Albert/Joeckel perspective
 

How would you feel if the Chiefs had the #2 overall pick and packaged it and Albert for Joeckel? Because that's what the Chiefs are on the brink of doing.

#1 pick = 3000 points
#54 pick = 360 points

difference is 2640 points

#2 pick is worth 2600 points

Chiefs are going to invest 3000 - 360 = 2640 points to replace Albert with Joeckel. It could be a good deal for the Chiefs if 1) Albert is out of the league in two years, 2) Jockel is a HOFer and 3) the alternatives (like Geno) don't have very good careers.

I would and still feel like SHIT

The point that no one wants to acknowledge. In 5 years max, Albert WILL be out of the league, and Joeckell will be 26. Joeckell, will also get a 5 year rookie deal this year, that will be cheaper than Alberts deal. Albert, has also shown the propensity to be about Albert, and not about the team. If i was going to pay you 12 million dollars a year, if i wanted you to play water boy, you better get your ass out there and make sure there isnt a thirsty player on the field. Albert isnt that. Albert is about Albert. He didnt want to move to guard, he didnt want to move to right tackle. He wants to be Albert. A lot of people wont deal with that, which is why if you look at what the phins have done this offseason, adding mike wallace for one, they dont care about adding ME ME ME ME ME ME players. So its logical that ALbert would intrigue them.

Is there going to be a drop in production? Probably. But, when you factor in the cost of keeping Albert long term, his age, and his attitude, its not really that big of a loss.

Oh good, we give up the equivalent of the #2 overall in the draft and we get "not really that big of a loss".

Those are 3 very big "ifs".

I already knew just from looking at it that this deal was terrible for the Chiefs.

I didn't need the stat guy to mathematically prove it for me. That just makes it sting even more.

I agree with you that I could care less about the age thing.Not that this helps enough, but you also have to factor in who you can get in free agency with the cost savings. It could be the difference of $5M per year.

not necessarily, you arent even factoring the impact that Alex Smith has. Alex Smith, at least for this year, will outplay the 34th pick in the draft. So the value that you gave up, to what you get, will be less. Meaning the Chiefs won.

Dont you think?

Mother of Pearl, PLEASE stop with the outdated ****ing value chart.

The other key is at Quarterback. If Geno is average, it's a so-so pick. If we get a QB in the next 1-2 years who ends up being better than Geno, then the QB part of this equation doesn't even matter.

It's not the path I'd take. But let's be real here. If the Chiefs find a good QB, nobody will really care about Alex Smith or Joeckel or Albert.

Would you rather have:

Albert and ______ or Joeckel and 54?

Put any of top 15 prospects in the blank and tell me this is a good trade.

Okay it's outdated. The early picks are worth even more now since they don't have a heavy salary penalty. We'll factor that in and the trade is even worse.

Depends on who 54 is. If 54 turns into a qb, who then turns around to be better than Geno Smith, then the Chiefs win all the way around.

regardless, you were getting Joeckell no matter what. Albert, or no Albert. THats why they wanted Albert to move to RT in the first place. So your equation is do you want albert, and joeckell, or Joeckell, and 54........

post is spot on

we are paying a premium price to upgrade from "very good" LT to "hope this guy is elite."

it's like paying a website a premium price for chiefs news you already have.

Considering I'm already writing off the Alex Smith years, no I don't think he makes any of this smell better. If he doesn't lift his game significantly above where he has played in the past, I hope he busts so we can move on sooner. The closest thing we've had to more than a stop gap at QB in 40 years is Trent Green. You have no idea what that is like. NO IDEA.

It's not outdated.

How many times should I post the breakdowns from LAST YEARS DRAFT TRADES that show how teams followed the draft value chart really closely.

The only two that didn't were the RG3 and Richardson trades...the rest followed the chart.

