PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft If Curry is gone at the 3 spot...who do we take or what do we do?


Pages : [1] 2

journeyscarab
02-28-2009, 10:07 PM
Say the Lions draft Curry, Rams draft Smith....do we take Monroe/Orakpo/or drop a few spots to get someone else?

MGRS13
02-28-2009, 10:09 PM
They won't. NO. Yes.

OnTheWarpath58
02-28-2009, 10:09 PM
I've never been an advocate of trading down, but I'd take a hit on chart value to get out of that spot, even if Curry IS still there.

The odds are beyond slim, however.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:09 PM
Aaron Curry isn't going to be a top 3 pick can we just come off this now, especially since this team wants to go 3-4.

Want a tip here, BJ Raji or move down if they can is probably what you're looking at.

Rey Maualuga is a better pick and much better value than Aaron Curry is if you're a 3-4 team...

journeyscarab
02-28-2009, 10:10 PM
NFL channel says Curry would be good fit in 3-4 so does 8:10

DeezNutz
02-28-2009, 10:11 PM
I've never been an advocate of trading down, but I'd take a hit on chart value to get out of that spot, even if Curry IS still there.

The odds are beyond slim, however.

Under the above scenario, Stafford might be big enough bait for a team like SF. And to be honest, I wouldn't care if we had to wipe with cotton balls for a week after the exchange.

Recoup a second rounder. That's what I want. More would be gravy.

DeezNutz
02-28-2009, 10:11 PM
NFL channel says Curry would be good fit in 3-4 so does 8:10

Why is Yuma talking about the Chiefs?

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:12 PM
NFL channel says Curry would be good fit in 3-4 so does 8:10

As a MLB, and taking a MLB for a 3-4 that high is pretty bad especially when there's another guy that can do it better going later...

Curry is not a pass rusher don't have visions of him getting 10 sacks.

blueballs
02-28-2009, 10:13 PM
Sounds like a horror show

Count Zarth
02-28-2009, 10:13 PM
IMO, there's no reason not to trade down. Regardless of who is available.

journeyscarab
02-28-2009, 10:14 PM
than lets go ahead and try to get Canty..offer more money than the Giants because thats the team Schefter keeps talking about where he could land

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:15 PM
IMO, there's no reason not to trade down. Regardless of who is available.

Most of the players that the Chiefs will look at are about the same now...

MGRS13
02-28-2009, 10:15 PM
Curry is not a pass rusher don't have visions of him getting 10 sacks.
I have a hard time having visions of him getting 2 sacks.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:15 PM
I have a hard time having visions of him getting 2 sacks.

Aaron Curry is like a shittier version of Takeo Spikes thats the best way to describe him.

notorious
02-28-2009, 10:17 PM
This would be wonderful because you would have teams falling over themselves to get at Stafford. Excellent trade bait.

Not going to happen, though. Curry number one would cause the entire CP Forum to implode.

OnTheWarpath58
02-28-2009, 10:18 PM
I have a hard time having visions of him getting 2 sacks.

Aaron Curry is like a shittier version of Takeo Spikes thats the best way to describe him.

When I read his biggest fan say he compares to DJ Williams, and I've watched DJ Williams suck ass in this division for years, I have a hard time thinking he's worth a Top 20 pick, much less a Top 5.

You can get a MLB that gives you the same production in later rounds.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:19 PM
When I read his biggest fan say he compares to DJ Williams, and I've watched DJ Williams suck ass in this division for years, I have a hard time thinking he's worth a Top 20 pick, much less a Top 5.

You can get a MLB that gives you the same production in later rounds.

Fuck I'd rather trade to 10 and put Rey Maualuga in there than take Curry 3.

MGRS13
02-28-2009, 10:22 PM
When I read his biggest fan say he compares to DJ Williams, and I've watched DJ Williams suck ass in this division for years, I have a hard time thinking he's worth a Top 20 pick, much less a Top 5.

You can get a MLB that gives you the same production in later rounds.
If you run the tampa two and got him in the second round you could be really stoked. But the bucs used that pick on K2.

redsurfer11
02-28-2009, 10:24 PM
If Curry is gone. Take Monroe from Virginia. He was good enough to keep Brandon Albert at guard. That would give us a dominant O-line for the next 10-12 years. It might even make LJ want to play football again.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:25 PM
And now we're back to the Oline argument, why is this fan base so obsessed with offensive linemen?

The Bad Guy
02-28-2009, 10:26 PM
As a MLB, and taking a MLB for a 3-4 that high is pretty bad especially when there's another guy that can do it better going later...

Curry is not a pass rusher don't have visions of him getting 10 sacks.

Mother of god.

Not every fucking linebacker has to get 15 sacks.

I have visions of a ball-hawking linebacker. That's what I have visions of.

I'd be willing to place whatever sig bet you want on the fact that Curry will have a much more successful first 2 seasons than Rey will.

MGRS13
02-28-2009, 10:26 PM
If Curry is gone. Take Monroe from Virginia. He was good enough to keep Brandon Albert at guard. That would give us a dominant O-line for the next 10-12 years. It might even make LJ want to play football again.
A right tackle with #3 over all. Great yea. Or even better a left guard with #3. You O line all the time guys are great.

The Bad Guy
02-28-2009, 10:26 PM
And now we're back to the Oline argument, why is this fan base so obsessed with offensive linemen?

Why are some in this fan base so obsessed with linebackers only rushing the passer?

tk13
02-28-2009, 10:27 PM
It would be best to trade down. But I'd have to say, if you got locked in that spot, you might just have to go OL. I know that will make certain people go bat feces crazy, but then again a lot of those people are the same ones saying Curry, Orakpo, Crabtree, etc aren't worth top 5 picks. Which pretty much leaves offensive linemen. We really need to go defense but the best value at that pick might be on the line.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:27 PM
Why are some in this fan base so obsessed with linebackers only rushing the passer?

If you run a 3-4 defense they are SUPPOSE TO RUSH THE PASSER, is that difficult to understand?

Did people miss this memo that Herm and his cover 2 is gone?

MGRS13
02-28-2009, 10:28 PM
Mother of god.

Not every ****ing linebacker has to get 15 sacks.
They better or they are not worth the #3 over all.

OnTheWarpath58
02-28-2009, 10:28 PM
If Curry is gone. Take Monroe from Virginia. He was good enough to keep Brandon Albert at guard. That would give us a dominant O-line for the next 10-12 years. It might even make LJ want to play football again.

Sorry, but that's bullshit.

Monroe played tackle because that's the only position he could play, where Albert was versatile enough to play guard.

Moving a kid that is going to be a rock-solid LTOTF just for the fuck of it is beyond ridiculous.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:28 PM
I want to know if people missed this memo that the Chiefs are going to be a 3-4 team.

LB's in the 3-4 rush the fucking passer.

ILChief
02-28-2009, 10:29 PM
Either Oher or Raji if you can't trade down.

OnTheWarpath58
02-28-2009, 10:30 PM
Why are some in this fan base so obsessed with linebackers only rushing the passer?

C'mon.

You know that's not what this is about.

Effective MLB's can be found in just about any round.

True pass rushers are special, are more valuable, and go early.

No one is devaluing the kid, but if he can't rush the passer, which by his own admission is something he would have to "learn to do", then he's just not that valuable.

MGRS13
02-28-2009, 10:30 PM
Either Oher or Raji if you can't trade down.

Oher isn't even a top 10 pick. Christ.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:31 PM
Oher isn't even a top 10 pick. Christ.

He's lucky if he's a top 20 pick at this point.

JASONSAUTO
02-28-2009, 10:31 PM
Sorry, but that's bullshit.

Monroe played tackle because that's the only position he could play, where Albert was versatile enough to play guard.

Moving a kid that is going to be a rock-solid LTOTF just for the fuck of it is beyond ridiculous.

this is what i always want to respond a awww jeeez not this shit again. why dont you throw that otw?:D

Dayze
02-28-2009, 10:32 PM
IMO, there's no reason not to trade down. Regardless of who is available.

This.

I hope we can find someone to trade with

CanadaKC
02-28-2009, 10:32 PM
It sounds to me none of the anti-Curry people believe this kid can be coached

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:33 PM
It sounds to me none of the anti-Curry people believe this kid can be coached

Yes you can just coach a guy to have pass rush ability, if it was that easy pass rushers wouldn't be one of the most valued things in the league now would they?

notorious
02-28-2009, 10:35 PM
Oher isn't even a top 10 pick. Christ.

Remember last year? Everyone wanted him to come out early because he was going to be top 5. Boy, that sure was a kick in his errrrr, wallet.

Sam Hall
02-28-2009, 10:35 PM
panic

Iowanian
02-28-2009, 10:35 PM
I personally think we'll learn alot more about what will be done with the #3 over the next couple of weeks of FA. If the Chiefs bring in a LB or two, or a 3-4 DE, that would lend me to believe its going another direction.

Given NE's history, they seem to stockpile picks, most every year. They ended up trading completely out of the first round, and then have had multiple years of 1st round draft picks.

I can see a trade down scenerio, especially if someone has a hardon for the remaining top 3 player.

I'm a fan that just wants positive moves made that make me feel good about the future of the team. I want the Chiefs to be good, by the time my daughter is old enough to go to a game.

The Bad Guy
02-28-2009, 10:36 PM
If you run a 3-4 defense they are SUPPOSE TO RUSH THE PASSER, is that difficult to understand?

Did people miss this memo that Herm and his cover 2 is gone?

Don't talk to me in your condesending prick way like I'm JASONSAUTO.

So the inside linebacker in the 3-4 is supposed to rush the passer?

Is that what you're trying to tell me?

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:36 PM
NE's history until last year, was to sign FA LB's and draft high on the DL....if you use their history everything points to Raji.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:37 PM
Don't talk to me in your condesending prick way like I'm JASONSAUTO.

So the inside linebacker in the 3-4 is supposed to rush the passer?

Is that what you're trying to tell me?

Uh yea they do at times, both of the MLB's don't drop in coverage every time.

You can take it condescending if you want, I don't care but to act like him not having pass rush ability doesn't matter is a head shaker.

JASONSAUTO
02-28-2009, 10:37 PM
I want the Chiefs to be good, by the time my daughter is old enough to go to a game.

me too the little one's almost 4 so we dont have long...

MGRS13
02-28-2009, 10:37 PM
Yes you can just coach a guy to have pass rush ability, if it was that easy pass rushers wouldn't be one of the most valued things in the league now would they?

Hell why don't we just coach a left tackle to also play LB. I guess I never figured it was that easy. Why even draft some one at all we can just coach thigpen into getting us 17 sacks next year coming off the edge. Glad this is all finally figured out.

CanadaKC
02-28-2009, 10:38 PM
so mecca...you're telling me then, Curry doesn't know which way to run to the QB...like it's an art form similar to the Cirque Du Solier?

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:38 PM
Hell why don't we just coach a left tackle to also play LB. I guess I never figured it was that easy. Why even draft some one at all we can just coach thigpen into getting us 17 sacks next year coming off the edge. Glad this is all finally figured out.

People think this is Madden where everyones rating just auto goes up and you taking a LB or a DE high just means he can automatically get sacks.

notorious
02-28-2009, 10:39 PM
NE's history until last year, was to sign FA LB's and draft high on the DL....if you use their history everything points to Raji.

LOL when I watched him run the 40 at the combine he was 320-330 pounds of nothing but ass and hamstrings. The commentators were joking about how he wore his "T.O." tights to run. ROFL

The Bad Guy
02-28-2009, 10:39 PM
Uh yea they do at times, both of the MLB's don't drop in coverage every time.

You can take it condescending if you want, I don't care but to act like him not having pass rush ability doesn't matter is a head shaker.

What pass rush moves does an inside linebacker need to have? 9 times out of 10 they aren't going to plant their hand on the ground and have to beat an OT. They are blitzing.

tk13
02-28-2009, 10:39 PM
Maybe I just haven't been around much lately, but some of you people appear really angry, almost too angry about some of this stuff. We're just discussing football, seriously people. Some of you guys treat every post like someone who disagrees with you is some spiteful child who deserves to be punished..

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:39 PM
so mecca...you're telling me then, Curry doesn't know which way to run to the QB...like it's an art form similar to the Cirque Du Solier?

He admitted in an interview he's never rushed the passer or been asked to do that...

JASONSAUTO
02-28-2009, 10:39 PM
Don't talk to me in your condesending prick way like I'm JASONSAUTO.

So the inside linebacker in the 3-4 is supposed to rush the passer?

Is that what you're trying to tell me?

what the fuck's it got to do with me? he talks to everyone that way

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:40 PM
LOL when I watched him run the 40 at the combine he was 320-330 pounds of nothing but ass and hamstrings. The commentators were joking about how he wore his "T.O." tights to run. ROFL

Well atleast he's built properly.

JASONSAUTO
02-28-2009, 10:41 PM
LOL when I watched him run the 40 at the combine he was 320-330 pounds of nothing but ass and hamstrings. The commentators were joking about how he wore his "T.O." tights to run. ROFL

shit he said he'd run a 5.06 and ran a 5.13 damn close

notorious
02-28-2009, 10:41 PM
People have been extra pissed lately.

Very entertaining.

MGRS13
02-28-2009, 10:41 PM
People think this is Madden where everyones rating just auto goes up and you taking a LB or a DE high just means he can automatically get sacks.
Agreed! Whats that rating on tank and turk we should be set, right?ROFL

philfree
02-28-2009, 10:42 PM
He admitted in an interview he's never rushed the passer or been asked to do that...

He didn't act like it would be any big deal though. The way Curry sheds blocks combined with his speed he'll be able to rush the passer if that's what's asked of him.


PhilFree:arrow:

notorious
02-28-2009, 10:44 PM
shit he said he'd run a 5.06 and ran a 5.13 damn close

Ya, that was when they were talking to Warren Sapp, and touched on the fact that Warren ran a 4.69. That is un-f$#@ing real for a big body. Hell, that would be good for the RB's and TE's this year.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:44 PM
He didn't act like it would be any big deal though. The way Curry sheds blocks combined with his speed he'll be able to rush the passer if that's what's asked of him.


PhilFree:arrow:

Of course he acted that way, his non pass rush ability is the biggest thing that can drop him, if I was him I'd always say I could do it and it's no problem. It's millions of dollars...

Think of if this way, if you're running a 3-4 without a proper line you're LB's are going to get manhandled by offensive lineman.

J Diddy
02-28-2009, 10:48 PM
Of course he acted that way, his non pass rush ability is the biggest thing that can drop him, if I was him I'd always say I could do it and it's no problem. It's millions of dollars...

Think of if this way, if you're running a 3-4 without a proper line you're LB's are going to get manhandled by offensive lineman.


this. and I got a pm question for you regarding that very subject.

redsurfer11
02-28-2009, 10:48 PM
Sorry, but that's bullshit.

Monroe played tackle because that's the only position he could play, where Albert was versatile enough to play guard.

Moving a kid that is going to be a rock-solid LTOTF just for the **** of it is beyond ridiculous.

Wow, do you always answer to peoples opinions cursing. Damn, get a life.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:50 PM
Wow, do you always answer to peoples opinions cursing. Damn, get a life.

He didn't really cuss at you....it's just the way some of us talk, are you offended?

philfree
02-28-2009, 10:51 PM
Of course he acted that way, his non pass rush ability is the biggest thing that can drop him, if I was him I'd always say I could do it and it's no problem. It's millions of dollars...

Think of if this way, if you're running a 3-4 without a proper line you're LB's are going to get manhandled by offensive lineman.


What's that got to do with what Curry can or can't do with his skill set? You make it sound like it would be rocket science for Curry to rush the passer and that's just to far over the top. I don't have problem with drafting Raji though I just think Curry would be a good pick too. Honestly if Stafford is on the board and I can't get anyone to trade up for him I might just take him.


PhilFree:arrow:

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:53 PM
What's that got to do with what Curry can or can't do with his skill set? You make it sound like it would be rocket science for Curry to rush the passer and that's just to far over the top. I don't have problem with drafting Raji though I just think Curry would be a good pick too. Honestly if Stafford is on the board and I can't get anyone to trade up for him I might just take him.


PhilFree:arrow:

If pass rushing was as easy as coaching I don't think you'd see teams like the Chiefs set a record for the fewest amount of sacks...or see DE's get paid like QB's.

I just don't like that argument at all pass rushing is something guys either have or they don't very rarely does someone develop it and if they do it's usually only to a passable level.

tk13
02-28-2009, 10:54 PM
I'd agree that LB's don't normally get taken very high. But DT's don't either. There's only been one DT taken top 3 in the last decade or so. Six in the last 20 years. And that list is Gerard Warren, Darrell Russell, Dan Wilkinson, Steve Entman, Russell Maryland, and Cortez Kennedy.

philfree
02-28-2009, 10:56 PM
If pass rushing was as easy as coaching I don't think you'd see teams like the Chiefs set a record for the fewest amount of sacks...or see DE's get paid like QB's.

I just don't like that argument at all pass rushing is something guys either have or they don't very rarely does someone develop it and if they do it's usually only to a passable level.

The thing is that there is nobody saying Curry can't rush the passer. People like Mayock say he can do it and he's not the only one.


PhilFree:arrow:

Dayze
02-28-2009, 10:57 PM
If pass rushing was as easy as coaching I don't think you'd see teams like the Chiefs set a record for the fewest amount of sacks...or see DE's get paid like QB's.

I just don't like that argument at all pass rushing is something guys either have or they don't very rarely does someone develop it and if they do it's usually only to a passable level.

Hey, that's not fair. Vonnie Holiday and Eric Hicks were coached into sack artists.
:D

Mecca
02-28-2009, 10:58 PM
The thing is that there is nobody saying Curry can't rush the passer. People like Mayock say he can do it and he's not the only one.


PhilFree:arrow:

His 9 sacks in his college career and the words out of his own mouth say he's not a polished pass rusher.

Dayze
02-28-2009, 10:58 PM
If pass rushing was as easy as coaching I don't think you'd see teams like the Chiefs set a record for the fewest amount of sacks...or see DE's get paid like QB's.

I just don't like that argument at all pass rushing is something guys either have or they don't very rarely does someone develop it and if they do it's usually only to a passable level.


also, I don't know what the big deal is; Curry can beach coached. JFC, we have Crumrie.

:evil:

Mecca
02-28-2009, 11:00 PM
I'm simply putting it this way, this team obviously desires to be a 3-4 team, the most important position in a 3-4 is a nose tackle, without it you'll get killed up the middle.

If people want to point to the Pats all 3 of their Dlineman are 1st round picks...

philfree
02-28-2009, 11:03 PM
His 9 sacks in his college career and the words out of his own mouth say he's not a polished pass rusher.

But there is nothing that says he can't rush the passer in the NFL. He has the tools along with his coverage skills and his ability to take on and shed blocks on his way to making plays.


PhilFree:arrow:

Mecca
02-28-2009, 11:05 PM
No one knows if he has tools to rush the passer because he doesn't do it.

redsurfer11
02-28-2009, 11:06 PM
He didn't really cuss at you....it's just the way some of us talk, are you offended?

I'm not offended. But some of you need a Time Out. Do you think Pioli and his coaches, have already evaluated the talents of rushing linebackers. Maybe they think there is no talent there this year. Could be why they picked up Vrabel as a stopgap player. Was DeMarcus Ware a great pass rusher, or did he have all the physical skills?

Mecca
02-28-2009, 11:08 PM
I'm not offended. But some of you need a Time Out. Do you think Pioli and his coaches, have already evaluated the talents of rushing linebackers. Maybe they think there is no talent there this year. Could be why they picked up Vrabel as a stopgap player. Was DeMarcus Ware a great pass rusher, or did he have all the physical skills?

DeMarcus Ware was a defensive end in college that racked up double digit sacks so yea.

philfree
02-28-2009, 11:09 PM
I'm simply putting it this way, this team obviously desires to be a 3-4 team, the most important position in a 3-4 is a nose tackle, without it you'll get killed up the middle.

If people want to point to the Pats all 3 of their Dlineman are 1st round picks...

I do think Raji is a good pick for the Chiefs. Obviously I like Curry too.


PhilFree:arrow:

Sam Hall
02-28-2009, 11:09 PM
Let's either trade for Shaun Rogers or draft Ndamukong Suh next year. Suh could also play a little tight end

Mecca
02-28-2009, 11:10 PM
Let's either trade for Shaun Rogers or draft Ndamukong Suh next year. Suh could also play a little tight end

If we're waiting till next year we'll draft Terrence Cody.

Sam Hall
02-28-2009, 11:13 PM
If we're waiting till next year we'll draft Terrence Cody.

OK, but Suh might have been a first round pick this year.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 11:15 PM
OK, but Suh might have been a first round pick this year.

And Cody wouldn't have been?

Next years defensive class is ridiculous.

Dayze
02-28-2009, 11:17 PM
And Cody wouldn't have been?

Next years defensive class is ridiculous.

another reason to attempt to trade out a bit.


I suspect the Cheifs will be a top 12 pick next year as well and will have more flexibility as it relates to defensive position (since we need a lot) and value.

IMO

Mecca
02-28-2009, 11:21 PM
another reason to attempt to trade out a bit.


I suspect the Cheifs will be a top 12 pick next year as well and will have more flexibility as it relates to defensive position (since we need a lot) and value.

IMO

Oh cmon I want a higher pick so we can get Eric Berry!

Dayze
02-28-2009, 11:22 PM
Oh cmon I want a higher pick so we can get Eric Berry!

I think the Chiefs at around 12 would be 'worst case' (depending on how you look at it :D)

The Buddha
02-28-2009, 11:23 PM
I don't understand the debate between the cover LB and the Blitzing LB. They're LBs... they're supposed to do BOTH! And shouldn't ANY LB drafted in the top 5 be able to do both?

I'd be sorely disappointed in drafting an LB that could only predominantly do one or the other. For this high of a pick, he should be able to drop back AND rush.

Ray Lewis has 33 sacks and 28 INTs... Great Balance, which is the type of guy we should go be looking for if we're going to draft an LB with the third pick.

kcpasco
02-28-2009, 11:24 PM
I don't understand the debate between the cover LB and the Blitzing LB. They're LBs... they're supposed to do BOTH! And shouldn't ANY LB drafted in the top 5 be able to do both?

I'd be sorely disappointed in drafting an LB that could only predominantly do one or the other. For this high of a pick, he should be able to drop back AND rush.

Ray Lewis has 33 sacks and 28 INTs... Great Balance, which is the type of guy we should go be looking for if we're going to draft an LB with the third pick.

Lewis is a 1 in a million freak of nature

Dayze
02-28-2009, 11:27 PM
And shouldn't ANY LB drafted in the top 5 be able to do both?




therein lies the dilema.
Which is why they are seldom drafted in the top 5 (let alone the top 10).

redsurfer11
02-28-2009, 11:31 PM
DeMarcus Ware was a defensive end in college that racked up double digit sacks so yea.

Ware had good numbers as a defensive end. there were only a few coaches who thought he could make the transition to linebacker. The move has worked out for the Cowboys, but Ware had a rough time adjusting his first couple of years. Picking the success of a player is sometimes a crapshoot.

Mecca
02-28-2009, 11:33 PM
It was obvious when Ware worked out he was more than just a DE he ran a 4.5

The Buddha
02-28-2009, 11:37 PM
\Picking the success of a player is always a crapshoot.

Fixed your post for you.

LiL stumppy
03-01-2009, 12:02 AM
Aaron Curry isn't going to be a top 3 pick can we just come off this now, especially since this team wants to go 3-4.

Want a tip here, BJ Raji or move down if they can is probably what you're looking at.

Rey Maualuga is a better pick and much better value than Aaron Curry is if you're a 3-4 team...

The only reason you think Rey is better is because of the douchebag college he attended.


Curry FTW

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:03 AM
He fits the middle of a 3-4 better than Curry does...Currys a better 4-3 fit though.

BigRedChief
03-01-2009, 12:59 AM
I've never been an advocate of trading down, but I'd take a hit on chart value to get out of that spot, even if Curry IS still there.

The odds are beyond slim, however.
Your a draftnik. You know thew chances of us being able to trade down are pretty slim. The only scenerio I see it happening is if Stafford or Sanchez is there and someother team is hot for them and want to trade up? But then they would work a cheaper deal with the #4 slot since they know we are not taking them.

No, we are stuck with the pick.

Will
03-01-2009, 08:22 AM
I probably wouldn't go with Raji here becuase next years DL class is much better than this years. If all of the underclassman would have came out this year than there wouldn't be much discussion of Raji going number 3.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 08:23 AM
I probably wouldn't go with Raji here becuase next years DL class is much better than this years. If all of the underclassman would have came out this year than there wouldn't be much discussion of Raji going number 3.

End yea, but finding a guy who can play NT isn't something that comes out along all that often it's a very hard spot to fill.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 08:28 AM
so mecca...you're telling me then, Curry doesn't know which way to run to the QB...like it's an art form similar to the Cirque Du Solier?

It's not a 40 yard dash, you fucking moron, it's a complicated skillset that requires great footwork, leverage, explosive movements, fast hands, long arms, and great lower body strength.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 08:29 AM
It's not a 40 yard dash, you fucking moron, it's a complicated skillset that requires great footwork, leverage, explosive movements, fast hands, long arms, and great lower body strength.

I bet you will be met with some defense like "you aren't a coach" no matter how clearly it is explained some people will never get it or they'll just ignore it one or the other.

philfree
03-01-2009, 08:37 AM
It's not a 40 yard dash, you ****ing moron, it's a complicated skillset that requires great footwork, leverage, explosive movements, fast hands, long arms, and great lower body strength.

I don't think it's that complicated.



PhilFree:arrow:

Mecca
03-01-2009, 08:40 AM
I don't think it's that complicated.



PhilFree:arrow:

If it was easy pass rushers wouldn't be so valued, workout warrior DE's or LB's would be top flight pass rushers a guy like Mike Mamula would have been awesome...think about that.

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 08:42 AM
If it was easy pass rushers wouldn't be so valued, workout warrior DE's or LB's would be top flight pass rushers a guy like Mike Mamula would have been awesome...think about that.

If it were easy, DJ would be a much, much better player.

philfree
03-01-2009, 08:45 AM
If it was easy pass rushers wouldn't be so valued, workout warrior DE's or LB's would be top flight pass rushers a guy like Mike Mamula would have been awesome...think about that.

I didn't say it was easy I said it wasn't that complicated.


PhilFree:arrow:

Mecca
03-01-2009, 08:46 AM
I didn't say it was easy I said it wasn't that complicated.


PhilFree:arrow:

More so than you'd ever think it is....I don't think Curry is a crappy player or anything but he's not going to solve the Chiefs sack problem.

Bwana
03-01-2009, 08:53 AM
More so than you'd ever think it is....I don't think Curry is a crappy player or anything but he's not going to solve the Chiefs sack problem.

Do you think there is a player in the draft that is going to solve it?

I hope they end up trading down and picking up more draft picks at this point, "IF" the chance to do so presents itself. We still have a lot of holes to fill, a lot more holes IMHO than can be taken care of in one draft. I do however, want to see them get off to a good start in filling our numerous needs this year.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 08:54 AM
Do you think there is a player in the draft that is going to solve it?

I hope they end up trading down and picking up more draft picks at this point, "IF" the chance to do so presents itself. We still have a lot of holes to fill, a lot more holes IMHO than can be taken care of in one draft. I do however, want to see them get off to a good start in filling our numerous needs this year.

I don't really think he's a good fit for the 3-4, that doesn't mean he'd suck just that I don't think he'd live up to the pick.

We're going to need a NT above all else for that kind of defense though.

philfree
03-01-2009, 08:59 AM
More so than you'd ever think it is....I don't think Curry is a crappy player or anything but he's not going to solve the Chiefs sack problem.

Well not by himself. He could help the D alot though with all over play making ability. IMO he'll be able to take his ability to shed blocks combine that with his speed and he'll be able to rush the passer. He won't be DT.

PhilFree:arrow:

DeezNutz
03-01-2009, 09:00 AM
I don't really think he's a good fit for the 3-4, that doesn't mean he'd suck just that I don't think he'd live up to the pick.

We're going to need a NT above all else for that kind of defense though.

Didn't you post some time ago, when Pioli was first hired, that you had a friend who said something along the lines of, "Expect Raji to be the pick."?

philfree
03-01-2009, 09:07 AM
I like what i've seen of Raji and i'd be fine with him as our pick.


PhilFree:arrow:

Bwana
03-01-2009, 09:07 AM
I don't really think he's a good fit for the 3-4, that doesn't mean he'd suck just that I don't think he'd live up to the pick.

We're going to need a NT above all else for that kind of defense though.

Well, the one fact that is hard to dispute, is the fact that we still need lots of help on both O and D. The OL still has a lot of holes on the other side of the ball as well. As stated in another post, if we go into the season with the O line we have right now, we are going to get our new QB killed. It doesn't do any good to have a top notch QB if they can't protect him. It's hard to throw if you have DL hanging on you, or you're laying on your back looking up through your facemask at two 300+ pound DL laying on top of you.

MahiMike
03-01-2009, 09:24 AM
After ONLY giving away a 2nd pick for 2 outstanding players (WOW), the next rabbit Pioli pulls out of his hat is trading the #3 pick for a 1st and a 3rd. Both picks will be used on defense, IMO.

Craqhead
03-01-2009, 09:25 AM
IMO, there's no reason not to trade down. Regardless of who is available.

Millions of dollars sounds like a good reason too trade down. IMO

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2009, 09:30 AM
I've never been an advocate of trading down, but I'd take a hit on chart value to get out of that spot, even if Curry IS still there.

The odds are beyond slim, however.

Ha. Glad I finally got people on board with this.

The trade chart is stupid. If you don't like what you have and you like guys that you can find a little later, then trade down and take what you can get (without getting yourself ripped off).

If the Chiefs only got a 2nd round pick or something similar to that to move down a few spots, that's fine with me. To hell with what the draft chart says.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 09:31 AM
Didn't you post some time ago, when Pioli was first hired, that you had a friend who said something along the lines of, "Expect Raji to be the pick."?

Yea...

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 09:33 AM
Ha. Glad I finally got people on board with this.

The trade chart is stupid. If you don't like what you have and you like guys that you can find a little later, then trade down and take what you can get (without getting yourself ripped off).

If the Chiefs only got a 2nd round pick or something similar to that to move down a few spots, that's fine with me. To hell with what the draft chart says.

The fact that you've got a gun to your head doesn't invalidate the draft chart.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 09:44 AM
As a MLB, and taking a MLB for a 3-4 that high is pretty bad especially when there's another guy that can do it better going later...


