Pundits propose NFL trades: Am I missing something?

[Brady6]

Re: Re: Pundits propose NFL trades: Am I missing something?

Another one for the rumor mill:



https://twitter.com/NFLDraftBites/status/393110003856314368

I don't see the appeal for a 28 year old undersized running back, coming off an injury, who will be a free agent after the season.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

I don't see the appeal for a 28 year old undersized running back, coming off an injury, who will be a free agent after the season.

ESPN suggested that exact same trade for a 2014 6.

 

[supafly]

Really interesting, if that went down what would that mean for Ridley and Vereen?

IF true (the key word being "IF), I don't think it would change the future plans of either Ridley or Vereen too much. They'll continue to stay here and play out their current pacts, with a high probability of at least ONE signing an extension in 2015.

Some will disagree, but it certainly wasn't written in stone that both would be retained in the next 16-17 months anyway.

Many here will get their underwear in a bunch over losing one of them, but the reality is that this happens every single season. Every year there is a whole new crop of "Vereen's and Ridley's" that come out in the draft, and semi-talented RB's that can be had for relatively small amounts of money in free agency and from team cuts. The goal is to have a somewhat deep RB corps who can start in a pinch and offer their talents as a bell-cow back for a handful of games if needed.

Now of course, we can assume that Belichick will do his best to retain both due to the smaller amounts of money that it takes compared to most other positions, and if the price is right we may see both stay here; but it's certainly not a guarantee, and I wouldn't think that bringing in MJD would do much to change that too much. Then again, I highly doubt that it actually happens either.

 

[Sciz]

If the Pats could get the Jags to pay a large part of MJD's salary this year and get MJD to agree to a reasonable year or two extension, I'd totally be up for trading a 6th for him. I definitely wouldn't consider it any kind of need, though.

 

[supafly]

If the Pats could get the Jags to pay a large part of MJD's salary this year and get MJD to agree to a reasonable year or two extension, I'd totally be up for trading a 6th for him. I definitely wouldn't consider it any kind of need, though.

Absolutely.

I think that is obviously the key for assessing a deal with a player like this. No one wants him at his 4.5m+ salary, but if a reasonable deal can be worked out, there's no doubt that it could prove to be beneficial for us.

I'd even go as high as a 5th myself for the right deal.

 

[stcjones]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! Don't do it BB!!! MJD has no rubber left on the tires and he's riding on the rims!!!!! Yeah.....thats it....our primary need is an over the hill, injury prone, prima dona RB!!! Bring in some DT and OL help......

https://twitter.com/NFLDraftBites/status/393110003856314368[/QUOTE]

 

[Brady6]

IF true (the key word being "IF), I don't think it would change the future plans of either Ridley or Vereen too much. They'll continue to stay here and play out their current pacts, with a high probability of at least ONE signing an extension in 2015.

Some will disagree, but it certainly wasn't written in stone that both would be retained in the next 16-17 months anyway.

Many here will get their underwear in a bunch over losing one of them, but the reality is that this happens every single season. Every year there is a whole new crop of "Vereen's and Ridley's" that come out in the draft, and semi-talented RB's that can be had for relatively small amounts of money in free agency and from team cuts. The goal is to have a somewhat deep RB corps who can start in a pinch and offer their talents as a bell-cow back for a handful of games if needed.

Now of course, we can assume that Belichick will do his best to retain both due to the smaller amounts of money that it takes compared to most other positions, and if the price is right we may see both stay here; but it's certainly not a guarantee, and I wouldn't think that bringing in MJD would do much to change that too much. Then again, I highly doubt that it actually happens either.

I think you’re spot on, I guess I just don’t see the need for Jones-Drew but maybe they feel like the offense needs something and at the midpoint in the season it would be easier to integrate a running-back into the system than a tight-end or wide-receiver.

 

[Kontradiction]

Another one for the rumor mill:



https://twitter.com/NFLDraftBites/status/393110003856314368

I don't get it. I really don't. As a straight up runner, Ridley is more effective at this point in his career than MJD. The only way that would make sense is if they wanted an upgrade as far as a pass catching RB, but even then they put Vereen on IR, designated to return. If that trade happens, it will be a real head scratcher. Give me Nicks or Little, a fatbody DT, and/or a coverage LB. Of course, Gonzalez would be nice as well.

 

[supafly]

Bill Belichick's thoughts on making a trade and the difficulty of bringing in an outsider during this point of the season:

Belichick on trades: It?s hard to get someone ready in a short time | ProFootballTalk