PDA

View Full Version : Would the Steelers Trade Mike Wallace before the draft?



BlitzburghRockCity
04-12-2012, 03:01 PM
It wouldn't be the first time they pulled a manuever like this with a top flight player. They traded Santonio Holmes just before the draft a couple years ago. Could they do it again with the now obviously disgruntled Wallace and his agent Bus Cook going public with his intentions this offseason?

Wallace knows by now nobody is going to sign him to a deal being an RFA. Parting with all that money and a 1st round draft pick is too steep. He's not happy about it that's for sure.

Would the Steelers consider parting with Wallace for say a 3rd round pick, maybe a 4th? He would have to sign his tender offer first though because right now he's technically not under contract and can't work out with the team but the Steelers own his rights. Giving him away for anything less than a 3rd would be ridiculous and pointless.

Something to think about..is it worth it to you to get say a mid round pick and just get rid of the headache he's become? Or do you make him honor the tender, play in 2012 and then try to sign him before the season or after? He's not exactly the worst WR in the league and Ben did talk to Haley and practically begged him to keep Wallace this offseason no matter what.

This article came out today from the Trib's Steel Mill blog, and talks about the possibility of teams being interested in trading for Mike Wallace. Here is part of the article, you can read it in full via the link if u like.


If the Steelers want to keep Mike Wallace, there’s nothing he can do to prevent that.

However, he can try to force the Steelers’ hand to either pay him or trade him.
And that’s exactly what he and his representatives are doing.

Less than 24 hours after a league source told me that a handful of teams are interested in trading for Wallace leading up the NFL draft scheduled for two weeks from today, news leaked that Wallace doesn’t intend on showing up to any of the Steelers’ offseason activities in protest of his first-round tender.

It isn’t by coincidence that the news was leaked that Wallace doesn’t plan to sign his restricted free agent tender by the April 20 deadline only weeks before the draft, it is strategy.

Even though Bus Cook’s plan of planting information that his client would be a major player in the restricted free agent market this year because of the new CBA rule that requires only a first-round pick as compensation rather than a first and a third backfired, that doesn’t mean this tactic won’t.

There was no way that any team would give up a first-round pick for Wallace along with signing him to a lucrative long-term contract on the RFA market, and that became apparent early on.

However, it is very attractive to teams to try to get Wallace via a trade because it would definitely command less than a first-round pick it would’ve cost them on the RFA market.

Also, it is very attractive for Wallace to go to a team that is willing to pay him the excess of $10 million per season he is demanding.

Source (http://blog.triblive.com/steel-mill/2012/04/12/teams-interested-in-trading-for-wallace-but-will-steelers-listen/)

LatrobePA
04-12-2012, 03:09 PM
Hell yea you trade him!

K Train
04-12-2012, 03:17 PM
pretty sure he has to sign his tender to be traded without an offer from another team (which is essentially a trade)

i hope they 1)sign him, 2)stand strong and dont let him bully them, 3)trade and get damn good compensation

trading him for anything less than a first is an epic fail

BlitzburghRockCity
04-12-2012, 03:30 PM
We have yet to hear from Mike Wallace on this so we have to be careful on how much we judge him. His agent though is making sure that everyone knows, or atleast thinks, that Wallace is all kinds of pissed off.

Let's assume that is indeed the case... if I'm the Steelers I'm not going to give in to a 3rd year guy with a gigantic ego and an agent who's telling him to do things that I don't like. The team holds the cards here, they can keep him in Pittsburgh and either he can play or sit. It still costs them the same right now, the 1st round tender.

The business side of you though says that maybe you do consider letting him go, but for nothing less than a 3rd rounder at the absolute minimum. That's the compensation you'd get next year for losing him anyways. Letting him go this year for a 3rd would get rid of the headache he's caused but is that worth it now? This is a deep draft and there are many needs to focus on. None of this 5th round crap that you got for Santonio Holmes. Wallace hasn't been in trouble with the law and has been fine up until this point.

Nolrog
04-12-2012, 03:34 PM
Would the Steelers consider parting with Wallace for say a 3rd round pick, maybe a 4th?

The compensatory pick for losing Wallace would likely be a 3rd round pick (based primarily on salary). So anything they trade him for needs to be 3rd or higher.

coldrolled
04-12-2012, 03:35 PM
so if a team signs a wr in the top 27 in the draft. what will they have to pay that player?? and use a first round pick...

so... wallace isnt worth the first and the difference in costs for his guaranteed years of experience?

Plus wallace would be a 0 bust pick right...???

Njsteelersnut
04-12-2012, 03:38 PM
I think if his monetary demands are as high what is being reported, no way are we signing him to a long term deal. So why keep him for a year only to lose him next year and get nothing when he leaves. If we can can a get a pick in any of the top three rounds for him I say go for the trade.

PITTxPRIDE
04-12-2012, 03:45 PM
Im depressed to hear about this but Mike is probably gone acoording to NFL.com

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82842a0c/article/mike-wallace-generates-trade-interest-from-several-teams?module=HP11_headline_stack

his plans for offseason workouts are pointing twords him being absent...

