PDA

View Full Version : Miami.com blurb; Surtain/KC trade talks intensified


Bootlegged
03-16-2005, 08:08 AM
CHATTER

• Conversations with Kansas City have intensified regarding a trade for Dolphins cornerback Patrick Surtain, but the Chiefs have reservations about meeting his request for a large signing bonus. Miami's Nick Saban has indicated he's not opposed to keeping Surtain.



Nothing new, but this was in today's edition. Hopefully something to it.

htismaqe
03-16-2005, 08:30 AM
Yeah, I hope this is true.

If we could lock up Surtain and then get Adams and Hall, I think we'd be in VERY good shape.

donkhater
03-16-2005, 08:50 AM
I think that if KC yields a third round compensatory pick for losing Tait last year, that this deal is as good as done.

jspchief
03-16-2005, 08:55 AM
I think that if KC yields a third round compensatory pick for losing Tait last year, that this deal is as good as done.

That's what I'd like to see come of it. If we can bump it down to a third rounder, it's a no brainer.

I'm a little bit worried about Saban though. He may be trying too hard to play hardball, in an effort to establish himself as more than a 1st year head coach.

tyton75
03-16-2005, 09:01 AM
I know this has probably been asked a million times.. but when will we know what pick we get for Tait?

Chiefnj
03-16-2005, 09:01 AM
Can a team trade compensatory picks?

Radar Chief
03-16-2005, 09:05 AM
Can a team trade compensatory picks?

:shrug: Why couldn’t they?

the Talking Can
03-16-2005, 09:07 AM
" but the Chiefs have reservations about meeting his request for a large signing bonus"

when will CP figure out that #1 CBs are expensive?

you don't get them for cheap..for cheap you scrubs like Herndon...

Hoover
03-16-2005, 09:11 AM
I think then the chiefs give up the second and keep their 3, I don't think you can trade those picks.

tomahawk kid
03-16-2005, 09:14 AM
Sounds like CP and DV might think Law is too big of a risk.

If the front office has the stones to pull this off, I'm going to start dusting off the bandwagain. That's a big "IF" though.......

Cochise
03-16-2005, 09:15 AM
DO IT CARL :cuss:

Fire Me Boy!
03-16-2005, 09:15 AM
I don't think we get a compensatory pick... you ONLY get a compensatory pick if you lose more than you sign... I'm not sure which of these guys were FAs, but we did sign Bober and Dalton (I know Welbourne was a trade).

Long story short, I think we signed more FAs than we lost. And if that's the case, we wouldn't get a compensatory pick.

Cochise
03-16-2005, 09:16 AM
I don't think we get a compensatory pick... you ONLY get a compensatory pick if you lose more than you sign... I'm not sure which of these guys were FAs, but we did sign Bober and Dalton (I know Tait was a trade).


Tait was not a trade. He was a restricted free agent whom the Bears signd to a ridiculous offer sheet we weren't willing to match.

Coogs
03-16-2005, 09:18 AM
I know this has probably been asked a million times.. but when will we know what pick we get for Tait?

I think I read some where that it will be announced next week. Don't have a link, just recall reading it somewhere.

Fire Me Boy!
03-16-2005, 09:21 AM
Tait was not a trade. He was a restricted free agent whom the Bears signd to a ridiculous offer sheet we weren't willing to match.
Sorry, I misspoke, I meant to say Welbourne (mixed up my John's). I'll edit.

Chiefnj
03-16-2005, 09:27 AM
I don't think we get a compensatory pick... you ONLY get a compensatory pick if you lose more than you sign... I'm not sure which of these guys were FAs, but we did sign Bober and Dalton (I know Welbourne was a trade).


That isn't completely true.

From NFL.COM:

"Under terms of the NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement, a team losing more or better compensatory free agents than it acquires in a year is eligible to receive compensatory draft picks."

It is possible to get a comp pick even if you didn't lose more free agents than you signed - the use of the word "or". But, from past experience whatever calculation is used to determine comp picks, seems to really favor a team losing more than it signs. A few years back the Skins lost 6 and signed 6 and were awarded 1 comp pick. I'm not aware of anyone who signed more than they lost who got a comp pick, but from the NFL.COM article it seems possible, highly unlikely, but possible.

The one thing I don't know of, is that since Tait was a transition player he technically might not have been a "free agent." I don't know how transition players affect the calculation of compensatory picks.

the Talking Can
03-16-2005, 09:33 AM
according to an article someone posted from kffl, we should get a 3rd based on the salary differentials of Tait and the guys we signed...

TRR
03-16-2005, 09:37 AM
Before FA began, I think we had a shot to trade for Surtain. The only thing Peterson couldn't work out was a deal with Surtain's agent. Surtain wants an enormous signing bonus.

However, if we are going to throw big money at a CB, it might as well be a young ascending player like PS.

J Diddy
03-16-2005, 09:39 AM
Before FA began, I think we had a shot to trade for Surtain. The only thing Peterson couldn't work out was a deal with Surtain's agent. Surtain wants an enormous signing bonus.

However, if we are going to throw big money at a CB, it might as well be a young ascending player like PS.


Agreed, spend it wisely if your gonna spend it

Hoover
03-16-2005, 09:40 AM
Before FA began, I think we had a shot to trade for Surtain. The only thing Peterson couldn't work out was a deal with Surtain's agent. Surtain wants an enormous signing bonus.

However, if we are going to throw big money at a CB, it might as well be a young ascending player like PS.
I agree with that. I would then be tempted to take a DE in the first. I know we have our great leader Hicks, but if Gun has a new toy to play with you know he is going to use it.

siberian khatru
03-16-2005, 09:44 AM
However, if we are going to throw big money at a CB, it might as well be a young ascending player like PS.

Not disagreeing with pursuing Surtain, I like him and am not averse to trading a No. 2. But I would quibble with him being characterized as a "young, ascending player." He turns 29 in June and has played 8 years. That's not young by NFL standards. I don't think he's ascending -- I think he's already ascended and is at his peak, perhaps even just past his peak. But I think he's still a very good player, and we only need a couple of good years out of him anyway.

Mr. Laz
03-16-2005, 09:50 AM
That's what I'd like to see come of it. If we can bump it down to a third rounder, it's a no brainer.

I'm a little bit worried about Saban though. He may be trying too hard to play hardball, in an effort to establish himself as more than a 1st year head coach.

except for you can't trade compensatory picks :(

Cormac
03-16-2005, 09:51 AM
The problem with the Surtain deal is that it will cost us BOTH the draft pick and the big SB. Starting corners aren't cheap, but he is probably asking for $15m, 50% higher than any player on the Chiefs roster has ever gotten. If we sign him, we'll in all likelihood be done as far as FA signing is concerned, and will still have a big ? at OLB, and no 2nd round pick to help.

I'm not against it. It might be our single biggest opportunity to really improve our D that is still available to us, but it sucks that he would cost us so much.

Mr. Laz
03-16-2005, 09:52 AM
I don't think we get a compensatory pick... you ONLY get a compensatory pick if you lose more than you sign... I'm not sure which of these guys were FAs, but we did sign Bober and Dalton (I know Welbourne was a trade).

Long story short, I think we signed more FAs than we lost. And if that's the case, we wouldn't get a compensatory pick.

they don't go by numbers ... they go by value


ie Tait is worth more than dalton and bober easily. Tait was considered an upper tier starter. dalton and bober are considered journeymen type players.

donkhater
03-16-2005, 09:53 AM
No you can't trade compensaory picks. I was just pionting out that if KC somehow got a 3rd rounder that giving up a 2nd rounder for Surtain wouldn't hurt so much.

In the absence of the compensatory selection,, should KC trade the 2nd rounder for Surtain, they would only have 1 first day pick.

Mr. Laz
03-16-2005, 09:55 AM
CHATTER

• Conversations with Kansas City have intensified regarding a trade for Dolphins cornerback Patrick Surtain, but the Chiefs have reservations about meeting his request for a large signing bonus. Miami's Nick Saban has indicated he's not opposed to keeping Surtain.



Nothing new, but this was in today's edition. Hopefully something to it.


by the way.... anyone have a date on this snippet? it would be nice to know whether they are talking about our last talks with miami or whether these are new talks.

beavis
03-16-2005, 09:56 AM
No you can't trade compensaory picks. I was just pionting out that if KC somehow got a 3rd rounder that giving up a 2nd rounder for Surtain wouldn't hurt so much.

