Jump to content

Welcome to our forums!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums. By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Photo
- - - - -

Can we get back our two picks for the 2018 draft?


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#21 jetlord

jetlord

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,561 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 04:29 AM

The Chiefs are going to have to axe two important guys to keep Peters. That's just the way this will work out. I'm not sure Peters is worth what the Chiefs will lose to keep him. I've said the same thing about guys like Hali and Berry, and you especially feel the drain on talent when your premiere player goes down for several games, or even a whole season.

If Smith, DJ, and Hali are all gone next season, wouldn't the Chiefs have the cap room to keep their other players?



#22 Calichief

Calichief

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 4,427 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 04:31 AM

If Smith, DJ, and Hali are all gone next season, wouldn't the Chiefs have the cap room to keep their other players?

Yes.

#23 Goldbrick

Goldbrick

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 356 posts
  • LocationNorthern Colorado

Posted 08 October 2017 - 05:07 AM

Could we get a first and a third for Peters? I know it won’t be popular, but that would essentially be trading Peters straight across for Mahomes , and I’d trade a great corner for a great young qb every time.

 

The only problem with this logic is you'd essentially be trading a great cb for a young, developmental qb.



#24 MisChief-Maker

MisChief-Maker

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 231 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 09:06 AM

The Chiefs are going to have to axe two important guys to keep Peters. That's just the way this will work out. I'm not sure Peters is worth what the Chiefs will lose to keep him. I've said the same thing about guys like Hali and Berry, and you especially feel the drain on talent when your premiere player goes down for several games, or even a whole season.

 

Which two are more important than a CB who is rated in the top three in the league and is only 24 years old? If you were talking about Kelce, Hill or Hunt I might agree, but they aren't going anywhere.

 

As for folks talking about trading Peters!!... smh it would be utter madness imo and it seems like folks are talking this up just because the man is motivated to sit in the name of equality. Oh what a crime he has committed.



#25 MisChief-Maker

MisChief-Maker

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 231 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 09:12 AM

Anyway guys. I dunno if people paid attention to this but last month we traded Isaiah Battle to Seattle for a "conditional draft pick". Battle hasn't played for them yet but he's been active on their roster all season thus far. It would probably be a late round pick but perhaps this could be one of the two picks we may get back? Let's hope so. The next port of call will be getting back a 2nd round pick. 

 

Smith, Ware, Hali, DJ, Conley etc could all potentially be used? 



#26 PhataLerror

PhataLerror

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,951 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 03:11 PM

If Smith, DJ, and Hali are all gone next season, wouldn't the Chiefs have the cap room to keep their other players?

No.

 

Here's a list of promising talents that will come up for free agency before 2020: Bennie Logan, Dee Ford, Marcus Peters, Mitch Morse, Chris Jones, and Tyreek Hill. This is before you start counting guys from the 2015 and 2016 draft classes that may start playing an important role this year: Chris Conley, Steven Nelson, Ramik Wilson, and Parker Ehinger. If Smith, Johnson, and Hali do come off the books next year, that alone will open up $32 million under the salary cap ceiling, not a small number, but that will go quickly as Logan, Ford, Peters, Morse, Conley, Nelson, and Wilson all come up eligible for extension. What corners will have to be cut so that the Chiefs can stretch out $32 million for a high-end nose tackle, a solid edge-rushing linebacker, a premiere cornerback, a quality center, a decent possession receiver, a good nickle corner, and the middle linebacker to complement Derrick Johnson's replacement. And the second year of these extensions will certainly eat into the cap space for guys like Chris Jones and Tyreek Hill.

 

For the lack of a first-round pick, none of these guys approaching extension eligibility and/or free agency are likely to be replaced by a player to be drafted in 2018. The Chiefs said 'no' to some of these guys when they said 'yes' to Eric Berry, and now the Chiefs will be forced to release players that are making a difference now while Berry is sidelined with an injury that will likely prevent him from ever again playing like the Berry we've known.

 

No, the Chiefs will not be able to keep everyone just because they're opening up approximately $32 million in cap space. And half of that is subject to whether or not Smith actually departs this year, which won't likely happen if Mahomes is deemed to have not made enough progress in Reid's system.



#27 moons314

moons314

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 326 posts
  • LocationKansas

Posted 08 October 2017 - 05:23 PM

Which two are more important than a CB who is rated in the top three in the league and is only 24 years old? If you were talking about Kelce, Hill or Hunt I might agree, but they aren't going anywhere.

As for folks talking about trading Peters!!... smh it would be utter madness imo and it seems like folks are talking this up just because the man is motivated to sit in the name of equality. Oh what a crime he has committed.


His age and our needs are what makes the situation, because it gives him greater trade value. It’s a good problem to have. A couple of top end picks that could be parlayed into a linebacker or top shel receiver to compliment Hill would go a long way for this team. For me it’s not necessarily about the money and more about roster construction. If we somehow managed to get a 2nd out of smith and got a pair of picks for Peters , we could have five picks in the first three rounds. That’s vital to building for now and the future of sustainability

#28 MisChief-Maker

MisChief-Maker

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 231 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 05:51 PM

His age and our needs are what makes the situation, because it gives him greater trade value. It’s a good problem to have. A couple of top end picks that could be parlayed into a linebacker or top shel receiver to compliment Hill would go a long way for this team. For me it’s not necessarily about the money and more about roster construction. If we somehow managed to get a 2nd out of smith and got a pair of picks for Peters , we could have five picks in the first three rounds. That’s vital to building for now and the future of sustainability

 

I just don't think it's wise to get rid of a player who is one of the best in the league in his position. Those are the guys you try to keep at all costs and continue to build around them. Peters, Houston, Jones, Hill, Kelce and Hunt are those kind of players imo. I firmly believe that there are many other players in the roster that we could move on apart from Peters. We might not get as many picks, but it would still make more sense in the longterm. 



#29 Calichief

Calichief

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 4,427 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 06:17 PM

Marcus peters is a franchise corner. Enough said.

#30 PhataLerror

PhataLerror

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,951 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 09:11 PM

Marcus peters is a franchise corner. Enough said.

No one is disputing that. The question is whether or not he can be afforded. Teams have to make tough choices. The trend has been that Chiefs that perform well don't give their team a discount when it's time to negotiate. And one Peters costs three starter-quality defenders. One Berry cost the Chiefs the opportunity to have a better backup interior lineman than Zach Fulton.



#31 Semo

Semo

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 4,785 posts

Posted 08 October 2017 - 09:58 PM

Peters wants to be a Raider. I think he will refuse any extension offers and coast through his rookie contract.

#32 AppalachianChief

AppalachianChief

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 257 posts
  • LocationKentucky

Posted 09 October 2017 - 12:06 AM

Peters wants to be a Raider. I think he will refuse any extension offers and coast through his rookie contract.


I read a great article on Peters. It changed my entire opinion and thoughts on the young man. The article explained a lot I didn't know and I didn't give him credit for. I retract my statement that he is a punk, I was wrong and I am man enough to admit it. With that said I wish he wouldn't use his status in the NFL as a platform but I understand I just don't agree.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users