When a guy can't work out a new deal with two completely different front offices, him staying is a rather unlikely part of the equation. Thus, the question should actually be this. Would you rather have:

Bowe on the franchise tag, Joeckel, and Albert leaving without us getting a single thing in return

or

Bowe re-signed, Joeckel, and a 2nd round pick for Albert?

Well... all of this assumes that Branden Albert is re-signable, even if we tried. Or that his asking price isn't completely unreasonable.

Let's also not rule out KC perhaps setting the price for Albert, so he can cut his demands.

I'm going to be honest, I won't accept the Joeckel pick unless he's on a HOF level within 2 to 3 years and there's no way around it. Since he's an excellent technician with immaculate footwork for an OT.

What's interesting about your point is that we're beating the shit out of the Chiefs for decisions other teams don't want to make either.

If Geno was a consensus #1, the Chiefs wouldn't be begging to get rid of 1.1. The trade comp for Albert isn't unreasonable. The main reason he hasn't been traded yet is money. If the Dolphins don't want to pay him, that tells you his salary demands are too high. If they do trade for him, it will be interesting to see how reasonable his salary is.

It IS outdated.

JFC.

So, you and ALL of your buddies have SPAMMED this forum with "It's CHEAP to take a QB" because of the new CBA, right?

But, you're going to say that compensation should remain the same?

What the ****?

I don't give a flying **** what Washington gave up for RGIII. Any team that is going to demand the same compensation Pre-2011 CBA as Post 2011 CBA is smoking crack.

ANY salesman worth his salt would say "**** off".

New rules.

If Joeckel ends up being a solid starter and we get a QB in 1-2 years better than Geno Smith, would you care about the Joeckel pick?

I'll take the deal the Dolphins sign Albert to. You have one reriem that was incompetent and another one that seems to have locked on to one player, regardless of whether the sum of the transactions surrounding that player are likely to improve the team during the next 3 years.

Sorry, this post is a cluster****.

What?

No, and how do we know KC will pick a QB since Smith and Daniel are anointed 1st and 2nd string on the depth chart.

I suppose the Chiefs could also come out on top if

1) Joeckel/Fisher are good players. They aren't total busts.
2) Alex Smith unprecedentedly plays leaps better than even his last two seasons in San Francisco
3) The 2nd rounder we get from the Dolphins turns out to be a pretty damn good player

With needs at safety, ILB, TE and WR depth, I'd be surprised if they took a QB this year, unless they absolutely love a guy.

I don't know. I do know that Reid and Dorsey have a history of drafting a lot of QBs, there have been rumors that they like Tyler Wilson, and that neither Smith nor Daniel have long-term deals.

But to the main point... I don't get it. Isn't the only reason people don't want Joeckel because they want Geno? If we end up with a better QB than Geno, than what did we lose?

Let me try again.

1. I'm suspecting that the Dolphins will sign Albert to a reasonable deal. I'd take that deal for the Chiefs.
2. Big Rock argued that Albert was unsignable based on inability of the last two front offices to sign him. My response:

a. Pioli was incompetent
b. Reid/Dorsey seem to be locked in on Joeckel. And willing to create a spot to for him, even if doing so won't make the Cheifs markedly better over the next 3 years.

I don't think these two cases prove that Albert is unsignable.

yep, I could see them go for a QB in the 5th( being very generous) to UDFA

If the Chiefs find a better QB than Geno, and Joeckel isn't a bust, the Chiefs did fine on their pick. I'm not saying that will be easy. But let's stop twisting the argument. People aren't against Joeckel as much as they are against the idea of passing on Geno.

I don't think it's a matter of sign-ability with the Chiefs. It think it's a matter of compatibility.

Albert is absolutely overrated by 99% of this forum.

Time to move on.

I'm not in the Geno or bust group but I want an impact player. (QB,Pass Rusher, WR,CB)

Joeckel will have to be on the same level as Roaf when comes to pure dominance. It's what that draft slot demands.

Albert + Jordan > Joeckel
Albert + Warmack > Joeckel
Albert + Jones > Joeckel
Albert + Milliner > Joeckel

Complete speculation

This x eleventy.

