I feel like I'm the only one not very high on Ya-Sin. Seems like he's at his best when he's got his arms on the wr and I don't think that bodes well for the current climate of the NFL. He's always going to be a liability against those quick nimble receivers. I'd rather have Bunting.

That's fine if you have other guys that can matchup. You just give him the big guy as most teams seem to field some huge dude now days.

Yeah but his name is Rock Ya-Sin.

I mean, that alone is reason enough to draft him.

All the mediocre QBs in this class should be taken early with so much need around the league which should allow better players to fall.

On top of that the Raiders have 3 1st round picks and will likely reach on all 3.

Concur.

This guy looks like Justin Houston before his knee injury. He’s a complete player.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">2016 Frank Clark highlights:<br>- Elite explosiveness/twitch<br>- Effective up &amp; down LOS<br>- Non-stop motor<br>- PHYSICAL<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Seahawks?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Seahawks</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/TheRealFrankC_?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@TheRealFrankC_</a> <a href="https://t.co/1A2iVqhMEO">pic.twitter.com/1A2iVqhMEO</a></p>&mdash; Brandon Thorn (@BrandonThornNFL) <a href="https://twitter.com/BrandonThornNFL/status/879750915883843584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 27, 2017</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

If I'm not mistaken, I believe the Colts' "locker room culture" is asking the players to sit quietly while Luck tells them, "It is what it is."

FAX

Well if we're going for names Hamp Cheevers stock is going to start rising lmao

That's what I thought, he kind of looks like a cross between Ford and Houston with Houston's size and power and Ford's speed.

Hell, I'm with you. A bad ass name is all you need.

I can't explain why some people have brains that don't work very well. Maybe they were struck in the head as a child, I don't know.

I do know that the smart play by the Chiefs is to let Tyreek's situation play itself out and do nothing to disturb that process. Meanwhile, are the Chiefs supposed to hold their water on any/all other personnel moves? I think not.

Tea leaf readers are going to conclude whatever stories their limited imaginations construct. Unfortunately, it doesn't prevent them from posting in public like manic, gypsy fortune tellers on amphetamines.

FAX

Why'd we let Dee Liner go?

We just lost a guy named Dee Ford and replaced him with someone who has the same name as my accountant, Frank Clark. We really have some work to do getting our name mojo back.

I dont like making a big post and it being at the very end of a page lol.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">One thing I&#39;ve heard --- the Seahawks aren&#39;t sure Clark would have even taken the deal from them he got from the Chiefs. He seemed ready to play on the tag, not reporting or signing it until September. That wasn&#39;t really an ideal situation.</p>&mdash; Bob Condotta (@bcondotta) <a href="https://twitter.com/bcondotta/status/1120863098368188416?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

He wanted to play with Pat and Tyrann :D

I'm just going to bring up only one more point in a non-angry way, then I promise I'll shut my mouth on this for good. Excluding, of course, the tiny chance that Clark ends up struggling in KC for whatever reason *knocks on wood*

It's a bit unfair to say, "Chiefs fans just want to hoard draft picks and salary cap space but never spend it." That's largely not true. I think some fans occasionally get sticker shock (the Sammy Watkins deal comes to mind, but to be honest that contract gave most NFL GMs sticker shock, much less Chiefs fans). Hitchens was a big deal. Honey Badger was a big deal. Berry, Houston extensions were also huge. I never heard complaints about those contracts other than from the occasional Tuckdaddy or other weirdo naysayer.

Moreover, the big issue is this situation is entirely different from anything we've come across as Chiefs fans, and it DOES warrant at the very least a conversation about the merits of going "all-in" at this stage, regardless of whether the trade compensation or the contract is fair or not.

We're about to wrestle with some rough cap numbers over the next decade+ in about 2 years. 17%+ of the cap will be spent on one player. And it absolutely should be that way. We've never had to witness our team struggle with that. We know Veach has a plan, apparently, but any way you slice it, it's going to come down to cutting corners as much as possible through drafting well and being mostly conservative in free agency.

