Quote:
Originally Posted by RunKC
DeCosta just said they are optimistic about keeping Ronnie Stanley.
The LT FA class and draft class is not good folks. Neither is this FA class in general.
And I think Veach’s thought process is that there isn’t anyone outside of Trey that they want to spend huge money on, as well as not making this OL even worse next year.
I’m not on the same page but I understand the logic behind it
|
That's reactive roster building. "Playing scared" so to speak.
It's an awful, awful plan.
"Well it might be hard to find a better solution at LT so lets just bring back a similar OL but make it a LOT more expensive..."
That cannot be the plan.
Because frankly, Smith in a vacuum wasn't worth the salary he'll command. He just wasn't that good this year. A top 15 guard, almost certainly. He MIGHT be one of the 20-25 best pass-blocking OGs in football.
And we couldn't run the ball for shit with him, so I'm not sure he moves the needle as much as we insist he does in the running game.
Set aside any cap considerations for a moment and just look at the player and the cost -- it's simply a bad decision. You don't pay top of the market money for a 2nd tier position and a guy who's -- generously -- top 10 there but with clear holes in his game (that happen to align really poorly with what we want to do).
The Chiefs shouldn't bring him back.
And the area where this team has gotten itself in the most trouble is with its own guys. Mostly they've been veterans they refuse to cut bait on (Sorensen, Watkins, Clark) but this would be similar. They cannot let inertia win here. If Trey Smith were a free agent from the Vikings looking for this contract, there's simply no way we'd give it to him.
And there's ZERO chance anyone here would support doing so or "see the logic in it".
This is a really bad decision.
I don't trust the reporting for that reason. That or it is little more than a PR play to lessen the sting if/when he leaves.