PDA

View Full Version : Any chance we draft Jarrett or Smardzija?


supercoupe91
01-03-2007, 09:42 PM
With the first pick?

I know we have a ton of holes, but a WR to replace Parker seems like the most glaring.

Bowser
01-03-2007, 09:44 PM
I say we draft the entire Boise State team with the first pick. I know they probably won't stand up to REAL NFL competition, but a few of them might pan out.

Saulbadguy
01-03-2007, 09:44 PM
Replace Parker?

supercoupe91
01-03-2007, 09:47 PM
Replace Parker, cut Parker, whatever to get rid of him. He can't catch easy passes. He also thinks every first down is worthy of a celebration. This past week....he tried to fight Spicer or Ingram.

By 3rd year in the League Jarrett will be Pro Bowl.

Silock
01-03-2007, 09:53 PM
Jarrett won't last that long after his performance two nights ago.

BWillie
01-03-2007, 09:54 PM
Replace Parker, cut Parker, whatever to get rid of him. He can't catch easy passes. He also thinks every first down is worthy of a celebration. This past week....he tried to fight Spicer or Ingram.

By 3rd year in the League Jarrett will be Pro Bowl.

You can't cut a guy for bein' a dbag. Larry Johnson is a dbag, do you think we should cut him too?

supercoupe91
01-03-2007, 09:57 PM
BWillie,

Can we cut Parker for being a crap WR?

DaKCMan AP
01-03-2007, 09:58 PM
No ND players (Quinn, Samardjiza), please.

BWillie
01-03-2007, 10:03 PM
BWillie,

Can we cut Parker for being a crap WR?

Cut him for who? Who are you going to pick up instead of Sammie? Contrary to popular belief on this board I highly doubt we are going to draft a receiver first round. Herm is a defensive coach, and he wants this tema to go in that direction. I'd bet the house it's a D-Tackle. No way we draft a WR in my opinion. I think Eddie has another good year left in him, the guy doesn't quit.

Silock
01-03-2007, 10:05 PM
I'm just not sure there's going to be a DT that's worth a first rounder when we pick.

supercoupe91
01-03-2007, 10:10 PM
I agree Kennison has more production in him. He's a great competitor.

Sorry, but Sammie is not. Good guy, bad WR.

There are 3 DT's worth taking in the 1st round....they all be gone by the time we pick.

DaKCMan AP
01-03-2007, 10:13 PM
KFD Samie Parker. I think he's shown improvement each year. KFD.

Bob Dole
01-03-2007, 10:13 PM
I'm just not sure there's going to be a DT that's worth a first rounder when we pick.
Is there ever?

SNR
01-03-2007, 10:13 PM
Samardasdizisaidjzjaza is a bust. He will be a bust. He's already a bust as far as I'm concerned. If we draft this guy I'll poop my pants

Bowser
01-03-2007, 10:14 PM
Samardasdizisaidjzjaza is a bust. He will be a bust. He's already a bust as far as I'm concerned. If we draft this guy I'll poop my pants

Pffft. Like you need that excuse.

InChiefsHell
01-03-2007, 10:15 PM
Samie is not our worst problem by far. We will go DT or CB or something, but our first rounder will not be a WR. And probably shouldn't be.

Silock
01-03-2007, 10:21 PM
Is there ever?

True... not like that's stopped us before.

BWillie
01-03-2007, 10:23 PM
True... not like that's stopped us before.

You gotta take what you get. I don't think any D-Tackle we get could be as big of a bust as Ryan Simms. I just don't think it's possible.

Frosty
01-03-2007, 10:23 PM
If there are any stud OL, DL or CB players available when the Chiefs pick in the first round, get them then and then pick up USC's Steve Smith in the second.

Bowser
01-03-2007, 10:24 PM
If there are any stud OL, DL or CB players available when the Chiefs pick in the first round, get them then and then pick up USC's Steve Smith in the second.

No way he lasts until we pick in the second. He may not MAKE the second.

milkman
01-03-2007, 10:25 PM
Samie is not our worst problem by far. We will go DT or CB or something, but our first rounder will not be a WR. And probably shouldn't be.

If a WR is the best athlete on the board, a WR damn well should be our first rounder.

There isn't one position on this team that can't be upgraded.

supercoupe91
01-03-2007, 10:27 PM
Defensive End cannot be upgraded.

Silock
01-03-2007, 10:27 PM
If a WR is the best athlete on the board, a WR damn well should be our first rounder.

There isn't one position on this team that can't be upgraded.

RB.

Frosty
01-03-2007, 10:30 PM
No way he lasts until we pick in the second. He may not MAKE the second.

I've seen late second, early third. I'm betting though, that after the combine, Jarrett and Smith will trade places. I don't think Jarrett will run a good time and the Mike Williams whispers will start, droppping his stock. That kind of crap always seems to happen after the combine.

milkman
01-03-2007, 10:30 PM
RB.