I don't think it's wrong or unhealthy to be concerned about what's going to happen when that extension arrives. We still have pieces that need to be added to this defense in order to get it to be respectable, and we basically gave Hill's extension to Clark. That's fine and all, but that now takes away a significant option to this team. It's unreasonable to expect us to churn out the scoring like we did last year without Hill. That means we need a defense better than 20-25. We'll probably need a top 10-15 unit.

Can we draft, develop, and cobble together those pieces when the Mahomes day of reckoning occurs? Are we going to be able to keep Honey Badger, Jones, and Clark around, and do we have enough draft stock to continue to build up the defense and make it better?

I guess in the end, I'm not reticent to hand out contracts or trade away draft picks. I just question whether this particular deal for what we had to give up actually puts us in a better position as a team, both in the short and long term.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pR5lorilRcI" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Again, not looking at those moves individually. Just showing the trend of overpaying. Again, being too aggressive is better than not trying at all or making dumb moves. It's OK to approve of the moves we are making without spinning stories about how we're shrewd negotiators.

I had to go way deep into the wayback machine to think about the last time we got a legit blue chip free agent from another team without executing a mega trade. I guess honey Badger is on the borderline. But since going back to the Hugh Douglas days it just seems like we can't land a big fish without a pick heavy trade.

I'm okay with this move now, the more I look at it, with him, Jones, Nnandi and (Fill in the Blank) our DLine is secured for many years once Jones gets signed. We'll have this same dance with Oline next year or the year after.

If ya'all haven't looked at THIS video....you should. If he's pretty consistently the guy in this video, the deal was worth it.


If ya'all haven't looked at THIS video....you should. If he's pretty consistently the guy in this video, the deal was worth it.

To be fair that tackle should've been made by his two teammates like REALLY should've. Also, you can't just come in late, which Clark would've been, on a QB while two of your teammates have him wrapped up (theoretically).

But keep cherry picking

I'm with you. I'm happy as hell to have Clark. But using the Watkins example... That contract looked like it was designed to get him off the books as quick as possible. Easy to cut at any time. The goal is to use the draft or find an underpriced free agent who you feel comfortable replacing Watkins. We've got a lot of these guys. Breeland, Okafor, ogbah, even honey Badger is only a three year deal. People keep looking at the #29 pick as if he needs to be a superstar. If you land even a serviceable WR2 we stay dominant on offense while freeing up $20m in 2020 to invest in other players. I'm a little fine with overpaying. But somehow we got into this business of thinking draft picks are worthless, let alone first rounders. With Mahomes' contract coming due draft picks are more important than ever.

You might be right, Mr. Fax, and I think the beautiful and fiesty Mrs. Eleazar would probably agree with you. She however carries no brief for Kareem Hunt, and upon his release for the latest iteration of Mr. Hunt not being able to control his temper, replied that he should be sent back to kindergarten until he learns that we don't hit others.

He’s good friends with Mathieu but Clark said he just wanted to be somewhere where he felt wanted

Okay after 114 pages, I have come around a bit. I'm going to admit some things...

-I am too attached to the draft. The #29 pick is not as valuable as my evening Thursday with beers and friends watching the draft makes me think it is.

-I had already decided in my head a first was too much and hearing "first and a second" made my brain short circuit. In actuality when you look at the draft slot numbers it is only a slight overpay.

-I hear "domestic violence" and think oh shit not this again but I had not heard about his upbringing and story and it is not quite what I thought it was.

-I see those contract numbers and got triggered about overpaying but it appears this contract is manageable and doesn't prevent the Chiefs from signing any other current players.

-I clearly had not seen enough Clark film. I thought he was "good" and the Chiefs think he is "DMVP candidate good" and there is a wide chasm between those two.

-This guy is a monster. He reminds me more of Khalil Mack than anybody else.

I have come around on this pick. Imagine the Chiefs taking a center at 29 or taking a guy with the skills to be a defensive MVP candidate.

It's a good thing I'm not the GM.

You make a key point there with your second to last bullet. If the team thinks he's the second best pass rusher in the NFL, which is what some reports said motivated them here, then a slight overpay is nothing.

Are we going to be upset about some special teamer that we could have gotten with the extra draft value when Clark makes a critical sack on third down? Or every time he puts an opponent in a 2nd and long situation by being able to play the run? If we get off the freaking field in the AFC Championship game this year when a team is running down our throats because they know we can't do anything about it?

People forget that the team was on pace for some time last year to give up the most yards any team has ever given up. EVER.

It's ok to pay a premium to fix that. Really.

The Chiefs might just see the situation as an "opportunity" to get Hill cheaper.

Veach is saying **** you to the haters! We are all in this year. Super bowl or bust. Clark is so much better then Ford and actually compares very well to Khalil Mack except for the tackles for loss. This is a damn good trade! Veach gets my stamp of approval!!

Sounds like some major damage control on their end, and I'm not really sure why they're doing it.

I'm watching the full Broncos/Seahawks 2018 game. Most of the time, Clark is singled up on either Bolles or Heuerman and isn't getting anywhere. He got one sack on a well-designed stunt.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">One player teams view as being available: <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Eagles?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Eagles</a> WR Nelson Agholor. A versatile weapon, he carries a $9.4M fully guaranteed price tag and is a potential to be traded if Philly drafts a receiver.</p>&mdash; Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) <a href="https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/1121096684803514368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 24, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

dude, you're acting like since we signed Clark we don't get to draft anyone in the next two years.

The truth is, if you want to take advantage of this Mahomes on his rookie contract window, no picks from #29 or the second round are going to play at a level that Frank Clark has already demonstrated in 2019 or 2020. They're just not. you're not going to get Derrick Thomas at #29.

It's not like we just went nuts in Vegas either; we jettisoned old contracts that were bloated and huge with Berry and Houston and considering what we would've had to pay Ford, we're still ahead money-wise.

And check this- so if we'd kept Ford, we'd have paid what, $17.5 million? So we're literally talking about...like $3 million. That's like...Eric Murray.

Who ****ing cares? AND we still have two #2's, a HIGHER #3, a #5, two #6's and a #7 as well as a full complement of picks next year.

We didn't mortgage anything. We're still ahead of where we were cap-wise in January, we got younger, stronger, and more aggressive. We got HEALTHIER, which was a major problem previously.


We wanted a re-build on defense, and Veach and Reid have done it in a head-spinningly quick fashion. I for one am pretty ****ing impressed.

Neat.

Great post

If you make a trade in fantasy and after it goes through the other guy in the trade posts it on the league board with glee you're going to be like oh damn did I just lose someone who is more valuable than I thought?

I also feel this way after I discard a Queen of spades and someone snatches it up while cackling maniacally.

It's what he do

We still have 3 picks in the top 85 dude. That’s what they are for.

I get the future being stable, but please understand one tiny little detail:

IT HAS BEEN 50 YEARS SINCE THIS FRANCHISE HAS BEEN IN THE SUPER BOWL. WE HAVE NEVER WON THE TROPHY WITH OUR FOUNDERS NAME ON IT.

WE HAVE A 2 YEAR WINDOW WITH A QB ON A LOW SALARY. I AM GLAD WE AREN’T PISSING THAT OPPORTUNITY AWAY BY BEING PASSIVE.

If this was the Chiefs of 2010 we’d be calling up AJ Hawk to see if he wants to play again.

Being mediocre isn’t a thing anymore. We have balls now!!!!

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Via the draft network <br><br>61. Rock Ya-Sin CB Temple<br>63. Kelvin Harmon WR NC Stare<br>84. Trysten Hill DT UCF<br>167. Foster Moreau TE LSU<br>201. Dexter Williams RB Notre Damr<br>214. T.J Edwards LB Wisconsin <br>216. Tyrell Dodson LB Texas A&amp;M</p>&mdash; Ian Brennan (@Brennan316) <a href="https://twitter.com/Brennan316/status/1121100530540011520?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 24, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

:clap:

And every QB we play against is going to have them dragged across their faces.

Clark is exactly the kind of player we need at this time.

