dave mcbride Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...ex.html?eref=T1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writ...ex.html?eref=T1 Makes sense. That's probably why there won't be a deal for Peters till after the top tackle signs. Hopefully with the woeful economy, that this will impact the draft contracts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Hopefully with the woeful economy, that this will impact the draft contracts I wouldn't count on it - although it is Detroit at #1, and they're the only NFL team to lose money last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I wouldn't count on it - although it is Detroit at #1, and they're the only NFL team to lose money last year. I smell a holdout Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermike Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Since the Lions can negotiate with anyone, I wonder if they might be tempted to take a player not-rated in the Top 5, and pay him like he was the 5th pick or something. If they want a tackle, maybe go after Michael Oher, who's projected in the 10-20 range, and give him a deal worth much less than the #1 pick, but more than the #6 pick. Do you think his agent would let him do that? His other option would be to keep dropping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I would disagree Dave. I think the Bills will have resolved the Peters situation before the draft. Firstly if they find that they can't sign him, they will want to trade him for draft picks before the draft. Along those same lines, once signed, they will have eliminated the tackle position as a draft need. Additionally, as I pointed out before, neither Peters or his agent said that they wanted to be the highest paid tackle in the game. This is what a source supposedly told Mark Gaughan. Neither Peters nor his agent are saying anything publicly, a position that however admirable is arguably hurting him in the court of public opinion. As you and I had discussed before, the same source also said that the Peters' camps initial offer to the Bills was around $11.5 million per year...in other words they would negotiate down from there. The same report said the Billls initial offer to him was about $3 million lower than Peters' price. One thing no one is talking about is whether this year's draftees will be getting an inflationary raise from last year. The economy is in the dumper. Team revenues are expected to decrease. The expiration of the CBA is nearing. NFL teams and the league itself are laying off employees. In a depressed economy don't be surprised if the NFL owners seek to hold the line on the practice of inflationary slotting. I don't think the Peters camp will want to wait to see what happens with this year's rookie contracts. Regardless my point is that this would logically be resolved before the draft. It makes no sense for either side to wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Since the Lions can negotiate with anyone, I wonder if they might be tempted to take a player not-rated in the Top 5, and pay him like he was the 5th pick or something. If they want a tackle, maybe go after Michael Oher, who's projected in the 10-20 range, and give him a deal worth much less than the #1 pick, but more than the #6 pick. Do you think his agent would let him do that? His other option would be to keep dropping. It does not matter where they are rated. It's where they are picked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 looks like Peters will be playing on that existing 2 years left contact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 looks like Peters will be playing holding out on that existing 2 years left contact. I fixed it for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 looks like Peters will be playing on that existing 2 years left contact. nonsense! the bills have no leverage and no choice in the matter - they are backed against the wall and, furthermore, are obligated to give peters anything he demands. haven't you been reading this board? (apparently, according to some, mr. 'i-scored-six-on-the wonderlic' is also quite brilliant ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Considering Peters hold out from last year had him playing poorly all season, I highly doubt the Bills will want to go through another hold out again. Then looking at his plays from last season and sacks allowed, I just don't see Buffalo giving in to his demands and making him the highest paid tackle in the NFL. My take is, they trade the guy away just before or during the draft,otherwise what is to stop him from holding out again, and again the very next time he thinks he is underpaid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stussy109 Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 When Push comes to shove, Bills hold all the chips here. Peters is shortstacked and on a bluff. He is locked in for 2 years whether he likes it or not, and the Bills have Time on their side to get a fair value deal that is good for both sides. he can hold out again, get fined, and play sh------- again for the 1st half of the season. I would not be surprised if the Bill stake an OT if one falls to them in rd 1 to up the stakes, and as an insurance policy is the Peters deal gets messy. I'm fairly confident L walker could play LT just fine full-time or as a stop gap until the draft pick gets up to speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted March 19, 2009 Author Share Posted March 19, 2009 I would disagree Dave. I think the Bills will have resolved the Peters situation before the draft. Firstly if they find that they can't sign him, they will want to trade him for draft picks before the draft. Along those same lines, once signed, they will have eliminated the tackle position as a draft need. Additionally, as I pointed out before, neither Peters or his agent said that they wanted to be the highest paid tackle in the game. This is what a source supposedly told Mark Gaughan. Neither Peters nor his agent are saying anything publicly, a position that however admirable is arguably hurting him in the court of public opinion. As you and I had discussed before, the same source also said that the Peters' camps initial offer to the Bills was around $11.5 million per year...in other words they would negotiate down from there. The same report said the Billls initial offer to him was about $3 million lower than Peters' price. One thing no one is talking about is whether this year's draftees will be getting an inflationary raise from last year. The economy is in the dumper. Team revenues are expected to decrease. The expiration of the CBA is nearing. NFL teams and the league itself are laying off employees. In a depressed economy don't be surprised if the NFL owners seek to hold the line on the practice of inflationary slotting. I don't think the Peters camp will want to wait to see what happens with this year's rookie contracts. Regardless my point is that this would logically be resolved before the draft. It makes no sense for either side to wait. Good points. That said, I'm not entirely convinced that it'll get done before the draft. Another team has to offer something of great value for Peters, and given the excellent OT draft class, I'm not sure some teams will want to do that. Plus the Bills can always do what they did last year - put up with a holdout and take a pretty good season from Peters (as opposed to a great one). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I fixed it for you. let him... it will only hurt his value even more because he will have to come back and play at sometime, and when he looks like crap the league will notice and he will be even more hard pressed for a 10mil + deal the Bills will be drafting an OT if Peters in not signed by the draft, and might even trade him and then make a move on one of the 3 top OT that will probably be drafted in the top 10. Peters is worth a minimum of a 1st rd pick, and we could trade our #11 and our 2nd and move up a few spots to pick one of the OT in the top 10. Move Walker to LT and groom our new LT at RT or if were lucky our new OT will settle in at LT immediately I'd rather not, but then again I honestly do not care about Peters status as a Bill anymore.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I think it'll be based on Peters being the highest paid LT in the biz. And the only way that relates to the top pick is if the top pick happens to be a LT. Either way, the guy is looking for at least $12M per season. Insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Caveman Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 Since the Lions can negotiate with anyone, I wonder if they might be tempted to take a player not-rated in the Top 5, and pay him like he was the 5th pick or something. If they want a tackle, maybe go after Michael Oher, who's projected in the 10-20 range, and give him a deal worth much less than the #1 pick, but more than the #6 pick. Do you think his agent would let him do that? His other option would be to keep dropping. If the lions decided they want a guy they could get in the 10-20 range (and if that's all they're willing to pay); they'd be much better served to trade down, and get something of value. In general, guys get paid based on where they're picked, not where they would have been picked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San Jose Bills Fan Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I think it'll be based on Peters being the highest paid LT in the biz. And the only way that relates to the top pick is if the top pick happens to be a LT. Either way, the guy is looking for at least $12M per season. Insane. So you're saying that the Buffalo News reports of the Peters' camps initial number of $11.5 per season is erroneous? If you have better information document it please. Neither Peters nor his agent have said anything publicly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 If the lions decided they want a guy they could get in the 10-20 range (and if that's all they're willing to pay); they'd be much better served to trade down, and get something of value. In general, guys get paid based on where they're picked, not where they would have been picked. who wants the #1 pick with the price tag associated with it? the fact of the matter is the lions (or the phins last year) couldn't give it away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 The Bills need to step up to the plate, pay him a 6 year $60 Million contract, with incentives taking it up to as high as $70 million, $30 Million Guaranteed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertpaul49 Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 What about trading him to Detroit? They need a left tackle, and he is a sure thing. The salaries are close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts