Welcome to PatsFans.com

Wish we could trade our #1 for Jason Peters

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by BelichickFan, Aug 24, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,328
    Likes Received:
    121
    Ratings:
    +249 / 7 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    Sounds like his holdout will go into the regular season.

    Man I wish we could trade for him, move Light to RT, Kaczur could be a strong backup and/or compete for Neal's guard spot. Our OL would come together great then. I'm not a fan of trading #1s for the right to pay a player big money but I'd do it in this case.
  2. JSn

    JSn Rookie

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2008
    Messages:
    7,449
    Likes Received:
    32
    Ratings:
    +32 / 0 / -0

    Re: Wish we could trade our #1 for Jason Peter

    We'd likely have to pay a number one MORE, so if it were worth it (not seeing it) it would probably be way CHEAPER.
  3. Jimke

    Jimke Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    3,701
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +15 / 0 / -0

    Re: Wish we could trade our #1 for Jason Peter

    Peter would not join the Pats without a huge contract increase.

    An offensive tackle drafted #1 by the Pats would be much cheaper

    because he would be a late round pick.
  4. PatsFanInEaglesLand

    PatsFanInEaglesLand Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2004
    Messages:
    3,785
    Likes Received:
    35
    Ratings:
    +77 / 5 / -7

    #37 Jersey

    Re: Wish we could trade our #1 for Jason Peter

    True, but that doesn't really help us this year.

    I don't see Buffalo trading with us, unless we blew them away with a deal, which I would not want to do. I would do it for a 1st and a 4th.
  5. patsgo

    patsgo Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2006
    Messages:
    1,466
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    belichick raved about peters before both bills games called him the most important player on their offense, i highly doubt the bills would trade him to the pats, but id do the deal in a minute
  6. alvinnf

    alvinnf Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Messages:
    3,298
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +2 / 0 / -0

    Forget a #1, while we are wishing, I'll wish to have Marcus Mcniel in lieu of Mr. Jackson. G or T.
  7. amazinPats

    amazinPats Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    It's a great idea if we can afford what he wants. Hopefully, the team is exploring it.
  8. ALP

    ALP Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    Messages:
    7,403
    Likes Received:
    9
    Ratings:
    +12 / 0 / -0

    allrgiht...it seems nobody thinking straight has come into this thread yet...so ill be the first to say this


    "its preseason"

    and unless Light goes to IR....im fine with the O line...
  9. LoganMankinsPancakeBlocks

    LoganMankinsPancakeBlocks Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    You can be fine with the offensive line and still want a guy who is arguably the best tackle in the NFL and is still young. When Light is healthy, I'm fine with the offensive line as well, but I'd deal a 1st for Peters in a second. He's a beast.

    Unfortunately, Buffalo isn't trading him and if they did, it wouldn't be to us.
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2008
  10. Raffy15

    Raffy15 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2008
    Messages:
    213
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Peters is the 2nd best tackle in the nfl after walter jones.
  11. captain stone

    captain stone Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    8,575
    Likes Received:
    47
    Ratings:
    +101 / 25 / -17

    No Jersey Selected

    ...and we could've had him with our 7th-round pick in '04. Instead, we were given: Christian Morton.

    Except for Big Vince, the FO really F'ed Up the 2004 draft, same as it did to the 2007 draft. It's no wonder that we're scrambling to find quality depth at some positions.
  12. unoriginal

    unoriginal Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Messages:
    3,209
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +41 / 2 / -1

    He was adamant about being an NFL tight end in the 2004 draft, which is why he went undrafted at 320 lbs.
  13. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,328
    Likes Received:
    121
    Ratings:
    +249 / 7 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    Your expectations for drafts are way to high. Do you have links to what you would have done before drafts, not after them, one name per pick not a list where you can choose the one guy who did well ?

    The 2004 draft was OK. Vince was a great pick. Watson was a solid pick. M. Hill probably wasn't going to get it done but we'll never know . . . although on Draft Eve, Curran made it sound like we really liked Bob Sanders; too bad Indy got him before our #2. Gus Scott may have been an OK backup if he'd stayed healthier.
  14. VJCPatriot

    VJCPatriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    12,347
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +46 / 1 / -4

    Oh come on. That's like saying 31 other teams screwed up their drafts royally by not taking Tom Brady in the 6th round.

    There are always sleepers that sneak under the radar that will do really well, you can't expect to find them all. There are 31 other teams drafting and the odds are 31/32 that another team will get a sleeper that your team doesn't.

    Back to Jason Peters. If the Pats can afford to pay him, I'd say trading a 1st round pick would be worth it for a franchise LT. But I'd start the offer at a 2nd. Who knows how bad this impasse is.
  15. VJCPatriot

    VJCPatriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    12,347
    Likes Received:
    28
    Ratings:
    +46 / 1 / -4

    Bob Sanders > Watson. But this is all in hindsight obviously.
  16. DW Toys

    DW Toys Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,832
    Likes Received:
    5
    Ratings:
    +11 / 1 / -2

    Speaking of CJ. The bengals are waiving Rudi Johnson around for a trade for a WR because of Chad Johnsons shoulder issues.

    Would you do this? Trade Chad for Chad (even though damaged goods) and hope he recovers somewhat enough to play (which he can) and he's is healthy for 2009? It's like a draft choice for CJ. Would you out there?
    DW Toys
  17. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,328
    Likes Received:
    121
    Ratings:
    +249 / 7 / -9

    #24 Jersey

    Clearly - but Watson was still a solid pick. I think they were hoping to get Sanders in the second round due to his (lack of) height.
  18. D-cleater

    D-cleater Rookie

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    882
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    There's no way anyone can honestly say that we we drafted well in 2004, or 2007 ( excluding Welker and Moss). I don't like the 2006 draft either, now that we've had two full years to evaluate.

    But regarding Peters, there is no way the Bills make this trade.
  19. BPF

    BPF Rookie

    Joined:
    May 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,469
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    Wilfork alone makes the 2004 draft a good one and I still like Watson. 2006 can be a great one if some of these guys shake the injury bug. Maroney, Jackson, Thomas and O'Callaghan can still be solid players in this league and Gostkowski is developing into a solid PK, he will have his best year in 2008. LeKevin Smith also has a chance. Meriweather is on his way but 2007 was a weak draft class in general and the way the Pats continually traded out of that draft let us know they definitely felt that way.

    I agree Peters will not be traded.
  20. LoganMankinsPancakeBlocks

    LoganMankinsPancakeBlocks Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Some of you have some unrealistic expectations for the draft, apparently.

    2004 was a very good draft. They landed an elite nose tackle in Wilfork and while I think Watson hasn't reached his potential yet and it's now starting to appear like he'll never become that star I hoped and thought he'd become-- he's still a good, starting caliber TE with the potential to be more than that.

    Any time you get a player like Wilfork, you've had a successful draft. Watson is just gravy.

    I also don't see why you'd exclude trades in 2007. Trades are a part of the draft as well. They dealt a late 1st round pick, a 2nd round pick and a 4th round pick. They could've kept those assets and had a better draft in terms of players they actually selected that year but they came out of it with Welker and Moss instead, plus a 1st rounder from the 9ers which ended up being a top 10 pick and Jerod Mayo. Throw in Meriweather and that's a pretty amazing haul if you ask me.
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2008
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>