PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Trade DT Ryan Sims



Chiefster
05-01-2007, 04:54 PM
Chiefs Trade DT Ryan Sims to Tampa Bay

May 01, 2007, 1:45:53 PM



Kansas City Chiefs President Carl Peterson announced on Tuesday that the club traded DT Ryan Sims to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers for an undisclosed future draft pick.
Sims (6-4, 315) played in 59 games (36 starts) in five seasons with Kansas City. He recorded 149 tackles (79 solo), 5.0 sacks (-22.0 yards), 36 QB pressures, an interception, one pass defensed, one forced fumble and one fumble recovery. He also played in two postseason contests (one start). The Spartanburg, South Carolina native started all 16 games in 2003, totaling a career-high 83 tackles (41 solo), 3.0 sacks (-13.0 yards), seven QB pressures, a forced fumble, one fumble recovery and an interception. He originally entered the NFL as the Chiefs first-round draft choice in 2002.
Sims saw action in 43 games (33 starts) as a three-year starter at North Carolina. He finished his collegiate career with 167 tackles (83 solo), 14.0 sacks (-87.0 yards), 28.0 tackles for loss, 11 passes defensed, 40 QB pressures and a fumble recovery. He was a first-team all-state, all-region and all-area selection as a senior at Paul M. Dorman High School in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2007/05/01/chiefs_trade_dt_ryan_sims_to_tampa_bay/

...Can't say that I'm surprised.

texaschief
05-01-2007, 05:41 PM
perhaps Carl realizes he needs to put together more draft choices for next year. Let's pray Sims has a breakout year and goes to the pro bowl. . . Hello first day pick!! it's not like the guy doesn't have the potential. Personally, i think the kid just needed some vet leadership in the weight room. but, with the kids we just drafted, this is impressive foresight from a G.M. who usually craps away talent by releasing them instead of trading.

wolfpack
05-01-2007, 06:24 PM
its about time they got rid of that fat ***, waste of a roster spot. thank god they got rid of hicks also.

Coach
05-01-2007, 08:33 PM
its about time they got rid of that fat ***, waste of a roster spot. thank god they got rid of hicks also.

Such distain. I never realized Chiefs fans disliked him that much.
:character0052:

Chiefster
05-01-2007, 08:53 PM
Hicks had lost his ability to be effective, and Sims idea of off season training was walking to the fridge.

KcBigChief
05-01-2007, 09:02 PM
See ya! #6 overall waiste. Never really found a love for the game here in KC.

Chiefster
05-01-2007, 09:16 PM
See ya! #6 overall waiste. Never really found a love for the game here in KC.


Agreed; and welcome aboard the "Crowd" KcBigChief! :D

Chiefsfan27
05-01-2007, 09:43 PM
perhaps Carl realizes he needs to put together more draft choices for next year. Let's pray Sims has a breakout year and goes to the pro bowl. . . Hello first day pick!! it's not like the guy doesn't have the potential. Personally, i think the kid just needed some vet leadership in the weight room. but, with the kids we just drafted, this is impressive foresight from a G.M. who usually craps away talent by releasing them instead of trading.

how do we know what pick we get. Is it determined after the season. How do the teams come to an agreement?

Coach
05-01-2007, 11:02 PM
how do we know what pick we get. Is it determined after the season. How do the teams come to an agreement?
I have the same question.

Welcome to the boards 'KcBigChief'
:rock_dj:

Chiefster
05-01-2007, 11:17 PM
I'm not sure how it is determined; I would think that it is possible that it is somehow previously stipulated based on the traded players performance in order to determine player worth. I am totally guessing here, and admit that I have absolutely no idea.

texaschief
05-02-2007, 04:29 AM
undisclosed draft picks usually have a cieling and a basement. the teams set a pick round that can't be exceeded and a round that it can't be below. Take the Scott Fujita trade as an example. we traded him to dallas for an undisclosed draft pick. if he started (x) amount of games, we got a 3rd, if he started (y), we got a 4th, if he started (z) we got a 5th. (i'm not completely sure what the actual rounds or starts were) Well, the teams agreed that the pick could go no lower than a 5th but no higher than a 3rd. This way, both teams were somewhat protected by the player's performance. Fujita could've been hurt in training camp and never have seen the field and the Chiefs still would've got a 5th rounder. On the other hand, Fujita could've played out of his mind and made the pro bowl after after becoming the league and Super Bowl MVP and the cowboys only would've had to give up a 3rd rounder for him while they were only looking to plug a hole with a mediocre LB. Just because he happens to suprise people doesn't mean he's actually worth a first day pick.

