Chiefs Chiefs Sign WR Marquez Valdes-Scantling - Page 37

Dante84 · 03-24-2022, 01:51 PM

More to come

The #Chiefs are signing former #Packers WR Marquez Valdes-Scantling to a three-year, $30 million deal with $18 million in the first two years and incentives to reach a maximum of $36 million, his agents @NSAFootball tell @RapSheet and me. ��
— Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) March 24, 2022

Vid Links below

Spoiler!

RAS Score from college:

Spoiler!

htismaqe · 03-25-2022, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hydrae

I really know nothing about him as I don't follow college ball at all but have we all forgotten that we drafted Powell last year? Where will he slot into the receiver room?

Practice Squad.

TwistedChief · 03-25-2022, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

Yeah but he was also on the field when we couldn't pressure the worst O-line in the NFL. Ingram is ok. I'd like to re-sign him but only as a rotational guy. There's no ****ing reason we should go into the season with him and Clark starting.

LOL. You really are close to getting it.

Wouldn't it be nice if we had some extra draft picks we could package together and then trade up for an elite DE prospect who can solidify the position for years? Wouldn't that be nice?

Oh, no. We don't have those because we kept Hill.

-King- · 03-25-2022, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Clark was going to cost $7M against the cap next year if we cut him now. They increased his dead cap by just over $2M and saved $12M this year.

So it was just 7 extra?

Still the same thing to me. I don't get how you can be willing to restructure a terrible player and give him millions in new money but won't "overpay" a top 2 WR who's still giving you elite production.

Like i said, if you think that Hill is at least 2x better than MVS, then it's a terrible value replacing him with MVS.

And how come nobody was talking about how much cap trouble we were in and how much we had to change over the roster until after this trade was made? No one was talking this rebuild shit until after the trade. Kinda funny.

**dirk digler** · 03-25-2022, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

Ingram is okay? Seriously? Did you see what happened to our defense when he showed up?

Gilmore was a top-20 CB last year according to PFF. I know that has plenty of flaws, but please let me know what you're using to judge him so we can compare notes.

I said Ingram was ok, not that he sucked. He is 32 and has lots of mileage.

I got Gilmore confused with one of the other Pat's players, one of the McCourty brothers.

htismaqe · 03-25-2022, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

So it was just 7 extra?

Still the same thing to me. I don't get how you can be willing to restructure a terrible player and give him millions in new money but won't "overpay" a top 2 WR who's still giving you elite production.

Like i said, if you think that Hill is at least 2x better than MVS, then it's a terrible value replacing him with MVS.

And how come nobody was talking about how much cap trouble we were in and how much we had to change over the roster until after this trade was made? No one was talking this rebuild shit until after the trade. Kinda funny.

They gave him $8M in new money to save $13M this year, at an incremental cost of $2M in dead cap next year.

That wouldn't even make a DENT in Hill's contract.

And FTR, lots of people were saying we needed to do this at some point. We spent the better part of the last 2 months talking about this EXACT situation with Mathieu.

RunKC · 03-25-2022, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

Explain why keeping a $9 cap hit for Frank Clark who won't even be on a team is a good thing but a $20-30 for a top 2 WR who will give you elite production isn't.

They'll be paying MVS and Clark $19mil next year and one of them won't even be here.

The Clark contract was set years ago. You were paying him dead money no matter what. That was determined. Nothing you can do at this point with the contract.

So let’s say you pay Tyreek. You now have Clark’s contract AND Tyreek’s. You have no money and a lot of holes on your team. Have you seen our corner and DL positions? They are bad. So you keep Tyreek and have no real options and only 1 pick in the top 60. That’s how you get worse.

The Chiefs now have 3 top 50 picks in a draft that is strong at DL, WR and corner. Veach can fix those positions with drafting cheap talent just like he did at LB and OL. And by using draft picks he’ll open up cap space to fix other problems.

Losing Tyreek sucks but we have Andy Reid and Patrick Mahomes. We’re not going to suddenly suck on offense. We have tools to make our offense explosive in different ways.

-King- · 03-25-2022, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

LOL. You really are close to getting it.

Wouldn't it be nice if we had some extra draft picks we could package together and then trade up for an elite DE prospect who can solidify the position for years? Wouldn't that be nice?

Oh, no. We don't have those because we kept Hill.

Yeah I'll take having Hill over the piece of shit return we got. Especially when we'll have to use one of those tops picks to get a WR that we hope is as almost as good as hill (hopefully not as good, can't afford to pay that!).

TwistedChief · 03-25-2022, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

And how come nobody was talking about how much cap trouble we were in and how much we had to change over the roster until after this trade was made? No one was talking this rebuild shit until after the trade. Kinda funny.

Because the Chiefs had money slotted to pay to Hill - a lot of money - and then the Adams deal got done and reset the market higher. The Chiefs were already tight even before that in terms of their ability to fill out a competent roster and made the decision to trade him, get younger, and gain flexibility rather than go all-in for this next season when the rest of the AFC contenders have made short-term moves to dramatically improve. Not really funny at all. Just reality.

