Jump to content

What if: Wilkerson Traded for a High 1st Next Year to replace DBrick?


Lizard King
 Share

Recommended Posts

I wouldn't trade Mo just yet. While Williams has a ton of potential and we're all excited to see what he can do, let's not forget that he's still a rookie. We were all excited about Vernon Gholston (who was also picked at #6) as well. Anyone who says they knew he was going to be a bust is a liar.

I say keep Mo and if Williams is a bust, sign Mo to a long term deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of questions:

1) What team out there as of now can bank on getting a high draft pick next year?

2) If so why should they trade it if that's the case?

3) Why should they trade this high draft pick for Mo Wilkerson on a one year contract?

 

1) Every team over predicts how well they are going to do; I think you can find a good team that won't finish as high as they think they will.

2) A team may be willing to trade now and 'pay later' as people want immediate gratification or are trying to fill seats and think their defense will be so much better with Wilkerson

3) They would get 1 year at 6.7 million and the (worst case) pay tag next year (2 years) but most likely a team would do a trade only after having a deal in place (like with Tampa and Revis) - they would make a trade on the knowledge that they can work a deal and void the trade if they cannot; there are teams who are not as deep at DL and with cap who are likely to be willing to pay Wilkerson more than we are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you think they'll trade a top 10 DL for a rookie lineman?

That's usually how it works in sports leagues with salary caps. A player reaches end of his rookie deal, you can't pay him or in our case you can't pay him in combination with others, so you get younger cheaper players back in exchange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't trade Mo just yet. While Williams has a ton of potential and we're all excited to see what he can do, let's not forget that he's still a rookie. We were all excited about about Vernon Gholston (who was also picked at #6) as well.

I say keep Mo and if Williams is a bust, sign Mo to a long term deal.

Williams is real. We have way more leverage using Mo as trade bait now than a year from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha what?  This comment has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm talking about.  The top contract guys aren't ones you "experiment" with, it's the middle and bottom parts of the roster with which you can always afford to do that.  We have four guys (Aboushi, Colon, Harrison, Winters) in the mix at RG.  Not all of them are making the 45-man gameday rosters.  Experimenting with guys like that has zero impact on wins and losses in 2015.

 

Like I said, this is not the season to experiment things, especially putting Aboushi at RT when he's not even starting at his listed position. It can be the difference between giving up 4-5 extra sacks and each sack can potentially be a turnover/drive killer. So no, we're not conducting such experiments in a season we just paid out $200mil in contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving out $200 million worth of contracts doesn't really mean this won't be a down year. They spent that much money just to bring the talent level of the team to an acceptable NFL standard. Hate to beat a dead horse, but with the uncertainty of the QB situation, this is likely another middling year until a true answer is found there, no matter how much money was thrown at the other problems the team had.

 

STFU you SOJF loser.

  • Thumb Down 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Giving out $200 million worth of contracts doesn't really mean this won't be a down year. They spent that much money just to bring the talent level of the team to an acceptable NFL standard. Hate to beat a dead horse, but with the uncertainty of the QB situation, this is likely another middling year until a true answer is found there, no matter how much money was thrown at the other problems the team had.

 

WK 1: Win

Wk 2: would have tied with Packs if it wasn't for the Marty TO that shouldn't have been called by refs. TIE

Wk 3: PI calls not given in closing seconds in the EZ. Lost by 8. Could have tied that too. TIE

Wk 4: Against Lions. Some more bad calls there too towards the end that changed the course of the game. Loss

Wk 5: Loss

Wk 6: A potential game tying 2-minute drive ended in a pick 6. Loss

Wk 7: Time expiring, lead changing FG was blocked. Happens once in a blue moon. Should have won. WIN

Wk 8: Loss to Bills

Wk 9: Loss to Chiefs

Wk 10: Win

Wk 11: Loss

Wk 12: Loss to Dolphins where we forgot we could pass too. Lead the entire game till the last 2-3 minutes. WIN

Wk 13: Should have beat the Vikes if we had a cornerback. WIN

Wk 14: Win

Wk 15: Another time expiring, lead changing FG was blocked.. Should have won. WIN

Wk 16: Win

 

Its not that we didn't have talent "acceptable" at the NFL standard. We did. We just had too many injuries that derailed our season before it started and even then we were within a good call from a ref to a good play by a defender away from winning 4-5 extra games.