:thumbdown1:

Cricker24
04-12-2012, 03:46 PM
The first thing that needs to happen is Wallace must sign his tender before any trade can be made. I agree with BRC that you can't give up Wallace for anything less than a 3rd round pick. I probably would lean towards keeping Wallace right now since he has to sign his tender and play this season, otherwise he won't be able to be an UFA in 2013. Also, if Wallace truly wants top dollar like the rumors say, he's gonna have to play well this season or no team will show him the money. Then, if Wallace leaves via free agency after this season, won't the Steelers get a compensatory 3rd round pick in the 2013 draft?

Chris :tt02:

BlitzburghRockCity
04-12-2012, 04:10 PM
and on the flip side why it wouldn't make sense to trade him...per NFL.com's Gregg Rosenthal (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82842dde/article/mike-wallace-trade-rumors-dont-make-sense)


Mark Kaboly of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review writes (http://blog.triblive.com/steel-mill/2012/04/12/teams-interested-in-trading-for-wallace-but-will-steelers-listen/#.T4cMaWB7eCI.twitter):


"What the Steelers have to decide is whether having Wallace for this year is worth losing a possible third or fourth-round draft choice another team is willing to part with in a trade."


This makes no sense. The Steelers should get a third-round compensatory pick if Wallace left in free agency anyhow. So why trade him for that price when you can get a very valuable year out of him first? Kaboly also believes that there's no chance the team would place the franchise tag on Wallace, but there's no way to know that so far in advance.





So there's your arguments both for and against, you decide. If they could trade him for a 3rd round pick this year, it would be the same compensation as next year. Again, all this flurry of BS coming out of the Wallace camp is likely coming from his agent anways. How much does Wallace agree with all this is anybody's guess.

JensK
04-12-2012, 04:58 PM
I don't understand why Wallace is doing this. He is only hurting himself in the worst kind of way for various reasons:

First of all, as mentioned elsewhere, he cannot be traded anywhere if he has not signed the Tender. Meaning, if Steelers actually decide to play this all the way through, he could end up sitting a whole year doing nothing. As far as I understand the rules, he'd even be a RFA next year as well if he did not offer Steelers his service this year, putting him in the same boat as right now.

Obviously, neither camps want that to happen, however Wallace is not exactly showing the Steelers that they should feel at all inclined to help him at all; be that in signing him nor trading him.

Secondly, teams are not interested in paying big money to divas. Sure, if he was 32y old and on the decline you can throw a couple of mils after a player, but you are not going to throw 10 million+ per year after a guy who quite obviously are much more interested in making money than staying in football shape. He could EASILY attend to OTAs and still gain everything he wanted. In fact, chances are probably bigger that way.

When this is said, we really have no idea whether or not this is actually true, as none of all this have been stated by Wallace nor his agent.

Goodfrom55
04-12-2012, 05:12 PM
Depends on what trades are on the table. I wouldn't though; unless the Steelers were positive they had no chance of signing him to a long term deal. Like some of you have said, we have only heard one side. Would like to hear from Wallace himself.

Goodfrom55
04-12-2012, 05:16 PM
Remember, if he goes unsigned / untraded by the time the draft is over, he loses all leverage against the Steelers and gains nothing by sitting out.

Steelers will get something done, they always do.

JollyRob68
04-12-2012, 05:41 PM
I sound like a parrot but I'd tell him & Bus Cook to use this time to GEt Sign by another,seek alternate RFA compensation or Have teams call to negotiate a trade. Rams Have player & Multiple picks, Cards Have a Player and low second rd & 4th rd pick & Vikings have the picks Cap space & picks to deal. One person suggested picking up their 2nd,3rd,4th and giving our 5th,6st,& 7th.The total point value = the 21st pick. It's said teams can only have 10 picks in the draft total. Not bad at all to have double picks in 2,3,4.

Cricker24
04-12-2012, 05:52 PM
First of all, I don't trust anything La Crapfora says and I also don't put a lot of stock in the Trib either. Let's just wait and see what happens. The Steelers won before Mike Wallace and they'll continue to win without him.

Chris :tt02:

Real Deal Steel
04-12-2012, 06:01 PM
Look,

Wallace wants the big contract. And Bus Cook is also driving this too. With that in mind, the front office should straight out approach the Rams and ask them for the # 6 pick for Wallace in a straight swap. Start with the Rams and work our way down the line of teams that we know are considering taking a wide receiver with their first pick.

Wallace is going to learn the same hard lesson that Holmes learned by going to the Jets.

I'd settle for a 2nd and a 5th round pick for Wallace but if we can get a 1st rounder, so be it.

coldrolled
04-12-2012, 06:21 PM
. It's said teams can only have 10 picks in the draft total. Not bad at all to have double picks in 2,3,4.

Browns have 13 picks this year?

13

1.4, 1.22 (from ATL), 2.5, 3.4, 4.5, 4.23 (from ATL), 5.4, 6.5, 6.35 (Compensatory), 6.36 (Compensatory), 7.4, 7.38 (Compensatory), 7.40 (Compensatory)

Nolrog
04-12-2012, 07:44 PM
It's all posturing.

