Don't know if I agree with it, but here's an interesting take...
http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt...202135594.html
"Chiefs trade star Marcus Peters as smart AFC West rivals steepen the climb for Denver Broncos. Klee believes the trade helps the Chiefs.
He wrote: "The Chiefs became a more severe long-term threat Friday when they traded star cornerback Marcus Peters to the Rams. On the surface it looks like a blow to Kansas City: Peters is 25 and shows 21 interceptions in three seasons. The Chiefs will be better off in the long run without Marcus Peters. If Peters is that much of an asset, why did K.C.'s defense rank 30th (out of 32) in DVOA and why would a franchise move on from a 20-something All-Pro at a premium position?
"Easy. Peters isn't worth the trouble. As I wrote in August in a column on John Elway and the anthem protests, 'it's a business,' as players like to say.
"When guys hurt the bottom line — and you should've heard some of the fan vitriol aimed at Peters when the Broncos played at Kansas City — teams make a business decision to rid themselves of bad optics, whether you agree with their politics or not. Peters in conservative K.C. was bad for business."