Originally Posted by Lucky
Why would a team trade a draft pick (that would be under their control for 4 years) for a oft-injured RB on the last year of his contract? Especially when they have a more productive RB (Green-Ellis) on their roster and under contract for 2 years?
I could see the Bengals looking at upgrading the RB position in the draft with a young player who could complement Green-Ellis. Not Tate. I think the trade value of Tate is very over valued by fans. Really, Tate has more value to the Texans considering that he knows the offense and Arian Foster is coming off a year where he had 460 touches (including playoffs).
Learn to read. I said package Tate with picks.
The reason the bengals would do it is to add more versatility and explosiveness to their offense. Tate is more talented than green Ellis and ellis' contract wouldn't preclude them from signing Tate to a long term deal if he proved to be worth it.
And I'm not over valuing anything. I've been saying since last year that Tate wasn't some highly sought after commodity and this talk of him being a starter for most teams in the NFL other than the texans was foolish.
Go back to the browns rumor thread. I was all over trading Tate for that first round pick if true because I felt that was as good as it was going to get. While most of the board was talking about holding on to him because we needed him and he was more valuable than a late first rounder.
Matter of fact I think you were one of them saying that.