GreedoShotFirst
Footballguy
incorrect. There was some discussion that the Redskins would do that for salary reasons, but they did not. LaVar went 1.02, Samuels went 1.03.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
PFT Rumor: Niners mulling trade for Rivers (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SammyJankis
- Start date
Just Win Baby
Footballguy
Trading Rivers after his March 10 bonus was discussed in previous threads. To recap:- Rivers' original signing bonus was $7.65M, which was to be pro-rated over the 6 years of the contract for cap purposes. So $1.275M was paid in 2004. That leaves $6.375M to accelerate.- Rivers' roster bonus of $6.6M was paid on March 10. That was to be pro-rated over the remaining 5 years of the contract for cap purposes.- Rivers earned $75K in incentives in 2004. That was due to go on the 2005 cap.If this info is accurate, the Chargers will take a $13.05M cap hit in 2005 if they trade Rivers before June. If after June, I think they could split the cap hit evenly across 2005 and 2006.That is a large cap hit to take for a player who won't be on the roster. And on top of that, they will add a cap hit for the #1 pick, though that is easier to take since presumably it is an impact player.(On the other hand, as it stands today, if they keep Brees and Rivers, they will take ~$8M as a cap hit for Brees's one year deal. If this trade happens, they will likely sign Brees long term, which would presumably lower his cap hit for 2005 to $3M or so, making the move a bit easier to take.)Trading Rivers would also mean San Diego will have paid him ~$14.6M to take a handful of snaps. That kind of spending is hard to take, especially when we're not talking about a player who busted.For the reasons above, I don't see San Diego doing this.I could definitely see San Francisco wanting to do it, though. Even if they don't grade Rivers out higher, his cost/performance ratio would be much better than Rodgers/Smith. And besides, a small difference in grades is likely washed anyway, with Rivers' year of NFL experience.EDIT: Duh, can't add.
Last edited by a moderator:
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Part of me really thinks that this is SF just trying to drum up any hype they can for the #1 pick in a year that there is no #1 pick. This trade will not happen. period.
Colin Dowling
Footballguy
I stand corrected. Interesting..Colin
dirtyhalos
capital letter hater!
can you elaborate please, is this an analysts opinion? and if so, who?im not watching espn
AJ Smith has denied that there's anything to this rumor. Not that he needed to: it was silly to begin with.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jason Wood
Zoo York
SHOCKER
As others stated this morning, this had all the makings of the PFT rumor being picked up by enough other media outlets that somehow it became a "rumor with legs" and made it's way into the ESPN media machine via their Insider Rumor Mill. "Nothing to see here, carry on."
cstu
Footballguy
This would be the stupidest trade in history if it went through. The #4 overall pick from last year and taking a cap hit on his signing bonus just to get an unproven rookie WR? They could have drafted Roy Williams last year if they wanted to do that. What they need to do is trade Brees for whatever they can get and draft Williamson at #12.
