Jared Allen & Tony G trade results
 

Just wondering where the rest of the planet is standing on the grade we can give for the Allen and TG trade now that it has been a little while. I know Allens numbers have been down a little but it still looks like he is making the big plays and TG is still the best. So how do you grade the trades now and would we be much better if it never happened.

I didn't like either trade, especially the JA trade. But if things don't change, 2 of the recent 2nd round picks were just cut with NO compensation.

Here is to hoping that trend is over.

Well, would still have only won 2 games last year and be 0-3 this year, so no effect.

You never trade away your young franchise QB, DE or LOT. The Allen trade was stupid from the day Peterson refused to give him an extension. Security for future DUI's could have been built in just like Minnesota did.

TG's value will depend on who the Chiefs get with his draft pick.

Are you ****ing serious? Especially this year I think the Chiefs would be 2-1 with just Tony, let alone both of them.

Last year, who cares, Herm would have ****ed it up with JA.

We were 2-14 with TG last season. We may have beaten Oakland with both.

I feel much like I did when the Kansas City A's traded Roger Maris to the Yankees.

Clearly I think the Chiefs would be better. Possibly 6-10? 7-9? I still think they would be a losing team because they got holes everywhere on the roster.

But what can they do? both JA and TG wanted to leave and I don't blame them.

JA makes a huge difference. Gives the Chiefs a passrush which we all know they don't have. Passrushers make a world of a differnce he was an impact player and helped the pass defense.

TG gives the QB another receiver threat. Take him away and the passing game has one less threat and becomes less effective. Put him in there he draws double teams that simple. He opens up the passing game.

What makes me question is how would the Chiefs be if they kept JA, and actually stuck with the 4-3? How would they be if kept JA drafted Dorsey and used him the way he was used in college?

How would they be if the used Herb Taylor at LT, whom in my opinion showed something. Stuck with him, coached him and developed him. i just say this because had they not traded JA they would not have drafted Albert. So someone would have to play LT and my guess would be Taylor. I think if all this were to happen, they would have less positions to address.

Both trades get a big fat F grade for FAIL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Weren't the Chiefs 4-12 2 seasons ago with BOTH on the roster?

JA trade =F

TG trade = remains to be seen. I like it so far.

Let's not let the facts get in the way.

Yeah but that doesn't mean that they couldn't go 6-10 w/ them.

A defense is more than just one player. An offense is more than just one player.

Our offense was depending way too heavily on TG. Yeah, we would have won more games, but would we have really been better off?

I think the worse trade of the two is DEFINITELY JA.

Allen said he would not sign a contract with a clause like that in it here. He just did not want to play here, period.

Carl and Herm would still be here?
They would have drafted Sanchez?
Impossible game to play

Agree with the JA trade being an F
I do NOT like the TG trade, but it might turn out to be good.

The guy who should have been traded instead of JA was LJ. Once he got paid, I knew JA was gone. No way the Chiefs were going to pay both of them. You NEVER trade a elite pass rusher right as he is entering his prime. They are sooooo hard to find and are game changers for a decade or so.

I agree. They were 9-7 in '06, and 10-6 before that.

Since we are in the 3-4 now, Allen would be worthless.

Its already been said, but JA did not want to be here. I like the 2nd for TG. They may pick up a 10 yr starter for that pick. Plus, we didn't win a SINGLE playoff game with either player.

And I don't recall any language like that making its way into the contract - the PA was fighting against it - I can't imagine the PA lost that battle.

Yep. But what hasn't been said about the JA deal was that it got to that point - but it didn't have to.

The fault of not winnig a single payoff game was not theirs.

Allen didn't want to be here, it's a miracle we got the value for him that we did. Of course with Carl in charge of the draft, any victory was going to be short-lived.

We'll see what happens with Gonzo's pick. I'm not sure it's not an equally miraculous thing to get a 2nd rounder for a player at his position at his age. I'm interested to see how we use it, whether it's part of a trade or used on a rookie.

The biggest recent mistake is still signing LJ long term.

Yep. Horrible mistake.

You really think the Chiefs beat the Ravens with Tony?

http://blogs.twincities.com/Vikings/...ard-contr.html

The Vikings have not worked additional protections into DE Jared Allen's record contract.

While he has been arrested twice for DUI, the Vikings are relying on the standard protections in lucrative contracts. Under the latest Collective Bargaining Agreement, signing bonus language protects teams in the event a player fails to report to the club or runs afoul of the law.

Teams are also protected -- albeit to a lesser extent -- with roster bonuses. The only one not protected are called option bonuses, a distinction that was made clear when the Denver Broncos could not recoup said money from WR Ashley Lelie, who did not report to training camp in 2006.

Interestingly, half of Dwight Freeney's $30 million in guarantees is in the form of an option bonus. But the Vikings are believed to have excluded an option bonus from Allen's contract.

Allen has been said he quit drinking. But any other setbacks could dip into the amount of the $31 million he is scheduled to receive from the Vikings.

Simply put: He has to play to get paid.

The Jared Allen trade is looking like a steal for Minny so far..we got a decent LT, a good change of pace back, and a shitty underachieving TE

Dorsey was NOT used in college like you are thinking. The WArren Sapp comparisons were baseless. Dorsey had a total of something like 8 career sacks at LSU. He was not an interior pass rusher. He was in fact, a two gap control player.

I wonder if some of you actually watched him in college or just base these things off of "scouting reports" that are complete bunk. Dorsey was never a "3 technique" penetrator type in college. This rumor goes around here for some reason and there is no basis behind it.

Good find, and thanks. I didn't think there was anything "extra" put in his contract.

In reality, Allen was traded for the supplemental draft pick we would have received when he left (and he was going to leave--the bridges were burned). I personally look at the trade as Charles, Cottam, and Albert for a supplemental 3rd round pick and a year of Jared Allen's production.

That's worth it, IMO.

Too bad CP had to hang around for another year, huh?

I wonder how Allen would do as a OLB in a 3-4?

He had 13, you dumb mother****er. While playing largely a reserve role for half his college career. That's pretty damned good for an interior lineman.

And, NFL.Com's profile for him as a prospect:

"Compares To: WARREN SAPP-Oakland"

I don't know that he would have left. LJ seemed to want out a lot more than Allen. Tony wanted out last year and still had a hell of a season. Brandon Marshall is doing fine in Denver. Boldin is playing well in AZ. Seymour reported to the Raiders. It seems to me that more often than not, these little clashes die down and become forgotten.

I think if Carl would have given JA a long-term deal, he would've gotten over the hard feelings.

In retrospect, its impossible to like the JA trade, IMO.

I wonder what goes through Dorsey and Jackson's heads after a game like last week when both had zero tackles, zero assisted tackles, zero anything. It is just mind-boggling how year after year the Chiefs can fail so miserably at drafting defensive linemen.

Yep. Its like Cleveland picking QBs...

But we weren't planning on going 3-4 when we traded him, were we?

Yeah, we've gone through a ton of D linemen. It's hard for me to believe they are all bad. I'd be looking for a D line coach with a rep for developing them.

No. IMO, I think he would be just as good in Hali's position.

It's interesting how a team like the Giants find all these Dlineman, but why do the Chiefs struggle and have such a hard time finding Dlineman?

They're so hard pressed there. Had very little luck.

what are the Giants doing? and what are the Chiefs not doing?

would you want to play for Carl and the biggest loser in the NFL?

The only reason both of these guys wanted to leave was because our cocky front office treated them like shit.

The TG thing I'm not too upset about. To this day, I think Peterson should have been fired the day after the trade to the Vikings. The ONLY reason Allen was upset in KC was because Carl Peterson put on the douchiest negotiation of all time. He lowballed Allen. Refused to return his agent's calls. Then aired out dirty laundry to the media by calling Allen an "at risk" player.

The hilarious thing is that the Vikings gave Allen a contract with heavy "behavior" provisions. While there was no actual clause, it was a contract where Allen stands to lose a lot if he gets tagged. That clearly shows that the only reason Allen isn't a Chief today is because our douche bag owner was too arrogant to give him the deal he deserved.

What goes through their head is: "we're young, and we deserve time to make mistakes." Followed by: "in a 3-4, we don't have to make tackles to make plays."

Relax. This is a difficult position to learn and rarely do drafted players learn it this quickly. And their job isn't to make tackles as much as it is to open up opportunities for the back 7 to make tackles. They're more space-eaters than they are players who make a lot of big plays.

Was Jamaal Charles part of that trade? If our LT works out, it might be ok. Hopefully we will get a solid pick for the TG trade.

That's something I felt long ago which has recently become more and more blatantly apparent. I now find it impossible to really give 2 shits about this team. The owners main priority isn't winning - he tries to do just enough to give that illusion but it's so easy to see thru and I won't support a team whose main objective is manipulation.

Allen trade = F, because at this point and time we did not get any pro bowl difference makers in a game back, and we can't sack the QB.

Gonzo trade is all dependent on what we turn that 2nd rounder into...

Charles and Morgan were the other draft picks.

That's a stupid statement. JA is probably the best DE in the league and still young. Tg IS the best TE in the league. with those two on the team we could possibly be 2-1 or 3-0

The Vikings protected themselves with Allen:

The Minnesota Vikings made defensive end Jared Allen the highest-paid defensive player in the NFL last month, but also provided themselves plenty of financial protection in the deal. It’s the type of protection that could become increasingly popular around the NFL as teams deal with high-risk players in the post-Michael Vick era.

One of the key elements to Allen’s six-year, $74 million contract is a provision, pre-approved by the player, that allows the Vikings to convert an $8 million roster bonus Allen is due to receive in 2010 into a signing bonus. In such a case, the team would recoup its money from the player and the signing bonus would count under the salary cap for the remaining years of his contract. Under rules of the collective bargaining agreement, signing bonuses can be recovered by a team when a player violates his contract; a roster bonus can’t.

That was a key issue in Vick winning the right to keep approximately $16.25 million in a federal court judgment handed down in February. That ruling came after the Atlanta Falcons had initially won the right to recover the money because Vick was sentenced to federal prison on charges related to dog fighting last year.

More From Jason ColeLatest injury could spell end for Pennington Sep 29, 2009 Ugly loss won't help Zorn's long-term prospects Sep 27, 2009 ADVERTISEMENT

In light of the Vick decision, which the NFL has appealed, Minnesota has come up with this provision in contracts signed by multiple big-money acquisitions this offseason. According to an NFL Players Association source, several other franchises have utilized this practice, though specific examples were not provided. Minnesota included the provision in contracts for safety Madieu Williams and wide receiver Bernard Berrian, which made the clause acceptable to Allen, said his agent Ken Harris.

“This is something the Vikings did with other players they signed this offseason, so it was consistent with everyone,” Harris said. “Jared was not being singled out, so we were willing to do that.”

However, the talented Allen, who had 15½ sacks in 14 games last season despite playing with the 4-12 Kansas City Chiefs, comes with more baggage than the other aforementioned newcomers. He was arrested or charged for driving under the influence three times between 2002 and 2006, including twice in a five-month span in 2006. He spent 48 hours in jail for the latter arrest and was suspended for the first two games last season by the league as a result of the 2006 incidents.

Harris said Allen has taken his treatment under the league’s substance-abuse policy very seriously. In fact, he appealed the four-game suspension handed out by the league for violating the league’s substance-abuse policy and had his punishment reduced to two games. Still, there is no doubting that a relapse could be a serious problem for Allen.

Despite his history, the Vikings gave up the No. 17 overall pick in the first round, two third-round picks and exchanged picks in the sixth round to get Allen from Kansas City. That was all in addition to the contract. Allen was a franchise player for the Chiefs, meaning that he was allowed to negotiate a deal with other teams, but compensation was required if the Chiefs let him go to another team.

To protect themselves, the Vikings included language in the contract for the first two years that allows them to terminate the deal if he’s arrested or suspended. In addition, Allen’s $15.5 million signing bonus is guaranteed only for injury. Signing bonus money is considered payment as a promise from the player to fulfill the terms of his contract.

However, roster bonus money can’t be recovered because it is considered “earned” income under the terms of the collective bargaining agreement.

That issue was important not only in the Vick decision but also in a decision in a dispute between wide receiver Ashley Lelie and the Denver Broncos where Lelie was allowed to keep roster bonus money in 2006. In the Vick case, the Falcons had roster bonus money treated as signing bonus by guaranteeing it, but the language of the contract wasn’t formally changed, creating an obvious loophole.

In the case of the Allen contract, NFL Players Association lawyer Richard Berthelsen said the union would still likely fight the league if Allen were to ever lose the money. However, the fight might be more difficult this time because of the clause, which was deftly crafted by Minnesota vice president of football operation Rob Brzezinski.

