Teams Call On Steven Jackson

[NAHSTE]

Is $3 million even a lot of money?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Is $3 million even a lot of money?

It is when you are desperately looking for any branch to grab as you adjust your argument.

 

[BigBucs]

Yea, do him a solid man. Dont do him like Barry, set him free and trade his ass to GB.

He can't. This is the same guy that, just a few months ago, argued with me that I was the biggest Bucs homer on this board. When pretty much everyone else knows that I want nothing to do with the franchise since they pulled the dirtiest screw-job on a coach in recent memory.

:yao:

 

[f16harm]

Is $3 million even a lot of money?

to W2B, no, because he isn't paying the salary AND the player he wants traded is on his team where they would get the good end of the deal.

To another team, where the average salary of an NFL player is $1.8-2 MM a year, yes. You're "renting" a player for 150% of an average NFL salary, plus as I threw in earlier, you have to give something up to get the "honor" of paying that salary.

 

[NAHSTE]

to W2B, no, because he isn't paying the salary AND the player he wants traded is on his team where they would get the good end of the deal.

To another team, where the average salary of an NFL player is $1.8-2 MM a year, yes. You're "renting" a player for 150% of an average NFL salary, plus as I threw in earlier, you have to give something up to get the "honor" of paying that salary.

What is the average salary of a starting running back? Wouldn't it be worth it for a team desperate for a starting RB, if Jackson is x% better than the next available guy?

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

What? I don't even want the Rams to trade him. I constantly complain that they don't use him enough. I'd prefer they keep him and give him the ball 25 times per game, and then reevaluate at the end of the season.

What do the Rams gain by "saving" $3M for the remainder of the season? It's the middle of the year. Your argument makes zero sense.

This Jackson contract is a tailor made rental, the likes of which the NFL rarely sees. It's cheap (again, $3M is nothing) and you are free and clear of the player in two months. If a team like GB or NE or whoever can get him under the cap, it makes a ton of sense. There is no risk.

The contract will absolutely not be a hold up. The only thing that will potentially stop this from happening is what the Rams ask for in return. If they are serious about moving him, they can't expect better than a 5th rounder or so. Is that worth burning the goodwill of the fans, who Jackson is very popular with? Probably not.

 

[RyanLeaf16]

Yea, do him a solid man. Dont do him like Barry, set him free and trade his ass to GB.


:yao:

Hey, you've already taken up that spot. The hatchet is buried and will stay buried lol.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Contract makes a trade nearly impossible

f16harm made this same post in the DeAngelo Williams thread.

Williams, like Jackson, is 29. Williams also makes roughly the same amount of money as Jackson. The difference, is Williams is under contract beyond this season.

f16harm's argument in this thread is that Jackson's contract makes a trade nearly impossible because Jackson is a free agent after the season.

Yet we have Williams, who is the same age & makes the same money, who is under contract beyond this season, yet f16harm claims that contract makes a trade nearly impossible as well.

In short, f16harm is clearly talking out of his ass and had no idea what the terms of Jackson's deal was, and then moved the goalpost and tried to reframe his argument. But we already knew that.

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Sounds like a perfect player a team like Green Bay could pick up that they'll want to pay dividends in January.

Could probably get him for a 4th/5th round pick and cut ties with him in the off-season.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Sounds like a perfect player a team like Green Bay could pick up that they'll want to pay dividends in January.

Could probably get him for a 4th/5th round pick and cut ties with him in the off-season.

No way man.

That contract, which is relatively inexpensive and has no commitments beyond this season, makes a deal nearly impossible.

 

[JimLeavy59]

Packers better make a move on a RB would love to see Steven Jackson on this team. :lalala:

 

[OnlyOneBeerLeft]

You guys are trolling hard, F16 is right, he's a great and knowledgeable poster, I remember when he was the FIRST person to break the big news and inform us that Jim Harbough had become the new coach of the Miami Dolphins, per his incredible insider sources. W2B, you are wrong about Jackson's contract, F16 knows his insider football information better than any other person here, I would listen to him.