Is PFT ever reliable?SHOCKER
diesel7982
Footballguy
They post things in a RUMOR MILL.They rarely ever say something WILL happen...they just report stuff when they hear it. Like when they nailed the Randy Moss trade a week before any other media outlet did.Is PFT ever reliable?SHOCKER
Jason Wood
Zoo York
And around and around we go...where she stops, nobody knows.They post things in a RUMOR MILL.They rarely ever say something WILL happen...they just report stuff when they hear it. Like when they nailed the Randy Moss trade a week before any other media outlet did.Is PFT ever reliable?SHOCKER
diesel7982
Footballguy
I'm just tired of seeing people disparage them for being wrong when they, by the nature of the word RUMOR, are likely to often be wrong. They pass along information they hear from others. Why the hate for them?And around and around we go...where she stops, nobody knows.They post things in a RUMOR MILL.They rarely ever say something WILL happen...they just report stuff when they hear it. Like when they nailed the Randy Moss trade a week before any other media outlet did.Is PFT ever reliable?SHOCKER
LHUCKS
Footballguy
I kind of agree with this. As long as it is obvious what the source is, there's no harm.I'm just tired of seeing people disparage them for being wrong when they, by the nature of the word RUMOR, are likely to often be wrong. They pass along information they hear from others. Why the hate for them?And around and around we go...where she stops, nobody knows.They post things in a RUMOR MILL.They rarely ever say something WILL happen...they just report stuff when they hear it. Like when they nailed the Randy Moss trade a week before any other media outlet did.Is PFT ever reliable?SHOCKER
OK, I'll buy that. My issue is that PFT gets so much run on this MB for information that is not always conrete. When one of us posts comments on what we've heard, there's an immediate call for a LINK. Yet with PFT, they seem to get a pass. That's all I'm saying.I kind of agree with this. As long as it is obvious what the source is, there's no harm.I'm just tired of seeing people disparage them for being wrong when they, by the nature of the word RUMOR, are likely to often be wrong. They pass along information they hear from others. Why the hate for them?And around and around we go...where she stops, nobody knows.They post things in a RUMOR MILL.They rarely ever say something WILL happen...they just report stuff when they hear it. Like when they nailed the Randy Moss trade a week before any other media outlet did.Is PFT ever reliable?SHOCKER
Last edited by a moderator:
diesel7982
Footballguy
A valid point, but PFT does seem to have some legit sources(though they have to keep them nameless for obvious reasons), as evidenced by some of the stories they have broken. For most of us on the message board, we have no such sources, and only recycle info we hear from other news outlets. Whenever anyone posts something that is an ubstansiated rumor, and denotes it as such, there usually isnt a problem. Its when people post crap they hear on the radio, or such, and try to pass it off as fact, that we have a problem around here.OK, I'll buy that. My issue is that PFT gets so much run on this MB for information that is not always conrete. When one of us posts comments on what we've heard, there's an immediate call for a LINK. Yet with PFT, they seem to get a pass. That's all I'm saying.I kind of agree with this. As long as it is obvious what the source is, there's no harm.I'm just tired of seeing people disparage them for being wrong when they, by the nature of the word RUMOR, are likely to often be wrong. They pass along information they hear from others. Why the hate for them?And around and around we go...where she stops, nobody knows.They post things in a RUMOR MILL.They rarely ever say something WILL happen...they just report stuff when they hear it. Like when they nailed the Randy Moss trade a week before any other media outlet did.Is PFT ever reliable?SHOCKER
azcards33
Footballguy
I think that the 49ers are wisely calling the bluff of the Chargers, and any other team in need of a WR by telling the media and anyone who would listen that they are considering passing on Rodgers and Smith, and taking Braylon Edwards instead. He might be the only guy in the draft that would be worth moving up forEdwards is really the best gamebreaking WR in the draft, and his speed clearly sets him apart from Mike Williams, who doesn't have great wheels. I recall hearing Edwards name thrown out there by various college football sources as the favorite to win the Heisman trophy this year prior to Leinart's performance against OklahomaIf the 49ers don't end up with Rivers, they will definately take Rodgers or Smith.They are simply trying to create a market for the #1 pick since their clearly isn't one
azcards33
Footballguy
Rivers rumors run dry
49ERS, CHARGERS SQUASH TALK OF DEAL
By Dennis Georgatos
Mercury News
Rumors that the Chargers might trade Philip Rivers to the 49ers for the No. 1 pick in the April 23-24 NFL draft were shot down Tuesday by officials from both teams.
``It's never going to happen, not in a million years,'' San Diego team president Dean Spanos said. ``It's totally untrue, OK? There is no interest in that whatsoever and never has been. There have been no talks'' with the 49ers regarding such a deal.
Speculation about the possible trade has been swirling on various Internet sites, including Profootballtalk.com and ESPN.com. The rumored deal also has been fodder for sportstalk radio, but like Spanos, 49ers Coach Mike Nolan said there is nothing to it.
``It is simply a rumor and there is no truth to it,'' Nolan said through a team spokesman.
Nolan did not elaborate on the 49ers' intentions for the No. 1 pick. He has said previously that the team is considering four or five players with the top pick, which the 49ers received after finishing a league-worst 2-14 last season.
