Discussing Jason Peters
There's been a lot of talk lately about the availability of Bills' pro bowl LT Jason Peters and the Eagles interest or lack thereof in trading for him.
The most recent report mentioning the Eagles as a possible landing spot for Peters was posted in the fanshots earlier.
I was contacted by Brian Galliford of Buffalo Rumblings for a Philly perspective on the rumors. You can check out my answers to his questions over there... but Brian, who gets some good inside info on the Bills, did answer my one burning question. Do the Bills even want to trade the guy?
There's a difference between wanting to trade a player and being serious about trading a player. The Bills don't really want to trade Peters. When he's on his game, he's one of the best in the business. Who really wants to trade a player of that caliber?
The Bills are, however, (going to be) serious about trading him. Peters' contract demands are currently through the roof - he's looking for 5 to 6 years with annual salary in the Jordan Gross/Jake Long range and at least $30 million guaranteed. He literally wants to be the highest-paid tackle in the league - at least, if he's doing his playing in Buffalo. For the small-market Bills, facing a potentially uncapped 2010 season, those demands are a bit unrealistic, particularly when considering his unreliability on the field.
I have a hunch that, were Peters to be traded, his contract demands would drop significantly. Everyone who pays the slightest bit of attention to the NFL knows that Peters isn't the best tackle in the game (though, again, he's played like it for stretches), and he shouldn't be paid as such. Peters and his agent, Eugene Parker, have to realize this as well. They have showed zero willingness to budge from their demands during "negotiations" with the Bills. My guess is that the motive behind that approach is that they're trying to force a trade. Buffalo may not want to deal him, but they will most certainly seriously explore doing so.
The problem isn't his talent or, really, his work ethic - he's always been in good shape (and he was even after he held out last year; he just wasn't in "playing" shape). It's that Peters, by and large, is a pretty weird guy. This is a player that, as an undrafted free agent tight end, was very carefully molded into a two-time Pro Bowl left tackle by the Bills franchise. Along the way (in 2005), they gave him a five-year contract extension based solely on the faith that he'd amount to something - he hadn't played a lick at that point. There is no loyalty on Peters' behalf - we're not blaming him for wanting to be compensated fairly, but for his holdout tactics last year (no communication with the team for several months) and his negotiation tactics this year. This is a guy that has publicly stated that you play the game to make the Pro Bowl. He'll work his butt off for the team and make players around him better, but he doesn't do it for the team, if that makes any sense. I have a hunch that at least part of the brain trust in Buffalo wouldn't mind seeing him gone - he's been frustratingly inconsistent, and some have speculated that some of that inconsistency was pre-meditated.
He was a model citizen through the close of the 2007 season. If he gets his wish and is playing in a new city this coming fall, I have little doubt he'll return to model citizen status. Every action of his over the past year and a half screams of his desire to leave Buffalo. It's incredibly unfortunate, but players do have some leverage when they're as talented as Peters is.
They certainly have some leverage, but Peters also has leverage as well, as detailed above. You're absolutely right - the Bills don't want to deal with a holdout; in fact, they will not. The team is hell-bent on getting something done by the end of the draft, whether it be a new deal or a trade, for that exact reason. They're not going to let the situation fester as they did last year, because once they got him back, Peters came with baggage and a long stretch of consistent play. The team is in win-now mode; Dick Jauron needs a playoff season to keep his job beyond 2009. They're not going to risk deja vu with Peters. Either he's signed and participating in all workouts, or he's wearing a different uniform. Those are the only two options.
Thanks to Brian for the info. Check out my thoughts over at Buffalo Rumblings.
6 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
“Pro Bowl” is the most fugazi adjective in the NFL dictionary.
by andyreidswaistline on Apr 1, 2009 7:48 AM EDT reply actions
I dont want a player like that. even if he comes here and gives the Eagles a discount price and plays well, you know he’ll be demanding a huge raise the season after that. that is exactly what #81 did a few years back.
I posted this somewhere else but I want some color commentary
Forgive me if I’m wrong but isn’t Peters more of a "Run Blocking LT"? While guys like Lynch and Jackson have had success at the RB position, their QB’s in Losman and Edwards have been sacked to hell.
Peters was credited with 11.5 sacks allowed in 13 games last year versus Tra Thomas who was credited for 2 sacks. Thomas was more of a "Pass Blocking LT" and didn’t bring a whole lot to the run game in my opinion but look at our head coach. It’s obvious he runs a pass first offense so why bring in a run blocking LT? I say there’s no way he does it.
Naturally a LT should be fairly good at both things but the strengths at ability to run or pass block can be vastly different (ie Khalif Barnes Run>Pass). If you’re a 300 lb individual you might be stud when you need to plow a defender forward and then be a stiff when you need to plant your legs into the ground and hold a bull rush at bay.
I’d love to hear some poetic waxing from the BuffaloRumblings on Peters abilities on running plays versus passing plays. There’s certainly a different approach by the offensive line in run versus pass.
I’m surprised to hear that Jason thinks he might be worth a 1st and a 3rd to the Eagles. It’s almost like the Donald Brown vs. Chris Wells explanation he made. The same reason Eagles might cherish a Brown over a Wells is why we’d have little to no interest in Peters. Does he fit the offensive scheme if he can’t protect McNabb’s blind side on passing downs? Are we suddenly going to run the ball enough to allow for his strengths to outweigh his weaknesses?
by andyreidswaistline on Apr 1, 2009 10:49 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs

by 



































