Saving money by drafting Cam Erving

[RealSNR]

In 2013, I hated the Eric Fisher pick for multiple reasons. Worst of all was the idea of letting a pretty good LT walk for an average yearly salary for $9.400,000, which for a starting LT isn't bad as long as you're really confident in the player you acquired. Some people didn't like Albert as much as me... whatever. But our replacement for him was the #1 overall pick, whose contract was worth 4 years $22 million, or a yearly average of about 5.5 million. For the #1 overall pick, we got a worse player in the short term (small school) and possibly the long term all so we could save about $4 million per year on the cap.

The idea of drafting Cam Erving isn't quite as bad, but it's still the same philosophy. We're avoiding a much worse fate (paying 9 million/year for a C instead of a LT) than with Albert's contract situation, and our hypothetical replacement is at the #18 overall pick instead of at #1. Last year's 17th, 18th, and 19th overall picks are making somewhere around 4 years, 8-9 million, so the contract is also far better than Eric Fisher's meddling pennies we would have saved over not paying Albert. However, we're also spending a 1st on a C and a worse player than the guy who left town.

I'm fine with using a 1st to replace aging guys on the brink of retirement like in Hali's case. I'm fine using a 1st in large position groups like CB and WR, where depth is so crucial that you can never have too many good players stacked up. And I'm also fine with using a 1st to fill a hole or oust somebody who's just not any good, which is why I'm cool with La'el Collins or a true RT in the 1st.

But I can't stand using a 1st rounder just to avoid paying good starting players that the team wants to keep. It turns the 1st round pick, aka the most consistent source of finding blue chip franchise players, and it turns it into a game played by your front office salary cap guys and not your talent scouts. It's WORSE than drafting for need-- it's essentially drafting for a need that you manufactured.

This is at least a better situation than Eric Fisher. We're saving about $6.5-7 million per year on the cap for our starting C. That's better than saving a piddly $3.5-4 million per year on the cap for our starting LT. And as much as I like Kush, he's not like Branden Albert, an established veteran that we knew was good enough to not only start but play pretty well.

So do you think the money savings coupled with the poor positional value in the draft and decrease in playing ability is worth it for Cam Erving?

[jonzie04]

speaking of only cap value, the biggest bargains are going to come from qb, lt, wr, cb, and pass rusher.

10th highest paid for each position
QB 17.6m
LT 8.5m
WR 9.7m
4-3de/3-4 olb-10m
CB 9.5m

C- 6.2m and the 11th highest paid C in the nfl "only" makes 3.2m a year.

If whatever player we draft in the first develops into a top 10 type player, a center would only offer more value than a guard, a 3-4 end, fb, and a 4-3 olb.

a big reason why seattles been able to keep their team in tact is by saving nearly 17m a year due to russel wilson being on a rookie contract.

i know there are more factors to selecting a player, but this thread is about cap savings, and a first round center offers very little. i'd like to see is grab a tackle with lt potential, or a cb for when sean smith wants his 10+m a year after next season. or any other fallers.

[Urc Burry]

Originally Posted by Dicky McElephant

When was Fisher widely considered to be the best player in the draft? Pretty sure that up until draft day....they had us going back and forth between Fisher and Joekel.

After the senior bowl. It was either him or Joeckel at the top of 90% of big boards. Most had Fisher at the top with the higher upside

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

It's very rare to find an OL that has the feet to play LT and strength and brawn to play center.

I try not to get hung up on the position as much as the player. IMHO, at 18 if you draft a guy that becomes a pro bowler and locks down that position for the next decade it was a great pick regardless of whether it's a C, S, ILB or even G.

Hudson was that type of player.

Then he wanted to get paid and the Chiefs said, "No. It's not worth it."

I still believe the Chiefs were right to not pay that money to Hudson. So what's to stop the exact same scenario from happening with Erving if he becomes the greatest C of all time? If Dorsey didn't want to fork over the money this time, I highly doubt he'll want to do so in 4 years.

[Easy 6]

No first round fatties, period... I'd be more than ok with picking up a RT like Havenstein in the 2-3 range, or a Jarvis Harrison project for guard.

Grab a veteran backup center after camp cuts.

But no first rounders, please... only playmakers need apply.

[O.city]

Simply put, this is a reason you always take BPA especially in the later rounds. Take talent, let it sort itself out, then you don't have to overpay for guys like hudson. They've got kush, let him play.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by Urc Burry

Letting Hudson walk proves that this regime doesn't value the position like other teams. We had one of the best in the league and let him walk to draft another in the first? This isn't the same as Abert/Fisher. Albert was damn near 30, always banged up, and got paid 11 a year. And Fisher was widely considered the best player in the draft. Hudson was 25 and one of the top at his position, and we let him walk.. Erving is far from a sure thing. Best case scenario he is as good as Hudson was in 2 years

Albert was 27 and had missed 5 games in his entire tenure with the Chiefs when we entered the 2013 draft. Also, sportrac says he's getting about 9.5 million/year, NOT 11/year. Also, HE'S A ****ING LT, not a C.

That's hardly what I would call "damn near 30 and, always banged up, and got paid 11 a year"

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by O.city

I think it would be worth it simply for the reaction of SNR.

I'm already dead inside. The Colts loss changed me forever.

I'll probably say "**** you, Dorsey" and move on.

[SeeingRed]

I dont think it would be a bad pick to be honest

[nychief]

We save money by starting kush, this is a straw man argument methinks.

[Sandy Vagina]

First thought:

- In terms of a football fan, and the decisions that your team makes... accept what you can not control. Too many people suck at this.

Players (and agents) have the right to state their demands and set their value.
GMs have the right to set their value and limit on what they will pay that player before he even opens his mouth.

Branden Albert and Hudson set their price.. and it clearly was far more than KC was willing to pay. Maybe they were just happy to get the **** out of Missouri. So be it.. time to move on.

As for whether Erving is a worthy candidate for #18? Well, that is obviously subjective. Would he be ready to start right away? There have been some good and fair comments that suggest he would not be.. so that of course if true may push him out of being worthy of #18. I have seen a dozen or so sites that have him anywhere from mid-1st rd to mid-2nd... so #18 doesn't seem unreasonable to consider.

.. and if they want to wait till day 3 to address C competition for Kush? Fine by me too. Life's too short to make a big deal about things that are so far out of our control.

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

If Dorsey drafts Cam Erving at #18, he's dead to me.

That's silly. It should be about wins and losses.

[Mav]

Originally Posted by Easy 6

No first round fatties, period... I'd be more than ok with picking up a RT like Havenstein in the 2-3 range, or a Jarvis Harrison project for guard.



Grab a veteran backup center after camp cuts.



But no first rounders, please... only playmakers need apply.

Lol. But Andy needs a rib eating buddy.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Billay

That's silly. It should be about wins and losses.

The Chiefs will win far more games by adding a skilled playmaker in the first round, whether it's WR, CB, TE or ILB, than a 6'5 offensive lineman that is a jack of all trades and master of none.

[prhom]

If they are worried about replacing players slated to become high-priced FAs then I would think CB or OLB would be at the top of their list.

[RunKC]

Sorry guys you know this is coming....

@TerezPaylor: NFL Network analyst @CFD22 says one player who might make sense for the #Chiefs is FSU center Cameron Erving.

@TerezPaylor: NFL Network analyst @MoveTheSticks thinks the #Chiefs could go with Texas A&M OT Cedric Ogbuehi.