The old Chiefs would be kicking the tires on Clay Matthews and let Eric Berry coach the defensive backs from the sidelines. Also we believe in Chad Henne!

DAMON HUARD IS A FRANCHISE QB

Do you realize that you're putting for 'evidence' that contradicts itself and your point every time you post?

So we didn't overpay for Thomas, but we always overpay?

We should've gotten more for Peters, except nobody would pay it?

We should've gotten something for Houston! Except everyone knew we would release him, so they just waited for that. Because you know, you can just bluff people when they know what cards you're holding.

OMG we overpaid huge for Clark! Except, nah, not really. We're paying him a few million a year more than Ford. And he's twice the player.

YOU have decided, in your mind, on a narrative that you believe. You are now presenting any and all evidence as proof of that narrative, whether it fits or not.

You're not being logical at all. You're just reacting on an emotional level.

I've reviewed the game tape; (watched YouTube highlights), and I've come to the conclusion that this dude is a beast.

I think you're acting like I hate everything about what we're doing. Again, I am glad as hell we made the trade and have been very complimentary of our offseason to date. But let's not diminish the value of draft picks so we can put positive spin to what we gave up. We got a great player but we paid a very heavy price for it. We'll notice those picks missing in 2-3 years when we're losing players left to right and have shit on the bench to replace them. But again... I'm not saying this to say we made a bad trade. Just that we gave up a lottttt.

Todd McShay says Veach believes that he can get a good CB or safety in the second round but wouldn’t find a Frank Clark at 29

He must have ordered one of those 6-foot subs for the draft party and it's too late to cancel :p

You do realize there's a sweet spot between undercompensation and overcompensation, right? It's one thing if it feels just a touch off. But on each of those deals I mentioned Cp felt we were WAY off market value. It's amazing that we're all suddenly praising these past deals. Several of those deals were very controversial here. Again, if the market asks for $100, does it make you a great negotiator because you pay $500?

You've no idea what market value was.

This would be a real solid list of talent, and addresses almost every need (no Ol ?).

I’m gonna be honest. I don’t see a need for OL. We got Wylie and McKenzie and backups. And Jimmy Murray. Maybe a undrafted OL. But don’t see a need for O line

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Frank Clark&#39;s new 5-year contract with KC is in. Some details:<br><br>*Clark has a workout bonus of $195k this year &amp; $500k from 2020-2023<br>*Clark has a sack incentive of $300k of 11.5+ sacks from 2019 to 2023<br>*Clark is due a 2020 roster bonus of $7 million if he&#39;s on the roster Apr. 5.</p>&mdash; Terez A. Paylor (@TerezPaylor) <a href="https://twitter.com/TerezPaylor/status/1121106442537328641?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 24, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Clark&#39;s deal is worth $104 million over 5 years. <br><br>He has base salaries of $805k in 2019, $24m in 2020, $18.5m in 2021, $19m in 2022 and $20.5m in 2023</p>&mdash; Terez A. Paylor (@TerezPaylor) <a href="https://twitter.com/TerezPaylor/status/1121106845853212678?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 24, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Chiefs also have a 1st, SF's 2nd (in the top 10-15), and 3rd next year. It's not like Clark cost them an entire draft.

They also have UDFAs...whom would probably like a chance to play with Mahomes.

Dee Ford got $33 million guaranteed/$17 per/$85 million...the #28 pick is $10 million guaranteed, the #60-ish 2nd is $4 million. So essentially Clark cost $16 million more (guaranteed) than keeping everything as is...and $3-4 million more a year than Ford.

If you add it up per year...with the traded draft picks salary it comes out to almost even. Clark just has more long-term insurance.

Well worth for a guy that will change the culture on that side of the ball.

No, here's what I realize.

YOU can think whatever the hell you want about what compensation is ENOUGH and what is TOO MUCH.

But you're not privy to the conversations between teams GM's so you don't know. AT ALL. You have no idea. You don't know what the market is for individual players . So you're saying "OH THAT'S TOO MUCH" when you don't know what the market was.

