PDA

View Full Version : Top 10 Corners in the Draft (ESPN INSIDER)


Chieftain58
04-09-2006, 09:59 AM
Just purchased insider magazine and got the ESPN Insider POI, I see the mock drafts have us taking Tye Hill. I know mock drafts are garbage after the top 10 picks or so, I'm thinking we should move down and grab another draft pick or so and try grabbin 2 of these guys.. Carl seems to blow the top pick every year.. so what would it hurt.



Jimmy Williams CB 6'2" 213 VIRGINIA TECH
Tye Hill CB 5'9" 185 CLEMSON
Ashton Youboty CB 5'11" 189 OHIO STATE
Alan Zemaitis CB 6'1" 194 PENN STATE
Johnathan Joseph CB 5'11" 187 SOUTH CAROLINA
Kelly Jennings CB 6'0" 180 MIAMI (FLA.)
Antonio Cromartie CB 6'2" 208 FLORIDA STATE
Dee Webb CB 5'10" 183 FLORIDA
Richard Marshall CB 5'11" 189 FRESNO STATE
Jason Allen CB 6'0" 209 TENNESSEE

StcChief
04-09-2006, 10:00 AM
We need a CB of future. Pick a good one for once.

'Hamas' Jenkins
04-09-2006, 10:09 AM
I don't mind the idea of grabbing two corners, but I think it would be a huge mistake not to try and get a DE or DT. If we could drop down 6-8 spots and pick up a 3rd then maybe we could still get Hali and a decent corner in the 2nd and even in the 3rd as well.

Marco Polo
04-09-2006, 10:26 AM
I agree with Hamas. Get a DE in the first, get a CB with the second. Defense, Defense.

Frankie
04-09-2006, 10:37 AM
I agree with Hamas. Get a DE in the first, get a CB with the second. Defense, Defense.
DB no sooner than 3rd. Please! DE/DT in the first. LT (to groom to replace Roaf) in the second. That would be my strategy. (Carl, please put me in the draft room!) If by some miracle Jay Cutler slips to 20 I'd make an exception to that strategy.

Fish
04-09-2006, 11:46 AM
I didn't realize Hill was only 5'9"..... That's almost Mighty Mouse size....

rad
04-09-2006, 12:00 PM
Why isn't Michael Huff on that list?

jspchief
04-09-2006, 12:01 PM
Jason Allen will play safety in the NFL, and Jimmy Williams likely will too IMO.

cdcox
04-09-2006, 12:37 PM
We definitely need some more corners after cutting two, but I think a top talent at S has more impact than a top talent at CB in today's NFL. I also think we need at least one additional talent on the DL as a higher priority than the secondary.

tyton75
04-09-2006, 12:42 PM
what if... Chad Jackson should fall to us.... then what the hell do we do... esp if Tamba Hali and Tye Hill are still on the board as well...

if that happens.. I'll be crapping myself

Rausch
04-09-2006, 12:54 PM
I don't care how ****ing good he's supposed to be I don't want a ****ing 5'9" CB...

Rausch
04-09-2006, 12:57 PM
I didn't realize Hill was only 5'9"..... That's almost Mighty Mouse size....

He's a whopping 1 & 1/2 inches taller than me... :rolleyes:

jspchief
04-09-2006, 01:26 PM
I don't care how ****ing good he's supposed to be I don't want a ****ing 5'9" CB...Athleticism trumps height at the CB position every time. There's a lot of damn good NFL CBs that aren't very tall. 5'9" is certainly on the low side of it, but I'm not going to summarily dismiss him because of it.

Bwana
04-09-2006, 01:35 PM
He's a whopping 1 & 1/2 inches taller than me... :rolleyes:
And we sure as hell don't want you back there at CB either Rausch. :D

Demonpenz
04-09-2006, 01:45 PM
can he even ride the timberwolf?

CoMoChief
04-09-2006, 03:49 PM
Why isn't Michael Huff on that list?


Because Michael Huff is a safety. Having that said he has the talent and the physical attributes to play the CB position but he's listed and played as a safety in college.

cdcox
04-09-2006, 04:24 PM
Because Michael Huff is a safety. Having that said he has the talent and the physical attributes to play the CB position but he's listed and played as a safety in college.