In the absence of the compensatory selectionHello - commatard on the loose. should KC trade the 2nd rounder for Surtain, they would only have 1 first day pick.
How is trading a 2nd going to hurt anyway? Are we really hard pressed to have another Eddie Freeman in camp? Make the trade Carl.

JohnnyV13
03-16-2005, 09:56 AM
I think Dalton doesn't count for this calculation. Dalton was a street free agent b/c his original team CUT him.

siberian khatru
03-16-2005, 09:57 AM
The problem with the Surtain deal is that it will cost us BOTH the draft pick and the big SB. Starting corners aren't cheap, but he is probably asking for $15m, 50% higher than any player on the Chiefs roster has ever gotten. If we sign him, we'll in all likelihood be done as far as FA signing is concerned, and will still have a big ? at OLB, and no 2nd round pick to help.

I'm not against it. It might be our single biggest opportunity to really improve our D that is still available to us, but it sucks that he would cost us so much.

The price we pay for bungling the Rolle deal. :banghead:

Mr. Laz
03-16-2005, 09:57 AM
How is trading a 2nd going to hurt anyway? Are we really hard pressed to have another Eddie Freeman in camp? Make the trade Carl.

i think the new contract that surtain wants is the bigger issue then the 2nd round trade cost.

Chiefs Pantalones
03-16-2005, 10:21 AM
Reservations about giving a 28 year old pro bowl CB a large signing bonus? What is our team smoking? He's a freakin' pro bowl CB, he won't cost you pennies!! And a 2nd round pick on top of that is cheap for a pro bowl CB; a bargain.

Get this done. I don't want Law. Hence the signature. I like to take risks, but this is too much of a risk, IMO.

Get Surtain.

ct
03-16-2005, 10:29 AM
That isn't completely true.

From NFL.COM:

"Under terms of the NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement, a team losing more or better compensatory free agents than it acquires in a year is eligible to receive compensatory draft picks."

It is possible to get a comp pick even if you didn't lose more free agents than you signed - the use of the word "or". But, from past experience whatever calculation is used to determine comp picks, seems to really favor a team losing more than it signs. A few years back the Skins lost 6 and signed 6 and were awarded 1 comp pick. I'm not aware of anyone who signed more than they lost who got a comp pick, but from the NFL.COM article it seems possible, highly unlikely, but possible.

The one thing I don't know of, is that since Tait was a transition player he technically might not have been a "free agent." I don't know how transition players affect the calculation of compensatory picks.

It's really more about the salary cap level lost/gained, rather than just number of players lost/gained. We lost a guy with a big #, and signed 2 guys with small numbers. That DEFINITELY qualifies us to receive a pick, and a pretty good one. Will it be a 3rd or 4th is the question?

And yes you can trade any draft pick you want, but not until it's actually on the books. We could 'conditionally' trade that 3rd round pick, under the assumption we get it, then word the deal that if we don't a different compensation package kicks in. This is likely moot though, unless we add more picks or player(s), really seems Miami is dead set on a 2nd rounder, or they'll keep him. Who knows how much is negotiating ploy or rock bottom offer level.

ct
03-16-2005, 10:32 AM
according to an article someone posted from kffl, we should get a 3rd based on the salary differentials of Tait and the guys we signed...

http://www.kffl.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116792

Long read, but pretty informative. Can't speak to the legitimacy of his claims, but still interesting.

Fire Me Boy!
03-16-2005, 10:32 AM
I just read the Voices in the Star... funny sh*t... someone said, “The Chiefs already have the best cornerback in football, Johnnie Morton. He knocks down every pass thrown to him.”


That's funny.

ct
03-16-2005, 10:34 AM
except for you can't trade compensatory picks :(

Where can we confirm this? I have never heard any rule stating teams cannot trade comp picks, once awarded.

UPDATED:

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?act=DraftTracker&CODE=02&TeamID=9007

See 2003, pick 5.19 (5th round, 19th pick). Indicated that Houston traded a compensatory draft pick, which eventually ended up with the Titans.

Please correct me if I have misinterpreted.

Wallcrawler
03-16-2005, 10:44 AM
Reservations about giving a 28 year old pro bowl CB a large signing bonus? What is our team smoking? He's a freakin' pro bowl CB, he won't cost you pennies!! And a 2nd round pick on top of that is cheap for a pro bowl CB; a bargain.

Get this done. I don't want Law. Hence the signature. I like to take risks, but this is too much of a risk, IMO.

Get Surtain.



Amen.

You have to pay for talent. And when that talent belongs to another team, it costs to get the talent away from his current team. A second round to acquire him is nothing. Paying him the large signing bonus should have been a given from the start. They screwed the Rolle deal up, and that was an 11m Signing Bonus. Now, hopefully their lesson is learned and they dont f around with anymore top tier guys when they have a shot at landing them with the team.


With the way that the Ty Law situation is progressing, the Chiefs dont want to sign Law until they are sure he can play. Rightfully so.

But by that time, every other team in the league looking for a corner is going to know that Ty can play as well, and Law will be back to asking for his king's ransom in compensation.

Since we are going to end up paying a huge number to one of these guys, wouldnt you rather pay the younger guy who is going to be able to play corner longer than 2 years before becoming another Chiefs safety?

I sure would.

Mr. Flopnuts
03-16-2005, 04:32 PM
I just read the Voices in the Star... funny sh*t... someone said, “The Chiefs already have the best cornerback in football, Johnnie Morton. He knocks down every pass thrown to him.”


That's funny.



BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA so true. Surtain is the best available option at CB anywhere period. He has the best stats at the position than anyone in the last 5 years. He is hands down worth the pick and hands down worth the money. IMO this should've been done 2 weeks ago before other teams started getting in the mix. The only thing I can come up with is Carl believes that with the new contact rule beyond 5 yds the days of the shutdown corner are over. I however don't think that will be the case at all..........Time will tell.

Please god, give me Surtain for my birthday, please..........

Rukdafaidas
03-16-2005, 04:42 PM
I believe one of the reasons the Chiefs signed Knight was to help in their negotiations with Surtain.

htismaqe
03-16-2005, 04:45 PM
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA so true. Surtain is the best available option at CB anywhere period. He has the best stats at the position than anyone in the last 5 years. He is hands down worth the pick and hands down worth the money. IMO this should've been done 2 weeks ago before other teams started getting in the mix. The only thing I can come up with is Carl believes that with the new contact rule beyond 5 yds the days of the shutdown corner are over. I however don't think that will be the case at all..........Time will tell.

Please god, give me Surtain for my birthday, please..........

Pretty much.

If Ty Law was healthy, there might be an argument. As it is, Patrick Surtain is the best CB in the league. The fact that there's even a CHANCE to acquire him should be enough.

He should be a Chief already.

Chiefs_Fan_n_64081
03-16-2005, 04:55 PM
perhaps I am just stating the obvious, but if the Chiefs don't sign a CB soon it will be a cluster f*ck of epic proportions. 'Cause I don't see them geting it done in the draft alone.

Wallcrawler
03-16-2005, 05:01 PM
I believe one of the reasons the Chiefs signed Knight was to help in their negotiations with Surtain.


We can only hope.

Thats GOT to count for something though, unless the two guys just cant stand one another.

If we got Surtain along with Knight, thats half of one of the best starting 4 secondaries in the league the past couple seasons.



Maybe Sammy could talk him into jumping ship and joining the Chiefs also.

StcChief
03-16-2005, 05:11 PM
Sammy Knight and Surtain in Secondary major improvement give up the 2 or 3 pick.

eazyb81
03-16-2005, 05:21 PM
Now is not the time for Carl and Co. to get cheap with a signing bonus. We are 2/3 of the way there, let's make the deal happen and get this over with.

Starting CB: Surtain
Starting CB: Warfield
Nickelback: Carlos Rogers
Dimeback: Sapp/McCleon/Battle/Bartee/late round draft pick.....may the best man win.

Looks like one hell of an upgrade to me.

keg in kc
03-16-2005, 06:15 PM
I believe one of the reasons the Chiefs signed Knight was to help in their negotiations with Surtain.I doubt it seriously.

Calcountry
03-16-2005, 06:17 PM
Yeah, I hope this is true.

If we could lock up Surtain and then get Adams and Hall, I think we'd be in VERY good shape.Me too, BTW, I love your warpaint impersonation, lmao. How long you gonna keep it up? :thumb: