Neither of those scenarios are good. This has to be a very tricky trade, involving, first, a physical (obviously), second, performance-based compensation to the Packers (i.e., we don't throw in a high draft pick unless Walker plays a certain amount of snaps, etc.), and third, a performance-based contract extension to Walker to give us more than a one-year flyer on the guy. If they can pull all of that off, they HAVE to do the deal. BTW, if they don't, I bet the Patriots trade for Walker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 Moulds will go to whoever is willing to pay his contract in full. It doesn't matter who it is. Sure it does. If Moulds is expecting to get his contract paid in full by another team, he's NOT going to get it. No team will pay him $13M for the next 2 years. He'll have to do as he said and take less to play for a "contender." And Green Bay is NOT a contender, and as such, Moulds will probably DEMAND that his contract be fulfilled if traded to them, which makes the trade unpalatable for Green Bay. Hence the ridiculous trade offer on their part. And Walker suffered his injury prior to the start of the season. I don't see him being back before the start of THIS regular season, which would pretty much make him useless this year. And on top of that, he'll want a huge salary with guarantees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffBills#1 Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 Does anyone know if this is actually a legit offer though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 Moulds needs to go. If Walker is healthy or even if he will be, then we should work out a deal IMMEDIATELY! Before he was hurt the guy was the BOMB! I wonder how much Nall could influence this situation. He would know more about the inside situation about Walker and Green Bay than most I would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 There is NO WAY I'm giving up 2 picks that are BOTH higher than than the ONE pick Green Bay would be giving up, to pickup an injured WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 No but we do need to work SOMETHING out. I would love to have a healthy Walker on our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 There is NO WAY I'm giving up 2 picks that are BOTH higher than than the ONE pick Green Bay would be giving up, to pickup an injured WR. 642583[/snapback] What if the picks are variable and performance-based, and Walker agrees to an incentive-laden contract extension as a condition to the trade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 There is NO WAY I'm giving up 2 picks that are BOTH higher than than the ONE pick Green Bay would be giving up, to pickup an injured WR. 642583[/snapback] Of course, any trade would be contigent upon Walker being inspected by Bills doctors. And it would also, likely, be contigent upon the Bills being able to work out a contract extension with Walker. If he is healthy (and what I have read nothing to suggest that he won't recover from this injury in time to play in 2006), he is a better player, at this point, than Moulds. Why is everyone so caught up on later round draft picks? Walker is not just a run of the mill reciever, and he is young...he and Evans could be unbelivable together... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 It takes at least a year for a player to come back from an ACL injury. He injured his knee on September 11th last year, meaning you can't reasonably expect him to come back before then, which means he misses all of the off-season, training camp, and pre-season. At best I'd do a straight-up trade for the 2, MAYBE giving a conditional pick if Walker plays and plays well this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 UHHHre-read............he said IF javon is healthy etc.......... 642561[/snapback] There is no way to tell right now if Walker will ever be healthy again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superbowl Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 No way do we give up Moulds for what they are saying Walker and a 5th. We do it with Moulds and a third for their #1 pick, fifth overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAST MODE BABY! Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 You guys are getting your panties in a bunch over the first offer? We haven't even countered. Do you people ever purchase a car, because if you do, it seems most of you would storm out of the dealership at their first offer. If Green Bay has been this quick to make us an offer, then there will certainly be more teams who will be in the game also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffBills#1 Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 Why is everyone talking about this like Green Bay really offered this. Just because one person said he "heard" something we think it might happen? This is stupid and untill I see prove I have to assume this post is false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts