Could the Kansas City Chiefs go back to the trade market to find their left tackle of the future? One ESPN insider is watching a particular player closely if that’s the case.
ESPN’s Dan Graziano recently helped compile some last-minute free agency and trade buzz with the NFL’s legal tampering period kicking off at noon tomorrow. He mentioned that Houston Texans LT Laremy Tunsil could be a trade target for Kansas City if they’re unable to get a long-term deal done with Orlando Brown Jr. ahead of Monday.
Check it out:
Originally Posted by :
“One potential trade target I’m watching is Houston left tackle Laremy Tunsil. The Texans have resisted trading him in recent years, but he has just one year and a nonguaranteed $18.5 million left on his contract and could be a target of the Chiefs if they aren’t able to bring back Orlando Brown Jr.”
What would need to happen for a trade to materialize?
First, Houston would need to decide that they did not want to pay Tunsil a long-term contract extension. That would be a bold move considering they’re expected to draft a rookie quarterback and nothing is better for a rookie quarterback than an established left tackle.
Second, the two sides would have to agree on trade compensation. Would the Chiefs really be willing to potentially give up a first-round draft pick in 2023 (and potentially more) for Tunsil when they’re hosting the draft in Kansas City?
Next up, the Chiefs and Tunsil’s representation would need to first agree to a contract extension that would lower his 2023 salary cap hit. Right now, his cap hit would put the team over the cap.
Finally, Kansas City must view Tunsil as their “long-term solution” at left tackle. Will they envision him as such when he’ll be 29 years old in Week 1 of 2023? There is certainly nothing wrong with his ability — in three of the past four seasons, he’s been among PFF’s highest-graded pass-blocking offensive tackles. They should have no problem paying for that production, but would it be for more than one contract? It’s hard to say. When you draft a rookie in the first round, you get five years of control (fifth-year option), plus a likely sixth year of control through the franchise tag. Then you have the potential of re-signing that player to a long-term deal afterward.
There are certainly benefits to trading for Tunsil, but given what we’re hearing about what the Chiefs want out of the left tackle position this offseason, a trade might not be the route they take. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Tribal Warfare:
Past relationships, and it's been said that some interviews with players had the most blunt and intrusive questions about their family. Yes you uncover everything.
Like Tyreek and his girlfriend, they gave him a chance and he didn't **** it up.
The Texans clearly didn't do their due diligence.
Who is going to catch that?. What he did was wrong but it seemed more of a misinterpretation of what a sex worker was and I’m assuming he wasn’t doing this at Clemson. [Reply]
Originally Posted by UChieffyBugger:
Nah I'm not comfortable with spending another first round pick on a vet LT who we'll have to pay a big bag to. If we're gonna pay a bag we might aswell keep OBJ ffs. You can't do that and expect to keep our interior intact for much longer. It's time to draft a longterm solution now imo.
So you dont think Brown helped with the superbowl? [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501: Who is going to catch that?. What he did was wrong but it seemed more of a misinterpretation of what a sex worker was and I’m assuming he wasn’t doing this at Clemson.
Some did because he slipped past multiple QB needy teams. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Who is going to catch that?. What he did was wrong but it seemed more of a misinterpretation of what a sex worker was and I’m assuming he wasn’t doing this at Clemson.
We got a Desaun Watson apologist, everyone.
He just happened to mistake legit masseuses for sex workers 24 times.
And the Texans, whatever they knew prior to the draft, clearly facilitated his behavior with hotel rooms and NDAs.
Originally Posted by kccrow:
He's 28 and turns 29 in August (i.e. not 29 and turning 30). It's not ridiculous to imagine him playing through 5 years of a 6-year deal.
I'm hopeful this year's 1st is not part of the deal but if it is, it is. Tunsil is my favorite LT in the NFL so I'd be pretty giddy. I just don't want Veach to overpay either and when you start talking 1st round picks and mega deals, it's already getting there. It would be awesome if a 1st wasn't part of the deal, such as two 2's and a 3 or something, but I have a hard time thinking it wouldn't be. Would be nice if it is a 2024 1st if so.
I trust Veach to do what’s best in this situation and get him for the best possible value for KC when it comes to picks/contract. To my understanding LTs tend to age well so his current age should not play too much into this at all. [Reply]
No. The fact that you think they should have done some research to determine that Watson is a rapist (when he didn't start raping till after being drafted by the Texans) is just fucking bonkers, dude. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
No. The fact that you think they should have done some research to determine that Watson is a rapist (when he didn't start raping till after being drafted by the Texans) is just fucking bonkers, dude.
So those elements of his personality were so innocuous that they couldn't see that he "character guy". Houston pulled the trigger and got burnt bad. If they do the Tunsil trade would further affirm they are clueless considering they'll have a rookie QB without blindside protection. [Reply]