PDA

View Full Version : Kansas City Chiefs '06 Draft Review


Woodrow Call
05-24-2006, 11:18 AM
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/review/teams/kansascitychiefs.html
May 24, 2006

Kansas City Chiefs '06 Draft Review
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scott Wright
President, NFL Draft Countdown

For a team with so many clearly defined defensive needs heading into the draft the Chiefs did surprisingly bad in the first three rounds. For the most part the team did not get proper value for their picks and they failed to adequately address their most glaring weaknesses, which could come back to haunt them as they hope to make a Super Bowl push in 2006.

There was little doubt that the Chiefs were going defense in round one, with a lineman and cornerback being the two most likely options, but even though they addressed a position that most expected they would the manner in which they did it was a surprise. Penn St. defensive end Tamba Hali had a great senior season and was considered a mid-first rounder at one point but his stock had supposedly fallen after a poor showing in workouts to the point where at best he was considered a late first and probably more of an early second round pick. That didn't stop the Chiefs from reaching for him at #19 though and even though he definitely addresses a need they did not get very good value for the pick. Hali was very productive but he doesn't have ideal size or speed and that combined with the failure of other recent Nittany Lion defensive ends such as Courtney Brown and Michael Haynes makes his selection very questionable in my opinion. Hali will push Eric Hicks for a starting job opposite of Jared Allen but by grabbing him where they did Kansas City made one of the most questionable selections of the first round. In round two, despite their need for a cornerback, the Chiefs chose Purdue safety Bernard Pollard. A physical player who lacks great range and excels in the box, Pollard had some character concerns and went about a round higher than most expected him to. Even though Sammy Knight is getting older and Pollard might eventually be able to overtake him he's still a solid player and the team had much more glaring needs that could have been addressed with a premium pick.

With their choice in round three Kansas City brought in what they hope will be the long-term heir to Trent Green by selecting Alabama quarterback Brodie Croyle. An elite recruit coming out of high school, Croyle has a very strong arm and led the Tide to a great season in 2006 but he has an extremely frail build along with a dubious history of injuries. If he can stay healthy Croyle could develop into an average starting signal caller at the pro level but that is a big if and I see him more as a career backup. In round five the Chiefs finally brought in a cornerback when they selected Marcus Maxey of Miami (FL). An underrated prospect with ideal measurables, Maxey really emerged as a senior and the team may have gotten a Day Two steal with him. The spot opposite Patrick Surtain is wide open so look for Maxey to potentially be in the mix for that job at some point as a rookie.

With their sixth round pick the Chiefs nabbed some offensive line help by selecting guard Tre' Stallings of Ole Miss, who could be a bigger factor than some may think. With Will Shields gearing up to retire at any time the team needed to bring in some depth and an eventual successor which means that an opportunity could present itself for Stallings to earn a starting job as early as 2007, which would be impressive for a sixth rounder. With their next choice Kansas City brought in wide receiver Jeff Webb of San Diego St., who I really like. Webb had a great senior campaign and has all the physical tools you look for so with Eddie Kennison getting up their in years and not much to speak of beyond him Webb has a chance to work his way into the wideout rotation early on in his career. With their final pick the Chiefs chose another safety in Jarrad Page of U.C.L.A., who is a great athlete but very similar to Pollard and will likely be little more than a backup and special teamer if he is able to make the squad.

For the most part Kansas City ignored need and didn't maximize the value of their top picks, which is never a good combination and a sure-fire way to get a poor review from me. The bottom line is that Kansas City appears to have dropped the ball with their premium picks, reaching for both Hali and Pollard and essentially coming out of Day One with only one player who will play a key role for them in 2006. My main problem though was their failure to land a top defensive tackle or cornerback, which have been and still are enormous question marks and concerns. After a very rough start the Chiefs bounced back to a degree on Day Two with the likes of Maxey, Stallings and Webb but that wasn't enough to salvage a respectable grade and the team will get little or no help from this draft class this upcoming season.

GRADE: C-

Phobia
05-24-2006, 11:22 AM
I have a news flash for Mr. Wright. A defensive end is a defensive lineman.

You get an "F" for your inability to understand this rudimentary football concept.

Mr. Laz
05-24-2006, 11:24 AM
pretty close .... although i think more of Hali than this guy does.

StcChief
05-24-2006, 11:25 AM
Hopefully FUTURE comedy Gold...

milkman
05-24-2006, 11:27 AM
Penn St. defensive end Tamba Hali had a great senior season and was considered a mid-first rounder at one point but his stock had supposedly fallen after a poor showing in workouts

I will never understand this notion that post season workouts are more important in evaluating players than actual on field production.


For the most part Kansas City ignored need and didn't maximize the value of their top picks, which is never a good combination and a sure-fire way to get a poor review from me.

Yep, I'm fairly certain the Chiefs were concerned about how they would be rated by this guy.

They blew it!

The Poz
05-24-2006, 11:28 AM
That didn't stop the Chiefs from reaching for him at #19

That right there tells you that this turd (President of NFLDraftCountdown) is a moron. Last I checked it was #20. :shake:

Mr. Laz
05-24-2006, 11:28 AM
I have a news flash for Mr. Wright. A defensive end is a defensive lineman.

You get an "F" for your inability to understand this rudimentary football concept.
he said they DID grab the position expected(lineman or cornerback)



little doubt that the Chiefs were going defense in round one, with a lineman and cornerback being the two most likely options, but even though they addressed a position that most expected

F to phobia for his inability to read

Brock
05-24-2006, 11:28 AM
That's a pretty stupid, uninformed article. Saying that the Chiefs should not have drafted Hali because other Penn State DEs didn't pan out is like saying the Chiefs shouldn't have drafted Larry Johnson because of Curtis Enis.

ChiefButthurt
05-24-2006, 11:28 AM
Yeah, let's grab a corner with the first pick and continue to have a poor pass rush. Our corners would continue to get beat regardless of their skill level. That guy is a idiot.

InChiefsHell
05-24-2006, 11:29 AM
Personally, I don't think we need a damn corner in the draft! We got Walls, and a few younger guys to compete for the Warfield spot. We might sign Law still.
Who do we have at depth at safety? Pollard was a good choice.

We need a pass rush, and Hali may or may not be the answer there. Actually, I'm pretty happy with our draft. I gave it a b+...

InChiefsHell
05-24-2006, 11:30 AM
Yeah, let's grab a corner with the first pick and continue to have a poor pass rush. Our corners would continue to get beat regardless of their skill level. That guy is a idiot.

Exactly! :clap:

JimNasium
05-24-2006, 11:30 AM
I've never understood how you can forcast a player's potential based on how prior players from his school have performed. Using that criteria you would assume that Larry Johnson would be a failure too.

Mr. Laz
05-24-2006, 11:30 AM
Personally, I don't think we need a damn corner in the draft! We got Walls, and a few younger guys to compete for the Warfield spot.

:titus:

JimNasium
05-24-2006, 11:30 AM
That's a pretty stupid, uninformed article. Saying that the Chiefs should not have drafted Hali because other Penn State DEs didn't pan out is like saying the Chiefs shouldn't have drafted Larry Johnson because of Curtis Enis.
Beat me to the punch.

JimNasium
05-24-2006, 11:31 AM
Oh, and can you believe how he dissed Joe Montana Jr.?

KCTitus
05-24-2006, 11:33 AM
That's a pretty stupid, uninformed article. Saying that the Chiefs should not have drafted Hali because other Penn State DEs didn't pan out is like saying the Chiefs shouldn't have drafted Larry Johnson because of Curtis Enis.

Umm...



Where's OldTownChief? Here's a 'Realistic' report of the wasted KC draft picks.

A genious (chiefsplanet spelling) delight!

bkkcoh
05-24-2006, 11:34 AM
I've never understood how you can forcast a player's potential based on how prior players from his school have performed. Using that criteria you would assume that Larry Johnson would be a failure too.

He did have 2000+ yards his last year though.... And it was in the Big Ten conference, not one of your weaker conferences....

JimNasium
05-24-2006, 11:36 AM
He did have 2000+ yards his last year though.... And it was in the Big Ten conference, not one of your weaker conferences....
Yes, but if you used the professional performance of other Penn State running backs as a predictive tool LJ should have been a failure. The author of this draft review seems to think this is a valid approach with regards to our 1st round choice. I'm saying that this approach is complete and total BS.

Phobia
05-24-2006, 11:39 AM
he said they DID grab the position expected(lineman or cornerback)

F to phobia for his inability to read

And a well deserved "F" it is. Yet again, my inability to read keeps me off the honor roll.

noa
05-24-2006, 12:05 PM
I hate what this writer says about us reaching. I think its completely irrelevant. Who cares where other teams and so-called experts projected the player going? If you want the player and he's there, take him. The only time reaching might be important is if the Chiefs had an opportunity to trade down and still get our guy, and I'm guessing that since we didn't do that, we didn't have the opportunity. As for drafting Pollard, if the writer of this article looked at Sammy Knight's contract, he'd see what it might be best to plan on cutting him after this year. Reach shmeach.

milkman
05-24-2006, 12:15 PM
I hate what this writer says about us reaching. I think its completely irrelevant. Who cares where other teams and so-called experts projected the player going? If you want the player and he's there, take him. The only time reaching might be important is if the Chiefs had an opportunity to trade down and still get our guy, and I'm guessing that since we didn't do that, we didn't have the opportunity. As for drafting Pollard, if the writer of this article looked at Sammy Knight's contract, he'd see what it might be best to plan on cutting him after this year. Reach shmeach.

If this guy had half a clue, he'd know that the need for a safety, even without Knight's contract, was evey bit as big as the need at corner.

Some, like me, would say it was a bigger need.

DeepSouth
05-24-2006, 12:16 PM
"Croyle has a very strong arm and led the Tide to a great season in 2006"

Did I miss the 2006 football season?

htismaqe
05-24-2006, 12:17 PM
That's a pretty stupid, uninformed article. Saying that the Chiefs should not have drafted Hali because other Penn State DEs didn't pan out is like saying the Chiefs shouldn't have drafted Larry Johnson because of Curtis Enis.

Actually, IIRC, he said THAT VERY THING in his post-2003 draft article - Larry Johnson was a poor pick because of Enis, Thomas, and Carter.

Bob Dole
05-24-2006, 12:20 PM
I hate what this writer says about us reaching. I think its completely irrelevant. Who cares where other teams and so-called experts projected the player going? If you want the player and he's there, take him.

Exactly.

MeaTy The Pimp
05-24-2006, 12:22 PM
We might sign Law still.

You had to go and try to turn this into another Law thread didn't you? :-)

58-4ever
05-24-2006, 12:26 PM
You had to go and try to turn this into another Law thread didn't you? :-)

It was bound to happen.

Cave Johnson
05-24-2006, 12:39 PM
Personally, I don't think we need a damn corner in the draft! We got Walls, and a few younger guys to compete for the Warfield spot. We might sign Law still.
Who do we have at depth at safety? Pollard was a good choice.

Especially considering the track record of corners drafted between 20-32 the last few years. Other than Chris Gamble, who had the benefit of a monster d-line, not much production. I guess Sammy Davis is arguably in the discussion also, with 8 PDs and 2 INTs. Not that stats give a complete picture of a corner's play, mind you.

