Marcus Peters Thread

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
If there is any truth to the report, why would the Chiefs be looking to unload a young star CB on a cheap rookie contract?

That is the $64,000 question. All the answers are somewhat speculative.

As far as the 49ers go, Lynch would have to give up a lot of valuable capital going forward in order to get KC to send him here. It is going to cost a LOT more than a 3rd round pick as some have suggested. I think such a deal starts with a 1st round pick...and...if he plays like he has the past two years, he would be worth one 1st. Will KC demand more than that?

People overestimate trade compensation for these players. Particularly non-QBs. If they want more than a late 2nd...they can keep him or move him to another team willing to do that. You have a very good player who has character concerns and would require a long term deal to justify the trade compensation. Unless it's packaged with something else, nobody is giving up a 1st for that straight up.

Originally posted by ninerfan4life:
Everyone has been b***hing for years that we should have drafted Peters over Armstead. And now that he's available for trade no one wants him lol

Define "everyone"

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by ninerfan4life:

Everyone has been b***hing for years that we should have drafted Peters over Armstead. And now that he's available for trade no one wants him lol

Define "everyone"

Yeah it's just like 4 or 5 posters who are just very loud about it.

Originally posted by ninerfan4life:

Everyone has been b***hing for years that we should have drafted Peters over Armstead. And now that he's available for trade no one wants him lol

It's not the samething when u gotta trade something for him + give out an extension. Doesn't change the fact that we shoulda drafted him and had 3 or 4 good seasons at a rookie contract rate.

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
Quotes like the bolded make me laugh and shake my head.

Let me ask you this. Has it happened before? The answer is no. It absolutely has not. So why do people continue to make comments like his "attitude can cost his team games" when that has happened all of zero times before?

Peters helps a team far more than he hurts it. People simply like running with a narrative.

If there is any truth to the report, why would the Chiefs be looking to unload a young star CB on a cheap rookie contract?

Good call!

IMO, the guy is trouble.

Talent is HUGE x 10. Absolutely no question.

It's what comes w/it.

Can we win w/out him?

Absolutely - no question.

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by okdkid:
The real risk here is not in the trade compensation. It's in the extension.

You can't make a deal for Peters unless his agent agrees to provisions in any extension that protect the team for behavioral issues. If that doesn't happen, there's not shot at a deal.

Why does a player who is under team control for 2 more seasons under a rookie contract have to agree to an extension? Another thing that makes zero sense, yet people are running with this idea like its a fact.

Say you dont extend him. You pay him $3M in total over the next 2 years. Then say you franchise him him for year 3. You have then collectively paid one of the best cornerbacks in football a grand total of $17M for 3 years. Can anyone else say bargain?

Your numbers aren't anywhere close to being accurate.

You are right. His option would cost $9M.

Even with that being said, what team wouldnt pay $7+M a year for an elite cornerback?

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
If there is any truth to the report, why would the Chiefs be looking to unload a young star CB on a cheap rookie contract?

That is the $64,000 question. All the answers are somewhat speculative.

As far as the 49ers go, Lynch would have to give up a lot of valuable capital going forward in order to get KC to send him here. It is going to cost a LOT more than a 3rd round pick as some have suggested. I think such a deal starts with a 1st round pick...and...if he plays like he has the past two years, he would be worth one 1st. Will KC demand more than that?

People overestimate trade compensation for these players. Particularly non-QBs. If they want more than a late 2nd...they can keep him or move him to another team willing to do that. You have a very good player who has character concerns and would require a long term deal to justify the trade compensation. Unless it's packaged with something else, nobody is giving up a 1st for that straight up.

As I said in an earlier post, I think KC is fishing to see what they might get for him. As good as he is, if they could get two starting quality players for him, they would make the deal. Same as if someone gave them a first, although I can't see anyone giving a top-half 1st for him.

KC needs to fill holes and has zero cap money to spend. Two players or two draft picks might get it done.

At the end of the day, he stays in KC. The "character" issues will prevent anyone from giving KC the kind of deal they need.

SIGN HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEM!

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by okdkid:
The real risk here is not in the trade compensation. It's in the extension.

You can't make a deal for Peters unless his agent agrees to provisions in any extension that protect the team for behavioral issues. If that doesn't happen, there's not shot at a deal.

Why does a player who is under team control for 2 more seasons under a rookie contract have to agree to an extension? Another thing that makes zero sense, yet people are running with this idea like its a fact.

Say you dont extend him. You pay him $3M in total over the next 2 years. Then say you franchise him him for year 3. You have then collectively paid one of the best cornerbacks in football a grand total of $17M for 3 years. Can anyone else say bargain?

Your numbers aren't anywhere close to being accurate.

You are right. His option would cost $9M.

Even with that being said, what team wouldnt pay $7+M a year for an elite cornerback?

If he didnt come with emotional baggage every team in the league would pay that. In fact, the Chiefs would probably franchise him at a much higher rate. However, he does come with those issues and the 49ers arent going to go after another problem when they have to deal with Foster too.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Phoenix49ers:
If there is any truth to the report, why would the Chiefs be looking to unload a young star CB on a cheap rookie contract?

That is the $64,000 question. All the answers are somewhat speculative.

As far as the 49ers go, Lynch would have to give up a lot of valuable capital going forward in order to get KC to send him here. It is going to cost a LOT more than a 3rd round pick as some have suggested. I think such a deal starts with a 1st round pick...and...if he plays like he has the past two years, he would be worth one 1st. Will KC demand more than that?

People overestimate trade compensation for these players. Particularly non-QBs. If they want more than a late 2nd...they can keep him or move him to another team willing to do that. You have a very good player who has character concerns and would require a long term deal to justify the trade compensation. Unless it's packaged with something else, nobody is giving up a 1st for that straight up.

As I said in an earlier post, I think KC is fishing to see what they might get for him. As good as he is, if they could get two starting quality players for him, they would make the deal. Same as if someone gave them a first, although I can't see anyone giving a top-half 1st for him.

KC needs to fill holes and has zero cap money to spend. Two players or two draft picks might get it done.

At the end of the day, he stays in KC. The "character" issues will prevent anyone from giving KC the kind of deal they need.

If money is as big of an issue as you have been claiming for the past couple days, then there is no way Peters could yield 2 quality starting players for him. I mean, right? Unless you are getting two quality starting players on their rookie deals, how could the Chiefs make this work if they have no money? Then again, if they are after two quality starters on rookie deals, the other team would never make that trade.

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
If he didnt come with emotional baggage every team in the league would pay that. In fact, the Chiefs would probably franchise him at a much higher rate. However, he does come with those issues and the 49ers arent going to go after another problem when they have to deal with Foster too.

I know what you are saying. But people keep claiming that Peters has these problems and issues that are compared to Foster....and they are not even comparable. That is my issue. Foster cant stay out of handcuffs, and people are comparing that to a player who chucked a refs flag into the stands.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:
If he didnt come with emotional baggage every team in the league would pay that. In fact, the Chiefs would probably franchise him at a much higher rate. However, he does come with those issues and the 49ers arent going to go after another problem when they have to deal with Foster too.

I know what you are saying. But people keep claiming that Peters has these problems and issues that are compared to Foster....and they are not even comparable. That is my issue. Foster cant stay out of handcuffs, and people are comparing that to a player who chucked a refs flag into the stands.

I agree that his problems arent close to being the same as Fosters. I could easily see other teams going after him but I seriously doubt the Niners would take that chance right now.

Headcase but great skills.

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I know what you are saying. But people keep claiming that Peters has these problems and issues that are compared to Foster....and they are not even comparable. That is my issue. Foster cant stay out of handcuffs, and people are comparing that to a player who chucked a refs flag into the stands.

There are many other instances of emotional volatility that just that one. His issues are on the field, Fosters are off of it. Not the type of personality this locker room needs right now.

Originally posted by evil:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
I know what you are saying. But people keep claiming that Peters has these problems and issues that are compared to Foster....and they are not even comparable. That is my issue. Foster cant stay out of handcuffs, and people are comparing that to a player who chucked a refs flag into the stands.

There are many other instances of emotional volatility that just that one. His issues are on the field, Fosters are off of it. Not the type of personality this locker room needs right now.

Such as?