Talking about Rey?

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 09:45 AM
Talking about Rey?

Of course. Mecca = massive USC homer.

If Curry is gone I think we draft Monroe.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 09:46 AM
That's been addressed so many times I'm not even going to bother.

It's Brown or Raji.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 09:47 AM
NE's history until last year, was to sign FA LB's and draft high on the DL....if you use their history everything points to Raji.

It could also be taken as regarding both positions high(they spent a LOT on olb's) and having good opportunity in the draft, therefore filling the other hole elsewhere. Pure speculation of course but don't rule it out.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2009, 09:49 AM
The fact that you've got a gun to your head doesn't invalidate the draft chart.

So you'd rather reach for a pick or draft a player you don't want who is the BPA because a retarded piece of paper that doesn't change from year to year tells you not to? If Raji isn't a top 5 graded nose tackle, the BPA are not what we need and the players on the top of our board would be reaches.

I can't believe you're honestly sticking to your guns on this. There is no value to the Chiefs sticking at #3. They are going to grossly overpay for whomever they pick and they are missing an opportunity to get an extra pick or two in a draft where they need to fill a LOT of gaps. But I guess a stupid piece of paper says that Curry is worth the same value as Matt Ryan and Glenn Dorsey so we must stick to that.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 09:57 AM
So you'd rather reach for a pick or draft a player you don't want who is the BPA because a retarded piece of paper that doesn't change from year to year tells you not to? If Raji isn't a top 5 graded nose tackle, the BPA are not what we need and the players on the top of our board would be reaches.

I can't believe you're honestly sticking to your guns on this. There is no value to the Chiefs sticking at #3. They are going to grossly overpay for whomever they pick and they are missing an opportunity to get an extra pick or two in a draft where they need to fill a LOT of gaps. But I guess a stupid piece of paper says that Curry is worth the same value as Matt Ryan and Glenn Dorsey so we must stick to that.

That's not what I'm saying at all. If you think the Chiefs are going to take a 3rd rounder and nothing else to move down to 10, you're fucking retarded.

JASONSAUTO
03-01-2009, 09:58 AM
That's not what I'm saying at all. If you think the Chiefs are going to take a 3rd rounder and nothing else to move down to 10, you're fucking retarded.

yeah no way that happens, we have to get a 2nd at least:evil:

eazyb81
03-01-2009, 10:01 AM
How many threads have been created in the last 48 hours that essentially say the same thing? This is getting kind of annoying.

With the transition to the 3-4, the two positions that are must-haves that I'm not sure we have on the current roster is NT and rush backer. The odds are that we will look to fill one of those positions with the #3 pick, but I also think Pioli will desperately try to trade down because the value isn't there for those positions in the top 3 this year.

Curry is an option, but it's hard for me to sit here and believe that Pioli will use such a premium pick on an inside LB.

Mr. Krab
03-01-2009, 10:08 AM
If Curry is gone at the 3 spot...who do we take or what do we do?
We call Tampa Bay and trade them Matt Cassel for their 1st and 3rd and then we select Matt Stafford.

redsurfer11
03-01-2009, 11:16 AM
It was obvious when Ware worked out he was more than just a DE he ran a 4.5

Didn't Curry run a 4.5 at the Combine?

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:18 AM
Didn't Curry run a 4.5 at the Combine?

DeMarcus Ware ran that as a 265lb defensive end...it's a little different.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:19 AM
Of course. Mecca = massive USC homer.

If Curry is gone I think we draft Monroe.

You can get back to me when you understand the different roles of the LB's in the 3-4, and anyway I can't take the opinion of someone seriously that thinks the best picks for the 3rd pick are a cover backer and a RT.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 11:21 AM
You can get back to me when you understand the different roles of the LB's in the 3-4, and anyway I can't take the opinion of someone seriously that thinks the best picks for the 3rd pick are a cover backer and a RT.

And you can go blow Dirty Sanchez while jerking off Rey, USC homer. NO ONE takes your schtick seriously because you're a blind homer.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:23 AM
And you can go blow Dirty Sanchez while jerking off Rey, USC homer. NO ONE takes your schtick seriously because you're a blind homer.

So when did you become a dumbass...this is honestly the most tired schtick on this forum.

"Oh you're a homer" really I give honest takes about all players god forbid I should think a USC player is good. You know they only have the most NFL prospects of any college team.

Really get the shit out of your ears, well I guess you can't because you're just completely full of shit right now.

Ask anyone around here who reads my draft shit if I'm a homer or not.

Dave Lane
03-01-2009, 11:26 AM
so mecca...you're telling me then, Curry doesn't know which way to run to the QB...like it's an art form similar to the Cirque Du Solier?

If anyone could do it no one would care. It is a very difficult thing to do.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:27 AM
If anyone could do it no one would care. It is a very difficult thing to do.

Don't worry it'll get ignored like it's no big deal we've been over this stuff before.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 11:27 AM
So when did you become a dumbass...this is honestly the most tired schtick on this forum.

"Oh you're a homer" really I give honest takes about all players god forbid I should think a USC player is good. You know they only have the most NFL prospects of any college team.

Really get the shit out of your ears, well I guess you can't because you're just completely full of shit right now.

Ask anyone around here who reads my draft shit if I'm a homer or not.

If you are so objective, as you claim to be, then why do you whine about having the USC homer thing brought up? It's hilarious that you can't see it... and it's also not surprising.

You were the one being a prick here. If you can't take it, then don't dish it out. I am more than happy to have a civil debate but if you start acting like a know-it-all prick I'm going to call you on it.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:29 AM
Because it gets spouted all the fucking time, it's a tired comeback when you got nothing better to say.

You know who says people are know it alls...people who feel inferior at the time.

melbar
03-01-2009, 11:35 AM
As a MLB, and taking a MLB for a 3-4 that high is pretty bad especially when there's another guy that can do it better going later...

Curry is not a pass rusher don't have visions of him getting 10 sacks.

Sacks arent the job of the MLB in the 3-4.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:36 AM
Sacks arent the job of the MLB in the 3-4.

And that's why its an excessively high pick to use on him.

sedated
03-01-2009, 11:40 AM
What year did Pioli go to NE?

Here's a histroy of their first round picks since 1999:
2008: Mayo - LB (6)
2007: Meriweather - S (24)
2006: Maroney - RB (21)
2005: Mankins - G (32)
2004: Wilfork - DT (21)
2004: Watson - TE (32)
2003: Warren - DL (13)
2002: Graham - TE (21)
2001: Seymour - DL (6)
2000: None
1999: Woody - OL (17)
1999: Katzenmoyer - LB (28)

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:40 AM
I believe he starts with the Seymour pick.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 11:42 AM
Because it gets spouted all the ****ing time, it's a tired comeback when you got nothing better to say.

You know who says people are know it alls...people who feel inferior at the time.

No, in this instance it is in response to a condescending, assinine post on your behalf:

You can get back to me when you understand the different roles of the LB's in the 3-4, and anyway I can't take the opinion of someone seriously that thinks the best picks for the 3rd pick are a cover backer and a RT.

If you're going to condescend people are going to jump your ass. Act like a prick, get treated like one.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:43 AM
Do you really expect to get anything different when you want to take a OT 3rd when we already have a LT?

sedated
03-01-2009, 11:46 AM
2008: Mayo - LB (6)
2007: Meriweather - S (24)
2006: Maroney - RB (21)
2005: Mankins - G (32)
2004: Wilfork - DT (21)
2004: Watson - TE (32)
2003: Warren - DL (13)
2002: Graham - TE (21)
2001: Seymour - DL (6)

A lot of lower-round picks, but: 3 DL, 2 TE, 1 OL, 1 RB, 1 DB, and 1 LB

Not exactly targeting "skill" positions. No QBs or WRs

I can completely see them going for Raji. They've addressed LB with Vrabel, and have DJohnson already, might move Hali there as well. But the DLine, especially the big NT, is a total question mark if we switch to a 3-4.

eazyb81
03-01-2009, 11:49 AM
DeMarcus Ware ran that as a 265lb defensive end...it's a little different.

