oakland ups ante for howard

TheDeuce · 04-16-2005, 04:27 PM

I agree with JKool and everybody else who thinks that Howard needs to be shipped this year. He is very expendible considering he is now a backup. Sure we might be able to get more for Howard if we waited a year, but he needs to be shipped this offseason. He\'s a huge liability, and honestly I think we have much more pressing needs at positions like LB than to worry about an aging DE who is going to be playing behind the promising Will Smith. Besides, what\'s the big problem with getting a second-round pick? Depending on who we draft in the first round, a 2nd rounder could be used to draft an impact linebacker.

GumboBC · 04-16-2005, 04:34 PM

Look here folks ...

I\'m one of the biggest proponents of trading Darren Howard.

But only if we can get a player that is going to contribute this year. And not one that just takes up space on the field, either.

Darren Howard had ELEVEN sacks last year!!!

And many of those sacks came when Darren Howard was on the field with Will Smith.

We\'re just going to give up those ELEVEN sacks for what? A 2nd ? Maybe that\'s the best we can do. But I\'ll take those 11-sacks.

JKool · 04-16-2005, 04:47 PM

If it is the case, and I have every reason to believe it is, we cannot take the 11 sacks without restructuring a bunch of contracts or Howard\' - since we cannot sign our draft picks with Howard on the roster.

Furthermore, I still agree that a player for player trade is perfectly acceptable. I don\'t know what this BS is about taking a third or whatever we can get - there will still be competition among teams who want Howard (driving his price up), EVEN IF THERE IS NO WAY WE CAN KEEP HIM. It isn\'t like he\'s going to go cheap, so long as people want him.

GumboBC · 04-16-2005, 04:50 PM

If it is the case, and I have every reason to believe it is, we cannot take the 11 sacks without restructuring a bunch of contracts or Howard\' - since we cannot sign our draft picks with Howard on the roster.

Furthermore, I still agree that a player for player trade is perfectly acceptable. I don\'t know what this BS is about taking a third or whatever we can get - there will still be competition among teams who want Howard (driving his price up), EVEN IF THERE IS NO WAY WE CAN KEEP HIM. It isn\'t like he\'s going to go cheap, so long as people want him.

JKool --

Hey, you\'re the one who made the case that we MUST get rid of Darren Howard. You basically said it would hurt the team to keep him because of cap reasons.

If that is the case, then why would you be against taking a 3rd or 4th for Howard? It frees up cash to take care of other players. Right?

I only used the 3rd or 4th round as an example to show that the cap isn\'t the end-all to the Darren Howard trade.

[Edited on 16/4/2005 by GumboBC]

JKool · 04-16-2005, 05:26 PM

Point taken.

My secondary point is this: we\'re not in a position to worry about whether or not we\'re going to have to take a 3rd or 4th. The market is set around a 2nd - someone will give us that or player of nearly equal value exactly because Howard is a valuable commodity (in fact, he is much more valuable to some other teams than he is to us).

That said, the cap is the end all as to whether or not we can keep Howard (and we cannot without some serious work and his giving up on his ridiculous salary demands). It is just not the end all with respect to what we will get for him.

zachsaints52 · 04-16-2005, 06:04 PM

I agree with JKool, if we could get Raiders second, I am all for it. But if they were just willing to give a 3rd, another team would be ready to give a 2nd, more than likely. I would be willing to give up 11 sacks from DH, if we can get them from Smith and have that second help us in a bigger area of need.

pakowitz · 04-16-2005, 06:06 PM

heck id take the 38th pick in the draft.. there will be some good players at that spot and that would give us 3 picks in the top 40... if there is nothing better... id make it happen... the only other teams ive heard that are interested are dallas but they likely wont give up their 1st rounder and they pick after oakland in the 2nd round at 42, and then there is seattle which has picks at 23 and 54 in the 1st n 2nd rounds so if the highest is oakland at 38 then i would definetly have to do it.... with one other factor being that oakland is in the AFC

pakowitz · 04-16-2005, 06:09 PM

also if we do trade howard that frees up cap room that can be used to help resign deuce to a long term contract!!!

JKool · 04-16-2005, 06:57 PM

Exactly, pak. Exactly.

Also that extra money can be used to generate long term contracts for Grant, Bentley, McKenzie, AND McAllister. OR we can be in the same predicament next year AND potentially lose Howard with NO compensation at all.

ssmitty · 04-16-2005, 07:14 PM

every team has at least a few players that demand the big bucks..........every team...................
question is, are they worth it? and furthermore if they\'re worth it, can we afford them? i love the depth and would love to keep howard...........if we don\'t get nothing next yr and whoa, we may be losing a measly 2nd this yr for him so what? we\'ll have a prime time player for a year. what\'s wrong with that? what if he gets double digit sacks again? to our advantage or no? what if he does\'nt and no tag is placed? people, there will be a tomorrow, relax.....smitty

