49ers trade cornerback Kenneth Acker to the Chiefs, most likely a conditional draft p

[Mr_Tomahawk]

49ers trade cornerback Kenneth Acker to the Chiefs, most likely a conditional draft pick, according to a league source


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

But Russell and White's draft positions were what they were precisely because of that potential. Russell's a better athlete with a higher ceiling. They didn't draw names out of a hat; they clearly saw more potential in Russell.

Their draft order isn't random, it's a reflection on the potential that the team sees in them and therefore their willingness to develop that potential. Guys that are drafted higher are given more time because teams saw things in them worth working to turn into production.

I understand that Russell has "potential" but unlike White and Murray, he hasn't "earned" a 2016 roster spot, IMO.

The Chiefs cornerback depth is tenuous at best and there is cause for concern. Keeping a guy on the 53 as a "Redshirt" season may not be the wisest of decisions, IMO.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I understand that Russell has "potential" but unlike White and Murray, he hasn't "earned" a 2016 roster spot, IMO.

The Chiefs cornerback depth is tenuous at best and there is cause for concern. Keeping a guy on the 53 as a "Redshirt" season may not be the wisest of decisions, IMO.

And again, making roster decision exclusively based on who's 'earned one' over a single camp/pre-season is just remarkably short-sighted. I reiterate, Fred Williams 'earned' a roster spot last year over Chris Conley. Hell, as bad as Albert Wilson's been, he's been better than DeMarcus Robinson - would you support cutting Robinson in favor of Wilson?

Nobody does what you're suggesting, nor should they. That's the kind of shit the Raiders used to do and they've unfortunately smartened up a fair amount since then.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

And again, making roster decision exclusively based on who's 'earned one' over a single camp/pre-season is just remarkably short-sighted. I reiterate, Fred Williams 'earned' a roster spot last year over Chris Conley. Hell, as bad as Albert Wilson's been, he's been better than DeMarcus Robinson - would you support cutting Robinson in favor of Wilson?

Nobody does what you're suggesting, nor should they. That's the kind of shit the Raiders used to do and they've unfortunately smartened up a fair amount since then.

At no point have I suggested that they cut him nor am I suggesting that they cut him. Again, I'm merely pointing out that the NFL is not a true meritocracy and that because of this, it may have a negative effect on the Chiefs season.

And for the record, I'd support cutting Albert Wilson for anyone not named Albert Wilson.

Oh, and Robinson hasn't earned a roster sport, either, although I'd be surprised if they tried to sneak him through waivers.

[The Franchise]

It seems to be Dorsey's MO to draft a CB in the 3rd round with potential and have them sit for a year.

Gaines, Nelson and now Russell.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

At no point have I suggested that they cut him nor am I suggesting that they cut him. Again, I'm merely pointing out that the NFL is not a true meritocracy and that because of this, it may have a negative effect on the Chiefs season.

But...uh....you kinda did, though.

Originally Posted by RunKC

KeiVarae Russell? Wtf? They aren't cutting a 3rd rd pick after his first preseason.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

But, they should. Like I said earlier, if he was chosen in the 6th and White in the 3rd, he'd be waived and signed to the PS.

The guy's been running with the 3's and 4's and hasn't done a damn thing.

Just sayin'; if you're not suggesting they cut him, you've done a pretty good job of disguising it.

The kid's physical skills are top shelf. Relatively new to playing defensive back, suspended in '14, injured and gimpy through '15. The learning curve was always going to be steep so you gamble on the skills and hope you can pull them out. He's a smart kid and a guy with a good head on his shoulders.

He's a third rounder - they aren't all ready projects but when you have his talent and his personality, he's a good risk.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

But...uh....you kinda did, though.

Eh, maybe I did. I walked it back though. I understand there's no way they'd cut him, although IR wouldn't bug me a bit.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

He's a third rounder - they aren't all ready projects but when you have his talent and his personality, he's a good risk.

I hope so. I liked his draft profile and his early interviews. It just seems like this is one position that could tilt the Chiefs season in a downward spiral if they don't choose the correct players for the 53.

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

It seems to be Dorsey's MO to draft a CB in the 3rd round with potential and have them sit for a year.

Gaines, Nelson and now Russell.

Gaines didn't sit for a year.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by BigMeatballBillay

Gaines didn't sit for a year.

He sure as **** didn't start right away. He started 5 games his first year.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I hope so. I liked his draft profile and his early interviews. It just seems like this is one position that could tilt the Chiefs season in a downward spiral if they don't choose the correct players for the 53.

No doubt, but the keep/cut decision on Russell won't make a difference.

If they keep him, it will be for, who, Marcus Cooper?

It's the inherent flaw in Dorsey's model and really the only one. You have to constantly be backfilling and if you have a hiccup in there (i.e. Phillip Gaines slow development due to injury), you can end up with a hole in your depth chart pretty quickly. The guys behind Gaines aren't ready yet but there's enough talent there that you don't want to give up on them either. So you pretty much just grit your teeth for a season and hope it comes together.

It's the position the Chiefs would've found themselves in last year at C had Morse not been a HR pick. Or hell, CB last season had Peters not been a boss. I think we're also seeing it at ILB (and may see it again when DJ retires). When you rely so much on internal development and the draft is never going to be a 100% proposition, this shit is going to happen sometimes. So you keep throwing dice and sooner or later the hole gets filled. It's just not always on a perfect timeline.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

No doubt, but the keep/cut decision on Russell won't make a difference.

If they keep him, it will be for, who, Marcus Cooper?

It's the inherent flaw in Dorsey's model and really the only one. You have to constantly be backfilling and if you have a hiccup in there (i.e. Phillip Gaines slow development due to injury), you can end up with a hole in your depth chart pretty quickly. The guys behind Gaines aren't ready yet but there's enough talent there that you don't want to give up on them either. So you pretty much just grit your teeth for a season and hope it comes together.

It's the position the Chiefs would've found themselves in last year at C had Morse not been a HR pick. Or hell, CB last season had Peters not been a boss. I think we're also seeing it at ILB (and may see it again when DJ retires). When you rely so much on internal development and the draft is never going to be a 100% proposition, this shit is going to happen sometimes. So you keep throwing dice and sooner or later the hole gets filled. It's just not always on a perfect timeline.

Thats why there's free agency.

But, in the end, you're gonna have holes somewhere. It's inevitable.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

When you rely so much on internal development and the draft is never going to be a 100% proposition, this shit is going to happen sometimes. So you keep throwing dice and sooner or later the hole gets filled. It's just not always on a perfect timeline.

I'm a huge proponent of building a team through the draft and adding complimentary players through free agency but as you've stated, this type of commitment can have its flaws.

That said, I truly feel like this is THE YEAR, despite Houston's absence. The offense is loaded with talent at the skill positions, regardless of who they keep or discard at WR or RB. The offensive line, despite Ehinger's lack of strength, has depth and having bookend tackles for the first time since 2003 is awesome.

Unlike so many others, I feel like the pass rush will be adequate. They may not be in the Top 5 in sacks but there should be plenty of pressure from the defensive line and Sutton should be able to manufacture sacks, like he did against the Bears using DJ.

The cornerback position is the huge question mark for me. While I would not have given Sean Smith 4/40, the better play may have been to Franchise Smith and sign Eric Weddle.

I just hope that the cornerback position isn't this year's fatal flaw because IMO, in all other aspects, they're a better team than last year and ready for a championship run.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I'm a huge proponent of building a team through the draft and adding complimentary players through free agency but as you've stated, this type of commitment can have its flaws.

That said, I truly feel like this is THE YEAR, despite Houston's absence. The offense is loaded with talent at the skill positions, regardless of who they keep or discard at WR or RB. The offensive line, despite Ehinger's lack of strength, has depth and having bookend tackles for the first time since 2003 is awesome.

Unlike so many others, I feel like the pass rush will be adequate. They may not be in the Top 5 in sacks but there should be plenty of pressure from the defensive line and Sutton should be able to manufacture sacks, like he did against the Bears using DJ.

The cornerback position is the huge question mark for me. While I would not have given Sean Smith 4/40, the better play may have been to Franchise Smith and sign Eric Weddle.

I just hope that the cornerback position isn't this year's fatal flaw because IMO, in all other aspects, they're a better team than last year and ready for a championship run.

I've come around to the idea that I'd have given Sean Smith a compeptive offer and that it might have kept him here, but in the end, I they got out of him what they needed and it was time to move on.

If the defense were just missing Houston or had the cornerback situation it does, I think they'd be ok for a while.

With both Houston out and the CB spot looking shaky, I worry about the defense.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by O.city

I've come around to the idea that I'd have given Sean Smith a compeptive offer and that it might have kept him here, but in the end, I they got out of him what they needed and it was time to move on.

I wasn't down with giving a 29 year old with a history of suspensions a multi-year contract but considering their lack of options, the Franchise Tag may have been the right play.

Or not.

Originally Posted by O.city

If the defense were just missing Houston or had the cornerback situation it does, I think they'd be ok for a while.

With both Houston out and the CB spot looking shaky, I worry about the defense.

I don't think we're going to see a dominant defense this year without Houston but given the schedule and lack of powerhouse offenses in the division, I don't think it'll be necessary to win the division or maybe even get the #1 seed.

And as we saw on Saturday, this offense has the potential to be scary. 45 offensive plays in the first half wore down the Bears defense and gave their offense little time on the field to get into a rhythm.

At this point in time, that type of potential is what's keeping me from being concerned about the pass rush, although the CB position is somewhat worrisome as of today.

But knowing Dorsey, he may find a guy of waivers, like he's done so many times in the past, that shores up the position. Hell, for all we know, Ackers plays just well enough to where any dropoff in secondary play from 2015 is unnoticeable.

It's the uncertainty that's nagging.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

I wasn't down with giving a 29 year old with a history of suspensions a multi-year contract but considering their lack of options, the Franchise Tag may have been the right play.

Or not.



I don't think we're going to see a dominant defense this year without Houston but given the schedule and lack of powerhouse offenses in the division, I don't think it'll be necessary to win the division or maybe even get the #1 seed.

And as we saw on Saturday, this offense has the potential to be scary. 45 offensive plays in the first half wore down the Bears defense and gave their offense little time on the field to get into a rhythm.

At this point in time, that type of potential is what's keeping me from being concerned about the pass rush, although the CB position is somewhat worrisome as of today.

But knowing Dorsey, he may find a guy of waivers, like he's done so many times in the past, that shores up the position. Hell, for all we know, Ackers plays just well enough to where any dropoff in secondary play from 2015 is unnoticeable.

It's the uncertainty that's nagging.

The problem is that one goes hand in hand with the other. The secondary being troublemsome is going to make it that much harder on the pass rush to get him, especially if the ball is coming out quick.

[The Franchise]

Giving Sean Smith the franchise tag would have been more than Berry's tag. I'm not sure how we fit that under the cap with the rest of our signings.