The trade of Evans still makes no sense

August 12th, 2011 at 5:25 pm by under 4 Warn Weather

AP Photo

I guess you can ignore my previous post.  I couldn’t have been more wrong.  But the reasons I cited now appear to be the reasons why the Bills did in fact trade Lee Evans.

Let me first say that I hate this deal. I hate that a good player is gone, that nothing is coming in return and that message it sends to the current players and fans.

But first, let me try to explain why the Bills did this.  It’s based on talking to people around the team, league and obvious observations.  First off, there is young depth at the position.  While Johnson, Jones, Nelson, Easley, Roosevelt and even Davis have no longevity of production, they are talented players who have shown flashes.  The Bills could not keep all of them, and I think that was a big factor.  I’ve come to understand that Evans wasn’t a big fan of the current coaching staff.  That’s not uncommon when a new regime comes in and makes changes.  Chan Gailey had alluded to Evans’ inability (or desire) to go across the middle and run various routes.  Maybe Gailey really didn’t want him, and didn’t want him stealing time from the young guys.  Logic will also tell you that maybe Evans’ best days are behind him.  He has not been productive the last two years, and is already 30 years old.  Did Ryan Fitzpatrick’s limitations, especially when it comes to the long ball, mean having a deep threat like Lee unnecessary?  Money is always a factor, although Evans’ $3.25 million salary is neither cumbersome or a problem for a team way under the cap.

So those appear to the logical reasons, or the ones the Bills convinced themselves are why the trade was a good idea. 

But I still hate this deal.  First off, how can anyone put the blame on Lee for the past two years (or his entire career) when he never really played with a top quarterback?  I would love to have seen what he could establish with Fitz.  Lee can still play, still get deep, still make big catches and still threaten defenses.  So why let that go?  Why now?  If they got a starting player in return, maybe.  But now?  There is no way anyone can tell me the Bills are better than they were yesterday without Lee.  The Bills barely have enough good players, so why get rid of one of them?  So you have depth at receiver.  That’s good.  But none of those guys, even Johnson, have ever done anything for more than one season.  That’s a big, and unnecessary risk they’re taking.  Why do it, when you might have a chance to be a surprise team is the defense is greatly improved? 

I enjoyed dealing with Evans over the years.  I admit I even felt sorry for him having to play with such awful quarterbacks on such bad offenses.  But good for him.  He goes to a good team with a good QB and he might just win a Super Bowl.  One that we’ll all be watching again from our living rooms.

I like what Nix and Gailey have done, and I believe the Bills are on the right track to success.  But I think they convinced themselves they’re better off with Evans, and that’s just plain wrong.

5 Responses to “The trade of Evans still makes no sense”

  1. Rocco says:

    The Bills will never be anything without a quarterback, so it really does not matter

  2. mlanfearski says:

    It is a highly calculated risk the Bills are taking. Only time will tell. Keep track of Evans production, and what we will get in probably what will be a late fourth round pick next year.
    I agree with the youth movement, and let’s face it the Bills may be a surprise, but 8-8 at best? Build towards the future and hopefully make decisions, or at least give the youth some experience, that will give us a better chance when we become a true contender again, if ever!! Lee was a true professional and will be missed in the community, I think Nix respected that and thought it was only fair to give the guy the opportunity he deserves, to bad it was not in Buffalo.

    PS Have heard from a lot of sources the Roosevelt is burning up training camp, does he really have what it takes in the NFL to be a top receiver?

  3. Paul Peck says:

    Naaman has everthing it takes to be an NFL receiver….except speed. Having seen him at UB I know he can make every catch, he’s athletic, he works hard and he’s smart. Lots of NFL receivers with those skill have long careers. He needs the chance to show the coaches he can play, despite what they think about his speed. He has gotten that in camp, has looked good, and has a good chance to make it. Not a lock because the Bills still have a lot of receivers. But Naaman’s hopes lie with how Buster Davis and Marcus Easley progress.

  4. Ken Adamczyk says:

    It should be clear to us that the rumors from LA are true. they just got approval for their new 78,000 seat stadium in LA and the new owners of the Bills told Ralp that they didn’t want to be burdened with high priced talent he selected and that they want their knowledgeable people to have cap room to provide their fans with a winner. Ralph obliged they are millions under the cap and if they rid themselves of a few more salaries maybe Spiller they could use that wealth of money to build a contender not just a product with the famous Bills mantra wait till our young talent develops. (so we can let them go once they attain star status)Thanks Ralph for taking the loyal fans of WNY for all you could and now when your $50,000 investment turns into almost a billion you can in you final years know that you showed us that the one who ends up with the most toys “dollars” wins. Ralph in case you don’t know you can’t take it with you!!!

  5. don d says:

    one thing that baffles me on the trade is the timing of it. why do this prior to preseason? if they would have waited a few weeks to do it there’d be a decent chance another team in the nfl would loose a receiver due to injury and be much more willing to give something up better than a 4th round pick.

Leave a Reply