With this trade for Sims, it looks like has a very low cieling. the word around the league is that it probably can't be any higher than a 6th. Of course, there's also the chance they've already decided and they just haven't disclosed the draft pick. They could do this for a couple reasons. One of the teams may be looking at aquiring another player. keeping the draft pick under wraps prevents the market price to rise.

Let's say the Chiefs got a steal and aquired a 3rd round pick for Sims. Other teams look at his numbers and say, "hell, our player was more productive than Sims, we can ask for more than a 3rd for this guy." A good example of this is the Trent Green deal. They almost had a trade with Miami until they saw what they aquired from N.E. for Wes Welker. C.P. saw that Miami got a 3rd rounder for a 3rd WR. Why wouldn't he ask for a 2nd round pick for a starting Pro Bowl QB? If Miami and N.E. had kept those pics undisclosed, Trent would have a swimming mammal on the side of his head right now.

Chiefster
05-02-2007, 06:26 AM
undisclosed draft picks usually have a cieling and a basement. the teams set a pick round that can't be exceeded and a round that it can't be below. Take the Scott Fujita trade as an example. we traded him to dallas for an undisclosed draft pick. if he started (x) amount of games, we got a 3rd, if he started (y), we got a 4th, if he started (z) we got a 5th. (i'm not completely sure what the actual rounds or starts were) Well, the teams agreed that the pick could go no lower than a 5th but no higher than a 3rd. This way, both teams were somewhat protected by the player's performance. Fujita could've been hurt in training camp and never have seen the field and the Chiefs still would've got a 5th rounder. On the other hand, Fujita could've played out of his mind and made the pro bowl after after becoming the league and Super Bowl MVP and the cowboys only would've had to give up a 3rd rounder for him while they were only looking to plug a hole with a mediocre LB. Just because he happens to suprise people doesn't mean he's actually worth a first day pick.

With this trade for Sims, it looks like has a very low cieling. the word around the league is that it probably can't be any higher than a 6th. Of course, there's also the chance they've already decided and they just haven't disclosed the draft pick. They could do this for a couple reasons. One of the teams may be looking at aquiring another player. keeping the draft pick under wraps prevents the market price to rise.

Let's say the Chiefs got a steal and aquired a 3rd round pick for Sims. Other teams look at his numbers and say, "hell, our player was more productive than Sims, we can ask for more than a 3rd for this guy." A good example of this is the Trent Green deal. They almost had a trade with Miami until they saw what they aquired from N.E. for Wes Welker. C.P. saw that Miami got a 3rd rounder for a 3rd WR. Why wouldn't he ask for a 2nd round pick for a starting Pro Bowl QB? If Miami and N.E. had kept those pics undisclosed, Trent would have a swimming mammal on the side of his head right now.


This corresponds to the way I thought this works; good post.

Chiefsfan27
05-03-2007, 04:09 PM
undisclosed draft picks usually have a cieling and a basement. the teams set a pick round that can't be exceeded and a round that it can't be below. Take the Scott Fujita trade as an example. we traded him to dallas for an undisclosed draft pick. if he started (x) amount of games, we got a 3rd, if he started (y), we got a 4th, if he started (z) we got a 5th. (i'm not completely sure what the actual rounds or starts were) Well, the teams agreed that the pick could go no lower than a 5th but no higher than a 3rd. This way, both teams were somewhat protected by the player's performance. Fujita could've been hurt in training camp and never have seen the field and the Chiefs still would've got a 5th rounder. On the other hand, Fujita could've played out of his mind and made the pro bowl after after becoming the league and Super Bowl MVP and the cowboys only would've had to give up a 3rd rounder for him while they were only looking to plug a hole with a mediocre LB. Just because he happens to suprise people doesn't mean he's actually worth a first day pick.

