Dolphins working on a trade for offensive tackle Branden Albert

[ShowtimeSBMVP]

Branden Albert trade won’t happen unless he lowers his price
Posted by Michael David Smith on April 21, 2013, 6:46 PM EDT
Branden Albert AP

The much-discussed potential trade of Branden Albert from the Chiefs to the Dolphins doesn’t appear likely at the price Albert is currently seeking.

Although the Chiefs and Dolphins can probably agree on compensation — the Dolphins sending a second-round pick to Kansas City — the hangup is that Albert wants the kind of money that the Dolphins aren’t willing to spend. Specifically, according to Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports, Albert wants between $8 million and $9 million a year on a long-term deal.

In other words, Albert is looking for the same kind of contract that left tackle Jake Long got from the Rams — the very contract the Dolphins wouldn’t give Long, which is why he left Miami for St. Louis.

If the Dolphins weren’t willing to pay Long that kind of money, it’s hard to see why they’d be willing to give up a second-round draft pick for the privilege of paying Albert that kind of money. So the Dolphins may need to look elsewhere for a left tackle. And Albert may have to settle for playing this season for the Chiefs, making $9.8 million, and hitting free agency next year.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

The QB position is considered down. You're essentially advocating pissing away the pick, unless you're sure that almost everyone is wrong about the QBs.

That's risk without thought.

If your 'upside' is a lateral move at less cost in Joeckel, I'll take my chances on the QB.

[philfree]

Originally Posted by Rausch

EVEN IF YOU DO YOU'RE STILL JUST TREADING WATER.

What's the upside?

We go from 1 sack allowed to 0?....

It's more than a numbers game. We don't know how many times our
qb paniced because he didn't feel like his backside was covered. We don't know how many times we ran a draw play because we didn't trust Albert or the O line as a unit to protect the QB. There's alot from our vantage point that we don't know. Also I would think that if Albert fit perfectly in Reids offense Reid wouldn't be trying to move on from him. There's just alot more to this then PFF stats recorded by some fan sitting on his sofa.

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by philfree

It's more than a numbers game. We don't know how many times our
qb paniced because he didn't feel like his backside was covered. We don't know how many times we ran a draw play because we didn't trust Albert or the O line as a unit to protect the QB. There's alot from our vantage point that we don't know. Also I would think that if Albert fit perfectly in Reids offense Reid wouldn't be trying to move on from him. There's just alot more to this then PFF stats recorded by some fan sitting on his sofa.

You're right. We probably ran a lot of draw plays because Albert wasn't doing his job and not because our QBs sucked complete ass at throwing a football.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by jd1020

You're right. We probably ran a lot of draw plays because Albert wasn't doing his job and not because our QBs sucked complete ass at throwing a football.

It's like people don't even ****ing watch the games.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

If your 'upside' is a lateral move at less cost in Joeckel, I'll take my chances on the QB.

You're arguing 'upside' as if it's there and tangible. It's not. This isn't about upside. It's about making the best of a draft that's weak and volatile at the top. If this was the 2012 draft, the Chiefs would take Andrew Luck and worry about the LT position later. It's not, though. It's the 2013 draft, and the consensus seems to be that there's no QB worth taking at #1, nevermind a generational prospect like Luck.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by Guru

I've already had a some friends that I introduced CP to that are complaining about the unreadability of the site because of all the hate crap. I told them it is just because it is the offseason but these last few days have been pretty damned bad here.

I hate to hear that but then I don't.

There are soooOOOOO many n00bs that just sign on to flame, or sign on to hold a mult acct., or just can't flat out take being challenged.

This isn't the ****ing play room in kindercare.

I've been here for over a DECADE and when I'm wrong people pile on me. I'm a feisty old prick but wrong is still wrong and always will be wrong.

And it should be. It's how this place stays an accurate source for info and demands as much from those that post.

I don't ever want this place to be open for all and free to the n00bs to run amok....

**** that.

Grab a spear.

Man up and grab a ****ing spear or get the **** out...

[philfree]

Originally Posted by Rausch

I don't think he will.

That's part of the bet. His egg is shaken.

With his history I'm not convinced he'll play all 16 games so to me that would be a bad bet for me. 25 for 16 games or 1.6 TDs per game?

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by philfree

With his history I'm not convinced he'll play all 16 games so to me that would be a bad bet for me. 25 for 16 games or 1.6 TDs per game?

He'll never throw 25 TD's.

End of story.

Deep down we both know it's not happening...

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

You're arguing 'upside' as if it's there and tangible. It's not. This isn't about upside. It's about making the best of a draft that's weak and volatile at the top. If this was the 2012 draft, the Chiefs would take Andrew Luck and worry about the LT position later. It's not, though. It's the 2013 draft, and the consensus seems to be that there's no QB worth taking at #1, nevermind a generational prospect like Luck.

So asking our GM to do his job well when it's not easy is asking too much?

If the whole !@#$ing draft class sucks, then you're right. Unless Brandon Albert gets traded for a 2nd and proceeds to outperform them all.

Because he's going to dump a known quantity that's a damn good player to make room for the guy he's about to draft. As such, that guy had better be really !@#$ing good to justify dumping Albert.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

The QB position is considered down. You're essentially advocating pissing away the pick, unless you're sure that almost everyone is wrong about the QBs.

That's risk without thought.

It's about the individual prospects, not the group of players.

A QB should be graded on what he COULD do in the NFL and the likelihood that he'll achieve it.

If that chance is even reasonable, a QB (especially in an overall top-weak class like this) simply has to be the pick. That's a case where a team CAN'T afford to not take a risk.

ESPECIALLY if they're a historically QB-starved team like KC with a historically brilliant QB coach in Andy Reid.

[philfree]

Originally Posted by jd1020

You're right. We probably ran a lot of draw plays because Albert wasn't doing his job and not because our QBs sucked complete ass at throwing a football.

The point is that there's more variables then PFF stats. And there's been many a time since 2008 were we chose to go conservative on 3rd down because we couldn't block the defense.

[philfree]

Originally Posted by SNR

It's about the individual prospects, not the group of players.

A QB should be graded on what he COULD do in the NFL and the likelihood that he'll achieve it.

If that chance is even reasonable, a QB (especially in an overall top-weak class like this) simply has to be the pick. That's a case where a team CAN'T afford to not take a risk.

ESPECIALLY if they're a historically QB-starved team like KC with a historically brilliant QB coach in Andy Reid.

So if Reid doesn't think Geno is the guy is he still brilliant?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by philfree

The point is that there's more variables then PFF stats. And there's been many a time since 2008 were we chose to go conservative on 3rd down because we couldn't block the defense.

I disagree.

We've been conservative on 3rd downs because our quarterback has sucked dicks for the last 1/2 decade.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by Saul Good

So Miami is suddenly going to trade for a player whom they have tried, and failed, to sign to an extension?

That's the puzzling part.

You know what would make for qn exciting draft day 1?

The Chiefs reach a long term agreement with Albert on a contract extension and draft Gwno Smith.

As for the expectation discussion on if we draft Joeckel...

He absolutely MUST be a clear, day one upgrade to Albert and be an all pro quality player in the early part of his career...say year two.

FFS shouldn't we be allowed to have reasonable expectations on how the highest pick we have ever had us used without the ardent supporters clowning peoPle for having expectations?

We were 2-14...I'm not interested in lateral moves that save 4 milliOn on the cap...I'm interested in A player that can help us win a championship a d is a massive upgrade over and existing player we already have.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

You're arguing 'upside' as if it's there and tangible. It's not. This isn't about upside. It's about making the best of a draft that's weak and volatile at the top.

And how do you do that?

You select a player that's going to IMPROVE your team if he hits.

If Joeckel/Fisher plays at around the current ability of Albert, we haven't improved. And we're also down the 1st overall pick in a draft, which this team hasn't had since the AFL still existed.