« Lemonier among last of private visits Dolphins will host | Main | Dolphins to open '13 season at Cleveland; close vs. Jets »

Dolphins move on Albert should depend on details

Sometimes the devil is in the details and that's where the Dolphins are with Branden Albert.

As multiple media sources reported Wednesday, and as I reported on this blog on March 22, the Dolphins are considering making a trade for the Kansas City Chiefs franchise player.

[Update: John Clayton of ESPN is reporting the Dolphins have been given permission to speak with Albert and he'll visit the Dolphins and take a physical soon. Barry Jackson of The Miami Herald is reporting the sides are talking contract.]

On its face, the idea makes sense.

The Dolphins lost left tackle Jake Long to St. Louis in free agency. The club has a need and coach Joe Philbin didn't exactly endorse the idea of Jonathan Martin as his starting left tackle when he discussed the issue last month. The Dolphins also had a price point for Long and they have not used the cap space that was intended for Long on anyone else.

So the team can afford to sign Branden Albert and believes Albert to be a left tackle upgrade over Martin.

But ...

The devil is in the details.

The only way this trade makes sense is if the Dolphins do it in conjunction with another trade and only after Texas A&M left tackle Luke Joeckel comes off the board on draft day. That's right, this trade only makes sense if Joeckel isn't available because if he is on draft day, the Dolphins look like fools.

Consider:

If Joeckel goes No. 1 overall to Kansas City, then the Dolphins can be certain the best LT in the draft is gone and they move on. But if KC picks Eric Fisher and Joekel drops to No. 3 or No. 4, the Dolphins must, must, must try to trade up to get him. That move would be expensive in that it would require a second-round pick and other considerations. But it makes more sense than the Albert trade because that also will require a second-round pick plus a more expensive contract than Joeckel.

And Joeckel, unproven in the NFL as he is, is probably going to be a better player than Albert.

So the Dolphins would be going for a better player (Joeckel) using basically the same draft pick compensation (well, maybe more expensive but only slightly) and pay a lower contract in the transaction.

So if the Dolphins don't wait for draft day to make this Albert trade, they're not really thinking through all the contingencies. And if Joeckel then falls, the Dolphins will look downright foolish.

Then there is this:

Even if Joeckel goes No. 1 overall as expected, the Dolphins can simply trade a No. 2 for Albert, but they would still look kind of silly. You see, why pay a high draft pick and a big contract to Branden Albert when you could have had Jake Long for the big contract and kept the pick?

You mean to say the Dolphins played hardball with Long only to cave on Albert?

I understand Long is seemingly diminished and often injured. Trust me, I made the point here many times. But Albert comes with no guarantees, either. He basically had a very good season in 2012. But it was only good enough for the Chiefs to want to trade him. He's been injured during his career. He's struggled with weight issues. He was a turnstile in 2009, giving up nine sacks.

And, again, the Chiefs are willing to let him go so they can draft a rookie to play the same position.

So it's not like Branden Albert is a slam dunk worth-it move.

This is where the devil has to be in the details.

If the Dolphins pay Albert as much as Long got in St. Louis, they look dumb. If the Dolphins get Albert for much cheaper, they still have a find a way to recover that second-round pick they still gave up for him.

And how do they do that?

Well, here is my perfect scenario that would prevent me from thinking the Dolphins got ripped off on getting Branden Albert. If the Dolphins trade away their lower of two second-round picks for Albert and then trade down from No. 12 overall to a lower pick in the first round while then pickinng up a second-rounder for the move, I'll be straight. I'll be good.

The haul would then be a lower first, Albert (albeit at a big contract) and two second rounders for all those moves.

The trade down would mitigate the sting of giving up a second for Albert because it recovers a second-rounder for the trade down.

By the way, if the Dolphins somehow end up giving Albert more money than Long got from St. Louis, something is significantly amiss because even with his multiple injury issues, Long was still a better player than Albert when healthy.

All this has to play out.

The devil will be in the details.

 

needs to be part of another draft-day trade down

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

FIrst off I don't like trading 1st or 2nd rd picks for vets but whatever, better than dedicating your first and 2nd picks plus an additional one down the road for a LT. But whatever they do, don't repeat the mistakes of 2010 and trade down and out of drafting one of the class' best players. Forget the 2nd pick. It's done, gone. Used on a 28 year old guy who plays at a very good level. That's who your 2nd rd pick is.

Do not draft down to take the Odricks and Misis of the world. Take the BPA at 12 - regardless of position.

ALBERT WILL USE NATURAL OVAL MOTION IN PARAMETERS METRICS OF PLAY STYLE ALL IS REVEALED IN LATERAL MOVEMENT AND PIVOT ABILITY.

I would like see the Dolphins take Jonathan Copper or the TE from notre dame at number 12 or trade down.

This may not happen anyway. The Dolphins only have a little over 8 million in CAP space to use for Albert so he'd have to sign with Miami lower than what he'd make next year with KC. If he signs with Miami and the deal is done Albert must really want out of KC.

check Palm Beach Ben Volin Article - it has some good details.

http://blogs.palmbeachpost.com/thedailydolphin/2013/04/18/miami-dolphins-talking-points-trade-for-branden-albert-would-reinforce-jeff-irelands-need-to-win-at-all-costs-in-2013/

id take warmack,jones, or millner. omne of those guys will be there

if we give up our 2nd 2nd then we essentially traded Davis for Albert but we earned our early 2nd draft pick... which is a pretty big difference imo

texas that isnt true at all. kc wont do long term deal. miami will

Craig, you payign the bills? Who cares if there's another big contract? They have the space and the time for acquiring talent is done. They are in good cap shape.

Blog,

To Easy To Answer. But If I Do You Are Going To Cry Foul.

So I Would Keep My Joke To Myself.

We Don't Have Good Ham Sandwiches In Sfla. We Have Good Steak Sandwiches. But You Already Knew That.

I like The Sub Shop By The Stadium. Right Up The Street From Me.

Dusty - Yes, we'll do long term but Albert stands to make 9.8 Million from KC this year guaranteed. If he signs with Miami it would be in the 7 million range I would think this season. That is losing over 2 million dollars in 1 year. That is a lot of money for job security.

Posted by: B33RCA53 | April 18, 2013 at 01:51 PM

Im one of the few here not riding the Eiffert train. Keller had a much greater combine than Eiffert. If both were in this draft, Keller would clearly be the 1st TE chosen.

Keller was the Jets 2008 1st rd pick. I also love that it was Keller's request of a 1yr contract to "prove himself". You have to absolute love that in any player.

Basically, Im of, "Why draft a TE 1st rd, when we already have one on the team?" Keller is a 2008 1st rd pick of the NYJ's.

texas he would get bonus, def be more guaranteed money and a longer deal

"Speaking on his pre-draft conference call, NFL Network's Mike Mayock said he doesn't envision any of the top three offensive tackles making it to the Cardinals at No. 7."

Unbelievable if this happens.

TGH--I think that radio commentator MIGHT be getting ahead of himself. Remember the 2005 draft when we took Ronnie??? Check out this top 10;

1) Alex Smith (Eh...)
2) Ronnie Brown (Done)
3) Braylon Edwards (Done)
4) Cadillac Williams (Long Gone)
5) Cedric Benson (Done)
6) Pacman Jones (Nightmarish bust)
7) Troy Williamson (Bust)
8) Antrel Rolle (Good player)
9) Carlos Rogers (Good player)
10)Mike Williams (Bust)

pacman still in league, solid corner. benson far from done.smith just dealt for 2-2nd rds weak draft but tell the truth of it

..I don't know fellas...The way I read it, or understand it. Any player that has been franchised that gets traded. The team taking on the trade has to pay the player the amount of his franchise number. So it would be the number Albert is getting from KC...

I may be interpreting this wrong..Go read Phinsider. They brake it down. That is how it read.


I only hope he well paid for supreme expert of expertise he falsely exhibits here.

Posted by: Yesterday's Gone 4Ever! | April 18, 2013 at 01:42 PM

I know you meant well and tried Honey. That's all we can ask.

Now pick up your crayons and coloring books and put them away before your Father gets home.

(He's so cute when tries to play big boy)

re: a contract for Albert....maybe it's front loaded with guarantee money, which would be distributed over the life of the deal...we don't know....but who cares...I'm sure if it wasn't doable, the deal would never have been entertained...relax.....Jeffy has his junk together ....finally..

Go Fins!!!

Do not draft down to take the Odricks and Misis of the world. Take the BPA at 12 - regardless of position.

Mark,

I'm with you there. I'd rather have one very good player over two that are just okay any day of the week.

DD - That is true unless you can get a player to sign a new contract. Being able to talk to Albert means we struck a deal with KC but Albert would have to agree to a new contract for the trade to go through.

Brandon Albert Already Lives In Miami. Doubt He Has To Travel Far To Meet With Ireland.

If Lamar Miller doesnt perform or gets injured this could get 1-15 ugly.

This is just an idea of why Miami needed to severely upgrade not only the receiving talent around Tannehill but also the 5 guys blocking for him.

Trade a 2nd for Albert and draft Warmack!!!
Posted by: AndyNJ | April 18, 2013 at 10:05 AM

probably right

Shouldn't that be spending money ON a drunken hooker and not LIKE a drunken hooker...


brake it down. That is how it read.

Posted by: DarrylDunphy | April 18, 2013 at 02:03 PM

=======================================

A "brake" is what you stop a freaking CAR with, nitwit.

It's BREAK!!

Texas,
Im all for TDs and turnovers too but adding an elite talent like Warmack or Cooper would be very tempting considering the slam dunk that Pouncey has been in just 2 years. Pouncey was picked at 15 and according to many Centers shouldn't be picked at 15 and now Guards at 12 but thats hogwash to me. If a player has a chance to be dominant which Warmack certainly does and he's there @ #12, fills a huge need and is BPA, forget his positional value as a guard.
Posted by: AndyNJ | April 18, 2013 at 10:36 AM

right again

DD - I believe that is how it read but that isn't true.


The answer is NO YG.

Albert, Ireland and Aponte would have to hammer out a new contract BEFORE the Trade can be approved.

Posted by: odinseye | April 18, 2013 at 01:55 PM

If it isn't allowed for 1 team to franchise 2 players, I would think the same rule would apply in 1 team carrying 2 franchised contracts. Its the same damn thing.

So I would be shocked if the league approved a Albert trade without 1st Miami/KC hammering out a contract that gets Albert from underneath the franchise tag.

Either that, or, just make a Albert for Starks trade. Which is simply a franchised players swap. Then draft a DT to replace Starks. Now, this trade works on the books and meets all legal ramifications. Plus KC gets something for rather than nothing for Albert.

But for this scenario to work out, we would also need to hear Starks is on the way to KC to take a physical. LOL...

This trade will go through, and unless there is a player at 12 they absolutely love, they will likely trade back and recoup the 2nd.

Love the move!

Granted that Tannehill needs all the help he can get. He flat out sucked last year.

You also have to remember that A. Rodgers Went In That Draft.

A. Smith and A. Rodgers are Better Than Any QB in This Draft. I Would Say Any Draft That Has Mark Sanchez Top 5. Is a Bad Draft.

Tannehill got shut out when Jake Long didnt play.

i disagree, smith is not very good. one of these qbs will def be better


Do not draft down to take the Odricks and Misis of the world. Take the BPA at 12 - regardless of position.

Posted by: Mark in Toronto | April 18, 2013 at 01:55 PM

Nice Mark, I posted the exact same thing the other day.

Armando posts it and all the Sheeples affirm in unison. If Mando said we should Trade Down for Tyrone Biggums Mando's trained Monkey would be wondering what his Number is so he could buy his Jersey!

NO MORE Misi's or Odrick's!!!!

Hey Vetran - Thanks for re-posting that.

There are different ways of looking at that.

1. You could say get another top notch gaurd (And I agree that both Warmack and Cooper are top notch). And with that your running game and pass protection will be better.

2. You could say getting a top notch WR talent such as Austin would help both the passing and running game due to the fact there will always be match up nightmares for opponents Defenses. Therefore it would take less time for Tannehill to get rid of the ball plus Safety's will not be able to cheat up to the line.

So either way works but for me the 2nd way is better if you already have a pretty decent OLine. And the one added feature Austin would add is that he could score any time he touches the ball. Will he, probably not, but there is always that threat that will keep defenses honest.

With a lineup such as Wallace, Gibson, Miller and Austin in the game, who do you double? Someone is getting open quick.

Just my opinion.

You Guys Do Know Who Will Look Good At#12 If We Get B. Albert.

E. Lacy.

cant wait for the schedule released tonight

DD,

I know that the team a franchised player is traded to has to pay his franchise tag number. What Ive never heard of is a team already having a franchised tagged player of it's own then trading for another franchise tagged player.

If its a rule that a team cannot franchise more than one player. Then, imo, that ruling should still apply in trading for a franchised player when one already exists on your roster. In effect, that team would still have 2 franchised players on it's payroll.

It's just so very rare we hear that a franchised player is traded. So, it should at least be educating to see how the league rules on this. Ye or ne.

"pacman still in league, solid corner. benson far from done.smith just dealt for 2-2nd rds weak draft but tell the truth of it"

Dusty,

Pacman is a solid CB??? He's started 13 games in the last three years. Pacman is better than Jason Allen but that's not saying much. You're not picked @ 6 overall to be a backup.

And Benson is FAR from done??? Give me a break...He ran for 245 yards last year & he hasn't cracked over four YPC since 2009. The guy was the Number 5 pick in the draft & his career YPC are 3.8 & he's hardly ever used in the passing game.

Dusty Only G. Smith Will Be A Good QB In The League. The Other Guys Look Like Backups At Best.

And None Of These Guys Looks Better Than A. Rodgers.

yesterday he will be signed to an ext

Getting Albert is a no-brainer.