With this trade for Sims, it looks like has a very low cieling. the word around the league is that it probably can't be any higher than a 6th. Of course, there's also the chance they've already decided and they just haven't disclosed the draft pick. They could do this for a couple reasons. One of the teams may be looking at aquiring another player. keeping the draft pick under wraps prevents the market price to rise.

Let's say the Chiefs got a steal and aquired a 3rd round pick for Sims. Other teams look at his numbers and say, "hell, our player was more productive than Sims, we can ask for more than a 3rd for this guy." A good example of this is the Trent Green deal. They almost had a trade with Miami until they saw what they aquired from N.E. for Wes Welker. C.P. saw that Miami got a 3rd rounder for a 3rd WR. Why wouldn't he ask for a 2nd round pick for a starting Pro Bowl QB? If Miami and N.E. had kept those pics undisclosed, Trent would have a swimming mammal on the side of his head right now.

Ya thanks good post

Coach
05-03-2007, 10:52 PM
Thanks Texas! Green rep added.

Chiefster
05-04-2007, 01:09 AM
Thanks Texas! Green rep added.


Ditto!!

texaschief
03-13-2008, 04:56 AM
does anyone know what we got from Tampa for this trade? It should be showing up for this draft.

hermhater
03-13-2008, 05:00 AM
does anyone know what we got from Tampa for this trade? It should be showing up for this draft.

Is this about Bennett?

texaschief
03-13-2008, 05:09 AM
:sign0153: ....no. It's about Ryan Sims.

hermhater
03-13-2008, 05:11 AM
:sign0153: ....no. It's about Ryan Sims.

Oh yeah...

I just read that title.

When the hell was this thread started?

texaschief
03-13-2008, 05:18 AM
may of 07

hermhater
03-13-2008, 05:20 AM
may of 07

Then I could have been mistaken about what I posted.


What did I post?

texaschief
03-13-2008, 05:22 AM
Then I could have been mistaken about what I posted.


What did I post?

what? when? what are you talking about?

hermhater
03-13-2008, 05:58 AM
what? when? what are you talking about?

This is how I remember learning it.

What, when, why, where, and how.

I thought you were in college?

Chiefster
03-13-2008, 02:56 PM
I say that it was one of Petersons better trades.

anaeelbackwards
03-13-2008, 03:04 PM
ol' sims never lived up to his hype......

hermhater
03-14-2008, 05:49 AM
This is how I remember learning it.

What, when, why, where, and how.

I thought you were in college?


I say that it was one of Petersons better trades.

You said Peterson...


ol' sims never lived up to his hype......

Good times....

you were there you would know

:11:

Chiefster
03-15-2008, 08:43 PM
You said Peterson...



Good times....

you were there you would know

:11:

Exercising my 1st Amendment rights.

hermhater
03-16-2008, 06:54 AM
Exercising my 1st Amendment rights.

I'm glad you are doing that!

:lol:

It might have been funny had you responded!

:bananen_smilies046::bananen_smilies046:

Chiefster
03-17-2008, 01:28 AM
I'm glad you are doing that!

:lol:

It might have been funny had you responded!

:bananen_smilies046::bananen_smilies046:

...Exercising my 5th Amendment Rights.

hermhater
03-17-2008, 01:31 AM
...Exercising my 5th Amendment Rights.

What was the reason behind the 5th Amendment?

Was it to stop torture?

Chiefster
03-17-2008, 01:41 AM
What was the reason behind the 5th Amendment?

Was it to stop torture?

