Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
You have no idea where the Chiefs are with the Chris Jones negotiations and nothing matters until July 16th, the day after he's no longer allowed to sign a contract extension.
Deadline deals are done every year.
|
Thanks to reputable reporting, I do have some idea. It’s not ironclad but I rely on reputable reporting to give me some idea of what’s coming down the pipeline.
You do the same — you cited reporting that the Raiders offered the most to Clowney. (By the way, the reputable reporting I’ve read disputes that and cites Cleveland as the highest bidder, and that teams as of now have largely rescinded their offers as they’ve grown tired of Clowney’s intransigence.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
What, wait? Why would the Chiefs trade Chris Jones for a player that wants $20 million per year? That makes ZERO sense, just like most of your posts.
|
Just throwing out a name that could be an equitable player ina player-for-player trade. Sub another name in as you please.
There has been some ballyhooing since Spags arrival that Jones is an imperfect fit in the scheme. I agree that he is, but he’s so damn talented it doesn’t matter, which is why I’d pay him.
But we know Spags is a stickler for what players on his DL should look and how they should play. And if he thinks $20m could be better spent on a player that “fits” versus a player that imperfectly fits, who knows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud
Clowney? Clowney? The Chiefs don't have the cap room for Clowney and they'd be stupid to pay him $15 million or more per year, which is below his asking price.
The Chiefs need inexpensive, productive players, not MORE players in the $20 million per year category.
|
Any deal the Chiefs ostensibly sign Clowney to would be a one-year, in my mind. I could go on but I’d only reiterate what Duncan has said throughout the thread.