A Scenario So Crazy It Just Might Work: Mike Wallace Edition

If you have been reading rotoworld lately you have seen these two stories on back to back days:
This from Yesterday -

Quote:

---

ESPN's Adam Schefter reported on NFL Live Wednesday that restricted free agent Mike Wallace has no plans to sign his one-year, $2.742 million tender.
If his tender isn't signed, Wallace can't participate in Organized Team Activities. According to Schefter, Wallace plans to sit out all offseason workouts until the sides reach a long-term contract agreement. Schefter reports that Wallace and the Steelers have "struggled" to find a common ground, which means the deep threat receiver could be headed for an extended spring absence.

---

This from Today -

Quote:

---

There are reportedly a "handful" of teams interested in trading for restricted free agent Mike Wallace.
Coming a day after a report that Wallace has no intention of signing his one-year tender, this smacks of agent Bus Cook trying to force the Steelers' hand. If Pittsburgh isn't willing to hand over a long-term deal at more than $10 million per season, Cook wants to send Wallace to another team at less than a first-round price. Any team attempting to acquire Wallace would have to satisfy his contract wishes as well as the Steelers' compensation demands. The chances of a trade decrease dramatically after the upcoming draft.

---

We need to be one of those teams. Sure, we will need to give up a long term contract, but we are loaded with cap space next year. If we could get Wallace for the 2.1 (basically the equivalent of a 1st rounder), I would be ecstatic, as should the rest of you. Every player in the NFL draft is an unknown. Mike Wallace is a known. A proven superstar who can stretch the field as good as anyone, for the price of a second round pick you'd have to ask yourself: Mike Wallace or Alshon Jeffery? Mike Wallace or Reuben Randle?...Really?

Now this of course is all contigent on Pittsburgh getting rid of Wallace, but after what they did with Holmes (a player on the final year of his contract they knew they wouldn't retain), and the willingness to let a team give up a 1 for him, I think they would take the offer if Wallace is serious about his threat.

My Scenario:
Rams Trade the 1st pick of the second round for Mike Wallace
THEN:
If Trent Richardson is BPA, Rams select Trent Richardson.
If Morris Claiborne is BPA, Rams select Morris Claiborne.
Heres where things get interesting.
If Justin Blackmon is BPA, Rams trade down.

If the Rams trade down I bet they would minimally be able to net an extra second round pick. Let's say they trade down to the NYJ at #16, and pick up an extra 2.

We would be able to not have to reach for a player at 6, and take another player with the extra 2 (maybe even another WR).

So in this scenario we would be sitting with Mike Wallace, a mid 1st rounder, and two second rounders, as opposed to before trading for Wallace, a early first rounder and two second rounders.

But I would be perfectly comfortable staying pat at 6 and just taking another player, along with Wallace and just having Washington's 2, but what I need to ask is:

Mike Wallace for a 2?

So you want to pay Wallace $10M/year?

The going rate for a Top 10 WR (based on Julio Jones' deal from last year) is about $4M/year.

Wallace has priced himself out of my market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AvengerRam

So you want to pay Wallace $10M/year?

The going rate for a Top 10 WR (based on Julio Jones' deal from last year) is about $4M/year.

Wallace has priced himself out of my market.

---

Fair enough if you think 10m a year is too much for him, but you honestly think Julio Jones is a top 10 WR already? Wait until Julios' second contract when he's actually a top 10 WR.

I think Avenger meant WR drafted in the top 10. That means Blackmon would come approximately $6mil cheaper per year, which is a huge difference. The Rams might have to cut someone like Jason Smith to make a $10mil salary work. That salary would be a tough pill to swallow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by berg8309

I think Avenger meant WR drafted in the top 10. That means Blackmon would come approximately $6mil cheaper per year, which is a huge difference. The Rams might have to cut someone like Jason Smith to make a $10mil salary work. That salary would be a tough pill to swallow.

---

Ahh thanks for the clarification, now I understand what you were saying Av. Disregard last post then.

Mike Wallace is interesting but not at 10 Mil. I would rather take Blackmon and with the second RD pick we gave up to get him take Randle. Blackmon and Randle combined will out produce Wallace and do it cheaper.