Meet the 2006 first round draft choice of the Kansas City Chiefs.

KcMizzou
04-09-2006, 04:30 PM
can he even ride the timberwolf?ROFL

You must be this tall...

Reaper16
04-09-2006, 04:44 PM
can he even ride the timberwolf?
Who cares, he's faster than the Timber Wolf.

melbar
04-09-2006, 04:51 PM
what if... Chad Jackson should fall to us.... then what the hell do we do... esp if Tamba Hali and Tye Hill are still on the board as well...

if that happens.. I'll be crapping myself
HOlmes is a better WR. That would be a bigger dilema. Jackson is #2 in a weak class and moved up because of his workouts not so much his play.

kepp
04-09-2006, 07:18 PM
Meet the 2006 first round draft choice of the Kansas City Chiefs.
Of course - he's got "let's transform him from a safety to a corner" written all over him! We won't be able to resist it.

Frankie
04-09-2006, 07:20 PM
DB no sooner than 3rd. Please! DE/DT in the first. LT (to groom to replace Roaf) in the second. That would be my strategy. (Carl, please put me in the draft room!) If by some miracle Jay Cutler slips to 20 I'd make an exception to that strategy.
Resubmitted for thed rest of you draft strategy challenged. :p

rad
04-09-2006, 07:30 PM
Because Michael Huff is a safety. Having that said he has the talent and the physical attributes to play the CB position but he's listed and played as a safety in college.

I thought that's what a college safety was, an NFL corner???

milkman
04-09-2006, 07:34 PM
Resubmitted for thed rest of you draft strategy challenged. :p

If you believe that the Chiefs are still potential contenders, then your draft strategy is the one that's challenged.

This team needs a DE, CB, and DT in the draft.

They can be drafted in that order, or in the reverse order.

Drafting an LT in the second round is admitting that this team needs to look to the future, and is unlikely to contend this season.

milkman
04-09-2006, 07:34 PM
I thought that's what a college safety was, an NFL corner???

So does Gunt, apparently.

Mecca
04-09-2006, 07:57 PM
I consider those DE's to be reaches at our pick. How about we get out of this masterful idea of "we must have this position" and just pick the best players on the board in each round? You reach for needs and you screw up drafts, that was a Vermiel speciality. The one time they didn't draft for need they got the best player in Vermiels time here, Larry Johnson, and what's he do? He blasts that pick and holds a grudge for years.

From how I expect this draft to breakdown I expect Cromartie to be the best value on the board when we pick. He'd also fit perfectly into a cover 2 since he has excellent size and playmaking ability. The only way he won't be is if by some stroke of a miracle Bunkley is on the board when we pick.

Simple as this, you go into a draft saying you need these positions you reach and have a bad draft. You go into the draft taking the best players available each time regardless of position you do better.

CoMoChief
04-09-2006, 08:02 PM
I thought that's what a college safety was, an NFL corner???


The way our coaching staff developes CB's on this team, one would seem to think that. Sad isnt it?

T-post Tom
04-09-2006, 08:24 PM
Jason Allen will play safety in the NFL, and Jimmy Williams likely will too IMO.

The morning show on NFL radio has been talking Williams up as possibly the best CB in the draft. I haven't seen him play, but the guys on NFL radio were really gung ho on Williams. They loved his size and athleticism. I guess he moved over from safety, but much more successfully than most as he was voted a concensus All-American at CORNERBACK. Anyone watch the Hokies last year? One review off the net:

"One of the best things about Jimmy, is that he can play both corner and safety. He has the most fluid hips of any CB in the draft other than Antonio Cromartie, who is injured. He also has good recognition between run and pass, and route recognition. He's a smart player that won't make many mistakes on the field. His good leaping ability allows him to compete with WRs in jump-ball situations."

craneref
04-09-2006, 09:26 PM
Obviously it is wise to look towards need when drafting, however I htink there should be an emphasis on taking the BEST available athlete, if you do that, then you tend to have the best team. I also think LJ is a perfect example of not drafting for need and going with the best athlete available at that pick. As far as CB goes, I like Cormartie. Go Chiefs

T-post Tom
04-09-2006, 10:45 PM
Obviously it is wise to look towards need when drafting, however I htink there should be an emphasis on taking the BEST available athlete, if you do that, then you tend to have the best team. I also think LJ is a perfect example of not drafting for need and going with the best athlete available at that pick. As far as CB goes, I like Cormartie. Go Chiefs

IIRC, Johnson was taken on need due to the uncertainty of Priest Holmes' health. He was not taken under the "best athlete available" philosophy.

