PDA

View Full Version : Grading Carl Peterson's offseason moves....


CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 09:38 AM
I just got back from the road and finally have a few days off to get my Planet fix. However, I have been closely following the personnel moves (non moves) on Sirius NFL channel. I grade Peterson's performance as follows:

1) Not signing Samari Rolle. F-

We had him here and nobody in this world can tell me they believe the BS reason CP gave as to why they didn't sign him. "Narrowing of the Spine"? Just how friggin stupid does Peterson think we are? When I heard that, the Peterson Screwed-the-Pooch O Meter went off the fuggin scale.

2) Signing Kendrell Bell. C (at best).

We don't sign a perfectly healthy top notch corner who is rarely injured if at all; but instead sign a LB who is top notch WHEN HEALTHY. The same one who missed all but 3 games last year because HE WAS INJURED. Don't get me wrong, I absolutely LOVE the signing. It was the sheer illogic of it that makes me want to take a chain saw to Peterson's car. Not to mention, why sign a player that has a history of injury in all but his rookie year over one (Ed Hartwell) who is young and healthy to a long term deal?

3) Not signing Fred Smoot. F-

After NOT signing Rolle, he fuggs this up too. If we had gotten Bell and Smoot I would have been exstatic. But, we have Bell and nothing else at this point. Granted, the new rules make a shutdown corner an anachronism but we still play in a Division with the likes of Lelie, Moss, etc.... Can anyone confidently say that Crispy, Toasty or McNugget can cover Moss for even a few seconds? Corner is still a high priority. Nice job Carl.

Summary: Final grade thus far...D-

Our offense isn't getting any younger and we have 1 or maybe 2 runs at the big dance left before the offense has to be retooled. I had hoped CP and Co would go all out for a run NOW by getting as many (within financial boundaries) defensive upgrades as possible. I have been in CP's corner for many years now but this offseason is making me rethink that position. If the remaining offseason moves (FA and draft) don't give us a middle of the rod defense AT THE VERY LEAST, I am all for dragging our GM through the streets behind his own SUV by his entrails. Mr Peterson, if you want to mess up a team please go elsewhere and do so.

nascher
03-09-2005, 09:42 AM
Smoot wasn't even in KC ??? Skip IT

Bell B+ if healthy
Rolle C- Baltimore offered him simply more Money in the first years that KC could affort.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 09:43 AM
I think I will wait until Free Agency is over [that would be in late July, by the way] before I presume to issue a grade.

I tend to wait until I have some evidence before I slap down a judgment.

Out of fashion, I know, but what can you do?

xoxo~
Gaz
Funny that way.

Hoover
03-09-2005, 09:45 AM
I think that is really harsh.

Not Signing Rolle is worth an F

Rolle was the top FA, and he was there for the taking.

Trotter - I
We offered more cash for him to play here, he went back to philly, what else can we do?

Smoot - I
Smoot got a 10.8M signing bonus, 200K less than Rolle, is Smoot worth it? I don't think so.

Bell - A

I think the Bell signing will be huge. I liked Trotter, I like Hartwell, but are either of those guys playmakers? No. IMO, we just got a Derrick Thomas type player for a 3.5 M siging Bonus.

While I'm pissed about Rolle, I'm going to wait till I cast my judgement. If Carl Brings in Surtain or Law I'll give him an A for this offseason.

MGRS13
03-09-2005, 09:48 AM
Don't you mean move? So far a D+ but an F if all we get is Bell and Sammy Knight which by the way is my prediction.

eazyb81
03-09-2005, 09:52 AM
I think the Bell signing is an A if he stays on the field (which he should). His injuries aren't the type that will linger with him, they are more freakish injuries like a sports hernia from trying to squat too much weight. I would be worried about Bell if he had knee problems or something like that, but he doesn't and he is a Pro Bowl LB when he plays.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 10:06 AM
Can we go ahead and grade the draft now, too?

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 10:07 AM
I think I will wait until Free Agency is over [that would be in late July, by the way] before I presume to issue a grade.

I tend to wait until I have some evidence before I slap down a judgment.

Out of fashion, I know, but what can you do?

xoxo~
Gaz
Funny that way.


I probably should have said "thus far". Note that I did add the caveat "if the remaining offseason moves FA and draft don't produce a middle of the road D" BEFORE any mention of entrail dragging behind large motorized conveyances.

Robert <----- clearing the muddy waters........

mikey23545
03-09-2005, 10:08 AM
Can we go ahead and grade the draft now, too?

I want someone to post next season's won-loss record so I can see how we did!

mikey23545
03-09-2005, 10:09 AM
Or should it be "how we do"?

Gaz
03-09-2005, 10:09 AM
Can we go ahead and grade the draft now, too?

Okay, THAT was funny.

Sad, but true: someone [and I must admit I paid it all the attention it deserved] already posted our Win/Loss record for this year.

xoxo~
Gaz
Saving up his FA outrage for July 22nd.

htismaqe
03-09-2005, 10:11 AM
We don't sign a perfectly healthy top notch corner who is rarely injured if at all; but instead sign a LB who is top notch WHEN HEALTHY.

Which CB woud that be?

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 10:12 AM
Offseason thus far IMO: D

Bell was an okay signing, but he missed more games than any of the other FAs we brought in. He ranked third on my LB wishlist.

F*ckface absolutely BLEW IT w/ Rolle. Combine that with inactivity for a week, and you've got a piss-poor rating thus far. I don't know why I'm pissed; I knew this would happen... just didn't want to believe it (dumbass fan).

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 10:13 AM
We don't sign a perfectly healthy top notch corner who is rarely injured if at all; but instead sign a LB who is top notch WHEN HEALTHY.

Which CB woud that be?

Samari Rolle

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 10:15 AM
We don't sign a perfectly healthy top notch corner who is rarely injured if at all; but instead sign a LB who is top notch WHEN HEALTHY.

Which CB woud that be?
Rolle. He has been in the league since 1998 and played 101 out of 112 games. Pretty healthy if you ask me.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 10:15 AM
“… a perfectly healthy top notch corner who is rarely injured if at all…”

No, that is not Rolle. He has a medical condition that can lead to serious consequences. That precludes “perfectly healthy.”

xoxo~
Gaz
Looked up the definition of “perfectly” and “healthy” and does not get to Rolle from there.

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 10:19 AM
“… a perfectly healthy top notch corner who is rarely injured if at all…”

No, that is not Rolle. He has a medical condition that can lead to serious consequences. That precludes “perfectly healthy.”

xoxo~
Gaz
Looked up the definition of “perfectly” and “healthy” and does not get to Rolle from there.


A condition that hasn't kept him from playing 101 out of 112 games in the last 7 years. Sorry, that "condition" was a lame azz excuse by CP to cover up the fact that he humped the canine on that deal.

ChiTown
03-09-2005, 10:21 AM
Okay, THAT was funny.

Sad, but true: someone [and I must admit I paid it all the attention it deserved] already posted our Win/Loss record for this year.

xoxo~
Gaz
Saving up his FA outrage for July 22nd.


Damnit! I already missed THIS season? ****ing :cuss: work

Skip Towne
03-09-2005, 10:21 AM
My years of experience on the Planet have taught me that some people just like to bitch. I used to work with a guy we called "Donnie the bitcher".

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 10:21 AM
“… a perfectly healthy top notch corner who is rarely injured if at all…”

No, that is not Rolle. He has a medical condition that can lead to serious consequences. That precludes “perfectly healthy.”

xoxo~
Gaz
Looked up the definition of “perfectly” and “healthy” and does not get to Rolle from there.


:spock:
That's bullshit and you know it. Rolle has a congenital narrowing of the spine. It has not affected him in his entire footabll career - from pee-wee league through Pro Bowl NFL seasons.

Don't spout off the party line like some brainless sheep Gaz, you're smarter than that.

milkman
03-09-2005, 10:25 AM
Can we go ahead and grade the draft now, too?

D.

Cormac
03-09-2005, 10:27 AM
You know what's really funny about this offseason:

Now people are making noise about how great the WRs are in our division, and the best they can come up with is Lelie and Moss.

Is this the same Lelie that everybody laughs at the Donks for drafting, or is there a different Lelie in the AFC West that I am supposed to be scared of?

Gimme a break!

ROFL

Gaz
03-09-2005, 10:33 AM
HC_Chief-

I am not one to spout a party line. I think you know that.

Rolle has a congenital condition that could cause serious problems down the road. That does not qualify as “perfectly healthy” by any criteria. Personally, I am glad the Chiefs passed on him.

xoxo~
Gaz
Seldom invited to any parties.

Dr. Van Halen
03-09-2005, 10:35 AM
:spock:
That's bullshit and you know it. Rolle has a congenital narrowing of the spine. It has not affected him in his entire footabll career - from pee-wee league through Pro Bowl NFL seasons.

Don't spout off the party line like some brainless sheep Gaz, you're smarter than that.

And you, HC Chief, don't spout the local anti-Carl crap.

"Spinal stenosis (narrowing of the spine)(Rolle's issue) usually starts gradually and develops over a long period of time. Narrowing of the spinal canal can squeeze and irritate the nerve roots that branch out from the spinal cord, or it can squeeze and irritate the spinal cord itself. This may cause pain, cramping, numbness, or weakness, most often in the legs, feet, and buttocks. Symptoms may be severe at times, and less severe at other times...

Spinal stenosis usually occurs in the lower (lumbar) back of the spine. When it does occur in the neck (cervical) region, it may cause pain, numbness, and/or weakness in the arms, hands, and/or legs.

Severe disability is not common. However, if symptoms become severe, they often do not improve without surgery. Severe symptoms may restrict your normal daily activities and affect your quality of life. If symptoms are still severe after a period of time of nonsurgical treatment, surgery may be considered. Surgery may not be an option for some older adults who have other serious health problems that make surgery too risky."
-Web MD

If I was genetically predisposed to contract cancer, but haven't yet, doesn't mean I could breathe a sigh of relief and start smoking five packs a day. Just because Roll'e spine hasn't effected him yet, doesn't mean it wouldn't end his career. It has done so to a few players already. What would be a minor injury on someone else could develop into a serious injury in him.

htismaqe
03-09-2005, 10:39 AM
A condition that hasn't kept him from playing 101 out of 112 games in the last 7 years. Sorry, that "condition" was a lame azz excuse by CP to cover up the fact that he humped the canine on that deal.

On the injury report over 50% of the time.

It has nothing to do with his "condition". He IS injury prone and your comments are laughable.

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 10:42 AM
On the injury report over 50% of the time.

It has nothing to do with his "condition". He IS injury prone and your comments are laughable.

Whatever you say sport. You are entitled to your opinion just as I am.

Hoover
03-09-2005, 10:44 AM
A condition that hasn't kept him from playing 101 out of 112 games in the last 7 years. Sorry, that "condition" was a lame azz excuse by CP to cover up the fact that he humped the canine on that deal.
Its not as if Rolle has played evey game in the last 2 years.

htismaqe
03-09-2005, 10:45 AM
Whatever you say sport. You are entitled to your opinion just as I am.

And I'm entitled to laugh at your opinion when it has no basis in fact.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 10:45 AM
Here is Rolle’s injury resumé:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/4305/injuries.html

Clearly, “perfectly healthy” is not accurate.

xoxo~
Gaz
Perfectly correct.

htismaqe
03-09-2005, 10:45 AM
Its not as if Rolle has played evey game in the last 2 years.

Come on Hoover, don't be dense. Rolle has no injury concerns. Carl is a moron.

shakesthecat
03-09-2005, 10:47 AM
Whatever you say sport. You are entitled to your opinion just as I am.


But the Chiefs medical staff isn't?

They were right about Green, Roaf, and Holmes, but they're just making this up to cover Carl's ass? Right.

I think I'll trust their opinion over a bunch of message board posters with an axe to grind.

jspchief
03-09-2005, 10:50 AM
On the injury report over 50% of the time.

It has nothing to do with his "condition". He IS injury prone and your comments are laughable.

Jeff Fisher is notorious for his large, overblown injury reports. Look no further the "toughest QB in the league" and his constant reisdence on the injury report.

Not saying that proves or disproves anything, just saying that it should be taken with a grain of salt.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 10:52 AM
Let me be clear: I am not throwing the “injury-prone” rock at Rolle.

I am, however, debunking the clearly false “perfectly healthy” nonsense.

And I think the "top-notch" bit was off-base as well.

xoxo~
Gaz
Precise in his targeting.

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 10:52 AM
Here is Rolle’s injury resumé:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/4305/injuries.html

Clearly, “perfectly healthy” is not accurate.

xoxo~
Gaz
Perfectly correct.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/2586/injuries.html

Perhaps we shouldn't have gone after Roaf either.........<---Sarcasm

htismaqe
03-09-2005, 10:54 AM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/players/2586/injuries.html

Perhaps we shouldn't have gone after Roaf either.........<---Sarcasm

Don't try and change the argument.

You called out the FO for not signing a "perfectly healthy" CB. That is obviously not a true statement, so now you're backpedaling.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 10:54 AM
...Perhaps we shouldn't have gone after Roaf either...

Nobody claimed Roaf was “perfectly healthy” did they?

xoxo~
Gaz
Thinks that bit of overzealous hyperbole should be withdrawn.

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 10:55 AM
But the Chiefs medical staff isn't?

They were right about Green, Roaf, and Holmes, but they're just making this up to cover Carl's ass? Right.

I think I'll trust their opinion over a bunch of message board posters with an axe to grind.

Shakes, I don't have the proverbial "axe to grind". I have supported CP over the years but I don't agree with this decision. If anything, I have been most Homeristic.

Chief Henry
03-09-2005, 10:55 AM
How about throwing in last seasons off season moves too........Carl, What was the score of the New Orleans Saints game?

D+ on players from last season....
D so far on this season...

I need to see MUCH MORE. Yes I'm Pizzed off.

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 10:57 AM
Don't try and change the argument.

You called out the FO for not signing a "perfectly healthy" CB. That is obviously not a true statement, so now you're backpedaling.

I am NOT backpedaling. YOU said he was injured 50% of the time which is patent BS. I may have been a bit overzealous regarding the use of the term "perfectly healthy" and I will withdraw that bit of hyperbole. Insert "healthy MOST of the time but plays injured". Feel better?

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 10:58 AM
Nobody claimed Roaf was “perfectly healthy” did they?

xoxo~
Gaz
Thinks that bit of overzealous hyperbole should be withdrawn.


Withdrawn. See response to Rufusmacque for revised qualification.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 11:03 AM
Withdrawn. See response to Rufusmacque for revised qualification.

Okay. We’ll just let the “top notch” thing slide…

So, are you revising your grade? Since the “what should have happened” side of your value equation has been reduced, the “what actually happened” side must also be reduced by an equal amount.

It is a fundamental mathematical law.
I am not making this up.
Look it up.

xoxo~
Gaz
Eagerly awaits Revision A.

htismaqe
03-09-2005, 11:06 AM
I am NOT backpedaling. YOU said he was injured 50% of the time which is patent BS. I may have been a bit overzealous regarding the use of the term "perfectly healthy" and I will withdraw that bit of hyperbole. Insert "healthy MOST of the time but plays injured". Feel better?

Obviously he played through injuries. That doesn't mean he wasn't injured.

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 11:09 AM
Okay. We’ll just let the “top notch” thing slide…

So, are you revising your grade? Since the “what should have happened” side of your value equation has been reduced, the “what actually happened” side must also be reduced by an equal amount.

It is a fundamental mathematical law.
I am not making this up.
Look it up.

xoxo~
Gaz
Eagerly awaits Revision A.


ROFL Classic Gaz. I love it. :thumb:

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:09 AM
I think I will wait until Free Agency is over [that would be in late July, by the way] before I presume to issue a grade.

I tend to wait until I have some evidence before I slap down a judgment.

Out of fashion, I know, but what can you do?

xoxo~
Gaz
Funny that way.


Gaz while technically true, who have we picked up after the draft in past offseasons that made a significant difference??

Gaz
03-09-2005, 11:13 AM
Gaz while technically true, who have we picked up after the draft in past offseasons that made a significant difference??

