Chiefs WalterFootball grades the Chiefs Free Agency LOL - Page 12

**Bufkin** · 03-15-2015, 12:10 AM

Chiefs sign WR Jeremy Maclin (5 years, $55M; $22.5M guaranteed): C- Grade
This move is getting a ton of hype, but it's all unjustified. This is a bad signing - and that goes for both Jeremy Maclin and the Chiefs.

Paying $11 million per year and $22.5 million in guarantees to Maclin is insane, considering his dubious injury history. Maclin finally stayed healthy last year and thrived as a consequence, but he has two bum knees and can't be counted on to have many more healthy seasons. It's also worth noting that Maclin's 2014 stats were inflated because of the number of snaps he played in Chip Kelly's offense. I'm not saying Maclin is a mediocre player, or anything; on the contrary, if he can stay healthy, he's very effective. He's just not the stellar No. 1 receiver that his 1,318 receiving yards say he is, and that's without even factoring in his health.

As for Maclin, you have to wonder what he's possibly thinking. I can't completely bash him because he's reuniting with his former head coach, but he's effectively sabotaging his career by choosing to play with Alex Smith. Maclin should've consulted Greg Jennings, Mike Wallace, James Jones, etc. about how it feels to take more money to play in a worse offense. All three receivers are regretting their decisions.

Chiefs sign G Paul Fanaika (3 years, $8.1 million): D Grade
Quite frankly, this is not a good move whatsoever. The Chiefs traded for Ben Grubbs earlier today - scroll down for that grade - but they wanted to add another guard. That's fine, but they could've done much better than Paul Fanaika. The former Arizona Cardinal was a dreadful blocker this past season in all regards. He doesn't seem like an upgrade, so it's puzzling that the Chiefs would sign him for nearly $3 million per year, especially when there were so many equal or better guards available, per the NFL Free Agent Rankings list.

Chiefs re-sign S Ron Parker (5 years, $30 million): D Grade
Uhh... did the Chiefs mean to re-sign Ron Parker to a 5-year, $3 million deal? Because that would've made more sense. Parker is barely a starter; he would be better served as a backup. He was decent enough in coverage this past season, but was an abomination in run support. In fact, aside from the injuries, Parker was the primary reason why Kansas City struggled to stop the rush in 2014.

Making matters worse, Parker has been a starter just one season in his 4-year career, so it's not like he even has a proven track record prior to his pedestrian 2014 campaign. I just don't get this signing, but I won't give the Chiefs a Millen grade because other teams were inexplicably interested in Parker's services as well.

Chiefs extend G Ben Grubbs (4 years, $24M; $8M guaranteed): B- Grade
I'm not as big a fan of this extension as I was of the initial trade. Giving away a fifth-round pick for a temporary upgrade at one of the guard positions made a lot of sense, but an extension with $8 million guaranteed isn't as good of a move.

This isn't a terrible extension, or anything, as it won't set Kansas City back very much if Grubbs flops. However, there's a chance that he will continue to regress. He's been a strong player throughout his career, but his play dropped off last year. He just turned 31, so that could continue. He should still be a temporary upgrade, but it's conceivable that Kansas City may want to cut him Year 2 into this deal.

philfree · 03-15-2015, 06:33 PM

Don't the other teams have to ask for permission to talk to Houston and his agent and state that they are willing to give up the compensation before an offer sheet can be offered and signed? I haven't heard/read a peep about anyone having an interest in signing Houston.

jd1020 · 03-15-2015, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

Neat. Good to see you still don't understand the concept that even with a big ****ing asterisk next to his name, he can still talk to other teams and figure out exactly what his worth is.

That's the concept of testing the free agency waters. grts

Maybe you should try learning the concept of the effects of not being free has on contract negotiations.

BryanBusby · 03-15-2015, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

Maybe you should try learning the concept of the effects of not being free has on contract negotiations.

Don't you understand the concept of that ****ing doesn't matter and teams could tell him exactly what they'd give him if/when he becomes a UFA?

The Dolphins unofficially did this with Branden Albert and wow holy shit he was signed so quick when FA began the next year.

milkman · 03-15-2015, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

It kind of does.

No it doesn't.

He is not under contract and is allowed to talk to any team and negotiate a contract.

That, by definition, is a free agent.