Dave Lane
04-10-2006, 01:01 AM
Why isn't Michael Huff on that list?


Hes a safety

Dave

58-4ever
04-10-2006, 01:06 AM
I'd like to see Hali in the 1st, and Cromartie as late as we can get him. From what I've seen, that kid is a real playmaker. The Florida St. safety, whose name is escaping me, is also a first day selection that we should look at.

Mecca
04-10-2006, 01:40 AM
I'd like to see Hali in the 1st, and Cromartie as late as we can get him. From what I've seen, that kid is a real playmaker. The Florida St. safety, whose name is escaping me, is also a first day selection that we should look at.

Pat Watkins......

Rausch
04-10-2006, 01:43 AM
And we sure as hell don't want you back there at CB either Rausch. :D

Exactly...

JakeT
04-10-2006, 08:29 AM
IIRC, Johnson was taken on need due to the uncertainty of Priest Holmes' health. He was not taken under the "best athlete available" philosophy.

Exactly --

All of you best athlete available guys -- how about another TE in the first?

jspchief
04-10-2006, 08:50 AM
Exactly --

All of you best athlete available guys -- how about another TE in the first?I think there has to be a balance between need and BAA. You don't take a 2nd round guy in the first round just because he fills a need, but at the same time, a team like the Chiefs probably wouldn't want to use a first rounder on a TE or RB just because he was the BAA (unless we're talking Reggie Bush or Vernon Davis).

The Chiefs should have a list of positions of need, and a list of guys they feel are 1st round quality to fill one of those positions. Just like all of us with our mocks, they have a general idea of who will be gone, and who will likely still be there. They aren't going to lock in on just the best CB left on the board. They are going to look for the best guy from a list of CB, S, DE, DT, WR, or whatever else they feel is a need.

Tribal Warfare
04-10-2006, 09:16 AM
IIRC, Johnson was taken on need due to the uncertainty of Priest Holmes' health. He was not taken under the "best athlete available" philosophy.


He was taken because Priest wanted to renegotiate his contract

htismaqe
04-10-2006, 09:25 AM
Meet the 2006 first round draft choice of the Kansas City Chiefs.

There's no way we could be that lucky...

Frankie
04-10-2006, 09:51 AM
If you believe that the Chiefs are still potential contenders, then your draft strategy is the one that's challenged.

This team needs a DE, CB, and DT in the draft.

They can be drafted in that order, or in the reverse order.

Drafting an LT in the second round is admitting that this team needs to look to the future, and is unlikely to contend this season.
The future I'm concerned with is "Near Future." We all saw how important a good LT was to this 'O' when Roaf went down. we need to groom another reasonable semblance of Roaf while we still have him. Targetting a diamond in the rough in the 2nd and allow him to learn and get polished behind Willie is the best way to ensure that. I would still reserve this year's 2nd to "future" while dedicating the rest of the draft to "now." Don't forget, there are older solid FA DBs out there that can tie us over for now until the next draft.

Frankie
04-10-2006, 09:55 AM
I'd like to see Hali in the 1st, and Cromartie as late as we can get him. From what I've seen, that kid is a real playmaker. The Florida St. safety, whose name is escaping me, is also a first day selection that we should look at.
Hali has been my "realistic" 1st rounder for a long time. I still stand by that pick. But now his apparent drop in value might be a blessing in disguise for us, in that we may be able to trade down a few slots and still pick him up while gaining a 4th or even an additional 3rd.

Coogs
04-10-2006, 10:03 AM
You reach for needs and you screw up drafts, that was a Vermiel speciality. The one time they didn't draft for need they got the best player in Vermiels time here, Larry Johnson, and what's he do? He blasts that pick and holds a grudge for years.

