Jason Peters, your opening day starting LT in 2021

[Wisconsin_Chief]

That’s what’s happening. Then he’ll move to RT when Fisher is healthy, and Remmers moves to guard and we win 3 bowls in a row.

The end.

It’s almost getting too easy to predict.

https://www.nbcsports.com/philadelph...ore-season-nfl

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief

Well we’ve got 2 injured veteran tackles in the last year of their deals taking up like $30 million in cap space. We have a veteran right guard coming back making big money who we basically can’t cut due to the backlash it would create no matter how he looks when he returns. We don’t have a lot of short term flexibility unfortunately.

Backlash? WTF? The Chiefs can't cut LDT because of the Dead Cap hit.

Originally Posted by Wisconsin_Chief

I’m sure they’ll bring in some draft picks and they still have high hopes for Niang, but for next year we’re in a very tough spot.

You are ****ing clueless.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Titty Meat

Hes washed

He's a washed up 39 year old man who should not be on the Chiefs "radar".

Good grief.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

He also was protecting for a mentally broken QB who lost his confidence and started holding the ball for long periods of time.

Check this out: It's a really good breakdown that assigns "blame" on sacks. They drop Peters to "responsible" for 5 sacks.

There's also video of all the sack reps, so you can see Peters in action.

I wouldn't want to count on him for a full season by any means, but I can see utility in bringing him in on a cheap, no-risk deal to band-aid LT for the first 4-6 games of the year while either Fisher gets healthy, or Niang or a rookie draft pick gets up to speed to handle.

He's obviously not what he was, but he could be a good cheap option.

King doesn’t understand context and nuance.

All he does is post stats that support his stance and leave it at that.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

He's obviously not what he was, but he could be a good cheap option.

There will be better options than an old, broken 39 year old once Free Agency begins.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

There will be better options than an old, broken 39 year old once Free Agency begins.

Oh, I think there will.

I also think Peters is likely to sign on a deal that's so reasonable/low it doesn't even actually count towards the cap (similar to a lot of those vet deals they signed last summer).

If you watch tape of him from last year, you see a guy who is still massive, still has solid LT-quickness, and still can absolutely stone guys if he gets his hands on them.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Oh, I think there will.

I also think Peters is likely to sign on a deal that's so reasonable/low it doesn't even actually count towards the cap (similar to a lot of those vet deals they signed last summer).

If you watch tape of him from last year, you see a guy who is still massive, still has solid LT-quickness, and still can absolutely stone guys if he gets his hands on them.

Then what happens if Peters is playing well but Fisher is ready to return? Peters hasn't exactly been known as a great lockerroom guy. He got pissed off last year that he had to move from right guard to left tackle, then immediately demanded more money.

He also had toe surgery, which isn't a good sign for a starting tackle, let alone, a guy as old as Peters.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Then what happens if Peters is playing well but Fisher is ready to return? Peters hasn't exactly been known as a great lockerroom guy. He got pissed off last year that he had to move from right guard to left tackle, then immediately demanded more money.

He also had toe surgery, which isn't a good sign for a starting tackle, let alone, a guy as old as Peters.

You tell him:

“Hi. Fisher is back and ready to play LT. We’d like to keep you in the lineup at (position) and also as our top insurance if he or Schwartz go down. Do you still want a ring”

And if he throws a fit, you release him.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

He also was protecting for a mentally broken QB who lost his confidence and started holding the ball for long periods of time.

Check this out: It's a really good breakdown that assigns "blame" on sacks. They drop Peters to "responsible" for 5 sacks.

There's also video of all the sack reps, so you can see Peters in action.

I wouldn't want to count on him for a full season by any means, but I can see utility in bringing him in on a cheap, no-risk deal to band-aid LT for the first 4-6 games of the year while either Fisher gets healthy, or Niang or a rookie draft pick gets up to speed to handle.

He's obviously not what he was, but he could be a good cheap option.

Sure but even if you say some of them are because of Wentz, that's still a shit load of ****ing sacks in half a season. And he's still a 39 year old with major injuries the past few years.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by staylor26

King doesn’t understand context and nuance.

All he does is post stats that support his stance and leave it at that.

So make the context better for me. Is he not a 39 year old oft injured player who allowed a shit load of sacks last year? Can you show me any person who thought he was playing well before being injured and out for the rest of the season?

Is 5 sacks in 8 games like the article Duncan linked really changing the context much?

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by -King-

Sure but even if you say some of them are because of Wentz, that's still a shit load of ****ing sacks in half a season. And he's still a 39 year old with major injuries the past few years.

Did you watch the tape?

There are three real WINS out of those five sacks they credit him with, 1 by Chase Young and 2 by Carl Lawson (who was a top 5-10 pass rusher in the league last year). The one by young, it actually looks like the RB chip helped young move through his spin to beat Peters back inside.

He’s got warts. But he would be a fairly low cost, practically no risk option for addressing an issue.

It’s a band aid that makes sense if you’re confident you 1) get Fisher back around midseason or 2) have a rookie T or Niang lined up to take over but need some seasoning.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

You tell him:

“Hi. Fisher is back and ready to play LT. We’d like to keep you in the lineup at (position) and also as our top insurance if he or Schwartz go down. Do you still want a ring”

And if he throws a fit, you release him.

If he's on the Week 1 roster, his salary is guaranteed for the entire season, so if he doesn't take Vet Minimum (and I assume he won't, given his stance in Philly last year), there's a Dead Cap charge as well.

Again, if they decide to go with a veteran in place of Fisher I think there will be much better options than old man Peters, especially coming off of toe surgery that ended his season in December.

[oldman]

I'm kind of with Dane on this one due to the toe surgery. But out of curiousity, what would the vet minumum be for Peters? Let's get real, we've seen what the duo of Remmers and Wylie did and that wasn't pretty. We have to have a servicable REAL T by opening day. Not a G that knows where the T lines up, a REAL T.

[htismaqe]

Told you guys Kelce wasn't going anywhere.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Kman34

I respect your football takes Pug.. But you’re out of your mind if you think a 39 year old Peters can block this guy or anyone close to him.. Peters will need a concealed weapon to aid him in his endeavor...

How many people can block him one on one? The expectations here are pretty unrealistic.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

How many people can block him one on one? The expectations here are pretty unrealistic.

Yeah. I mean, peak Mitchell Schwartz can probably handle him 1x1. There aren't many T in the league who are going to hold up against him on an island without fail.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

If he's on the Week 1 roster, his salary is guaranteed for the entire season, so if he doesn't take Vet Minimum (and I assume he won't, given his stance in Philly last year), there's a Dead Cap charge as well.

Again, if they decide to go with a veteran in place of Fisher I think there will be much better options than old man Peters, especially coming off of toe surgery that ended his season in December.

Yeah, I'm aware of that. Vet minimum for him would probably be something like 1.1 or 1.2 million, but if he signs for a deal where he isn't one of their top 51 salaries, there's no impact to the cap. If he DOES sign for a deal that puts him in the top 51 you'd be liable for dead money if cutting him... but that's money that's spent and under the cap already at that point.

He signed for 1 year, $3M last year. I can't see him getting that again. It will be less. If it's more than 1.5-2 with incentives that take it higher, I'm 100 percent out.

Originally Posted by oldman

I'm kind of with Dane on this one due to the toe surgery. But out of curiousity, what would the vet minumum be for Peters? Let's get real, we've seen what the duo of Remmers and Wylie did and that wasn't pretty. We have to have a servicable REAL T by opening day. Not a G that knows where the T lines up, a REAL T.

See above. I'm not saying it's THE plan. Just one potential way to approach it that COULD work or make sense.