5th Amendment http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2008/03/55.jpghttp://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2008/03/55.jpghttp://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2008/03/55.jpghttp://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2008/03/55.jpg


"Private property was the original source of freedom. It still is its main bullwark"
Walter Lippman
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
The Fifth Amendment was written to protect an accused from abuses witnessed throughout history, including in the early days of Colonial America. The founding fathers wished to ensure that, while trials could be conducted and guilty criminals punished, innocent men and women wouldn't suffer by mere government whim. Sufficient evidence of criminal conduct would have to be presented to a Grand Jury; the government couldn't repeatedly try an individual on the same charges until he or she was either convicted or financially exhausted; it couldn't demand answers from the accused, but rather would have to provide sufficient evidence to convict without such testimony; and it couldn't simply snatch property it wanted or needed from its owner.

hermhater
03-17-2008, 01:45 AM
5th Amendment http://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2008/03/55.jpghttp://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2008/03/55.jpghttp://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2008/03/55.jpghttp://www.chiefscrowd.com/forums/images/imported/2008/03/55.jpg


"Private property was the original source of freedom. It still is its main bullwark"
Walter Lippman
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
The Fifth Amendment was written to protect an accused from abuses witnessed throughout history, including in the early days of Colonial America. The founding fathers wished to ensure that, while trials could be conducted and guilty criminals punished, innocent men and women wouldn't suffer by mere government whim. Sufficient evidence of criminal conduct would have to be presented to a Grand Jury; the government couldn't repeatedly try an individual on the same charges until he or she was either convicted or financially exhausted; it couldn't demand answers from the accused, but rather would have to provide sufficient evidence to convict without such testimony; and it couldn't simply snatch property it wanted or needed from its owner.



Protection from government torture.

Chiefster
03-17-2008, 01:47 AM
Protection from government torture.


Umm, ok. :rolleyes:

hermhater
03-17-2008, 01:49 AM
Umm, ok. :rolleyes:


Government taking away your livelihood.

I guess it's not physical torture, but it's the same concept.

Prosecutors can't crush your ribs to make you confess, that is what I was referring to kind of.

:D

Chiefster
03-17-2008, 01:58 AM
This is what I was referring to:

The making of statements that might expose you to criminal prosecution, either now or in the future. The 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from forcing you to provide evidence (http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/4074F074-A383-40A9-A314301B35C39470) (as in answering questions) that would or might lead to your prosecution (http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/A0847BFF-795E-4E0A-8A4035B40B52CF29) for a crime (http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/D82E9E8C-BB95-4F9A-97E134E302E0D7C2).

AKA: Self Incrimination.

hermhater
03-17-2008, 02:02 AM
This is what I was referring to:

The making of statements that might expose you to criminal prosecution, either now or in the future. The 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from forcing you to provide evidence (http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/4074F074-A383-40A9-A314301B35C39470) (as in answering questions) that would or might lead to your prosecution (http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/A0847BFF-795E-4E0A-8A4035B40B52CF29) for a crime (http://www.nolo.com/definition.cfm/term/D82E9E8C-BB95-4F9A-97E134E302E0D7C2).

AKA: Self Incrimination.

Nice.

Is this really Chiefster?

Since when do you know what the hell you are talking about?

:sign0098: :D

Chiefster
03-17-2008, 02:04 AM
Nice.

Is this really Chiefster?

Since when do you know what the hell you are talking about?

:sign0098: :D

Google is a wonderful thing. :D

rbedgood
03-19-2008, 02:51 PM
Seriously HH, if you keep this thread alive any longer someone is going to have to exercise their 2ND AMENDMENT rights!!!

Canada
03-19-2008, 06:27 PM
Nice.

Is this really Chiefster?

Since when do you know what the hell you are talking about?

:sign0098: :D

He should know what he is talking about....he was there when they wrote it! :11:

Chiefster
03-24-2008, 10:43 AM
Seriously HH, if you keep this thread alive any longer someone is going to have to exercise their 2ND AMENDMENT rights!!!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

YouTube - Larry the Cable Guy - Good Advice For America


He should know what he is talking about....he was there when they wrote it! :11:

Heck, I wrote it!