No he didn't, Ware was 250 at the combine.

Reaper16
03-01-2009, 11:50 AM
No, in this instance it is in response to a condescending, assinine post on your behalf:



If you're going to condescend people are going to jump your ass. Act like a prick, get treated like one.
Talk like someone who only recently started watching football, and you'll be treated like one.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 11:51 AM
Do you really expect to get anything different when you want to take a OT 3rd when we already have a LT?

I didn't say I wanted anything - I said what I thought would happen.

KC has need at OT. They have a LT in Albert that has played multiple OL positions. They have a VERY high pick with several needs; greatest player value where they are at = Monroe. He is a very good LT prospect.

It makes sense. Especially when you consider KC just traded for a QB. They know they have to keep their QBs healthy, esp after a year where they lost TWO starters.

If they draft Monroe, they move Albert to RT.

The other options: Curry and Raji are logical as well, however they bring up counter-points, just like Monroe.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:51 AM
Talk like someone who only recently started watching football, and you'll be treated like one.

Thank you.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:52 AM
I didn't say I wanted anything - I said what I thought would happen.

KC has need at OT. They have a LT in Albert that has played multiple OL positions. They have a VERY high pick with several needs; greatest player value where they are at = Monroe. He is a very good LT prospect.

It makes sense. Especially when you consider KC just traded for a QB. They know they have to keep their QBs healthy, esp after a year where they lost TWO starters.

If they draft Monroe, they move Albert to RT.

The other options: Curry and Raji are logical as well, however they bring up counter-points, just like Monroe.

Do me a favor, go look up how many teams right now have 2 1st round OT's...

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:53 AM
No he didn't, Ware was 250 at the combine.

You know you're probably right I did throw out a number I admit that but lets also understand Ware was a DE that would have played DE if a 4-3 team picked him and had pass rush moves and major experience rushing the passer.

Reaper16
03-01-2009, 11:54 AM
I didn't say I wanted anything - I said what I thought would happen.

KC has need at OT. They have a LT in Albert that has played multiple OL positions. They have a VERY high pick with several needs; greatest player value where they are at = Monroe. He is a very good LT prospect.

It makes sense. Especially when you consider KC just traded for a QB. They know they have to keep their QBs healthy, esp after a year where they lost TWO starters.

If they draft Monroe, they move Albert to RT.

That is just a savage misallocation of resources.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 11:56 AM
That is just a savage misallocation of resources.

I want him to get back to me on the thing I asked him to do.

eazyb81
03-01-2009, 11:58 AM
You know you're probably right I did throw out a number I admit that but lets also understand Ware was a DE that would have played DE if a 4-3 team picked him and had pass rush moves and major experience rushing the passer.

Agree on the position, just don't want Curry's performance at the combine to get downgraded. What he did at that size is amazing and is comparable to what Ware did when he came out. The big difference, obviously, is that Ware was a DE in college and Curry was not.

I've done some research, and I'm not aware of any successful 3-4 OLBs that actually played LB in college instead of DE. So unless Pioli thinks Curry is just a freak, I think we'll probably pass because I can't see him using such a premium pick on an ILB.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:01 PM
Agree on the position, just don't want Curry's performance at the combine to get downgraded. What he did at that size is amazing and is comparable to what Ware did when he came out. The big difference, obviously, is that Ware was a DE in college and Curry was not.

I've done some research, and I'm not aware of any successful 3-4 OLBs that actually played LB in college instead of DE. So unless Pioli thinks Curry is just a freak, I think we'll probably pass because I can't see him using such a premium pick on an ILB.

Ok we're on the same page, I just want people to realize I'm not saying Curry sucks, he'll in all likely hood be a good player, LB is a pretty safe position.

I just don't think he's a good pick for us in this current situation.

sedated
03-01-2009, 12:01 PM
just don't want Curry's performance at the combine to get downgraded.

I'm always scared of the combine warrior that shoots up the draft board.

milkman
03-01-2009, 12:01 PM
A lot of lower-round picks, but: 3 DL, 2 TE, 1 OL, 1 RB, 1 DB, and 1 LB

Not exactly targeting "skill" positions. No QBs or WRs

I can completely see them going for Raji. They've addressed LB with Vrabel, and have DJohnson already, might move Hali there as well. But the DLine, especially the big NT, is a total question mark if we switch to a 3-4.

Hali is not a LB, inside or outside, in a 34.

Hali has no place in a 34 defense.

Hell, Hali is a marginal DE in a 43.

milkman
03-01-2009, 12:03 PM
I'm always scared of the combine warrior that shoots up the draft board.

I don't want Curry, but he isn't a combine warrior that is shooting up the board because of his combine performance.

kcpasco
03-01-2009, 12:03 PM
Hali will be looking for new employment by this time next season

melbar
03-01-2009, 12:03 PM
And that's why its an excessively high pick to use on him.

I understand what you are saying, but sacks arent the only way to affect a game.

I know I keep going to the well on this one, but the Ravens 3-4 is a model by which to judge and Ray was the biggest game changer on that team from that position without rushing the passer. One of the greatest LB in history.

Again, not saying he's Ray, but with the right talent and everyone doing their jobs that position can be extremely effective.

The rub here is also getting players (NT and OLB) who also do their jobs well, but all are needed to be successfull. Either way we need several pieces on this team.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 12:03 PM
Do me a favor, go look up how many teams right now have 2 1st round OT's...

Who cares? Seriously? You are hung up on what other people have done; on imaginary board position/value numbers.

You do what you have to do to improve your team through the draft. If that means taking OT in the first round two years in a row, so be it. If it pisses off Mel Kiper & his clones, who gives a shit?

KC has needs at OL, LB, DL, WR.

Of those positions, where is the greatest player value at #3? Note that all things are not equal. You have stronger OL and WR prospects at that position than you do DL and arguably LB. While all of the positions have strong value, where is the greatest and where does it help the Chiefs the most? Now consider the trade for a QB.

OL makes sense. To say it is ludicrous/illogical is patently false. It is extremely logical that KC could draft Monroe, best OT available.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2009, 12:04 PM
I didn't say I wanted anything - I said what I thought would happen.

KC has need at OT. They have a LT in Albert that has played multiple OL positions. They have a VERY high pick with several needs; greatest player value where they are at = Monroe. He is a very good LT prospect.

It makes sense. Especially when you consider KC just traded for a QB. They know they have to keep their QBs healthy, esp after a year where they lost TWO starters.

If they draft Monroe, they move Albert to RT.

The other options: Curry and Raji are logical as well, however they bring up counter-points, just like Monroe.

It sounds good in theory, but you're basically using a top 5 pick on a guard or a right tackle when in practice most of those guys aren't taken until the very late first or early second. Because when you do a slight upgrade at left tackle and move your current left tackle to guard or tackle, you are mostly doing that because you want to upgrade at right tackle.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:05 PM
Who cares? Seriously? You are hung up on what other people have done; on imaginary board position/value numbers.

You do what you have to do to improve your team through the draft. If that means taking OT in the first round two years in a row, so be it. If it pisses off Mel Kiper & his clones, who gives a shit?

KC has needs at OL, LB, DL, WR.

Of those positions, where is the greatest player value at #3? Note that all things are not equal. You have stronger OL and WR prospects at that position than you do DL and arguably LB. While all of the positions have strong value, where is the greatest and where does it help the Chiefs the most? Now consider the trade for a QB.

OL makes sense. To say it is ludicrous/illogical is patently false. It is extremely logical that KC could draft Monroe, best OT available.