I don’t know.

How many times has our Defense been so wretchedly bad that the Chiefs publicly proclaimed that we need new LBs & CBs?

The thing is, FA lasts until July 22nd. Until that time, we cannot accurately or fairly judge any team’s FA moves.

That, of course, assumes that we have a passing interest in accuracy or fairness.

xoxo~
Gaz
Not sure that applies to the Planet.

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:19 AM
Come on Hoover, don't be dense. Rolle has no injury concerns. Carl is a moron. Regardless of the first sentences valid or invalid premise. The second statement is basically no longer in dispute with 80% of the fan base. That figure is likely to continue to grow.

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 11:22 AM
Obviously he played through injuries. That doesn't mean he wasn't injured.

True. But to say he is injury prone is also an incorrect statement. Any GOOD player sacks up when he gets an "owie" and does what he is paid to do. That being said, would you agree the team would have been dramatically better WITH him at CB than Crispy, Toasty or McNugget? That is really the point here. IS HE A DRAMATIC UPGRADE OR NOT? If he is so "injury prone", why did Belichik jump on him like a hobo on a ham sandwich? Just because I finally brought some criticism of the FO to the table after all these years doesn't mean I am any less a fan or homer, I just laid the blinders to the side for a bit.

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:22 AM
I don’t know.

How many times has our Defense been so wretchedly bad that the Chiefs publicly proclaimed that we need new LBs & CBs?

The thing is, FA lasts until July 22nd. Until that time, we cannot accurately or fairly judge any team’s FA moves.

That, of course, assumes that we have a passing interest in accuracy or fairness.

xoxo~
Gaz
Not sure that applies to the Planet.
My real point is that an impact free agent freeing up after the draft is extremely rare. If we have not got the player by the draft The Refrigerator is Closed, the Eggs are chilling, and the Beer is getting cold.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 11:24 AM
My real point is that an impact free agent freeing up after the draft is extremely rare. If we have not got the player by the draft The Refrigerator is Closed, the Eggs are chilling, and the Beer is getting cold.

I think it's at this point where I note that Holmes and Green were acquired around draft time...

Let the flames begin. :D

Gaz
03-09-2005, 11:25 AM
Vlad Logicslav-

Well, there is a difference between thee and me.

I chose to wait until FA is over to make a pronouncement.

Must be an Engineer thing…

xoxo~
Gaz
Bases his judgments on those pesky old facts.

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 11:26 AM
People are really parsing words over Rolle. How many games has Rolle missed in his career because of his spine?

If free agency ended today Carl would get an F. I believe Peterson himself stated on some interviews that the goal was to sign 2 or 3 impact defensive free agents. He hasn't achieved his own goal yet so he fails.

Braincase
03-09-2005, 11:27 AM
I'm still a bit down, but won't judge until the team roster is finalized. For all we know, there will be June 1st cuts that make us into ... something a little bit better than last years team.

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 11:28 AM
Vlad Logicslav-

Well, there is a difference between thee and me.

I chose to wait until FA is over to make a pronouncement.

Must be an Engineer thing…

xoxo~
Gaz
Bases his judgments on those pesky old facts.


Being that you are in the aeronautic industry I'd feel safer if the engineers would speculate on things rather than wait until the airplane actually blows up in midflight.

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:29 AM
I think it's at this point where I note that Holmes and Green were acquired around draft time...

Let the flames begin. :D
First Green was not a free agent, second that just supports my argument that basically nothing of significance tends to happen after the draft. Priest was acquired before the draft and Trent was aquired on draft day.

milkman
03-09-2005, 11:29 AM
I think it's at this point where I note that Holmes and Green were acquired around draft time...

Let the flames begin. :D

Green was aquired in trade, and I think by "impact free agent" they mean a highly sought after player with a proven history as a playmaker type.

I don't believe that Priest was that.

Clearly he has been an impact signing.

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:30 AM
Vlad Logicslav-

Well, there is a difference between thee and me.

I chose to wait until FA is over to make a pronouncement.

Must be an Engineer thing…

xoxo~
Gaz
Bases his judgments on those pesky old facts.
That might work except we are both engineers. I am an EE.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 11:30 AM
First neither was a free agent, second that just supports my argument that basically nothing of significance tends to happen after the draft.

Holmes was a UFA who was released by Baltimore and Green is about as much of a 'FA' as Surtain is.

Wallcrawler
03-09-2005, 11:31 AM
Bell - A

I think the Bell signing will be huge.

IMO, we just got a Derrick Thomas type player for a 3.5 M siging Bonus.







Do you hear that sound?

Thats the sound of your credibility being flushed down the toilet.

You just compared Kendrell Bell to one of the greatest linebackers of all time, Derrick Thomas. You are officially section 8. Seek immediate psychiatric help.

He had a great rookie season, and then a couple pretty decent seasons afterward. Then the injuries.

Lots of guys have a single pro bowl appearance on their resume. That doesnt put them in the same category as DT.

Just because the guy shows up to Arrowhead Stadium sporting a DT jersey doesnt put him in the same league as he was.


Seriously now. I think this team's lack of a playmaker on defense has seriously altered the mental state of some people. When a decent player (when healthy) is signed and DT comparisons start popping up, its time to step back and look at the situation a bit more closely.


Kendrell Bell is better than Kawika Mitchell, if he can stay on the field. When he starts putting up double digit sack numbers yearly, and racking up Pro Bowl appearances, then I might consider putting him in the category of "Derrick Thomas Type" of player.

Until then, head on down the hall for your straightjacket fitting.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 11:33 AM
Being that you are in the aeronautic industry I'd feel safer if the engineers would speculate on things rather than wait until the airplane actually blows up in midflight.

If the airplane did not have to fly until July 22nd, I would not ground it on March 9th.

BTW, Engineers do not “speculate.” An Engineer gathers all the pertinent information available and makes a rational decision based solely on those facts.

xoxo~
Gaz
Cleaning up a really awful analogy.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 11:33 AM
Green was aquired in trade, and I think by "impact free agent" they mean a highly sought after player with a proven history as a playmaker type.

I don't believe that Priest was that.

Clearly he has been an impact signing.

Feh...an impact free agent is a player who makes an impact on YOUR team. There's no need to parse it any further than that. Using your definition you could say that Hugh Douglas was an 'impact FA' for Jax or Trotter for the Skins who is still paying 5M in cap hit for him today...

Gaz
03-09-2005, 11:35 AM
That might work except we are both engineers. I am an EE.

Then why are you not waiting for facts?

Turn in your slide rule, man. You are busted.

xoxo~
Gaz
Always knew the Sparkies were just barely Engineers.

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:36 AM
Holmes was a UFA who was released by Baltimore and Green is about as much of a 'FA' as Surtain is.

I agree and I was changing my post when you posted this statement. Does not change the fact that Priest was signed before the draft and Trent was traded for on draft day. My premise is that it is rare for an impact free agent to be acquired after draft day.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 11:37 AM
...You just compared Kendrell Bell to one of the greatest linebackers of all time, Derrick Thomas...

Although it will no doubt earn me a flurry of blows to the head, I have to disagree on Thomas. He was one of the best pass rushers, but hardly a great Linebacker. It was for exactly that reason that he did not make it into the Hall of Fame.

xoxo~
Gaz
Gonna need his helmet.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 11:38 AM
I agree and I was changing my post when you posted this statement. Does not change the fact that Priest was signed before the draft and Trent was traded for on draft day. My premise is that it is rare for an impact free agent to be acquired after draft day.

Ok, fine...then Im going to say that there is still a chance of it happening. About as much chance as the 2nd rounder some dont want traded for Surtain becoming an impact player this season. ;)

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:39 AM
Then why are you not waiting for facts?

Turn in your slide rule, man. You are busted.

xoxo~
Gaz
Always knew the Sparkies were just barely Engineers.
I have to be innovative, to be innovative you have to work on gut feeling and best guess quite often. RF design is a black art not a pure science.

milkman
03-09-2005, 11:41 AM
Feh...an impact free agent is a player who makes an impact on YOUR team. There's no need to parse it any further than that. Using your definition you could say that Hugh Douglas was an 'impact FA' for Jax or Trotter for the Skins who is still paying 5M in cap hit for him today...