And as such, he is being allowed to test the waters, whether teams contact him, or he has to initaitate contact.

milkman · 03-15-2015, 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Don't the other teams have to ask for permission to talk to Houston and his agent and state that they are willing to give up the compensation before an offer sheet can be offered and signed? I haven't heard/read a peep about anyone having an interest in signing Houston.

No permission required.

jd1020 · 03-15-2015, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

No it doesn't.

He is not under contract and is allowed to talk to any team and negotiate a contract.

That, by definition, is a free agent.

And as such, he is being allowed to test the waters, whether teams contact him, or he has to initaitate contact.

You're right. The fact that Houston can only leave KC on their authority has no impact on his status as a free agent.

Tell me. How many offer sheets does a 26 year old OLB that just had a 22 sack season have on the table right now? Being a free agent he should have at least 5.

I highly doubt that any team is seriously talking with Houston because he is in fact not free.

**SAUTO** · 03-15-2015, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Technically he is a free agent until he signs the tender offer.

The fact that he is tagged and demands 2 first round pick compensation doesn't change the fact that he is a free agent.

Free agent always meant to me you didn't have to give anything up to sign them.

BryanBusby · 03-15-2015, 06:40 PM

If you understood football at all, you'd know why they wouldn't bother talking to Houston now.

philfree · 03-15-2015, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

No permission required.

Maybe I's thinking that in regards to the other teams wanting to give less than the two 1sts. None the less I have seen no chatter on Houston.

jd1020 · 03-15-2015, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanBusby

If you understood football at all, you'd know why they wouldn't bother talking to Houston now.

Oh so as soon as the draft is over he's going to get flooded with offers? OK!

**SAUTO** · 03-15-2015, 06:41 PM

Does anyone think suh is in Miami at the contract cost and also costing two first rounders?

milkman · 03-15-2015, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jd1020

You're right. The fact that Houston can only leave KC on their authority has no impact on his status as a free agent.

Tell me. How many offer sheets does a 26 year old OLB that just had a 22 sack season have on the table right now? Being a free agent he should have at least 5.

I highly doubt that any team is seriously talking with Houston because he is in fact not free.

Once again, none of the other shit matters.

He is not under contract.

He's a free agent.

Urc Burry · 03-15-2015, 06:47 PM

This was my dream off season AND we got Ben Grubbs. I don't give a shit what Walter thinks

BryanBusby · 03-15-2015, 06:47 PM

Nobody is outright insisting that a team is going to happily hand over 2 first round picks to the rights for Houston.

Teams can talk all ****ing day and night about contract numbers with Houston. This gives him and his agent a good idea exactly what his worth would be.

If a team really wants him bad than they would have to negotiate with the Chiefs, if they choose not to pay 2 firsts.

If I were a team like the Indianapolis Colts, who are on the cusp of being in the Super Bowl, I'd probably make the move right after the draft ends. The two picks would be future (likely late firsts) and you just weakened a potential playoff threat in the process.

If and when the Chiefs got a good offer for him on the table, they would have to seriously consider it. If they've pissed him off enough, he may never sign a longterm contract here and they may want to consider the haul they'd get in return.

jd1020 · 03-15-2015, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

He is not under contract.

He's a free agent.

I'll think I'll bow out and let you bash your head against the wall in your padded room and your helmet strapped up.

03-15-2015, 12:10 AM
Bufkin Just here for the Royals Join Date: Jul 2014 Casino cash: $10029260	WalterFootball grades the Chiefs Free Agency LOL Chiefs sign WR Jeremy Maclin (5 years, $55M; $22.5M guaranteed): C- Grade This move is getting a ton of hype, but it's all unjustified. This is a bad signing - and that goes for both Jeremy Maclin and the Chiefs. Paying $11 million per year and $22.5 million in guarantees to Maclin is insane, considering his dubious injury history. Maclin finally stayed healthy last year and thrived as a consequence, but he has two bum knees and can't be counted on to have many more healthy seasons. It's also worth noting that Maclin's 2014 stats were inflated because of the number of snaps he played in Chip Kelly's offense. I'm not saying Maclin is a mediocre player, or anything; on the contrary, if he can stay healthy, he's very effective. He's just not the stellar No. 1 receiver that his 1,318 receiving yards say he is, and that's without even factoring in his health. As for Maclin, you have to wonder what he's possibly thinking. I can't completely bash him because he's reuniting with his former head coach, but he's effectively sabotaging his career by choosing to play with Alex Smith. Maclin should've consulted Greg Jennings, Mike Wallace, James Jones, etc. about how it feels to take more money to play in a worse offense. All three receivers are regretting their decisions. Chiefs sign G Paul Fanaika (3 years, $8.1 million): D Grade Quite frankly, this is not a good move whatsoever. The Chiefs traded for Ben Grubbs earlier today - scroll down for that grade - but they wanted to add another guard. That's fine, but they could've done much better than Paul Fanaika. The former Arizona Cardinal was a dreadful blocker this past season in all regards. He doesn't seem like an upgrade, so it's puzzling that the Chiefs would sign him for nearly $3 million per year, especially when there were so many equal or better guards available, per the NFL Free Agent Rankings list. Chiefs re-sign S Ron Parker (5 years, $30 million): D Grade Uhh... did the Chiefs mean to re-sign Ron Parker to a 5-year, $3 million deal? Because that would've made more sense. Parker is barely a starter; he would be better served as a backup. He was decent enough in coverage this past season, but was an abomination in run support. In fact, aside from the injuries, Parker was the primary reason why Kansas City struggled to stop the rush in 2014. Making matters worse, Parker has been a starter just one season in his 4-year career, so it's not like he even has a proven track record prior to his pedestrian 2014 campaign. I just don't get this signing, but I won't give the Chiefs a Millen grade because other teams were inexplicably interested in Parker's services as well. Chiefs extend G Ben Grubbs (4 years, $24M; $8M guaranteed): B- Grade I'm not as big a fan of this extension as I was of the initial trade. Giving away a fifth-round pick for a temporary upgrade at one of the guard positions made a lot of sense, but an extension with $8 million guaranteed isn't as good of a move. This isn't a terrible extension, or anything, as it won't set Kansas City back very much if Grubbs flops. However, there's a chance that he will continue to regress. He's been a strong player throughout his career, but his play dropped off last year. He just turned 31, so that could continue. He should still be a temporary upgrade, but it's conceivable that Kansas City may want to cut him Year 2 into this deal.
Posts: 4,052

03-15-2015, 06:33 PM	#166
philfree Indian Twitter Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Free Agency Casino cash: $1236198	Don't the other teams have to ask for permission to talk to Houston and his agent and state that they are willing to give up the compensation before an offer sheet can be offered and signed? I haven't heard/read a peep about anyone having an interest in signing Houston. __________________ [/SIGPIC]
Posts: 15,048

03-15-2015, 06:40 PM	#173
BryanBusby In Search of a Life Join Date: Mar 2006 Casino cash: $3709900 VARSITY	If you understood football at all, you'd know why they wouldn't bother talking to Houston now.
Posts: 22,231

03-15-2015, 06:41 PM	#176
SAUTO Shit Join Date: Jun 2008 Casino cash: $10039067	Does anyone think suh is in Miami at the contract cost and also costing two first rounders?
Posts: 55,715

03-15-2015, 06:47 PM	#178
Urc Burry Veteran Join Date: Jan 2011 Casino cash: $9031048	This was my dream off season AND we got Ben Grubbs. I don't give a shit what Walter thinks
Posts: 2,465

03-15-2015, 06:47 PM	#179
BryanBusby In Search of a Life Join Date: Mar 2006 Casino cash: $3709900 VARSITY	Nobody is outright insisting that a team is going to happily hand over 2 first round picks to the rights for Houston. Teams can talk all ****ing day and night about contract numbers with Houston. This gives him and his agent a good idea exactly what his worth would be. If a team really wants him bad than they would have to negotiate with the Chiefs, if they choose not to pay 2 firsts. If I were a team like the Indianapolis Colts, who are on the cusp of being in the Super Bowl, I'd probably make the move right after the draft ends. The two picks would be future (likely late firsts) and you just weakened a potential playoff threat in the process. If and when the Chiefs got a good offer for him on the table, they would have to seriously consider it. If they've pissed him off enough, he may never sign a longterm contract here and they may want to consider the haul they'd get in return.
Posts: 22,231