PDA

View Full Version : GBN mock 1/25/09


Mr. Laz
01-27-2009, 01:33 PM
<center><b><big><big><big>2009 DRAFT PROJECTION</big></big></big></b>

January 25, 2009

* Indicates underclassman

<table style="width: 524px; height: 883px;" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">#
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Team
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;"><small>Player
</small></td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;"><small>POS
</small></td> <td style="vertical-align: top;"><small style="font-weight: bold;">School</small>
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td>1</td> <td>Detroit
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Matthew Stafford
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">QB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Georgia
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td>2</td> <td>St. Louis</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Andre Smith
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">OT
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Alabama
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td>3
</td> <td>Kansas City</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Aaron Curry
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">LB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Wake Forest
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td> <dt>4
</dt> </td> <td> <dt>Seattle</dt> </td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Michael Crabtree
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">WR
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Texas Tech
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td> <dt>5 </dt> </td> <td> <dt> Cleveland</dt> </td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Aaron Maybin
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">DE/LB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Penn State
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td>6
</td> <td>Cincinnati </td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Eugene Monroe
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">OT
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Virginia
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">7</td> <td style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Oakland</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Jason Smith
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">OT
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Baylor
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> <td> <dt>8
</dt> </td> <td>Jacksonville</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Michael Oher
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">OT
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Mississippi
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> <td>9
</td> <td>Green Bay </td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">B.J. Raji
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">DT
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Boston College
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">10
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">San Francisco </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Mark Sanchez
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">QB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Southern California
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">11</td> <td> Buffalo</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Everette Brown
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">DE
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Florida State
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td>12</td> <td>Denver </td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Chris Wells
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">RB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Ohio State
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td>13</td> <td>Washington</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Brian Orakpo
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">DE
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Texas
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td>14</td> <td>New Orleans</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Malcolm Jenkins
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">CB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Ohio State
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; text-align: left; font-weight: bold;">15
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Houston</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;"><small>Jeremy Maclin</small>
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">WR
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Missouri
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top;">16
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">San Diego</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Rey Maualuga
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">LB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Southern California
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top;">17 </td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">New York Jets </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Alphonso Smith
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">CB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Wake Forest
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td>18</td> <td>Chicago</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">D.J. Moore</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">CB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Vanderbilt</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">19
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Tampa Bay </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Percy Harvin
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">WR
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Florida
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td style="vertical-align: top;">20 </td> <td>Detroit (from Dallas)</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">James Laurinaitis
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">LB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Ohio State
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">21
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Philadelphia </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Knowshon Moreno
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">RB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Georgia
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top;">22 </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Minnesota</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Vontae Davis
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">CB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Illinois
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top;">23
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">New England </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Brian Cushing
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">LB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Southern California
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">24
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Atlanta </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Peria Jerry
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">DT
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Mississippi
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td>25</td> <td>Miami</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Michael Johnson
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">DE
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Georgia Tech</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">26
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Baltimore </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Clint Sintim
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">LB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Virginia</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top;">27
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Indianapolis
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Sen'Derrick Marks
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">DT
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Auburn
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">28
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Philadelphia (from Carolina)</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Eben Britton
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">OT
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Arizona
</td> </tr> <tr style="font-weight: bold;"> <td style="vertical-align: top;">29 </td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">New York Giants</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Hakeem Nicks
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">WR
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">North Carolina
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">30
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Tennessee </td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">Brandon Pettigrew
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">TE
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Oklahoma State
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">31
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Arizona
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">LeSean McCoy
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">RB
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Pittsburgh
</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;">32
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top;">Pittsburgh
</td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;"><small>Duke Robinson
</small></td> <td style="vertical-align: top; font-weight: bold;"><small>OG
</small></td> <td style="vertical-align: top;"><small>Oklahoma</small>
</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

</center>
If you have comments or suggestions, e-mail: The editor (clindsc555@rogers.com). The GBN can also be reached by phone at (613) 692-1088; by fax at (613) 951-0387; or regular mail at PO Box 5282, Merivale Depot, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; K2C 3H5.
Great Blue North Draft Report Privacy Policy (http://www.gbnreport.com/privacypolicy.htm).
The GREAT BLUE NORTH DRAFT REPORT is a division of SQUITERLAND ENTERPRISES, Ottawa, Ontario,Canada

BigChiefFan
01-27-2009, 01:41 PM
I can't see us making an OLBer our top pick this year.

The Bad Guy
01-27-2009, 01:42 PM
The Chiefs can fix some of the LB problems in free agency.

I'd rather take Crabtree than Curry.

OnTheWarpath58
01-27-2009, 01:47 PM
Here's a good write-up on why Aaron Curry will NOT go in the Top 3:

http://www.walterfootball.com/nfldraftpicks.php

I've received a ton of e-mails from people asking me why I didn't consider Aaron Curry to the Rams or Chiefs in my 2009 NFL Mock Draft, and why I believe Mark Sanchez is a good bet to be chosen in the top three.

Rather than slap all of those e-mails together into one NFL Draft Mailbag, I thought I'd create a separate page outlining the history of the top three selections in the NFL Draft.

The following chart details which positions were taken with the top three selections since the 1998 NFL Draft:

http://i40.tinypic.com/2ihnvhc.jpg

As you can see, all the picks were either quarterbacks, running backs, receivers, offensive tackles or defensive ends.

There were exceptions that I bolded. In 2001, the inept Cleveland Browns took defensive tackle Gerard Warren No. 3 overall. He was a major bust. The year before, genius drafter Daniel Snyder selected LaVar Arrington second overall. Arrington had injury and attitude problems, and his career was consequently cut very short.

Going into more detail, here are how many of each position were taken in the first three picks since 1998:

http://i44.tinypic.com/mm3p8o.jpg

So, what does all of this mean? Unless a team is convinced a certain linebacker will be the next Ray Lewis, and Daniel Snyder isn't involved, you can forget about one going in the top three picks.

Conversely, if there's a quarterback on the fringe of top-five consideration, there's a good chance he'll be chosen in the top three, assuming one of those teams could use an upgrade at the position.

Like Arrington and Warren, there are exceptions to the rule. Some quarterbacks like Aaron Rodgers and Brady Quinn bottomed out completely.

Of course, those exceptions are the things that cause us to gasp in amazement and then rant about how dumb some of these NFL general managers are. And that's just what makes the NFL Draft so fun.

Pestilence
01-27-2009, 02:00 PM
Why do you people keep pushing Sanchez on the 49ers? They already have 3 QBs on their team that could start for them. I have a feeling that Singletary is going to see what he has at QB and draft defense.


And I agree with 99% of the article above. Expect Brady Quinn didn't bottom out completely. He fell because Miami let him fall...and everyone after that didn't need a QB. Cleveland saw the opportunity to trade back up and grab him....and they did. I wonder how differently our team would be right now if we had taken Quinn instead of Bowe that year.

DaneMcCloud
01-27-2009, 02:01 PM
And I agree with 99% of the article above. Expect Brady Quinn didn't bottom out completely. He fell because Miami let him fall...and everyone after that didn't need a QB. Cleveland saw the opportunity to trade back up and grab him....and they did. I wonder how differently our team would be right now if we had taken Quinn instead of Bowe that year.

Quinn would have been in IR sooner than he was in Cleveland and the Chiefs wouldn't have a number one receiver.

Mr. Laz
01-27-2009, 02:06 PM
only problem is that many people consider Curry a DE/LB guy

which means if the team thinks he can line up and sack the QB as a RushBacker then all those historical facts and figures are worthless.

Chiefnj2
01-27-2009, 02:57 PM
If you are a strict best available player theorist then you should be happy with Curry.

DaneMcCloud
01-27-2009, 03:04 PM
If you are a strict best available player theorist then you should be happy with Curry.

That's far too high for a linebacker, unless he's Derrick Thomas, Lawrence Taylor or Ray Lewis.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-27-2009, 03:31 PM
LaVar Arrington was a rush backer. It's not like he was a Cover Backer. Same with Derrick Thomas.

The last true cover back to be taken that high that I can remember was fucking Aundray Bruce...how'd that turn out?

And Aaron Curry is not a DE/OLB by any stretch of the imagination.

ChiefsCountry
01-27-2009, 03:53 PM
LaVar Arrington was a rush backer. It's not like he was a Cover Backer. Same with Derrick Thomas.

The last true cover back to be taken that high that I can remember was ****ing Aundray Bruce...how'd that turn out?