All in all, I'd rather take my chances with a vet, experienced or not.

rad
05-24-2006, 12:40 PM
What's all this "reaching " crap? Hali was expected to go late 1st to early 2nd. Well, we didn't have a pick in that range so we took him before someone else did b/c he filled a need. He would definately have been gone by the time our 2nd pick came around.

buddha
05-24-2006, 12:45 PM
That's a pretty stupid, uninformed article. Saying that the Chiefs should not have drafted Hali because other Penn State DEs didn't pan out is like saying the Chiefs shouldn't have drafted Larry Johnson because of Curtis Enis.

Excellent post. You can safely make that point if you're dealing with a system player, such as any random QB from Texas Tech. A poodle could throw for 3,000+ yards in Tech's offense. That doesn't translate at all to defensive ends. Either you can get pressure on the QB or you can't.

That clown doesn't even know what draft pick the Chiefs used on Hali. His opinion and his ranking doesn't mean squat.

kepp
05-24-2006, 01:44 PM
If this guy had half a clue, he'd know that the need for a safety, even without Knight's contract, was evey bit as big as the need at corner.

Some, like me, would say it was a bigger need.
I agree. How many big plays did Wesley give up last year? I think Kawika covered downfield better than he did.

Rausch
05-24-2006, 01:48 PM
If this guy had half a clue, he'd know that the need for a safety, even without Knight's contract, was evey bit as big as the need at corner.

Some, like me, would say it was a bigger need.

Well, you're in luck because we tend to draft 2 a year...

Iowanian
05-24-2006, 02:12 PM
Just to reitterate that I understand the authors point....Because Dj Dozier, Kijana Carter, Hurtis P-nis all sucked....Larry Johnson sucks.

Got it.

milkman
05-24-2006, 02:16 PM
Well, you're in luck because we tend to draft 2 a year...

Yes, but this is the first time in some time we actually drafted a safety that we intend to plat at safety.

Spicy McHaggis
05-24-2006, 02:54 PM
That's a pretty stupid, uninformed article. Saying that the Chiefs should not have drafted Hali because other Penn State DEs didn't pan out is like saying the Chiefs shouldn't have drafted Larry Johnson because of Curtis Enis.

I hate that argument. It actually makes a little sense for a QB or a RB because a college system can help a player have some success that doesn't translate to the pros. It's still a really stupid argument. For a position like DE though, it's even more ludicrous. Stop the run, rush the passer. To say Penn State a top college program that plays other high level schools can't turn out DE's is just ignorant.

Also Courtney Brown is lazy and oft-injured. Michael Haynes was still really raw coming out of college. Hali is neither of these things.

InChiefsHell
05-24-2006, 03:13 PM
You had to go and try to turn this into another Law thread didn't you? :-)


:p Hadn't seen one in a couple of hours so... :)

Mecca
05-24-2006, 03:59 PM
He thinks the Chiefs reached.......I thought they did, and so did a ton of other people.

He's going to jump all over that Pollard pick because the Chiefs have a starter at SS and really don't at CB. You can say what you want about the safeties sucking but that pick is going to get bashed because our defense is bad and we picked a player that looks like he won't start this year. Not to mention he's kind of slow.......

He basically said what I said, I thought the picks were bad value.

htismaqe
05-24-2006, 04:01 PM
He thinks the Chiefs reached.......I thought they did, and so did a ton of other people.

He's going to jump all over that Pollard pick because the Chiefs have a starter at SS and really don't at CB. You can say what you want about the safeties sucking but that pick is going to get bashed because our defense is bad and we picked a player that looks like he won't start this year. Not to mention he's kind of slow.......

He basically said what I said, I thought the picks were bad value.

Interestingly enough, nobody gives a **** what you think either...

Spicy McHaggis
05-24-2006, 04:03 PM
He thinks the Chiefs reached.......I thought they did, and so did a ton of other people.

He's going to jump all over that Pollard pick because the Chiefs have a starter at SS and really don't at CB. You can say what you want about the safeties sucking but that pick is going to get bashed because our defense is bad and we picked a player that looks like he won't start this year. Not to mention he's kind of slow.......

He basically said what I said, I thought the picks were bad value.

Yes, yes, because Hali ran a less than stellar 40 time after dominating in the Senior Bowl and having a great season he was a reach.

HolmeZz
05-24-2006, 04:06 PM
I usually like Wright, but that review was utter garbage. The Chiefs did address the DLine, taking the best DLineman available. He's complaining about not getting a top DT prospect, but who was on the board for the Chiefs to take at #20? No one. Pollard was a reach in value, but I think Croyle slipping to the 3rd balances that out. He liked the Maxey pick and we wouldn't have taken him had we taken a CB in round 2 or 3.

His take on Hali was terrible though. He admitted Tamba was a mid first rounder who fell because of WORKOUTS. I thought he was better than the 'other prospects from this school failed, so he will too' philosophy.

htismaqe
05-24-2006, 04:10 PM
Yes, yes, because Hali ran a less than stellar 40 time after dominating in the Senior Bowl and having a great season he was a reach.

This is what I like best. Mecca tells us:

You can say what you want about the safeties sucking but that pick is going to get bashed because our defense is bad and we picked a player that looks like he won't start this year.

This statement comes from someone who spent the weeks leading up to the draft telling everyone that the ONE guy the Chiefs needed was CROMARTIE.

Double-standard? Nah.

Mecca
05-24-2006, 04:10 PM
Interestingly enough, nobody gives a **** what you think either...

That's some awesome insight there.......I'm sorry I actually have an opinion contrary to everyone else around here. But hey I guess I should just knod and smile and not have an opinion different from everyone else.

