Rp2K read the article and his perception was Peters wasn't a long term "big contract extension" fit for the Fangio defensive concepts. Or possibly what McVay wasn't willing to gamble on based on his performance as a Ram during the Wade regime.

Maybe a combination of both but that is for Rp2K to explain in more details.

dzrams cut and pasted sections of the article that seem to fit some of Peters' strengths and I get that perception as well.

I understand both of you and for me, the bottom line is McVay and all that were involved at the time believed Peters was not worth paying the extension and Ramsey was the long term corner you gamble on.

Either way, Ramsey's availability and what it took to get him was probably mostly the reason Peters was traded.

Can't have two corners with their cap hits (assuming Ramsey gets his pay day).

The article in "context" made some good observations about Fangio's defense but the writer left out some intangibles that can't be explained unless you hear it from the horses mouths.. Meaning McVay and Fangio giving honest opinions about how Peters would have been a decent, good or great fit etc.