56 replies to this topic

[The_Jonas]

HG, on 13 January 2012 - 01:42 PM, said:

I think its possible the whole coaching situation that we were unaware of had something to do with it.

Because Carr is playing on a 1 year tender, I don't think we can re-sign him until that expires.

I was in favor of giving him a long term contract instead of the tender, because it would save us money in the long run if we did opt to resign the guy because his value just keeps going up.

[milkman]

The_Jonas, on 13 January 2012 - 02:51 PM, said:

Because Carr is playing on a 1 year tender, I don't think we can re-sign him until that expires.

I was in favor of giving him a long term contract instead of the tender, because it would save us money in the long run if we did opt to resign the guy because his value just keeps going up.

You can re-sign your own guys that are under contract, whether it's a one year tender deal or a long term contract, at any time during the season and in the months following the season.

As to the QB discussion, I think we, as fans in general, are looking at this the wrong way.

I do think that other teams ahead of us have more to offer for the Rams pick, and don't believe the Chiefs have a chance in hell to get that.

I also believe, however, that if the Colts pay Manning the roster bonus due him, there's no way they use that #1 overall to draft Luck, despite the posturing from Irsay and the Colts organization.

Paying Manning that bonus puts them in win now mode.

They won't have time for draft picks to develop.
They will need players that can come in and contribute immediately, especially on defense.

They won't have the cap room to sign free agents, so they'll need to trade for players whose salary is cap friendly, and the teams that can afford absorb signing bonuses to the cap will have the ammo to make a move for that pick.

The Chiefs are one of those teams.

[The_Jonas]

milkman, on 22 January 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

You can re-sign your own guys that are under contract, whether it's a one year tender deal or a long term contract, at any time during the season and in the months following the season.

As to the QB discussion, I think we, as fans in general, are looking at this the wrong way.

I do think that other teams ahead of us have more to offer for the Rams pick, and don't believe the Chiefs have a chance in hell to get that.

I also believe, however, that if the Colts pay Manning the roster bonus due him, there's no way they use that #1 overall to draft Luck, despite the posturing from Irsay and the Colts organization.

Paying Manning that bonus puts them in win now mode.

They won't have time for draft picks to develop.
They will need players that can come in and contribute immediately, especially on defense.

They won't have the cap room to sign free agents, so they'll need to trade for players whose salary is cap friendly, and the teams that can afford absorb signing bonuses to the cap will have the ammo to make a move for that pick.

The Chiefs are one of those teams.

So what you're saying is that you think there's a legit chance that KC could get the #1 pick and Andrew Luck if we really wanted it?

Hmmm... all makes sense. I don't buy the posturing either, but I also don't think Manning will ever be medically cleared to play football again.

[NOLA]

The_Jonas, on 22 January 2012 - 02:58 PM, said:

So what you're saying is that you think there's a legit chance that KC could get the #1 pick and Andrew Luck if we really wanted it?

Hmmm... all makes sense. I don't buy the posturing either, but I also don't think Manning will ever be medically cleared to play football again.

Rob Lowe told me he's not going to play again. So there ya go.

[BrooklynChiefsFan]

milkman, on 22 January 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

You can re-sign your own guys that are under contract, whether it's a one year tender deal or a long term contract, at any time during the season and in the months following the season.

As to the QB discussion, I think we, as fans in general, are looking at this the wrong way.

I do think that other teams ahead of us have more to offer for the Rams pick, and don't believe the Chiefs have a chance in hell to get that.

I also believe, however, that if the Colts pay Manning the roster bonus due him, there's no way they use that #1 overall to draft Luck, despite the posturing from Irsay and the Colts organization.

Paying Manning that bonus puts them in win now mode.

They won't have time for draft picks to develop.
They will need players that can come in and contribute immediately, especially on defense.

They won't have the cap room to sign free agents, so they'll need to trade for players whose salary is cap friendly, and the teams that can afford absorb signing bonuses to the cap will have the ammo to make a move for that pick.

The Chiefs are one of those teams.

I get the salary cap part, but you specifically mention having defensive trade chips. Who on the Chiefs do you think would be on the block in an Andrew Luck scenario? Since this thread is about Carr he certainly jumps out, but his contract won't be friendly and he is still a free agent anyway.

[milkman]

The_Jonas, on 22 January 2012 - 02:58 PM, said:

So what you're saying is that you think there's a legit chance that KC could get the #1 pick and Andrew Luck if we really wanted it?

