Tipster19 Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dallas has the first pick (#101) in the 4th rd. That would be fair enough compensation IMO. We have dealt with them in the past and this could be a good trade partner for us because of the conferences. http://www.star-telegram.com/332/story/1322662.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 The Bills lose more than they gain from it, IMO. Hypothetically speaking, if the Bills were to use that 4th round pick to replace Parrish, is it more likely that the replacement would be better or worse than he was? Certainly, its more likely that the replacement would be worse, which is why the Cowboys would want to make that trade to begin with. So the question is, where's the value for the Bills? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 The Bills lose more than they gain from it, IMO. Hypothetically speaking, if the Bills were to use that 4th round pick to replace Parrish, is it more likely that the replacement would be better or worse than he was? Certainly, its more likely that the replacement would be worse, which is why the Cowboys would want to make that trade to begin with. So the question is, where's the value for the Bills? The value is that you dump $3million in salary for a guy who's going to play 10-12 plays a game. You can then (hopefully) use that money on someone who will contribute more--like Freddie Kieaho or Derrick Brooks, both still out there and both who would improve our D, or Kendall Simmons, also still out there and also someone who, if healthy, would improve our O. It's the same with the Peters trade--people need to look at the totality of it, including cap and cash to cap ramifications. For ex., if the Bills use the 4th rounder and some of the $11 million or so cash to cap I suspect they budgeted for Peters on getting Rhodes (done), Henderson in trade and/or other like the guys above and also get a 1st rounder and 6th rounder for Peter you have to look at all of that as what we got for JP. Looks a bit better in that light (if that should come to pass), doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeF Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Wonder if Chris Watson is still kicking around somewhere? Wade thought highly of him as a punt catcher if I recall.... What Wade really needs is Ronnie Jones back as ST coach....He is a high school defensive coordinator in Arlington, TX now. Come on Wade--make the call. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Looks a bit better in that light (if that should come to pass), doesn't it? Not immediately, because there's no guarantee that the Bills are going to do anything with any money saved from unloading him. The only thing we know for sure is that they'd have another 4th round draft choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 I think it's silly to trade Parrish just because we suddenly find ourselves deep at WR. We won't get much for him because of this, anyway. It's not worth trading him. And quite frankly, I wouldn't mind him being the full-time punt and kick returner. I know he doesn't do kickoffs, but he could. That way McKelvin can keep his energy and focus for just playing CB and locking down number one WRs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virgil Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Wonder if Chris Watson is still kicking around somewhere? Wade thought highly of him as a punt catcher if I recall.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronnie_Jones It took me years of therapy to make myself forget that piece ever played for us. How dare you!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typical TBD Guy Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 The value is that you dump $3million in salary for a guy who's going to play 10-12 plays a game. You can then (hopefully) use that money on someone who will contribute more--like Freddie Kieaho or Derrick Brooks, both still out there and both who would improve our D, or Kendall Simmons, also still out there and also someone who, if healthy, would improve our O. It's the same with the Peters trade--people need to look at the totality of it, including cap and cash to cap ramifications. For ex., if the Bills use the 4th rounder and some of the $11 million or so cash to cap I suspect they budgeted for Peters on getting Rhodes (done), Henderson in trade and/or other like the guys above and also get a 1st rounder and 6th rounder for Peter you have to look at all of that as what we got for JP. Looks a bit better in that light (if that should come to pass), doesn't it? A player like Parrish can take those 10-12 plays and dramatically alter the outcome of the game. Also, that $3 mill per season saved is less important now that Peters is gone. I say keep Parrish, have him take some of the punt returning load off of McKelvin, and try to be more creative with incorporating Rosoce's unique skills into the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 And quite frankly, I wouldn't mind him being the full-time punt and kick returner. I know he doesn't do kickoffs, but he could. That way McKelvin can keep his energy and focus for just playing CB and locking down number one WRs. Ruturning kicks is different than returning punts and Parrish has sucked at returning kicks. Oh a punt return the name of the game is to make the first guy miss this is Parrish's forte. if you make two guys miss all hell can break loose. This skill could be useful on kicks but you also have to have enough size to take partial hits and bounce off. Parrish has sucked at this he gets knocked down too easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKOOBY Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Big Mc can handle the load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Dallas has the first pick (#101) in the 4th rd. That would be fair enough compensation IMO. We have dealt with them in the past and this could be a good trade partner for us because of the conferences. http://www.star-telegram.com/332/story/1322662.html This is interesting. After the first day the Bills will have a lot of time to see who is left on the draft board. With the first pick on day two they might have a lot of options. It might not have to be a replacement for Parrish. Maybe a Center or LB will be forgotten on day 1. Personally, I think keeping Parrish is the best option but the first pick on day two could be valuable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Best line in that article: "...two of the top punt returners in the draft, but likely will be gone when the Cowboys pick in the second round and even in the third." (emphasis added by me) So wait, not only will these guys be gone by the Cowboys' second pick, but they'll STILL be gone when the Cowboys pick again? What a rip-off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeF Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 It took me years of therapy to make myself forget that piece ever played for us. How dare you!!!!! I have a lot of friends in the psychotherapy business....they will thank me Picture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Stampede Posted April 18, 2009 Share Posted April 18, 2009 Fred Jackson had a better return average. Parrish is great, but we are loaded with returners. I mean even Dominic Rhodes can return. I can see Buffalo moving McKelvin to Punt returns and Rhodes to Kick returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts