Chiefs Peter King: Chiefs called all 31 teams about Peters, 28 passed or offered little - Page 3

pugsnotdrugs19 · 02-27-2018, 09:33 AM

Since everything negative on the Chiefs side seems to get its own thread...

The Chiefs called all 31 other teams about Marcus Peters. 28 took a hard pass or offered nothing of value. @SI_PeterKing on why Kansas City moved on from its star cornerback: https://t.co/EAVdfM504G pic.twitter.com/ppLh2tJQlg
— Sports Illustrated (@SInow) February 27, 2018

STORY BELOW

For the Chiefs, Marcus Peters Wasn’t Worth the Trouble—and Only Three Other Teams Had Any Interest

Spoiler!

O.city · 02-27-2018, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

If Veach is stupid enough to send a spam message to all 31 other teams advertising that he's desperate to get rid of Peters, we've got far bigger issues than we'd realized. You gain negotiating power by keeping discussions quiet and not letting the other party know what your situation is.

So take your pick: the Chiefs are telling the truth and are complete idiots when it comes to negotiating trades or the Chiefs are lying to save face about getting a shit return in this deal. It's one or the other.

See, though, I know we feel like it's a shit return.

But it's probably not.

I'm referencing Middlekauf again, but he talked about it on his podcast. The impending contract is what makes it matter.

**The Franchise** · 02-27-2018, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

See, though, I know we feel like it's a shit return.

But it's probably not.

I'm referencing Middlekauf again, but he talked about it on his podcast. The impending contract is what makes it matter.

I can almost guarantee you that some of the teams that we talked to weren't going to give up shit because they figured he was gone after 2 years anyways. Realistically the only teams that we could trade him to was a team on the west coast because they knew that they'd have a chance of keeping him. No one is giving up a 1st round pick for a 2 year rental. Especially a 2 year rental of a known hot head on the field.

O.city · 02-27-2018, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence

I can almost guarantee you that some of the teams that we talked to weren't going to give up shit because they figured he was gone after 2 years anyways. Realistically the only teams that we could trade him to was a team on the west coast because they knew that they'd have a chance of keeping him. No one is giving up a 1st round pick for a 2 year rental. Especially a 2 year rental of a known hot head on the field.

Yeah, its kind of crazy the rams did it too. They've got some big names coming up for deals soon.

Sassy Squatch · 02-27-2018, 10:54 AM

I mean, its not like we rushed into this trade and took a shit offer without turning over all the stones we could. He was on the block for 3+ weeks.

**DaFace** · 02-27-2018, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence

I can almost guarantee you that some of the teams that we talked to weren't going to give up shit because they figured he was gone after 2 years anyways. Realistically the only teams that we could trade him to was a team on the west coast because they knew that they'd have a chance of keeping him. No one is giving up a 1st round pick for a 2 year rental. Especially a 2 year rental of a known hot head on the field.

Is there a source for where this originally came from? I've heard it all over the place, but I've never actually seen any sort of evidence that Peters feels that way. Sure, he loves Oakland, but Shane Ray has a Chiefs logo tattoo, and I don't think he's leaving Denver for KC any time soon.

patteeu · 02-27-2018, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

If Veach is stupid enough to send a spam message to all 31 other teams advertising that he's desperate to get rid of Peters, we've got far bigger issues than we'd realized. You gain negotiating power by keeping discussions quiet and not letting the other party know what your situation is.

So take your pick: the Chiefs are telling the truth and are complete idiots when it comes to negotiating trades or the Chiefs are lying to save face about getting a shit return in this deal. It's one or the other.

Or the Chiefs were going to get rid of Peters one way or the other this off-season and after striking out or finding underwhelming interest among the most likely trading partners they decide to give everyone a call to see if anyone is willing to offer more.

**DaFace** · 02-27-2018, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superturtle

I mean, its not like we rushed into this trade and took acquit offer. He was on the block for 3+ weeks.

That's hard to believe that's the case given that the period for making trades technically hasn't even started yet. How many other trades have you seen that haven't involved the Chiefs?

We had plenty of time before the season begins.

**The Franchise** · 02-27-2018, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

Is there a source for where this originally came from? I've heard it all over the place, but I've never actually seen any sort of evidence that Peters feels that way. Sure, he loves Oakland, but Shane Ray has a Chiefs logo tattoo, and I don't think he's leaving Denver for KC any time soon.

There's no definitive source. But it seems pretty obvious to me.

A new beginning and being closer to family @RamsNFL #CALI #OAKLAND is all we need sometimes. Congrats @marcuspeters #MT #MoneyTeam one of my very own pic.twitter.com/ZFb9RSDaPR
— Donte Williams (@CoachD_UofO) February 24, 2018

O.city · 02-27-2018, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

That's hard to believe that's the case given that the period for making trades technically hasn't even started yet. How many other trades have you seen that haven't involved the Chiefs?

We had plenty of time before the season begins.

I'd imagine most teams want the trades and signings all done before the draft so theres probably quite a few already done we don't know about.

**DaneMcCloud** · 02-27-2018, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The only teams interested were in the nfc in California. Both right next to Oakland.

Since when is Los Angeles "right next to Oakland"?

Messier · 02-27-2018, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superturtle

I have no problem believing that. Probably had a caveat that since you're in our division you're paying us a ridiculous premium, to which the Raiders said "**** off" and hung up. Reid has had no qualms in the past about trading players to division rivals.

Or said. Peters for Mack. Straight up.

Sassy Squatch · 02-27-2018, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

That's hard to believe that's the case given that the period for making trades technically hasn't even started yet. How many other trades have you seen that haven't involved the Chiefs?

We had plenty of time before the season begins.

They wanted him gone now. I agree that its ****ing dumb to broadcast that fact to the league, but it was pretty obvious anyway.

**DaneMcCloud** · 02-27-2018, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

That's hard to believe that's the case given that the period for making trades technically hasn't even started yet. How many other trades have you seen that haven't involved the Chiefs?

We had plenty of time before the season begins.

Teams can negotiate trades for players under contract for 2018 but they can't make them official until March 14th.

chiefzilla1501 · 02-27-2018, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace

Is there a source for where this originally came from? I've heard it all over the place, but I've never actually seen any sort of evidence that Peters feels that way. Sure, he loves Oakland, but Shane Ray has a Chiefs logo tattoo, and I don't think he's leaving Denver for KC any time soon.

I think you put 2 + 2 together that the only 2 teams at the end were California teams. I also think back to mellingers article months ago about peters. I get the sense that peters is actually somewhat of an introvert and that Oakland is the area he connects with and has people he trusts. Sounded like he went back there a lot. It wouldn't surprise me if his heart was set in Oakland. And I think he's a different breed that feels like an outside anywhere else.

**DaneMcCloud** · 02-27-2018, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Superturtle

They wanted him gone now. I agree that its ****ing dumb to broadcast that fact to the league, but it was pretty obvious anyway.

It's an extremely small club of 32 teams. Most of the guys working in the league have worked in the league forever.

All it takes is one person to say "Hey, I just heard that Marcus Peters is available via trade" for every other team to find out.

The players are tight knit as well. Most of these guys have known each other since 6th or 7th grade via camps.

It's a very insular league.

02-27-2018, 09:33 AM
pugsnotdrugs19 SUPER BOWL CHAMPIONS Join Date: Aug 2013 Casino cash: $9089447	Peter King: Chiefs called all 31 teams about Peters, 28 passed or offered little Since everything negative on the Chiefs side seems to get its own thread... The Chiefs called all 31 other teams about Marcus Peters. 28 took a hard pass or offered nothing of value. @SI_PeterKing on why Kansas City moved on from its star cornerback: https://t.co/EAVdfM504G pic.twitter.com/ppLh2tJQlg — Sports Illustrated (@SInow) February 27, 2018 STORY BELOW For the Chiefs, Marcus Peters Wasn’t Worth the Trouble—and Only Three Other Teams Had Any Interest Spoiler! Peter King February 27th, 2018 Day by day, we learn more about the Chiefs-Rams trade that netted Los Angeles a 25-year-old star cornerback, Marcus Peters. On Monday, Ian Rapoport of NFL Network reported the terms of the deal: Kansas City dealt Peters to Los Angeles for a fourth-round pick this year (the 124th overall pick) and a second-round pick next year. The compensation, even for a problem player like Peters, seemed light to me. The Rams won 11 games in 2017, and if they win a similar number next year, they’d likely have a second-round pick in the low 50s. So, let’s say Peters was acquired for the 124th pick in 2018 and 58th pick in 2019. Seems like the Rams got a heck of a deal for a 25-year-old turnover-creating machine who’s been named to two Pro Bowls in his three seasons and was All-Pro in 2016. Now I’ll tell you a few reasons why the compensation was as light as it was: • I’m told the Chiefs called all 31 other teams in the league this month on Peters, looking for a trade partner, and 28 teams either said they were not interested or did not make an offer of any value. For a player with the playing history of Peters at a vital and hard-to-fill position, that’s amazing. One team made an offer of a mid-round pick, laughable for a player of Peters’ age and stature. (My guess is that was Cleveland or Indianapolis.) Two were in it until the end—the Rams and 49ers. And the Rams’ offer of second- and fourth-round picks was evidently better than San Francisco’s. • The fact that a GM who knew Peters very well—Indianapolis’ Chris Ballard—did not pursue Peters hard for the Colts this month was viewed as telling by several other teams in the league. Ballard was the Chiefs’ director of player personnel in 2015, and visited Peters and his parents that spring at their Oakland home, before the draft. He was in favor of the Chiefs picking Peters, which they did in the first round of the 2015 draft, 18th overall. Clearly, Ballard would have a pipeline to the inner feelings of the Chiefs, and when he didn’t engage the Chiefs seriously, one source close to the deal said it was a telling sign. However, there is one counterpoint to this: Because the Colts are in full rebuilding mode, they’re not a great fit right now for a very good player who could be a handful, and who could leave in free agency in two years. • Those around the Chiefs saw there was life after Marcus. The team played one of its best defensive games of the season last year without Peters. He got suspended for a game by the Chiefs for freaking out on the field in a Week 13 loss at the Jets, throwing a penalty flag into the stands and stalking off the field while the game was in play though he had not been ejected. The next week, without Peters, Kansas City held Oakland to 104 total yards and no points through 48 minutes, building up a 26-0 lead. The Chiefs won the game, 26-15. • The fact that the Chiefs were calling every team in the league about Peters let teams know that Kansas City coach Andy Reid and GM Brett Veach were desperate to dump him. • Peters’ behavior had become erratic, apparently, capped by the Week 13 meltdown in the Meadowlands. The Chiefs decided they couldn’t trust his behavior anymore and, despite his playmaking ability, felt whatever they could fetch for him in trade would be better than Peters returning in 2018. • His protests during the national anthem didn’t help—at various points he raised his fist, sat on the bench and stayed in the locker room—but weren’t the driving force behind a trade. • Peters loves football. He practiced hard in Kansas City. But his tendency to lose it was a divisive part of his résumé too, and a big reason why the Chiefs dumped him. So, did the Rams make a bad trade? I don’t think so. The Rams have a defensive coordinator, Wade Phillips, who has handled high-maintenance players, and who puts great cover corners like Peters in position to maximize their ability and earning power. Peters is due $10.7 million over the next two years, very reasonable for a player who at his peak is a shutdown cornerback and one of the best in the league. So even if the Rams don’t keep him after 2019, they’ve (theoretically) paid $10.7 million over two years for a cornerback who should be supremely motivated to be great. It’s the only way he’s going to get paid Revis money. In the end, Peters’ temper and disposition probably cost him a long career in Kansas City. But talent always gets a second chance (and a third, if the talent is as big as Peters’), and the Rams are betting that Sean McVay and Phillips and a more forgiving environment will be a good new start for a very good player.
Posts: 26,384

02-27-2018, 10:54 AM	#34
Sassy Squatch The man you could post like. Join Date: Oct 2010 Casino cash: $1889655	I mean, its not like we rushed into this trade and took a shit offer without turning over all the stones we could. He was on the block for 3+ weeks.
Posts: 38,167