Michael Lombardi on the potential Burgess trade

[Armchair Quarterback]

I'm pretty sure that Vollmer is not even eligible to be traded. I don't think drafted players can be traded untill after their first year. The drafted player must make the roster, be cut or put on IR.

 

[mossisboss]

This trade (Burgess) will not happen. Neither will the Peppers trade.

BUT I have a good feeling that either Peppers or Burgess will be a Patriot NEXT year. Burgess will be a free agent, and I doubt Carolina will franchise Peppers again at a 20 MILLION dollar tag.

Let's remember the Patriots attempted to trade for Randy Moss from the Raiders before the trade deadline in 2006, without success! Next year what happened, Randy becomes a Patriot.

Burgess or Peppers I predict will be a Patriot in 2010!

 

[eom]

I think signing burgess next year is far less likely than the trade this year.
he's going to want a ton of money, and he's just not a great long term fit.

one year for a couple million is another story.

we'll see on peppers, but carolina could tag him again if they felt like paying the dough.

 

[BelichickFan]

I'm pretty sure that Vollmer is not even eligible to be traded. I don't think drafted players can be traded untill after their first year. The drafted player must make the roster, be cut or put on IR.

I don't know all the rules but Eli Manning says "nyet" to this statement as it stands.

 

[State]

Want a good laugh?

Oakland will deign to give us Burgess in exchange for Vince Wolfork? Blog entry here.

Raider fans still smarting over Randy Moss.

Fahgedaboutit, son.

 

[eom]

they'd be a lot smarter to get brady.

or maybe moss.

I think this thing is starting to turn into fantasy football.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I'm pretty sure that Vollmer is not even eligible to be traded. I don't think drafted players can be traded untill after their first year. The drafted player must make the roster, be cut or put on IR.

There's no prohibition against trading rookies per se. The difficulty, though, is that the rookie salary cap does not increase when a team trades for a rookie. In other words, let's assume that this offer was genuine. The Raiders would then have to find a way to fit Vollmer's rookie cap hit into their existing rookie cap, which would almost certainly require them to release at least one of their other rookies.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

I don't know all the rules but Eli Manning says "nyet" to this statement as it stands.

I don't know all the rules either and I'm not even 100% sure about this. It is probably once they are signed, they can't be traded during the first year. Vollmer is not signed so they could trade the rights to him I guess.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

There's no prohibition against trading rookies per se. The difficulty, though, is that the rookie salary cap does not increase when a team trades for a rookie. In other words, let's assume that this offer was genuine. The Raiders would then have to find a way to fit Vollmer's rookie cap hit into their existing rookie cap, which would almost certainly require them to release at least one of their other rookies.

There you go. My original statement was based on a fuzzy recollection of the rule if it even exists. Either way Vollmer is not going to be traded.

 

[slash83]

Who do the raiders think we are, the raiders?

 

[spacecrime]

There you go. My original statement was based on a fuzzy recollection of the rule if it even exists.

Well, at least you now top the Gibberish Poster of the Year Leader Board. I've noticed that having a clue what you are talking about severely limits your posting options and chances to bring home the trophy.

 

[Feep50]

KO'C and Seabass for Burgess? Huh, are you kidding me? No way! No how! The Raiders are a joke of a team..... Next years second round pick, now we are talking sense!

 

[spacecrime]

D'oh! Reading comprehension FAIL. :ugh:

Not your fault. It was ambiguously written. Sort of like a recent article here in the Portsmouth Herald that said a drunken driver was arrested by the Hampton Tool Booths.

It would have been better if Lombardi didn't have a comma after "pick."

 

[patriot lifer]

i know that they're trying to make the appearance of making an effort to trade Burgess, but when your asking price is so high, they clearly don't care. Just say 'no' instead of saying a ridiculous asking price. they can't possibly think his value is so high. I also don't understand why al davis would care if a team like the Patriots gets better. the Raiders have to be more concerned with long-term success, not immediate performance. just because the competition gets a little better now doesn't affect their team's success in 3+ years.

 

[BelichickFan]

Not your fault. It was ambiguously written.

Yeah, I believe '77s reading works grammatically also - it's the fact that we no longer have a "second-round pick this year" that is the dead giveaway to the meaning.

 

[Armchair Quarterback]

Well, at least you now top the Gibberish Poster of the Year Leader Board.

Good English.