Assessing The Kansas City Chiefs At The Trade Deadline

by primetime 07 on Oct 9, 2008 8:59 AM CDT in Campaign 2008

Larry Johnson

Everyone says he can not be traded because of the cap hit. Let's take a look at why this is true. Here's the breakdown of the hit we would take if we traded him before the week 6 deadline.

Prorated 2008 salary: $1.7 million

2009 salary: $4.55 million

Prorated Bonus ($12.5 million over 6 years and prorated in 2008): $9.68 million

Total Cap Hit in 2009: $15.93 million

This is my understanding of the cap hit we would take if we traded him. Of course, after 2009 that number would drop drastically.

Tony Gonzalez

This is intriguing but only because we know Tony still has it. The facts are, though, that he's 32 years old and hasn't committed to playing beyond 2009. I could see him being sent to a contender looking to be pushed over the hump.

But would the Chiefs do it? Unlikely. Right now he and Bowe are our only consistent offensive threats in the passing game. And our passing game sucks so we need Tony more than anyone else.

Damon Huard

Believe it or not, Huard has some value. He's a proven back up at the most important position in the league. Unfortunately for us, like Tony we need him more than anyone else. We can not, repeat can not continue this season without Huard. Croyle is unlikely to stay healthy for the next 11 games which would leave Tyler Thigpen or someone off the street to lead our team and we've seen how catastrophic that can be.

Patrick Surtain

I'm down for moving him. He's in the 4th year of a 7 year deal signed in 2005. Brandon Carr has proven he can hang in the secondary so Surtain seems to be a stop gap until the rookie is ready to take his spot full time. On top of that, there's been talk of Carr taking Surtain's spot at some point this season anyway.

0 recs | Comment 31 comments |

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

On LJ

If we traded him would we take the hit this year or next?

Because if it is this year we have more than enough room to take the cap hit. We are still $32 million under the cap so even with his $16 million we would still be $16 million under the cap. So I don’t see how that is a problem. Now if it is a hit against next year then that is a different story.

by tevans96 on Oct 9, 2008 9:19 AM CDT 0 recs

I agree

We are one of the few NFL teams that can absorb a huge cap hit.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 9, 2008 9:23 AM CDT up 0 recs

2009

by primetime 07 on Oct 9, 2008 9:26 AM CDT up 0 recs

And

You don’t see why it’s a problem to take a $16 million cap hit for a guy who won’t be on the roster? Not to mention the salary we would take on for the player we traded for? Or to sign the draft pick we traded for?

by primetime 07 on Oct 9, 2008 9:26 AM CDT up 0 recs

No

If it would have been this year.

But if it is against next year, and I trust what you say, it is a different story because then it limits us on our ability to resign and persue players.

by tevans96 on Oct 9, 2008 9:29 AM CDT up 0 recs

Are we really

Going to be that active pursuing players next year? I still see us “going young” and maybe signing a few more stop gap players in reserve roles. Are there any contracts coming off the payroll next year?

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 9, 2008 10:52 AM CDT up 0 recs

I think it depends

on how the second half of the season goes.

If we continue to stink it up, I think we are looking at another “going young” year.

If we improve over the remaining season and are competitive, we might see a mix of draft/ FA players to fill spots.

by NJChiefsFan on Oct 9, 2008 10:54 AM CDT up 0 recs

Still too many holes

We don’t have near the number of draft picks this year as we did last year. And we have almost as many holes to fill. We need help at the following positions

Looks like we need new starters at:
QB
G
T
DE
MLB

We need depth at
QB
WR
C
G
LB

If we repeat the performance in the draft I think we will still have several positions we will need to address in FA.

by tevans96 on Oct 9, 2008 11:03 AM CDT up 0 recs

What about Trading Ron Edwards for like a 6th or a 7th. IF Ryan Sims was enough to get a 7th Edwards could be a little more

by IamtheGreatest on Oct 9, 2008 1:47 PM CDT 0 recs

while we're at it,

why dont we trade Sackintosh for a barbed wire fence, Im sure that could keep more defenders out of the backfield.

by ComeSackMyQB on Oct 9, 2008 1:49 PM CDT 0 recs

Donnie Edwards

Wouldn’t Donnie have some trade value to a contender? The Patriots like old, smart LBs, for example. I love Edwards, but the time to pay him was before he left, not after he was done being really good. Nice work CP, give him the money but don’t get the performance. Maybe Carl’s next signing will be Len Dawson or Red Grange.

Anyone over 30 on this team needs to be available in the right deal, and most over 30 need to go if we can anything at all for them.

I doubt anyone would give us enough for Gonzalez or LJ to make it worth our while to make the deal. On the other hand, if some team panicked and offered us something we couldn’t refuse, then don’t refuse it. I love TG, but that’s why I would be okay to see him Ray Bourqued and traded somewhere where he can win playoff games. But only in a move that also benefits KC.

Surtain should be moved if the cap hit won’t hurt us next year. Huard could go too. We can lose 34-0 with him or without him, really. You’d just have to also bring in a new QB as well. If Croyle can play in three weeks, then you’d only have to go one game with Ingle Martin, Pigpen and whoever else you bring in. (Guess what, we’re probably going to lose that game anyway, with Huard or not.) If Croyle can play against TN, then there’s no reason to keep Huard at all. If you can get a draft pick for Huard (Peter King speculated NE would give us a conditional 5th rounder a couple weeks ago) then do it.