Let's homer it up, awesome draft, no one did better! :)

OnTheWarpath58
05-24-2006, 04:12 PM
1.) I could give a shit what Scott Wright thinks. Like my day is ruined because some douchebag, er President of NFL Draft Countdown thinks CP effed up.

2.) I could give two shits if anyone thinks Hali, Pollard or any other picks were a "reach." All I care about is if they produce on the field on game day.

Mecca
05-24-2006, 04:12 PM
This is what I like best. Mecca tells us:

You can say what you want about the safeties sucking but that pick is going to get bashed because our defense is bad and we picked a player that looks like he won't start this year.

This statement comes from someone who spent the weeks leading up to the draft telling everyone that the ONE guy the Chiefs needed was CROMARTIE.

Double-standard? Nah.

Because Cromartie wouldn't have started at corner for a team that basically has 1 corner. If you wanna point out something I said fine, but how about you think it through first?

htismaqe
05-24-2006, 04:14 PM
Because Cromartie wouldn't have started at corner for a team that basically has 1 corner. If you wanna point out something I said fine, but how about you think it through first?

ROFL

And you wanna bust on me for Homervision.

Spicy McHaggis
05-24-2006, 04:16 PM
Let's homer it up, awesome draft, no one did better! :)

I don't think it's homerism if Hali is one of the guys I wanted us to pick all along. Gretz didn't come over, swing a watch in front of my face and brainwash me into liking the pick.

Mecca
05-24-2006, 04:17 PM
ROFL

And you wanna bust on me for Homervision.

You basically tried to say I had a double standard for saying we shouldn't have taken a player that won't start when I wanted Cromartie.......show me how he wouldn't have started.

And if you tell me in all honesty that Lenny Walls or Julian IR Battle would have started over him this arguement is going to end in immense laughter.

go bowe
05-24-2006, 04:17 PM
I have a news flash for Mr. Wright. A defensive end is a defensive lineman.

You get an "F" for your inability to understand this rudimentary football concept.a defensive end is a defensive lineman?

when did that start?

Cochise
05-24-2006, 04:24 PM
Yes, yes, because Hali ran a less than stellar 40 time after dominating in the Senior Bowl and having a great season he was a reach.

Haven't you been paying attention? 40 time > actual production. :p

Spicy McHaggis
05-24-2006, 04:30 PM
Haven't you been paying attention? 40 time > actual production. :p

What have I told you about listening to Al Davis?

Ugly Duck
05-24-2006, 04:56 PM
That right there tells you that this turd (President of NFLDraftCountdown) is a moron. Hey..... he has Oakland's 4th round pick rated above KC's 1st round pick. I think the guyza genious!

http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/rankings/top.html

htismaqe
05-24-2006, 05:02 PM
You basically tried to say I had a double standard for saying we shouldn't have taken a player that won't start when I wanted Cromartie.......show me how he wouldn't have started.

And if you tell me in all honesty that Lenny Walls or Julian IR Battle would have started over him this arguement is going to end in immense laughter.

So it's laughable to think that Lenny Walls would beat out Cromartie, but totally realistic to think that Hali won't beat out Hicks? Immense laughter is right. You're funny.

Of the 14 first-round CB's drafted since 2003, only half of them started in the first game of his rookie season, and only nine of them started more than half of the games.

Six started all 16 games. Only Sammy Davis in that group of six was picked after the 11th pick overall.

Interestingly enough, NONE of these guys had missed an entire season of college football prior to being drafted because of a major injury.

Lenny Walls is gonna start whether you want to admit it or not.

go bowe
05-24-2006, 05:10 PM
Yes, but this is the first time in some time we actually drafted a safety that we intend to plat at safety.it does feel strange, doesn't it?

shaneo69
05-24-2006, 09:19 PM
I disliked the Chiefs draft for two reasons. 1.) I think Lawson and Kiwanuka will be better than Hali; and 2) I thought we should've taken a DT like Kyle Williams or Orien Harris in the 3rd round. It is an absolute joke that we lined up an undrafted FA DT with the first stringers at the full-squad mini-camp. Even if it was meant to send a message, it still shows how pathetic that position is on our team.

shaneo69
05-24-2006, 09:20 PM
Lenny Walls is gonna start whether you want to admit it or not.

You really think Lenny will beat out Ty Law?

nychief
05-24-2006, 09:26 PM
these things are laughable.... call me in three years.

keg in kc
05-24-2006, 09:41 PM
I've always wondered how you can review a draft before any of the players have a chance to play a down.

shaneo69
05-24-2006, 10:49 PM
I've always wondered how you can review a draft before any of the players have a chance to play a down.

The only thing you can realistically judge IMO is whether they filled their needs. Did they get a DT who can join the rotation this year? No. Did they get a CB who will at least play in the dime defense? No.

We got two players who may play this year. And if you were going to target Jarrad Page later in the draft, why draft Pollard in the 2nd? You signed Sammie Knight last year as one of your hyped free agents; you might as well let him start again this year then let Page take over next year. In that scenario, you could've got a DT or CB in the 2nd round.

Rausch
05-24-2006, 10:51 PM
You really think Lenny will beat out Ty Law?

Considering you have to have a contract to before competing for a position, yeah...

Rausch
05-24-2006, 10:52 PM
The only thing you can realistically judge IMO is whether they filled their needs.

Which can't be judged until their value can be determined on the field...

shaneo69
05-24-2006, 11:01 PM
With the advent of free agency, I think you need to draft for THIS year. I think your first four picks need to play THIS year. Your last few picks should be like Stallings, Jeff Webb, or Jarrad Page, guys who can/should replace older players like Shields, Kennison, and Knight within the next two years.

To me, picking a guy in the first 3 rounds who's going to sit on the bench for 2 years is a waste, because you could've drafted a guy at that position in the later rounds and developed him into a starter by that time. Or if you can't develop a later-round draft pick into a starter at a position of need, there's always free agency.

kc rush
05-24-2006, 11:06 PM
Hali was the guy the Chiefs wanted.

Could he have been taken lower than 20? Possibly

Could the Chiefs have grabbed him with their second round pick? Doubtful, he probably would have been gone by then.

Could the Chiefs have traded down? Only if they have a trading partner, and at that they risk losing the guy that they really wanted.

I wouldn't call taking Hali a reach. Pollard probably could have been taken later, but if the guy truly does push for Sammy Knights starting job (at any point during the season), you can't fault the pick.

Wait and see.

milkman
05-24-2006, 11:11 PM
The only thing you can realistically judge IMO is whether they filled their needs. Did they get a DT who can join the rotation this year? No. Did they get a CB who will at least play in the dime defense? No.

We got two players who may play this year. And if you were going to target Jarrad Page later in the draft, why draft Pollard in the 2nd? You signed Sammie Knight last year as one of your hyped free agents; you might as well let him start again this year then let Page take over next year. In that scenario, you could've got a DT or CB in the 2nd round.

I don't think you pass on a guy in the second round because you have someone "targeted" that plays the same position in the 7th round.

Rausch
05-24-2006, 11:12 PM
With the advent of free agency, I think you need to draft for THIS year. I think your first four picks need to play THIS year. Your last few picks should be like Stallings, Jeff Webb, or Jarrad Page, guys who can/should replace older players like Shields, Kennison, and Knight within the next two years.

To me, picking a guy in the first 3 rounds who's going to sit on the bench for 2 years is a waste, because you could've drafted a guy at that position in the later rounds and developed him into a starter by that time. Or if you can't develop a later-round draft pick into a starter at a position of need, there's always free agency.

I think the key is getting production out of your 1st round pick (due to both the value of the first round pick and the price tag they carry.)

A good example would be the Steelers.

Last 5 first round picks by Pitt:

2006 Santonio Holmes WR Ohio State
2005 Heath Miller TE Virginia
2004 Ben Roethlisberger QB Miami (OH)
2003 Troy Polomalu S USC
2002 Kendall Simmons OL Auburn
2001 Casey Hampton DT Texas
2000 Plaxico Burress WR Michigan St.
1999 Troy Edwards WR LA Tech
1998 Alan Faneca G LSU

Out of those picks only Troy Edwards was a bust. All the rest started or are still starting for the Steelers and were productive.

Do not attempt to compare and contrast this with KC's draft results in the same time unless your keyboard is vommit proof...

Halfcan
05-24-2006, 11:12 PM
If Hali was a reach where we got him then so be it. I like the kid, and if he fails it wont be because he is lazy like Brown. Bonecrusher-he will be all pro some day if he keeps hitting like he did in college.

Rausch
05-24-2006, 11:26 PM
If Hali was a reach where we got him then so be it. I like the kid, and if he fails it wont be because he is lazy like Brown. Bonecrusher-he will be all pro some day if he keeps hitting like he did in college.

He seriously needs to hit the weights...

FAX
05-24-2006, 11:34 PM
He seriously needs to hit the weights...

If you're referring to Da Mamba, Mr. Rausch, Gun had something interesting to say on this subject in the radio interview the other day.

Basically, he said that the coaches and trainers already know that, because of the quality of conditioning equipment and regimen in the NFL compared to what he's accustomed to, Da Mamba will certainly gain much more strength. However, he was concerned about him putting on too much weight.

I suppose because they don't want to adversely affect his quickness?

FAX

keg in kc
05-24-2006, 11:51 PM
Basically, he said that the coaches and trainers already know that, because of the quality of conditioning equipment and regimen in the NFL compared to what he's accustomed to, Da Mamba will certainly gain much more strength. However, he was concerned about him putting on too much weight.I think his exact statement was that Penn State used machines rather than free weights.

keg in kc
05-24-2006, 11:56 PM
The only thing you can realistically judge IMO is whether they filled their needs. Did they get a DT who can join the rotation this year? No. Did they get a CB who will at least play in the dime defense? No. Again, I'm not sure how you can judge anything at this point. By your logic, Ryan Sims was a good pick in 2002, because he filled a need. Of course, his performance to date would suggest otherwise.

If Hali and Pollard are both starting by sometime in October, would that make them passable picks in your book? What if Dalton, Edwards, Sims and whoever else are (positively) impacted by the play of Hali? What if Maxey ends up filling your dime corner need?

Will those things happen? Who knows. Some might. I doubt they all will.

Either way, my point is that production is what matters, not draft board projections or "prognostications".

Spicy McHaggis
05-25-2006, 04:55 AM
I think his exact statement was that Penn State used machines rather than free weights.

Fire that strength trainer.

htismaqe
05-25-2006, 08:20 AM
You really think Lenny will beat out Ty Law?

ROFL

htismaqe
05-25-2006, 08:20 AM
The only thing you can realistically judge IMO is whether they filled their needs. Did they get a DT who can join the rotation this year? No. Did they get a CB who will at least play in the dime defense? No.

We got two players who may play this year. And if you were going to target Jarrad Page later in the draft, why draft Pollard in the 2nd? You signed Sammie Knight last year as one of your hyped free agents; you might as well let him start again this year then let Page take over next year. In that scenario, you could've got a DT or CB in the 2nd round.

DE and S were both needs. We addressed both of them.

rad
05-25-2006, 08:23 AM
So it's laughable to think that Lenny Walls would beat out Cromartie, but totally realistic to think that Hali won't beat out Hicks? Immense laughter is right. You're funny.

Of the 14 first-round CB's drafted since 2003, only half of them started in the first game of his rookie season, and only nine of them started more than half of the games.

Six started all 16 games. Only Sammy Davis in that group of six was picked after the 11th pick overall.

Interestingly enough, NONE of these guys had missed an entire season of college football prior to being drafted because of a major injury.

Lenny Walls is gonna start whether you want to admit it or not.
Have you seen Walls play? Is he fast?
If not, I'd like to see Walls as our nickelback.

With his size, he might actually be good to have in the slot to cover the tight ends we have to face this year(Gatesx2, that monster the 9ers drafted, Jerramy Stevens, Winslow? etc.)

Then again, I've never seen Walls play, I'm just assuming with his size, he's not fast enough to keep up with recievers on the outside. Maybe Sapp could be our #2?

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 08:27 AM
You know, I just had an epiphny.

I was rereading my post earlier, where I talked about draft board predictions and prognostications. And something I've never been able to verbalize finally dawned on me: all these draft 'experts' are doing is making predictions. When these predictions aren't met, why do so many hold the teams (as we all know, fans of every team do this...) as the ones who've screwed up, rather than the charlatans with the apparently cracked crystal balls?

In other words, did the Chiefs screw up by drafting Hali at 20? Or was it did the online draft boards that listed him lower that were in error?

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 08:28 AM
Maybe Sapp could be our #2?Sapp will never be a #2 for anyone at his size, and I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't even our nickel in '06 based on some of the things I've heard and read. He's basically worked as a blitzing DB the last few years.

rad
05-25-2006, 08:31 AM
Sapp will never be a #2 for anyone at his size, and I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't even our nickel in '06 based on some of the things I've heard and read.

Really. I heard Gun blitzes him alot, so he must have some speed?

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 08:33 AM
I don't think he has any kind of special speed. Even if he did, he's still only 5'9 (and that's in 2" lifts).

rad
05-25-2006, 08:36 AM
I don't think he has any kind of special speed. Even if he did, he's still only 5'9 (and that's in 2" lifts).

Fug it. Throw Maxey to the wolves.

jspchief
05-25-2006, 08:37 AM
Sapp just isn't great in coverage. The most he'll ever be is a ST spark and a nickel blitzer.

rad
05-25-2006, 08:40 AM
But what about Walls? Was he at the Mini-camp?

KCTitus
05-25-2006, 08:42 AM
In other words, did the Chiefs screw up by drafting Hali at 20? Or was it did the online draft boards that listed him lower that were in error?

A wise observation...Im reminded of a similar situation with one John Tait.

Ranked the best overall LT by all the 'experts', KC takes him at 14 (I think). As KC moves him from LT to RT to make room for Roaf, KC's suddenly at fault for taking what was the highest ranked LT coming out of college.

One cannot have it both ways...

Chiefnj
05-25-2006, 09:23 AM
1st round - I think if you looked at the draft boards from 4 random NFL teams from picks 10-50 you would have seen an enormous range of rankings. I don't think the Chiefs reached for Hali. I have no proof, but I think the NYG would have seriously considered taking him instead of Kiwi. In any event DE is a huge need for the Chiefs and KC got a player of need. The only real question is could the Chiefs have moved back and grabbed him while getting another 3rd rounder. Nobody will ever know.

2nd round. I like the player, I don't like the pick. IMO, KC needed a FS not a SS. Why grab a SS this year with so many other immediate needs when you just grabbed Knight last year? Was Knight a wasted free agency move? This was a building for the future pick to me. I'd of preferred a DT or FS.

3rd round. Another build for the future pick. Again, was there a defensive player or WR who could have contributed more in 2006 than a QBOTF? I don't mind the pick in the big picture, but in the small window of lets try to win it now with Green, Shields and Roaf it seems like they could have gone D.

KCTitus
05-25-2006, 09:28 AM
...In any event DE is a huge need for the Chiefs and KC got a player of need...

I really dont like this philosophy, especially, in the first round. Never have. The drafting of LJ pretty much nailed it for me...always go best available in the first round.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 09:36 AM
He may have been best available on their draft board. I think I heard more than once they were looking at 3 players when they made the pick, and they chose him. So who knows.

nmt1
05-25-2006, 09:42 AM
He may have been best available on their draft board. I think I heard more than once they were looking at 3 players when they made the pick, and they chose him. So who knows.

Bottom line: Any of the three would've been frowned upon.
With Lawson, it would've been he's too small for a 4-3 defensive end and drafted too high for a situational pass rusher.
With Williams, it would've been he is more likely to play safety in the pros and has character issues.
And with Hali, it's he was a reach at 20.
We wouldn't have been able to pick any player that would've been "right" according to the Geniouses.

Coogs
05-25-2006, 09:46 AM
1st round - I think if you looked at the draft boards from 4 random NFL teams from picks 10-50 you would have seen an enormous range of rankings. I don't think the Chiefs reached for Hali. I have no proof, but I think the NYG would have seriously considered taking him instead of Kiwi. In any event DE is a huge need for the Chiefs and KC got a player of need. The only real question is could the Chiefs have moved back and grabbed him while getting another 3rd rounder. Nobody will ever know.

2nd round. I like the player, I don't like the pick. IMO, KC needed a FS not a SS. Why grab a SS this year with so many other immediate needs when you just grabbed Knight last year? Was Knight a wasted free agency move? This was a building for the future pick to me. I'd of preferred a DT or FS.

3rd round. Another build for the future pick. Again, was there a defensive player or WR who could have contributed more in 2006 than a QBOTF? I don't mind the pick in the big picture, but in the small window of lets try to win it now with Green, Shields and Roaf it seems like they could have gone D.


