This is the correct take. Trading a player because he's young and doesn't jive with your "mild, genteel Chiefs"- program is utter bullshit. If you want a locker room full of hypocrisy clothed in "character", attend a ****ing FCA meeting and leave the professional talent the **** alone.

If you're trading Peters you must really, really hate having him in the locker room. There's no other reason to do it.

I just see this as a huge mistake. He’s still under control for two years before the franchise tag ability. I’ll trust Andy and Veach on this because now that we have Mahomes, I’m not tied to players like I used to be. But they better get a ton of value.

I mean theoretically KC could trade Peters and sign Trumaine Johnson. That’s robbing peter to pay Paul but we’ll see what happens. It’s heating up for sure. Not thrilled but I’ll trust the evaluators right now.

I don't see how we would possibly get full value back for him. In 2 years won't we have plenty of cap room? I really don't like this idea at all. I guess I don't know the true locker room impact but I don't perceive it as an issue. Seemed like he said and did the right things after his suspension.

This reads like offseason clickbait, but I'm in the school that anyone is available for the right price.

If they don't intend to sign Peters to a massive deal while they are still going to be paying Houston's massive deal and Berry's massive deal, then they would be right to flip him for picks now.

It would take a 1st round + to get the conversation started. Probably worth 2 first rounders depending on the picks. I'm ok with trading peters though. Like the player but dislike the person.

The team still controls him for 2 seasons considering the 5th year option. He's a top 5 CB when he wants to be. One of the best playmakers to have played the position.

Malcolm Butler was said to be worth a late 1st rounder last offseason.

For that reason alone, Peters had better fetch much more or it’s not worth it.

If Clark Hunt has no intention of signing Peters to a long term deal, they're going to take what they can get.

If he does get traded, my guess is that it’s Clark’s decision. And I hate that. Because if Clark is the reason they get rid of him, it likely means it’s purely about business and politics. **** that. This guy is a game changer unlike any defender in football right now.

You can't have your cake and eat it too in this case. You want to win? You draft and/or sign winners. Going the opposite direction is futile.
Frankly, I think we're all getting worked up about nothing. As Staylor has said, until we hear something from someone local and trusted, this is off season traffic-generation.

I’m waiting to hear from someone actually reliable. Ben Albright who is plunged in said no chance last night. Now things can change.

If Peters is traded, it’s to SF. He gets back to the Bay Area and in the NFC

Yes, so why trade Peters over anything to do with business and/or politics? If the order comes from Clark, you can be sure that is the major reason why.

I'm tellin' ya man, Clark Hunt will have a problem paying $18 million for Marcus Peters.

I can totally see it. I just think it’s a big mistake if you aren’t getting his true value in return.

Even if we were able to get a couple of other defensive starters in the draft through a trade, the odds that either impact games like Peters is quite slim.

Odds are he will mature more as the years pass, and he’s a major spark for our team. Wouldn’t get rid of that guy just yet.