And Aaron Curry is not a DE/OLB by any stretch of the imagination.

I want to say that Bruce was a pass rusher at Auburn.

KCUnited
01-27-2009, 06:23 PM
Here's a good write-up on why Aaron Curry will NOT go in the Top 3:

http://www.walterfootball.com/nfldraftpicks.php

I've received a ton of e-mails from people asking me why I didn't consider Aaron Curry to the Rams or Chiefs in my 2009 NFL Mock Draft, and why I believe Mark Sanchez is a good bet to be chosen in the top three.

Rather than slap all of those e-mails together into one NFL Draft Mailbag, I thought I'd create a separate page outlining the history of the top three selections in the NFL Draft.

The following chart details which positions were taken with the top three selections since the 1998 NFL Draft:

http://i40.tinypic.com/2ihnvhc.jpg

As you can see, all the picks were either quarterbacks, running backs, receivers, offensive tackles or defensive ends.

There were exceptions that I bolded. In 2001, the inept Cleveland Browns took defensive tackle Gerard Warren No. 3 overall. He was a major bust. The year before, genius drafter Daniel Snyder selected LaVar Arrington second overall. Arrington had injury and attitude problems, and his career was consequently cut very short.

Going into more detail, here are how many of each position were taken in the first three picks since 1998:

http://i44.tinypic.com/mm3p8o.jpg

So, what does all of this mean? Unless a team is convinced a certain linebacker will be the next Ray Lewis, and Daniel Snyder isn't involved, you can forget about one going in the top three picks.

Conversely, if there's a quarterback on the fringe of top-five consideration, there's a good chance he'll be chosen in the top three, assuming one of those teams could use an upgrade at the position.

Like Arrington and Warren, there are exceptions to the rule. Some quarterbacks like Aaron Rodgers and Brady Quinn bottomed out completely.

Of course, those exceptions are the things that cause us to gasp in amazement and then rant about how dumb some of these NFL general managers are. And that's just what makes the NFL Draft so fun.

I compiled a similar list in December and emailed it to a local radio show in an attempt to put a stop to the RT/LB at #3 talk. Of course it didn't work.

However, going by that list of positions taken in the top 3 over the last decade, it seems that at this early point before the draft there are no RBs, WRs, 4-3 DEs, and DTs worth the #3 pick and I don't believe we need to draft OT in the 1st. I believe our options are QB or trade back, and yes I understand how rare that happens.

Mecca
01-27-2009, 06:27 PM
only problem is that many people consider Curry a DE/LB guy

which means if the team thinks he can line up and sack the QB as a RushBacker then all those historical facts and figures are worthless.

If you think Curry is a rush backer I'm going to question if you've ever seen him play...

bowener
01-27-2009, 07:25 PM
Well, with that being said, we now know we need to set up a chart to show how unlikely it is to trade back from the top 3 position to nip that talk in the bud before this thread is over run by the 'trade-down' crowd.

KCUnited
01-27-2009, 07:34 PM
Well, with that being said, we now know we need to set up a chart to show how unlikely it is to trade back from the top 3 position to nip that talk in the bud before this thread is over run by the 'trade-down' crowd.

Not sure about top 3, but I believe the last time a team traded into the top 5 was 1999 when NO moved up to take Ricky Williams.

Mr. Laz
01-27-2009, 07:35 PM
Well, with that being said, we now know we need to set up a chart to show how unlikely it is to trade back from the top 3 position to nip that talk in the bud before this thread is over run by the 'trade-down' crowd.
ya .... cuz we wouldn't want draft talk to run rampant or anything. :spock:

Mecca
01-27-2009, 07:36 PM
I think his point is to nip the ridiculous talk in the bud...talking about the draft is great but it'd be nice if people brought a common knowledge of it before talking about it.

melbar
01-27-2009, 07:54 PM
If everyone had the exact same knowledge and thus the same opinion, this would be a very boring discussion board.

Mr. Laz
01-27-2009, 07:56 PM
I think his point is to nip the ridiculous talk in the bud...talking about the draft is great but it'd be nice if people brought a common knowledge of it before talking about it.
if the "ridiculous talk" means that people are involved and enjoying the NFL draft, then more power to 'em.

if people want to speculate about the chiefs trading 10 times and spend hours digging up the drafting reports on some players they think are going to be good, then more power to 'em.

it's fun ... it brings interest to the team ... it brings HOPE


i didn't know there was such as draft elite-ism but i guess so *sigh*

AustinChief
01-27-2009, 08:01 PM
Well, with that being said, we now know we need to set up a chart to show how unlikely it is to trade back from the top 3 position to nip that talk in the bud before this thread is over run by the 'trade-down' crowd.

The only POSSIBLE trade downs would be a trade from #3 to 4-6 .. anything past that would require New Orleans-esque tomfoolery...

The key would be for one of those 3 teams to be dead set on a player AND think that we (or one of the other teams above them but below us) were set on taking that same player....

For example, if we somehow "sold" Seattle on the idea that we were drafting Crabtree and they wanted him bad enough... we "might" get a 3rd rounder out of the deal... maybe even a 3rd and 4th....

Not very likely in any regard...


Let's say the #8 pick want to trade with us... it would take their 1st, 2nd. 3rd and 5th and 6th picks to equal our pick at #3...

Sam Hall
01-27-2009, 08:18 PM
Let's say the #8 pick want to trade with us... it would take their 1st, 2nd. 3rd and 5th and 6th picks to equal our pick at #3...

Now we're talking:) Somebody get San Francisco on the phone so they can move up seven spots.

Mr. Laz
01-27-2009, 08:19 PM
The only POSSIBLE trade downs would be a trade from #3 to 4-6 .. anything past that would require New Orleans-esque tomfoolery...

The key would be for one of those 3 teams to be dead set on a player AND think that we (or one of the other teams above them but below us) were set on taking that same player....

For example, if we somehow "sold" Seattle on the idea that we were drafting Crabtree and they wanted him bad enough... we "might" get a 3rd rounder out of the deal... maybe even a 3rd and 4th....

Not very likely in any regard...


Let's say the #8 pick want to trade with us... it would take their 1st, 2nd. 3rd and 5th and 6th picks to equal our pick at #3...
alright enough of that bossman ..... nip it in the bud.

OnTheWarpath58
01-27-2009, 08:38 PM
alright enough of that bossman ..... nip it in the bud.

Dear God, Laz. Enough with the drama.

You know exactly what Bowener and Mecca were saying.

It shouldn't be that much to ask to bring some intelligent, thought-out opinions to the table.

Fact is, there are very very few legitimate trade down scenarios - yet this place will soon be running wild with dumbass ideas that we should trade down with the Eagles and take their 2 1st round picks in the 20's for our #3.

Just like the dumbass idea that we should have done the same thing with Dallas last year.

Different opinions ARE great, and make this place tick. But it's hard to respect an opinion when it's obvious the person that posted it put ZERO time into considering it's legitimacy.

No one is saying that people shouldn't voice their opinion - but if you expect people to respect it, take more than a nano-second to think it through before you post it.

Posting every random, non-sensible thought that enters one's head is NOT what makes this place tick.

milkman
01-28-2009, 07:51 AM
Dear God, Laz. Enough with the drama.

You know exactly what Bowener and Mecca were saying.

It shouldn't be that much to ask to bring some intelligent, thought-out opinions to the table.

Fact is, there are very very few legitimate trade down scenarios - yet this place will soon be running wild with dumbass ideas that we should trade down with the Eagles and take their 2 1st round picks in the 20's for our #3.

Just like the dumbass idea that we should have done the same thing with Dallas last year.

Different opinions ARE great, and make this place tick. But it's hard to respect an opinion when it's obvious the person that posted it put ZERO time into considering it's legitimacy.

No one is saying that people shouldn't voice their opinion - but if you expect people to respect it, take more than a nano-second to think it through before you post it.

Posting every random, non-sensible thought that enters one's head is NOT what makes this place tick.

Let's trade LJ and our #1 to the Raiders for JaRussell and their #1.



Is that the kind of post you were talking about?

Fat Elvis
01-28-2009, 07:56 AM
The Chiefs can fix some of the LB problems in free agency.

I'd rather take Crabtree than Curry.

Absolutely.

OnTheWarpath58
01-28-2009, 08:09 AM
Let's trade LJ and our #1 to the Raiders for JaRussell and their #1.



Is that the kind of post you were talking about?

Good example.

BigChiefFan
01-28-2009, 10:21 AM
I've already said it another thread, but Jacksonville, with the 7th overall pick, is the ideal candidate to trade with.

Pestilence
01-28-2009, 10:22 AM
I've already said it another thread, but Jacksonville, with the 7th overall pick, is the ideal candidate to trade with.

Jacksonville has the 8th.

EDIT: And it would take them their 1st, 2nd AND 3rd round picks to trade up 5 spots.

Chiefnj2
01-28-2009, 10:22 AM
I've already said it another thread, but Jacksonville, with the 7th overall pick, is the ideal candidate to trade with.

Jax traded up last year. I doubt they do it again and lose more picks.

BigChiefFan
01-28-2009, 11:02 AM
I would have sworn the Jags picked 7th overall. In any case, the 7th overall pick, whoever has that pick is the prime candidate. It's just a swap of 1st rounders, plus a
2nd rounder and we give up a late round pick back. Maybe crazy Al really wants Crabtree.

OnTheWarpath58
01-28-2009, 11:38 AM
I would have sworn the Jags picked 7th overall. In any case, the 7th overall pick, whoever has that pick is the prime candidate. It's just a swap of 1st rounders, plus a
2nd rounder and we give up a late round pick back. Maybe crazy Al really wants Crabtree.

:shake:

We wouldn't have to give anything, and the team trading with us from #7 is still 200 points short.

#3 = 2200

#7 + # 40 = 2000

(Plus #7 is Oakland, sorry, but that trade ain't happening...)

ChiefsCountry
01-28-2009, 12:38 PM
:shake:

We wouldn't have to give anything, and the team trading with us from #7 is still 200 points short.

#3 = 2200

#7 + # 40 = 2000

(Plus #7 is Oakland, sorry, but that trade ain't happening...)

Trade down stupidity is high around here.

Pestilence
01-28-2009, 12:41 PM
The only possible person that someone would want to trade with us for is Crabtree. That's IF (and a big if) they think that he's just like Fitzgerald (which I don't). The only people I could see trading for him would be Jacksonville and San Francisco. It's not going to happen though because it would cost them too much to get up to the #3 spot.

PhillyChiefFan
01-28-2009, 12:48 PM
Let's trade LJ and our #1 to the Raiders for JaRussell and their #1.



Is that the kind of post you were talking about?

Didn't WPI report this deal was done? :D

BigChiefFan
01-28-2009, 12:50 PM
:shake:

We wouldn't have to give anything, and the team trading with us from #7 is still 200 points short.

#3 = 2200

#7 + # 40 = 2000

(Plus #7 is Oakland, sorry, but that trade ain't happening...)HELLO??? I said It's just a swap of 1st rounders, plus a
2nd rounder and we give up a late round pick back.

Pestilence
01-28-2009, 12:55 PM
HELLO??? I said It's just a swap of 1st rounders, plus a
2nd rounder and we give up a late round pick back.

Did you actually READ his post before you responded? It would cost them a 1st and 2nd round pick (like you said) but they would still be short and we wouldn't be giving them a pick.

DaneMcCloud
01-28-2009, 12:58 PM
Trade down stupidity is high around here.

"Mr. Steinbrenner, I've figured out a way to get Griffey and Bonds, and we really wouldn't have to give up that much."

OnTheWarpath58
01-28-2009, 01:01 PM
Did you actually READ his post before you responded? It would cost them a 1st and 2nd round pick (like you said) but they would still be short and we wouldn't be giving them a pick.

FWIW:

Chiefs #3: 2200 points.

Raiders #7, #40 and #71: 2235 points.


So it would take the Raiders 1st, 2nd and 3rd to make that trade.

In that scenario (ignoring how retarded it is) we MIGHT give a 5th round pick back.

OnTheWarpath58
01-28-2009, 01:01 PM
"Mr. Steinbrenner, I've figured out a way to get Griffey and Bonds, and we really wouldn't have to give up that much."

LMAO

Chiefnj2
01-28-2009, 01:09 PM
:shake:

We wouldn't have to give anything, and the team trading with us from #7 is still 200 points short.

#3 = 2200

#7 + # 40 = 2000

(Plus #7 is Oakland, sorry, but that trade ain't happening...)

That's why the chart is a joke.

If KC has a player targeted at #3 that they are certain they can get at #7, then any additional picks they can get are gravy even if the "chart" doesn't say so.

Pestilence
01-28-2009, 01:09 PM
FWIW:

Chiefs #3: 2200 points.

Raiders #7, #40 and #71: 2235 points.


So it would take the Raiders 1st, 2nd and 3rd to make that trade.

In that scenario (ignoring how retarded it is) we MIGHT give a 5th round pick back.

FWIW.....before anyone throws it out there. The Eagles would have to give us their ENTIRE draft to get to #3 and they'd still be 10 points short.....and they have 10 picks.

Pestilence
01-28-2009, 01:10 PM
That's why the chart is a joke.

If KC has a player targeted at #3 that they are certain they can get at #7, then any additional picks they can get are gravy even if the "chart" doesn't say so.

Except no one is certain of shit. If they trade out of the #3 spot to the #7 spot because they want someone......and that person gets taken at #6....then it was worthless.

DaneMcCloud
01-28-2009, 01:12 PM
That's why the chart is a joke.

If KC has a player targeted at #3 that they are certain they can get at #7, then any additional picks they can get are gravy even if the "chart" doesn't say so.

The only problem is that there's absolutely no guarantee that the player you've targeted will still be there at #7. None.

That's why the Giants and Chargers waited to make their trade in 2004 until AFTER both QB's had been selected. You can't run the risk of "your" guy not being there in the Top Ten.

It's too risky.

OnTheWarpath58
01-28-2009, 01:15 PM
Except no one is certain of shit. If they trade out of the #3 spot to the #7 spot because they want someone......and that person gets taken at #6....then it was worthless.

Exactly.

Then you're left holding your dick and a 2nd round pick, without your targeted player, all because you weren't worried about getting value.

Picks are POWER.

Taking less than what is rightfully owed is fucking retarded.

Chiefnj2
01-28-2009, 01:16 PM
Except no one is certain of shit. If they trade out of the #3 spot to the #7 spot because they want someone......and that person gets taken at #6....then it was worthless.

Does having 200 extra points make it worthwhile?

Frosty
01-28-2009, 01:17 PM
The only possible person that someone would want to trade with us for is Crabtree. That's IF (and a big if) they think that he's just like Fitzgerald (which I don't). The only people I could see trading for him would be Jacksonville and San Francisco. It's not going to happen though because it would cost them too much to get up to the #3 spot.

You don't think Cinci might? They are probably losing both Housh and Ocho Cinco. That leaves them with pretty much only Chris Henry.

Chiefnj2
01-28-2009, 01:17 PM
Exactly.

Then you're left holding your dick and a 2nd round pick, all because you weren't worried about getting value.

Picks are POWER.

Taking less than what is rightfully owed is ****ing retarded.

Why is some random chart "rightfully owed"?

DaneMcCloud
01-28-2009, 01:17 PM
Does having 200 extra points make it worthwhile?

If it's the difference between having Brendan Carr and NOT having Brendan Carr, I'd say yes.

OnTheWarpath58
01-28-2009, 01:18 PM
Why is some random chart "rightfully owed"?

Yeah, it's a "random" chart that the entire league uses to decipher pick value.

:spock:

DeezNutz
01-28-2009, 01:20 PM
Does having 200 extra points make it worthwhile?

Maybe. You can trade them in at the Fun Factory for a mid-grade prize.

Chiefnj2
01-28-2009, 01:23 PM
Yeah, it's a "random" chart that the entire league uses to decipher pick value.

:spock:

"Miami would like nothing better than to trade down, stockpile picks and save cap space, but that's much easier said than done. Potential trading partners that aren't scared off by the cap's voodoo economics are handcuffed by the value chart that has become standard across the NFL. This chart, which assigns a numerical value to every slot (3,000 for No. 1, 590 for No. 32, 44 for No. 128, and so on), was designed to help GMs pinpoint the market value of their picks. Problem is, the chart is absurdly top-heavy, making it hard for teams to trade down and to look like they didn't get taken in the eyes of the fans and media. "Every GM would trade these picks in a heartbeat if they could," says Polian. "But no one else wants to pay for them."



