Trade Lynch for Hawk?

[packerbacker1234]

Personally, if we make a play on Lynch I would rather give up a draft pick.

The circumstances of Sunday's game were unusual in terms of Philly's offensive packages and our being shorthanded on the DL. Capers isn't going to play the entire year in a nickel defense. Since I don't trust Bishop at all, I want Hawk in there on the base D.

The obvious replacement isn't even Bishop, it's Brandom Chillar, who already plays a lot as it is. He took time away from hawk last year even in teh base defense. The packers obviously believe he is a key LBer for our scheme, so the lineup would most likely be:

Matthews, Barnett, Chillar, Brad Jones - which Jones getting benched in the nickle. Bishop and Zombo become the main guys to rotate in for rest reasons.

[3irty1]

It makes both teams better and makes sense for both players. (Bob Sanders ties for Hawk, Cal ties for Lynch) but the money part of it makes it seem unlikely.

[pbmax]

why didn't capers adjust the D once vick went in the game? vick isn't going to hurt you with his passing, he'll kill you with his running

with that said i would have thought we would see hawk in more then chillar in the second half. chillar is the better coverage guy, but having the better read-react guy, better tackler and better run stuffer in the game might have changed things up a bit when vick started scrambling all over the place on us

just a thought

Like Harv pointed out elsewhere, they were short of lineman and needed the nickel. I would imagine he did not have a 5 LB personnel grouping planned, even though it would have come in handy.

[The Shadow]

Wouldn't trade Hawk, but I would float out a 3rd rounder for Lynch.
The Bills might be more receptive at this point.
Hawk may well play a role in the season - we don't play Philly every week, after all.

[Guiness]

why didn't capers adjust the D once vick went in the game? vick isn't going to hurt you with his passing, he'll kill you with his running

with that said i would have thought we would see hawk in more then chillar in the second half. chillar is the better coverage guy, but having the better read-react guy, better tackler and better run stuffer in the game might have changed things up a bit when vick started scrambling all over the place on us

just a thought

I was wondering just that, and like Smidge above, I wondered if it's because of the style of runner Vick is? I think that's a possible answer, but grasping a bit. If they expected Vick to run more (which he did) and Hawk is a better run stopper, I would've thought they'd have him in there. I know he isn't usually in the nickel, but I have trouble believing he doesn't know it/couldn't play in it.

[Guiness]

It makes both teams better and makes sense for both players. (Bob Sanders ties for Hawk, Cal ties for Lynch) but the money part of it makes it seem unlikely.

I haven't seen anything about ML's contract - they're both first rounders, so it's not like ML's making the minimum or something. Since there's no cap this year, how much does it really matter? Unless the $10 million Hawk is due next year is scaring the Bill's off, because they expect the cap to be back.

[3irty1]

It makes both teams better and makes sense for both players. (Bob Sanders ties for Hawk, Cal ties for Lynch) but the money part of it makes it seem unlikely.

I haven't seen anything about ML's contract - they're both first rounders, so it's not like ML's making the minimum or something. Since there's no cap this year, how much does it really matter? Unless the $10 million Hawk is due next year is scaring the Bill's off, because they expect the cap to be back.

From Rotoworld:

six-year, $18.935 million contract. The deal contains $10.285 million guaranteed, including a $3 million signing bonus. 2010: $885,000, 2011: $1.14 million, 2012: $1.14 million (Voidable Year)

He's a deal for the next two years.

[woodbuck27]

It makes both teams better and makes sense for both players. (Bob Sanders ties for Hawk, Cal ties for Lynch) but the money part of it makes it seem unlikely.

I haven't seen anything about ML's contract - they're both first rounders, so it's not like ML's making the minimum or something. Since there's no cap this year, how much does it really matter? Unless the $10 million Hawk is due next year is scaring the Bill's off, because they expect the cap to be back.

From Rotoworld:

six-year, $18.935 million contract. The deal contains $10.285 million guaranteed, including a $3 million signing bonus. 2010: $885,000, 2011: $1.14 million, 2012: $1.14 million (Voidable Year)

He's a deal for the next two years.

Wow! Marshawn Lynch is a deal as AJ Hawk and his contract looking ahead to 2011 isn't.

Maybe? he'll want TT to negotiate that contract soon after we get him and if TT does 'in fact' acquire this RB for our team.

Note: I was 'called out' by a member here, on a remark I made RE: TT and did so in this post. A comment that isn't pertinant to the issue of this topic. I edited out a comment that isn't fair in terms of many members opinion of TT. As a GM they deeply respect. woodbuck27

TT is imaculate and he works that very well as ' the Turtle '. Who coined that nickname for TT? Was it Bretzky? or Tank?