It's a huge damn deal, no other team has done it, most teams don't even have more than 1 first round lineman on the entire line. You're going to overvalue the position to such a level that it will screw us cap wise.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 12:13 PM
I didn't say I wanted anything - I said what I thought would happen.

KC has need at OT. They have a LT in Albert that has played multiple OL positions. They have a VERY high pick with several needs; greatest player value where they are at = Monroe. He is a very good LT prospect.

It makes sense. Especially when you consider KC just traded for a QB. They know they have to keep their QBs healthy, esp after a year where they lost TWO starters.

If they draft Monroe, they move Albert to RT.

The other options: Curry and Raji are logical as well, however they bring up counter-points, just like Monroe.

No, it's pretty fucking simple.

If you stay at 3, you take Raji. If you get someone to move up for Sanchez, you can take Raji, Brown, or Maclin in the 6-10 range.

You don't spend a first on a LT when you have a LT and you can fill every other position on the line outside of the first round.

How is that so hard to understand?

Remember the Chiefs line of '03-'05?

1st round LT, UD LG, UD C, 3rd Round RG, 4th round RT.

One of the best lines in league history.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 12:21 PM
No, it's pretty ****ing simple.

If you stay at 3, you take Raji. If you get someone to move up for Sanchez, you can take Raji, Brown, or Maclin in the 6-10 range.

You don't spend a first on a LT when you have a LT and you can fill every other position on the line outside of the first round.

How is that so hard to understand?

Remember the Chiefs line of '03-'05?

1st round LT, UD LG, UD C, 3rd Round RG, 4th round RT.

One of the best lines in league history.

Again with the condescension... and you guys wonder why you are called names and treated like assholes.... because your behavior warrants it!

Note the bolded part, now note the thread title.

Raji -v- Monroe is a valid argument, but on the merits of the player & his value at #3 & to the team, not on your opinion of a position's value within the draft.

How many of our #1s have we spent on DT?

Raji = Dorsey. Is the need greater?

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:22 PM
Raji and Dorsey are not remotely the same, it is believed Raji can play over the nose in the 3-4 where Dorsey can't.

This team is switching to the 3-4 the most important position in that defense is the nose tackle.

milkman
03-01-2009, 12:25 PM
Raji = Dorsey. Is the need greater?

Oh Jesus!

:doh!:

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 12:26 PM
Again with the condescension... and you guys wonder why you are called names and treated like assholes.... because your behavior warrants it!

Note the bolded part, now note the thread title.

Raji -v- Monroe is a valid argument, but on the merits of the player & his value at #3 & to the team, not on your opinion of a position's value within the draft.

How many of our #1s have we spent on DT?

Raji = Dorsey. Is the need greater?

God fuck.

When you tell people the same thing over and over, it gets old.

Just study draft history for 30 minutes. You'll see that there is no value in 1st round lineman to the right of the left tackle.

Read up on football strategy for another 30 minutes. You'll realize that 1 gap penetrators, like Dorsey, are completely different players from 2 gap space eating NTs, like Raji.

It's just frustrating when people come in here with completely uneducated takes and act like they know what a team should do when it's not based in any form of reality.

I mean, you don't even know the difference between the roles of linebackers in a 3-4. I can't remember if it was you or not, but someone made the claim that you could teach any linebacker to be a pass rusher.

Just study up on this shit for a little bit. It's neither hard nor time consuming.

Chiefnj2
03-01-2009, 12:36 PM
God ****.

When you tell people the same thing over and over, it gets old.

Just study draft history for 30 minutes. You'll see that there is no value in 1st round lineman to the right of the left tackle.

Read up on football strategy for another 30 minutes. You'll realize that 1 gap penetrators, like Dorsey, are completely different players from 2 gap space eating NTs, like Raji.

It's just frustrating when people come in here with completely uneducated takes and act like they know what a team should do when it's not based in any form of reality.

I mean, you don't even know the difference between the roles of linebackers in a 3-4. I can't remember if it was you or not, but someone made the claim that you could teach any linebacker to be a pass rusher.

Just study up on this shit for a little bit. It's neither hard nor time consuming.

Arizona took a RT with the #5 pick, didn't they?

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 12:37 PM
Arizona took a RT with the #5 pick, didn't they?

NO! Study the draft, asshole! :p

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:37 PM
Arizona took a RT with the #5 pick, didn't they?

Yea and he was suppose to be an LT and he's a giant disappointment so not really a good example.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 12:37 PM
Arizona took a RT with the #5 pick, didn't they?

Yeah, and if they would have taken Adrian Peterson, rather than reaching for a stiff, they would have won the Super Bowl.

Great argument.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:38 PM
Yeah, and if they would have taken Adrian Peterson, rather than reaching for a stiff, they would have won the Super Bowl.

Great argument.

I still remember on this very forum going "they should go Peterson here" and they took Brown and my response was something like "fucking retards"

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 12:39 PM
Yea and he was suppose to be an LT and he's a giant disappointment so not really a good example.

This is what I love about this place.

One dumbass makes a stupid comment.

Another dumbass comes in to back him up.

Dumbass #1 thinks he's vindicated.

Dumbassery spreads.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:39 PM
This is what I love about this place.

One dumbass makes a stupid comment.

Another dumbass comes in to back him up.

Dumbass #1 thinks he's vindicated.

Dumbassery spreads.

You mean like, "hey any LB can be taught to pass rush."

That one hurt my brain.

philfree
03-01-2009, 12:43 PM
1st Dumbass:This is what I love about this place.

One dumbass makes a stupid comment.

Another dumbass comes in to back him up.

Dumbass #1 thinks he's vindicated.

Dumbassery spreads.

2nd Dumbass:You mean like, "hey any LB can be taught to pass rush."

That one hurt my brain.





PhilFree:arrow:

milkman
03-01-2009, 12:45 PM
1st Dumbass:

2nd Dumbass:





PhilFree:arrow:

So, did the Cardinals draft Levi brown to play RT?

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 12:45 PM
From the 2007 draft thread:

It's to high for Brown........

Arizona is gonna have a hell of a young core on offense.

Then later,

These ESPN guys are morons, you do not reach for needs over the best player. Telling them they don't get it if they take Peterson over Brown is ****in dumb I'm sorry.

Well there goes the Cards string of drafts all these guys are morons.........

Taking a tackle over an elite prospect like Peterson, stupid.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:48 PM
The Cardinals always took players I really liked then they came out with that pick....to bad for them it cost them a bowl.

philfree
03-01-2009, 12:48 PM
So, did the Cardinals draft Levi brown to play RT?

Beats the hell out if me.


PhilFree:arrow:

milkman
03-01-2009, 12:50 PM
Beats the hell out if me.


PhilFree:arrow:

So you admittedly don't have a clue.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 12:50 PM
Beats the hell out if me.


PhilFree:arrow:

The answer is no.

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:50 PM
Then people wonder why there is a lack of patience displayed in these threads.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 12:51 PM
I just went back and read through my posts on that draft thread.

I had a fucking meltdown when we took Michael Allan over Brandon Siler. I was pretty pissed about the McBride over Kalil pick too. Then again, I liked the Medlock pick for his accuracy. :banghead:

Mecca
03-01-2009, 12:52 PM
Ha several of us wanted Siler.

I will never forget my Bernard Pollard meltdown.

philfree
03-01-2009, 12:56 PM
So you admittedly don't have a clue.


I really wasn't part of the Arizona conversation. Who are you the 3rd dumbass? Hamas left that part out of his post.



PhilFree:arrow:

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 01:27 PM
So if we stay at #3, don't trade down, as the roster stands today, the "studious draft experts" would take Raji?

And what do we do w/ Dorsey? Chuck him in the garbage? Seems to me we're doing worse with him than what you're bemoaning wrt Albert.

