Frank Clark ****ing sucks

[RealSNR]

Guy has done NOTHING in two games. Barely any pressures to speak of against trash OTs.

Yeah, I'm in bitchy gameday mode. Don't care. I'm tired of paying out the ass for defensive players who don't make plays.

At least Justin Houston could dominate against bad teams after we paid him.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

If I had to pick one or the other, I'd keep Clark over Vadger.

That guy has just turned me off in a big BIG way this year. Showing up teammates, picking fights on social media and not playing nearly as well as he seems to think he is - he's just irritating.

And I think a guy like that's message wears thin quickly. You can only hear that guy yelping coach-speak bullshit for so long before you tune him out. I think we've probably reached that point.

But I wouldn't keep either. The days of mutliple high-dollar defensive players AND multiple top of the scale skill position guys are over. Time to start focusing on acquiring quality, reasonably priced veteran depth pieces that slip through the cracks during the early periods of FA.

Then you supplement with draft picks and hope to get your force multipliers that way.

Yeah, it's time to cut weight on defense. It worked, it got a championship, and almost two, but we have to move on. Stars and scrubs ain't gonna cut it on that side of the ball moving forward.

Clark's playing well; but we've seen that is not the norm. HB is more consistent, but too expensive to risk that deal going into his 30's.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Yeah, it's time to cut weight on defense. It worked, it got a championship, and almost two, but we have to move on. Stars and scrubs ain't gonna cut it on that side of the ball moving forward.

Clark's playing well; but we've seen that is not the norm. HB is more consistent, but too expensive to risk that deal going into his 30's.

Yep.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Time to start focusing on acquiring quality, reasonably priced veteran depth pieces that slip through the cracks during the early periods of FA.

I don't think that's a thing. If you sign a FA you overpay. Period. That's the point - you have to overpay if you choose to add in free agency.

If you draft well and make the occasional trade you get good value. If you sign a FA you fill a big need with an overpay that's necessary. You can count on one hand the number of FA's that will take less than market value and that's most often due to them wanting a specific team or specific area.

Even when we were the odds on favorite to win the SB look how few "FA deals" we got...

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by Rausch

I don't think that's a thing. If you sign a FA you overpay. Period. That's the point - you have to overpay if you choose to add in free agency.

If you draft well and make the occasional trade you get good value. If you sign a FA you fill a big need with an overpay that's necessary. You can count on one hand the number of FA's that will take less than market value and that's most often due to them wanting a specific team or specific area.

Even when we were the odds on favorite to win the SB look how few "FA deals" we got...

Oh, I don't know about that. Lots of guys are paid below their production, they're just not the big name guys that sign deals immediately in FA. We should absolutely not be in on that nonsense anymore.

But like...Ingram's deal was reasonable; we almost got him in August. He's the sort of guy we should be looking at. Short term, reasonable cost, still got some juice. That augments your draft, fills holes, and adds depth.

But no, I agree with you in that we should not be setting market deals anymore.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Oh, I don't know about that. Lots of guys are paid below their production, they're just not the big name guys that sign deals immediately in FA. We should absolutely not be in on that nonsense anymore.

But like...Ingram's deal was reasonable; we almost got him in August. He's the sort of guy we should be looking at. Short term, reasonable cost, still got some juice. That augments your draft, fills holes, and adds depth.

But no, I agree with you in that we should not be setting market deals anymore.

For as much as people whine about Veach's drafting, he's a hell of a lot better at it than Belichick.

That's been their approach for years. Yes, they do have foundational pieces, but they're careful about who those guys are.

It's okay to let players walk if they become too expensive. Let's say years from now Bolton keeps up his production and gets to the end of his rookie deal. It might not make sense for us to re-sign him if it's going to put us in a hole just 1-2 years down the line.

What's the best path to get this team winning as many Super Bowls as possible when we've got Mahomes? That has to always be the question. To me, going all-in over a short span only to follow it up with a "clean house" couple of years is taking away multiple seasons in which Mahomes has a reasonable shot at putting us over the top regardless of whether or not the job got done in the "all-in" years.

You need a bit of luck to win Super Bowls. And the best way to acquire luck is multiple chances. Keep us always in the playoffs with a few trustworthy cornerstone pieces, Mahomes, and some selective free agents here and there, and I'll bet you Mahomes will work his magic and more often than if we go bananas once every 5 years or so.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Oh, I don't know about that. Lots of guys are paid below their production, they're just not the big name guys that sign deals immediately in FA. We should absolutely not be in on that nonsense anymore.

But like...Ingram's deal was reasonable; we almost got him in August. He's the sort of guy we should be looking at. Short term, reasonable cost, still got some juice. That augments your draft, fills holes, and adds depth.

But no, I agree with you in that we should not be setting market deals anymore.