Possibilities include Cal quarterback Aaron Rodgers, Utah quarterback Alex Smith and Michigan wide receiver Braylon Edwards.
Nolan also has not ruled out trading down. If that happens, Spanos said, it won't involve the Chargers, who already have two picks in the first round. He was even more emphatic when asked if there was a chance the Chargers would consider trading their starting quarterback, Drew Brees, who has been designated as San Diego's franchise player.
``We're staying the course with both of our guys. We're staying with Drew Brees and Philip Rivers, period!'' he said.
Rivers, formerly of North Carolina State, was the fourth overall selection by the New York Giants in last April's draft and some scouts rank him as a better prospect than either Rodgers or Smith. Rivers went to San Diego as part of the trade that sent last year's top pick by the Chargers, quarterback Eli Manning, to New York.
Rivers took himself out of the running for the Chargers' starting job last year when he missed much of training camp because of a contract holdout. Brees went on to rebound from a tough season, leading San Diego to a first-place finish in the AFC West.
• The 49ers open a three-day veterans mini-camp Friday. It will be the first opportunity for returning players to work with the new coaching staff
49ERS, CHARGERS SQUASH TALK OF DEAL
By Dennis Georgatos
Mercury News
Rumors that the Chargers might trade Philip Rivers to the 49ers for the No. 1 pick in the April 23-24 NFL draft were shot down Tuesday by officials from both teams.
``It's never going to happen, not in a million years,'' San Diego team president Dean Spanos said. ``It's totally untrue, OK? There is no interest in that whatsoever and never has been. There have been no talks'' with the 49ers regarding such a deal.
Speculation about the possible trade has been swirling on various Internet sites, including Profootballtalk.com and ESPN.com. The rumored deal also has been fodder for sportstalk radio, but like Spanos, 49ers Coach Mike Nolan said there is nothing to it.
``It is simply a rumor and there is no truth to it,'' Nolan said through a team spokesman.
Nolan did not elaborate on the 49ers' intentions for the No. 1 pick. He has said previously that the team is considering four or five players with the top pick, which the 49ers received after finishing a league-worst 2-14 last season.
Possibilities include Cal quarterback Aaron Rodgers, Utah quarterback Alex Smith and Michigan wide receiver Braylon Edwards.
Nolan also has not ruled out trading down. If that happens, Spanos said, it won't involve the Chargers, who already have two picks in the first round. He was even more emphatic when asked if there was a chance the Chargers would consider trading their starting quarterback, Drew Brees, who has been designated as San Diego's franchise player.
``We're staying the course with both of our guys. We're staying with Drew Brees and Philip Rivers, period!'' he said.
Rivers, formerly of North Carolina State, was the fourth overall selection by the New York Giants in last April's draft and some scouts rank him as a better prospect than either Rodgers or Smith. Rivers went to San Diego as part of the trade that sent last year's top pick by the Chargers, quarterback Eli Manning, to New York.
Rivers took himself out of the running for the Chargers' starting job last year when he missed much of training camp because of a contract holdout. Brees went on to rebound from a tough season, leading San Diego to a first-place finish in the AFC West.
• The 49ers open a three-day veterans mini-camp Friday. It will be the first opportunity for returning players to work with the new coaching staff
TheFanatic
Footballguy
On Mike and Mike this morning Mort said that this was mentioned by a couple Sports Talk Show Hosts in SF and it just snowballed from there. The Internet creating the story out of nothing more than an idea a couple of guys came up with who get paid to talk about sports all day.SHOCKER
TheFanatic
Footballguy
If it wasn't for posting while working I would never post!!!!
Last edited by a moderator:
Y'know, if you had bothered to read what PFT wrote, you wouldn't be saying this.Is PFT ever reliable?