The other key difference between roster bonus and signing bonus is how they are counted against the salary cap. In the case of a roster bonus, all of the money paid counts in that season. So for Allen, the entire $8 million roster bonus he is set to receive in 2010 will count that year. By contrast, signing bonus is counted in portions over the length of a contract. For example, if a player receives a $5 million signing bonus as part of a five-year contract, only $1 million is counted each year of the deal. There are stipulations if the player is released or traded before he finishes the contract, but that’s the basic idea.

which one of them would be playing right tackle?

Not its not. Not at all. Its fact. Neither one of those players are OL. Our worst position. At best were 1-2 with both.

I didn't like either trade at first,mainly because I hated to see both playes leave.I haven't seen what I had hoped out of the picks we got for JA,and we don't know who were getting for the TG pick so I guess we wait.So far I don't really like the results,but hopefully they'll turn that around soon.
Posted via Mobile Device

OK. So now we need an OL, a DE, and a TE. I can see how we're better off.

How can you grade the Tony G trade when they haven't even drafted the player in the second round yet?

As far as the Allen trade. One of the most idiotic deals ever.
Posted via Mobile Device

I have never understood why people believe trading away a proven commodity at any position for some unknown factor (draft picks which may or may not pan out) is a good idea. It seems to me some, just want to be wheelers and dealers. I always thought a bird in the hand is worth more than 2 in bush.

JA trade is moot. CP and JA did not get along. That trade happened beofre the new leadership. It was CP's kick in the butt to the Chiefs before he left. That appears to be a hugh mistake. TG falls on Pioli. We have yet to see how that is going to turn out for the next couple of years. TG would have been no help in the Philly game.

Yeah, Tony made such a huge difference in the win total over the last 2 years. Are you trying to build a Super Bowl winner in the future or a 4-12 team now?
Posted via Mobile Device

The JA deal continues to be the worst transaction in franchise history.

Pioli got a 2nd rounder out of an aging, nearly retired TIGHT ****ING END!

But he sucks...

It would appear most would agree Allen is gone because of Peterson. After that a lot of work has to go into the guess work forward.

The Chiefs were in a lot of games to the end in 2008. But. Then. The other team plays different when the results are different. Like the Raider game. The Raiders never made a drive down the field until after the Chiefs did.

We just fool ourselves into believing what we want to believe with guess work.

Wow he had 13 sacks in 4 years. 7 of which came in one year. I also like how he was in a "reserve role" for "half of his college career". Well yeah duh, but he was a freaking all american his first full year starting. And even then he only registered 3 sacks. So more than half of his sacks came in one season. The other three years he totaled up 6 sacks. Impressive. :rollseyes

I said that people comparing him to Warren Sapp were off. He is NOT a Warren Sapp and he didn't play that way at LSU you dipshit.

And the same site says this about him, which I see you ignored....

Hmmmmmm. Seems like the latter right now doesn't it? Does he look like Warren Sapp right now? I have no doubt that you watched very little of Dorsey in college because anyone who did could see he was not a natural pass rusher and he's struggled badly in learning to do that in the NFL. He didn't play in that kind of system in college and he was NEVER a gap-shooting penetrator type in college. Get a ****ing clue.

Yep, I don't think you should ever trade a franchise player for anything other than 2 high firsts, and maybe more.
You know what you've got in the player, you NEVER know what you're getting with future draft picks

Yes, it was really a one score game, that would have turned out totally different. Remember, that was the first game, the team was full of confidence and didn't know they sucked yet.

We still have LJ, that is part of the Jared Allen result = EPIC FAIL

Exactly

jared allen trade: F
tony gonzalez trade: F

people have been saying gonzalez is aging and nearly retired for years, yet he is still kicking everybody's ass. why do people think he is going to retire? he's still the best in the game.

Why does everyone always buy into the fact that one player cant be the difference in a winning or loosing season, or that a ref can't cost a team the game. In reality these things do make a difference. Seems everyone buys into those old and tired beliefs that are spouted on the radio.

Same reason some people never ask for directions, or read them when they are furnished. It is the macho thing to say, we should not have been in that position.

I would guess 2/3 of the games I have watched, have come down to 2 or 3 plays.

Yeah, he'll play till he's 50.