So you are completely speculating a bunch of bullshit and putting that forward as some sort of truth when it isn't.

And so if we DID NOT pay what the Ravens would for Thomas, but we OVERPAID in your opinion for Clark, how can both of those outcomes equal the same story in your mind? They conflict. Either Veach is a cheap-ass and won't pay for talent, or he's a feckless idiot who overpays. Which is it?

The truth is, you have no idea. You have no idea who was bidding and what the price was for anyone or anything.

No. But we know that the comp was very high by nfl standards. And I showed our history of negotiating not so great deals. Not hard to guess we gave up too much and everyone outside the cp bubble seems to agree.

you're playing a team with a shit qb you dont want to sell out on the pass so stay put stop the run and keenum is not beating you

You've no idea what the market value was for any of these, therefore, you can't "show" or "guess" anything.

Have you ever negotiated for anything bigger than a Toyota? How about something that someone else wanted, maybe as much as you?

You might go a little higher than you originally wanted to, because you want THIS ONE.

But someone else wants it too, and they'll go THIS HIGH.

But you'll go a little further, because THIS ONE IS THE ONE YOU WANT.

And then you win the negotiation, and you get what you wanted.

And some armchair jack-ass on the internet can squeal about how you suck at negotiations.

I don't care if the gave Frank 300 million if he comes in here and wins us a SuperBowl.

Do you want a Championship or Cap space you can save for the next year of missing the playoffs?

A) He never stayed put. He was pushing upfield every time. He tried the stunt two more times and got nothing.

B) He did nothing in the run game except miss a tackle on Freeman.

C) Keenum did beat him.

Most of all, I was surprised by how many plays he wasn't even on the field. Entire drives would go by without #55.

Lol yea it’s bc he sucks :rolleyes:

In doing so we got one of the best your 4-3 DEs in the game and the 23 year old league MVP. Would you trade that for a couple extra picks?

You do realize that this happens with every team, right?

Elite players typically do not sit out multiple drives. I'm watching the Seahawks/Chiefs game now, and he's playing a lot more, sitting out only sporadically. He's also playing a lot better.

Cp sure has a revisionist history of how wonderful all these deals we've made the past two years have been.

It's not an either or. Again, if the market asks for $100 and we lost out by bidding $75, that doesn't mean we need to jump to $500. I'm glad we're going aggressive on the bid to get our guy. But my lord do we have homer goggles on if we think we're getting market price on a lot of our deals the past 2 years. And my lord are we devaluing a first round pick in order to put positive spin on the deal. No, I don't know the market value of the deal. What we know is it's one of the biggest comps given for a player in the last decade and that veach has a negotiating track record that many prior to yesterday felt was a little spotty. So yeah, I'm guessing we paid too much.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Chiefs kept with the low 1st year salary cap number &amp; ballooning one in the 2nd year with Frank Clark. His 2019 cap number is $4.8M. It&#39;s $28.3M in 2020, which screams restructure for cap purposes to me.</p>&mdash; Joel Corry (@corryjoel) <a href="https://twitter.com/corryjoel/status/1121112655987503104?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Is he complaining about giving up firsts for Mahomes? Teams would give 5+ first round picks for him at 23 years old. All he cost was a late additional 1st/3rd...steal of the decade.

Picks and numbered order is arbitrary...Fournette was the 4th overall pick. All it does is give you an OPPORTUNITY to cheaply get a player you hope is good in a few years. Chiefs just got a DE that they KNOW is good...and will produce from game one.

KC is in a legitimate SB window and has a new defensive scheme... after 50 years, i dont care how they get there.

And that's fine. I'm not anti Clark trade. Definitely don't care about his cap number. But let's not spin it like we gave up a "meaningless" first and second round pick. We got a great player but it comes at a huge price.

OR, maybe you don't understand what you're talking about. MAYBE, if we look at the Watkins deal, for example, the year per money looks like it's a big overpay, but because of how it's structured you can get out of it earlier so it's not quite what it looks like. MAYBE you had to go higher on the total deal money BECAUSE it's not all guaranteed money, and the deal is pretty shrewd if you look at it in terms of long term cap health. Could that be? Or is it more likely that YOU are smarter than the guy they hired to be GM?

