PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft Your Draft: first three rounds.


Pages : [1] 2

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 01:00 AM
Try to keep it relatively realistic.

What are your three picks. Assume that we have the #5 spot in the Draft, just to be conservative.

Feel free to explain your picks.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 01:01 AM
Does it really have to be the 5th spot?

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 01:08 AM
As for me, I am convinced the Chiefs want to go DE with their first pick, but there doesn't seem to be any DEs that warrant, at this time, a top 5 pick. I like Michael Johnson, I like Brian Orakpo, I like George Selvie -- but they are flirts with the #10 selection rather than the #5. I'm not going to bet my life on them trading down, but it sure wouldn't surprise me.

That said, the Chiefs trade down anywhere from 9 to 15 so they feel less self conscious about going DE. Some other team reaches for Orakpo, so the Chiefs, with the 10th overall pick in the Draft, go for Michael Johnson. No word on exactly what the Chiefs received in return.

In the second round, Alex Mack has fallen for no discernable reason other than the fact that rarely does anymore than 1 interior lineman go in the first round, and the Steelers already opted for Duke Robinson. Mack drops a bit and the Chiefs pounce for their second rounder.

Their third rounder, one imagines, has to concern itself again with the front seven. They end up taking Dannell Ellerbe from Georgia for MLB, a fast player who has done nothing but rack up great numbers for a solid SEC defense.

1. DE Michael Johnson, Georgia Tech
2. C Alex Mack, California
3. MLB Dannell Allerbe, Georgia

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 01:09 AM
Does it really have to be the 5th spot?

Make it whatever you want. Why not.

I'd love to see your picks.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 01:10 AM
I'm going to be honest if they take Michael Johnson with a top 5 pick I'm going to lose it.

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 01:15 AM
I'm going to be honest if they take Michael Johnson with a top 5 pick I'm going to lose it.

I'm betting the farm on them trading down. It makes perfect sense, considering no DE is really worth that high of a pick, and this team needs to stockpile draft choices anyway. Our Top 5 pick is fucking wholesale.

Is there any doubt right now we go DE with our first pick?

Mecca
12-03-2008, 01:16 AM
It's probably going to be a reach then because it's not easy to drop out of a top 5 pick.

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 01:18 AM
It's probably going to be a reach then because it's not easy to drop out of a top 5 pick.

We almost did it last year with the Saints.

It's not easy but people are always willing to buy the farm if the right person drops.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 01:19 AM
Who are you gonna move for....after the top 3 players go you get into this debate about who's worth the pick who's this who's that.

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 01:25 AM
Good question. It's especially hard to say any team is entirely intent on Oher or any of the other tackles because there's three of them this year.

I'm not going to posit any hypotheticals to that regard just yet, it'll get way more interesting in April. I will say that none of the DEs look elite to me. The one I'd think about even throwing a Top 10 at would be Orakpo, but even then I think he and MJ are 10-15 picks at best. Selvie's a midrounder.

All of this is subject to change, but right now I don't see it.

Ebolapox
12-03-2008, 01:26 AM
maualaga, mack, best available DE. that order. (that is, if stafford is gone. he changes things if he gets busted for pot before the draft)

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2008, 01:31 AM
I'll bite at #5.

1st Round - Sam Bradford, QB Oklahoma (I'm assuming he comes out and that DET, CIN, STL, OAK are ahead of us) other choices: Mays or Rey
I would like Cutler (Stafford) but we get Rivers instead, Mays is such a freak and makes you want him so bad but you can't pass up a franchise quarterback if you dont have one.

2nd Round - Alex Mack, C California other choices: Maurice Evans
This is assuming Spikes is gone. Mack is a stud, I think we could have a Pro Bowl center for 10 plus years with him and with our young QB we need protection. Also if you look at the NFL dyntasy's center has been a big part of their success.

3rd Round - Micah Johnson, LB Kentucky
I am assuming he comes out. He could be a stud MLB in the NFL. Size, speed, smarts about everything you want.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 01:40 AM
What the Chiefs will do and should do are two very different things.

First, I think the Chiefs absolutely must make a very strong play for Julius Peppers in the free agent market. And Jordan Gross.

If they get Peppers, the strategy becomes pretty clear:

Trade down #5 to #9 or #10 for a 2nd round pick

Draft Maualuga or Laurinitis
2nd round #1 - Alex Mack, C, LSU
2nd round #2 (via trade) - Ebbon Britton, T,

3rd round - Either Derrick Williams, WR, Penn State or Matt Shaughnessy, DE, Wisconsin

Darth CarlSatan
12-03-2008, 01:41 AM
QB/Maualuga up-top( yes Myrtle; a solid, attacking LB absolutely warrants such "idiocy" at this point ). One to follow the other.

After that, look for augmentation on both lines. I'm thinking one-draft/one FA on each.

If TG is gone, look for a possible TE FA, though I'm pretty sure if he leaves; the importance on TE in the overall Offensive Scheme goes with him. Which leaves the running game.
If LJ is gone, bump Attack Back up before line selection.
After all that; stack that Defense with everything you need to promote rivalry and competition.

DCS has spoken.

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 01:54 AM
I'd actually love Maurice Evans over Mack in the 2nd.

I just don't see him getting that far. DE is one of those positions that 100% of teams need.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 01:55 AM
Maurice Evans really has no reason to come out...he's been overshadowed by an end on his own team.

Darth CarlSatan
12-03-2008, 02:05 AM
maualaga, mack, best available DE. that order. (that is, if stafford is gone. he changes things if he gets busted for pot before the draft)

If THAT happens, I have to not-so reluctantly jump on the bandwagon!

Ebolapox
12-03-2008, 02:11 AM
If THAT happens, I have to not-so reluctantly jump on the bandwagon!

at this point, I may have to take a trip down to georgia to plant some pot on him. when the fuck are we actually gonna get that super-bowl winning franchise qb? did we squander it before I was born on dawson?

Pablo
12-03-2008, 02:12 AM
OT
OT
OT

I just want depth at the OT spot.

Darth CarlSatan
12-03-2008, 02:27 AM
at this point, I may have to take a trip down to georgia to plant some pot on him. when the fuck are we actually gonna get that super-bowl winning franchise qb? did we squander it before I was born on dawson?

I have a theory on that.

The Chiefs jumped so hard, fast, and unsuspecting on the world when we last won a Championship then a Super Bowl; we're still paying for the Karmic Boost.

But rest assured; we WILL see another SB Victory before you and I die.

Sam Hall
12-03-2008, 02:46 AM
Some of this talk makes me hope the Chiefs win more games so the first round pick isn't a reach. The fifth pick doesn't seem like a good spot, unless it's an offensive tackle. I'd prefer a defensive player.

POND_OF_RED
12-03-2008, 03:52 AM
1. Brian Orakpo DE (Tex)
2. Duke Robinson G (OU)
3. Chase Coffman TE (Mizzou-if available)/Antoine Caldwell C (Bama)

mylittlepony
12-03-2008, 04:14 AM
1#, Taylor Mays, FS, USC
2#, George Selvie, DE, USF
3#, Demarcus Granger, DT, OU

Ultra Peanut
12-03-2008, 04:25 AM
I trade Patrick Surtain and our fifth overall pick for the first overall pick, Jackie Battle and our fifth rounder for the second overall pick, and our seventh rounder for the third overall pick.

1. Matt Stafford
2. Brian Orakpo
3. Thomas Tapeh Jr.

mylittlepony
12-03-2008, 04:31 AM
Wouldnt the smart thing then be to draft the QB 3rd. Seing as he will get the most money?

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 06:40 AM
Some of this talk makes me hope the Chiefs win more games so the first round pick isn't a reach. The fifth pick doesn't seem like a good spot, unless it's an offensive tackle. I'd prefer a defensive player.

#5 is great because it's a significantly easier pick to trade out of if you don't like what you have available.

PhillyChiefFan
12-03-2008, 07:29 AM
1. Brian Orakpo/Rey Maualuga/Michael Johnson (only if we drop further)
2. Duke Robinson/Alex Mack/Everette Brown (if he comes out)
3. Derrick Williams/Maurice Evans/QB Depth

We need a lot. But these guys would be a great continuation of last years draft.

I like Gramham from Michigan, but he is too small to be a pass rusher.

BigRedChief
12-03-2008, 07:32 AM
I trade Patrick Surtain and our fifth overall pick for the first overall pick, Jackie Battle and our fifth rounder for the second overall pick, and our seventh rounder for the third overall pick.
hey I'm on board with that. We just need GoChiefs to use his Jedi mind tricks on Detroit and we are home free.

the Talking Can
12-03-2008, 07:37 AM
Some of this talk makes me hope the Chiefs win more games so the first round pick isn't a reach. The fifth pick doesn't seem like a good spot, unless it's an offensive tackle. I'd prefer a defensive player.

nein

we want the highest picks in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round as well

imagine missing on Flowers...

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 07:46 AM
#5 Overall: Brian Orakpo DE/Texas. He will grade out as a top five selection by the time the scouting process is over. He's a smart kid with a non-stop motor, he's fast for a DE (will run a 4.6) and can bench 515 pounds. He'll put up 30+ reps at the combine, and he could get near 40. He has good footwork and a quick first step, and knows how to use his hands, which is further helped by the fact that he took boxing lessons in the offseason (this also helped his footwork). He's going to be a very good player

#37: Nate Davis, QB, Ball State. There's a pretty good chance that he goes top 25 if he measures 6'2", but I think that he's going to be 6'1". Combine that with the lack of elite competition that he's played against, and scouts might bump him down just enough. If he really impresses at the combine, he could go in the top 15, but if he shows any mechanical hitches or problems with accuracy, he will get penalized even more.

#69: Max Unger: C Oregon- Unger is basically an underrated Alex Mack. He's not going to run a 4.7 like Joe Staley, but he's a very smart player, who is a good technician and does all the little things very very well. He's much stronger at the POA than someone like Wiegmann was, so don't think that he's finesse only, but he's not a Nick Mangold powerhouse either. He played LT his first two years at Oregon, but isn't fast enough to handle speed rushers at either tackle position. He could very easily slide out to either guard position, though, and would be effective enough in open space to be a good pulling guard on running plays.

PhillyChiefFan
12-03-2008, 07:46 AM
I know a lot of people want to draft a QB with the 1st rd pick, but with offenses scoring almost at will on us and putting up ungodly numbers on us, can someone give me a good argument to take Stafford over a top tier pass rushing DE? Serious question, no sarcasm.

To me, I see our sack column and I throw up in my mouth a lil. QB's can start a campfire and finish the first verse of Kumbya before selecting a receiver. Our offense is playing better than our defense, and our QB, while young and inexperienced is improving. And he will probably be slated to be the starter on game day next season.

My point is, if we draft say...Stafford or Bradford, we are drafting for depth on a team that desperatly needs a pass rush and a ball hawk MLB. IMHO, we need guys who can start next season and improve on about the same learning curve Dorsey, Flowers, etc. are on. To me, for future teams (ie 2010) that will create a defense with cohesion and experience.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 07:47 AM
FWIW, if we lose out, the worst we can draft is 3rd.

milkman
12-03-2008, 07:47 AM
As for me, I am convinced the Chiefs want to go DE with their first pick, but there doesn't seem to be any DEs that warrant, at this time, a top 5 pick. I like Michael Johnson, I like Brian Orakpo, I like George Selvie -- but they are flirts with the #10 selection rather than the #5. I'm not going to bet my life on them trading down, but it sure wouldn't surprise me.

That said, the Chiefs trade down anywhere from 9 to 15 so they feel less self conscious about going DE. Some other team reaches for Orakpo, so the Chiefs, with the 10th overall pick in the Draft, go for Michael Johnson. No word on exactly what the Chiefs received in return.

In the second round, Alex Mack has fallen for no discernable reason other than the fact that rarely does anymore than 1 interior lineman go in the first round, and the Steelers already opted for Duke Robinson. Mack drops a bit and the Chiefs pounce for their second rounder.

Their third rounder, one imagines, has to concern itself again with the front seven. They end up taking Dannell Ellerbe from Georgia for MLB, a fast player who has done nothing but rack up great numbers for a solid SEC defense.

1. DE Michael Johnson, Georgia Tech
2. C Alex Mack, California
3. MLB Dannell Allerbe, Georgia

This is a pretty good draft.

And just for the hell of it, so I'm not completely riding your draft, I'll add a 4th rd. pick and take Fenuki Tupou, OT, Oregon.

PhillyChiefFan
12-03-2008, 07:48 AM
#5 Overall: Brian Orakpo DE/Texas.
#37: Nate Davis, QB, Ball State
#69: Max Unger: C Oregon

Um...yes...yes I think I could live with that. :D

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 07:49 AM
I know a lot of people want to draft a QB with the 1st rd pick, but with offenses scoring almost at will on us and putting up ungodly numbers on us, can someone give me a good argument to take Stafford over a top tier pass rushing DE? Serious question, no sarcasm.

Because it's not a one year rebuild, QBs are much more important than DEs, and Stafford is a rare prospect.

Look at the Giants. Take away Osi and Strahan from that team. Does one or two DEs kill that D? Nope.

Where would they be if they had David Carr behind center as opposed to Eli?

And Stafford will have a much better draft grade than Eli.

We aren't going to be any good next year either. We still have holes at 3/5 O-line positions, both DE's, Will Backer, Mike Backer, and we need another safety plus two QBs and a RB for depth.

PhillyChiefFan
12-03-2008, 07:54 AM
Because it's not a one year rebuild, QBs are much more important than DEs, and Stafford is a rare prospect.

Look at the Giants. Take away Osi and Strahan from that team. Does one or two DEs kill that D? Nope.

Where would they be if they had David Carr behind center as opposed to Eli?

And Stafford will have a much better draft grade than Eli.

We aren't going to be any good next year either. We still have holes at 3/5 O-line positions, both DE's, Will Backer, Mike Backer, and we need another safety plus two QBs and a RB for depth.

Good arguement, thank you Mr. Ice.

And you are right about the Giants. I suppose I am just a defensive minded person, I like TFL and sacks.

Could we get a DE in free agency? I am not sure who is available, but it might be good to get a decent DE in FA, then I would be all for a QB in the first.

Alas, Mr. Ice, our debate is all for not. Because Detroit needs a QB like I need my liver. :D

CoMoChief
12-03-2008, 08:21 AM
1. DE Brian Orakpo - Texas
2. TE Chase Coffman - Missouri (I think we trade TG in the offseason)
3. WR Derrick Williams - Penn St
3. RB Javon Ringer - Michigan St

FA
MLB - Jonathan Vilma

Trade
KC 4th rd pick and LJ for PHI OL Shawn Andrews

CoMoChief
12-03-2008, 08:22 AM
Um...yes...yes I think I could live with that. :D

No to Nate Davis

CupidStunt
12-03-2008, 08:27 AM
1. DE Brian Orakpo - Texas
2. TE Chase Coffman - Missouri (I think we trade TG in the offseason)
3. WR Derrick Williams - Penn St
3. RB Javon Ringer - Michigan St

FA
MLB - Jonathan Vilma

Trade
KC 4th rd pick and LJ for PHI OL Shawn Andrews

Stick your keyboard up your ass.

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2008, 08:28 AM
I know a lot of people want to draft a QB with the 1st rd pick, but with offenses scoring almost at will on us and putting up ungodly numbers on us, can someone give me a good argument to take Stafford over a top tier pass rushing DE? Serious question, no sarcasm.


Do you want Elway or Derrick Thomas/Neil Smith? For as good as those two were Elway thumped them alot.

milkman
12-03-2008, 08:28 AM
Stick your keyboard up your ass.

That's a bit rough, but on point I agree.

CupidStunt
12-03-2008, 08:29 AM
STFU and give us your picks, Mecca. So many words and so little to say. WHO WOULD YOU ACTUALLY TAKE?

PhillyChiefFan
12-03-2008, 08:30 AM
Trade
KC 4th rd pick and LJ for PHI OL Shawn Andrews

He had depression issues, and is still suffering from them.

That said he is a great OLineman, but apparently his depression was bad enough to make him miss games this year.

PhillyChiefFan
12-03-2008, 08:34 AM
Do you want Elway or Derrick Thomas/Neil Smith? For as good as those two were Elway thumped them alot.

Good point too. Like I said I just wanted a discussion from the other side of the fence. I am not one to say "my way is right, f*ck offense".

I definitly want to draft a QB, I just am not convinced on a 1st rder competely.

Make no mistake, if we draft Stafford I will not be upset at all. I just see the holes on defense, and our sack totals, etc.

Oh, I DID play def. back though. Might have something to do with it... :)

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2008, 08:39 AM
I definitly want to draft a QB, I just am not convinced on a 1st rder competely.

Rule #1 in the draft, if you dont have a franchise QB then draft one.

CoMoChief
12-03-2008, 08:41 AM
He had depression issues, and is still suffering from them.

That said he is a great OLineman, but apparently his depression was bad enough to make him miss games this year.

Agreed, but a change of scenery could help a lot :D

milkman
12-03-2008, 08:41 AM
STFU and give us your picks, Mecca. So many words and so little to say. WHO WOULD YOU ACTUALLY TAKE?

It's rather entertaining to watch when one poster can't wait to bash another.

PhillyChiefFan
12-03-2008, 09:34 AM
Rule #1 in the draft, if you dont have a franchise QB then draft one.

I always thought rule #1 was surrender all your picks for a running back from Texas. :D

PhillyChiefFan
12-03-2008, 09:36 AM
Agreed, but a change of scenery could help a lot :D

Well, in that case, as a package deal...I offer the Chiefs OL Shawn Andrews and myself, PhillyChiefFan. So that I can get the hell out of this city too!

Chiefnj2
12-03-2008, 10:03 AM
If Stafford is gone, I like the idea of trying to fall back to the 10 range.

At 10 I'd grab Spikes or Laurinaitis.

Top of the 2nd I'd take Brown the DE from FSU
Other 2nd round pick (From dropping to #10) I'll take the best QB available.
Top of the 3rd - the best OT or OG or C available. Probably a Loadholt/Boone/Luigs.

RedThat
12-03-2008, 10:09 AM
Here's what I predict will happen:

-Chiefs lose 3 of their next 4 games. they dont win in Denver, SD beats them, Miami beats them, and maybe they might beat Cinci...If they lose out, I think they get the number 2 pick overall. which could happen? And there will be a great prospect in the wings at #2.

-So with that being said, there will be a team that will want to trade up with us. So the Chiefs will trade down to possibly 10th-15th range and they're gonna get a lot picks in return. So the Chiefs will stockpile on draft picks again.

And I predict by trading down, their gonna take either Rey Mauluga or Taylor Mays in the 1st. Then there gonna trade up from the early second to late 1st, and their take Brandon Spikes. And then I say they trade up again from early 3rd, to late 2nd and take Everette Brown.

So here goes it:

Chiefs 1st rd pick-LB Mauluga or S Mays
Chiefs late 1st rder(traded up)-LB Brandon Spikes
Chiefs late 2nd rder(traded up-DE Everette Brown

CoMoChief
12-03-2008, 10:12 AM
1#, Taylor Mays, FS, USC
2#, George Selvie, DE, USF
3#, Demarcus Granger, DT, OU

Shoot yourself. IF we drafted a safety that high I would fuckin burn down Arrowhead

milkman
12-03-2008, 10:17 AM
Here's what I predict will happen:

-Chiefs lose 3 of their next 4 games. they dont win in Denver, SD beats them, Miami beats them, and maybe they might beat Cinci...If they lose out, I think they get the number 2 pick overall. which could happen? And there will be a great prospect in the wings at #2.

-So with that being said, there will be a team that will want to trade up with us. So the Chiefs will trade down to possibly 10th-15th range and they're gonna get a lot picks in return. So the Chiefs will stockpile on draft picks again.

And I predict by trading down, their gonna take either Rey Mauluga or Taylor Mays in the 1st. Then there gonna trade up from the early second to late 1st, and their take Brandon Spikes. And then I say they trade up again from early 3rd, to late 2nd and take Everette Brown.

So here goes it:

Chiefs 1st rd pick-LB Mauluga or S Mays
Chiefs late 1st rder(traded up)-LB Brandon Spikes
Chiefs late 2nd rder(traded up-DE Everette Brown

I'd be really surprised if, after the combines, Brown isn't a late first rounder.

The guy at DE has speed to burn.

milkman
12-03-2008, 10:19 AM
Shoot yourself. IF we drafted a safety that high I would ****in burn down Arrowhead

In most cases, picking a safety that high would be absolutely moronic.

Taylor Mays, however is an exception.

evolve27
12-03-2008, 10:20 AM
1)Sam Bradford
2)Brandon Spikes
3)Derrick Williams

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 10:22 AM
1. DE Brian Orakpo - Texas
2. TE Chase Coffman - Missouri (I think we trade TG in the offseason)
3. WR Derrick Williams - Penn St
3. RB Javon Ringer - Michigan St

FA
MLB - Jonathan Vilma

Trade
KC 4th rd pick and LJ for PHI OL Shawn Andrews

ROFL

What makes you think that the Eagles are going to trade away one of their good, young O-linemen for a 30+ RB when they already have Westbrook?

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 10:24 AM
Shoot yourself. IF we drafted a safety that high I would ****in burn down Arrowhead

What are you talking about? I don't know enough about Mays and if he's good enough, but you're acting like it would be the first time a Safety has been drafted this high. The Redskins have taken both Sean Taylor and Leron Landry at #5 and #6, and they don't regret for a second taking them (barring, of course, the completely unexpected tragedy of Taylor's death). The Bills took Whitner at #8. If you have an all-world talent at safety, they are enormous difference makers.

I don't know that safety is nearly as high in our needs to justify the pick. But if Mays tests off the charts in the scouts' eyes, then it would be stupid to not consider the guy just because he's a safety. LBs and Safeties are two positions that are traditionally taken in the middle and late first, but there are plenty of exceptions where they cracked the top 10 and were well worth the pick.

Chiefnj2
12-03-2008, 10:25 AM
I'd be really surprised if, after the combines, Brown isn't a late first rounder.

The guy at DE has speed to burn.

He has a very good first step, but the frustrating thing is that he comes up empty against good competition.

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2008, 10:28 AM
Here's what I predict will happen:

-Chiefs lose 3 of their next 4 games. they dont win in Denver, SD beats them, Miami beats them, and maybe they might beat Cinci...If they lose out, I think they get the number 2 pick overall. which could happen? And there will be a great prospect in the wings at #2.

-So with that being said, there will be a team that will want to trade up with us. So the Chiefs will trade down to possibly 10th-15th range and they're gonna get a lot picks in return. So the Chiefs will stockpile on draft picks again.

And I predict by trading down, their gonna take either Rey Mauluga or Taylor Mays in the 1st. Then there gonna trade up from the early second to late 1st, and their take Brandon Spikes. And then I say they trade up again from early 3rd, to late 2nd and take Everette Brown.

So here goes it:

Chiefs 1st rd pick-LB Mauluga or S Mays
Chiefs late 1st rder(traded up)-LB Brandon Spikes
Chiefs late 2nd rder(traded up-DE Everette Brown

So you would take 2 MLBs? In the first round at that. :shake:

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 10:30 AM
Good arguement, thank you Mr. Ice.

And you are right about the Giants. I suppose I am just a defensive minded person, I like TFL and sacks.

Could we get a DE in free agency? I am not sure who is available, but it might be good to get a decent DE in FA, then I would be all for a QB in the first.

Alas, Mr. Ice, our debate is all for not. Because Detroit needs a QB like I need my liver. :D

But to counter that, keep in mind that the Giants have been loading up on DEs. Justin Tuck and Mattias Kiwanuka would start for the majority of teams in this league. That is a rare case of a team that is 4-deep in DEs. Keep in mind that the Giants had umenyiora and Strahan when they drafted Tuck and Kiwanuka. This is a team that had 3 outstanding DEs that decided to use a first round pick on Kiwanuka.

So I think using the Giants is a bad example because this is a team that is loaded at DE only because they used a lot of high picks on DEs. It's not a team that were lucky to have good enough backups to effectively replace Umenyiora and Strahan.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 10:31 AM
But to counter that, keep in mind that the Giants have been loading up on DEs. Justin Tuck and Mattias Kiwanuka would start for the majority of teams in this league. That is a rare case of a team that is 4-deep in DEs. Keep in mind that the Giants had umenyiora and Strahan when they drafted Tuck and Kiwanuka. This is a team that had 3 outstanding DEs that decided to use a first round pick on Kiwanuka.

So I think using the Giants is a bad example because this is a team that is loaded at DE only because they used a lot of high picks on DEs. It's not a team that were lucky to have good enough backups to effectively replace Umenyiora and Strahan.

Yeah but didn't they draft Kiwanuka and plan as using him as a LB? They ended up moving him back to DE because Usi got hurt.

RedThat
12-03-2008, 10:33 AM
So you would take 2 MLBs? In the first round at that. :shake:

Who says they both have to be MLBs?

One of them cant play the outside?

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 10:33 AM
Who says they both have to be MLBs?

One of them cant play the outside?

So we're drafting people.....just to move their positions? :spock:

RedThat
12-03-2008, 10:36 AM
So we're drafting people.....just to move their positions? :spock:

It's about improving the LBing core.

milkman
12-03-2008, 10:36 AM
He has a very good first step, but the frustrating thing is that he comes up empty against good competition.

Yeah, I know.

If he finished plays, he'd be at the top of the draft.

But teams won't be able to resisit that speed and the overall potential he'll bring.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 10:41 AM
It's about improving the LBing core.

Then you grab a MLB in rounds 1 or 2 and then look at grabbing a OLB in the 3rd or 4th round. You don't grab 2 MLBs and then move one to OLB. We have more than just 2 holes to fill.

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2008, 10:41 AM
Who says they both have to be MLBs?

One of them cant play the outside?

No they are both natural MLB. If you want to draft an OLB then draft one who actually has played that position.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 10:42 AM
But to counter that, keep in mind that the Giants have been loading up on DEs. Justin Tuck and Mattias Kiwanuka would start for the majority of teams in this league. That is a rare case of a team that is 4-deep in DEs. Keep in mind that the Giants had umenyiora and Strahan when they drafted Tuck and Kiwanuka. This is a team that had 3 outstanding DEs that decided to use a first round pick on Kiwanuka.

So I think using the Giants is a bad example because this is a team that is loaded at DE only because they used a lot of high picks on DEs. It's not a team that were lucky to have good enough backups to effectively replace Umenyiora and Strahan.

Kiwi was a late first rounder, Tuck was a third rounder, Osi was one of the last picks of the second round.

Those aren't terribly high picks to spend on ends.

HC_Chief
12-03-2008, 10:46 AM
WR, LB, OL

Rinse & repeat.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 10:47 AM
WR, LB, OL

Rinse & repeat.

There are no WRs in this draft worthy of a top five pick, and tackle is too saturated of an area for us to get any bites on a trade down scenario.

Michael Crabtree is not Larry Fitzgerald.

RedThat
12-03-2008, 10:52 AM
No they are both natural MLB. If you want to draft an OLB then draft one who actually has played that position.

But whos to say that? you?

Have you ever considered putting your attention to the other things i.e. a players attributes and strengths and realize he could possibly play another position?

AND I also said, S or MLB in the first. I didn't exactly say we had to pick 2 MLB's. It could be S in the 1st, and MLB in the 2nd. Or course you on the other hand are looking for an argument it's blatintly obvious:rolleyes:

royr17
12-03-2008, 10:56 AM
Is that MLB from Nevada Joshua Mauga any good ?

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 10:59 AM
Kiwi was a late first rounder, Tuck was a third rounder, Osi was one of the last picks of the second round.

Those aren't terribly high picks to spend on ends.

But it still says a lot when the team has 2 outstanding DEs and a very solid backup DE in Tuck and they still chose to invest in a DE.

Point being, you can never have too many DEs. But you sure as hell can have too little.

the Talking Can
12-03-2008, 11:03 AM
1. DE Michael Johnson, Georgia Tech
2. C Alex Mack, California
3. MLB Dannell Allerbe, Georgia

Ellerbe is someone I'm hoping is around later, maybe the general weakness of Georgia's defense will push his stock down...

i haven't seen much from johnson, but he has the measurables...

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 11:05 AM
If we're staying at our spot...with no trades.

1st. Brian Orakpo, DE, Texas - We need to get a pass rushing DE bad. Keep Hali at his spot and stick Orakpo in as Allen's replacement. Hali and Turk can work in a rotation and hopefully Brian Johnston and Jason Babin can be a decent rotation behind Orakpo.

2nd. Alex Mack, C, Cal - I'd love to grab Brandon Spikes here but I think he goes in the late 1st round. So I'll go with a position that we need to get filled up. Grab Mack and immediately start him at Center. Move Niswanger to RG where he actually plays better. That shores up two positions with one draft pick. Now all we need is a RT.

3rd. Dannell Ellerbe, MLB, Georgia - Since I can't grab Spikes in the 2nd ...I'll go with Ellerbe in the 3rd. I haven't seen a lot of Georgia games but everywhere I read....says this kid is good. Yeah I know....I'm stupid.

Now obviously this would change depending on how we go in Free Agency. If we can sign Suggs to be our DE then I would try and trade down for Maualuga, Laurinaitis or Mays. If we grab a MLB like Vilma in FA then I would go Orakpo in the 1st, Mack in the 2nd and Derrick Williams (WR Penn State) in the 3rd.

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2008, 11:12 AM
But whos to say that? you?

Have you ever considered putting your attention to the other things i.e. a players attributes and strengths and realize he could possibly play another position?


They are not OLB material. Period.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 11:12 AM
But it still says a lot when the team has 2 outstanding DEs and a very solid backup DE in Tuck and they still chose to invest in a DE.

Point being, you can never have too many DEs. But you sure as hell can have too little.

You are either being dishonest, or you don't know what you are talking about

They drafted Tuck when Osi was unknown.
They drafted Kiwi when Tuck was unknown.

They weren't just investing in DEs because they had an embarrassment of riches, it was a legitimate need and they happened to hit on every pick.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 11:14 AM
You are either being dishonest, or you don't know what you are talking about

They drafted Tuck when Osi was unknown.
They drafted Kiwi when Tuck was unknown.

They weren't just investing in DEs because they had an embarrassment of riches, it was a legitimate need and they happened to hit on every pick.

What's with the name change?

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 11:20 AM
What's with the name change?

I was in the grocery store yesterday and saw a fifth of Ice 101. It reminded me of the time when one of my friends got drunk for the first time, chugging a fifth of it in about 10 minutes. He spent the next two hours lying outside of the tent dry heaving trying not to die.

Two years later we were in his room and he was drunk. He starts rummaging through old alcohol bottles and finds that, I get him to autograph it and give it to me. I had the bottle for over 6 years before some dumbass threw it out during a move.

Chiefnj2
12-03-2008, 11:21 AM
The Giants take DE's like GB takes QB's. It's just their philosophy. Think they've drafted 7 or 8 DE's in the last 7 years.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 11:22 AM
I was in the grocery store yesterday and saw a fifth of Ice 101. It reminded me of the time when one of my friends got drunk for the first time, chugging a fifth of it in about 10 minutes. He spent the next two hours lying outside of the tent dry heaving trying not to die.

Two years later we were in his room and he was drunk. He starts rummaging through old alcohol bottles and finds that, I get him to autograph it and give it to me. I had the bottle for over 6 years before some dumbass threw it out during a move.

LMAO

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 11:23 AM
LMAO

And by dumbass I mean my mother in law.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 11:26 AM
And by dumbass I mean my mother in law.

ROFL

CoMoChief
12-03-2008, 11:43 AM
ROFL

What makes you think that the Eagles are going to trade away one of their good, young O-linemen for a 30+ RB when they already have Westbrook?

Westbrook isnt an everydown back and PHI has been wanting a bulldog type of back for some time now.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 11:44 AM
Westbrook isnt an everydown back and PHI has been wanting a bulldog type of back for some time now.

True....but they're not going to trade away a starting RG for a RB that's 30+, set the record for carries in a season, has off the field troubles and is known to be a pain in the ass....when they could easily just draft one.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 11:47 AM
Westbrook isnt an everydown back and PHI has been wanting a bulldog type of back for some time now.

And you can get those in the 4th round.

CoMoChief
12-03-2008, 11:54 AM
And you can get those in the 4th round.

BUT ITS LARRY FUCKIN JOHNSON!!!!!!!!!!!!! :doh!:

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 12:04 PM
BUT ITS LARRY FUCKIN JOHNSON!!!!!!!!!!!!! :doh!:

Who's value on the open market right now is a 3rd or 4th round pick, at best.

So, why spend that pick on a 30 year old with issues, when you can use that pick on a 22 year old?

It amazes me how much people here overvalue the RB and TE position...

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 12:05 PM
Who's value on the open market right now is a 3rd or 4th round pick, at best.

So, why spend that pick on a 30 year old with issues, when you can use that pick on a 22 year old?

It amazes me how much people here overvalue the RB and TE position...

I don't even know if I'd value him at a 3rd rounder. I'd go with a conditional 5th that can become a 4th at best.

I do find it funny though that the pick that the Jets gave to the Packers for Favre is currently sitting at a 3rd and in something like 2 weeks will become a 2nd round pick. If Favre leads them to the Superbowl.....the Packers will get the Jet's 1st round pick next year.

Micjones
12-03-2008, 12:21 PM
#1 Brian Orakpo, DE
#2 Alex Mack, C
#3 Dannell Ellerbe, MLB

suds79
12-03-2008, 12:24 PM
I'll give it a shot.

We can't avoid FA forever.

So my vote would be to sign Suggs or Peppers if possible. Leaving our pass rush up for a rookie to solve scares me. I'm not against Orakpo. I like the kid. I just think asking him to get 10+ sacks in his rookie year (which is what we need from the RDE spot) is asking too much.

1st - Rey Maualuga. Orakpo would be okay also. Then you'd need a FA MLB. I'm assuming Stafford is gone. If Stafford is there, take him. You don't pass on franchise QBs.

2nd - LSU - OG - Herman Johnson. 2nd best Guard out there and Duke Robinson will be long gone. I think Brandon Spikes will be gone also. I don't think Herman makes it to the 3rd. Our right side of the line is terrible and he'd add some much needed size & strength.

3 - Don't know yet. I feel sick to my stomach saying this but I still think we need more size at DT. Need some run stuffers. Could go another LBer also.

JASONSAUTO
12-03-2008, 12:35 PM
Who's value on the open market right now is a 3rd or 4th round pick, at best.

So, why spend that pick on a 30 year old with issues, when you can use that pick on a 22 year old?

It amazes me how much people here overvalue the RB and TE position...

Probably because those 2 positions have been our offensive "glamour" positions for as long as most of us have been alive

milkman
12-03-2008, 12:40 PM
Probably because those 2 positions have been our offensive "glamour" positions for as long as most of us have been alive

So you're only 12 years old?

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 12:41 PM
So you're only 12 years old?

LMAO

JASONSAUTO
12-03-2008, 12:46 PM
So you're only 12 years old?

no, who would you say were our glamour players before that?

JASONSAUTO
12-03-2008, 12:47 PM
got a Qb in mind? montana? old when he got here

John_Wayne
12-03-2008, 01:04 PM
The Chiefs need RT, DE, QB, DT, G, FB, probably in that order.

If Thiggy plays well and is expected to be the starter in '09.......

1st round - RT or DE
2nd round - DE or G
3rd round - QB

milkman
12-03-2008, 01:06 PM
no, who would you say were our glamour players before that?

It was a joke, that just went right over your head.

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2008, 01:07 PM
The Chiefs need RT, DE, QB, DT, G, FB, probably in that order.

If Thiggy plays well and is expected to be the starter in '09.......

1st round - RT or DE
2nd round - DE or G
3rd round - QB

You DO NOT DRAFT A RT IN THE FIRST ROUND. People get this in your head especially in the top 10, and no way in hell in the top 5.

milkman
12-03-2008, 01:08 PM
You DO NOT DRAFT A RT IN THE FIRST ROUND. People get this in your head especially in the top 10, and no way in hell in the top 5.

It's like talking to brick walls.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 01:09 PM
It's like talking to brick walls.

These are usually the same people who think we can trade down in the 1st round three times. It's like they think everyone will just give us their picks because they feel sorry for us.

milkman
12-03-2008, 01:11 PM
These are usually the same people who think we can trade down in the 1st round three times. It's like they think everyone will just give us their picks because they feel sorry for us.

Wait!

What are you saying?

I was going to try to trade down three times in the first to stockpile picks and draft Brandon Spikes at about 24.

Are you saying I won't be able to that.

Take it back!!!

:cuss:

Alphaman
12-03-2008, 01:54 PM
To answer this I have to take a guess at what happens with picks 1 through 4. I'll say they go like this:

1) Detroit - Bradford QB Oklahoma
2) Oakland - Crabtree WR Texas Tech (Trades up with Cincy to get WR)
3) St. Louis - Smith OT Alabama
4) Cincy - Jenkins CB Ohio State
5) KC - Stafford QB Georgia

KC Draft
1) Stafford QB Georgia
2) Loadholt OT Oklahoma
3) Witherspoon OLB Missouri

A couple of notes:

a) I don't think KC drafts down at #5. I think we end up with 3 wins max and draft at #3.

b) If we draft at #3, I think we can trade down with someone wanting to get an OT or CB or perhaps Crabtree.

c) I don't really like Stafford at #5, but I don't think we can pass him up there. I'd rather move back to around #8 and take him there.

d) I'm hoping we get a shot at Peppers in the offseason. However, I'm thinking he gets franchised by Carolina

e) Same with Vilma. I don't think New Orleans will resign him because it would cost them their 1st round pick. I'm hoping we throw a boat load of money at him to come to KC.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 01:55 PM
You are either being dishonest, or you don't know what you are talking about

They drafted Tuck when Osi was unknown.
They drafted Kiwi when Tuck was unknown.

They weren't just investing in DEs because they had an embarrassment of riches, it was a legitimate need and they happened to hit on every pick.

Strahan was a pro bowler as the DE#1
Umienyora had a strong campaign in 2004 and then had an unbelievable season in 2005 in which he racked up 14.5 sacks. I think I know what I'm talking about when I say a 14.5 sack DE was a legit starting DE.

And Tuck played quite a bit of snaps his rookie season. Racked up a pretty decent 30 tackles in 2005. That's really good for a rotational DE.

It's not being dishonest. The Giants had 2 stud DEs at the time. They had a strong rotational player in the pipeline. And they used a 1st rounder on a 4th DE.

Yes, that can be justified as being a preparation for Strahan's eventual retirement, but it goes to show that you simply cannot draft enough DEs. Most people attribute their strong depth at DE to be the main reason the Giants won the Super Bowl.

Alphaman
12-03-2008, 01:57 PM
You DO NOT DRAFT A RT IN THE FIRST ROUND. People get this in your head especially in the top 10, and no way in hell in the top 5.

If we draft at #5 and the top 4 picks are Bradford, Stafford, Crabtree and Jenkins, the top 2 guys left on the board would be OTs. I would have no problem taking one them (Smith or Oher) and plugging him in at RT. Bookend tackles for years to come is worth using a top 5 pick even if it goes against the normal grain.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 01:58 PM
The Chiefs need RT, DE, QB, DT, G, FB, probably in that order.

If Thiggy plays well and is expected to be the starter in '09.......

1st round - RT or DE
2nd round - DE or G
3rd round - QB

FB is not a priority--we have a decent one right now. MLB is a huge priority.

The priority list, to me (in order), is....
RDE, MLB, C, RT, OLB, Backup QB, G.

Secondary list:
WR #3, DT (depth), LB (depth), WR (depth), CB (depth)

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 02:01 PM
If we draft at #5 and the top 4 picks are Bradford, Stafford, Crabtree and Jenkins, the top 2 guys left on the board would be OTs. I would have no problem taking one them (Smith or Oher) and plugging him in at RT. Bookend tackles for years to come is worth using a top 5 pick even if it goes against the normal grain.

That makes the huge leap of assumption that they'll transition naturally to RT and that still doesn't justify using a top 5 pick on a RT that you can find much later in the draft.

The only reason those guys are top 5 value is because they are LTs. It is a tremendous reach to take either in the top 5 to be a RT. If you move Albert to RG or RT, then the argument is that you're using a top 5 pick for a guard or RT, which also doesn't apply.

If Oher and Smith are on the board, there are lots of teams who badly need a LT. Given the dramatic drop-off, in my opinion, between Oher/Smith and the next best option, you have to aggressively seek a trade down.

RedThat
12-03-2008, 02:11 PM
That makes the huge leap of assumption that they'll transition naturally to RT and that still doesn't justify using a top 5 pick on a RT that you can find much later in the draft.

The only reason those guys are top 5 value is because they are LTs. It is a tremendous reach to take either in the top 5 to be a RT. If you move Albert to RG or RT, then the argument is that you're using a top 5 pick for a guard or RT, which also doesn't apply.

If Oher and Smith are on the board, there are lots of teams badly need a LT. Given the dramatic drop-off, in my opinion, between Oher/Smith and the next best option, you have to aggressively seek a trade down.

If the Chiefs are picking at #2, one of those guys Oher or Smith will be available. And I think somebody would want to trade up with us cause like you said there are teams that need a LT. Albert has been playing well for the Chiefs, unless they draft a LT like Smith or Oher, and move Albert to RG which I'd be fine with too.

But I'd be more in favor of trading down, and stockpiling on picks. That's the best case scenario for a rebuilding team with a lot of holes. I think thats a realistic possiblity for the Chiefs and I hope something like that happens.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 02:38 PM
If the Chiefs are picking at #2, one of those guys Oher or Smith will be available. And I think somebody would want to trade up with us cause like you said there are teams that need a LT. Albert has been playing well for the Chiefs, unless they draft a LT like Smith or Oher, and move Albert to RG which I'd be fine with too.

But I'd be more in favor of trading down, and stockpiling on picks. That's the best case scenario for a rebuilding team with a lot of holes. I think thats a realistic possiblity for the Chiefs and I hope something like that happens.

Jesus.....all the things I hate wrapped up in one post! :clap:

You don't draft a RT that high in the draft. And you damn sure don't draft a LT when you already picked up one in the draft before. You don't move your LTOTF over to the RG spot because you have a shot at drafting another LT.

The chance of us trading down is slim to none. You have to find someone to trade down with and they have to be willing to give up the farm to move up for one player. This shit does not happen anymore.

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2008, 02:39 PM
If we draft at #5 and the top 4 picks are Bradford, Stafford, Crabtree and Jenkins, the top 2 guys left on the board would be OTs. I would have no problem taking one them (Smith or Oher) and plugging him in at RT. Bookend tackles for years to come is worth using a top 5 pick even if it goes against the normal grain.

:banghead:

Chiefnj2
12-03-2008, 02:51 PM
That makes the huge leap of assumption that they'll transition naturally to RT and that still doesn't justify using a top 5 pick on a RT that you can find much later in the draft.

The only reason those guys are top 5 value is because they are LTs. It is a tremendous reach to take either in the top 5 to be a RT. If you move Albert to RG or RT, then the argument is that you're using a top 5 pick for a guard or RT, which also doesn't apply.

If Oher and Smith are on the board, there are lots of teams who badly need a LT. Given the dramatic drop-off, in my opinion, between Oher/Smith and the next best option, you have to aggressively seek a trade down.

I think Monroe will be rated as high as those guys as well as the kid from Baylor (Smith?).

EyePod
12-03-2008, 02:52 PM
There are no WRs in this draft worthy of a top five pick, and tackle is too saturated of an area for us to get any bites on a trade down scenario.

Michael Crabtree is not Larry Fitzgerald.

I think he will be an elite WR and he is much better than anything we have right now. I wouldn't kill myself if we took him at 5.

Sam Hall
12-03-2008, 03:09 PM
I'd say trade down in round one because a lot of the best defensive players don't seem worthy of a top 5 pick.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 03:13 PM
Malcolm Jenkins is not going in the top 5.....I suspect some teams will rate him as a FS...Vontae Davis is gonna be the first CB picked.

ChiefsCountry
12-03-2008, 03:17 PM
What the hell is this fanbase's want to trade down? Geez people.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 03:18 PM
What the hell is this fanbase's want to trade down? Geez people.

They have an obsession with how much money guys make?

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 03:22 PM
What the hell is this fanbase's want to trade down? Geez people.

They believe that the 31 other teams in the league want to help us rebuild by giving up the house for one player. They don't want to see us get a fucking playmaker with a top 5 pick.

Sam Hall
12-03-2008, 03:27 PM
I'd change my mind if one of the defensive ends or linebackers rises into top 5 status.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 03:28 PM
They've been conditioned to fear by 20 years of Carl. They are risk averse and moron aplenty. They think that spending a top 5 pick on an LT is the best of all worlds, because if he doesn't work out at LT he can be moved to guard or right tackle, as though that's an acceptable return on your draft choice.

We have a dumb front office who is masterful at controlling the nutless local media, and a fanbase full of sycophants who care more about socializing in the parking lot than building a winning football team.

They're also reactionary rather than proactive. We are behind the curve on the size of linemen and our defensive scheme. We also aren't looking to the future.

As passing becomes even easier due to the rules, the only defenses that will be able to consistently slow down spread attacks will either be ones with an otherworldly front 4 (just too hard to bank on, same probs at the T2) or zone blitzing schemes that can confuse the QB from making quick reads and force his offensive linemen to block for more than three seconds.

Our front office should be able to see this.

duncan_idaho
12-03-2008, 03:30 PM
I think this is the key question: Who is the best player the Chiefs can get at No. 5 if Stafford, two of the tackles, and, say, Orakpo are off the board already?

Assume you can't trade down. The Chiefs are locked into that spot.

If Andre Smith is the third tackle (which wouldn't surprise me - Oher and Monroe will grade extremely high and are more "traditional" LTs) available, still there, is he a better choice at that pick than Michael Johnson? Than Rey Maualuga? Than Taylor Mays? Than Malcolm Jenkins?

A MLB is a reach there. A safety is a reach there. A corner isn't, but corner is the one place the Chiefs ARE decent (and DB is the one place Edwards actually has shown good talent ID). The No. 2 DE is a huge reach.

What do you do? I'm not sure, in that situation, that taking Smith would be the disaster some claim. Yeah, he probably would be the tackle you look at at RT. But having a pair of tackles drafted fifth and sixteen, though not extremely common, is not sacrilegious in that situation to me... because no matter what you do, you're bucking "conventional" wisdom.

My hope, if the Chiefs end up in that spot, is that they would be able to trade down 2-3 spots and still take Mays or Maualuga, while picking up another round 2 pick (not 100 percent sure if that move would be worth a second and too lazy to look up the draft value, so I'm guessing here)


That said, what I'd do at No. 5 if we can't trade down:
Round 1: Taylor Mays
Round 2: Pray for Spikes or Davis to fall here
Round 3: BPA, preferably a pass-rushing DE or an OLB.

If the trade-down happens:

Round 1 (No. 8): Mays/Maualuga
Round 2 (original): Spikes/Davis
Round 2 (acquired): Alex Mack/Best OL available
Round 3: Best OLB/DE available

Zouk
12-03-2008, 03:31 PM
Malcolm Jenkins is not going in the top 5.....I suspect some teams will rate him as a FS...Vontae Davis is gonna be the first CB picked.

Tony Pauline doesn't agree with you. It'll be a while before we find out who's right....

http://tfydraft.com/news.php?newsID=382

Vontae Davis/CB/Illinois: It would be a bigger surprise if Davis stayed for his senior season and did not enter the draft according to our sources. The consensus on Davis is he's being overrated by many on the outside, something we agree with. He also has character issues which will likely raise red flags.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 03:34 PM
Tony Pauline doesn't agree with you. It'll be a while before we find out who's right....

http://tfydraft.com/news.php?newsID=382

Vontae Davis/CB/Illinois: It would be a bigger surprise if Davis stayed for his senior season and did not enter the draft according to our sources. The consensus on Davis is he's being overrated by many on the outside, something we agree with. He also has character issues which will likely raise red flags.

CB is the biggest workout warrior position in the draft and no one will post better numbers than Davis.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 03:35 PM
If we are stuck at five and Stafford, Oher, Monroe, and Orakpo are gone and we simply cannot trade that pick....

I'd probably choose Taylor Mays. He has more upside than any back 7 player in this draft and is already familiar with our scheme, as Carroll runs a Cover 2 shell at SC. Given his size, and hitting ability, I'd blitz his ass from all over the place, but he'd also be fast enough to be the deep man in a Cover 1. He's a very versatile athlete.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 03:36 PM
If we are stuck at five and Stafford, Oher, Monroe, and Orakpo are gone and we simply cannot trade that pick....

I'd probably choose Taylor Mays. He has more upside than any back 7 player in this draft and is already familiar with our scheme, as Carroll runs a Cover 2 shell at SC. Given his size, and hitting ability, I'd blitz his ass from all over the place, but he'd also be fast enough to be the deep man in a Cover 1. He's a very versatile athlete.

I warn you he doesn't have a whole lot of experience blitzing...Ellison, the other safety, does most of the blitzing because Mays has such range that they can do that and still be safe.

'Hamas' Jenkins
12-03-2008, 03:43 PM
I warn you he doesn't have a whole lot of experience blitzing...Ellison, the other safety, does most of the blitzing because Mays has such range that they can do that and still be safe.

If Benny Sapp can do it, anyone can.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 04:20 PM
http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=884490

NFL Draft: Mays looks to be special prospect

The 2008 NFL draft didn't have a defensive back selected until the 11th pick, which is the deepest the draft had gone without a defensive back being selected since 2001.

The 2009 defensive back class looks a lot more talented, especially at the front end. In fact, three could come off the board in the top 15 picks.

Mike Lombardi, Andrew Brandt and Wes Bunting of the National Football Post break down this year's top 10 defensive backs.

1. FS Taylor Mays (6-3/230), USC
THE BUZZ: Mays, a junior, has the body of a linebacker, runs like a corner and hits like a strong safety. He is a strong, wrap-up tackler who shows good pop on contact. Mays is quick to sniff out run/pass keys. He looks natural at the line of scrimmage and does a nice job taking on blockers at the point of attack. He is fluid and light-footed in coverage and moves extremely well for a man of his size. He has a smooth and compact backpedal, and has excellent closing speed. He also has the ability to cover a lot of ground. Mays is an average man-to-man cover guy and at times is slow to redirect in and out of his breaks. But he is the total package and is the most physically gifted safety to come along since Sean Taylor.

2. CB Malcolm Jenkins (6-1/202), Ohio State
THE BUZZ: He's a long, angular corner with good size and excellent arm length for the position. Jenkins has excellent athletic ability and exceptional change-of-direction skills. He looks natural as a ballhawk in zone coverage and is physical in man-to-man coverage. He has good instincts in coverage and does a nice job reading quarterbacks' eyes. He also can close quickly when the ball is in the air. While he lacks elite deep speed, he still looks like a 4.45 guy. He trusts his height and leaping ability too much at times, and he will lose track of receivers behind him. While it's doubtful he ever will be an elite NFL player, his combination of speed, coordination and physicality will make him a solid starter.

3. FS William Moore (6-1/224), Missouri
THE BUZZ: A thickly built safety, Moore is a physical, punishing tackler who flies around the field and takes good angles toward the ball. He is a sound wrap-up tackler. He has a good first step and great closing speed. He always seems to be at the right place at the right time, with good instincts and a nose for getting his hands on the ball. He is comfortable at the line of scrimmage and does a nice job reading blocks and shooting gaps inside. He has the ability to run sideline-to-sideline. He looks confident and comfortable in man coverage down the field and has the quickness and burst to undercut routes and break on the ball. But he has a tendency to try to get into the backfield too quickly and will overrun the ball at times. He needs to play with a little more patience and control. He's an imposing strong safety prospect who has the body control, burst and instincts to make an impact at the NFL level.

4. CB Vontae Davis (6-0/204), Illinois
THE BUZZ: Davis, a junior, has rare athletic ability for a cornerback and has the speed to turn and run with any NFL receiver down the field. He has a nose for the ball but at times gets caught jumping too many short routes. He needs to learn to become a bit more patient and instinctive underneath. He has the athleticism to sit on routes a little more than he does. Once he learns to trust his backpedal more, he will be dynamic. Davis has become more and more physical each season, and he can consistently reroute receivers off the line. Davis also does a nice job breaking off his receiver and ballhawking in the secondary. He still needs to become a more reliable open-field tackler, but he has the power to lay the wood when he wants to.

5. CB Sean Smith (6-2/215), Utah
THE BUZZ: Smith is a big, long-limbed athlete who looks more like a safety then he does a corner. He loves to play press coverage and looks comfortable and natural at the line of scrimmage. He has good balance and body control and does an excellent job getting his hands on receivers and rerouting them at the line. He has fluid hips and does a nice job coming out of his backpedal and turning to run down the field. If he does have a problem with his height, it comes when he transitions from his backpedal. At times, he needs an extra step to get going. He is smart and instinctive, uses the sideline as a second defender down the field and does a great job using his length to break on balls at their highest point. He's a decent tackler who uses his length to wrap up, but he doesn't drop and really explode through his hits. He has some similar traits to the NFL's top cover man, Oakland's Nnamdi Asomugha.

6. CB Alphonso Smith (5-9/192), Wake Forest
THE BUZZ: Smith is an undersized corner who lacks height, but he possesses the overall thickness and girth to hold up in the NFL. A playmaker with elite short-area quickness, he has excellent body control and flexibility and he can turn and run with receivers down the field. Smith lacks great straight-line speed and is more quick than fast. While he will struggle consistently running with faster receivers down the field, he has the awareness and instincts to go up and get the ball at a high point. He closes quickly on balls in front of him. He lacks the power and strength in bump coverage and struggles rerouting receivers. He lacks the physical makeup to be a top-flight corner at the next level, but his elite quickness and burst will make it tough for NFL receivers to get good separation from him.

7. CB D.J. Moore (5-10/184), Vanderbilt
THE BUZZ: He's a decent-sized corner who lacks girth and overall power. But Moore makes up for his lack of size with excellent athleticism and fluidity in coverage. He has the burst to close quickly on the ball, and he has the ability to get in and out of his break quickly. He has great closing speed and takes excellent angles in man coverage. His lack of power and size can hurt him against bigger, more physical receivers. He isn't physical in any dimension of the game, but he will stick his head in against the run. He isn't that comfortable in press-man coverage and will have a tough time against some of the NFL's physical receivers.

8. CB Trevard Lindley (6-0/178), Kentucky
THE BUZZ: Lindley is a long, lean-looking athlete who possesses good size but lacks great bulk for the position. He will need to hit the weight room and add muscle. He has great footwork and great closing speed, and he does a nice job in his backpedal not wasting any steps and making a beeline toward the ball. He isn't that physical and struggles getting a good bump on receivers. He gives up the inside release too easily, but he has the speed and body control to work his way back inside and break on the football. He gets lazy at times against subpar competition. He isn't a physical tackler but breaks down well in space and takes good angles.

9. CB Victor Harris (6-0/200), Virginia Tech
THE BUZZ: He's a big, physical corner who possesses a thick frame and good length for the position. He plays with great confidence and emotion, and he loves to line up in man and take on the best receivers in the nation. He is a bit raw in his backpedal; he has a tendency to get too high and needs to do a better job playing with more flexibility. He allows too many short completions underneath as he struggles planting and exploding quickly because of his long stride. He has good overall physicality for the position and isn't afraid to commit to the run game. He has average deep speed but does a good job turning and running with receivers down the field. But he will struggle making up for a false step and doesn't have the makeup speed to play from behind. He is much more quick than fast. He does a nice job in press coverage. Harris is best-suited to play "Cover 2" at the next level because of his ball skills, lack of deep speed and overall physical nature.

10. FS Derek Pegues (5-10/196), Mississippi State
THE BUZZ: Pegues possesses a strong, muscular build, and he also has natural athletic ability with good range and burst. He is solid coming out of his breaks and plays with good balance and flexibility. He seems to have a "sixth sense" when reading quarterbacks' eyes in zone coverage. He always is flowing toward the ball and takes excellent angles in the passing game. He is dangerous after the catch and has the ability to jump a route and go the distance. He has good straight-line speed and the fluidity in space to play the center field-type role in the NFL. He lacks great power and girth and isn't much of a force at the line of scrimmage. He is an explosive safety with the instincts and ball skills to ballhawk and make plays at free safety in the NFL.

According to these guys Mays is a better prospect than any of the corners....

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 04:30 PM
Where do you think Victor Harris grades out? 3rd round? 4th round?

Mecca
12-03-2008, 04:33 PM
Where do you think Victor Harris grades out? 3rd round? 4th round?

Macho?

He's probably going to be somewhere between 7-12 for CB's so start guessing how many you think are going to get picked...

He has good size and he's a good special teamer with alot of experience but I could see his timed speed hurting him. If he can somehow get into the 4.4's I could see him moving up the list.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 05:22 PM
Jesus.....all the things I hate wrapped up in one post! :clap:

You don't draft a RT that high in the draft. And you damn sure don't draft a LT when you already picked up one in the draft before. You don't move your LTOTF over to the RG spot because you have a shot at drafting another LT.

The chance of us trading down is slim to none. You have to find someone to trade down with and they have to be willing to give up the farm to move up for one player. This shit does not happen anymore.

If the Chiefs draft at #5, they can move down a few spots for only a 2nd round pick. That's not "the farm." That's a good deal for both sides.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:24 PM
Why is everyone obsessed with trading down...

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 05:25 PM
If the Chiefs draft at #5, they can move down a few spots for only a 2nd round pick. That's not "the farm." That's a good deal for both sides.

:banghead:

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:26 PM
I'd be satisfied if I never heard the term trade down or draft a RT with our first pick ever again.

Sam Hall
12-03-2008, 05:31 PM
Why is everyone obsessed with trading down...

I think it's because the one player we really like (Stafford) won't be available. The draft looks like a toss up for the Chiefs outside of him.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 05:33 PM
:banghead:

You don't think a high 2nd round pick is valuable? It's practically like being handed an extra first rounder.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:33 PM
I'd rather have a playmaker than trading down.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 05:39 PM
Why is everyone obsessed with trading down...

Because I don't see the point in drafting a player at a position that's already strong like LT or reaching for a player you could easily get a few spots lower. It's especially true when you have several players who will help you equally as well.

If you get a second round pick, that's the prime spot to take a starting guard, center, or LB. For the first two, it could end up being the top-rated guard or center in the draft class.

So let's see... you can either draft a stud at a position that's already filled, draft a really good impact player, or draft a really good impact player plus an extra lineman.

I can understand not agreeing with the idea of a trade-down. But the amount of resistance astonishes me. If you can get a player you really want plus a 2nd round pick on the side, why is it so hard to see the upside?

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 05:40 PM
I'd rather have a playmaker than trading down.

I want to trade down either, but this statement is retarded.

Hell, the biggest "playmakers" of the last 4-5 drafts were taken between the 7th pick, and the 19th.

McKelvin - 11th

Peterson - 7th

Willis - 11th

Cromartie - 19th

Merriman - 12th

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 05:41 PM
Because I don't see the point in drafting a player at a position that's already strong like LT or reaching for a player you could easily get a few spots lower. It's especially true when you have several players who will help you equally as well.

If you get a second round pick, that's the prime spot to take a starting guard, center, or LB. For the first two, it could end up being the top-rated guard or center in the draft class.

So let's see... you can either draft a stud at a position that's already filled, draft a really good impact player, or draft a really good impact player plus an extra lineman.

I can understand not agreeing with the idea of a trade-down. But the amount of resistance astonishes me. If you can get a player you really want plus a 2nd round pick on the side, why is it so hard to see the upside?


Part of it is because you're making it sound like it's easy.

It's not.

Name the last team to trade up into the Top 5 from outside the Top 5.

I'll wait.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 05:41 PM
I want to trade down either, but this statement is retarded.

Hell, the biggest "playmakers" of the last 4-5 drafts were taken between the 7th pick, and the 19th.

McKelvin - 11th

Peterson - 7th

Willis - 11th

Cromartie - 19th

Merriman - 12th



According to the people around here, playmakers are only taken in the top 5.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 05:41 PM
I'd rather have a playmaker than trading down.

#1 - You don't trade down if there's a can't miss playmaker--unless you can get tremendous value.
#2 - If the Chiefs trade at #5, there is probably not going to be a big difference between the talent at #5 and #9 or #10.

You still get a playmaker with your top pick and you get another terrific pick in the early second round. I would much rather get a two very good players than one playmaker.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:42 PM
If we're picking 5th I'm taking Taylor Mays you start dropping down he's gonna get picked.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:43 PM
According to the people around here, playmakers are only taken in the top 5.

Now I don't think anyone thinks that but you need to have realization to what class it is and where you think guys are going to get picked.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 05:44 PM
You don't think a high 2nd round pick is valuable? It's practically like being handed an extra first rounder.

Let's look at it this way. Say we're drafting 3rd and Stafford and Oher go #1 and #2. San Francisco who is at #7 wants to trade up because the Rams are right behind us...and they know that the Rams want the next available OT. According to the draft value chart......that's the 49ers 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks to move up 4 spots. That's basically their whole draft for one player.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:44 PM
#1 - You don't trade down if there's a can't miss playmaker--unless you can get tremendous value.
#2 - If the Chiefs trade at #5, there is probably not going to be a big difference between the talent at #5 and #9 or #10.

You still get a playmaker with your top pick and you get another terrific pick in the early second round. I would much rather get a two very good players than one playmaker.

If this team trades down and takes James Laurenaitis I'm gonna be pissed off beyond belief.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 05:45 PM
Part of it is because you're making it sound like it's easy.

It's not.

Name the last team to trade up into the Top 5 from outside the Top 5.

I'll wait.

My point is that it's hard because the team with the top 5 pick makes it too hard. The Jags traded way up to get to #8. The Saints traded with the Pats to get to #7.

If you're willing to move 1 or 2 rounds away from the draft chart, you can still make very good deals that benefit both sides. For some reason, that doesn't happen as often as it should.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 05:46 PM
My point is that it's hard because the team with the top 5 pick makes it too hard. The Jags traded way up to get to #8. The Saints traded with the Pats to get to #7.

If you're willing to move 1 or 2 rounds away from the draft chart, you can still make very good deals that benefit both sides. For some reason, that doesn't happen as often as it should.

Waiting...

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:46 PM
My point is that it's hard because the team with the top 5 pick makes it too hard. The Jags traded way up to get to #8. The Saints traded with the Pats to get to #7.

If you're willing to move 1 or 2 rounds away from the draft chart, you can still make very good deals that benefit both sides. For some reason, that doesn't happen as often as it should.

Those teams took less value than they should have because they wanted to drop the Pats did it for money reasons..that played into Baltimore aswell.

If you start dropping to 10 the players that will be there are players that no one is going to get real excited about.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 05:47 PM
Let's look at it this way. Say we're drafting 3rd and Stafford and Oher go #1 and #2. San Francisco who is at #7 wants to trade up because the Rams are right behind us...and they know that the Rams want the next available OT. According to the draft value chart......that's the 49ers 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks to move up 4 spots. That's basically their whole draft for one player.

Here comes the post about how stupid teams are for sticking to the value chart...

YAY!

Just what this places needs, another guy who thinks he's smarter than the National Fucking Football League.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:48 PM
Lets look at this draft board...if you start dropping into the 8-12 range who are you going to take then?

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 05:48 PM
Now I don't think anyone thinks that but you need to have realization to what class it is and where you think guys are going to get picked.

Yet it is said every year. Like last year. Mckelvin. and the year before. Peterson.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 05:48 PM
Those teams took less value than they should have because they wanted to drop the Pats did it for money reasons..that played into Baltimore aswell.

If you start dropping to 10 the players that will be there are players that no one is going to get real excited about.

Jesus Christ...

CALL OFF THE DRAFT!

There's no point in having more than 9 picks, anyone after that isn't worth getting excited over...

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 05:49 PM
Here comes the post about how stupid teams are for sticking to the value chart...

YAY!

Just what this places needs, another guy who thinks he's smarter than the National Fucking Football League.

So wait....are you bashing me or the guy who is going to respond to my post? :D:hmmm:

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:50 PM
Jesus Christ...

CALL OFF THE DRAFT!

There's no point in having more than 9 picks, anyone after that isn't worth getting excited over...

That's a hell of a spin on what I said but I don't think anyone is gonna be real thrilled about dropping down to draft Aaron Curry.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 05:50 PM
Let's look at it this way. Say we're drafting 3rd and Stafford and Oher go #1 and #2. San Francisco who is at #7 wants to trade up because the Rams are right behind us...and they know that the Rams want the next available OT. According to the draft value chart......that's the 49ers 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks to move up 4 spots. That's basically their whole draft for one player.

First, we're operating under the assumption that we'll have a #5 pick, which is easy to trade out of.

Second, this is exactly my point. Teams are always begging teams to trade with them because they don't want their top 5 pick. And yet these deals never get done. That's a pretty strong indication that the Draft Value Chart is retarded and is not functioning well for top 5 picks. They place far too much value on the top 5 picks in the draft.

If Stafford and Oher are off the board, more than likely there is a huge talent drop, based on what we know now. Would I be willing to settle for less than a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd? You're damn right I would. If you could cut that down to a 1st and a 2nd, or a 1st, 3rd, and another second day pick, that's still a great trade for you to make.

Given that I've rarely seen trades that don't almost perfectly match the draft value chart, that tells me that far too many trades are killed because of a stupid list.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:51 PM
Yet it is said every year. Like last year. Mckelvin. and the year before. Peterson.

McKelvin was the first CB taken...everyone knew he was a dynamic return man..Peterson was the first RB taken..it's not like people thought he sucked just some teams don't value RB's...and some teams are devaluing corners now the Pats do that.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 05:51 PM
First, we're operating under the assumption that we'll have a #5 pick, which is easy to trade out of.

Second, this is exactly my point. Teams are always begging teams to trade with them because they don't want their top 5 pick. And yet these deals never get done. That's a pretty strong indication that the Draft Value Chart is retarded and is not functioning well for top 5 picks. They place far too much value on the top 5 picks in the draft.

If Stafford and Oher are off the board, more than likely there is a huge talent drop, based on what we know now. Would I be willing to settle for less than a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd? You're damn right I would. If you could cut that down to a 1st and a 2nd, or a 1st, 3rd, and another second day pick, that's still a great trade for you to make.

Given that I've rarely seen trades that don't almost perfectly match the draft value chart, that tells me that far too many trades are killed because of a stupid list.

Trades don't happen because teams know that the #3 pick is worth a lot to a team who wants to trade up to that spot. Teams don't just call other teams to bullshit. They call to make a trade. So why wouldn't you rape the other team for them to trade up?

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:51 PM
First, we're operating under the assumption that we'll have a #5 pick, which is easy to trade out of.

Second, this is exactly my point. Teams are always begging teams to trade with them because they don't want their top 5 pick. And yet these deals never get done. That's a pretty strong indication that the Draft Value Chart is retarded and is not functioning well for top 5 picks. They place far too much value on the top 5 picks in the draft.

If Stafford and Oher are off the board, more than likely there is a huge talent drop, based on what we know now. Would I be willing to settle for less than a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd? You're damn right I would. If you could cut that down to a 1st and a 2nd, or a 1st, 3rd, and another second day pick, that's still a great trade for you to make.

Given that I've rarely seen trades that don't almost perfectly match the draft value chart, that tells me that far too many trades are killed because of a stupid list.

Because taking poor value to allow another team to take a better player for no other reason than you're being cheap is brilliant.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 05:52 PM
Lets look at this draft board...if you start dropping into the 8-12 range who are you going to take then?

Mays

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 05:52 PM
Those teams took less value than they should have because they wanted to drop the Pats did it for money reasons..that played into Baltimore aswell.

If you start dropping to 10 the players that will be there are players that no one is going to get real excited about.

Jerod Mayo has 96 tackles right now.

The Pats traded out of that spot because they didn't need Ellis and knew there was a team that badly wanted him.

You would be probably the only person that would argue that the Pats got hosed on that deal.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 05:52 PM
Lets look at this draft board...if you start dropping into the 8-12 range who are you going to take then?

Looking at it NOW?

Crabtree
Michael Johnson
Maualuga
Aaron Curry


But that's the thing, the draft is in 5 months.

A lot is going to change.

Remember where Jarod Mayo was projected to go this time last year?

Late 2nd, early 3rd.

The Patriots took him, what, 10th?

And so far, he's been worth it.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 05:53 PM
McKelvin was the first CB taken...everyone knew he was a dynamic return man..Peterson was the first RB taken..it's not like people thought he sucked just some teams don't value RB's...and some teams are devaluing corners now the Pats do that.

And that has what to do with this season. There will be similar situations this season.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:54 PM
Jerod Mayo has 96 tackles right now.

The Pats traded out of that spot because they didn't need Ellis and knew there was a team that badly wanted him.

You would be probably the only person that would argue that the Pats got hosed on that deal.

They traded out because they don't value CB's.......which may not be smart because McKelvin would be helpful to them...

But they traded out to save money, they were going to take Mayo or Rivers but in fairness that is a ready made team that doesn't need top 5 picks to rebuild.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:54 PM
Mays

I don't think he drops that far...

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:55 PM
Looking at it NOW?

Crabtree
Michael Johnson
Maualuga
Aaron Curry


But that's the thing, the draft is in 5 months.

A lot is going to change.

Remember where Jarod Mayo was projected to go this time last year?

Late 2nd, early 3rd.

The Patriots took him, what, 10th?

And so far, he's been worth it.

And to be honest with you I am not comfortable taking any of those guys but 1.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 05:57 PM
Trades don't happen because teams know that the #3 pick is worth a lot to a team who wants to trade up to that spot. Teams don't just call other teams to bullshit. They call to make a trade. So why wouldn't you rape the other team for them to trade up?

Because when "raping" the other team leads to you taking a guy you don't really want or taking a guy you know could have fallen a few spots down, then you're raping yourself. You could have gotten the same player plus picks, but you didn't because the compensation didn't match the draft chart.

Like I said. I have rarely seen a trade executed that didn't match the draft chart. That tells me that teams more than likely make a call for a trade down and see if there are any suckers who will pay the ridiculous compensation. It speaks wonders that you see a lot of teams unhappy with a top 5 slot, yet completely incapable of getting rid of their pick.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 05:58 PM
Because when "raping" the other team leads to you taking a guy you don't really want or taking a guy you know could have fallen a few spots down, then you're raping yourself. You could have gotten the same player plus picks, but you didn't because the compensation didn't match the draft chart.

Like I said. I have rarely seen a trade executed that didn't match the draft chart. That tells me that teams more than likely make a call for a trade down and see if there are any suckers who will pay the ridiculous compensation. It speaks wonders that you see a lot of teams unhappy with a top 5 slot, yet completely incapable of getting rid of their pick.

