Albert to sign tender but still not close on long term deal

[Mr. Laz]

CHIEFS
Branden Albert to sign one-year contract with Chiefs
March 18
BY ADAM TEICHER
The Kansas City Star

Left tackle Branden Albert told the Chiefs on Monday he planned to sign their one-year contract offer worth about $9.83 million. Once he signs the deal, Albert will be bound to join the Chiefs for their mandatory mini-camp in June and then for the start of training camp in July.

Beyond that, his situation with the Chiefs remained unclear. The Chiefs and Albert could still negotiate a contract that would keep Albert in Kansas City for a longer term, though Albert recently told the Kansas City Star the sides were not close to an agreement on a multi-year contract before Albert was designated as the franchise player two weeks ago.

General manager John Dorsey expressed a preference for having the player at a prominent position like left tackle under contract for the long term.

“That would make a lot of sense regardless of who it is,” said Dorsey, who wouldn’t confirm that Albert had informed the team of his plans to sign the one-year contract. “You’d like to have some stability at that position.”

Even if the Chiefs and Albert don’t agree on terms of a long-term contract and he plays the season under his one-year deal, the Chiefs would still face some uncertainty about the future of a most important position.

For that reason, the possibility of selecting a left tackle like Luke Joeckel of Texas A&M or Eric Fisher of Central Michigan with the first pick in the draft would seem to be still in play.

If the Chiefs draft either Joeckel or Fisher with their first pick, Albert could be asked to switch positions. The Chiefs have a vacancy at right tackle after releasing last year’s starter, Eric Winston.

Albert, who played guard in college at Virginia, recently said he wouldn’t change positions to accommodate another player.

“I’ll be playing left tackle,” he said.

By signing the one-year deal, Albert would also open the possibility the Chiefs could trade him. A player cannot be traded unless he has a contract for the upcoming season.

The Chiefs were obligated to make the one-year contract offer worth almost $10 million to Albert when they designated him as their franchise player. By using the franchise designation on Albert, the Chiefs were able to effectively keep him off the free-agent market.

Albert, a first-round draft pick of the Chiefs in 2008, has developed into one of the league’s better left tackles.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by jd1020

The thought of not trading Albert and drafting a RT makes me puke.

Likewise. But I can also acknowledge that having an offensive line with that much quality is a game changer.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by jd1020

The thought of not trading Albert and drafting a RT makes me puke.

Seriously, a team with Albert + Fisher/Joeckel is going to be better than a team with only Fisher/Joeckel, and that's the bottom line for me. If you let Albert walk to save money (while giving your stinking punter money that could be going to a T) that is the worst use of 1.1 I can think of. To me if you let Albert walk you missed on an opportunity to improve your team just to justify drafting a player that you fell in love with. At least with Albert + Fisher/Joeckel the team got better.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

Thought Hudson just broke his leg
Posted via Mobile Device

Looks like you were right.

I thought it was one of those nasty combo deals where the kneecap broke and a bunch of shit snapped in the process.

Looks like I'm just conflating reports; early reports said knee injury, later reports said broken leg.

I still don't think we should count on him for much, though. I was never terribly impressed by him at C.

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Seriously, a team with Albert + Fisher/Joeckel is going to be better than a team with only Fisher/Joeckel, and that's the bottom line for me. If you let Albert walk to save money (while giving your stinking punter money that could be going to a T) that is the worst use of 1.1 I can think of. To me if you let Albert walk you missed on an opportunity to improve your team just to justify drafting a player that you fell in love with. At least with Albert + Fisher/Joeckel the team got better.

Albert is going to be here for 1 year.

The Chiefs and Albert seem to be as far apart as Bowe and *****.

If you trade Albert you are getting more picks to do something to better the team for the future. If you don't trade him you lose him next year and then you move your RT to LT and you're back to square 1.

Guess I forgot the Chiefs were putting all their eggs in the 2013 basket with Alex Smith and a RT at 1.1.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Seriously, a team with Albert + Fisher/Joeckel is going to be better than a team with only Fisher/Joeckel, and that's the bottom line for me. If you let Albert walk to save money (while giving your stinking punter money that could be going to a T) that is the worst use of 1.1 I can think of. To me if you let Albert walk you missed on an opportunity to improve your team just to justify drafting a player that you fell in love with. At least with Albert + Fisher/Joeckel the team got better.

But at this point they're not letting Albert walk; which I think everyone will agree would've just been monumentally stupid.

But let's say you're Andy Reid and you realize that Brandon Albert is driving a damn hard bargain. You see the writing on the wall that says you're probably not going to get him to sign long-term. You also know you have a 2-14 team that probably isn't going to truly contend this year.

So you take Fisher in preparation for the fact that Albert isn't eager to stick around without at least testing the market. Then, rather than watch Albert walk in 2014, you deal him for a 2nd rounder that actually has the ability to become a legitimate asset.

I'm not saying this is anywhere near my ideal scenario, but isn't it at least a defensible one?