And MAYBE you're focused on OMG FIRST ROUND PICK! when it's really a #29 which is essentially a high second in terms of available talent and historically speaking you have like a 35% chance of that pick being a "successful" NFL player, so taking a very good PROVEN NFL player isn't such a bad idea when you have a 2/3 year window on Mahomes' rookie contract and we were six inches from a Super Bowl?

If you don't see that these deals are structured much, MUCH better than, say, Eric Berry's deal was, or Justin Houston's deal, then you are not educated enough to have this discussion.

No, absolutely not. I just used it to show that we've sacrificed a lot of picks the past two years. But for context... Trading up especially to get a qb is very common. Trading a first rounder straight up for a veteran is much more uncommon and the outcomes have been a little spotty.

I didn't say these deals were worse than Berrys or Houstons. I just said on the negotiating end we haven't gotten great deals. Right moves, but gave up too much to do many of them or gotten way too little in return. It's possible to like the strategy but see flaws in some of the execution. Cp is revising history if all of a sudden we think we've been doing a great job the past two years getting market value out of deals. I'm not the only one, except that in our excitement we're misremembering.

That's fine. I'd rather be worse at negotiating if the strategy is right and we still get the player. But let's not fart roses about it.

He's a dominant-type player at a premium position that is a known NFL quantity and is 25 years old. There is no such thing at #29 in the draft. He should have, at a minimum, 4 years of peak performance barring injury. And guess what? We can get out of the deal by then.

We cleared cap space to be able to make moves like this. The window to be able to do things like this is NOW. In three or four years, we'll have to be thriftier. If you want to win a SB in 2019 and 2020, we needed NFL proven talent, and that costs money.

You've just decided on a narrative, and are casting about to try to fit evidence to that rather than looking at evidence and forming an opinion.

so whats the reason to have the small cap hit this year?

More signings is my guess. If they can carry over some of the cap from this year to cover that massive hit next year that would be nice too.

too little in return? See this is what I'm talking about. You're assuming there was more to be had in the Peters, Ford, or Houston moves. The reality is that there just wasn't. It takes two to negotiate. You're assuming because YOU valued those players highly that the rest of the league did too. The reality is otherwise. But you're emotionally invested in it; they're not.
We got a 2 and a 4 for Peters. If we decided that return was 'not enough' we'd have kept him another year and he walks for a 3.

We got what we could for Ford. You really think anyone else didn't see the flaws we did? You're assuming YOU know what the market is. You don't.

Houston-everyone knew we weren't paying him #22 million. What leverage do you have to negotiate? None. Everyone knew they could just wait and sign him after he was cut. But somehow we should've gotten more!

Berry-nobody's taking that shitshow on. somehow though, DAMIT VEACH!

I've already outlined how Watkins deal looks huge but isn't really what it looks like. Structure and planning is everything.

Your assumption is that YOU know what the market should be. You have no idea what conversations and negotiations are going on between NFL GM's.

We traded the opportunity to acquire essentially one second round talent player this year, and one essentially third round talent player next year to get what is certainly an excellent proven player right now. (oh, and we got an extra 8 slots in this year's third round, too. ) While we're in Mahomes' rookie window. You think that's too much? You're wrong. There were other teams interested. It's what we had to give. Somehow you think there were better deals, but you have no knowledge of any such thing. You're judging shit you have no basis for judging.

I'm done talking to you. It's like arguing with a wall.

Im fine with making an aggressive move. I don't care about the cap charge. I just believe we spent too much and we seem to only get players we want by paying too much. That's better than not trying at all. But let's call it for what it is.

There are a lot of people on cp who were very critical of moves we made the past few years because we paid too much or didn't get enough in return. And now we're suddenly spinning those same deals positively to justify a very comp loaded trade. So who's making the narrative here? Not saying you as I know you've liked a lot of moves we've made. It's just weird to me that I'm being attacked by people who are all of a sudden spinning veach into some kind of consistently great dealmaker.