That's your definition.

But when discussing impact FA, I think people are referring to potential, and no one realized that Priest had that kind of potential.

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:45 AM
Ok, fine...then Im going to say that there is still a chance of it happening. About as much chance as the 2nd rounder some dont want traded for Surtain becoming an impact player this season. ;)

I certainly line up on the side wanting to trade a 2nd for Surtain. But it is more because, first he is younger, second clearly Law's health for the upcoming season is a big question, and finally I feel Law has only a couple of years left as a CB and I am concerned that such a serious foot bone break may have caused undetected ligament damage that will slow him down. I will stil gladly accept Law if that is what works out but I prefer Surtain.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 11:46 AM
How can you judge “impact” before the fact?

Does that mean that Champ Bailey [heh] was an "impact" signing and Priest Holmes was not?

xoxo~
Gaz
Considers that a judgment that can only be made in hindsight.

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:47 AM
P.S. Gaz

I have been out of RF Systems Design for a couple of years working as a Program Manager for electronics products.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 11:49 AM
P.S. Gaz

I have been out of RF Systems Design for a couple of years working as a Program Manager for electronics products.

Well, THAT explains a lot, doesn’t it?

Actually, congratulations. I have been here for 24 years and they keep asking me when I am going into Management.

xoxo~
Gaz
Born to be a grunt in the trenches.

Logical
03-09-2005, 11:51 AM
How can you judge “impact” before the fact?

Does that mean that Champ Bailey [heh] was an "impact" signing and Priest Holmes was not?

xoxo~
Gaz
Considers that a judgment that can only be made in hindsight.


Based on past performance projected forward. This is a BB it is based on speculation. Of course you are technically correct but then we should just shut down the BB in the offseason because the place would not be the least bit interesting. I want only the facts I should go to CBSSportsline, ESPN.com, or NFL.com

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 11:51 AM
How can you judge “impact” before the fact?

Does that mean that Champ Bailey [heh] was an "impact" signing and Priest Holmes was not?

xoxo~
Gaz
Considers that a judgment that can only be made in hindsight.


So you're still holding out hope that Bartee will come around?

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 11:51 AM
I certainly line up on the side wanting to trade a 2nd for Surtain. But it is more because, first he is younger, second clearly Law's health for the upcoming season is a big question, and finally I feel Law has only a couple of years left as a CB and I am concerned that such a serious foot bone break may have caused undetected ligament damage that will slow him down. I will stil gladly accept Law if that is what works out but I prefer Surtain.

Trading our 2d for Surtain is a no brainer IMO. Compare: 3 time Pro Bowler vs a throw of the dice on a CB that likely needs at least 1 year to get acclimated to the NFL. Problem is likely to be if the monetary compensation that we offer to Surtain is satisfactory to Surtain and if he is within our means.

milkman
03-09-2005, 11:58 AM
How can you judge “impact” before the fact?

Does that mean that Champ Bailey [heh] was an "impact" signing and Priest Holmes was not?

xoxo~
Gaz
Considers that a judgment that can only be made in hindsight.


It's true, Gaz, that one can not actually judge impact until after the fact.

But the fact remains that if you looked at a list of FAs, then, before he was signed, Priest would not have been considered an "impact" signing, whereas, Chester McGlockton was.

It's based on potential, not fact.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:04 PM
And you, HC Chief, don't spout the local anti-Carl crap.

"Spinal stenosis (narrowing of the spine)(Rolle's issue) usually starts gradually and develops over a long period of time. Narrowing of the spinal canal can squeeze and irritate the nerve roots that branch out from the spinal cord, or it can squeeze and irritate the spinal cord itself. This may cause pain, cramping, numbness, or weakness, most often in the legs, feet, and buttocks. Symptoms may be severe at times, and less severe at other times...

Spinal stenosis usually occurs in the lower (lumbar) back of the spine. When it does occur in the neck (cervical) region, it may cause pain, numbness, and/or weakness in the arms, hands, and/or legs.

Severe disability is not common. However, if symptoms become severe, they often do not improve without surgery. Severe symptoms may restrict your normal daily activities and affect your quality of life. If symptoms are still severe after a period of time of nonsurgical treatment, surgery may be considered. Surgery may not be an option for some older adults who have other serious health problems that make surgery too risky."
-Web MD

Super duper... it's still a bullshit excuse for f*ckface blowing the negotiations. Heh, then the prick had the audacity to blame the MEDIA for his bullshit excuse.

Baltimore's doctors found nothing wrong with him - certainly nothing that would suggest his congenital condition would threaten his ability to play football for oh, say, the next seven years. But hey, what do those Ravens know about defense anyway? :rolleyes:

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 12:07 PM
Super duper... it's still a bullshit excuse for f*ckface blowing the negotiations. Heh, then the prick had the audacity to blame the MEDIA for his bullshit excuse.

Baltimore's doctors found nothing wrong with him - certainly nothing that would suggest his congenital condition would threaten his ability to play football for oh, say, the next seven years. But hey, what do those Ravens know about defense anyway? :rolleyes:

Shhhhhhhh......don't you know that anyone who says anything critical of the front office is a negative malcontent that has no clue?

Gaz
03-09-2005, 12:09 PM
So you're still holding out hope that Bartee will come around?

I think Bartee could be a good Safety.

But, once again, your analogy blows. I have seen Bartee at CB. The evaluation period is concluded [unlike the Free Agency period]. I saw him all season long and THEN drew my conclusion.

xoxo~
Gaz
Thinks a google on “analogy” might be in order.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 12:12 PM
SideWinder-

So, Champ Bailey [heh] was an “impact” signing, in a good way, under your definition?

xoxo~
Gaz
Results-oriented kinda guy.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:13 PM
Bartee may make a good safety, but I think the fans are so fed up with his ineptitude at CB that they're done with him. He's damned in most people's eyes.

Personally, I think he's another player "wasted" by the Chiefs. He has a tremendous build and excellent athleticism. He can run, hit and <i>tackle</i> - one of the few on the current roster. His sin is the inability to turn his head and look for the ball in coverage. He's had six(?) years to learn how to do this, yet still fails.... must be a complete dumbass; or simply NOT MEANT TO PLAY CORNER. But, but, but, the latter <i>can't</i> be true... after all, the coaching geniouses[sic] for the Chiefs say he's a corner... even though he played safety for most of his football life prior to joining KC.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 12:16 PM
HC_Chief-

Well, since Carl does not care what the fans think, that is a moot point, ennit?

xoxo~
Gaz
Thinks it is a shame that the Chiefs tried to shoehorn Bartee into a CB box.

milkman
03-09-2005, 12:17 PM
Gaz, clearly results are what matters, but we are a society that wants instant gratification.

That's why we already have had offseason FA grades, and why we'll have grades on the draft the second they conclude.

We grade on potential, as much or more, than actual results in sports.

Nightfyre
03-09-2005, 12:18 PM
Ive decided that people are MORONS.
1) Rolle is on the injured list more often than not? How is he classified as healthy? So to grade: Not giving an injury liability 14 mil? A+
2) Bell's injuries were actually fairly minor and were a result of overworking. He is in perfect health and those injuries don't look like they will return. So to grade: Signing Bell A+
3) Smoot went to the vikings before the Chiefs had a chance to look. Hes unproven at best and wouldnt fit our scheme. So to grade: N/A.
4) We gave Trotter the best offer, but he was using us as a bargaining chip to raise his price in philly. So to grade: N/A.
5) Smith: Who cares? N/A
6) The Hartwell case looks a lot better for us right now. No one is expressing interest except us and the Cards and the Cards dont seem to have cap space anymore. We've shown Hartwell that we dont need him, but we still have the best offer on the table. So look at it this way: We've got him where we want him. He has run out of bargaining tools and we've shown that we are not going to budge from our offer, and we are losing interest in his effort to extort money. So as far as we have dealt with him: A+ . If he signs with us, fantastic. If not? Ok. We have a MLB and can draft OLB readily. I think Hartwell will be a Chief. "We aren't pursuing him" != We have withdrawn offer. It just means we arent budging from the current offer.

