Kansas City is trading its first-round pick Thursday night, along with three other picks in the 2021 and 2022 drafts, to the Baltimore Ravens in exchange for Pro Bowl OT Orlando Brown and one pick in the 2021 draft and another in 2022, per sources.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
So now we're going to go there? Brown is somehow a schlub because the Ravens were willing to trade him?
SMH
Orlando Brown is a storied member of the old Browns/Ravens family. The Ravens weren't ever going to treat Brown Jr. poorly or deny him his wishes because it wasn't ever in their best interest to do so. It's not just a simple case of a player being disgruntled. It's about a guy that proved he can play a position for which they didn't have room.
NFL teams trade with whoever they can trade with to get the best offer. They don't operate the way you're suggesting.
Not saying he’s a schlub at all.
They feel they have a better option at LT and can find another rt and weren’t gonna pay him so I get trading him. Maybe no one else offered mirror close to kc I dunno [Reply]
Originally Posted by Detoxing:
Ok, lol. I don't know what else to say, you're still not getting it.
IT'S ALWAYS OUT OF YOUR CONTROL!
THAT is why you take the ONLY option that's in your control: The best possible return.
For all the Ravens know they could send Brown to the Rams, he becomes a FA the following season and the Chiefs sign him.
The end result would be the same: The Ravens have to play Brown. The difference? You took less compensation to achieve the same goddamn end result.
How the Peters situation doesn't perfectly showcase that to you is beyond me.
There are more variables than i have fingers and toes. For all anyone knows, Brown can get injured in TC and walk in the offseason. The Ravens cant control that. All they can control is max compensation.
So worrying about any other variable is just dumb.
You also have a year where he’s not on said team.
You’re in competition with the rest of the league every year. I don’t think it’s too crazy to think you should worry about what everyone else is doing.
But I’m clearly in the minority here so I must be wrong [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
Not saying he’s a schlub at all.
They feel they have a better option at LT and can find another rt and weren’t gonna pay him so I get trading him. Maybe no one else offered mirror close to kc I dunno
They don't just have a better option - they have a starting left tackle. Stanley got hurt, pushing Brown to LT. In 2021, Stanley will be back and that means Brown has to go back to RT and he said he wouldn't. They really had no choice but to either trade him or let him disrupt the team.
Obviously KC had the best offer or the trade wouldn't have happened. [Reply]
It's early 2019. The Chiefs just lost to the Patriots because Dee Ford was offsides.
In the offseason, Tyreek Hill runs afoul of the law. He's eventually exonerated, but he has a bad taste in his mouth with the way the city and organization handled it and demands a trade. A number of teams are interested but no one wants to give up much given his 'volatile past.' Except for one team, the Patriots, who are looking for playmakers at WR and willing to offer a package similar to what we just gave up for OBJ.
We trade him to the Patriots.
Are you guys really totally fine with that? Even if we're able to ideally use the picks to improve the roster?
I'm pretty sure some of you would rather set Hill on fire than trade him to the Patriots. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
It's early 2019. The Chiefs just lost to the Patriots because Dee Ford was offsides.
In the offseason, Tyreek Hill runs afoul of the law. He's eventually exonerated, but he has a bad taste in his mouth with the way the city and organization handled it and demands a trade. A number of teams are interested but no one wants to give up much given his 'volatile past.' Except for one team, the Patriots, who are looking for playmakers at WR and willing to offer a package similar to what we just gave up for OBJ.
We trade him to the Patriots.
Are you guys really totally fine with that? Even if we're able to ideally use the picks to improve the roster?
I'm pretty sure some of you would rather set Hill on fire than trade him to the Patriots.
You're asking if we would accept it emotionally, not rationally. There's a big difference between the two.
I for one would be absolutely devastated by the scenario you described. That being said, it wouldn't be that hard to understand the logic behind the move. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud:
I have but it's been glossed over.
The Chiefs didn't get OBJ for free.
A 1st, 3rd, 4th and next year's 5th will go a long way in strengthening an already good football team, which is FAR more than the 2023 3rd round Comp pick they would have received had they held on to OBJ and made him inactive each week.