We certainly aren't going to replace LJ, but it would be nice to find one that can take about 100 carries.

I'm sure the same question could have been raised when LJ was picked.

Hoover
01-03-2007, 10:33 PM
I think we should keep Parker as a #3. We lack any type of quality WR depth.

Silock
01-03-2007, 10:33 PM
Well, he said "upgraded." There's building depth, and then there's upgrading. Drafting a stud RB would be for depth, not to upgrade the position.

milkman
01-03-2007, 10:35 PM
Well, he said "upgraded." There's building depth, and then there's upgrading. Drafting a stud RB would be for depth, not to upgrade the position.

If you upgrade depth, you are upgrading the position.

LJ isn't a position, he's the top player on the team at his position.

supercoupe91
01-03-2007, 10:37 PM
We certainly aren't going to replace LJ, but it would be nice to find one that can take about 100 carries.

I'm sure the same question could have been raised when LJ was picked.



Adrian Peterson can take 100 carries.

Silock
01-03-2007, 10:38 PM
If you upgrade depth, you are upgrading the position.

LJ isn't a position, he's the top player on the team at his position.

Semantics. In any case, I doubt we'd be able to draft anyone that would be better than Bennett at this point.

BWillie
01-03-2007, 10:43 PM
I've seen late second, early third. I'm betting though, that after the combine, Jarrett and Smith will trade places. I don't think Jarrett will run a good time and the Mike Williams whispers will start, droppping his stock. That kind of crap always seems to happen after the combine.

I really really want that kid Steve Smith...almost more than Jarret. Jarret overshadows Smith so maybe we can steal him late second round or third or something. I think he'd be a great receiver for the Chiefs.

milkman
01-03-2007, 10:46 PM
Semantics. In any case, I doubt we'd be able to draft anyone that would be better than Bennett at this point.

Maybe not.

But we might get someone who doesn't tear his labia every ****in' time he steps onto the field.

And for the record, I'm not actually proposing we draft a RB in the first round, but if there's a RB there and he is clearly head and shoulders better than everyone else sitting on the board, then we either have to take him, or trade down to a team that wants that player.

Silock
01-03-2007, 10:47 PM
Perhaps :)

milkman
01-03-2007, 10:48 PM
Semantics. In any case, I doubt we'd be able to draft anyone that would be better than Bennett at this point.

I agree, semantics.

But improving depth is exactly what I was talking about, though I was thinking of DE when I said it.

greg63
01-03-2007, 10:48 PM
Maybe not.

But we might get someone who doesn't tear his labia every ****in' time he steps onto the field.

And for the record, I'm not actually proposing we draft a RB in the first round, but if there's a RB there and he is clearly head and shoulders better than everyone else sitting on the board, then we either have to take him, or trade down to a team that wants that player.

I think the more immediate need is the "O" line. JMHO

Silock
01-03-2007, 10:50 PM
I agree, semantics.

But improving depth is exactly what I was talking about, though I was thinking of DE when I said it.

I'm all for the "best player available" philosophy, or trading down. I was just pointing out that there isn't a real, tangible "upgrade" at RB that we could draft when there are much bigger, more glaring holes to fill.

milkman
01-03-2007, 10:52 PM
I think the more immediate need is the "O" line. JMHO

And drafting for need is one of the reasons this team has been spinning it's wheels in mediocrity for so long.

Imagine how bad this team would be if we had drafted for need instead of drafting LJ.

milkman
01-03-2007, 10:56 PM
I'm all for the "best player available" philosophy, or trading down. I was just pointing out that there isn't a real, tangible "upgrade" at RB that we could draft when there are much bigger, more glaring holes to fill.

We're really pretty much on the same page.

I am being a bit over the top, to illustrate how important I feel drafting the best player available philosophy is.

Silock
01-03-2007, 10:57 PM
It's a good philosophy, but hopefully, we can have another draft like this year's where half the picks come in and have an immediate impact.

greg63
01-03-2007, 11:10 PM
And drafting for need is one of the reasons this team has been spinning it's wheels in mediocrity for so long.

Imagine how bad this team would be if we had drafted for need instead of drafting LJ.

Ok, but at some point we are going to have to address the gaping hole in the "O" Line left by Roaf, and waiting on some other team to let lose of a quality "O" Lineman through free agency doesn't leave us in very good shape either. IMO

milkman
01-03-2007, 11:15 PM
Ok, but at some point we are going to have to address the gaping hole in the "O" Line left by Roaf, and waiting on some other team to let lose of a quality "O" Lineman through free agency doesn't leave us in very good shape either. IMO

I fully understand that, and agree with that.

However, we can not simply take an OT with our pick if that player isn't worth that pick.

