So why didn't the Bills trade Nate Clements

[ACor58]

I am going with either Cap room or finding a replacement for Youbooty.

[ch19079]

cus we needed a CB this season.

 

McGee is not a #1 CB and we didnt have another CB that is good enough to be the #2.

[cantankerous]

He's good, no suitable replacement...and we probably wouldn't get what he's worth. That is my opinion.

 

Thank god it's friday.

[silvermike]

He is an expensive player going into a contract year. I don't think his value is as high as we think it is.

[VABills]

Because he is injured. The Bills know it, and probably so does the rest of the league, considering he's been reported as having a torn/injured quad for at least a couple weeks.

 

But go ahead and keep hating.

 

BTW, with the injury it may cut down on how much he makes next year. I wouldn't be shoked to see a long term contract for Nate before next year from the Bills.

 

Of course Nate and Mcgee aren't struggling because you have two rookie safeties who are thinking and reacting too slowly in picking up converage. No that would never happen. Nope, Nate and Mcgee just all of a sudden started sucking. But of course Vincent and Milloy sucked. Yup, it was all their fault. Now we have two rookies that each has and INT and everyone loves them. I like them too, but they are making mistakes that doesn't seem obvious. Late breaks in coverage. Lake of support. Not picking up the right guy. etc....

[apuszczalowski]

Because no one wanted to give anything to a player who will be a FA at the end of this year and who has a 90% chance of not being resigned by his current team. Who is going to give up any value for someone they could get for free this offseason? Plus his spectacular (note the sarcasim) play this year so far probably lowered his trade value to the point where it wasn't worth making a deal.

 

I doubt it was because we don't have a replacement. Its not like the Bills are in the middle of the playoff hunt right now and can't risk starting a rookie like Youbooty right now.

[Ramius]

Because no one wanted to give anything to a player who will be a FA at the end of this year and who has a 90% chance of not being resigned by his current team. Who is going to give up any value for someone they could get for free this offseason? Plus his spectacular (note the sarcasim) play this year so far probably lowered his trade value to the point where it wasn't worth making a deal.

 

I doubt it was because we don't have a replacement. Its not like the Bills are in the middle of the playoff hunt right now and can't risk starting a rookie like Youbooty right now.

810953[/snapback]

 

Exactly.

[Brandon]

Maybe its because he's better than he's given credit for and the Bills still hold out some hope of re-signing him?

[ACor58]

But go ahead and keep hating. 

 

810952[/snapback]

 

I am not hating on Nate, just trying to get everyone's assesment on why he wasn't traded since earlier in the week he was headed to Tampa.

 

Great point on the injury, and I hadn't even thought of that.

[Bflojohn]

First off, the proposed trade of Clements was problematic because of contract dynamics, IMO. If a team was interested, they would have demanded a long-term contract as a stipulation to any trade proposal. The Bills might have wanted a PULSE coming back the other way, and some teams protect these like cold water in the desert! The flaw in the argument about him being a free agent, hence, "we" can just sign him in March 2007 is that that is assuming that a team interested in Nate would indeed secure his services next year! Has anyone here ever heard of a bidding war? If you are team A and team B,C, and D also want Nate, a trade makes sense, insofar as being able to get your man without the chance that he escapes to the other squad. Sometimes it pays to give (trade) to get the player you need!

[ganesh]

I am not hating on Nate, just trying to get everyone's assesment on why he wasn't traded since earlier in the week he was headed to Tampa.

 

Great point on the injury, and I hadn't even thought of that. 

810968[/snapback]

 

May be Nate wanted to go to a contender and didn't feel TB was close to being a good team....Remember the team trading Nate would have wanted a contract extension....

[ACor58]

May be Nate wanted to go to a contender and didn't feel TB was close to being a good team....Remember the team trading Nate would have wanted a contract extension....

811406[/snapback]

 

For some reason, Nate strikes me as the type of player that thinks $$$$ first and winning 2nd.

[Ramius]

a bit off the wall, but perhaps the bills dangled nate's name in trade talks, knowing the other team would want to extend him. This indirectly gives the bills some ballpark figures about what other teams think he's worth $$ wise.

[bills4bowl21]

If they traded him, they will have to find someone to replace Ashton Youbooty to work at the Bills Store.

 

 

huh?????????????????

[Captain Hindsight]

He's good, no suitable replacement...and we probably wouldn't get what he's worth. That is my opinion.

 

Thank god it's friday.

810930[/snapback]

the bills really didnt have an option. Marv said he was going to offer a 3rd rounder for booger not nate. Clements is a good corner wheter you agree or not. but if you traded him 1) you wont get fair value 2) who will start in his place thomas greer youboty? opposing teams will be licking their chomps. she if you can resign him in the off season if not youboty might be ready or asante samual sounds good to me. greer or thomas would be okay for a game or two but not long term. lets face it he is the best optionj we have a cb, no reason to trade him