Steelersfan
04-12-2012, 08:20 PM
Maybe its just me but I see Wallace like some other WR's the steelers have had over the years. Randle El comes to mind. Played great for the team and I would of loved for them to stay, but they asked way too much for what they did.
If that's the case here then see ya later Mike. I love the speed he ads but just not worth top dollar.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

SteelDad
04-12-2012, 08:23 PM
Patience is needed here because this is essentially posturing by Wallace and Cook.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk 2

JollyRob68
04-12-2012, 08:34 PM
Patience is needed here because this is essentially posturing by Wallace and Cook.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk 2

How would Wallace & Cook take it the told them to take advantage of his time this week and seek Alternate compensation from teams who want him?

JollyRob68
04-12-2012, 08:37 PM
Look,

Wallace wants the big contract. And Bus Cook is also driving this too. With that in mind, the front office should straight out approach the Rams and ask them for the # 6 pick for Wallace in a straight swap. Start with the Rams and work our way down the line of teams that we know are considering taking a wide receiver with their first pick.

Wallace is going to learn the same hard lesson that Holmes learned by going to the Jets.

I'd settle for a 2nd and a 5th round pick for Wallace but if we can get a 1st rounder, so be it.

Rams have two 2nd round picks. I agree for the Steelers to contact them and tell Cook to contact teams.

JollyRob68
04-12-2012, 08:39 PM
Browns have 13 picks this year?

13

1.4, 1.22 (from ATL), 2.5, 3.4, 4.5, 4.23 (from ATL), 5.4, 6.5, 6.35 (Compensatory), 6.36 (Compensatory), 7.4, 7.38 (Compensatory), 7.40 (Compensatory)

Thanks, thats good to know. I wasn't sure when I read it if it was true or not.

coldrolled
04-12-2012, 09:06 PM
Rams have two 2nd round picks. I agree for the Steelers to contact them and tell Cook to contact teams.

For this scenario to work the browns need to take blackmon #4

connecticutsteel
04-13-2012, 10:54 AM
He's not total garbage so why would we trade him to anyone in the AFC NORTH that's retarded send him to Tampa of frisco Dallas Miami anywhere but here

BlitzburghRockCity
04-13-2012, 11:00 AM
Yesterday, we painstakingly made the case why the Mike Wallace trade rumors (http://www.nfl.com/goto?id=09000d5d82842a0c) made no sense (http://www.nfl.com/goto?id=09000d5d82842dde). The entire story seemed like an agent-driven Hail Mary.

Longtime Steelers beat reporter Ed Bouchette of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette was more succinct (https://twitter.com/#!/EdBouchette/statuses/190634915610636289) in his analysis: "Ain't happening."

Well, there you go. Perhaps the Wallace trade talk will have legs, but consider the source of the rumors. There will be teams interested in trading for Wallace for less than a first round pick. But it takes two teams to trade, and the Steelers will have no interest in such a move.

Wallace can huff, puff, and holdout this offseason. We may not see him until training camp. But it's safe to say that the Steelers won't deal him.

From NFL.com (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82848aa9/article/steelers-reporter-wallace-trade-isnt-happening?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed)


Looks like the Trib's Mark Kaboly jumped the gun once again and got what he wanted..a fire storm of viewers to his page and a media frenzy. You guys all were awesome in breaking down why it wouldn't be a great idea, rock on!

K Train
04-13-2012, 11:04 AM
i would trade wallace for #6 in a HEARTBEAT.

i

connecticutsteel
04-13-2012, 11:50 AM
The Steelers said they won't trade him

strummerfan
04-13-2012, 12:56 PM
i would trade wallace for #6 in a HEARTBEAT.

i

I really like the flexibility having 3 2nd round picks would provide.

SteelDad
04-13-2012, 01:42 PM
How would Wallace & Cook take it the told them to take advantage of his time this week and seek Alternate compensation from teams who want him?

This stuff goes on all the time. The Rooneys have been to this rodeo many times before as has Bus Cook. Both sides know how the deal works. He can go out and look for a trade partner and when no one bites he comes back with tail between his legs but will eventually get paid in the long-term. If the offer is right, take it and send Wallace on his way.

Nolrog
04-13-2012, 06:47 PM
i would trade wallace for #6 in a HEARTBEAT.

i

For F's sake. No one is giving up the 6th pick in the draft for Mike Wallace.

Zachintosh66
04-14-2012, 10:33 AM
hopefully someone goes after him bc I dont want to pay him half of what he wants and we'll never get a #1 pick for him...

Real Deal Steel
04-14-2012, 04:59 PM
I'm thinking that DURING the draft is when Wallace could be dealt.

Follow me,....after Blackmon and Floyd are taken, you have a few teams (like the Texans) who have a real need for a WR but are near the bottom of the first round. It would make sense for them to give that same first round pick on Wallace instead of using it on Stephen Hill.

Moving him then is the most logical move IF the front office is going to move him at all. Timing is everything and teams will be talking the right kind of talk to the front office right after the first two wide receivers are off the board.