The only teams that want to move out of their top 5 pick without getting great value would be teams that are to cheap to pay the contract.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:00 PM
That's a hell of a spin on what I said but I don't think anyone is gonna be real thrilled about dropping down to draft Aaron Curry.

No spin at all, it's exactly what YOU said:

If you start dropping to 10 the players that will be there are players that no one is going to get real excited about.

Quit saying stupid shit and it's not an issue.

Again, I'm not advocating it, because I know it's not realistic.

But if we were to step into chiefzilla's fantasy world for a second...

Yeah, if someone actually called, I'd rather move down a few spots, still get Johnson or Maualuga, and be able to have 3 picks in the first 40 instead of 2 in the first 35.

Or, be able to use that extra pick to move up to grab a guy, if necessary.

Sorry, but I'd rather have (as an example) Maualuga, Mack and a guy like Selvie/Graham than take a guy earlier than necessary. Especially at a position like LB or Safety.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:01 PM
And to be honest with you I am not comfortable taking any of those guys but 1.

Of course you're not.

Admitting otherwise would completely destroy your agrument.


Mecca '09: Stafford, Mays or Bust.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:02 PM
I'm gonna be pretty pissed off if Taylor Mays gets picked by the Raiders and I consider that a likely scenario.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:02 PM
Of course you're not.

Admitting otherwise would completely destroy your agrument.

You listed a DE that isn't very productive a OLB that isn't a pass rusher....those are the kinds of things you don't take in the 1st round.

And Crabtree has question marks all around him.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:03 PM
I'm gonna be pretty pissed off if Taylor Mays gets picked by the Raiders and I consider that a likely scenario.

I don't know...I think Al Davis is going to get a hardon for Crabtree.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:04 PM
You listed a DE that isn't very productive a OLB that isn't a pass rusher....those are the kinds of things you don't take in the 1st round.

And Crabtree has question marks all around him.

Yet they are universally thought of as Top 10 picks by every expert on the planet not named, well, YOU.

They fucking suck.

Let's move on.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:04 PM
I don't know...I think Al Davis is going to get a hardon for Crabtree.

Crabtree doesn't have blazing speed....Crabtree is one of those guys I don't think should come out because he's going to have a ton of question marks surrounding him.

Taylor Mays is everything Al Davis will love physically.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:04 PM
I don't know...I think Al Davis is going to get a hardon for Crabtree.

This is Davis to a T.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:05 PM
Crabtree doesn't have blazing speed....Crabtree is one of those guys I don't think should come out because he's going to have a ton of question marks surrounding him.

Taylor Mays is everything Al Davis will love physically.

Yeah but look at who they have at WR. Crabtree was a stud in college and they have nobody.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:05 PM
Yet they are universally thought of as Top 10 picks by every expert on the planet not named, well, YOU.

They fucking suck.

Let's move on.

Yea so were alot of other guys that ended up sucking, I'm going with what I think here. Michael Johnson has never been a really productive college player...Aaron Curry has alot of INT's but he's not a pass rusher..how's that saying go..you don't take non pass rushing OLB's in the 1st round.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:06 PM
Yea so were alot of other guys that ended up sucking, I'm going with what I think here. Michael Johnson has never been a really productive college player...Aaron Curry has alot of INT's but he's not a pass rusher..how's that saying go..you don't take non pass rushing OLB's in the 1st round.

Thomas Davis? Jon Beason? Keith Rivers?

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:06 PM
Yeah but look at who they have at WR. Crabtree was a stud in college and they have nobody.

Well he didn't get a hardon for Fitzgerald...it's hard to say on this front he likes WR's but he tends to like the guys with blazing speed.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:07 PM
Thomas Davis? Jon Beason?

Jon Beason is a MLB who got picked at the back end of the 1st round so that's a little different...

You could argue Davis while being solid hasn't played to his selection when you can pull up alot of mid rounders who've done the same, LB is a position where you don't need to use high picks unless you are a 3-4 team that needs rushers.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:08 PM
A.J. Hawk? D.J. Williams?

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:09 PM
A.J. Hawk? D.J. Williams?

A LB in the Top 5?

Blasphemous.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:09 PM
A.J. Hawk? D.J. Williams?

Do you think they're worth their draft selections?

That's just a personal belief of mine unless the guy brings pass rush skills I think a LB above say pick 20 isn't a good idea.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 06:10 PM
Thomas Davis? Jon Beason? Keith Rivers?

Jerod Mayo. Derrick Johnson. Patrick Willis.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:10 PM
A LB in the Top 5?

Blasphemous.

That's fine, I personally wouldn't do it, I look at LB as a position that can be filled in the middle rounds.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:10 PM
Jerod Mayo. Derrick Johnson. Patrick Willis.

You listed 2 guys who play in the middle......and Derrick Johnson wasn't worth his pick.

I think a MLB does have more value than a non rushing OLB.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:11 PM
You listed 2 guys who play in the middle......and Derrick Johnson wasn't worth his pick.

I think a MLB does have more value than a non rushing OLB.

Jerrod Mayo was listed as an OLB in the draft though.

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 06:11 PM
Do you think they're worth their draft selections?

That's just a personal belief of mine unless the guy brings pass rush skills I think a LB above say pick 20 isn't a good idea.

I don't think New England, Cincinnati, or San Francisco regret for a second taking Mayo, Rivers, or Willis. And I don't know how happy Green Bay is with the value of Hawk, but he's played pretty well so far.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:11 PM
Jerod Mayo. Derrick Johnson. Patrick Willis.

Well, 2/3 ain't bad...

:D

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:12 PM
Jerrod Mayo was listed as an OLB in the draft though.

He was either or......I loved Keith Rivers as much as anyone but I don't know if I would have used a top 10 pick on him.

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:12 PM
As the thread starter, I don't know if I've seen either Mecca or OTW provide their three round mocks.

Gents? Care to step up to the plate?

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:13 PM
Jerrod Mayo was listed as an OLB in the draft though.

No he wasn't.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:13 PM
As the thread starter, I don't know if I've seen either Mecca or OTW provide their three round mocks.

Gents? Care to step up to the plate?

Do you want me to do a mock of what I want or what I think the Chiefs will do...

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:14 PM
Do you want me to do a mock of what I want or what I think the Chiefs will do...

You just about nailed their draft last year, so who's to say they won't be one in the same?

Go for it.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:15 PM
No he wasn't.

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft

10 Jerod Mayo OLB Tennessee New England Patriots

chiefzilla1501
12-03-2008, 06:15 PM
That's fine, I personally wouldn't do it, I look at LB as a position that can be filled in the middle rounds.

So is Safety. But there are exceptions to the rule, like Mays.

Let me also bring up that in the past 3 drafts, Kuharich has had three picks outside of the top 10. Hali, Bowe, and Albert. So far, he has hit a home run on two of those guys.

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:16 PM
http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft

10 Jerod Mayo OLB Tennessee New England Patriots

That's either a typo or it's wrong. I read close to a thousand mocks last year and if one of them listed Mayo at OLB, I missed it.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:16 PM
As the thread starter, I don't know if I've seen either Mecca or OTW provide their three round mocks.

Gents? Care to step up to the plate?

Mecca always does this. I couldn't get him to do it last year. I wanted you guys to make picks on draft day, but no one especially Mecca wanted to be held accountable for their picks. I'd like to do it this year too, but like I said, if they turn out to be wrong they couldn't carry on acting like draft gurus.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:17 PM
You just about nailed their draft last year, so who's to say they won't be one in the same?

Go for it.

Not the Chiefs pick. Their picks. And we should put'em out on draft day.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:18 PM
You just about nailed their draft last year, so who's to say they won't be one in the same?

Go for it.

The Chiefs are the kind of team that has a really hard time admitting they made a mistake with a high pick..so if you were going to ask me what I thought the Chiefs would do right now...

I'd list it this way..

Rey Maualuga
Herman Johnson
Marcus Freeman

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:19 PM
FTR I'm not saying they couldn't make good picks, just that they're scared to do so. They would rather critcise picks after they're made.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:20 PM
Mecca always does this. I couldn't get him to do it last year. I wanted you guys to make picks on draft day, but no one especially Mecca wanted to be held accountable for their picks. I'd like to do it this year too, but like I said, if they turn out to be wrong they couldn't carry on acting like draft gurus.

What are people suppose to be picking though, who they should take or who they will take? What if you get the pick wrong but the player you wanted them to take is better?

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:20 PM
Not the Chiefs pick. Their picks. And we should put'em out on draft day.

I put out a gajillion year. Playing Mock Draft God is one of my favorite things to do.

I think I could be criticized for sucking at it, but I don't think I could be criticized for being shy.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:21 PM
FTR I'm not saying they couldn't make good picks, just that they're scared to do so. They would rather critcise picks after they're made.

I said the Cardinals should have taken Peterson instead of Levi Brown...how's that work I got that pick wrong but they'd be better off...

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:23 PM
I put out a gajillion year. Playing Mock Draft God is one of my favorite things to do.

I think I could be criticized for sucking at it, but I don't think I could be criticized for being shy.

Yeah...I can't wait for the annual Chiefsplanet mockdraft. I'm putting my name into the hat right now.

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:23 PM
The Chiefs are the kind of team that has a really hard time admitting they made a mistake with a high pick..so if you were going to ask me what I thought the Chiefs would do right now...

I'd list it this way..

Rey Maualuga
Herman Johnson
Marcus Freeman

This is clearly not what you'd do.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:25 PM
This is clearly not what you'd do.

Nope it's not but that is what I know of the Chiefs and I expect something similar.

They have 4 high picks on the DL and LB is the worst position on the team they'll somehow blame their lack of pass rush on injuries.

Now I hope I'm wrong but the history of Carl Peterson says he has a really really hard time admitting he made a mistake with a pick.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:26 PM
I said the Cardinals should have taken Peterson instead of Levi Brown...how's that work I got that pick wrong but they'd be better off...

That's the thing. I'm not saying what this team or that team would do. Your peterson pick was the right pick. +1 for you. You did not get the pick wrong. They did.

I love playing the draft game, and seeing who would have put together a good draft, but no one wants to do it. I'd love to look back at the picks, and see who made the right calls. For example. We should do a CP draft challenge.

Players have to available when we pick, and you have to get the pick in before our alloted time. That would be sweet. Then we could actually see who knows their shit. Anybody can talk draft hinesight.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:26 PM
Nope it's not but that is what I know of the Chiefs and I expect something similar.

They have 4 high picks on the DL and LB is the worst position on the team they'll somehow blame their lack of pass rush on injuries.

Now I hope I'm wrong but the history of Carl Peterson says he has a really really hard time admitting he made a mistake with a pick.

What would your three picks be then?

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:27 PM
Nope it's not but that is what I know of the Chiefs and I expect something similar.

They have 4 high picks on the DL and LB is the worst position on the team they'll somehow blame their lack of pass rush on injuries.

Now I hope I'm wrong but the history of Carl Peterson says he has a really really hard time admitting he made a mistake with a pick.

So your banking on Peterson balking on a DE in the first three rounds even after a record-setting low in sacks, because he's proud.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:28 PM
What would your three picks be then?

Tell me who you think the 1st 4 picks are and I'll go from there.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:28 PM
And Mocks never fall out like the real thing, and it makes the mock worthless, because your pick may not have been available at the time, and people say well I wanted him, but he wasn't there.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:29 PM
So your banking on Peterson balking on a DE in the first three rounds even after a record-setting low in sacks, because he's proud.

After the 1st round there aren't going to be any DE's....and I could easily see it happening.

JASONSAUTO
12-03-2008, 06:29 PM
Tell me who you think the 1st 4 picks are and I'll go from there.

who you would take if you were the GM

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:30 PM
Tell me who you think the 1st 4 picks are and I'll go from there.

Lions -- Stafford
Bengals -- Oher
Rams -- Monroe
Seahawks -- Crabtree

That's what I'd guess, anyway.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:30 PM
who you would take if you were the GM

Like I said give me a starting point of who's getting picked ahead of us.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:31 PM
Tell me who you think the 1st 4 picks are and I'll go from there.

I'll go with this:

Stafford, Oher, Smith, Crabtree

JASONSAUTO
12-03-2008, 06:32 PM
Lions -- Stafford
Bengals -- Oher
Rams -- Monroe
Seahawks -- Crabtree

That's what I'd guess, anyway.

I'll go with this:

Stafford, Oher, Smith, Crabtree

either one you pick

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:34 PM
You guys have Crabtree going super high, but ok...

I'd probably lean to Mays as he brings playmaker ability to the secondary..then I'd hope one of the ends fell into the top of the 2nd...

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:35 PM
As the thread starter, I don't know if I've seen either Mecca or OTW provide their three round mocks.

Gents? Care to step up to the plate?

You know me, D. I'm always putting out mocks.

But I'm not going to even consider doing one until after the college season is over, at least.

Doing one this early is a complete waste of time, IMO.

However, to answer the question you're probably most interested in:

Assuming we're picking 5th, I take Maualuga.




If we're picking 5th, then it's highly likely that both Stafford and Orakpo are already gone. That leaves the BPA's all being at positions of questionable value. (OT, MLB, Safety)

That being the case, I have to take the BPA at the position of the greatest need, which is MLB.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:35 PM
You guys have Crabtree going super high, but ok...

I'd probably lean to Mays as he brings playmaker ability to the secondary..then I'd hope one of the ends fell into the top of the 2nd...

I have Crabtree going that high because the Seahawks desperately need a WR.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:37 PM
I have Crabtree going that high because the Seahawks desperately need a WR.

They need alot of things...I wouldn't put it past them to take one of the OT's Walter Jones is getting old.

MahiMike
12-03-2008, 06:37 PM
Round 1 - Michael Oher, OT
Round 2 - Alex Mack, C
Round 3 - Peria Jerry, DT

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:38 PM
Round 1 - Michael Oher, OT
Round 2 - Alex Mack, C
Round 3 - Peria Jerry, DT

How uninspiring.

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:39 PM
They need alot of things...I wouldn't put it past them to take one of the OT's Walter Jones is getting old.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8p3lPw3LmKQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8p3lPw3LmKQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

MahiMike
12-03-2008, 06:39 PM
How uninspiring.

Yup. All big uglies. I would draft only linemen - every stinkin round.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:40 PM
How uninspiring.

And still no pick from you, and once again ignoring my challenge because you don't want to be held to your picks.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:40 PM
Yup. All big uglies. I would draft only linemen - every stinkin round.

And you would never win a Superbowl........ever.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:40 PM
For the purpose of what building a team that gets beat by the good teams?

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:40 PM
And still no pick from you, and once again ignoring my challenge because you don't want to be held to your picks.

I just gave pick scenarios...

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:42 PM
I just gave pick scenarios...

Maybe Mays, and hopefully a DE? Yeah, that's what the tread title is asking for.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:43 PM
Well it's not draft day so I don't know who's on the board, I like Everette Brown but should I really be giving his name up as a pick when I don't even know if he's coming out?

MahiMike
12-03-2008, 06:43 PM
And you would never win a Superbowl........ever.

All starts and ends on the line. Free agency is for the other positions. With a great OL, you can run any Joe Schmoe behind them. After that's established, then you can think about other positions. But not until.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:45 PM
All starts and ends on the line. Free agency is for the other positions. With a great OL, you can run any Joe Schmoe behind them. After that's established, then you can think about other positions. But not until.

:banghead:

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:46 PM
Well it's not draft day so I don't know who's on the board, I like Everette Brown but should I really be giving his name up as a pick when I don't even know if he's coming out?

Exactly why the draft challenge has been issued, but you'll run from that too.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:46 PM
All starts and ends on the line. Free agency is for the other positions. With a great OL, you can run any Joe Schmoe behind them. After that's established, then you can think about other positions. But not until.

He's right you know why.....you need playmakers....let me show you an article..

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/column/317072

Oates: Lack of playmakers dooms Packers



GREEN BAY There were many reasons for the Green Bay Packers' four-point loss to Carolina Sunday, but ultimately the game wasn't decided by poor play-calling or feeble kickoff coverage or even an interception.

It was decided by Steve Smith.

A quick, physical wide receiver, Smith is one of the NFL's best playmakers, the kind of difference-maker coaches covet when a game is on the line. At crunch time Sunday, it was as simple as this: The Panthers had Smith and the Packers didn't.

Nothing was working for Carolina's offense in the second half, but two long catches by Smith both on superior individual plays against solid positional coverage set up the two fourth-quarter touchdowns that beat the Packers. Indeed, those two catches accounted for 90 of Carolina's 128 yards in the half.

"Every good football team has great players," Carolina coach John Fox said afterward. "He's been making plays like that around here since I've been here."

Fox was correct when he said every good football team has great players. In fact, great players are the currency of the NFL.

If you want to know why the Packers are 1-4 in games decided by five points or less this season, look no further than their roster. There is decent across-the-board talent and solid depth, but precious few players who consistently make big plays. That void is killing Green Bay in close games this season.

Old friend Cliff Christl, who is retired but remains the godfather of pro football writers in Wisconsin, always says that long-time NFL scouts believe there are only 25 to 50 true difference-makers in the league and the other players are largely interchangeable. The more difference-makers on the roster, the better the team.

Difference-makers are players who can dominate an opponent with their size, strength and athletic ability. They throw fear into opposing players and force opposing coaches to scheme with them in mind. They make the players around them better by drawing extra attention or inspiring teammates to elevate their play. Oh, and they consistently make big plays.

The Packers had such a playmaker on offense last year in quarterback Brett Favre. Is it any coincidence they were 5-1 in games decided by seven points or less?

Cornerback Charles Woodson is the only current Packers player who is a consistent playmaker, though wide receiver Greg Jennings and safety Nick Collins are working on it. Others such as defensive end Aaron Kampman, wide receiver Donald Driver and cornerback Al Harris are excellent players, but they do it more with effort and smarts than pure physical ability.

Coach Mike McCarthy said Wednesday that explosive gains on offense and turnovers on defense are "a big part of winning in the NFL." Those kinds of plays generally are made by difference-makers like Smith.

"Obviously, (Smith's final catch) was a big factor in the outcome of the game, and he's done it time and time again," McCarthy said. "But we also feel good about a number of players that we have to make those types of plays."

Maybe so, but so far the Packers aren't making those types of plays in close games.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:47 PM
Yeah...I can't wait for the annual Chiefsplanet mockdraft. I'm putting my name into the hat right now.

Don't worry, you're in.

Everyone that had a team last year gets rights of first refusal.

Granted they didn't disappear for half the draft.

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:47 PM
:banghead:

He wants to build the Chiefs teams that got beat...

Mecca
12-03-2008, 06:48 PM
Exactly why the draft challenge has been issued, but you'll run from that too.

Cmon now I participated in the Chiefs mock thing last year and I think I did a nice job.

MahiMike
12-03-2008, 06:50 PM
Good point. I'm not saying you don't need playmakers. All I'm saying is you don't spend $ on those guys until the other pieces are in place. That's why I keep saying to forget a QB and/or WR until 2010. Look at the Giants. They have a lot of talent but the reason they'll win 2 SB's in a row is due to their OL and DL. Same deal w/Titans.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:50 PM
Exactly why the draft challenge has been issued, but you'll run from that too.

Sorry, but contrary to popular belief, some of us actually have lives.

For me, draft weekend is a big-ass party.

There's a group of 8 of us that come into STL for the weekend to play golf on Saturday morning, then we eat, sleep and breath the draft the rest of the weekend - with poker tournaments and cash games sprinkled in.

Sorry, but I'm not dropping an 8 year tradition to prove anything to guys on a fucking message board.

Direckshun
12-03-2008, 06:51 PM
Sorry, but contrary to popular belief, some of us actually have lives.

For me, draft weekend is a big-ass party.

There's a group of 8 of us that come into STL for the weekend to play golf on Saturday morning, then we eat, sleep and breath the draft the rest of the weekend - with poker tournaments and cash games sprinkled in.

Sorry, but I'm not dropping an 8 year tradition to prove anything to guys on a ****ing message board.

Pussy.

:evil:

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:52 PM
Don't worry, you're in.

Everyone that had a team last year gets rights of first refusal.

Granted they didn't disappear for half the draft.

Hopefully I get someone other than the Jaguars and Packers.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:53 PM
Cmon now I participated in the Chiefs mock thing last year and I think I did a nice job.

True. I agree. You did.
It's a mock though. They NEVER fall like the actual draft, nor are they on the clock. Let's do the real thing. It won't take up much time. The Chiefs are on the clock, you make your pick, it's as simple as that, and no one can bitch about the Chiefs pick unless yours was better. I think it's a great challenge.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 06:55 PM
Sorry, but contrary to popular belief, some of us actually have lives.

For me, draft weekend is a big-ass party.

There's a group of 8 of us that come into STL for the weekend to play golf on Saturday morning, then we eat, sleep and breath the draft the rest of the weekend - with poker tournaments and cash games sprinkled in.

Sorry, but I'm not dropping an 8 year tradition to prove anything to guys on a ****ing message board.

I bartend during the draft, and party afterward. I have a laptop. A pick takes 3 seconds to type.

so you're saying you won't be posting during the draft? Ok.

FTR every weekend is bigass party for me. Do you ever see me post Fri, or Sat night?

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:55 PM
Hopefully I get someone other than the Jaguars and Packers.

I'm planning on doing my best to make sure guys don't get the same teams they did last year.

To be blatantly honest, I'm half tempted to cut it down to 16 owners, since there's only about that many we can actually trust to take it seriously, and give each guy 2 teams and do a full 7 round mock like last year.

Dicky McElephant
12-03-2008, 06:57 PM
I'm planning on doing my best to make sure guys don't get the same teams they did last year.

To be blatantly honest, I'm half tempted to cut it down to 16 owners, since there's only about that many we can actually trust to take it seriously, and give each guy 2 teams and do a full 7 round mock like last year.

That sounds fucking wonderful to me. I was fine with 2 teams and 7 rounds.

OnTheWarpath58
12-03-2008, 06:59 PM
I bartend during the draft, and party afterward. I have a laptop. A pick takes 3 seconds to type.

so you're saying you won't be posting during the draft. Ok.

Feel free to go back through any of the past draft day threads, and see if I'm hanging around...

Trust me, as the "Commish" of the CP mock draft, I'll tell you that while your idea may sound good in theory, it will never work.

Finding 32 guys that are disciplined enough to be near a computer for an entire weekend and not miss a pick is ridiculously unrealisitic.

Christ, owners get 24 HOURS for their picks in the CP Mock, and we still have guys going AWOL.

beach tribe
12-03-2008, 07:04 PM
Feel free to go back through any of the past draft day threads, and see if I'm hanging around...

Trust me, as the "Commish" of the CP mock draft, I'll tell you that while your idea may sound good in theory, it will never work.

Finding 32 guys that are disciplined enough to be near a computer for an entire weekend and not miss a pick is ridiculously unrealisitic.

Christ, owners get 24 HOURS for their picks in the CP Mock, and we still have guys going AWOL.

I believe it. I guess you're right. I never planned on having that many. Just whoever wanted to register a pick, but I getcha. Everybody's drinking, having fun etc. Nobody wants to be tied to something on that day. I want in on that mock though plz.

milkman
12-03-2008, 08:12 PM
Good point. I'm not saying you don't need playmakers. All I'm saying is you don't spend $ on those guys until the other pieces are in place. That's why I keep saying to forget a QB and/or WR until 2010. Look at the Giants. They have a lot of talent but the reason they'll win 2 SB's in a row is due to their OL and DL. Same deal w/Titans.

If you have the chance to get a potential franchise QB before you get the other pieces in place, you get him.

Valiant
12-03-2008, 08:20 PM
Does it really have to be the 5th spot?

Honestly I see us picking from the 7th or 8th spot knowing how our team is and past history.. Need to get closer to .500 this year and prove a point..