Here are the players over 30 on the roster:

Boone, Darche, Donnie Edwards, Ron Edwards, Gonzalez, Napoloen Harris, Huard, McIntosh, Surtain, Waters. McGraw was born in 1979 and stinks, he should go, but no one will give us anything for him.

No one will give us anything for scrubs on a bad team like Harris or Ron Edwards. Waters might bring back something, but OL is the only position where it makes sense to have veterans, since they can allow the other players to show what they can do.

Huard and Donnie for a New England 4th rounder? Surtain for whatever he brings back.

And hey Jets we’ll trade you back Herm for a 6th rounder, think of the profit you’ll make, getting a 4 and only giving up a 6 for the same guy, you can’t turn that down!! :)

by Offense of the 70s on Oct 9, 2008 2:45 PM CDT 0 recs

Can't see Donnie having any trade value

Old, slow, injured…who wants that? And Huard? Huard has stunk this year (he has had a crappy o-line, but still). If the Pats GM traded a 4th rounder for both, he should be fired.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 10, 2008 10:14 AM CDT up 0 recs

Trades have lost their suspense…

Since the advent of Free Agency.

IMO, most trades are motivated by injury issues that have depleted depth at a certain position. Or to send away a disgruntled player who no longer wants to be a part of the organization (or deal w/ management).
GM’s hold onto their draft picks as if they were last pieces of toilet paper in the bathroom after you just finished doing a #2, and are conserving on those last few squares to finished the job before humiliating yourself by screaming for someone to help you out.

Only Tony and Surtain look like they might have some value, but I don’t think they will bring anything back higher than a 4th or 5th rounder, and like PT said at this point they are of more value to us than to anyone else. If we offered those other guys, I think we will be greeted with chuckles rather than with counter offers.

by aPacificChief on Oct 9, 2008 3:44 PM CDT 0 recs

quite the imagery...

by AngryJesus on Oct 9, 2008 4:03 PM CDT up 0 recs

Haha...LoL..

Just bothers me sometimes how these GM’s think they get a deal when they get somebody’s 5rd pick.
Or that we only got a 1st and 2 third rounders for Jared ( the sack leader of ’07 and in his prime) when we could of got 2 first rounders and 3rd, and that was a deal. An extra 3rd rounder?

by aPacificChief on Oct 10, 2008 6:38 AM CDT up 0 recs

Jared didn't want to be here

And in order to MAKE (keyword, make) him stay was to pay an exhuberant amount of cash.

So under the circumstances, we made a prudent decision and got a lot of value for the guy.

And the only other criticism is that we should’ve used LJ’s money to keep Jared, but when we signed LJ it was also the right decision. We needed a guy who could handle 350 snaps a year.

by AngryJesus on Oct 10, 2008 7:27 AM CDT up 0 recs

There was an article posted some time back in AP...

where Allen said that he could see himself living in a ranch in Kansas City, but got sick of the way Peterson handled his contract situation (don’t want to bother going into that again discussion) and wanted to be traded regardless of what CP tried to offer him.

Unlike LJ who has said in the past that he would like out of KC, but was given a FAT contract instead (wanted to renegotiate from a newer contract, even though he was still under contract) for a player who has serious flaws in his game (can’t effectively pass block). There was rumored that Green Bay saw our issues with LJ, and had offered a 1st and a 3rd in the 2007 draft.

About the same in value, except for the extra 3rd round we got from the JA trade. Plus you can find running backs in this league. How often do you find a top notch pass rusher who can play the run and the pass effectively? Plus the guy was 6-6 270 +, and we only have 3 sacks this year.

by aPacificChief on Oct 10, 2008 4:04 PM CDT up 0 recs

the green bay 1st rounder in '07 was DT Justin Harrell and the

3rd rounder was used on WR James Jones. But the forces up above (not the brass of KC, but after your username) deemed that this draft was stronger than last years. So only time will tell. If we made the right long term moves.

by aPacificChief on Oct 10, 2008 4:10 PM CDT up 0 recs

I never

want to see LJ or TG traded personally. There’s something to be said for all-time franchise players and what fan favorites can do for a team. This teams been liquidated over the past few seasons and if you cant keep a foundation it paints a troublesome picture.

I would love to see Surtain & Huard traded before the deadline because we need the picks. Neither should be returning next season anyway so the sooner they’re gone the better, right? I know very well losing Huard could even mean not winning a game for the rest of the season. But we’ve seen where this road is going 5 games into the season so we might as well travel it fully. Not winning another game hopefully would create enough backlash where it would cost Carl his job and we’d then be poised for a much better 09’ season

by KansasCityShuffle on Oct 9, 2008 6:45 PM CDT 0 recs

why?

Why would no one give us anything for Ron Edwards he has played better recently than Ryan Sims ever did and we got a 7th for him so I fail to see why a team with little DT depth would not give up a 7th round pick for him.

by IamtheGreatest on Oct 9, 2008 9:03 PM CDT 0 recs

Draft Position

Edwards, if traded next season would be near 30 years old, Sims was only 27 last year when he was traded. Maybe that has something to do with it.

Plus, since Sims was drafted 6th overall and Edwards 76th overall I imagine many see more upside in Sims.

by primetime 07 on Oct 9, 2008 9:11 PM CDT up 0 recs

Sims was considered a great talent at one point

Tampa Bay probably thought they could get him to improve his work ethic and live up to his potential. Edwards has very little upside – he is as good as he will ever get. No sense trading for a player that mediocre.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Oct 10, 2008 10:13 AM CDT up 0 recs