Originally Posted by Bowser:
If, and I do mean IF they hit the threepeat, I can see them sacrificing a draft class to move way the hell up and secure a (presumably) can't miss prospect at left tackle. Shore that position up for 4-5 years and press on.
why wouldn't they hold onto Humphries if they threepeat? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Balto:
Not 100% true. Veach could have always over paid to move up and hasn’t. I think all of us would be fine giving up an extra late round 1st too get a stud LT
You're not talking about an extra late round pick, though. To get up high enough you're talking about a Mahomes-like trade involving multiple first round picks. That's extremely hard to do. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bowser:
If, and I do mean IF they hit the threepeat, I can see them sacrificing a draft class to move way the hell up and secure a (presumably) can't miss prospect at left tackle. Shore that position up for 4-5 years and press on.
Veach is a creature of habit. If DJ hits i think they sign him back and then kick LT the can down the road until they feel comfortable knowing Kingsley is a total bust. Because right now it's not 100% yet. And drafting three LT's in three consecutive years would be crazy but we'll see :-) . [Reply]
Originally Posted by SHOWTIME:
why wouldn't they hold onto Humphries if they threepeat?
They certainly could, but if he comes in and plays at his former pro bowl level, his ask may be too rich for their tastes. I'm sure if Mahomes had it his way, he'd take a vet playing at a pro bowl level at that position over a rookie, no matter how highly touted he is.
I hope that conversation ends up taking place, because that would mean we ended up in the best case possible scenario. We'll see. [Reply]
Originally Posted by crayzkirk:
It's all the price of success and paying aging players. I'm not saying the paying Chris Jones was a mistake, I'm saying that the Chiefs have a habit of keeping star players past their due dates because it's the feel good thing to do and not necessarily the best for the team.
Companies let good people go all of the time, when I was corporately de-engineered, it was never about my performance, it was just business.
Does BV? He traded Hill and let OBJ go. Traded Sneed.
Yes, he has sometimes extended players to make cap room, for instance Taylor. But I don't see that as a feel good move, it was to free up cap space.
Really is there anyone outside of CJ that this comment applies to? [Reply]
Originally Posted by SHOWTIME:
why wouldn't they hold onto Humphries if they threepeat?
If Humphries plays well and they let him walk, it would be an incredibly stupid mistake. I hope to high hell they aren’t that dumb. We cannot continue putting Mahomes through this bullshit year after year. The frustration is starting to boil over again for him, and he showed it on Friday several times.
There are always ways around the cap, and this is one of those situations where you just do what needs to be done. If he shows he’s still the same guy he was pre-injury, we’d be complete morons to let him go at any price with our current situation. Hell, franchise the guy if you have to, I don’t fucking care. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Jones is still an elite player
The thing on defense is that if you have weak spots around elite guys it’s hard for said elite player to make plays
DT's fall off a cliff pretty fast once the decline starts. He's still an all-pro and maybe next year too. But, that 3rd year....he will still be a leader in the locker room. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief:
If Humphries plays well and they let him walk, it would be an incredibly stupid mistake. I hope to high hell they aren’t that dumb.
His injury history is a real concern giving him a long term deal especially as he enters his 30's. But...... We dont have a choice.
No time soon are we going to get into the top 10-15 picks to get a legit young tackle to groom. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
His injury history is a real concern giving him a long term deal especially as he enters his 30's. But...... We dont have a choice.
No time soon are we going to get into the top 10-15 picks to get a legit young tackle to groom.
Yeah, we’ve tried just about every other avenue there is. Terron Armstead will be available, but he’s older and injury prone, too. Simply cannot just keep throwing dudes out there and hoping they work out, it’s taking away from Mahomes’ best years.
You pay DJ and hope to high hell he’s at least available when it matters. I just don’t know what else you can do at this point, and they clearly don’t either. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
His injury history is a real concern giving him a long term deal especially as he enters his 30's. But...... We dont have a choice.
No time soon are we going to get into the top 10-15 picks to get a legit young tackle to groom.
Three year team friendly deal with some outs would be the way to go. With free agency the talk of a long term contract for Humphries is silly. He's 30 and has some injury history so a few years at a time with the ability to move on without a bunch of cap space wasted. Is any other team going to give him a five year deal with a huge bonus? Probably not. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Pagan:
Does BV? He traded Hill and let OBJ go. Traded Sneed.
Yes, he has sometimes extended players to make cap room, for instance Taylor. But I don't see that as a feel good move, it was to free up cap space.
Really is there anyone outside of CJ that this comment applies to?
My brain is Nyquil addled so my thinking isn't the best. Just commenting on past history with rewarding certain players which caused a deficiency later. Yes, keeping Jones was a necessary movie as was letting Hill/Sneed go. Hill was actively seeking a trade and Sneed was going for the money which the Chiefs couldn't match.
One reason for the Patriots success was how TB took less money because his wife made more than he did. They also made a lot of trades of players at their peak value and managed to keep a lot of very good players and trade for others. [Reply]
