Jared Allen <=> Brandon Albert?

[petegz28]

I would throw Dorsey in the mix but Albert has been the only one performing. Now, was Albert worth trading Allen?

I say, yes. Albert has been great for a rookie who did not play the pre-season, etc, etc. I think good-great LT's are a more valued commodity than a good-great DE.

So with all the talk going on about Allen, was Albert worth the trade?

[TrickyNicky]

If he DUI's again, it should be jail time. Of course, thats for Joe Schmoe, not Purple Jesus.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by Brock

Link?

If players keep clean for two years they leave the program.

[OnTheWarpath15]

It amazes me that anyone could bitch about this trade. It might be the single smartest thing Carl Peterson has done in his 19 years in KC.

At WORST, it's a dead-even swap. Filling a hole at arguably the most important offensive position, while creating a hole at DE.

At best, it's an absolute landslide in our favor, as we've filled THREE holes while only creating one.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

For what Jared Allen was asking for in terms of compensation, and accounting for what he actually provides on the field, I'll trade him for a franchise LT straight up every day of the week and not blink. Charles and Morgan are just icing on the cake.

[Brock]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

If players keep clean for two years they leave the program.

So what is the penalty for an ensuing positive test? I'm just asking this question to avoid another pages long argument about whether betting on a probable addict is a good bet.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by Brock

So what is the penalty for an ensuing positive test? I'm just asking this question to avoid another pages long argument about whether betting on a probable addict is a good bet.

1 year

[blueballs]

didn't allen say
he would NOT sign a long term deal with the Chiefs
under any circumstances EVER

[BigChiefFan]

The point is, we a fixed a hole only create another one which was already filled with one of the best players in the league at the position. That's called cutting off your nose to spite your face. While I understand we also did well by attaining additional picks, some act like discarding a genuine premier DE was the greatest move in the history of the NFL. We gave up something that we are now going to have to address with, you guessed it TOP MONEY and an additional PICK in the draft, with only a shot that said player will live up to JAs play. I'm okay with the move, but it seems a bit short-sighted in the grand scheme of things, considering we now have to address the pass-rush, when one side was already sured up. I prefer the team keep the premium players and ADD to them and actually BUILD the team. Blowing up what already is working well, isn't a rebuild, that's a demolition.

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

It amazes me that anyone could bitch about this trade. It might be the single smartest thing Carl Peterson has done in his 19 years in KC.

At WORST, it's a dead-even swap. Filling a hole at arguably the most important offensive position, while creating a hole at DE.

At best, it's an absolute landslide in our favor, as we've filled THREE holes while only creating one.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

For what Jared Allen was asking for in terms of compensation, and accounting for what he actually provides on the field, I'll trade him for a franchise LT straight up every day of the week and not blink. Charles and Morgan are just icing on the cake.

The real problem here is the wrong player got the big payday.
The money should've gone to Allen not Johnson.

Same scenario as Edwards/Warfield. The wrong player got the big contract.

I have been very satisfied with Albert thus far, but we really haven't gained anything by improving the Offensive Line while handicapping the Defensive Line. We just created a problem for the Defensive Line. A problem that will see this defense being the most futile at getting to the QB in league history.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by BigChiefFan

The point is, we a fixed a hole only create another one which was already filled with one of the best players in the league at the position. That's called cutting off your nose to spite your face. While I understand we also did well by attaining additional picks, some act like discarding a genuine premier DE was the greatest move in the history of the NFL. We gave up something that we are now going to have to address with, you guessed it TOP MONEY and an additional PICK in the draft, with only a shot that said player will live up to JAs play. I'm okay with the move, but it seems a bit short-sighted in the grand scheme of things, considering we now have to address the pass-rush, when one side was already sured up. I prefer the team keep the premium players and ADD to them and actually BUILD the team. Blowing up what already is working well, isn't a rebuild, that's a demolition.

Do we really have to go through this again?

1) Allen wanted out. Period. He said he'd never sign a long-term deal in KC.

2) Sorry, but he's not worth $70M. Not even close. He's having an average year playing next to the best DT combo in the league. There's no reason to only have 10 sacks if you're being paid as the best defensive player in the league. None.

3) You can get a DE in just about any round of the draft. People that say we HAVE to replace Allen with a #1 pick are being ridiculous - apparently, they have forgotten that Allen himslef was a FOURTH round pick.

4) We filled a hole at the most important position on the offense for the next decade, and potentially have filled holes at 2 other positions as well, all while saving over $50M in the process.

5) We won 4 games last year while the guy had a CAREER year. He's not exactly the mising link you guys think he is. Would we have more sacks with Allen in the lineup? Sure. Would we be giving up MORE sacks without Albert in the lineup. Absolutely. Would we have more wins as a TEAM with Allen, but without Albert, Morgan and Charles? No ****ing way, IMO.

[CoMoChief]

Originally Posted by Micjones

Thus far it looks to be a push.

We all know the real problem is the fact that they gave money to the wrong player (Larry Johnson).

I love the fact that we drafted backups with the picks we got from Allen.

Pure genious i tell ya.

Thing about it is, McIntosh is a lot better a LT than RT, and could have done a lot better over there this season, then this draft we draft Smith/Oher.

How many games this year could Thigpen won with a good pass rush? How much would it have helped Dorsey? etc

If I know one thing is that you dont EVER trade young good players.

**** the whole DUI shit, there are far more worse things than that.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Dorsey had no bearing on that trade. We would have drafted him regardless, and he wasn't part of the compensation.

Is that so hard to understand?

not necessarily


if we don't have the pick later then i think the Chiefs trade down instead of drafting Dorsey.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by blueballs

didn't allen say
he would NOT sign a long term deal with the Chiefs
under any circumstances EVER

...... because Peterson is a dick


we could of fired Peterson and signed Allen imo

[blueballs]

to be fair Albert wasn't all Allen trade
they used the 5th from Miami for Green
to move up

[Chiefnj2]

Let's trade Albert for a first and two thirds. The Chiefs can get another LT and fill two more holes with one trade.

[blueballs]

Originally Posted by Laz

...... because Peterson is a dick


we could of fired Peterson and signed Allen imo

I don't blame Peterson for not taking a chance on Allen
but the way he handled it was wrong -same with Green