Yeah I'd like to have him, but I don't think he's a superstar. He wants to be paid like a top 5 of 10 receiver but I don't really see it. That's Andre Johnson/Vincent Jackson money. Not to mention the high draft pick. I just don't see any team willing to take that kind of hit. If he was a free agent, sure, someone would overpay for him. I just don't see it happening via the trade market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rambos

Mike Wallace is interesting but not at 10 Mil. I would rather take Blackmon and with the second RD pick we gave up to get him take Randle. Blackmon and Randle combined will out produce Wallace and do it cheaper.

---

So the Rams should spend two draft picks to get the production of one player?
Reminds me of Pettis / Salas.

Vincent Jackson received $11 million. Wallace will want and get that much.

Why are people afraid of paying him $10mill/year? He's the best deep threat in the NFL and one of the fastest players in the NFL, if not the fastest. This guy has been doing great in the league and will continue to do great things. I'd even feel comfortable taking Blackmon at #6 if we got Wallace. That would be the deadliest combo in the NFL. Blackmon is the possession YAC WR, with Wallace going deep, Amendola and Salas across the middle, and SJAX in the backfield? Thats a ferocious offense!

I dont see why someone would pass a proven top 10 WR because they can take Blackmon for $6mill less, doesn't mean he will be good at all... Its hard to find game changers as good as Wallace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RebelYell

So the Rams should spend two draft picks to get the production of one player?
Reminds me of Pettis / Salas.

Vincent Jackson received $11 million. Wallace will want and get that much.

---

No.... Instead of giving them the #39 pick and spending 10 Mil on Wallace I would rather just take Randle. I think we need a true one and a number two. That being said in this scenario we where going to give them our second. So I would still take Blackkmon with the first. The cost for both of them will be cheaper then over paying Wallace IMO. I said "combined will out produce" not the same, heck Blackmon alone may produce more then Wallace. Wallace may get 11 million more power to him.

I also don't think Pettis/Salas are not in the same class as Blackmon and Randle IMO.

On last note on over paying in FA:

Between bonuses and base salary, Bennett will pocket $9.5 million in 2007. He will earn $13 million in the first two years of the contract and $21 million over the first four seasons of the deal.

Yikes!!!

I'd offer the Rams #6 pick for the Steelers first round pick and Wallace. Equals out roughly to trading the 19th pick for Wallace. Steelers will eventually pay, I understand why they don't want to pay this year.

For the first pick in the second round, I'd do it. And if you think $10 million per year is too much to pay for Wallace, consider what Jim Thomas said in his Tuesday chat: the Rams "were offering Garcon $8 million a year." If the Rams are willing to pay $8 million per year to Garcon, then $10 million per year to Wallace shouldn't be out of the question for this organization.

Well Wallace has a 1st round tender so the Steelers will ask for more than just the #33 pick because is not a 1st rounder no matter how close to the round it is.

But just think about it guys lets play out the T-Rich situation you can add a playmaking RB with an outside deep threat with 2 potential inside threats Danny Boy and Kendricks...then you have a health competition with Steve Smith and DX whoever is healthier starts opposite of Wallace

Our biggest O problem last year was scoring this situation will get us points

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nick

For the first pick in the second round, I'd do it. And if you think $10 million per year is too much to pay for Wallace, consider what Jim Thomas said in his Tuesday chat: the Rams "were offering Garcon $8 million a year." If the Rams are willing to pay $8 million per year to Garcon, then $10 million per year to Wallace shouldn't be out of the question for this organization.

---

Well put, Nick.

I love Wallace and i been barking up this tree for a long time to trade for him.But the big difference in my theory is that i would get Wallace and also draft Blackmon at #6 if hes there.In this league u need more than 1 good WR and whats wrong with having 2??Blackmon and wallace we would be set for years at WR they would easily be out 1/2 and if blackmon pans out as expected we would have a nice duo right there.Give Sam his own version of Marvin/Reggie,look what Manning did with 2 good WR's,i like the outcome as i think every does lol.10 mil a year is a little steep but like said above if we really were prepared to pay Garcon 8 mill a year i think we have to find a way to make 10 mill work if thats the case.Whether it is or not remains to be seen but if so i think it makes sense to pull the trigger on Wallace,he is a proven commodity no risk that he wont work he already showed he can play at the NFL level and produce great numbers at that.Just my .02 cents though