The national media types tend to forget/gloss-over the fact that the Ravens sent us a 2nd rounder for THIS YEAR in the deal as well. Yeah, we sent them our first rounder, but we got their 2nd rounder back. Given Beach's comments regarding the talent falling off a cliff, the 3rd and 4th aren't as big as they might otherwise be. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
You're asking if we would accept it emotionally, not rationally. There's a big difference between the two.
I for one would be absolutely devastated by the scenario you described. That being said, it wouldn't be that hard to understand the logic behind the move.
Emotionally, obviously not acceptable.
I think the logic/rationality argument of it is a bit more suspect.
The singular goal is winning a Super Bowl, not improving your roster. If you make the one team that you can't beat more unbeatable, even if you're better able to compete against every other team in the league, it doesn't really matter.
I obviously understand both sides of it. I just lean slightly toward this one. [Reply]
Are you guys really totally fine with that? Even if we're able to ideally use the picks to improve the roster?
As a fan, of course no one is "fine" with that. But we're fans, we're emotionally invested.
As a front office, it's the right deal to make because it gives you the most ammunition to recover from a losing situation.
I'm sure this trade sucks in the eyes of Ravens fans.
Hell, i wasn't "fine" with trading Marcus Peters, even to the NFC.
How i feel about it doesn't change what's best for the team.
*********
No one seems to feel any type of way about the fact that the Chiefs just gave up a 1st round draft pick to the best drafting team in the league.
No one seems to feel any type of way that we just made our top competition better by helping them out of a losing situation at the cost of our 1st round selection.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
They don't just have a better option - they have a starting left tackle. Stanley got hurt, pushing Brown to LT. In 2021, Stanley will be back and that means Brown has to go back to RT and he said he wouldn't. They really had no choice but to either trade him or let him disrupt the team.
Obviously KC had the best offer or the trade wouldn't have happened.
Exactly. Many say that the Ravens believe that Stanley is a better tackle, so they kept him over Brown. But is that true? The reality is that, when Stanley's injury occurred, the Ravens had already committed large dollars to him. Whether they preferred Stanley or not, they were stuck with him over Brown.
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
Emotionally, obviously not acceptable.
I think the logic/rationality argument of it is a bit more suspect.
The singular goal is winning a Super Bowl, not improving your roster. If you make the one team that you can't beat more unbeatable, even if you're better able to compete against every other team in the league, it doesn't really matter.
I obviously understand both sides of it. I just lean slightly toward this one.
I think the issue here is the whole idea of "the one team you can't beat".
We're talking about NFL teams here, full of alpha dogs with huge egos. No NFL team actually thinks there's a "team they can't beat". In fact, Harbaugh recently said as much in a press conference.
WE look at the Chiefs as the Ravens' kryptonite but the RAVENS don't see it that way. The Ravens are only concerned with being the best team they can be. That doesn't mean we're wrong and they're right. It's just the reality of the situation - NFL teams don't worry about other teams, they worry about themselves.
I mean honestly, if the Ravens were REALLY worried about getting over the KC hurdle, GIVING KC a left tackle is practically irrelevant compared to Baltimore GETTING a new QB. [Reply]
The singular goal is winning a Super Bowl, not improving your roster.
And the most controllable way to win a SB is to build the best roster you can.
It's the only thing you can control when it comes to winning a SB.
You can't allow yourself to worry about what-if's.
Again, if Orlando Brown gets hurt in TC and never even plays a down for the Chiefs, will the Ravens look like winners then?
If they trade him to say, the Rams, for lesser compensation and Mahomes has a season ending injury rendering the Chiefs season over, the Ravens would look like some real losers then as a Brown trade wouldn't even effect them.
What if the Ravens play the Chiefs in the playoffs and BEAT them? Don't you think they'd look like winners then?
There are just so many damn variables that could work in the Ravens favor (or not) that you simply cannot compensate for them all.
Thus you take the best compensation as that's the ONLY thing you can control. [Reply]