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]
Dude I am not apologizing for him. He was flat out in the wrong. I can’t speak to whether the Texans enabled the behavior but I’m guessing this was not an issue at Clemson when Deshaun didn’t have money. And given that he was getting recs from other players about masseuses, I assume happy endings are relatively common and that early on that’s what was assumed was going on. In either event, to someone else’s point, not sure why that’s even all that relevant to this thread so I’ll stop there. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
I'd rather it be a 2nd this year and a 1 next year, but not sure that would get it done.
Send them pick 31. You can get a similar prospect at pick 62.
What would be really tasty is if you can get some draft capital BACK from the Texans this year - say, #104 - and use that to move UP in the 2nd round. You could get to around #50 that way.
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
What would be really tasty is if you can get some draft capital BACK from the Texans this year - say, #104 - and use that to move UP in the 2nd round. You could get to around #50 that way.
Is it doable? No clue.
#31 + 2024 3rd for Tunsil and 2024 4th?
I just think it ends up a 1 and a 2 value wise somehow if it were to get done. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Tribal Warfare:
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.
Houston is a poorly run organization but drafting Watson is not one of those mistakes. He was probably the safest QB pick leading up to that draft. [Reply]
Understandably, if you make this move you would lose out on a player or two. Draft pick and pay isn't ideal.
But at LT, you would lock up arguably the best LT in the game for the prime of his career. Mahomes would have an elite LT for the prime of his, or atleast the first half of it.
You'd think they'd be fine to have a big salary at LT due to the importance of the position. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
There's reports that a good part of the league looking for a LT doesn't think Brown fits best at LT and would want him to play RT.
I think the Chiefs have their number and are sticking to that. I understand it.
That being said if we can drive a hard bargin lets fucking do it... IF we get away paying him SOLID LT money instead of top money lets go. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BleedingRed:
That being said if we can drive a hard bargin lets ****ing do it... IF we get away paying him SOLID LT money instead of top money lets go.
The chances of that went to basically nill when he was allowed to hit free agency unencumbered by the franchise tag. [Reply]