Quote:
Originally Posted by Wallcrawler
The main problem trying to trade Jones will be the sane problem the Chiefs encountered the first time.
The rest of the league knows that KC doesn't want to pay Jones what he wants. That's why there were no huge offers for him on his first extension, the league either has a team get Jones for less than he's worth, or they force KC to pay more than what they want to pay and to to hamstring our cap situation.
Make no mistake here, this won't likely be a Tyreek Hill type haul if Jones is traded, unless it's just some team desperate to make a big splash and feel a superstar DT puts them over the top and they're fine to "overpay".
The biggest win for the Chiefs on moving Chris Jones is unfortunately the cap space and the ability to retain our younger players for longer.
I don't realistically see any team trading a first round pick or multiple respectable picks and committing 30m per year to acquire Chris Jones.
Guy's good, but we will be completely fine without him.
|
This is where we disagree. DeForest Buckner got traded for the 13th pick overall a few years back, and although younger, had much less success than CJ95.
Tyreek's trade (at a position that has a larger age premium than DT) I think is a similar trade value that we can look at (maybe even a little higher)
Also, the same concept applied with Tyreek. We were either going to trade or overpay essentially (Just because we as fans didn't know, doesn't mean that other teams didn't, hell his agent was calling around)
I do agree however that with the freed up cap, and what we get in said theoretical trade, that we can make up for Jones' absence.