Hmmm... all makes sense. I don't buy the posturing either, but I also don't think Manning will ever be medically cleared to play football again.

I think you may be right about Manning.

But if he's cleared, and the colts pay him that bonus, then I think that first pick is in play.

It appears, however, that the Colts are leaning strongly toward cutting Manning, regardless.

BrooklynChiefsFan, on 22 January 2012 - 09:51 PM, said:

I get the salary cap part, but you specifically mention having defensive trade chips. Who on the Chiefs do you think would be on the block in an Andrew Luck scenario? Since this thread is about Carr he certainly jumps out, but his contract won't be friendly and he is still a free agent anyway.

To get a potential franchise QB, one that is as close to a sure thing as there will ever be, everyone is available.

Looking at the Colts and what they need, I'd offer up a package that includes Glen Dorsey, DJ and Kendrick Lewis.

This gives them the run stuffer in the middle of the D-Line, an All Pro Calibre MLB that can play all three downs, and help in the back end of their pass defense.

Bottom line, though, no one is untouchable.

[BrooklynChiefsFan]

milkman, on 25 January 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

I think you may be right about Manning.

But if he's cleared, and the colts pay him that bonus, then I think that first pick is in play.

It appears, however, that the Colts are leaning strongly toward cutting Manning, regardless.



To get a potential franchise QB, one that is as close to a sure thing as there will ever be, everyone is available.

Looking at the Colts and what they need, I'd offer up a package that includes Glen Dorsey, DJ and Kendrick Lewis.

This gives them the run stuffer in the middle of the D-Line, an All Pro Calibre MLB that can play all three downs, and help in the back end of their pass defense.

Bottom line, though, no one is untouchable.

Wow, that's quite a bounty. Are you sending picks to Indy as well? I have been on record as willing to do whatever it takes to get a franchise QB via draft trade, but this seems extreme even for me. I'd be leery to trade all those guys without having Carr under contract and the uncertainty about Berry's health going forward. Top that off with TJax heading into free agency before long and the D could be really gutted.

[JTChief82]

BrooklynChiefsFan, on 25 January 2012 - 11:49 AM, said:

Wow, that's quite a bounty. Are you sending picks to Indy as well? I have been on record as willing to do whatever it takes to get a franchise QB via draft trade, but this seems extreme even for me. I'd be leery to trade all those guys without having Carr under contract and the uncertainty about Berry's health going forward. Top that off with TJax heading into free agency before long and the D could be really gutted.

IMO the Colts won't give up that #1 because they are guaranteed to get Luck. By that time Manning will either have been released or retired so they really will have no choice.

I'd rather not send any players from the D off in a trade, but if we had to send one it would probably be Dorsey. I think he has better trade value since he could play in any scheme.
I think that trading with the Rams to get RGIII is more reasonable if it could happen. Sending Bowe(IF Franchised),Dorsey, our #1 and 3 this year and maybe a 2 next year.

Having an excellent Defense can help a young QB in the early years. If we dismantle what looks like it could potentially be a top 5 D for a shot at a Franchise QB, we could be putting more pressure on a guy to carry the team because the D can't keep the other team from scoring.

[milkman]

JTChief82, on 25 January 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

IMO the Colts won't give up that #1 because they are guaranteed to get Luck. By that time Manning will either have been released or retired so they really will have no choice.

I'd rather not send any players from the D off in a trade, but if we had to send one it would probably be Dorsey. I think he has better trade value since he could play in any scheme.
I think that trading with the Rams to get RGIII is more reasonable if it could happen. Sending Bowe(IF Franchised),Dorsey, our #1 and 3 this year and maybe a 2 next year.

Having an excellent Defense can help a young QB in the early years. If we dismantle what looks like it could potentially be a top 5 D for a shot at a Franchise QB, we could be putting more pressure on a guy to carry the team because the D can't keep the other team from scoring.

You'd be building around Luck.

You'd obviously have swap picks in this draft, and probably have to add another pick, maybe a 2nd rounder next year, but to get that Luck pick, you are going to have to outbid other teams.

You probably have the replacement for Dorsey on the roster with Bailey, who flashed beastly potential late in the season.

You can probably target a guy like LeRon Landry in free agency to replace Lewis, with the idea of moving Berry to Lewis' free safety spot and starting Landry at SS.