Sounds like they nailed it from the beginning. Just a bunch of talk from people in SF who didn't stop to think about whether it would make sense for SD.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sinrman
Footballguy
Again, and I said this even BEFORE last season, the Chargers gave up on Brees too early. Now they are in some trouble and will eventually have to decide one way or the other which direction to go -- Rivers or Brees? I think this year is a good year for the Chargers to try and admit their mistake in getting Rivers and get some good value for him, and go with Brees. But, that's just my humble opinion...
nightshift
Footballguy
Considering that he's under a 1 year tender, why doesn't SD trade Brees to the Niners (assuming they want him, of course)?
nightshift
Footballguy
Let me throw this possibility out:First, the Niners draft Rodgers & sign Boston. That will solve both problems and allow them to focus on other areas of need, like the rest of the team.Second, SD is in the market to move Rivers but not to the Niners. Who then? Which team(s) have the cap room and the need to make such an investment?2 come to mind
ALLAS - Bledsoe is a stop gap solution. Jones will want his franchise QB again. Could they trade pick 11 plus? for Rivers?But better yet,CLEVELAND - Here is a team in dire need of a franchise QB, with a high pick & cap room.
ALLAS - Bledsoe is a stop gap solution. Jones will want his franchise QB again. Could they trade pick 11 plus? for Rivers?But better yet,CLEVELAND - Here is a team in dire need of a franchise QB, with a high pick & cap room.
kylechoffman
Footballguy
Cant believe this subject hasnt been put to rest - Chris Mort confirmed with the SF gm and owners at the owners meetings that its a rumor. Mort reported this three days ago on Mike and Mike. Done - end of story.
-OZ-
Footballguy
I don't recall that one, but even if true, there's a significant difference between the occasional bad report and habitual bad reporting.You mean as reliable as ESPN? Wasn't it just last year that ESPN reported Portis had broken his leg/ankle in training camp and was probably done for the year? :rotflmao:Is PFT ever reliable?
Just Win Baby
Footballguy
Just Win Baby
Footballguy
Suppose the Chargers decide to commit to Brees, as you suggest.If they trade Rivers now:
1. They take a $13M cap hit for 2005.
2. They must sign a backup QB, which requires more cap money, though perhaps not much. Perhaps more importantly, the new QB is unfamiliar with system.
3. They get something of value for him, let's say one extra first round draft pick. Presumably that player helps the team, but there is more cap money required.
All in all, quite expensive cap-wise.
If they don't trade Rivers now:
1. Rivers requires only about $3M on the cap for 2005.
2. No additional backup QB is needed.
3. They don't get the extra draft pick. BUT, they can use the $10M+ in cap savings to sign one or more free agents instead. Probably a wash, talent-wise.
So it really doesn't make sense to trade him. And, again, this doesn't even address the stupidity of paying Rivers close to $15M to take a few snaps and leave.
Big Score
Footballguy
PFT specifically said their report was scuttlebutt and appeared under the specific catagorey RUMOR MILL.ESPN broke the story of Portis and his training camp injury as FACT.I don't recall that one, but even if true, there's a significant difference between the occasional bad report and habitual bad reporting.You mean as reliable as ESPN? Wasn't it just last year that ESPN reported Portis had broken his leg/ankle in training camp and was probably done for the year? :rotflmao:Is PFT ever reliable?
Now tell me again which one is the bad reporting
Oz, take another look at what PFT wrote. I don't see a single thing that's inaccurate."We've heard rumblings from the Bay Area that the San Francisco 49ers could be trying to pry away from the Chargers quarterback Philip Rivers, in exchange for the No. 1 pick in the 2005 draft.PFT specifically said their report was scuttlebutt and appeared under the specific catagorey RUMOR MILL.ESPN broke the story of Portis and his training camp injury as FACT.I don't recall that one, but even if true, there's a significant difference between the occasional bad report and habitual bad reporting.You mean as reliable as ESPN? Wasn't it just last year that ESPN reported Portis had broken his leg/ankle in training camp and was probably done for the year? :rotflmao:Is PFT ever reliable?
Now tell me again which one is the bad reporting
We've yet to substantiate this one via any sources with actual knowledge of the discussions, but the rumor is "out there" -- and some might think that it really is "out there.""
