Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22

Thread: LJ options

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Jun 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    3,846

    Default LJ options

    http://blogs.nfl.com/2008/12/30/chie...s-for-johnson/

    From Adam Schefter of NFL.com:

    For Kansas City to trade Johnson, it would cost $8.8 million against its salary cap next season. For the Chiefs to keep Johnson, it would cost $8.2 million against the salary cap next season.
    So this is their choice — trade a player who has said he wants out, or keep the player who could be a detriment in the locker room.
    Whoever is the new general manager for the Chiefs will have to weigh whether it is worth auctioning off Johnson to the highest bidder, hoping to get back, at best, a second-round pick and more likely a third-round pick and possibly some other late-round compensation.

    ********************************
    I gotta tell ya, if the Chiefs can get a 2nd and 4th, I'd be good with that. It'd be great if the Chiefs could get something comparable for TGonz if he still wants out. I'd be good with 3 2nd rounders and 3 4th rounders. Imagine how great things could get if we could trade down a few spots from the 3rd pick. We could be talking about at least 4 2nd round picks. That'd be freakin awesome!!

  2. #11
    Member Since
    Oct 2007
    Location
    tucson
    Posts
    4,553

    Default

    something we all have to concider is that there wont be too many if any goof FA's willing to come to KC with the turmoil a brewing. all these scenerios sound nice but we have to be some what pesamistic about our situation.

  3. #12
    Member Since
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Scottsdale,Az
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pro_Angler View Post
    something we all have to concider is that there wont be too many if any goof FA's willing to come to KC with the turmoil a brewing. all these scenerios sound nice but we have to be some what pesamistic about our situation.
    This could be a true statement and it was all brought on by the fact that they have been unwilling to spend the money to put the needed players on the field to win in the last several years.

  4. #13
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    This could be a true statement and it was all brought on by the fact that they have been unwilling to spend the money to put the needed players on the field to win in the last several years.
    I finally agree with you.

    And it isn't our inability to spend, per se. It's just that we only spend on bad or overhyped players. Herm/Carl gave out some terribly large contracts to Ty Law, Surtain, McIntosh, and Donnie Edwards.

  5. #14
    Member Since
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Scottsdale,Az
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmlamerson View Post
    I finally agree with you.

    And it isn't our inability to spend, per se. It's just that we only spend on bad or overhyped players. Herm/Carl gave out some terribly large contracts to Ty Law, Surtain, McIntosh, and Donnie Edwards.
    Yea while they passed on guys like Hutchinson and Faneca the last few years. Maybe the price tag would have been too high but didn't even invite them in to talk is what pisses me off!

  6. #15
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    Yea while they passed on guys like Hutchinson and Faneca the last few years. Maybe the price tag would have been too high but didn't even invite them in to talk is what pisses me off!
    Hutchinson wasn't a FA per se - he was a restricted free agents whose contract wasn't matched by Seattle.

    I agree about Faneca - he was my #1 FA I wanted for the Chiefs.

  7. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmlamerson View Post
    Hutchinson wasn't a FA per se - he was a restricted free agents whose contract wasn't matched by Seattle.

    I agree about Faneca - he was my #1 FA I wanted for the Chiefs.
    Well JM, we might get a second chance this year to take another good Steeler lineman in Marvel Smith. I dont think they looked at Faneca because he's 32, but then again Marvel is 29, so who knows. I think they might reach out more this offseason though. The only knock on Marvel is that he's been pretty dinged up lately. The only thing would stop us from getting Smith is A: he re-signs with Pitt or B: We draft a tackle, which would leave a hole at guard, which in the long run would mean that your want for Faneca was right all along.
    Last edited by Big Daddy Tek; 12-31-2008 at 06:13 PM.


    CLICK HERE! FOR MY TWITTER PAGE

  8. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Daddy Tek View Post
    Well JM, we might get a second chance this year to take another good Steeler lineman in Marvel Smith. I dont think they looked at Faneca because he's 32, but then again Marvel is 29, so who knows. I think they might reach out more this offseason though. The only knock on Marvel is that he's been pretty dinged up lately. The only thing would stop us from getting Smith is A: he re-signs with Pitt or B: We draft a tackle, which would leave a hole at guard, which in the long run would mean that your want for Faneca was right all along.
    Yeah, Smith does not look like the same player this season, but it could be because of injuries this season. However, as a linemen he has at least 4-5 years left in him.

  9. #18
    Member Since
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Scottsdale,Az
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmlamerson View Post
    Hutchinson wasn't a FA per se - he was a restricted free agents whose contract wasn't matched by Seattle.

    I agree about Faneca - he was my #1 FA I wanted for the Chiefs.
    We didn't even get into the race!!!!

  10. #19
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,915

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Daddy Tek View Post
    Well JM, we might get a second chance this year to take another good Steeler lineman in Marvel Smith. I dont think they looked at Faneca because he's 32, but then again Marvel is 29, so who knows. I think they might reach out more this offseason though. The only knock on Marvel is that he's been pretty dinged up lately. The only thing would stop us from getting Smith is A: he re-signs with Pitt or B: We draft a tackle, which would leave a hole at guard, which in the long run would mean that your want for Faneca was right all along.
    Marvel would be pretty perfect along our line. I agree, his injuries might be a problem, but drafting him would allow us to put a good RT out there (either move him or Albert to RT) instead of a rookie. We would have then the luxury of McIntosh as a reserve, plus we could draft and groom someone in the late rounds.

  11. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jmlamerson View Post
    Marvel would be pretty perfect along our line. I agree, his injuries might be a problem, but drafting him would allow us to put a good RT out there (either move him or Albert to RT) instead of a rookie. We would have then the luxury of McIntosh as a reserve, plus we could draft and groom someone in the late rounds.
    Sounds good to me. Oh yeah, were not the GM's. nevermind.


    CLICK HERE! FOR MY TWITTER PAGE

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •