Joeckel vs. Alberts

[FRCDFED]

I know I probably misspelled his name but I want to get everyones true opinion of Joeckel. We want to sign Alberts but I believe most on here are in agreement that he isn't worth top 5 money. At the moment we don't know his demands.

Ever since Alberts was drafted we have debated on here whether or not he should be playing T or G. Mostly because he was a G in college. Most on here would agree that he is a pretty solid LT just not elite.

With that being said.........how does everyone really feel about potentially having a prototipical LT in Joeckel? Put the whole QB situation aside for a minute and just think of the OL.

If we came out of the draft with Joeckel and potentially Barkley if we traded back up or he fell for some reason then wouldn't that be a great start?

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by O.city

What team pays a guys LT money then moves him to G and drafts another LT?


Of course teams pay LTs big money. But they stay at LT.

I didn't say other teams do that. You said the Chiefs couldn't afford to pay Albert and draft Joeckel. That's incorrect because they'd only be paying one player big LT money. Lots of teams pay one player big LT money. Of course they can afford it.

[O.city]

So let me get this right.

You want to pay Albert LT money, draft Joeckel, then move Albert to guard?

[-King-]

Originally Posted by patteeu

And what?

What the hell does that have to do with anything you've said? Did they draft another LT after re-signing Joe Thomas like you want the Chiefs to do after re-signing Albert?

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by O.city

And IIRC, if you franchise him at LT, he has to play LT otherwise he would be classified as a G.

No.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by patteeu

I didn't say other teams do that. You said the Chiefs couldn't afford to pay Albert and draft Joeckel. That's incorrect because they'd only be paying one player big LT money. Lots of teams pay one player big LT money. Of course they can afford it.

I don't understand what you're even arguing here. Teams pay their best players. Well.. duh. If a team has a top LT, then yes they'll pay him bit LT money. What's your point exactly?

Has any team ever signed a player to a big time contract and then drafted his replacement that same offseason? No.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by patteeu

I didn't say other teams do that. You said the Chiefs couldn't afford to pay Albert and draft Joeckel. That's incorrect because they'd only be paying one player big LT money. Lots of teams pay one player big LT money. Of course they can afford it.

Because you would essentially be paying your RG, LT money. It would make more sense to keep Albert at LT and draft Warmack, who's actually a guard.


Albert isn't a guard. He's a LT.

[-King-]

So now we're paying Albert LT money to play guard. This is just hilarious now.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by O.city

So let me get this right.

You want to pay Albert LT money, draft Joeckel, then move Albert to guard?

This isn't about what I want. This is a hypothetical thread that is about whether or not taking Joeckel would make any sense, leaving the QB situation aside for the purposes of the discussion.

I agree with Boss that it seems kind of nonsensical to let Albert go and then use the 1st on Joeckel. It makes more sense to keep Albert and draft Joeckel. Eventually, Joeckel would end up at LT (assuming he surpasses Albert). That doesn't necessarily have to happen on day one, but if it did, that would be fine too. Play both wherever it makes the most sense to play them.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by -King-

So now we're paying Albert LT money to play guard. This is just hilarious now.

What difference does it make? Are you suggesting that we'd be better off letting Albert go and drafting Joeckel? Now you're back in the situation where you've traded Albert and a 1st overall pick for Joeckel. Brilliant.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by patteeu

No.

When you franchsie someone, you pay them the average of the top 5 players at their position. You would classify Albert as a LT or a G.


If you classify him at LT and play him at G, you are severly over paying for a G. Especially a guy who has never played G in the NFL.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by patteeu

I agree with Boss that it seems kind of nonsensical to let Albert go and then use the 1st on Joeckel. It makes more sense to keep Albert and draft Joeckel. Eventually, Joeckel would end up at LT (assuming he surpasses Albert). That doesn't necessarily have to happen on day one, but if it did, that would be fine too. Play both wherever it makes the most sense to play them.

No it doesn't. Thats why no team in NFL history has ever done it.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by patteeu

What difference does it make? Are you suggesting that we'd be better off letting Albert go and drafting Joeckel? Now you're back in the situation where you've traded Albert and a 1st overall pick for Joeckel. Brilliant.

No, how about you just re-sign Albert and don't draft an LT in the first round.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by patteeu

This isn't about what I want. This is a hypothetical thread that is about whether or not taking Joeckel would make any sense, leaving the QB situation aside for the purposes of the discussion.

I agree with Boss that it seems kind of nonsensical to let Albert go and then use the 1st on Joeckel. It makes more sense to keep Albert and draft Joeckel. Eventually, Joeckel would end up at LT (assuming he surpasses Albert). That doesn't necessarily have to happen on day one, but if it did, that would be fine too. Play both wherever it makes the most sense to play them.

It makes no sense to draft Joeckel if you keep Albert. Then you are drafting for depth at 1, a position where you are supposed to get an immediate impact player.


Again, Albert won't sign to play guard.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by O.city

Because you would essentially be paying your RG, LT money. It would make more sense to keep Albert at LT and draft Warmack, who's actually a guard.


Albert isn't a guard. He's a LT.

Albert can play guard or tackle. It doesn't matter which positions are being paid as long as the total fits within your financial concept.

Keeping Albert at LT and drafting Warmack would be a similar alternative. Between the two options, you'd have to decide whether your team is better with an Albert/Warmack combo or a Joeckel/Albert combo. And the other advantage of taking Joeckel is that you'd have two solid options at LT if your starter gets injured.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by O.city

It makes no sense to draft Joeckel if you keep Albert. Then you are drafting for depth at 1, a position where you are supposed to get an immediate impact player.


Again, Albert won't sign to play guard.

The Chiefs should be trying to sign Albert well before the draft takes place. And no, you wouldn't be drafting for depth. Good lord, this isn't that complicated.