Yesterday afternoon, I caught just the tail end of a Chiefs report on the radio. They were talking about the Chiefs pass rush from the front four for this upcomming season, and I could swear I heard them say Hali was going to be on the inside. Why, I have no clue, but if that is the case to move Hali to a DT position, then adding this player in July's supplemental draft sort of makes sense...

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9447397

5/23 Update on Brooks
Brooks is tentatively scheduled to hold a workout for pro scouts at noon on June 22 at the University of Virginia. Cavaliers head coach Al Groh, along with Brooks' position coach and trainer, will be on hand to talk to the NFL personnel guys before the workout.

Brooks has been training in Atlanta with Chip Smith. As of yesterday, his weight was 274 -- he has a target weight of 265 for the workout. Brooks, who played linebacker in college but might project as a Julius Peppers-type defensive end in the pros, missed six games with a right knee injury last year.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 09:53 AM
Hali isn't going inside. You don't draft a 265 pound end in the first round to thicken him up and play tackle, especially if you expect to get anything out of him in year 1 (which we do).

Woodrow Call
05-25-2006, 09:59 AM
5/23 Update on Brooks
Brooks is tentatively scheduled to hold a workout for pro scouts at noon on June 22 at the University of Virginia. Cavaliers head coach Al Groh, along with Brooks' position coach and trainer, will be on hand to talk to the NFL personnel guys before the workout.

Brooks has been training in Atlanta with Chip Smith. As of yesterday, his weight was 274 -- he has a target weight of 265 for the workout. Brooks, who played linebacker in college but might project as a Julius Peppers-type defensive end in the pros, missed six games with a right knee injury last year.

I would love to see the Chiefs grab him. Character issues aside he is a special player IMO.

Coogs
05-25-2006, 10:02 AM
Hali isn't going inside. You don't draft a 265 pound end in the first round to thicken him up and play tackle, especially if you expect to get anything out of him in year 1 (which we do).

I am just repeating what I heard. In fact, I have heard this on several occasions since we drafted him. He played inside some at PSU IIRC. Maybe with his physical size they plan on bulking him up a bit and moving him to the DT spot. :shrug:

Coogs
05-25-2006, 10:03 AM
I would love to see the Chiefs grab him. Character issues aside he is a special player IMO.


Yep! I agree totally. When Virginia played him on the end of the line in two seasons ago, he was an absolute beast rushing the passer.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 10:08 AM
I am just repeating what I heard. In fact, I have heard this on several occasions since we drafted him. He played inside some at PSU IIRC. Maybe with his physical size they plan on bulking him up a bit and moving him to the DT spot. Well, other than the "he started his career at PSU as a tackle" bit that came out the week of the draft and the possibility of using him inside in a nickel package, which was conjecture from radio hosts, I haven't heard word one about him moving inside. At all. Every interview with him or any Chiefs coach I've heard since the day he was drafted has talked about his role with the team as a defensive end. I haven't heard anything about him working at tackle in any of the 10 practices we've had, which you think they would've done if that was the plan. I think that would've been all over the news locally if it happened...

Coogs
05-25-2006, 10:12 AM
Well, other than the "he started his career at PSU as a tackle" bit that came out the week of the draft and the possibility of using him inside in a nickel package, which was conjecture from radio hosts, I haven't heard word one about him moving inside. At all. Every interview with him or any Chiefs coach I've heard since the day he was drafted has talked about his role with the team as a defensive end. I haven't heard anything about him working at tackle in any of the 10 practices we've had, which you think they would've done if that was the plan. I think that would've been all over the news locally if it happened...


Don't shoot me, I am just repeating what I have heard.

Woodrow Call
05-25-2006, 10:14 AM
I am just repeating what I heard. In fact, I have heard this on several occasions since we drafted him. He played inside some at PSU IIRC. Maybe with his physical size they plan on bulking him up a bit and moving him to the DT spot. :shrug:

I have heard that they might put Hali at DT in passing situations and then put Bell or Hall in at DE.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 10:16 AM
Don't shoot me, I am just repeating what I have heard.No worries, I'm just pointing out how unlikely it is that there's any validity to what you've heard.

Unless there's some kind of conspiracy here in KC (which would have to include the local press, who are all on such good terms with the Chiefs....) to keep it all hush hush.

Chiefnj
05-25-2006, 10:16 AM
Titus- I agree that drafting soley for need isn't the way to go. I don't think the Chiefs did it though. I think they really had Hali that high. A few other writers had him around the 20 mark as well (Vic the writer for the Jags for example).

Coogs & Keg - Either Herm and/or Gun have said that they intend on putting Hali on the inside on certain passing downs so they can get Hali, Allen and Bell or Hall on the field at the same. Personally, I think it is dumb as hell but I've never coached a day of football in my life.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 10:17 AM
I have heard that they might put Hali at DT in passing situations and then put Bell or Hall in at DE.Yeah, I think we've all heard that. But I think what Coogs is saying is that someone's apparently reporting they're moving him permanently inside to DT.

FWIW, a lot of folks seem to think even moving Hali inside in nickel packages is a bad idea, including LJ, sr, his former position coach.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 10:19 AM
Titus- I agree that drafting soley for need isn't the way to go. I don't think the Chiefs did it though. I think they really had Hali that high. A few other writers had him around the 20 mark as well (Vic the writer for the Jags for example).Gosslin had him there in his final mock, too, which as far as I was concerned made it a cold lock that we were taking him, what with the ties he has to the team.

Coogs
05-25-2006, 10:23 AM
Coogs & Keg - Either Herm and/or Gun have said that they intend on putting Hali on the inside on certain passing downs so they can get Hali, Allen and Bell or Hall on the field at the same. Personally, I think it is dumb as hell but I've never coached a day of football in my life.