But we probably will again as Tyreek is due to get paid very soon and I would not be surprised if he wants top dollar (which he has earned).

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

For as much as people whine about Veach's drafting, he's a hell of a lot better at it than Belichick.

That's been their approach for years. Yes, they do have foundational pieces, but they're careful about who those guys are.

It's okay to let players walk if they become too expensive. Let's say years from now Bolton keeps up his production and gets to the end of his rookie deal. It might not make sense for us to re-sign him if it's going to put us in a hole just 1-2 years down the line.

What's the best path to get this team winning as many Super Bowls as possible when we've got Mahomes? That has to always be the question. To me, going all-in over a short span only to follow it up with a "clean house" couple of years is taking away multiple seasons in which Mahomes has a reasonable shot at putting us over the top regardless of whether or not the job got done in the "all-in" years.

You need a bit of luck to win Super Bowls. And the best way to acquire luck is multiple chances. Keep us always in the playoffs with a few trustworthy cornerstone pieces, Mahomes, and some selective free agents here and there, and I'll bet you Mahomes will work his magic and more often than if we go bananas once every 5 years or so.

Totally agree.

I don't fault Veach for doing it in '19, but I wouldn't do it again now that Mahomes starts getting expensive. It made since to maximize the pre-hit portion of his contract. But at this point, no, we need to do the draft, develop, churn, and burn method.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by tredadda

But we probably will again as Tyreek is due to get paid very soon and I would not be surprised if he wants top dollar (which he has earned).

I don't mind paying Tyreek. He's a physical freak, a good team player, shows no signs of slowing down and should be a viable option well into his mid 30's as long as he stays relatively healthy.

But I'm not paying for any more Frank Clarks.

I'll pay our guys if they project out at a high level.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

I don't mind paying Tyreek. He's a physical freak, a good team player, shows no signs of slowing down and should be a viable option well into his mid 30's as long as he stays relatively healthy.

But I'm not paying for any more Frank Clarks.

I'll pay our guys if they project out at a high level.

Completely agree with that.

[Hammock Parties]

oh yeah

Frank Clark has been DOMINANT the last two weeks 😤

♦️ 90.2 PFF Grade (2nd among all Edge Defenders)
♦️ 86.9 Pass Rush Grade (5th)
♦️ 3 QB hits (t-1st) pic.twitter.com/uzXq0w6BbM

— PFF KC Chiefs (@PFF_Chiefs) November 11, 2021

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by Hammock Parties

oh yeah

Frank Clark has been DOMINANT the last two weeks 😤

♦️ 90.2 PFF Grade (2nd among all Edge Defenders)
♦️ 86.9 Pass Rush Grade (5th)
♦️ 3 QB hits (t-1st) pic.twitter.com/uzXq0w6BbM

— PFF KC Chiefs (@PFF_Chiefs) November 11, 2021

Amazing how good the D looks when the D line is playing like it should.

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

Amazing how good the D looks when the D line is playing like it should.

told everyone for weeks when they were shitting on our DBs

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Oh, I don't know about that. Lots of guys are paid below their production, they're just not the big name guys that sign deals immediately in FA. We should absolutely not be in on that nonsense anymore.

But like...Ingram's deal was reasonable; we almost got him in August. He's the sort of guy we should be looking at. Short term, reasonable cost, still got some juice. That augments your draft, fills holes, and adds depth.

But no, I agree with you in that we should not be setting market deals anymore.

Exactly, that's why I specifically referenced the first wave.

You sign anyone on the first couple of days of FA and about all you can hope for is that they play to the level of their contract. Thuney is likely to be a perfect example there. You paid him to be great and even if he's great, there's no 'discount' there. There's no surplus value.

And when that's the case, all you have in a deal is downside (i.e. Frank Clark, Hitchens, Watkins).

With so many guys on the roster soon to be at market, they'll have to find more bargains to keep a complete roster together. You can find those later in free agency. And on some rare occasions you can find those in the middle-class of FAs fairly early (such as Damien Wilson).

I think you look for guys like Ingram who falls through the cracks or Wilson who you target early as an undervalued asset if you think you can get him signed prior to other options getting signed that may serve to pull his market together.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by Hammock Parties

oh yeah

Frank Clark has been DOMINANT the last two weeks 😤

♦️ 90.2 PFF Grade (2nd among all Edge Defenders)
♦️ 86.9 Pass Rush Grade (5th)
♦️ 3 QB hits (t-1st) pic.twitter.com/uzXq0w6BbM

— PFF KC Chiefs (@PFF_Chiefs) November 11, 2021

Not at all surprising. He's looked great now that he's healthier.

[RunKC]

1 sack
3 QB hits
5 total pressures

That’s worth the money if he keeps this up