04-16-2005, 04:27 PM	#51
TheDeuce 1000 Posts + Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,928	oakland ups ante for howard I agree with JKool and everybody else who thinks that Howard needs to be shipped this year. He is very expendible considering he is now a backup. Sure we might be able to get more for Howard if we waited a year, but he needs to be shipped this offseason. He\'s a huge liability, and honestly I think we have much more pressing needs at positions like LB than to worry about an aging DE who is going to be playing behind the promising Will Smith. Besides, what\'s the big problem with getting a second-round pick? Depending on who we draft in the first round, a 2nd rounder could be used to draft an impact linebacker.
TheDeuce 1000 Posts + Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,928

04-16-2005, 04:34 PM	#52
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	oakland ups ante for howard Look here folks ... I\'m one of the biggest proponents of trading Darren Howard. But only if we can get a player that is going to contribute this year. And not one that just takes up space on the field, either. Darren Howard had ELEVEN sacks last year!!! And many of those sacks came when Darren Howard was on the field with Will Smith. We\'re just going to give up those ELEVEN sacks for what? A 2nd ? Maybe that\'s the best we can do. But I\'ll take those 11-sacks.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-16-2005, 04:47 PM	#53
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	oakland ups ante for howard If it is the case, and I have every reason to believe it is, we cannot take the 11 sacks without restructuring a bunch of contracts or Howard\' - since we cannot sign our draft picks with Howard on the roster. Furthermore, I still agree that a player for player trade is perfectly acceptable. I don\'t know what this BS is about taking a third or whatever we can get - there will still be competition among teams who want Howard (driving his price up), EVEN IF THERE IS NO WAY WE CAN KEEP HIM. It isn\'t like he\'s going to go cheap, so long as people want him.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

04-16-2005, 04:50 PM	#54
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	oakland ups ante for howard If it is the case, and I have every reason to believe it is, we cannot take the 11 sacks without restructuring a bunch of contracts or Howard\' - since we cannot sign our draft picks with Howard on the roster. Furthermore, I still agree that a player for player trade is perfectly acceptable. I don\'t know what this BS is about taking a third or whatever we can get - there will still be competition among teams who want Howard (driving his price up), EVEN IF THERE IS NO WAY WE CAN KEEP HIM. It isn\'t like he\'s going to go cheap, so long as people want him. JKool -- Hey, you\'re the one who made the case that we MUST get rid of Darren Howard. You basically said it would hurt the team to keep him because of cap reasons. If that is the case, then why would you be against taking a 3rd or 4th for Howard? It frees up cash to take care of other players. Right? I only used the 3rd or 4th round as an example to show that the cap isn\'t the end-all to the Darren Howard trade. [Edited on 16/4/2005 by GumboBC]
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-16-2005, 05:26 PM	#55
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	oakland ups ante for howard Point taken. My secondary point is this: we\'re not in a position to worry about whether or not we\'re going to have to take a 3rd or 4th. The market is set around a 2nd - someone will give us that or player of nearly equal value exactly because Howard is a valuable commodity (in fact, he is much more valuable to some other teams than he is to us). That said, the cap is the end all as to whether or not we can keep Howard (and we cannot without some serious work and his giving up on his ridiculous salary demands). It is just not the end all with respect to what we will get for him.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

04-16-2005, 06:04 PM	#56
zachsaints52 500th Post Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Abingdon, Virginia Posts: 522	oakland ups ante for howard I agree with JKool, if we could get Raiders second, I am all for it. But if they were just willing to give a 3rd, another team would be ready to give a 2nd, more than likely. I would be willing to give up 11 sacks from DH, if we can get them from Smith and have that second help us in a bigger area of need.

04-16-2005, 06:06 PM	#57
pakowitz The Dark Overlord Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,450	oakland ups ante for howard heck id take the 38th pick in the draft.. there will be some good players at that spot and that would give us 3 picks in the top 40... if there is nothing better... id make it happen... the only other teams ive heard that are interested are dallas but they likely wont give up their 1st rounder and they pick after oakland in the 2nd round at 42, and then there is seattle which has picks at 23 and 54 in the 1st n 2nd rounds so if the highest is oakland at 38 then i would definetly have to do it.... with one other factor being that oakland is in the AFC
	I Live In Beastmode!

04-16-2005, 06:09 PM	#58
pakowitz The Dark Overlord Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,450	oakland ups ante for howard also if we do trade howard that frees up cap room that can be used to help resign deuce to a long term contract!!!

04-16-2005, 06:57 PM	#59
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	oakland ups ante for howard Exactly, pak. Exactly. Also that extra money can be used to generate long term contracts for Grant, Bentley, McKenzie, AND McAllister. OR we can be in the same predicament next year AND potentially lose Howard with NO compensation at all.

04-16-2005, 07:14 PM	#60
ssmitty 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 1,879	oakland ups ante for howard every team has at least a few players that demand the big bucks..........every team................... question is, are they worth it? and furthermore if they\'re worth it, can we afford them? i love the depth and would love to keep howard...........if we don\'t get nothing next yr and whoa, we may be losing a measly 2nd this yr for him so what? we\'ll have a prime time player for a year. what\'s wrong with that? what if he gets double digit sacks again? to our advantage or no? what if he does\'nt and no tag is placed? people, there will be a tomorrow, relax.....smitty
ssmitty 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 1,879