How a Derrick Burgess Trade Could Bring Vince Wilfork to the Raiders

(This article is part of my application for CBS Correspondent.)

I have previously written that the Raiders should acquire Vince Wilfork in a trade for Derrick Burgess. Some thought that the trade would be unbalanced in favor of Oakland.

Well, here's another scenario.

Carolina still must deal with the Julius Peppers situation and has been hesitant to act. 

I realize that multi-team trades are rare in the NFL, but are they impossible? I doubt it. Thus if it fits your need, then why not?

The Raiders could send Burgess and a fourth-round draft pick to Carolina for Wilfork, whom Carolina would acquire for Peppers from New England.

Bottom line is...the Raiders cannot allow the "rich to get richer" by trading Derrick Burgess for less than he's worth. The Raiders need more help on defense and should demand nothing less.

Rather than believe the lies within the media that pollute the decisions of the Raider turncoats that are only in the organization to enhance their résumé, the Raiders can make moves to improve their defense.

Thus, the Raiders must receive on-field talent for Burgess in 2009, particularly defensive tackles, in order to compete with the current players to ensure that the best talent is on the field for 2009.

The point was...Burgess is worth more than his stock right now. The Raiders cannot trade him for nothing like they did with Randy Moss.

Teams think they can steal Burgess for nothing because his stock is low. The Raiders will make offers they think are reasonable, and the other team will reject it in order to push the price lower. The reality is, the Raiders should shop around or keep Burgess.

The Raiders must demand fair value for Burgess in any trade or just keep Burgess. Another season with Burgess is better than magic beans.

The questions about Derrick Burgess are utterly false. Burgess dominates at his position and should be treated like a dominant player—not as a throw-in that you're trying to unload.

Any attempt to say that Burgess is not a dominant defensive player is a lie.

The same thing happened with Charles Woodson. The media questioned him until Raider fans did, and the Raiders let him walk.

Now he's in Green Bay as a dominant corner again. Enough with believing the media hocus pocus around the Raiders.

So unless the Raiders get fair value at a needed position—keep Burgess.