There is no defense for the pissing away of 1.1.

Drafting Luke Joeckel would be markedly worse than the Tyson Jackson pick. Jackson at least filled a legitimate need, not one the FO created through their own dipshittery.

Dane,

The teams followed the chart on the first round trades last year.

Jaguars/Bucs
#5 (1700) for #7(1500) and #101(96)
1700 for 1596

Cowboys/Rams
#6 (1600) for #14(1100) and #45(450)
1600 for 1550

Eagles/Seahawks
#12 (1200) for #15(1050), #114(66), and #172(22)
1200 for 1138

Pats/Bengals
#21 (800) for #27 (680) and #93 (128)
800 for 808

Pats/Broncos
#25 (720) for #31 (600) and #126(46)
720 for 646

Vikings/Ravens
#29 (640) for #35(550) and #98(108)
640 for 658

Bucs/Broncos
#31 (600) and #126(46) and #36(540) and #101(96)
646 for 636

I strongly disagree.

Tyson Jackson was an awful pick for numerous reasons. Two down player, 5 tech, passing on Elite talent (Matthews, Harvin, etc.) and forcing an entire defensive shift. And ***** most certainly created that "hole" through personal amount of dipshittery.

Joeckel/Fisher would fill a need created by the trade of Albert. Let's face it: The promise of Albert's rookie season went unfulfilled his subsequent four seasons.

Haley made him lose weight, which caused him to lose confidence. His 2009 was shaky at best and while he played better in 2010, he wasn't a Pro Bowler, let alone All-Pro.

He's a guy that's slightly above average. He's probably closer to John Tait than John Alt and he's no where near "Elite". At nearly 29 years of age and a new regime, I'm fine with him moving on.

I'm not stating that teams haven't held true to the draft chart: I'm stating that it should be no longer relevant.

Football people are ****ing dumb. It's a network of "friends". Once one of these dumbshits figure out that the value has decreased radically due to the new CBA, they'll all fall in line.

They would fill a need created by the trade of an established player who plays at a high level. A created need.

It's the very definition of one step forward and two steps back.

Would you support trading Jamaal Charles for a 2nd and then using that pick on a back?

That would also fill a created need.

The chart is from Jimmy Johnson era which is Plan B free agency and before the big money rookies, its came full circle where its probably back to being more accurate.

Of course not.

But I don't there's a single person in the league that feels that Brendan Albert equals Jamaal Charles.

Furthermore, Joeckel is at least 8 years younger and $5 million per less than Albert. All things being equal in terms of play, there is a benefit to moving him, not to mention the fact that Albert has stated unequivocally that he will not play any position other than left tackle, regardless of salary.

I don't know about you but if I walked into a new situation and I could move that guy, he's gone.

Right, which makes it even more irrelevant today.

Any team that's willing to pay those outdated rates is foolish.

Although Charles is an unquestionably better player than Albert, their trade value is probably near equal.

That said, Branden Albert is a better LT than the majority of starters who have played in the last five Super Bowls. He's not a problem. If you are renovating a house you don't tear out five year old, perfectly good copper pipes and replace them with new ones, especially if the new pipes won't lead to a demonstrable increase in water pressure or flow.

Furthermore, why wouldn't Albert say he's only going to play LT? It's the most important position on the line and he does it really, really well. Would you move a hitter with a .920 OPS from the 3 hole to the 7 hole? You could, but what purpose would it serve? What is the point of moving Branden Albert to any other position on the line?

He's a problem for a new regime that not only questions his ability but the amount of money he's demanding.

Let's not be naive about his demands: He's wanting to be paid as a Top 3 left tackle, something that he has not demonstrated to date. He's nearly 29 years old, so it's unlikely, given his position and size, that he'll play at a high level for more than three years.

Why pay him nearly $10 million per year for sub-Top 3 play?

This is just more evidence that he's not welcome and not in their long-term plans. Once again, it's time to move on.

