Trade Targets at WR

[houtz]

I'd take Maclin in a heart beat.

[SF Dolphin Fan]

It's a good question, CK. I think the odds are really good that Miami gets Wallace or Jennings. However, a lot of us felt the same way last year about Manning and we know how that worked out.

Ireland is under pressure to get someone who will step in and perform right away and a rookie wr is unlikely to do that. Let's face it, his job is on the line and another sub-500 finish could do him in.

Not to state the obvious, but we would need to look at teams that have a surplus of wide receivers or a team that is rebuilding and would be okay with sending a veteran for younger players or draft picks.

So saying that, I think a guy like Larry Fitzgerald could be in play.

Reasons:
Arizona is clearly in the rebuilding mode and needs to find a young franchise quarterback before even thinking about taking that next step. San Francisco and Seattle are teams with super bowl aspirations heading into the 2013 season and the Rams are gaining ground. Fitzgerald could bring the Cardinals a lot in return and could be 32-33 before Arizona starts to turn things around. Miami has the picks and the salary cap to make it happen.

[ckparrothead]

I just don't buy that Arizona is actually making Larry Fitzgerald available to anyone.

---------- Post added at 03:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:03 PM ----------

I was working in south Jersey last month & listened to 97.5 the Fan out of Philly every day & once Chip Kelly was announced as the head coach the big topic, aside from Vick/Foles, was trading Maclin because he didn't fit Kelly's system. He lacks explosion for someone that was a big play receiver at Mizzou in college.

Yes there's a reason I put Jeremy Maclin in my group of runners up.

[hooshoops]

There is not a SINGLE WR going into free agency this year that does NOT have injury/health concerns. If a guy is healthy, teams will do almost anything to keep an elite WR on their roster. When they are letting him go quietly, you can mark it down that he's damaged goods and/or has exceeded his mileage.

This is why #12 CANNOT be anything but a brand-new, healthy, fresh, elite WR all our own. There are linemen and defensive players everywhere.

what injury does soon to be free agent and in his prime wr mike wallace have???

[ckparrothead]

what injury does soon to be free agent and in his prime wr mike wallace have???

So Mike Wallace is your guy? At $12 million a year?

[hooshoops]

These trades are not common but they do happen. Every year. Dismiss the point of the thread if you want to but burrowing down on the details can reveal reasons why one of this guy or that might at least theoretically get traded here rather than just being stunned about it when it happens.

The Dolphins, after all, are the team that traded for Brandon Marshall for high picks and gave him big money, then traded him away for not quite as high picks, and then traded away Vontae Davis when he had two years left on his deal. If there's a team out there willing to do this kind of thing it's as likely to be the Dolphins as anyone.

name me the last guy that was not going into the final year of his contract was coming off a underwhelming season for his prior year salary and had a inflated salary # for the remainder of his contract and got traded for good compensation???

[hooshoops]

So Mike Wallace is your guy? At $12 million a year?

not at $12 mil per he's not...depends on the guaranteed money which is what everyone should focus on anyways...but lets say i can work it where that guaranteed money is over with in 3 years and then he just has yearly salary #'s that are inflated like these other wrs we are talking about...all things being equal i'd rather take the chance on wallace for no compensation then a guy with a bum hip in sidney rice who hasn't met expectations since he got paid or a miles austin...

if i can get a contract done where in 4 years he's off my books if i want him to be considering he's 26 and in his prime it's a chance i take...

where do people get the maclin is not explosive stuff from b/t...maclins been dinged up a lot in philly...but never have i watched that kid and said he's not explosive...true he's not what he looked like at missouri from an explosion stand point but he's not a possession wr either...his problem imo has been health related in the pros

[TheWalrus]

name me the last guy that was not going into the final year of his contract was coming off a underwhelming season for his prior year salary and had a inflated salary # for the remainder of his contract and got traded for good compensation???

So for a comparison to mean anything to you, a trade has to have met these conditions?

1.) Not going into last year of contract.
2.) Coming off underwhelming season.
3.) Has high cap numbers going forward.
4.) Was traded for good compensation.

First off, if a guy meets 1-3, 4 probably doesn't apply. It would be relatively low compensation, and I wasn't talking about trading a first rounder for Sidney Rice nor do I think CK was talking about a first for Miles Austin. But how about the trade of Brandon Marshall to the Bears? Wasn't the last year of his deal and he had high cap numbers going forward. His 2011 wasn't underwhelming on the field but was in the locker room.

Then there's DeMeco Ryans. He was traded last year after signing a big deal in 2010. He ruptured his Achilles in 2010 then had a subpar 2011, was asked to take a pay cut (he refused) and was traded to the Eagles for a swap of thirds and a fourth.

I don't buy the necessity of your model of comparisons. It sounds designed not to find relevant examples but to preclude discussion. If a team has good reasons to want to trade somebody and they can find a suitor, then that's all it takes. Those hypothetical conditions are what's being discussed here.

[ckparrothead]

The way the contracts work whatever you pay Mike Wallace in signing bonus and/or option bonus is prorated over the entire life of the contract. If you sign a 5 year deal or a 6 year deal with the man there's no way to have all of the guaranteed money expensed in the first 3 years. Whatever is paid that isn't salary is expensed over the life of the deal.

Vincent Jackson's contract involved 5 years, $55.55 million with $26 million guaranteed. Let's say that's what Mike Wallace wants. Do you do it, or not?

[ckparrothead]

Vincent Jackson's contract will pay him $36 million over the first three years. The last two years involve payments of $19.94 million (provided he makes his workout bonuses). Near as I can tell, if you were to cut him after his third year, his 2015 salary cap figure of $12.402 million (assuming the workout bonus from 2014 was earned) would reduce down to $4.864 million of "dead" money. You'll have paid Vincent $36 million for 3 years of service.

This seems to be the contract Mike Wallace wants to model his own contract after in free agency. The question is whether you'd sign him for the same money.

I say no.