Bwana
03-09-2005, 12:22 PM
I like the Bell move, but Peterson has more work to do. Bell is going to help this team, but he's not superman. Get on it Carl!

whoman69
03-09-2005, 12:22 PM
This sounds like those who grade the draft while they're in round 3. The Chiefs can't really be graded until it becomes clear that we have the players were going to get.
I won't be giving out any Fs until we get Earthwind Moreland as our top CB signing or some Ray Crockett wannabe. We wanted Rolle, Carl wanted Rolle, but it didn't happen. I certainly don't buy his "its the media's fault" excuse, but he's got to move on and get someone who is a significant upgrade from McCleon/Bartee.
We also have other pieces of the puzzle whom we may not know who they are until after the draft. Safety and a 2nd corner come to mind.

CHIEF4EVER
03-09-2005, 12:23 PM
I like the Bell move, but Peterson has more work to do. Bell is going to help this team, but he's not superman. Get on it Carl!

Amen.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:23 PM
HC_Chief-

Well, since Carl does not care what the fans think, that is a moot point, ennit?

xoxo~
Gaz
Thinks it is a shame that the Chiefs tried to shoehorn Bartee into a CB box.


Oh, I don't think that's at alllllll accurate. I blieve Carl has a MASSIVE ego - to the point of vanity. The man is absolutely obsessed with self-image; therefore what EVERYONE thinks about him is important. Why else would he react so when faced with media 'opposition'? He has, on occassion, used strong-arm tactics to pressure local television, radio, and print outlets: refusing access, refusing interviews to select members, applying pressure by threatening to yank advertizing; making vitriolic statemets in regards to a particularly rotund op-ed author - attempting to have him arrested; making snide comments about the Royals when the <i>dared</i> to start taking some of HIS spotlight....

The man is a prick, through and through. A prick, who is very self-conscious. He cares an awful lot of what the fans think... but it doesn't really affect his bottom line as long as people keep sending in the dough.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 12:23 PM
But the fact remains that if you looked at a list of FAs, then, before he was signed, Priest would not have been considered an "impact" signing, whereas, Chester McGlockton was.

Did you type that with a straight face?

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:25 PM
Did you type that with a straight face?

Hey, I remember A LOT of people bitching about that one. I, however, was one of the few people to really like that signing :D

hehe

Gaz
03-09-2005, 12:27 PM
SideWinder-

But aren’t FA grades now and draft grades on draft day premature?

I am having difficulty with the idea that Hugh Douglas and Champ Bailey were “impact” signings, yet Priest Holmes and Trent Green were not.

I suppose if we call them “impact potential” signings, that would make a bit more sense. However, that precludes the idea that a player can blossom under a new coach, in a new scheme or just mature with exposure to the NFL.

I think that Bailey [heh] and Holmes clearly illustrate that we have no idea who will have a positive impact on his team.

It seems to me that we are too eager to lay down our ruling on a situation. Maybe we want the cred of being the first who said it.

xoxo~
Gaz
Trying in vain to wrap his brain around it.

milkman
03-09-2005, 12:28 PM
Did you type that with a straight face?

**** off.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 12:29 PM
Hey, I remember A LOT of people bitching about that one. I, however, was one of the few people to really like that signing :D

hehe

I assume you're talking about Holmes, yes, Ive noted on several occasions you were one of the most vocal in support of the signing.

Glock predates my KC BB existence, so I dont know about that, but let's not forget not only did he get at the time the largest SB in Chiefs history, he also cost KC a 1st and 3rd for being tagged franchise/transition player of Oakland. I'd say the only impact Glock had with KC was on the cap.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 12:30 PM
**** off.

If that's your way of admitting your misstatement, I'll take it.

milkman
03-09-2005, 12:32 PM
SideWinder-

But aren’t FA grades now and draft grades on draft day premature?

I am having difficulty with the idea that Hugh Douglas and Champ Bailey were “impact” signings, yet Priest Holmes and Trent Green were not.

I suppose if we call them “impact potential” signings, that would make a bit more sense. However, that precludes the idea that a player can blossom under a new coach, in a new scheme or just mature with exposure to the NFL.

I think that Bailey [heh] and Holmes clearly illustrate that we have no idea who will have a positive impact on his team.

It seems to me that we are too eager to lay down our ruling on a situation. Maybe we want the cred of being the first who said it.

xoxo~
Gaz
Trying in vain to wrap his brain around it.


I have been saying that it's all based on potential.
Perhaps they should be called "impact potential", and that is what they mean.

But they don't use that term, they always say "impact" only.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:34 PM
Glock predates my KC BB existence, so I dont know about that, but let's not forget not only did he get at the time the largest SB in Chiefs history, he also cost KC a 1st and 3rd for being tagged franchise/transition player of Oakland. I'd say the only impact Glock had with KC was on the cap.

IIRC I was lukewarm on McGlockton. He was one of those "could be" players, as in "could be a GREAT acquisition if he can be motivated". I was happy to take him away from chOakland; the dude could dominate a game when he wanted to.

Sucked that he played for us the same way he played for the faid and the donkeys: 1 out of 3 snaps.

milkman
03-09-2005, 12:35 PM
If that's your way of admitting your misstatement, I'll take it.

No, I'm not admitting my misstatement.

I just don't have the gift of spinning words like you do, so I'm done with it.

I only have a 5th grade vocabulary and writing skills.

Nightfyre
03-09-2005, 12:35 PM
Man, no one has anything to say about my outstandingly long analysis?

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 12:36 PM
I think Bartee could be a good Safety.

But, once again, your analogy blows. I have seen Bartee at CB. The evaluation period is concluded [unlike the Free Agency period]. I saw him all season long and THEN drew my conclusion.

xoxo~
Gaz
Thinks a google on “analogy” might be in order.


So you can say that based on previous seasons Bartee's evaluation is concluded and he isn't a good CB, but you can't say the Chiefs faltered by not signing their primary target Rolle, who based on past playing experience, has proven himself to be a top corner?

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 12:37 PM
No, I'm not admitting my missatement.

I just don't have the gift of spinning words like you do, so I'm done with it.

I only have a 5th grade vocabulary and writing skills.

LOL...Im not the one that just said Holmes wasnt an impact FA while Glock was. I dunno, that takes some pretty good twists in logic to work out, I think you sell yourself short.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:40 PM
LOL...Im not the one that just said Holmes wasnt an impact FA while Glock was. I dunno, that takes some pretty good twists in logic to work out, I think you sell yourself short.

That's not what he said, Titus. He said "BEFORE he was signed"... in other words, Priest wasn't deemed a '1st tier' FA acquisition, ie "impact player" by consensus. He is absolutely correct there: most thought it was an okay signing, but nothing to get excited about (others were downright pissed... a few really liked it... toot toot :D)

milkman
03-09-2005, 12:41 PM
That's your definition.

But when discussing impact FA, I think people are referring to potential, and no one realized that Priest had that kind of potential.

Right here, I said we were talking about potential.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 12:42 PM
I disagree with your fundamental assertion that Rolle is a top CB. True, he is better than McCleon, Bartee or Battle, but he is hardly the best out there. Furthermore, it has been disclosed that he has a medical problem that can lead to serious complications.

No, the Chiefs did not falter. They [wisely or by dumb luck] avoided signing a big risk.

xoxo~
Gaz
Pleased that Rolle is in Baltimore.

Nightfyre
03-09-2005, 12:43 PM
*Still wishing that people would rip on his A+ CP offseason.*

milkman
03-09-2005, 12:44 PM
It's true, Gaz, that one can not actually judge impact until after the fact.

But the fact remains that if you looked at a list of FAs, then, before he was signed, Priest would not have been considered an "impact" signing, whereas, Chester McGlockton was.

It's based on potential, not fact.

And here, I said "before he was signed" and "based on potential".

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 12:44 PM
Green was aquired in trade, and I think by "impact free agent" they mean a highly sought after player with a proven history as a playmaker type.

I don't believe that Priest was that.

Clearly he has been an impact signing.

HC: above is the post that spawned this...We've gone full circle on this.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:45 PM
*Still wishing that people would rip on his A+ CP offseason.*

myopic homer jaggoff

Happy now?
:D

Gaz
03-09-2005, 12:45 PM
*Still wishing that people would rip on his A+ CP offseason.*

You’re a moron.

xoxo~
Gaz
Eager to please.

Nightfyre
03-09-2005, 12:45 PM
You’re a moron.

xoxo~
Gaz
Eager to please.

I love you too GAz.

milkman
03-09-2005, 12:46 PM
Gaz, clearly results are what matters, but we are a society that wants instant gratification.

That's why we already have had offseason FA grades, and why we'll have grades on the draft the second they conclude.

We grade on potential, as much or more, than actual results in sports.

And here I said "clearly results are what matters."

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:47 PM
HC: above is the post that spawned this...We've gone full circle on this.

I agree with him: <i>most</i> didn't see Priest as a "high impact" acquisition. NOBODY knew he would have as great an impact as he did.

Gaz
03-09-2005, 12:49 PM
I agree with him: <i>most</i> didn't see Priest as a "high impact" acquisition. NOBODY knew he would have as great an impact as he did.

The conclusion I draw from that is that we do not have a freakin’ clue as to which player is “impact” or not. We look at statistics, watch a few minute of him playing on the tube and then decide that Carl is an idiot/genius if he signs this guy.

xoxo~
Gaz
Really does not like that term.

milkman
03-09-2005, 12:49 PM
Green was aquired in trade, and I think by "impact free agent" they mean a highly sought after player with a proven history as a playmaker type.

I don't believe that Priest was that.

Clearly he has been an impact signing.

And here I said "Clearly he has been an impact signing" talking about Priest.

And every arguement I've made in regards to FA impact players is based von the definition I forwarded here, in the first sentence of the above quote.

Clint in Wichita
03-09-2005, 12:51 PM
I disagree with your fundamental assertion that Rolle is a top CB. True, he is better than McCleon, Bartee or Battle, but he is hardly the best out there. Furthermore, it has been disclosed that he has a medical problem that can lead to serious complications.

No, the Chiefs did not falter. They [wisely or by dumb luck] avoided signing a big risk.

xoxo~
Gaz
Pleased that Rolle is in Baltimore.



Rolle already confirmed that he was born with the condition...a "condition" that was not a concern for the Giants or the Ravens. KC was either trying to hurt his market value, or provide an excuse for not signing him.

He may not be the #1 CB in the league, but he is certainly a top CB, and has been for some time now.

Why anyone would be happy that Rolle is a Raven when we are still looking at Warfield and McCleon as the starters is beyond me.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 12:53 PM
I agree with him: <i>most</i> didn't see Priest as a "high impact" acquisition. NOBODY knew he would have as great an impact as he did.

Heh...I dont see the reason to parse the words here...he didnt say 'acquisition' he say Impact Free Agent. A reasonable person would not say that Glock was an Impact FA, and Priest wasnt.

I really dont understand the need to go to out on that limb.

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 12:53 PM
I disagree with your fundamental assertion that Rolle is a top CB. True, he is better than McCleon, Bartee or Battle, but he is hardly the best out there. Furthermore, it has been disclosed that he has a medical problem that can lead to serious complications.

No, the Chiefs did not falter. They [wisely or by dumb luck] avoided signing a big risk.

xoxo~
Gaz
Pleased that Rolle is in Baltimore.


Rolle wasn't the top free agent corner this year? He isn't a top level corner? Has his alleged medical "problem" ever caused him to miss a single game?

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:54 PM
The conclusion I draw from that is that we do not have a freakin’ clue as to which player is “impact” or not. We look at statistics, watch a few minute of him playing on the tube and then decide that Carl is an idiot/genius if he signs this guy.

Again, I disagree. We DO have a clue as to who will most likely be an impact player. How? By watching them play. If they've shown flashes of brilliance, they have a higher probability of being an impact player.

What I get upset about is when we pass on those guys in favor of <I><B><U>safe</I></b></u>, average, ie '2nd/3rd-tier' players because there agent is easier to deal with, or they're nice guys, or they've always been solid but unspectacular performers.

I am a firm believer in "no guts, no glory".

Gaz
03-09-2005, 12:55 PM
Clint-

I do not believe that Warfield and McCleon will be the starters.

xoxo~
Gaz
Not concerned on that front.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 12:56 PM
Heh...I dont see the reason to parse the words here...he didnt say 'acquisition' he say Impact Free Agent. A reasonable person would not say that Glock was an Impact FA, and Priest wasnt.

I really dont understand the need to go to out on that limb.

So why are you parsing then? His intent was pretty clear to me. Of course, I'm not the one who incessantly attempts to root-out any/all anti-Carl/negative posts, so perhaps my 'radar' was off.

milkman
03-09-2005, 12:56 PM
HC: above is the post that spawned this...We've gone full circle on this.

I didn't misstate.
Priest wasn't a highly sought after proven playmaker type before he signed with us.

I then stated that he clearly was an impact signing.

To clarify, he wasn't a proven playmaker before he signed, but he has proven since that he was an impact signing.

And I'm guessing you are the only one that read it any other way than that.

milkman
03-09-2005, 01:03 PM
Heh...I dont see the reason to parse the words here...he didnt say 'acquisition' he say Impact Free Agent. A reasonable person would not say that Glock was an Impact FA, and Priest wasnt.

I really dont understand the need to go to out on that limb.

And I'm going to say this one more time, although I've said several times before.

When I am talking about "impact", I am talking about the potential "impact".

So, again to clarify, Priest wasn't considered a potential "impact" FA, and Glock was considered a potential "impact" FA.

But again, **** off, cause I have absolutely no doubt you knew exactly what I was saying, especially since I've pointed out several times that I was discussing these players in terms of potential.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 01:07 PM
And I'm going to say this one more time, although I've said several times before.

When I am talking about "impact", I am talking about the potential "impact".

So, again to clarify, Priest wasn't considered a potential "impact" FA, and Glock was considered a potential "impact" FA.

But again, **** off, cause I have absolutely no doubt you knew exactly what I was saying, especially since I've pointed out several times that I was discussing these players in terms of potential.

Good Lord, and to thank a few posts back you accused me of spinning...Whatever man, it's good to know that you dont really care about results on the field, rather on the history of the player previous to their signing with KC.

I'll go with the tried and true method of not caring until I see results on the field.

CosmicPal
03-09-2005, 01:16 PM
[rant]

2) Signing Kendrell Bell. C (at best).



How can you honestly grade someone who's never even played a down for the Chiefs?

All this free agent "who we should've signed" "who we didn't sign" and "who we DID sign" is all utter BS. Nobody has any idea how this or any other free agent might help or hurt, yes- HURT, the team. The Chiefs have a lot of young, versatile talent on the defensive side of the ball....Sims and Siavii just might be a tortuous combo that terrorizes offenses to come, but we don't know that for now 'cause the fact is- Siavii needs some playing time.

Nobody was screaming a deadly curse on the Chiefs when we got Cunningham- sh*t, most people on here were saying Gunther would "magically" transform all the players into the D of the 90's- it's not going to happen- BUT what WILL happen is this defense WILL improve, even with the current players....We do NEED a DB most importantly- we know that, and CP knows that, and DV knows that, and anyone who's ever watched a football game for reasons other than drinking beer and ogling cheerleaders know the Chiefs need a DB- but not to make things better, but to fill a void.

This "grading" BS is just what it is- BS...lighten up and cheer on your favorite team....better yet, wait until the offseason programs and training camp and preseason before you start to grade your "new" defense.

milkman
03-09-2005, 01:17 PM
Good Lord, and to thank a few posts back you accused me of spinning...Whatever man, it's good to know that you dont really care about results on the field, rather on the history of the player previous to their signing with KC.

I'll go with the tried and true method of not caring until I see results on the field.

I'm spinning now?

But when discussing impact FA, I think people are referring to potential, and no one realized that Priest had that kind of potential.

I've made it pretty clear, I have been talking about potential, as far back as post #66.

KCTitus
03-09-2005, 01:26 PM
I'm spinning now?