EDIT: What JD said...slightly less snarkily. There's a long-term justification for that series of events. Even though the trade-down and LTC from Albert is still easily my preferred outcome.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by jd1020

Albert is going to be here for 1 year.

The Chiefs and Albert seem to be as far apart as Bowe and *****.

If you trade Albert you are getting more picks to do something to better the team for the future. If you don't trade him you lose him next year and then you move your RT to LT and you're back to square 1.

Guess I forgot the Chiefs were putting all their eggs in the 2013 basket with Alex Smith and a RT at 1.1.

Albert is worth more than a typical 2nd. Trading Albert for a 2nd probably doesn't make your team better.

[mcaj22]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Albert is worth more t han a typical 2nd. Trading Albert for a 2nd probably doesn't make your team better.

so you think Albert is worth a 1st round pick?

on what market? Madden?

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Albert is worth more than a typical 2nd. Trading Albert for a 2nd probably doesn't make your team better.

"Probably"

I'll take probably over a guaranteed not to.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

But at this point they're not letting Albert walk; which I think everyone will agree would've just been monumentally stupid.

But let's say you're Andy Reid and you realize that Brandon Albert is driving a damn hard bargain. You see the writing on the wall that says you're probably not going to get him to sign long-term. You also know you have a 2-14 team that probably isn't going to truly contend this year.

So you take Fisher in preparation for the fact that Albert isn't eager to stick around without at least testing the market. Then, rather than watch Albert walk in 2014, you deal him for a 2nd rounder that actually has the ability to become a legitimate asset.

I'm not saying this is anywhere near my ideal scenario, but isn't it at least a defensible one?

EDIT: What JD said...slightly less snarkily. There's a long-term justification for that series of events. Even though the trade-down and LTC from Albert is still easily my preferred outcome.

Albert isn't going to get a better from Miam or anyone else than Long did. You probably aren't going to work out a trade for Albert unless he agrees to a reasonable contract with someone. He's indicated an eagerness to stay in KC. Unless his stated desire to stay in KC is a lie, he won't go anywhere unless Reid/Dorsey just don't want him around. A second for Albert isn't enough value to me, especially if it is to justify drafting a player they fell in love with. I'll forgive if the tackle they draft ends up a HOFer and plays 12+ years for the Chiefs.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Albert is worth more than a typical 2nd. Trading Albert for a 2nd probably doesn't make your team better.

Trading 1 year of virtually anyone on a 2-14 team with a 10/11 win ceiling probably makes the team better long-term.

As much better as trading down for an extra 1st and 2nd would and getting Albert to agree long-term? Nope, but you have to have contingencies for when things don't go according to your plan.

[Hammock Parties]

The elephant in the room is maybe Reid has hated Albert's tape this whole time and doesn't think he fits what he wants to do.

So if that's true...shrug...get something for him.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by cdcox

Albert isn't going to get a better offer than Long did with Miami or anyone else. You probably aren't going to work out a trade for Albert unless he agrees to a reasonable contract with someone. He's indicated an eagerness to stay in KC. Unless his stated desire to stay in KC is a lie, he won't go anywhere unless Reid/Dorsey just don't want him around. A second for Albert isn't enough value to me, especially if it is to justify drafting a player they fell in love with. I'll forgive if the tackle they draft ends up a HOFer and plays 12+ years for the Chiefs.

I agree, but I also don't think Albert's not been offered a fair deal.

If Albert's refusing to sign long-term despite Long setting the market, he's being unreasonable and is going to want to hit the market. When a premier FA hits the market, 90% of the time he's gone. I don't have any interest in losing Albert as a FA.

I don't think Joeckel or Fisher is "a player they fell in love with"; it's not like they're sending small armies to work them out. Rather, both of these guys are simply solid solutions to potential problems.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Go to Hell

The elephant in the room is maybe Reid has hated Albert's tape this whole time and doesn't think he fits what he wants to do.

So if that's true...shrug...get something for him.

I heard a description of a basketball player that immediately made me think of Albert:

"A perfect trainwreck"

That's exactly Albert. Nothing about that guy's technique makes sense. He's a quirky, fundamentally unsound goofball of a blocker...that by God gets things done.

I could absolutely see a crusty old ball coach hating that kind of player. Because if you can't understand why his approach works, you can't coach up a solution if it stops working.

Yeah, it's possible that Reid just does not know what to make of what he sees in Brandon Albert - could any of us really blame him?

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by mcaj22

so you think Albert is worth a 1st round pick?

on what market? Madden?

If you list the key contributors on the Chiefs, Albert is on that list. So are a bunch of other 1st round picks. Flowers, Charles, and Houston are the only key contributors that aren't first round picks. Odds are pretty long of getting a better player than Albert with a 2nd round pick.

[Hammock Parties]

This all could have been avoided if Scott Pioli has just done his ****ing job a year ago.

He is still ****ing this franchise from the grave.