We've been picking for need for years, and we've never benefitted from that.

In the meantime, the Pats have just taken the best player, and they've enjoyed some measure of success.

greg63
01-04-2007, 12:21 AM
I fully understand that, and agree with that.

However, we can not simply take an OT with our pick if that player isn't worth that pick.

We've been picking for need for years, and we've never benefitted from that.

In the meantime, the Pats have just taken the best player, and they've enjoyed some measure of success.

Well just once or twice. :D

unothadeal
01-04-2007, 12:28 AM
Herm said about this years draft that you take the most talent that's on the board. So I wouldn't be surprised if we get a WR

wutamess
01-04-2007, 01:19 AM
Well, DT is our most immediate need.
That's the key to our cover 2 to work successfully.

If we can sure up the defense to be dominate like the Bears (pre-injuries) or the Ravens... we have the O to do well also (even with the most worthless WR (Parker) in football).

We get a stunning defense (with some great DT's) we'd be well on our way.

Young Ends, Safeties, we have about 1-2 more years out of our CB's. Basically what I'm saying is... take Green out and insert Huard and we're good on O. Black will only get better.

RedThat
01-04-2007, 02:13 AM
Well, DT is our most immediate need.
That's the key to our cover 2 to work successfully.

If we can sure up the defense to be dominate like the Bears (pre-injuries) or the Ravens... we have the O to do well also (even with the most worthless WR (Parker) in football).

We get a stunning defense (with some great DT's) we'd be well on our way.

Young Ends, Safeties, we have about 1-2 more years out of our CB's. Basically what I'm saying is... take Green out and insert Huard and we're good on O. Black will only get better.

I agree with DTs.

I would be open to drafting one, however, if all the top ranked DT guys are gone by the time we pick, I say go WR. Even OL would be good too.

Shields might retire? A nice offensive tackle would be nice.

*A big priority should be to re-sign Huard. I like Gonzo, and Kennsion they are consistent and put up decent numbers every year, but I would LOVE to see a WR that can bring big playmaking ability to KC and compliment those guys. We've never had that. Not for a while at least...lol

SCTrojan
01-04-2007, 06:10 AM
I really really want that kid Steve Smith...almost more than Jarret. Jarret overshadows Smith so maybe we can steal him late second round or third or something. I think he'd be a great receiver for the Chiefs.

Steve runs precise routes, is tough over the middle, catches most everything thrown his way and has a great work ethic. I think he'd be worth a late second, early third pick. But then, I'm obviously biased.

He doesn't have the straight-line speed of Samie, though, so I think he will last into the third round.

CupidStunt
01-04-2007, 06:20 AM
And while we're at it, lets take a defensive end in round two and a punter in round three.

chagrin
01-04-2007, 06:38 AM
Steve runs precise routes, is tough over the middle, catches most everything thrown his way and has a great work ethic. I think he'd be worth a late second, early third pick. But then, I'm obviously biased.

He doesn't have the straight-line speed of Samie, though, so I think he will last into the third round.


Nobody has adressed this yet, except for the dude who started the thread - Samie cannot catch the ball - so having said that, can Steve Smith for example, simply at least CATCH consistently?

CupidStunt
01-04-2007, 07:06 AM
Nobody has adressed this yet, except for the dude who started the thread - Samie cannot catch the ball - so having said that, can Steve Smith for example, simply at least CATCH consistently?

What part of "catches most everything thrown his way" did you fail to understand?

chagrin
01-04-2007, 07:20 AM
What part of "catches most everything thrown his way" did you fail to understand?

whoops, guess I buzzed right through that

Frosty
01-04-2007, 07:44 AM
Steve runs precise routes, is tough over the middle, catches most everything thrown his way and has a great work ethic. I think he'd be worth a late second, early third pick. But then, I'm obviously biased.

He doesn't have the straight-line speed of Samie, though, so I think he will last into the third round.

The times I have watched SC (except for maybe the Rose Bowl this year), I have been more impressed overall by Smith than Jarrett. God knows, he torched us for more than 200 yards this year. :shake:

htismaqe
01-04-2007, 09:27 AM
Steve Smith is the more NFL-ready WR. But his athletic ceiling is probably fast approaching. He's a #2-type possession WR.

Jarrett is going to be a stud #1.

No thanks on McCaffery II.

Redrum_69
01-04-2007, 09:44 AM
No thanks on McCaffery II.


YOur mom is like a well....a cavernous neverending supply of life giving mana, once her lid is open her sides are covered with green moss, and everytime you toss a penny in you'll get more than you wished for

htismaqe
01-04-2007, 09:50 AM
YOur mom is like a well....a cavernous neverending supply of life giving mana, once her lid is open her sides are covered with green moss, and everytime you toss a penny in you'll get more than you wished for

ROFL