Albert was ranked higher than Long last year allowing less sacks and QB pressures.

Fins would have a GUARANTEED starter from day 1 at a critical position.

WHAT guarantee is there that the 2nd given up for him would have been a starter or a star? NONE.

never said they were up to where they were picked. but hes still in league and resigned cause his team wanted him back. hes a solid corner. disagree dashi on smith, i dont like him. i do like wilson though and maybe even glennon

dashi,

Just draft Lacy at #12 on your fantasy football team and be done with it. At least you wouldn't have to worry about him getting your qb killed in pass protection. LOL...

2009 Draft. Zero Probowlers In First 10 Picks. Weak Draft All Around.

Very comical that everyone is already blasting Ireland for a draft that hasn't happend and a deal that hasn't happened. Because Mando writes it doesn't mean its going to happen.

People seems to forget we don't need Albert to trade down and still get an additional 2nd rounder. So even under YG's supposedly perfect scenario we are still wasting a 2nd rounder on the guy.

So, getting stuck with Albert means Dolphins should have kept Long in the firt place anyway...

That's if Dolphins manage to trade down for a 2nd rounder at all. Value charts are meaningless in a year when most teams want the same thing: to trade down (meanwhile, trading-up could prove much cheaper than usual).

Oh! and Mando, please catch up. "Your" perfect scenario was posted by YG weeks ago.


This trade will go through, and unless there is a player at 12 they absolutely love, they will likely trade back and recoup the 2nd.

Love the move!

Posted by: D | April 18, 2013 at 02:10 PM

1. They haven't made a move.

2. They still haven't MADE A MOVE.

3. Just because Mando suggests something, it doesn't mean it's etched in stone, viable, smart, etc, etc....

(Why didn't you just post: YEAH MANDO WooWHOOO!!!!)?

Odin @ 2:13, hahaha

Tyrone Biggums: "I'm here for the free crack?!!"

Dashi,

Over Lacy, at #12, I would much rather draft the guy that helped produce 3 All-American rb's at Alabama.

Remember, Chance Warmack? Warmack is the constant demonator in all of the success Bama rb's have had for the past 3 seasons. They were all plugged in behind Chance Warmack.

Will the Fins find Wake's sacking complement in this draft?

If so, who and in which round?

YG,

This Lacy Can't Pass Block Is Hearsay.

He Is A Solid And Willing Pass Blocker. He Knocks Defenders Back Even Pass Blocking. He Played At Alabama So Pass Blocking Wasn't A Priority.

Lacy's 1 Knock Is That He Doesn't Have Breakaway Speed.

And That Is About It.

Who touches The Ball The Most On Offense Next To The QB?

The RB. Even The #2 RB Touches The Ball More Than The Top Receiver.

Heck, L. Miller As Our #3 Touched The Ball More Than Hartline.

Dashi, BJ Raji (9th pick 2009) was a ProBowler in 2011.

Posted by: Hydrashock | April 18, 2013 at 02:24 PM

At present, it's still great speculation we could be offering a 2nd rd'er for Albert. A 3rd and a 5th puts us close value wise.

In a perfect world a straight up Starks for Albert trade more than does it for me.

Anyway, I will be doing mental cartwheels if I hear we got Albert for less than the assumed 2nd rd pick.


In effect, that team would still have 2 franchised players on it's payroll.

It's just so very rare we hear that a franchised player is traded. So, it should at least be educating to see how the league rules on this. Ye or ne.

Posted by: Yesterday's Gone 4Ever! | April 18, 2013 at 02:19 PM
=============================

The team wouldn't actually have two franchised players.

The "Franchise Tag" for all intents and purposes is a guaranteed contract that's set on a predetermined average.

The second that Albert agrees to the terms of a new contract with Ireland and Aponte(and KC agrees to the trade), The KC Franchise Tag is automatically rescinded.

Albert would no longer be Tagged in any way shape or form.

Dashi,

Doesn't matter. Lacy is late 1st to upper 2nd rd material at best. No way is he #12 overall material.

Who the hell do you think he is, A-Pete?

Offer Starks??? Are you on drugs bro? One of our best players !!!


Posted by: odinseye | April 18, 2013 at 02:34 PM

This seems to make sense, but I would like to see something official on this first.

Jonathan Martin NO at left tackle! END OF !

Dashi,

To take Lacy #12, he would clearly need to be a top 10 pick that fell to #12. Hell, most experts feels he's only top 10 pick of the 2nd rd.

Please, no thanks to Lacy at #12.

I think 2nd for Albert is a great move. That way we dont have to waste a 1st on another O-Line.

We can use 1st round to get a sexier pick.

Where's the Free Crack! I need Dat Crack!

« 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »

The comments to this entry are closed.