ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   The Lounge (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Albert/Joeckel perspective (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=272267)

cdcox 04-18-2013 11:01 PM

Albert/Joeckel perspective
 
How would you feel if the Chiefs had the #2 overall pick and packaged it and Albert for Joeckel? Because that's what the Chiefs are on the brink of doing.

#1 pick = 3000 points
#54 pick = 360 points

difference is 2640 points

#2 pick is worth 2600 points

Chiefs are going to invest 3000 - 360 = 2640 points to replace Albert with Joeckel. It could be a good deal for the Chiefs if 1) Albert is out of the league in two years, 2) Jockel is a HOFer and 3) the alternatives (like Geno) don't have very good careers.

evolve27 04-18-2013 11:02 PM

I would and still feel like SHIT

Mav 04-18-2013 11:05 PM

The point that no one wants to acknowledge. In 5 years max, Albert WILL be out of the league, and Joeckell will be 26. Joeckell, will also get a 5 year rookie deal this year, that will be cheaper than Alberts deal. Albert, has also shown the propensity to be about Albert, and not about the team. If i was going to pay you 12 million dollars a year, if i wanted you to play water boy, you better get your ass out there and make sure there isnt a thirsty player on the field. Albert isnt that. Albert is about Albert. He didnt want to move to guard, he didnt want to move to right tackle. He wants to be Albert. A lot of people wont deal with that, which is why if you look at what the phins have done this offseason, adding mike wallace for one, they dont care about adding ME ME ME ME ME ME players. So its logical that ALbert would intrigue them.

Is there going to be a drop in production? Probably. But, when you factor in the cost of keeping Albert long term, his age, and his attitude, its not really that big of a loss.

cdcox 04-18-2013 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Smith Fan (Post 9601831)
The point that no one wants to acknowledge. In 5 years max, Albert WILL be out of the league, and Joeckell will be 26. Joeckell, will also get a 5 year rookie deal this year, that will be cheaper than Alberts deal. Albert, has also shown the propensity to be about Albert, and not about the team. If i was going to pay you 12 million dollars a year, if i wanted you to play water boy, you better get your ass out there and make sure there isnt a thirsty player on the field. Albert isnt that. Albert is about Albert. He didnt want to move to guard, he didnt want to move to right tackle. He wants to be Albert. A lot of people wont deal with that, which is why if you look at what the phins have done this offseason, adding mike wallace for one, they dont care about adding ME ME ME ME ME ME players. So its logical that ALbert would intrigue them.

Is there going to be a drop in production? Probably. But, when you factor in the cost of keeping Albert long term, his age, and his attitude, its not really that big of a loss.

Oh good, we give up the equivalent of the #2 overall in the draft and we get "not really that big of a loss".

AussieChiefsFan 04-18-2013 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdcox (Post 9601820)
How would you feel if the Chiefs had the #2 overall pick and packaged it and Albert for Joeckel? Because that's what the Chiefs are on the brink of doing.

#1 pick = 3000 points
#54 pick = 360 points

difference is 2640 points

#2 pick is worth 2600 points

Chiefs are going to invest 3000 - 360 = 2640 points to replace Albert with Joeckel. It could be a good deal for the Chiefs if 1) Albert is out of the league in two years, 2) Jockel is a HOFer and 3) the alternatives (like Geno) don't have very good careers.

Those are 3 very big "ifs".

RealSNR 04-18-2013 11:15 PM

I already knew just from looking at it that this deal was terrible for the Chiefs.

I didn't need the stat guy to mathematically prove it for me. That just makes it sting even more.

chiefzilla1501 04-18-2013 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdcox (Post 9601856)
Oh good, we give up the equivalent of the #2 overall in the draft and we get "not really that big of a loss".

I agree with you that I could care less about the age thing.Not that this helps enough, but you also have to factor in who you can get in free agency with the cost savings. It could be the difference of $5M per year.

Mav 04-18-2013 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdcox (Post 9601856)
Oh good, we give up the equivalent of the #2 overall in the draft and we get "not really that big of a loss".

not necessarily, you arent even factoring the impact that Alex Smith has. Alex Smith, at least for this year, will outplay the 34th pick in the draft. So the value that you gave up, to what you get, will be less. Meaning the Chiefs won.

Dont you think?

DaneMcCloud 04-18-2013 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdcox (Post 9601820)
How would you feel if the Chiefs had the #2 overall pick and packaged it and Albert for Joeckel? Because that's what the Chiefs are on the brink of doing.

#1 pick = 3000 points
#54 pick = 360 points

difference is 2640 points

#2 pick is worth 2600 points

Chiefs are going to invest 3000 - 360 = 2640 points to replace Albert with Joeckel. It could be a good deal for the Chiefs if 1) Albert is out of the league in two years, 2) Jockel is a HOFer and 3) the alternatives (like Geno) don't have very good careers.

Mother of Pearl, PLEASE stop with the outdated ****ing value chart.

chiefzilla1501 04-18-2013 11:19 PM

The other key is at Quarterback. If Geno is average, it's a so-so pick. If we get a QB in the next 1-2 years who ends up being better than Geno, then the QB part of this equation doesn't even matter.

It's not the path I'd take. But let's be real here. If the Chiefs find a good QB, nobody will really care about Alex Smith or Joeckel or Albert.

cdcox 04-18-2013 11:22 PM

Would you rather have:

Albert and ______ or Joeckel and 54?

Put any of top 15 prospects in the blank and tell me this is a good trade.

cdcox 04-18-2013 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 9601878)
Mother of Pearl, PLEASE stop with the outdated ****ing value chart.

Okay it's outdated. The early picks are worth even more now since they don't have a heavy salary penalty. We'll factor that in and the trade is even worse.

Mav 04-18-2013 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdcox (Post 9601897)
Would you rather have:

Albert and ______ or Joeckel and 54?

Put any of top 15 prospects in the blank and tell me this is a good trade.

Depends on who 54 is. If 54 turns into a qb, who then turns around to be better than Geno Smith, then the Chiefs win all the way around.

regardless, you were getting Joeckell no matter what. Albert, or no Albert. THats why they wanted Albert to move to RT in the first place. So your equation is do you want albert, and joeckell, or Joeckell, and 54........

Hammock Parties 04-18-2013 11:25 PM

post is spot on

we are paying a premium price to upgrade from "very good" LT to "hope this guy is elite."

it's like paying a website a premium price for chiefs news you already have.

cdcox 04-18-2013 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Smith Fan (Post 9601876)
not necessarily, you arent even factoring the impact that Alex Smith has. Alex Smith, at least for this year, will outplay the 34th pick in the draft. So the value that you gave up, to what you get, will be less. Meaning the Chiefs won.

Dont you think?

Considering I'm already writing off the Alex Smith years, no I don't think he makes any of this smell better. If he doesn't lift his game significantly above where he has played in the past, I hope he busts so we can move on sooner. The closest thing we've had to more than a stop gap at QB in 40 years is Trent Green. You have no idea what that is like. NO IDEA.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.