The thing is, DV wanted defense. We traded out of the 15th spot (or 16th) because our draft board didn't have any defensive players worthy of that spot. And the Steelers traded up with us and drafted defense. And a good one at that.

Makes me think the guy who sets up our draft board needs to be replaced. Chuck Cook? Is that the guy in charge of college scouting?

jspchief
04-10-2006, 10:39 AM
The thing is, DV wanted defense. We traded out of the 15th spot (or 16th) because our draft board didn't have any defensive players worthy of that spot. And the Steelers traded up with us and drafted defense. And a good one at that.

Makes me think the guy who sets up our draft board needs to be replaced. Chuck Cook? Is that the guy in charge of college scouting?It's easy to second guess passing on Polamalu using hindsight, but safety wasn't exactly a position of need for the Chiefs at the time. Remember, Woods and Wesley both played very well that year.

Other than Polamalu, there wasn't another D player drafted after that #16 spot that has had a significant impact in the league yet.

RedThat
04-10-2006, 10:50 AM
I think there has to be a balance between need and BAA. You don't take a 2nd round guy in the first round just because he fills a need, but at the same time, a team like the Chiefs probably wouldn't want to use a first rounder on a TE or RB just because he was the BAA (unless we're talking Reggie Bush or Vernon Davis).

The Chiefs should have a list of positions of need, and a list of guys they feel are 1st round quality to fill one of those positions. Just like all of us with our mocks, they have a general idea of who will be gone, and who will likely still be there. They aren't going to lock in on just the best CB left on the board. They are going to look for the best guy from a list of CB, S, DE, DT, WR, or whatever else they feel is a need.

I wholeheartedly agree. Makes a lot of sense.

I mean, that would be my approach as well. I wouldn't draft a RB because he is the BAA. No. You have LJ, and he will last you another 5,6 years. Hopefully.

Same can be said about Gonzo.

RedThat
04-10-2006, 10:55 AM
Would any of you hestitae to take Jimmy Williams if he is there at 20? Curious.
We can always take CB in the 2nd rd 2. Hopefully a guy like Jonathan Joseph or Richard Marshall will be available by mid 2nd rd.

-Im one that is pretty big on Safeties. Especially playmakers back there, and guys that can cover, tackle.

Coogs
04-10-2006, 10:57 AM
It's easy to second guess passing on Polamalu using hindsight, but safety wasn't exactly a position of need for the Chiefs at the time. Remember, Woods and Wesley both played very well that year.

Other than Polamalu, there wasn't another D player drafted after that #16 spot that has had a significant impact in the league yet.

I agree on the hind sight part. I think the Eagles took a DE from Miami that the Chiefs wanted IIRC. But the point is, the Steelers saw something in Polamalu and traded up quite a few spots to get him. And it turns out they were correct. Our draft people said there wasn't any defensive players worth of that spot.

htismaqe
04-10-2006, 11:24 AM
The thing is, DV wanted defense. We traded out of the 15th spot (or 16th) because our draft board didn't have any defensive players worthy of that spot. And the Steelers traded up with us and drafted defense. And a good one at that.

Makes me think the guy who sets up our draft board needs to be replaced. Chuck Cook? Is that the guy in charge of college scouting?

DV wanted Tyler Brayton. They were also looking at Jerome McDougle and to a lesser extent Chris Kelsay.

The three of them have combined for 15 sacks in 3 seasons and Kelsay, who has been BY FAR the most productive of the 3, was selected 1 pick after Kawika Mitchell.

Spicy McHaggis
04-10-2006, 04:10 PM
DV wanted Tyler Brayton. They were also looking at Jerome McDougle and to a lesser extent Chris Kelsay.

The three of them have combined for 15 sacks in 3 seasons and Kelsay, who has been BY FAR the most productive of the 3, was selected 1 pick after Kawika Mitchell.


I agree. I'm of the belief that despite what the Chiefs say, they really wanted McDougle at the 16th spot and when Philly traded up and nabbed him right before that is what really sealed the deal to trade down to the 27th spot. In retrospect its working out well now for us.