 

:troll:

 

[bucky]

If a team like GB or NE or whoever can get him under the cap, it makes a ton of sense. There is no risk.

There is a risk, depending on what you have to give up. A late round draft pick, maybe. Otherwise I don't want to rent a RB for 2 months and let a possible 10 year player go because you gave up a draft pick. I'd rather have the draft pick then the rental, unless the price is right. Not that you are saying otherwise. I'm just saying it's not risk free. It all depends on what a team would have to give up.

Sounds like a perfect player a team like Green Bay could pick up that they'll want to pay dividends in January.

Could probably get him for a 4th/5th round pick and cut ties with him in the off-season.

I like when Ted Thompson has draft picks. Not sure I want Ted to lose a 4th round draft pick to use a guy for only 2 months. Really, Ted Thompson's strongest asset as a GM is drafting.

 

[f16harm]

f16harm made this same post in the DeAngelo Williams thread.

Williams, like Jackson, is 29. Williams also makes roughly the same amount of money as Jackson. The difference, is Williams is under contract beyond this season.

f16harm's argument in this thread is that Jackson's contract makes a trade nearly impossible because Jackson is a free agent after the season.

Yet we have Williams, who is the same age & makes the same money, who is under contract beyond this season, yet f16harm claims that contract makes a trade nearly impossible as well.

In short, f16harm is clearly talking out of his ass and had no idea what the terms of Jackson's deal was, and then moved the goalpost and tried to reframe his argument. But we already knew that.

Your reading comprehension is awful, in no way did I ever say the main reason the contract is impossible because he is a free agent at the end of the season. That is something a team is going to take into consideration though if trading, and I mentioned that.

The trades are impossible because of the contractually obligated salary that is guaranteed for the remainder of the season. No one is going to pay $3M to old running backs to rent them for 8-9 games. Not to mention the latest I heard/read was that STL wants a 3rd round pick or higher (lulz). I really don't know why this is so hard for you to understand and you keep trying to say I didn't know the contract. I exactly know the contract, in fact, it was explained during yesterday's Noon pregame show on CBS by LaCanfora.

You are trying some weak, old school Senser bullshit that I have read since 2000 on Maddenmania. Just keep posting and posting, the same argument, even when I have long left the conversation, to make you seem so smart.

 

[SuperKevin]

I think just about any team would be willing to give up 3 million and middle round picks for a shot at the Super Bowl.

 

[f16harm]

I think just about any team would be willing to give up 3 million and middle round picks for a shot at the Super Bowl.

A 5, 6, or 7, maybe, but that's not what STL wants for him. I guess we'll see who's right here between me and W2B by 4pm tomorrow :yep:

 

[SuperKevin]

This is a win now culture in the NFL. GMs are more worried about the Super Bowl this year than they are about the Super Bowl in 2015. Someone(if not several teams) will be willing to give up a 2nd or 3rd round pick to make this work

 

[f16harm]

This is a win now culture in the NFL. GMs are more worried about the Super Bowl this year than they are about the Super Bowl in 2015. Someone(if not several teams) will be willing to give up a 2nd or 3rd round pick to make this work

How many RBs have been traded for a 2nd or 3rd round pick in the last 5+ years? Last big RB trade I can think of is Clinton Portis, when Denver got Champ and a 2nd.

EDIT: thought of another; Mcgahee to Ravens from Buffalo for (2) 3rds and a 7. I believe that was 2006 or 2007 .

 

[Primetime]

I really wanted Lynch when he was on the market a few years ago from the Bills and the Packers had a similar RB situation. Grant was injured and we needed a replacement. For some reason though, I really am not feeling a Steven Jackson trade. Not sure why that is at this point yet.

 

[ralaw]

This is a win now culture in the NFL. GMs are more worried about the Super Bowl this year than they are about the Super Bowl in 2015. Someone(if not several teams) will be willing to give up a 2nd or 3rd round pick to make this work

NFL GM's love their draft picks, so I highly doubt they'd give up anything more than a late round (5-7) pick for an aging veteran running back. Considering the way they have used him this year (or should I say haven't used him) they have killed his trade value. A team isn't going to give up much to get him.