Giving up DJ would be hard, but Mikes in a 34 are easier to find than franchise QBs.

[The_Jonas]

milkman, on 25 January 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

You'd be building around Luck.

You'd obviously have swap picks in this draft, and probably have to add another pick, maybe a 2nd rounder next year, but to get that Luck pick, you are going to have to outbid other teams.

You probably have the replacement for Dorsey on the roster with Bailey, who flashed beastly potential late in the season.

You can probably target a guy like LeRon Landry in free agency to replace Lewis, with the idea of moving Berry to Lewis' free safety spot and starting Landry at SS.

Giving up DJ would be hard, but Mikes in a 34 are easier to find than franchise QBs.

I hate the idea of Berry playing FS.

The guy is a terror around the line of scrimmage, and SS is a much more important position in Romeo's defense.

[nathanKent]

milkman, on 25 January 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

You'd be building around Luck.

You'd obviously have swap picks in this draft, and probably have to add another pick, maybe a 2nd rounder next year, but to get that Luck pick, you are going to have to outbid other teams.

You probably have the replacement for Dorsey on the roster with Bailey, who flashed beastly potential late in the season.

You can probably target a guy like LeRon Landry in free agency to replace Lewis, with the idea of moving Berry to Lewis' free safety spot and starting Landry at SS.

Giving up DJ would be hard, but Mikes in a 34 are easier to find than franchise QBs.

While I know you're correct, the thought of giving up DJ just depresses the hell out of me.

[autodrummer]

nathanKent, on 25 January 2012 - 10:08 PM, said:

While I know you're correct, the thought of giving up DJ just depresses the hell out of me.

Yeah that would totally suck.

[BrooklynChiefsFan]

not to continue off topic, but my approach would be to try and get the Rams pick very early on. Then when we are secure in the #2 spot and can begin to evaluate what our other trade chips are still in our possession and see if that can entice the Colts.

The same approach could be taken with the Vikings pick, and trying to power play from #3 to #2. In that case, the Rams are still guaranteed to get the player who is on top of their board, they pay him a little less, and whatever we give them is 100% free. Trading with the Browns or Redskins does open them up to having to down down their draft board. Getting the Vikings pick early on would also leave us in the pole position should the Rams not be able to work something out or they decide to keep their pick. It's risky as hell supposing RG3 still goes at #2 and then we've spent assets to not get the guy we were targeting, but it could work out. It's chess, not checkers.

[NOLA]

BrooklynChiefsFan, on 26 January 2012 - 08:56 AM, said:

not to continue off topic, but my approach would be to try and get the Rams pick very early on. Then when we are secure in the #2 spot and can begin to evaluate what our other trade chips are still in our possession and see if that can entice the Colts.

The same approach could be taken with the Vikings pick, and trying to power play from #3 to #2. In that case, the Rams are still guaranteed to get the player who is on top of their board, they pay him a little less, and whatever we give them is 100% free. Trading with the Browns or Redskins does open them up to having to down down their draft board. Getting the Vikings pick early on would also leave us in the pole position should the Rams not be able to work something out or they decide to keep their pick. It's risky as hell supposing RG3 still goes at #2 and then we've spent assets to not get the guy we were targeting, but it could work out. It's chess, not checkers.

I can't imagine the Rams drafting RGIII. They're stuck with Sam Bradford, last of the $60mil rookie QBs.

[BrooklynChiefsFan]

NOLA, on 26 January 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

I can't imagine the Rams drafting RGIII. They're stuck with Sam Bradford, last of the $60mil rookie QBs.

I should have separated my two sentences better. I meant if we move to 3, but can't close a deal for 2 and the Rams trade it thereafter. Playing games and moving to 3 in the hopes of parlaying that into #2 is a risky venture but it's an angle I'd investigate. If we were at 3 and the Rams don't trade, yeah, RG3 falls in our laps.

[NOLA]

BrooklynChiefsFan, on 26 January 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

I should have separated my two sentences better. I meant if we move to 3, but can't close a deal for 2 and the Rams trade it thereafter. Playing games and moving to 3 in the hopes of parlaying that into #2 is a risky venture but it's an angle I'd investigate. If we were at 3 and the Rams don't trade, yeah, RG3 falls in our laps.

Ah. Gotcha.

[HG]

This is funny. The last "Big" move I can remember making was moving up to get Gonzales.