In 2006, two professors, Yale's Cade Massey and the University of Chicago's Richard Thaler, published a study of the 1991 to 2002 drafts. They found that a first-rounder is nearly as likely to be out of the NFL after five years (8%) as he is to make the Pro Bowl during those five seasons (9%). And it gets worse. While top picks do perform better than lower ones, Massey and Thaler also discovered that performance falls off much faster than compensation, making No. 1 and No. 32 nearly indistinguishable from a value standpoint. In other words, at this year's draft, the Giants, selecting at No. 31, will likely grab as valuable a player as the Dolphins will at No. 1. If the Dolphins truly understood what they were up against, they'd let the clock expire on their choice 20 times and ultimately risk only $10 million instead of $60 million. "There is no science to the draft," admits Giants GM Jerry Reese. "If you guess right, you look smart. If you make a couple of wrong guesses, you look dumb. You just try to get more right than wrong.""

OnTheWarpath58
01-28-2009, 01:26 PM
"Miami would like nothing better than to trade down, stockpile picks and save cap space, but that's much easier said than done. Potential trading partners that aren't scared off by the cap's voodoo economics are handcuffed by the value chart that has become standard across the NFL. This chart, which assigns a numerical value to every slot (3,000 for No. 1, 590 for No. 32, 44 for No. 128, and so on), was designed to help GMs pinpoint the market value of their picks. Problem is, the chart is absurdly top-heavy, making it hard for teams to trade down and to look like they didn't get taken in the eyes of the fans and media. "Every GM would trade these picks in a heartbeat if they could," says Polian. "But no one else wants to pay for them."



In 2006, two professors, Yale's Cade Massey and the University of Chicago's Richard Thaler, published a study of the 1991 to 2002 drafts. They found that a first-rounder is nearly as likely to be out of the NFL after five years (8%) as he is to make the Pro Bowl during those five seasons (9%). And it gets worse. While top picks do perform better than lower ones, Massey and Thaler also discovered that performance falls off much faster than compensation, making No. 1 and No. 32 nearly indistinguishable from a value standpoint. In other words, at this year's draft, the Giants, selecting at No. 31, will likely grab as valuable a player as the Dolphins will at No. 1. If the Dolphins truly understood what they were up against, they'd let the clock expire on their choice 20 times and ultimately risk only $10 million instead of $60 million. "There is no science to the draft," admits Giants GM Jerry Reese. "If you guess right, you look smart. If you make a couple of wrong guesses, you look dumb. You just try to get more right than wrong.""

Yet the entire league continues to use the chart, as-is.

You and zilla can get together over tea and bitch about how stupid the chart is, while the rest of the league continues to use it.

If you think it's smart to trade down from 3 to 7 and only get a 2nd round pick out of the deal, I can't help you. You'd need a professional to figure out WTF is going through your head.

Chiefnj2
01-28-2009, 01:35 PM
Yet the entire league continues to use the chart, as-is.

You and zilla can get together over tea and bitch about how stupid the chart is, while the rest of the league continues to use it.

If you think it's smart to trade down from 3 to 7 and only get a 2nd round pick out of the deal, I can't help you. You'd need a professional to figure out WTF is going through your head.

Do you have good draft classes and bad draft classes where the talent level changes?

Would the Raiders have made a mistake trading away the #1 pick (Jamarcus Russell) for the 7th round pick, a 2nd rounder and came up short 200 points on the chart?

Pestilence
01-28-2009, 01:41 PM
Do you have good draft classes and bad draft classes where the talent level changes?

Would the Raiders have made a mistake trading away the #1 pick (Jamarcus Russell) for the 7th round pick, a 2nd rounder and came up short 200 points on the chart?

Nice try....but no one knew if JaMarcus Russell was going to suck or not and at the time everyone thought Adrian Peterson was injury prone.

Just deal with the fact that you may not like the draft value chart....but all 32 teams use it.

OnTheWarpath58
01-28-2009, 01:42 PM
Do you have good draft classes and bad draft classes where the talent level changes?

Would the Raiders have made a mistake trading away the #1 pick (Jamarcus Russell) for the 7th round pick, a 2nd rounder and came up short 200 points on the chart?

Assuming you meant trading away the #1 overall for the 7th overall and a 2nd rounder - yeah, that's fucking retarded.