I've made it pretty clear, I have been talking about potential, as far back as post #66.

Your impetus for actually taking me to task was for what Logical said. Im not going to rehash the entire argument, but he said he found it hard to believe that KC could find any impact FA's after the draft. I pointed out Holmes and Green as significant signings around that time and your intial response was before post 66...

I understand your definition now, and find it a tenuous logical position that you've set for yourself that doesnt gauge players on the field, but their 'name' prior to signing. I'll stick with on the field performance.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 01:34 PM
Nobody was screaming a deadly curse on the Chiefs when we got Cunningham- sh*t, most people on here were saying Gunther would "magically" transform all the players into the D of the 90's

Seriously? Hehehe, I must have missed those takes. That sucks... I would have got a good laugh out of it :D

milkman
03-09-2005, 01:36 PM
Your impetus for actually taking me to task was for what Logical said. Im not going to rehash the entire argument, but he said he found it hard to believe that KC could find any impact FA's after the draft. I pointed out Holmes and Green as significant signings around that time and your intial response was before post 66...

I understand your definition now, and find it a tenuous logical position that you've set for yourself that doesnt gauge players on the field, but their 'name' prior to signing. I'll stick with on the field performance.

Yes that was my impetus, and this was my response.

Green was aquired in trade, and I think by "impact free agent" they mean a highly sought after player with a proven history as a playmaker type.

Perhaps I should have added, in that post, with the potential to have an impact with the Chiefs, but I thought everyone would get that intent.

Damn that 5th grade education!

nmt1
03-09-2005, 01:39 PM
Is Kendrell Bell an impact free agent?

milkman
03-09-2005, 01:42 PM
Is Kendrell Bell an impact free agent?

No.
Pay attention, he's only a potential impact FA.

nmt1
03-09-2005, 01:44 PM
No.
Pay attention, he's only a potential impact FA.

Couldn't that describe any free agent that a team picked up?

milkman
03-09-2005, 01:49 PM
Couldn't that describe any free agent that a team picked up?

You might be right, but the only way to evaluate a FAs impact is his performance with his new team over time.

It's funny how you hear the term "Impact Free Agent", but you rarely hear it used properly, i.e, Priest Holmes is an impact FA, since he has had an impact on the Chiefs since he signed here as a FA.

But I digress.
You need to find someone who has the definitions in their data base or something.

dirk digler
03-09-2005, 01:51 PM
Couldn't that describe any free agent that a team picked up?

Yep and just like the draft you never will know until after the season or seasons if you made the right move or not.

Priest was a definite impact FA as well as Marcus Allen.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 01:55 PM
I think you guys are purposely confusing the issue via "parsing" - what Titus loves to say everyone else does... then fails to realize that's his whole schtick.

You <i>obviously</i> cannot definiteively declare the impact of a player before said player has taken the field for a team. That's a given. There is no argument there.

The point of contention centers on the jargon.... "impact FA signing". It gets thrown out there with such terms as "upside", and "player instincts"... it's JARGON. To try and define it as anything-but is an exercise in futility... and assinine argumentation for the sake of arguing.

milkman
03-09-2005, 01:57 PM
Actually, every FA signed has an impact, either positive or negative.

They either become playmakers that help your team, or solid contributers or players that don't live up to expectations, or hopes, thus taking up valuable cap space that could be used on playmakers or solid contributers.

Fat Chet Was an Impact FA! nlm

milkman
03-09-2005, 02:01 PM
I think you guys are purposely confusing the issue via "parsing" - what Titus loves to say everyone else does... then fails to realize that's his whole schtick.

You <i>obviously</i> cannot definiteively declare the impact of a player before said player has taken the field for a team. That's a given. There is no argument there.

The point of contention centers on the jargon.... "impact FA signing". It gets thrown out there with such terms as "upside", and "player instincts"... it's JARGON. To try and define it as anything-but is an exercise in futility... and assinine argumentation for the sake of arguing.

All this is true, but Titus pissed me off today, so I argued for the sake of arguing.

philfree
03-09-2005, 02:09 PM
Rolle already confirmed that he was born with the condition...a "condition" that was not a concern for the Giants or the Ravens. KC was either trying to hurt his market value, or provide an excuse for not signing him.



With the Narrowing of the spine everytime Rolle makes a hit it's like playing Russian Roulette. And Rolle has missed a few games due to a sore neck.(I'm pretty sure I read that.) But the reason Rolle is in Baltimore isn't because of CArl being cheap it's because when he got the chance to play on one of the best Ds in the league he jumped on it. Why people can't figure that out is beyond me.


PhilFree :arrow:

dirk digler
03-09-2005, 02:15 PM
With the Narrowing of the spine everytime Rolle makes a hit it's like playing Russian Roulette. And Rolle has missed a few games due to a sore neck.(I'm pretty sure I read that.) But the reason Rolle is in Baltimore isn't because of CArl being cheap it's because when he got the chance to play on one of the best Ds in the league he jumped on it. Why people can't figure that out is beyond me.


PhilFree :arrow:

I respectfully disagree he joined the Ravens simply because the Chiefs or the Star put out a false report about his spine. When they found out the stopped all negotiations with the Chiefs.

philfree
03-09-2005, 02:17 PM
Is Kendrell Bell an impact free agent?


With the jargon I believe there are some who say that he is. Considering how bad the fans here felt about Mitchell I would think any of them would be considered an impact FA if they were to play his position. And that include milkman errr.....Side Winder.


PhilFree :arrow:

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 02:20 PM
I respectfully disagree he joined the Ravens simply because the Chiefs or the Star put out a false report about his spine. When they found out the stopped all negotiations with the Chiefs.

The "report" came out after the fact. It was an excuse. Then f*ckface <i>blamed</i> the <i>report</i> for <i>his</i> failure.

Disgusting.

philfree
03-09-2005, 02:21 PM
I respectfully disagree he joined the Ravens simply because the Chiefs or the Star put out a false report about his spine. When they found out the stopped all negotiations with the Chiefs.

Well then, with all due respect, you'll be wrong. Rolle stated that once the RAvens called he was done talking with the Chiefs. At that point there had been no reports of his narrowing of the spine released. He made his mind up before the infor was ever leaked.


PhilFree :arrow:

dirk digler
03-09-2005, 02:24 PM
Well then, with all due respect, you'll be wrong. Rolle stated that once the RAvens called he was done talking with the Chiefs. At that point there had been no reports of his narrowing of the spine released. He made his mind up before the infor was ever leaked.


PhilFree :arrow:

I respectfully disagree again. Of course I am sure the truth is somewhere in between.

according to CP:

Q: Rolle said that you guys brought that up after you heard he was negotiating with Baltimore?

PETERSON: “Specific to Samari we were negotiating with him and then the information got out that is either true or not true. Certainly nobody from the Kansas City Chiefs gave that information out. I am certain our doctors and trainers never comment on any player’s injury situation. That changed the situation for them.”

Q: Did it change it for you?

PETERSON: “It takes two parties to negotiate. They stopped negotiating and said they were going to Baltimore.”

Q: So they saw the report, got aggravated and said this deal is over with here?

PETERSON: “I know they did. I spoke with his agent. They saw the article in the newspaper and were very angry about it.”

Brock
03-09-2005, 02:26 PM
Well then, with all due respect, you'll be wrong. Rolle stated that once the RAvens called he was done talking with the Chiefs. At that point there had been no reports of his narrowing of the spine released. He made his mind up before the infor was ever leaked.


PhilFree :arrow:

Wrong.

Rolle and the Ravens were dismissive of medical questions that arose during his visit to the Kansas City Chiefs. Rolle was born with a spinal condition called stenosis, discovered during his physical with the Chiefs. But Rolle didn't fail his physical in Kansas City or Baltimore.

"It's the same thing I was born with," he said. "I guess (the Chiefs) might have heard I was coming here, but when I was there it never came up. It's funny how I come up here and that's all you hear."

philfree
03-09-2005, 02:33 PM
"It's the same thing I was born with," he said. "I guess (the Chiefs) might have heard I was coming here, but when I was there it never came up. It's funny how I come up here and that's all you hear."


Did you not read what you quoted? Out of Rolles mouth the words "when I was there it never came up". Once he got the call from Balt I'm sure he popped a woody over getting to play with Ray-Ray and Ed Reed.


PhilFree :arrow:

philfree
03-09-2005, 02:38 PM
I respectfully disagree again. Of course I am sure the truth is somewhere in between.

according to CP:

Q: Rolle said that you guys brought that up after you heard he was negotiating with Baltimore?

PETERSON: “Specific to Samari we were negotiating with him and then the information got out that is either true or not true. Certainly nobody from the Kansas City Chiefs gave that information out. I am certain our doctors and trainers never comment on any player’s injury situation. That changed the situation for them.”

Q: Did it change it for you?

PETERSON: “It takes two parties to negotiate. They stopped negotiating and said they were going to Baltimore.”

Q: So they saw the report, got aggravated and said this deal is over with here?

PETERSON: “I know they did. I spoke with his agent. They saw the article in the newspaper and were very angry about it.”


See my previous post. And I'm pretty sure that when CArl spoke to Rolles agent if was via the phone and Rolle and his agent was already in Balt. The questions and answers you posted aren't really reflective of the time line.


PhilFree :arrow:

Logical
03-09-2005, 02:40 PM
Your impetus for actually taking me to task was for what Logical said. Im not going to rehash the entire argument, but he said he found it hard to believe that KC could find any impact FA's after the draft. I pointed out Holmes and Green as significant signings around that time and your intial response was before post 66...

I understand your definition now, and find it a tenuous logical position that you've set for yourself that doesnt gauge players on the field, but their 'name' prior to signing. I'll stick with on the field performance.

Titus, this thread is about grading this offseasons effort at free agency. How are you going to use your tried and true method to participate in the grading process today?

If you want to criticize the concept of grading, fine, so be it. But to say you have to judge their on the field performance means you should stay out of a thread like this one because clearly that is impossible. Now that is logical.

Logical
03-09-2005, 02:47 PM
Is Kendrell Bell an impact free agent?

Yes he is because of his past performance levels, this whole potential impact thing is just people trying to worry about something that cannot have happened as of this period in time. Clearly people like Rolle, Surtain, Law, Bell etc that we have all been talking about for several weeks are at this point in time the players in the draft that have been judged impact players (first tier is probably a less controversial term for them).

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 02:55 PM
See my previous post. And I'm pretty sure that when CArl spoke to Rolles agent if was via the phone and Rolle and his agent was already in Balt. The questions and answers you posted aren't really reflective of the time line.


PhilFree :arrow:

My understanding was that Rolle left some time late Thursday so he could spent the weekend at home for his daughters party. Thereafter he got a call from the Ravens and stopped everything with KC.

Here is the transcript from the Ravens website:

Ozzie Newsome on the Rolle transaction:

“This all came about on Friday night on my way home, I got a call from Lamont Smith, who happens to be Derrick Mason’s agent, and he called and said there could be an interest from Samari on coming to play with you, would there be any interest on our part, and I said, yes, there was. At that point, I basically turned it over to Pat (Moriarty) and Lamont. They worked all day Saturday, and on Saturday night, they came to an agreement on a six-year deal. Obviously, we had to get Samari in, get a physical done and get some of the I’s dotted and the T’s crossed on the contract, but everything came together probably at about 3 O’Clock today.”

Samari Rolle

“I’d just like to say I’m honored to be a Raven. My wife, she was ready to come to Baltimore before I was, so when Lamont called and said Baltimore is a possibility, everything else stopped, and I was like, ‘that’s where I want to be.’ You just look at the players around here, great defense, great franchise, and all I’ve really got to do is just play football, do what’s expected, be a leader. It’s just an honor and I’m thrilled to be in an organization like this.”

What is the injury with your spine the Kansas City Chiefs were worried about?
ROLLE: “It’s the same thing I was born with. I guess they might have heard I was coming up here or something like that, but when I was (in Kansas City), it never came up, but it’s funny, I’m coming up here and that’s all you hear. I was getting calls about my spine this morning, and you know, I don’t worry about those things. This is where I’m supposed to be, and I’m happy we chose here.”

philfree
03-09-2005, 03:02 PM
My understanding was that Rolle left some time late Thursday so he could spent the weekend at home for his daughters party. Thereafter he got a call from the Ravens and stopped everything with KC.

Here is the transcript from the Ravens website:

Ozzie Newsome on the Rolle transaction:

“This all came about on Friday night on my way home, I got a call from Lamont Smith, who happens to be Derrick Mason’s agent, and he called and said there could be an interest from Samari on coming to play with you, would there be any interest on our part, and I said, yes, there was. At that point, I basically turned it over to Pat (Moriarty) and Lamont. They worked all day Saturday, and on Saturday night, they came to an agreement on a six-year deal. Obviously, we had to get Samari in, get a physical done and get some of the I’s dotted and the T’s crossed on the contract, but everything came together probably at about 3 O’Clock today.”

Samari Rolle

“I’d just like to say I’m honored to be a Raven. My wife, she was ready to come to Baltimore before I was, so when Lamont called and said Baltimore is a possibility, everything else stopped, and I was like, ‘that’s where I want to be.’ You just look at the players around here, great defense, great franchise, and all I’ve really got to do is just play football, do what’s expected, be a leader. It’s just an honor and I’m thrilled to be in an organization like this.”
What is the injury with your spine the Kansas City Chiefs were worried about?
ROLLE: “It’s the same thing I was born with. I guess they might have heard I was coming up here or something like that, but when I was (in Kansas City), it never came up, but it’s funny, I’m coming up here and that’s all you hear. I was getting calls about my spine this morning, and you know, I don’t worry about those things. This is where I’m supposed to be, and I’m happy we chose here.”


And there is the truth in bold print of why Rollem isn't a Chiefs.


PhilFree :arrow:

Chiefnj
03-09-2005, 03:15 PM
And there is the truth in bold print of why Rollem isn't a Chiefs.


PhilFree :arrow:

It is interesting how the Ravens negotiated and agreed on the deal in one day (Saturday), and then were able to get him in for the physical on Monday and have the press conference immediately thereafter all in about a half day.

HC_Chief
03-09-2005, 03:17 PM
It is interesting how the Ravens negotiated and agreed on the deal in one day (Saturday), and then were able to get him in for the physical on Monday and have the press conference immediately thereafter all in about a half day.

That's what happens when you're not an adversarial prick in negotiations.

the Talking Can
03-09-2005, 03:44 PM
And there is the truth in bold print of why Rollem isn't a Chiefs.


PhilFree :arrow:
no, CP had plenty of time to seal the deal...but, as usual, he was to busy trying to squeeze some pennies out of our "#1 priority"....he should have been signed already

the Talking Can
03-09-2005, 03:53 PM
It is interesting how the Ravens negotiated and agreed on the deal in one day (Saturday), and then were able to get him in for the physical on Monday and have the press conference immediately thereafter all in about a half day.

its the difference between wanting to win and wanting the fans to just shut up....

philfree
03-09-2005, 03:56 PM
It is interesting how the Ravens negotiated and agreed on the deal in one day (Saturday), and then were able to get him in for the physical on Monday and have the press conference immediately thereafter all in about a half day.


I don't know but I'm gonna go out on a limb a say that Rolle was asking for more when he got to KC then what he signed for in Baltimore. Besides that the fact that he developed such a woody when Baltimore called he and his agent where probably much more agreeable to anything the RAvens offered. With a D as bad as ours and in such need of a CB I'm sure Rolle and his agent were "high balling" just as much as Carl was low balling. I will agree that if we had Rolle targeted as our guy then we should have gotten a deal done before Rolle left KC but the fact that the Chiefs doctors found his narrowing of the spine I can't blame them for hesitating.


PhilFree :arrow:

philfree
03-09-2005, 03:57 PM
its the difference between wanting to win and wanting the fans to just shut up....


Yeah I'm sure that was it :rolleyes:


PhilFree :arrow:

Chief Henry
03-09-2005, 04:02 PM
That's what happens when you're not an adversarial prick in negotiations.



REP