TwistedChief · 03-25-2022, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

Yeah I'll take having Hill over the piece of shit return we got. Especially when we'll have to use one of those tops picks to get a WR that we hope is as almost as good as hill (hopefully not as good, can't afford to pay that!).

I realize there are a lot of moving pieces here and it's difficult for you to figure out how it all fits together with that shiny object twinkling overhead...

chiefzilla1501 · 03-25-2022, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dlphg9

Would rather have Pringle. Much cheaper and more productive on fewer snaps. Wtf?

Pringles productivity was heavily influenced by having two guys get double teamed and safeties sitting a million yards back. Love the dude but mvs is the right kind of upgrade. We need short term veterans like mvs and the back half of our WRS needs to be guys who legit can compete to be the WR1.

-King- · 03-25-2022, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC

The Clark contract was set years ago. You were paying him dead money no matter what. That was determined. Nothing you can do at this point with the contract.

So let’s say you pay Tyreek. You now have Clark’s contract AND Tyreek’s. You have no money and a lot of holes on your team. Have you seen our corner and DL positions? They are bad. So you keep Tyreek and have no real options and only 1 pick in the top 60. That’s how you get worse.

The Chiefs now have 3 top 50 picks in a draft that is strong at DL, WR and corner. Veach can fix those positions with drafting cheap talent just like he did at LB and OL. And by using draft picks he’ll open up cap space to fix other problems.

Losing Tyreek sucks but we have Andy Reid and Patrick Mahomes. We’re not going to suddenly suck on offense. We have tools to make our offense explosive in different ways.

Why would we have no money after paying him? Wasn't that part of why they structured Mahomes contract they way they did? To keep cap space but also be able to afford to keep our top talent?

And no I don't expect us to suck on offense but I do expect it to be harder. Basically we'll go to being a good to very good offense when we've been a "holy shit they scare the shit out of me" offense before.

staylor26 · 03-25-2022, 11:31 AM

At this rate, they’re going to have to change your name to Queen.

They’ve already paid Tyreek once and were prepared to do it again. Sorry that they have a line they just weren’t willing to cross. You can’t just hand everybody a blank check, especially when we already needed to rebuild a bit.

This just further pushed them into a place they already were. No half measures. Now this team is all-in on a 3-5 year plan. Accept it and move on.

There’s no reason not to be excited about the potential of a new era.

-King- · 03-25-2022, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TwistedChief

I realize there are a lot of moving pieces here and it's difficult for you to figure out how it all fits together with that shiny object twinkling overhead...

I mean, you could try to respond to the point I made.

Hill
Juju
Hardman
2nd round pick or 3rd round pick

MVS
Juju
Hardman
1st round or 1st + another pick WR

I pick the former everytime. And in both scenarios we still have a 1st round pick to improve the DLine

-King- · 03-25-2022, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26

At this rate, they’re going to have to change your name to Queen.

They’ve already paid Tyreek once and were prepared to do it again. Sorry that they have a line they just weren’t willing to cross. You can’t just hand everybody a blank check, especially when we already needed to rebuild a bit.

This just further pushed them into a place they already were. No half measures. Now this team is all-in on a 3-5 year plan. Accept it and move on.

There’s no reason not to be excited about the potential of a new era.

Making a player that is arguably the best WR in football the highest paid WR in football isn't giving someone a blank check.

**The Franchise** · 03-25-2022, 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by -King-

Why would we have no money after paying him? Wasn't that part of why they structured Mahomes contract they way they did? To keep cap space but also be able to afford to keep our top talent?

And no I don't expect us to suck on offense but I do expect it to be harder. Basically we'll go to being a good to very good offense when we've been a "holy shit they scare the shit out of me" offense before.

That "holy shit they scare the shit out of me" offense won us how many titles? One. Why? Because we didn't have a defense in 2018. Because no depth on the offensive line in 2020 and because Mahomes shit himself at the worst possible moment in 2021.

03-24-2022, 01:51 PM
Dante84 Tossed Salad & Scrambled Eggs Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: ATX & OPKS Casino cash: $-1938004 VARSITY	Chiefs Sign WR Marquez Valdes-Scantling More to come The #Chiefs are signing former #Packers WR Marquez Valdes-Scantling to a three-year, $30 million deal with $18 million in the first two years and incentives to reach a maximum of $36 million, his agents @NSAFootball tell @RapSheet and me. �� — Tom Pelissero (@TomPelissero) March 24, 2022 Vid Links below Spoiler! RAS Score from college: Spoiler!
Posts: 20,447

03-25-2022, 11:31 AM	#552
staylor26 In Search of a Life Join Date: Oct 2007 Casino cash: $-1990960	At this rate, they’re going to have to change your name to Queen. They’ve already paid Tyreek once and were prepared to do it again. Sorry that they have a line they just weren’t willing to cross. You can’t just hand everybody a blank check, especially when we already needed to rebuild a bit. This just further pushed them into a place they already were. No half measures. Now this team is all-in on a 3-5 year plan. Accept it and move on. There’s no reason not to be excited about the potential of a new era.
Posts: 52,889	1 0