In that scenario, you're giving up 1000 points, not 200. Or the equivalent of a mid-first round pick.

Don't blame the chart for the Raiders making a stupid selection, considering Calvin Johnson and Joe Thomas would have been worth the #1 overall, unlike Russell.

Chiefnj2
01-28-2009, 01:45 PM
Nice try....but no one knew if JaMarcus Russell was going to suck or not and at the time everyone thought Adrian Peterson was injury prone.

Just deal with the fact that you may not like the draft value chart....but all 32 teams use it.

If the Raiders gave up the first and made a deal that was 200 points short, the media and fans would have cried - bad move the "chart" said we are idiots and are 200 points short. In reality all that matters is whether or not your picks pan out. Whether you came up 200 points short, or made a great deal where you got 600 extra points - doesn't matter one bit unless you hit on the picks.

Saying someone came out ahead or behind because of the value chart is like grading the draft on the day of the draft.

Pestilence
01-28-2009, 01:47 PM
If the Raiders gave up the first and made a deal that was 200 points short, the media and fans would have cried - bad move the "chart" said we are idiots and are 200 points short. In reality all that matters is whether or not your picks pan out. Whether you came up 200 points short, or made a great deal where you got 600 extra points - doesn't matter one bit unless you hit on the picks.

Saying someone came out ahead or behind because of the value chart is like grading the draft on the day of the draft.

Yeah and you're going back and picking and choosing drafts and players because of how well they performed. Same fucking thing.

Chiefnj2
01-28-2009, 01:47 PM
Assuming you meant trading away the #1 overall for the 7th overall and a 2nd rounder - yeah, that's ****ing retarded.

In that scenario, you're giving up 1000 points, not 200. Or the equivalent of a mid-first round pick.

Don't blame the chart for the Raiders making a stupid selection, considering Calvin Johnson and Joe Thomas would have been worth the #1 overall, unlike Russell.

You proved my point. You had several athletes in that draft who were top talents and all worth the mythical 3,000 points. The chart doesn't take that into account.

DaneMcCloud
01-28-2009, 01:48 PM
If the Raiders gave up the first and made a deal that was 200 points short, the media and fans would have cried - bad move the "chart" said we are idiots and are 200 points short. In reality all that matters is whether or not your picks pan out. Whether you came up 200 points short, or made a great deal where you got 600 extra points - doesn't matter one bit unless you hit on the picks.

Saying someone came out ahead or behind because of the value chart is like grading the draft on the day of the draft.

Are you really Carl Peterson?

Chiefnj2
01-28-2009, 01:49 PM
Are you really Carl Peterson?

Get back under my desk and fellate me Mr. Gretz.

DaneMcCloud
01-28-2009, 01:49 PM
You proved my point. You had several athletes in that draft who were top talents and all worth the mythical 3,000 points. The chart doesn't take that into account.

No, he didn't.

Hindsight is 20/20. That's like saying that knowing what we all know, Tom Brady would STILL have been a 6th round pick.

There's HAS to be value assigned to each beyond the monetary compensation.

Otherwise, what's the purpose?

OnTheWarpath58
01-28-2009, 01:53 PM
If the Raiders gave up the first and made a deal that was 200 points short, the media and fans would have cried - bad move the "chart" said we are idiots and are 200 points short. In reality all that matters is whether or not your picks pan out. Whether you came up 200 points short, or made a great deal where you got 600 extra points - doesn't matter one bit unless you hit on the picks.

Saying someone came out ahead or behind because of the value chart is like grading the draft on the day of the draft.

Uh, those points EQUAL picks.

So getting shorted 200 points means you're missing out on another chance to pick a talented player in the 2nd round.

You're right, you have to HIT on the picks, but it's ridiculous to say you wouldn't want as many chances as possible.

Why pay $5 for $1 worth of lottery tickets?

Mecca
01-28-2009, 04:19 PM
Is NJ arguing about the value chart again?

ChiefsCountry
01-28-2009, 04:21 PM
Is NJ arguing about the value chart again?

Yep

Mecca
01-28-2009, 04:24 PM
NJ has basically told us, he doesn't like QB's unless they without a shadow of a doubt meet all these weird statistical breakdowns and he also doesn't like the value chart because he wants to trade down just to well trade down..

Boy he'd be a great GM.