Marcus Peters traded to Rams

[Sure-Oz]

https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/sta...97064676052993
@AdamSchefter: Chiefs are expected to trade CB Marcus Peters to the Los Angeles Rams, sources tell ESPN. Teams are in final stages of talks and barring an unexpected snag, the trade is expected to be agreed to as early as today.

@AdamSchefter: Rams and Chiefs are in final stages of talks and barring an unexpected snag, the trade is expected to be agreed to as early as today.

@AdamSchefter: Marcus Peters to LA Rams trade is now officially agreed to, per source; cannot be processed until March 14. But Peters expected to be a Ram.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

And you know this how?

The League Year doesn't open until March 14, 2018.

While teams can discuss trades, those trades cannot be officially announced by the involved franchises until the New League Year opens.

Because all the details of the Alex Smith trade are known whether its on the team web sight or not and Chiefs front office personnel have commented on the trade and wished Alex well publicly.

Smith has commented on it and Fuller has commented on it. No its not "official" yet but doesn't change we all know it and its been announced as fact.

[TwistedChief]

To the armchair GMs arguing we shouldn't have traded him... a hypothetical situation for you (that after reading everything actually mirrors what I think the actual narrative is):

Peters comes to you after the season and says "pay me or trade me." He wants to be a 15-20mm/yr guy and wants it now. You think, "You're on a contract. We have the leverage." Peters responds that he'll sit out the entire season. And given his nature, you see this as a genuine threat. One might respond, "No way he'll walk away from the 2mm-ish he's set to earn this year." But from Peters's perspective, one season lost of 2mm in exchange for the potential of getting 15-20mm a year or two earlier than otherwise is still probably positive expected value on his part. Then you consider that the fan base is so polarized over this guy that it will be an epic PR disaster and overall team distraction if this guy sits out for a prolonged period of time, perhaps the entire season. Peters thus has a lot more leverage than initially anticipated and he knows it.

So your options are sign Peters to a long-term deal or trade him. Note: the status quo of doing nothing is not an option. There's little question his body of work on the field may well warrant 15-20mm/yr. But given all of the other character issues associated with him, do you really feel good handing out this contract to him now? As he puts a gun to your head?

If the above happened, my vote is to trade him. It's not crystal clear, but that's the way I'd play it.

[NJChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19

Most people are still looking at this deal as if we are just trading away Marcus Peters the player.

Most people? You think most people don't know we were trading away the character, not the talent? Who thinks the chiefs traded him because of his skill?

[Sassy Squatch]

Originally Posted by saphojunkie

Yeah, it was that easy.

Was there even a single problem after he got sat against the Raiders? Coming out of that he kept his nose down, didn't take any plays off, and didn't draw any negative attention to himself. Yes, I believe that hitting Peters in the checkbook might've just been enough to at least alter the course of events that led to this.

[Molitoth]

Did I read somewhere in this thread that it's Dorsey's fault for drafting Peters in the first place? LOL

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath15

I would think the league wasn't terribly pleased with how the Alex Smith deal went down, (Fuller finding out via Twitter) and has asked both teams to zip it up.

As I stated earlier, teams aren't allowed to officially announce trades until March 14th.

I'm pretty sure the NFL was pissed that the Chiefs leaked the details of the Smith trade to Terez and warned them not to do the same in this instance.

A loss of draft picks would be devastating and basically negate the trade.

[pugsnotdrugs19]

For those who missed my story about talking to a former U of Washington football operations guy two years ago about Marcus Peters, here you go:

Spoiler!

I’m going to tell a story now that I’ve never said on CP in an attempt to get my point across.

During the summer of 2016, just following Marcus Peters’ rookie year, I was at a place where several Mizzou football coaches and higher ups were at one night. One of these higher ups, not a coach, had worked for the University of Washington for years prior. I knew this. All of the sudden, with him sitting feet away, I wanted to ask him. “What the **** happened with Peters?”

At the time we had all just saw his rookie season, and he seemingly had no attitude issues. Here’s what the guy tells me: said shit was completely out of control. Said that they had absolutely no choice but to move on. That he was seriously causing issues and drama within the locker room, and consistently having battles with coaches. The individual made it clear, he was one hell of a football player, but that it was an absolute MUST that they separate Peters from the program.

What does that sound like to you? Peters is at a place for 3 seasons, and gets kicked out elsewhere. Familiar?

I hate the fact that we are losing one of the best corners in football. But I also recognize that if there weren’t some serious ****ing problems going on here, he’d never have been traded.

[ILChief]

If this is because he wasn't going to re-sign, then just keep him for another two years and let him walk and get the third round compensatory pick.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Marcellus

Because all the details of the Alex Smith trade are known whether its on the team web sight or not and Chiefs front office personnel have commented on the trade and wished Alex well publicly.

Smith has commented on it and Fuller has commented on it. No its not "official" yet but doesn't change we all know it and its been announced as fact.

Where have Chiefs officials "wished" Smith well?

[doomy3]

Originally Posted by NJChiefsFan

Most people? You think most people don't know we were trading away the character, not the talent? Who thinks the chiefs traded him because of his skill?

Hell man, there are people thinking we should get Aaron Donald for him. Or multiple firsts. If we were just talking about the player, then that’s probably feasible. But when 31 teams don’t want him because he’s a ****ing basket case, people need to be more realistic. Knowing and accepting are two very different things.

[Marcellus]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

As I stated earlier, teams aren't allowed to officially announce trades until March 14th.

I'm pretty sure the NFL was pissed that the Chiefs leaked the details of the Smith trade to Terez and warned them not to do the same in this instance.

A loss of draft picks would be devastating and basically negate the trade.

OK thats possible.

[BossChief]

The league warning KC to not leak info is interesting. Especially after the way the reporting was botched on the Alex Smith trade.

A haul of picks became one pick became a pick and Fuller then not Fuller then the final compensation was reported.

Makes me think Veach agreed to trade with Washington and agreed to different scenarios and at that point info was leaked and that leak could have done damage to player GM relationships if a different scenario was finalized.

If they say it involves a player and then don’t end up agreeing on a new deal and it reverts to just picks, maybe that player never wants to sign with that team and irreparable harm has been done.

I know it’s a long shot, but I do think Aaron Donald is one of the options in this.

1) a package of picks for Peters
2) Peters and a pick for Donald
3) Joyner and a pick for Peters.

[carlos3652]

Has anyone though that maybe the other 29 teams were not interested because there was a minimum amount of asking price that was dangled.

Maybe only 2 teams wanted to deal a first for him.

I have a hard time that 29 teams would have passed on him if the starting price was a 3rd and a couple other mid rounders, even if you were just buying for a 2 year rental that guaranteed a 3rd round draft pick if he walked.

IF he was dealt for mid rounders, his reputation of a cancer will procede him unless he cleans it up.

I do not know if this was a good or bad move for the Chiefs. I hate they got rid of a great player, but maybe, just maybe you give Veach (who has done a great job so far) the benefit of the doubt.

[Mother****erJones]

KC is really going to wait to leak this compensation until day one of free agency aren’t they?

[Molitoth]

Originally Posted by NJChiefsFan

Most people? You think most people don't know we were trading away the character, not the talent? Who thinks the chiefs traded him because of his skill?

There are a few on the site who would try and justify that CB tackling skills and standing for the anthem is more important than ball hawking.
Nothing on the internet surprises me.