Are there any good reasons to move the controversial yet elite corner? We speculate about the Marcus Peters trade here.
Reports emerged on the 23rd that the Kansas City Chiefs and L.A. Rams agreed to a trade involving star corner Marcus Peters. After weeks of anonymous rumors regarding the availability of Peters, and much to the chagrin of real Chiefs fans, a deal has reportedly been completed. And while there are few good reasons for a deal to have been reached so early in the offseason without a bounty in return (reports are there is no big haul), let’s explore a couple reasons for a move of the star crossed defensive back. While we list possible explanations individually, obviously, the reasons behind such a move are likely far more complex.
Peters requested a trade:
This has been floated out by various media sources that Peters requested a trade after the Titans home playoff loss. At this point, it is unknown if such a request was made and at this point we will likely never know. However, if a request was made, following all that went down this season, perhaps the organization viewed now as the time to make a change. Again, at this point, we likely will never know.
Trade value was at its highest:
Depending on what comes back in the return (at the time of the writing, the return was both unknown and hotly debated), the Chiefs viewed this moment as the time to maximize the return on Peters. This may be the explanation I believe the least. While it has been widely discussed and thus accepted as fact that Peters would refuse to resign with the Chiefs, there doesn’t appear to be a thriving market for the services of the corner. The lack of a high demand would indicate the return value isn’t what many fans are hoping and rightfully expecting. At this point, based on pure conjecture and innuendo, it’s hard to imagine the Chiefs truly maximized the Peters value.
Too hot to handle:
Disclaimer: I’m only going to mention the Anthem ‘protest’ here once. If this was the catalyst for the move, then shame on everyone in the organization from Clark Hunt down. Perhaps naively so, but I’m going to believe this wasn’t nearly the factor we have made it out to be.
The biggest truth to this idea comes from the teams that were reportedly not interested in the services of Peters, namely the Cleveland Browns and Indianapolis Colts. Former GM John Dorsey in Cleveland and former assistant GM Chris Ballard worked extensively on the character and background of Peters (Ballard reportedly did extensive background work on the corner) when they were with the Chiefs, and neither team showed legitimate interest in the player. (The Browns were said to have ‘lukewarm’ interest.) Perhaps the people that know the Marcus Peters, both on and off the field the best were not motivated to bring in a top flight corner that is still on a rookie contract for two more seasons.
There comes a time which, in essence, the juice is not worth the squeeze, and perhaps that is what has happened here. This past season saw a slew of personal foul penalties, a walk off the field before the Jets game was finished and a team-issued one-game suspension. Perhaps Reid simply had enough. Again, much like the rumored trade request, we likely will never know. However, when moving a star player when you don’t have to, it’s hard to imagine this was a spur of the moment idea.
The return value is worth the trade:
Everything here on is purely speculation and rumor. No inside knowledge was used in writing of this section.
As of the moment of writing, it’s been over 24 hours since the knowledge of a trade became known. The Rams and Chiefs had worked out a trade involving Marcus Peters. Nothing else has been reported about the return in the trade except to say the Chiefs were NOT getting DE/EDGE Robert Quinn. Okay.
More from Arrowhead Addict
- Former Chiefs cornerback in legal trouble in Las Vegas
- Chiefs Kingdom: Get ready to break contract news
- Chiefs news: Travis Kelce wants to host fan ‘chug-off’ in Germany
- Podcast: Breaking down the Chiefs biggest roster battles
- KC Chiefs send Dave Merritt to NFL coaching accelerator
In a world in which the Alex Smith trade return was known hours after the news broke, a full 24 hour day has gone by without ANY indication of what is in return, except for a player that is not part of the deal. Or is he?
Perhaps there are contract negotiations going on behind the scenes between the Chiefs and the agent of a player, which would explain why there is no comment on the trade compensation because it hasn’t been fully decided yet. Perhaps parameters of a deal have been agreed upon based on the Chiefs’ ability to get a contract done with a player, and depending on if a deal is reached or not will affect just what the trade package turns out to be.
I bring up Robert Quinn simply because his name has been brought up. Why? No other names (outside of Peters obviously) have been mentioned, and in a slow part of the year, no NFL ‘insiders’ can get a sniff of what’s part of the trade. Quinn is entering the last year of a deal, and the Rams are looking at a lot of players that will be wanting big contracts. Matt Conner has brought this up as well, that his name being mentioned feels more ‘negotiation tactic’ than actual breaking news.
Another name could be Sammy Watkins, a pending free agent that could pair nicely next to Tyreek Hill. If the ‘Rams’ work out a contract for Watkins, that would then allow the Chiefs to trade for him. Parameters and such would have to be involved to make the deal work for both sides. It appears the Rams are not inclined to use the franchise tag the receiver, so perhaps something could be worked out.
Regardless of what happens, its appears certain the Chiefs are not afraid to make a big move or trade away a big name. At this point, the question of what they get in return remains to be seen, but at this point, it’s all conjecture—except for the fact the Chiefs have traded away one of the best young corners in the league.