Fill in the blank: Albert is the ________ best tackle in the NFL

14

i did because i masturbate to inflicted pain

It helps me understand your perspective WRT: Albert. I get the underlying logic, I just disagree on the ranking, which makes consensus impossible.

It's all good, Dude. Thank you for the conversation!

:toast:

Alex Smith sucks dog shit. He's ****ing awful, there is no other explanation.

I also think he will play past 32, but hey....I don't really know....

I just think if our goal is to collect peaches, we shouldnt trade a peach for an apple then draft a peach to replace it

we should hold on to the peach, and draft another

but thats just me

It's not just Joeckel. It would be Joeckel, a second round pick, and the free agent you can buy with the dollar savings (which is going to be $5-7M per year -- a pretty healthy amount). None of the options besides Geno should excite anyone. Let's be real -- this is just a shitty year to be at the top of the draft.

**** it. Better sign one of them fancy passrushing DEs with the Albert money you're saving.

I bet they sign him to a resonable deal too. But only because Albert has to have realized by now how soft the market is and that he's not getting the sort of money he wanted.

Unfortunately, players in that position rarely go back to their original team to say "You guys were right, I was asking for way too much". Some guys get so butt hurt that they end up taking less money somewhere else than what their original team was offering them.

But that he's looking for big money shouldn't even be up for debate. NFL.com just said in the last few days that Albert was looking for a "monster" contract. That's the strongest terms I've seen it put in yet. Other reports this week said the Chiefs told other teams what kind of money Albert was looking for. How many stayed interested? One. Out of desperation.

There is nothing, up to and including common sense, to suggest that Albert's just looking for a nice reasonable deal and it's everyone else's fault he hasn't gotten it.

At the end of the day, it's all about the dollars.

Get the **** out of here with that shit and go kill yourself with an aids tree.

Yeah, but you can make the best of it instead of making it into a bigger disaster.

Pioli would have let Albert walk, and we would have gotten nothing. Dorsey ALMOST let Albert walk and we would have gotten nothing. (forget the comp pick later cuz it certainly wouldnt have been a 2nd rounder). It has been made clear by two regimes that Albert would not be signed long term either because of his demands, or concerns about his health. The fact that we are getting a 2nd round pick for him should be seen as a HUGE win. I look at it as either way, Albert was gone. Keeping him on the franchise tag for this year doesn't seem to be something the team wants to do. I dont really understand that since its only for one year at 9MM, but if trading him also allows the extra 5MM to sign other players, that's fine.

No one likes what we gave up for Alex Smith, no one. Alex Smith will be a huge upgrade at QB from Cassehole. getting the 2nd round pick for Albert allows us to get a S/ILB to plug another hole. I'm not ready to raise pitchforks and torches until after I see how the draft plays out.

Dorsey's view is probably that we are trading a left tackle and a future pick for a franchise QB while still having a full set of draft picks in 2013. I think everyone would trade Albert for a franchise QB, if that were the case. Problem is the fact that Alex Smith is not a franchise QB so, in reality, you have traded Albert for a backup QB and will promptly waste the number one pick in the draft to replace Albert. So devastatingly disappointing, in particular given the Chiefs history.

This shit is so infuriating. Good LTs can be found in every ****ing year of the draft. We have the 1.1 pick and these ****ing assholes insist on a LT.

Here's your analysis and "impact":

Jokel and Alice: useless bags o' ****.
Posted via Mobile Device

LMAO I see what you did there...
Posted via Mobile Device

Fill in the blank: Joeckel will be the _____-best tackle in the NFL.

I'd go with 10th-15th.

Another fun fill-in-the-blank:

Alex Smith is the ______-best QB in the NFL.

I'd go with 15th/16th.

Sweet! We've used the Nos. 1, 34 picks AND Brandon Albert to acquire the 10th-best tackle, 15th-best QB and pick No. 52 in the NFL draft!

