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.

[O.city]

Yeah, cause those Qb's would have progressed exactly the same in a different situation.


Hell, Sanchez has had more success than Stafford.

[Sorter]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Yeah, and having Sanchez instead of Cassel would have made all the difference in KC, and they'd now be polishing off their second Lombardi in the past 4 years.

There's no way to know.


It's pure speculation to state how Sanchez would have done here, just as it is with projecting how any player would do in any other system.

There are these crazy little things called variables.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

No, you don't know that at all.

Wait, what?

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by Brock

For sure. We might have gone 2-14 last year if we had done that.

Good point. Tyson Jackson instead of Mark Sanchez is the reason the Chiefs went 2-14.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by O.city

Yeah, cause those Qb's would have progressed exactly the same in a different situation.


Hell, Sanchez has had more success than Stafford.

I would consider 40 TD's and 5,000 passing yards as more success than anything Sanchez has done.

And Stafford plays for ****ing Detroit. Detroit for God sakes.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by Ponderception

There's no way to know.


It's pure speculation to state how Sanchez would have done here, just as it is with projecting how any player would do in any other system.

There are these crazy little things called variables.

It would actually be worst case.


Suppose Sanchez is just good enough for Pioli to keep his job.

[keg in kc]

Did somebody seriously just try to contend that things would have been worse with Sanchez than with Jackson? How myopic can a fanbase be? I mean, hell, I've been consistently harder on Sanchez than pretty much everyone here since '09. I think he's a complete bust, thought at the time was overdrafted by nearly a full round and was never in favor of the idea that he was even first round talent. He still would have been a better selection than Tyson Jackson. Taking a 5-tech at 3 makes about as much sense as taking a LT at 1. Meaning none. You can get those guys in the mid rounds. You can't draft a quarterback there. Yes, there have been some flukes, but saying you can shouldn't draft a QB high because of Russel Wilson is like saying you shouldn't draft one at all and just scour grocery checkouts for Kurt Warner.

[Sorter]

Originally Posted by Hog Farmer

Several analysts have stated that Alex Smith is better than any of the draft picks AT THIS TIME.

Probably true.

However, given the correct circumstance, it wouldn't surprise me to see Geno, Barkley, Nassib, or Manuel out perform Alex (on base stats) this year.

[ct]

Originally Posted by Hog Farmer

Several analysts have stated that Alex Smith is better than any of the draft picks AT THIS TIME.

Same impression I get as well. Which is why I'm not ready to flush the season and the entire regime as well until we see whom we ARE going to draft at QB to groom LONG TERM. I personally do not believe alex smith is the long term plan. I sure hope not...

[Sorter]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

No, you don't know that at all.

Really? Having a historically bad QB doesn't make his trade the worst selection?

[O.city]

Originally Posted by RunKC

I would consider 40 TD's and 5,000 passing yards as more success than anything Sanchez has done.

And Stafford plays for ****ing Detroit. Detroit for God sakes.

So now it's about stats, not playoff wins. Yet when Alex Smith is brought up, it's all about wins. You yourself blab about how Smith was one game from a SB.

IIRC, Sanchez did it 2?


Which is it?


Stafford also has the best WR in football, throws the ball a TON.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by O.city

So now it's about stats, not playoff wins. Yet when Alex Smith is brought up, it's all about wins. You yourself blab about how Smith was one game from a SB.

IIRC, Sanchez did it 2?


Which is it?


Stafford also has the best WR in football, throws the ball a TON.

Thats a good question to ask yourself as well.

[Sorter]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Did somebody seriously just try to contend that things would have been worse with Sanchez than with Jackson? How myopic can a fanbase be? I mean, hell, I've been consistently harder on Sanchez than pretty much everyone here since '09. I think he's a complete bust, thought at the time was overdrafted by nearly a full round and was never in favor of the idea that he was even first round talent. He still would have been a better selection than Tyson Jackson. Taking a 5-tech at 3 makes about as much sense as taking a LT at 1. Meaning none. You can get those guys in the mid rounds. You can't draft a quarterback there. Yes, there have been some flukes, but saying you can shouldn't draft a QB high because of Russel Wilson is like saying you shouldn't draft one at all and just scour grocery checkouts for Kurt Warner.

Drafting a 3/4/5tech who can't rush the passer in the first round is the worse decision any team could possibly make IMO.

[nychief]

this is ****ing dumb conversation.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

It would actually be worst case.


Suppose Sanchez is just good enough for ***** to keep his job.

Or he could have actually been good. Who the hell knows.


But what we do know, for sure, is that nearly every move made in 09, was the wrong move.