I concur.

Coogs
05-25-2006, 10:28 AM
Yeah, I think we've all heard that. But I think what Coogs is saying is that someone's apparently reporting they're moving him permanently inside to DT.

I have not heard the permanent thing. But I am just thinking if you are going to move him inside for even the pass rushing plays that it does not make sense, UNLESS, they plan on beefing him up.

He is short and has short arms for a DE. They could probably get him up into the 290 range, and still have one hell of a fast DT that could create havoc in the backfield on all plays, which is what the cover two needs.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 10:59 AM
I have not heard the permanent thing. But I am just thinking if you are going to move him inside for even the pass rushing plays that it does not make sense, UNLESS, they plan on beefing him up.Okay, then I misunderstood you. I thought you were insinuating a permanent change. My bad.

And I think they are beefing him up, but only to the 270-275 range. I've heard several interviews in the past month where they (CP/HE) say that. Moving an end inside for the nickel wouldn't be something new, they've done it with Browning (before he went perma-DT), Hicks and Wilkerson. I think the concept is to get the most penetration possible on the field, having Allen, Hali and Hall twisting and stunting and all that jazz. Problem is (as we've seen in the past), the usual result is the o-line manhandling our light line, giving QB's ample time to pick apart the intermediate zones on 3rd down. Or leaving us wide open to gashing draws, delays or misdirection runs.

I've never understood the idea, it's not really like the 3-4, where you have beefy ends and a massive tackle, and count on the LBs for passrush, even if that's what people want to call it. I'm not sure I like it any more than Robinson's occasional 2-down linemen brilliance with the spinner. Although the pseudo 3-4 seemed to be working initially early last year until Fox hurt himself. But that probably had more to do with who we were playing than anything else.

htismaqe
05-25-2006, 11:12 AM
Have you seen Walls play? Is he fast?
If not, I'd like to see Walls as our nickelback.

With his size, he might actually be good to have in the slot to cover the tight ends we have to face this year(Gatesx2, that monster the 9ers drafted, Jerramy Stevens, Winslow? etc.)

Then again, I've never seen Walls play, I'm just assuming with his size, he's not fast enough to keep up with recievers on the outside. Maybe Sapp could be our #2?

If we're using cover 2 as much as they're letting on, straight line speed isn't nearly as important as you're making it out to be.

Plus, you're assuming he's slow just because he's 6'4".

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 11:17 AM
I heard reports last week (or was it this week, it's starting to blend together) that Walls was looking great in drills, that his mobility was better.

Oh shit, I may be repeating something I heard on the <a href="http://chiefsplanet.com">WPI</a> podcast. :eek:

Nevermind.

Actually, I think I heard that in more...traditional circles, too.

KCTitus
05-25-2006, 11:27 AM
Titus- I agree that drafting soley for need isn't the way to go. I don't think the Chiefs did it though. I think they really had Hali that high. A few other writers had him around the 20 mark as well (Vic the writer for the Jags for example).

That may very well be the case...I really have no idea.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 11:33 AM
That may very well be the case...I really have no idea.Don't let that stop you from speaking like it's a fact.

God knows it doesn't stop any of the rest of us.

shaneo69
05-25-2006, 11:37 AM
Again, I'm not sure how you can judge anything at this point. By your logic, Ryan Sims was a good pick in 2002, because he filled a need. Of course, his performance to date would suggest otherwise.

To me, there's two parts of judging a draft. The first part, as I mentioned earlier, you can do immediately after the draft, and that is, ask the question of "Did they fill their greatest needs?"

With Sims and Hali, you could say they passed that part of the test. If Kiwanuka turns out to be John Henderson, then we flunked the 2nd part of each test.

And in both years, I thought their 2nd pick flunked the "filling their greatest needs" part of the test. We needed a LB after Edwards left in '02, but they picked a DE/DT tweener in Freeman. This year we needed a DT or CB, but we took a SS. In the 3rd round, we still needed a DT or CB, and we took a QB. In both years, we also screwed ourselves by trading away 3rd and 4th round picks which made it even more difficult to fill needs.

keg in kc
05-25-2006, 11:46 AM
I didn't understand the Croyle pick. Everything I read/heard indicated that we went into the draft with the express purpose of acquiring talent that could contribute immediately. Yet we took a flyer on an oft-injured project who probably wouldn't see the field for 2-3 years (at best) if ever, and someone most prognosticators (hi, i'm being a hypocrite!) labeled a career-backup candidate. Because I do agree that DT and/or CB was still a need, and at the time I just didn't get it. I do hope it works out, though.

I also, however, think SS was a need. I think the people that told us (meaning us fans) that Knight's head was great but his physical liabilities would kill us were absolutely right. And if Pollard can really become a Lynch or an Atwater...well, damn. I'll take it. But that's me.

milkman
05-25-2006, 11:07 PM
I didn't understand the Croyle pick. Everything I read/heard indicated that we went into the draft with the express purpose of acquiring talent that could contribute immediately. Yet we took a flyer on an oft-injured project who probably wouldn't see the field for 2-3 years (at best) if ever, and someone most prognosticators (hi, i'm being a hypocrite!) labeled a career-backup candidate. Because I do agree that DT and/or CB was still a need, and at the time I just didn't get it. I do hope it works out, though.

I also, however, think SS was a need. I think the people that told us (meaning us fans) that Knight's head was great but his physical liabilities would kill us were absolutely right. And if Pollard can really become a Lynch or an Atwater...well, damn. I'll take it. But that's me.

All those scouting reports that stated that Croyle was likely a career B/U seemed to base that on his injury history.

It seems they don't think he'll be able to remain standing, even though he showed toughness last season.

And his injuries aren't exactly the kind that point to a fragile person.