The chart doesn't account for the fact that some years have a high value player like Andrew Luck in them and some don't. This one doesn't. In other words, the chart value of the first overall pick is too high, not too low as cdcox suggested. That's why the Chiefs are reportedly trying to trade down for a pittance.

If you want to [monty python] loooook on the bright si-ide of life [/python], the four offensive linemen selected with the #1 pick in the draft since 1960 were selected to 24 pro bowls so far and named to 15 all-pro teams. To date, 100% of eligible #1 o-linemen are in the Hall of Fame.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L2Wx230gYJw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L2Wx230gYJw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

I don't want to hear about no mutha****in' IFS. All I want to hear from yo ass is, "you ain't got a problem, Jules. Go back in, chill them n****s out, and wait for the GENO, which should be comin' DI-reck-ly."

LMAO

I think they would argue that good QBs can not be found in every ****ing year of the draft, which is why we are where we are.

I think Geno is the real deal, and I'm frustrated that they don't. This regime now has the unenviable circumstance that their fate is not tied to the player they will draft, but the one they do not. Maybe Geno doesn't fit the scheme. Maybe Reid wouldn't be able to coach him right. But if Geno goes somewhere else and blossoms, Reid's fate will have been sealed before he started his first training camp.

Shit, man. I'd way rather have some influence over my destiny, rather than letting my destiny walk out the door and be controlled by rival.

What if they want to use the 2nd rounder we would get to take a tackle because there is someone else at the top of the draft that isn't a tackle that they really like?

You are being kind. Alex is not in the top half of QBs, notwithstanding the arguments about his wonderful QB rating. His own team didn't even want him. Only a couple of other teams were interested. Does that sound like a top half QB? No

I've argued Alex is the 30th best starting QB, There are a couple clearly worse. However, I have mellowed and am willing to say that there might be 6-12 worse. So, he's probably the 20th/21st best starter (giving him extra credit for ascending the past two years). If you go back a couple of years, he was the 32nd best QB.

Joeckel would be lucky to be the 10-15th best LT in his rookie year.

Ironic considering that your current views align with those "Football people"...

I was being conservative in my hate.

I rank them like this:
No doubt (as in, no one would consider trading one of these guys for Smith):
Brady
Manning
Manning
Brees
Rodgers
Kaerpernick
RGIII
Andrew Luck
Ben Roethlisberger
Russell Wilson
Joe Flacco (call him average if you want, but you're wrong. Flacco has done nothing but win and win playoff games from Day 1)

Unlikely: (GM would be looked at as crazy for swapping them)
Matt Ryan
Cam Newton
Matt Stafford

(Check-in, we're now at 15/30 QBs listed)

Similar:
Matt Schaub
Tony Romo
Philip Rivers
Andy Dalton
Sam Bradford

My view? What view? That I don't give a shit? That POV?

Yeah, I don't give a shit that Brendan ****ing Albert, a slightly above average nearly 29 year old tackle for a shitty ****ing football team is being traded for a second round pick.

The ****ing guy was the "anchor" for two 2-14 teams, a 4-12 team, a 7-9 team and a 10-6 team. He's never been under ANY pressure to perform at a high level. He's not playing in New York or Philly or Washington or Dallas or Baltimore. He's played for a shit team and his play has been "okay".

Get the pick and move on. JFC.

Dane has Stockholm Syndrome.

LMAO

Due to too many years as a Chiefs fan.

Yeah, that's exactly what the ****ing dumb football people are saying.

I'd take any of these guys over Smith because each are capable of throwing the ball over 20 yards with accuracy and each of these is capable of mounting a 4th Quarter comeback when behind by more than a touchdown.

IMO Smith needs a lead in the score and an opposing defense that allows him to complete 5 yard passes regularly. Take either away and the game is in real jeopardy.

Look, I understand it. I don't endorse it. I've mentioned that several times.

I'd rather have Albert and Richardson or Austin or Jordan or whomever, rather than trading Albert and drafting his replacement.

But, it's completely out of my control.