I’d trade 2 firsts for Brian Burns.

Wouldn’t you?

He’s younger and better at DE than Frank Clark was. He’s a great compliment, style-wise and contract-wise for Karlaftis.

Those 1sts will likely not get us players in Burns’ stratosphere.

He’s so young and ascending that the 100m contract you’re giving him will be for future production, not present or past production.

DE is the second biggest position of need behind OT on this team and the hardest to acquire given the resources we have. Burns/Karlaftis gives us a ridiculous ceiling at the position.

I know the scars are fresh from Frank Clark, but you have to keep swinging. You simply need great DE talent to win Super Bowls, and we don’t have that right now.

The Chiefs still have 17 picks over the next two drafts without the 1st round picks.

I know that Clark Hunt doesn’t want us to trade the 1st. But I think he wants Super Bowls more, and I think Burns helps blow open your window over the life of his contract.
[Reply]

Nope.

I'd do ONE.

I don't believe in trading more than one first for anything other than an elite QB.

And we have one, so I don't like mortgaging your future ever while that window is open.

But that's just me.
[Reply]

Absolutely not.

2 firsts is way too steep.
[Reply]

Nope, not when I need an actual LT.

If you're convinced that the sieve that is OBJ is your long-term LT then you make a trade like that for Burns.

I don't mind burning a 1st in a trade, I'd just like it to not be this year's first.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
Nope.

I'd do ONE.

I don't believe in trading more than one first for anything other than an elite QB.

And we have one, so I don't like mortgaging your future ever while that window is open.

But that's just me.

Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Absolutely not.

2 firsts is way too steep.

2 firsts for a young pass rusher who has elite upside and a strong track record?

Mortgaging your future how?

The Chiefs will still have 17 picks, and Veach has been on a drafting hot streak.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by kccrow:
Nope, not when I need an actual LT.

If you're convinced that the sieve that is OBJ is your long-term LT then you make a trade like that for Burns.

I don't mind burning a 1st in a trade, I'd just like it to not be this year's first.

I think this is the fairest argument against trading the 1sts.

If the Chiefs don’t believe they can or want to keep OBJ long term, then you will need the 1sts. At least one of them, anyway.
[Reply]

Let me put a couple more offers out there for you guys that are less than the 2 1sts. Tell me which ones you’d make the deal for, if any.

* a 2023 2nd and a 2024 1st
* a 2023 2nd and LB Willie Gay
* a 2023 2nd and a 2024 2nd
* a 2023 1st

Keep in mind you’re paying Burns 100m once you acquire him.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Direckshun:
I think this is the fairest argument against trading the 1sts.

If the Chiefs don’t believe they can or want to keep OBJ long term, then you will need the 1sts. At least one of them, anyway.

If you truly intend on replacing OBJ in the draft, you'll need both of them because we'll likely have to trade up.

I'm dead set against trading two 1st for anybody. I would never trade two 1st, ever.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by htismaqe:
If you truly intend on replacing OBJ in the draft, you'll need both of them because we'll likely have to trade up.

I'm dead set against trading two 1st for anybody. I would never trade two 1st, ever.

You could still get your LT in the 2nd or 3rd round :-)
[Reply]

I don't think I'd do 2 1's. As much as I love the player, that's just not worth it unless it's a QB. Plus you're paying him after you trade.

Nah. I'd be out on that.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by O.city:
You could still get your LT in the 2nd or 3rd round :-)

You can if you want a developmental project to sit behind OBJ or play RT for a year or two.

If OBJ is gone and you absolutely need a guy that can step in day 1, you will probably have to trade up in the first.

Your thinking is so binary sometimes.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by Direckshun:
Let me put a couple more offers out there for you guys that are less than the 2 1sts. Tell me which ones you’d make the deal for, if any.

* a 2023 2nd and a 2024 1st
* a 2023 2nd and LB Willie Gay
* a 2023 2nd and a 2024 2nd
* a 2023 1st

Keep in mind you’re paying Burns 100m once you acquire him.

a 2023 2nd and LB Willie Gay is the easy choice for me.

One draft pick and I like the way Harris has played.
[Reply]

Keep in mind the Chiefs we’re willing to pay OBJ 25m/year last offseason. He wanted more.

But let’s not pretend like the Chiefs are on the fence about OBJ. They really, really want him. That is not at issue here, it’s can they agree to a deal with him. And there’s a non-zero chance Veach is under the apprehension that he can/will.

If so, I think you’re not as married to those 1sts. I literally think the LT position is the one thing potentially hamstringing a “2 1sts” offer.

These 1sts are at the bottom of the first round, and as I’ve said the Chiefs are already rich in picks with an elite drafting GM.

The most important thing this team needs after LT is passrush help. And if Burns can give you great passrushing for 5 years, it’s a deal I would make.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by htismaqe:
You can if you want a developmental project to sit behind OBJ or play RT for a year or two.

If OBJ is gone and you absolutely need a guy that can step in day 1, you will probably have to trade up in the first.

Your thinking is so binary sometimes.

The time to have done the developmental T was this past draft IMO.

You're at the point now where if you don't resign OBJ, you gotta think pretty long and hard about going up and getting a guy that can step in day 1.

No way can they tag OBJ again. For one, he won't play on it I don't think and for 2 it's a shit load of cap space burned.
[Reply]

Originally Posted by O.city:
The time to have done the developmental T was this past draft IMO.

You're at the point now where if you don't resign OBJ, you gotta think pretty long and hard about going up and getting a guy that can step in day 1.

No way can they tag OBJ again. For one, he won't play on it I don't think and for 2 it's a shit load of cap space burned.

I don't disagree at all.
[Reply]