 

Now we redid our secondary while losing no one there. We upgraded our WRs at EVERY position (since Decker is now the #2 WR). Those two our weakest positions last year along with the QB. With upgrades at every WR position, QB should be fine this year. Anything less than a 10 win season should be a failure this year. We have the "Porsche" in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's usually how it works in sports leagues with salary caps. A player reaches end of his rookie deal, you can't pay him or in our case you can't pay him in combination with others, so you get younger cheaper players back in exchange.

 

Of course we can pay in combination. Question isn't if we can pay or not. Its whether or not we are willing to overpay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You wanted the jets to draft TWO 1st round OT's and have them both sit for a year? That's absurd

Why? Brick is still worthy to start yet he will most likely not be a Jet next year and Giaccomini could have either stayed at RT or if one of the rookies showed the ability to start immediately then we could have pushed him inside to guard and had another body there to compete. Saying thats absurd is like saying drafting Williams was absurd when we have all the depth we have, yet thats exactly what we did. 

 

If we were able to get that done then these guys would have been able to learn behind current starters while going through the nfl program and be starters by next year not only taking over for our current starters at the position but clearing enormous cap space in terms of D'Brick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

How about trading Mo for Justin Houston straight up? They'd have Mo on a cheaper contract for a couple of years, we get a Beast at OLB for 5 years if we can get a deal done.

 

Chiefs, Justin Houston talking but not making significant progress
Posted by Mike Florio on June 4, 2015, 9:10 AM EDT
cd0ymzcznguwzdbhnduynddiytjhm2yyzthlmtjjAP

All players restricted by the franchise tag have until July 15 to sign long-term contracts with their current teams. After that, they can accept only one-year deals to stay put.

As to the Chiefs and linebacker Justin Houston, who racked up 22.0 sacks in his contract year, there’s still a chance a long-term deal will be negotiated. Per a source with knowledge of the situation, the two sides have been talking. However, significant progress has not yet been made.

Houston, who can earn $13.1 million under the one-year franchise tag for linebackers, has a clear objective regarding the value of a long-term deal. It’s still not clear what he’ll do if he doesn’t get the figure he desires.

He could stay away from all offseason work, training camp, and the preseason, showing up in early September and still collecting his full salary. The only risk is that the franchise tender will be rescinded, which seems highly unlikely given his production in 2014. (That said, coach Andy Reid has twice before yanked a franchise tender, from linebacker Jeremiah Trotter and later from defensive tackle Corey Simon.)

Houston also could hold out through 10 weeks of the regular season, showing up late, getting the prorated portion of the $13.1 million over the balance of the season, and doing it all over again next year, at a 20-percent raise.

It’s still possible, in theory, that someone else will sign Houston to an offer sheet, willing to give up first-round picks in 2016 and 2017 if the Chiefs don’t match. But since that hasn’t happened yet — indeed, no team has even brought Houston in for a visit — that would seem to be a long shot, at most.

If, as it appears, no one will make a run at Houston, it’s unlikely that any non-quarterback will ever be pursued via the franchise tag. Between the financial obligation it takes to craft an offer that wouldn’t or couldn’t be matched and the pair of first-round picks that would be sacrificed, teams apparently believe it’s simply too much to give up for someone other than an actual or potential franchise quarterback.

And that’s good news for the Chiefs, who seem to be destined to keep Houston. The only question is whether he stays under a long-term contract, a full season of the franchise tag, or a chunk of the 2015 regular season.

 

No, I'd rather have a good player at a respectable price for a few years. I'd preferably like to trade him for a quality QB. I think the Bucs made a mistake with Glennon. Not that I dont think Winston is the real deal. I think he will be, I just think that Winston will have the same problem that Glennon did, which was the Oline and WR drops. Too much money is heading the direction of the defense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF they can get Mo for under $12M per I think they get it done.  I don't think he is going to hold out, but he will avoid all voluntary activities.  This is pretty standard practice.

 

 

Whoever picks high needs a QB.  That is the NFL.  People think the Raiders are going to accept picking top 5 again and stick with Derek Carr?  I don't see it.

Probably. But there might not be three in the top 10 or more, which was my point, might be one for a team like us. If the Raiders are in the top 5 unless Carr is a complete bomb this year they won't pick a QB. They'll give him a little time to develop. 2 years isn't enough outside of NY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? Brick is still worthy to start yet he will most likely not be a Jet next year and Giaccomini could have either stayed at RT or if one of the rookies showed the ability to start immediately then we could have pushed him inside to guard and had another body there to compete. Saying thats absurd is like saying drafting Williams was absurd when we have all the depth we have, yet thats exactly what we did.