I've never seen a ref literally cost a team a game. You can usually point to a number of things that lead to the outcome, never a single play, good or bad. It's sort of like the whole "4th quarter comeback" stat. I've always been entertained by that one, because most of the time, if the QB had played better the first 3 quarters, he wouldn't have had to come back in the 4th.

As far as one player being the difference, well, as has been mentioned, this was a four win team with both of them on the roster, but even throwing that out, I'm not sure the specific problems we have right now would be helped all that much by either of them. Gonzo might help with the blocking, but I doubt Cassel would have any more time to throw with him on the field, and I just don't see Allen playing as an OLB, not at his height/weight.

All of which is sort of fantasy-land anyway. Reality is that neither one of them is here, and neither one of them is ever going to be here.

Good post.

Shannon Sharpe palyed until age 35. Tony Gonzalez is 33. Tony Gonzales> than Shanon Sharpe. So therefore Tony could be productive for at least 2 more years if not more.

I seem to recall a Denver, San Diego game last year where an inadvertant whistle by ref ed hockley cost one team a game. Anybody else remember this?

And how many 3rd down conversions do we think Tony g would have made by now?

Sometimes trades aren't simply about "were we better". Do you think Oakland would've been better with Randy Moss? Or the Patriots would've been better with Richard Seymour? Would San Diego have been better with Rodney Harrison? Would the Pats have been better with Deion Branch? Many things go into a player move, such as salary, contract expiration, what they're going to be looking for, how they feel about your team, what you get in return for picks, etc.,. It's not as simple as "we would've been better with them here". Of COURSE Tony G, even at his age, would've been the best receiving weapon on your roster. That goes without saying.

That call didn't cost the Chargers the game.

They still had several opportunities to keep Denver out of the end zone. And the opportunity to keep them from converting a 2-pt play.

Was it a bad call? Sure.

Could they have won the game anyway? Absolutely.

"I've never seen a ref literally cost a team a game."

_____

"Santa came to the Meadowlands yesterday disguised in black-and-white stripes and bearing an early gift for the Jets.

The Green Machine won a come-from-behind nail-biter 32-31 thanks to an official's dubious goal-line call that plucked the Seattle Seahawks' feathers and boosted calls to bring back instant replay.

"God's playing in some of these games, and he was on our side today," said coach Bill Parcells, after his 9-4 Jets got their sixth straight home victory to stay atop the AFC East.

With 20 seconds left, Vinny Testaverde ran a fourth-down quarterback sneak that was called a game-winning touchdown. But TV replays clearly showed the ball never crossed the goal line, and the Jets comeback should have fallen one yard short. "

I still gotta say if that whistle wasnt blown the outcome of the game would have been different, and the chargers come away with the win.

That's the point I was making. In every game there's going to be more than a single play that determines the outcome. You might look at one as "the play", but reality is that a missed field goal in the first quarter or a failed 4th down conversion in the second or a timeout wasted in the third is ultimately just as meaningful to the outcome as any questionable call at the end. There's always missed opportunities that would have won it.

(Just random examples)

God how bad would the Oline be if we didn't have Albert?

I agree 100%

I hate those ****ing trades. You spend all of your time as a fan hoping your team brings in a guy like that. Hell at any position....

Over 2 years KC traded away the two best players on their Roster, real franchise players.

Think about that.

Is that how you build a winning team? Trade away franchise players?

Regardless of circumstance or money issues or personality conflicts you cannot escape the simple fact that.

Over 2 years KC traded away the two best players on their Roster

OVER 2 YEARS KC TRADED AWAY THE TWO BEST PLAYERS ON THEIR ROSTER


OVER 2 YEARS KC TRADED AWAY THE TWO BEST PLAYERS ON THEIR ROSTER

OVER 2 YEARS KC TRADED AWAY THE TWO BEST PLAYERS ON THEIR ROSTER

OVER 2 YEARS KC TRADED AWAY THE TWO BEST PLAYERS ON THEIR ROSTER


WHAT

THE

****

I don't think it's rocket science that this isn't what you want to have happen to build a winning team, it's the opposite. Maybe we were forced into it because the players wanted it, maybe we HAD TO DO IT, but regardless of that being the case IT SILL SUCKS. It is absolutely undoubtedly the opposite of what fans should want. You hope to just hit on one guy like that per draft, so trading draft picks for those guys is clearly a lose no matter what kind of twisted thinking the drafterbators engage in.