Where is Bretzky? I miss that Packer fan.

GO ! PACK GO !!

[mraynrand]

We know that TT won't make a move unless he's absolutely sure his reputation cannot be touched.

This is trite and stale.

[woodbuck27]

In my final analysis of this RUMOR: AJ Hawk to the Buffalo Bills:

Green Bay Packers Depth Chart ' Offense':

http://www.packers.com/team/depth-chart.html

At issue here with some the loss or not of LB A J Hawk:

AJ Hawk:

http://www.packers.com/team/roster/A.J.-Hawk/f8705460-ceca-444d-974d-50c1125b52cc

Green Bay Packers Depth Chart 'defense':

http://www.packers.com/team/depth-chart.html

I'm not seeing it as 'a reality'. Too many what if's! The Bills have need at positions besides LBer. Their GM covets Donald or Pat Lee and Brad Jones for either RB Marshawn Lynch or Fred Jackson.

LB Brad Jones:

http://www.packers.com/team/roster/Brad-Jones/f36a54e1-7045-4ce9-a9ad-ad4ba468acf0

Bills RB Marshawn Lynch:

http://www.buffalobills.com/team/roster/Marshawn-Lynch/85ff28be-651a-40ed-be0d-b6595fff1df6

Bills RB Fred Jackson:

http://www.buffalobills.com/team/roster/Fred-Jackson/9197889b-672f-42fb-ba04-3b75b8afb81a

Of course TT isn't going to want to trade Brad Jones as he wants to deal AJ Hawk for obvious reasons. I don't see TE Donald Lee going to the Bills as they have more need in their secondary.

Packers TE Donald Lee:

http://www.packers.com/team/roster/Donald-Lee/5f3a2104-970b-4e50-93c3-3ab21a203659

Buffaklo Bills Depth Chart 'offense':

http://www.buffalobills.com/team/depth-chart.html

Buffalo Bill Depth Chart 'defense':

http://www.buffalobills.com/team/depth-chart.html

So what will get it done realistically, and I mean considering TT's ways? He'll have to 'give in' in terms of sacrificing a higher draft pick. We know just how pleased he'll be to go there. hahaa.

or Will it be? AJ Hawk and Pat Lee >>> Bills for Marshawn Lynch with TT's concerns RE: his character issues a question mark; but a very affordable for OUR immediate future fit with upside. or Option 'B' another Bills RB in terms of Fred Jackson ( solid RB with one drawback, his age of 29 years but we only need him to last 2-3 more yrars as we push for thew Super Bowl).

How much do y'all ' just really love CB Pat Lee?

http://www.packers.com/team/roster/Pat-Lee/a70ea275-6396-4d92-9a50-7f874d003342

For him to be included obviously the Bills GM Buddy Nix will also want an exchange of draft picks and again that gives TT issues.

Who's Bills GM Buddy Nix:

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4785461

http://www.buffalobills.com/media-lounge/videos/Buddy-Nix-Speaks-at-the-Monday-QB-Club/5f953c02-1d5d-4fdc-8e03-37365682b3c5

Bottom line Packer fans is that this is a rumor and 'no less' one of interest or moreso greater interest to some here.

Again I'll take you to a Buffalo Bills forum and this stories talk there. Specifically page 7 of that topic of the Packers > Bills trade rumor:

http://boards.buffalobills.com/showthread.php?t=288237&page=7

also... Please read page 8 and this topic is into page 9 at last look.

GO PACK GO!

[woodbuck27]

We know that TT won't make a move unless he's absolutely sure his reputation cannot be touched.

This is trite and stale.

I retract that mraynrand, as it's prejudiced by my personal observations and analysis since Ted Thompson became our teams GM.

Too many here at Packerrats 'just love' TT. TT has 'in fact' in his own way and style, that excuse this observation ; does frustrate some Packer fans. Regardless, TT has placed our team in a position to be considered as a serious contender for a Super Bowl appearance.

I wish him well as he works to make that a reality.

GO PACK GO!

[mission]

Woodbuck tl;dr...

[pbmax]

The Bills have rejected multiple previous offers, including a reported 3rd round pick and a player for Lynch. This despite the fact that they drafted his replacement.

Lynch is cheap for a starting caliber player, though not so cheap as a backup. Very manageable.

Lynch was in the doghouse with previous coaches (Jauron and Fewell) but has a new coach and relatively new GM (though that GM has been with the Buffalo org for Lynch's entire stay).

Lynch is 3rd on the RB depth chart for a bad team. Forget the Pro Bowl, he cannot find a way to start for a losing team that cannot run the ball.

The linebacker opening for the Bills will be open for 2-3 weeks. Does anyone think Thompson would trade for a RB if Grant was due back in 4 weeks?

Hawk is still the starter in the base defense. Think about the logic of trading a starter for a 3rd stringer. And that's a 3rd stringer is on a bad team.

Hawk is due $4 million this year and $10 million next year. What team will rent a player for 3 starts at that price? And what incentive does Hawk have to renegotiate either year? He would not be going to Buffalo to become a full-time starter, much less a 3 down player.

No other player mentioned is even the player that Hawk is. Donald Lee is expensive for a marginal starter. Pat Lee couldn't beat out a Undrafted Free Agent for the nickel slot.

Even if Thompson and McCarthy felt Lynch would fit the offense and be a clear upgrade, the Bills have no reason to want Hawk and he has no reason to make it easier to go to Buffalo.

The Bills either want Lynch at his relatively cheap price for insurance or they want a King's ransom for him. He is not the same back he was when he went to the Pro Bowl and his numbers weren't fantastic then either. The Packers should not pay a ransom for a marginal upgrade.

[Tony Oday]

The Bills have rejected multiple previous offers, including a reported 3rd round pick and a player for Lynch. This despite the fact that they drafted his replacement.

Lynch is cheap for a starting caliber player, though not so cheap as a backup. Very manageable.

Lynch was in the doghouse with previous coaches (Jauron and Fewell) but has a new coach and relatively new GM (though that GM has been with the Buffalo org for Lynch's entire stay).

Lynch is 3rd on the RB depth chart for a bad team. Forget the Pro Bowl, he cannot find a way to start for a losing team that cannot run the ball.

The linebacker opening for the Bills will be open for 2-3 weeks. Does anyone think Thompson would trade for a RB if Grant was due back in 4 weeks?

Hawk is still the starter in the base defense. Think about the logic of trading a starter for a 3rd stringer. And that's a 3rd stringer is on a bad team.

Hawk is due $4 million this year and $10 million next year. What team will rent a player for 3 starts at that price? And what incentive does Hawk have to renegotiate either year? He would not be going to Buffalo to become a full-time starter, much less a 3 down player.

No other player mentioned is even the player that Hawk is. Donald Lee is expensive for a marginal starter. Pat Lee couldn't beat out a Undrafted Free Agent for the nickel slot.

Even if Thompson and McCarthy felt Lynch would fit the offense and be a clear upgrade, the Bills have no reason to want Hawk and he has no reason to make it easier to go to Buffalo.

The Bills either want Lynch at his relatively cheap price for insurance or they want a King's ransom for him. He is not the same back he was when he went to the Pro Bowl and his numbers weren't fantastic then either. The Packers should not pay a ransom for a marginal upgrade.

Why not just give them a second? I mean you want a starter with teh second pick. ML would be a starter.

[pbmax]

The Bills have rejected multiple previous offers, including a reported 3rd round pick and a player for Lynch. This despite the fact that they drafted his replacement.

Lynch is cheap for a starting caliber player, though not so cheap as a backup. Very manageable.

Lynch was in the doghouse with previous coaches (Jauron and Fewell) but has a new coach and relatively new GM (though that GM has been with the Buffalo org for Lynch's entire stay).

Lynch is 3rd on the RB depth chart for a bad team. Forget the Pro Bowl, he cannot find a way to start for a losing team that cannot run the ball.

The linebacker opening for the Bills will be open for 2-3 weeks. Does anyone think Thompson would trade for a RB if Grant was due back in 4 weeks?

Hawk is still the starter in the base defense. Think about the logic of trading a starter for a 3rd stringer. And that's a 3rd stringer is on a bad team.

Hawk is due $4 million this year and $10 million next year. What team will rent a player for 3 starts at that price? And what incentive does Hawk have to renegotiate either year? He would not be going to Buffalo to become a full-time starter, much less a 3 down player.

No other player mentioned is even the player that Hawk is. Donald Lee is expensive for a marginal starter. Pat Lee couldn't beat out a Undrafted Free Agent for the nickel slot.

Even if Thompson and McCarthy felt Lynch would fit the offense and be a clear upgrade, the Bills have no reason to want Hawk and he has no reason to make it easier to go to Buffalo.

The Bills either want Lynch at his relatively cheap price for insurance or they want a King's ransom for him. He is not the same back he was when he went to the Pro Bowl and his numbers weren't fantastic then either. The Packers should not pay a ransom for a marginal upgrade.

Why not just give them a second? I mean you want a starter with teh second pick. ML would be a starter.

A marginal starter for a 2nd round pick with 2 years left is a steep price. He is also on the bench next year.

So he must be worth a second round pick this year, that is, be that much on improvement over Jackson to justify the price. And the Bills have to agree to a second rounder. We have no reason to believe they will.