Watching this catastrophe again and yeah I, like all of you, were pissed and let this man have it bc a TE blocked him out of a play one time.
Guys. Holy shit man. He played really really well. Again. I heard this on Times Ours but am even more angry after seeing it.
Not only did they double Chris at all times but they blatantly held him. A lot. Like it was basically “this man is all they have and we gonna hold this motherfucker most of the time bc they can’t call it every single time.”
They legitimately hack-a-Shaq’d this man the entire game and it made me furious that it wasn’t called. Like what the fuck?
Anyway. This guy is our DL. Karlaftis had a few pressures. Dunlap had that big play. Frank was invisible and Danna wasn’t any better.
He might be the best player on this team not named Patrick Mahomes.
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Trading Hill isn’t the same as trading Jones.
With Hill gone, we still had Patrick Mahomes, Andy Reid and Travis Kelce. Those 3 were critical in keeping the offense rolling. We additionally had Hardman to help with some of the same things due to pure speed.
We have nothing on the DL outside of a young improving Karlaftis. Nothing else.
We all saw how pathetic the pass rush was without Chris last Sunday. Gonna look a lot like that every week with him gone
Exactly. We're not replacing Jones, regardless of what we do. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Trading Hill isn’t the same as trading Jones.
With Hill gone, we still had Patrick Mahomes, Andy Reid and Travis Kelce. Those 3 were critical in keeping the offense rolling. We additionally had Hardman to help with some of the same things due to pure speed.
We have nothing on the DL outside of a young improving Karlaftis. Nothing else.
We all saw how pathetic the pass rush was without Chris last Sunday. Gonna look a lot like that every week with him gone
In a way, you're making my exact point for me.
We've got Jones and nothing else. If we have to pay him $30m per, and will be picking around #30 for the forseeable future, we will have neither cash, nor high enough draft picks to EVER have any true playmakers around him. You're not getting a difference maker at EDGE at the bottom of the first.
So one STAR and JAGS is the deal, then. Because that's what we'll have access to.
OR- what if someone else wants to pay that $30m and will trade, like, a mid first and a third for the opportunity to put a star on their defensive line?
Well, we could sign TWO plus DE's (or one and an OT maybe?) AND draft a guy half the first round higher than we would otherwise have access to.
I have no idea if such a deal exists out there, I really don't. But I think if it does, you have to seriously consider it.
Two and perhaps three plus players on the line, or just one-who can be double-teamed while his line-mates all get stoned one on one.
And the problem with your scenario of having nothing if we let Jones go is that the whole POINT would be to re-stock with multiple plus players. If they trade Jones and do nothing, then yeah, bad idea and we'll suck on defense. But that's not why you would ever trade Jones.
You'd trade him to improve with the freed up cap room and draft resources. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
In a way, you're making my exact point for me.
We've got Jones and nothing else. If we have to pay him $30m per, and will be picking around #30 for the forseeable future, we will have neither cash, nor high enough draft picks to EVER have any true playmakers around him. You're not getting a difference maker at EDGE at the bottom of the first.
So one STAR and JAGS is the deal, then. Because that's what we'll have access to.
OR- what if someone else wants to pay that $30m and will trade, like, a mid first and a third for the opportunity to put a star on their defensive line?
Well, we could sign TWO plus DE's (or one and an OT maybe?) AND draft a guy half the first round higher than we would otherwise have access to.
I have no idea if such a deal exists out there, I really don't. But I think if it does, you have to seriously consider it.
Two and perhaps three plus players on the line, or just one-who can be double-teamed while his line-mates all get stoned one on one.
And the problem with your scenario of having nothing if we let Jones go is that the whole POINT would be to re-stock with multiple plus players. If they trade Jones and do nothing, then yeah, bad idea and we'll suck on defense. But that's not why you would ever trade Jones.
You'd trade him to improve with the freed up cap room and draft resources.
Jones is a star RIGHT NOW. How do you ensure that you get "multiple plus players" with a trade? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Roundup:
We don't have to resign Jones this offseason. He is signed through next year. His number next year is a couple of million less than this year.
Jones is going off at 27 million next year.
You either extend and lower that number, or trade.
It will depend heavily on what he brings to the table this post season.
Couple huge, drive killing sacks that get the ball back for our offense would be all it would take to move the needle to extend over trade.
If we fall short of a title, and he's still got zero sacks after 2-3 more post season games, piss off.
Paying this dude way too much money to disappear in the big ones. He's gotta produce, it's that simple. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Wallcrawler:
Jones is going off at 27 million next year.
You either extend and lower that number, or trade.
It will depend heavily on what he brings to the table this post season.
Couple huge, drive killing sacks that get the ball back for our offense would be all it would take to move the needle to extend over trade.
If we fall short of a title, and he's still got zero sacks after 2-3 more post season games, piss off.
Yeah, he was over $29 million this year. We don't have to extend him next season. Could it be advantageous, yes but we don't have to extend him. [Reply]
There should be a name for the ChiefsPlanet phenomena where people disregard the (possible) (very) negative implications of doing something by claiming that things can’t get worse than they already are.
There's absolutely no guarantee you get a haul of players more impactful and I really don't think you need a haul to make this DL better. Yes, it's complete dog turd outside of Jones, but given how good Jones is you really only need, imo, a good DE and a run stuffer and this DL is immeasurably better. With Clark gone we should be able to get that. I also don't see anyway we get the sort of mid-first and 3rd picks Chris mentions.If we did, sure, you'd have to think about it, but I can't see it happening [Reply]
