-- Marcus Peters trade - Chiefs Compensation disclosed - Ian Rap/tweet

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by KCDC

Here's the balanced view:



1) Peters is a potential game changer. He is capable of winning a key game for you and is worth being considered a top corner.



2) He is good in coverage as a general matter as well.



3) He doesn't like to tackle so much, and that could cost giving up big plays and first downs at key moments.



4) He is a reckless and immature player who is more about himself than his team.



5) If we kept him, we may have gotten two years out of him and then he would have liked to go on to the Raiders (his home team).



6) If he did well we might have received a good compensation pick for him (depending on the size of his contract), meaning a third or fourth rounder.



7) On the other hand, his professionalism could regress and he could have become a pariah, meaning we would get nothing for him.



8) Other teams were aware of the items above and were not willing to give up meaningful compensation.



9) Management decided that points 1 and 2 above did not outweigh points 3 and 4 above. With a new QB, the thought was likely building a team-oriented defense that is less about showboating and more about everyone playing their roles well. It sum, they thought (notwithstanding his enormous talent) he was hurting the team more than helping. Andy saw that with TO in Philly.



10) With the addition of Fuller, management had the freedom to let him go, assuming that they may well draft a respectable CB in the upcoming draft.



11) Veach went with the best offer he received. The amount was incredibly low for such star quality but the decision was made to move him. What could he do?

Re-evaluate the wisdom of moving the asset if the return was so gapped out from potential value.

There's a TON of downside for the Chiefs here. And very little upside.