If we were able to get that done then these guys would have been able to learn behind current starters while going through the nfl program and be starters by next year not only taking over for our current starters at the position but clearing enormous cap space in terms of D'Brick.

I could understand if you wanted to draft peat to start at RT and then take over LT the following year but to take two OT's to sit for a year we'd be forfeiting a year of team control for a first round pick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we really shouldn't be thinking about trading off Wilkerson till we actually see how Williams develops at the very least even then you are taking a gamble trading a player who you know is good for an unknown one, On top of that who would we trade Wilkerson to? it would be a gamble to assume a team will be drafting in the top end of the first round (San Francisco is probably the safest bet going into the season). Idk I think its to early to think about trading Mo, give the guy a contract and let the young guys show what they are made of then re evaluate what we could do vs what we should do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could understand if you wanted to draft peat to start at RT and then take over LT the following year but to take two OT's to sit for a year we'd be forfeiting a year of team control for a first round pick

You wouldnt forfeit a thing. You'd have depth at both tackle positions which we dont have today and you could possibly plug in a RT this year anyway if either one of their performance was better than Breno's while still having D'Bricks eventual replacement on the team. What would be forfeiting is the stability of most likely placing the LT position to a rookie next year while not having clarity at either G positions, RT position while Mangold is yet another year older.

 

I guess we'll see how this works out next year. Hopefully D'Brick, Mangold or Breno dont get hurt this year, because if any of them did you at this very moment couldnt name me their back up.

 

But of course, the smarter move would be to draft Williams...a guy who plays a position that we're 7 men deep at. How did I go wrong there? lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF they can get Mo for under $12M per I think they get it done. I don't think he is going to hold out, but he will avoid all voluntary activities. This is pretty standard practice.

Whoever picks high needs a QB. That is the NFL. People think the Raiders are going to accept picking top 5 again and stick with Derek Carr? I don't see it.

Well JI didn't pick another QB with the Geno BS. Anyway this is all speculation and with the Jets luck the only teams looking to trade won't be picking in the top 3.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) Every team over predicts how well they are going to do; I think you can find a good team that won't finish as high as they think they will.

2) A team may be willing to trade now and 'pay later' as people want immediate gratification or are trying to fill seats and think their defense will be so much better with Wilkerson

3) They would get 1 year at 6.7 million and the (worst case) pay tag next year (2 years) but most likely a team would do a trade only after having a deal in place (like with Tampa and Revis) - they would make a trade on the knowledge that they can work a deal and void the trade if they cannot; there are teams who are not as deep at DL and with cap who are likely to be willing to pay Wilkerson more than we are.

This
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well JI didn't pick another QB with the Geno BS. Anyway this is all speculation and with the Jets luck the only teams looking to trade won't be picking in the top 3.

 

I don't understand your point.  I said teams picking at the top are picking QBs.  If the Raiders are in the top 3, it is likely they will not be so happy with Carr. Idzik did not pick another QB at the top of the 2014 draft, but the Jets didn't pick until 18.  Can't act like they were 4-12 in 2013.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wilkerson can play all of the positions on the defensive line, in any look or lineup we're in. So can Richardson. Williams should be able to as well. We don't, and won't, have a problem with redundancy with our defensive line if we decide to re-sign Wilkerson and Williams turns into a beast. That is all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't make a decision until you have to

 

see how it goes

 

maybe williams busts or richardson kills a hooker

 

let it play out

 

I think this is what they're doing.  It's certainly how they've handled it so far. 

 

They didn't lock up Mo until they could see how the draft unfolded. Well, they surprisingly drafted a (theoretically) more talented Mo clone 6th in the country. If they'd already locked up Mo, they more or less would have been forced to trade out of the pick or take a lower-ranked player. You don't use the 6th pick in the country to triple-up (or quadruple-up) at what was already the team's deepest position. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand your point. I said teams picking at the top are picking QBs. If the Raiders are in the top 3, it is likely they will not be so happy with Carr. Idzik did not pick another QB at the top of the 2014 draft, but the Jets didn't pick until 18. Can't act like they were 4-12 in 2013.

Misread your post.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

STFU you SOJF loser.

 

Enjoy your time off. When your vacation is over, please remember this is not the place for that stuff.

 

If you can't make a point without insults than we can arrange a longer vacation. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enjoy your time off. When your vacation is over, please remember this is not the place for that stuff.

 

If you can't make a point without insults than we can arrange a longer vacation. Thanks.

Thank you! Perhaps an Anger Management Class may be of some help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...