ChiefsCountry
03-01-2009, 01:28 PM
So if we stay at #3, don't trade down, as the roster stands today, the "studious draft experts" would take Raji?

And what do we do w/ Dorsey? Chuck him in the garbage? Seems to me we're doing worse with him than what you're bemoaning wrt Albert.

Dorsey becomes a right end in 3-4 with Raji as the nose tackle.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 01:29 PM
So if we stay at #3, don't trade down, as the roster stands today, the "studious draft experts" would take Raji?

And what do we do w/ Dorsey? Chuck him in the garbage? Seems to me we're doing worse with him than what you're bemoaning wrt Albert.

Why the hell do you think I was so pissed about moving to a 3-4?

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 01:31 PM
Dorsey becomes a right end in 3-4 with Raji as the nose tackle.

So the odd man out then becomes? Hali? Tyler? McBride?

Again, we're chucking one of our high DL drafts.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 01:32 PM
Why the hell do you think I was so pissed about moving to a 3-4?

Oh, I agree.... also why I see the logic in Monroe. Albert can play all along the OL.

Not that I want that to happen, but I can definitely see it as a possibility, w/ Dorsey or Tyler moved to NT.

On top of that, our LB corps SUCKS. Vrabel is a great 2-year stopgap & player coach, but other than him we have a lot of ?? / holes to fill, especially in a 3-4.

ChiefsCountry
03-01-2009, 01:33 PM
Hali and Tank will be gone, they dont fit the 3-4 at all.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 01:35 PM
Tank could play end, at least as a backup, and eventually maybe NT.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 01:38 PM
If that happens, we draft Raji and push out McBride/Tyler/Dorsey, has any other team failed as miserably drafting DL as KC?

This franchise has spent A LOT of high picks and $$ on DL, with very poor results to show for it. Exceptions exist to the rule of course (Jared Allen - but then we sent him packing. derrr)

ChiefsCountry
03-01-2009, 01:46 PM
If that happens, we draft Raji and push out McBride/Tyler/Dorsey, has any other team failed as miserably drafting DL as KC?


It shows the stubborness to implement the 3-4 more than anything.

eazyb81
03-01-2009, 01:56 PM
It shows the stubborness to implement the 3-4 more than anything.

I wouldn't say it's stubbornness. Every team Pioli has worked for during his tenure in the NFL ran the 3-4, so obviously it's the scheme that he knows best and feels is superior.

Would you really want him to abandon what he knows best just because we have a few scrub players from the league's worst defense that may not be perfect fits in the defensive scheme he knows inside and out?

Past draft picks are sunk costs. Yes, it sucks we may not get optimum value for them due to the defensive switch, but you don't avoid making the switch because of poor personnel decisions in the past.

Chiefnj2
03-01-2009, 02:39 PM
Yea and he was suppose to be an LT and he's a giant disappointment so not really a good example.

You should tell the Cards he was always their LT, because they never said so, not even the day he was drafted. From the Cards website:

"With the Cards having a few players on the roster that can be tackles, Brown’s selection gives Whisenhunt the flexibility of seeing which side his new OT can line up on. He was a left tackle at Penn State, but nothing is set in stone right now. Whisenhunt said Brown looked comfortable on both sides of the line during previous workouts. This is an issue that will be addressed at the minicamp in two weeks, the OTAs in the following month or even at training camp.

“When you talk about character, when you talk about intensity, about the physical nature and how you play a football game on the field, he certainly embodies a lot of those qualities,” Whisenhunt said. “That’s on thing that really shows on the football field when he plays, and ultimately that’s what you look for.”"

What's funny is how Mecca comes out and says something without support and all the Meccasexuals back him up as a matter of habit. They must like the view, and he the feel.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 02:50 PM
They put Levi Brown on the right side on purpose because Leinart is left-handed,therefore his blindside is the right.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2009, 03:09 PM
Hali and Tank will be gone, they dont fit the 3-4 at all.

Tank could fit in as a RDE, but I think you can teach him to play NT. I just don't think he's a guy that can play every single snap at that position. So he'd be good backup depth for the position.

Hali would be gone, but he was never anything beyond a rotational DE anyway.

Turk and Dorsey would likely be the DEs. By the way, Brian Johnston is also a great fit for a 3-4 alignment.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 03:11 PM
You should tell the Cards he was always their LT, because they never said so, not even the day he was drafted. From the Cards website:

"With the Cards having a few players on the roster that can be tackles, Brown’s selection gives Whisenhunt the flexibility of seeing which side his new OT can line up on. He was a left tackle at Penn State, but nothing is set in stone right now. Whisenhunt said Brown looked comfortable on both sides of the line during previous workouts. This is an issue that will be addressed at the minicamp in two weeks, the OTAs in the following month or even at training camp.

“When you talk about character, when you talk about intensity, about the physical nature and how you play a football game on the field, he certainly embodies a lot of those qualities,” Whisenhunt said. “That’s on thing that really shows on the football field when he plays, and ultimately that’s what you look for.”"

What's funny is how Mecca comes out and says something without support and all the Meccasexuals back him up as a matter of habit. They must like the view, and he the feel.

Nice try, dumbass.
bdeg summed that up perfectly.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2009, 03:12 PM
It shows the stubborness to implement the 3-4 more than anything.

I don't think so. He should run the defense that he thinks he can excel with.

There was never a better time to consider a 3-4 alignment. The Chiefs need a ton of players to run a 4-3 effectively, let alone a 3-4. Yes, some players might get pushed out, but filling in the pieces becomes considerably easier. Finding LBs in a 3-4 is really easy. If you find a nose tackle, the rush end becomes easier too.

While I like Dorsey, he's not a guy you build a defense around.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 03:14 PM
While I like Dorsey, he's not a guy you build a defense around.

Was Warren Sapp?

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2009, 03:17 PM
Was Warren Sapp?

Hmm... Interesting point. I take my statement back.

But regardless, Sapp was also surrounded by Brooks, Rice, Lynch, Ronde Barber, and an insanely good cast of defensive players. So while you're right, I stand by my point that the Chiefs are about as close to square 1 on defense as you can get. The only impact player that might have to change roles to a lesser one is Dorsey. The secondary stays the same and the only LB who deserves a starting spot, DJ, will have a strong role in a 3-4 defense too.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 03:20 PM
Hmm... Interesting point. I take my statement back.

But regardless, Sapp was also surrounded by Brooks, Rice, Lynch, Ronde Barber, and an insanely good cast of defensive players. So while you're right, I stand by my point that the Chiefs are about as close to square 1 on defense as you can get. The only impact player that might have to change roles to a lesser one is Dorsey. The secondary stays the same and the only LB who deserves a starting spot, DJ, will have a strong role in a 3-4 defense too.

Moving Dorsey to a 3-4 is like putting Chris Paul in the Triangle Offense or making Randy Johnson a pitch to contact hurler.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 03:28 PM
Moving Dorsey to a 3-4 is like putting Chris Paul in the Triangle Offense or making Randy Johnson a pitch to contact hurler.
Dorsey never performed like Randy Johnson.

I'm not saying our scheme played to his strengths, but Dorsey's no all-star we should tailor our defense around. He has potential, but there was some disagreement about where he should be played when he came out. All we can do is wait and see, I think he can be a performer in the new D.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 03:36 PM
Dorsey never performed like Randy Johnson.

I'm not saying our scheme played to his strengths, but Dorsey's no all-star we should tailor our defense around. He has potential, but there was some disagreement about where he should be played when he came out. All we can do is wait and see, I think he can be a performer in the new D.

It takes 3 years to find out what you have in a defensive tackle.

If you drafted a franchise QB to put in an offense like New England has, would you change it after one year to a smashmouth variant that ran the ball 630 times a year?

There wasn't really disagreement about where he would be played, either:

Scott Wright's report from last year:

Glenn Dorsey
Height: 6-11/2 | Weight: 297 | 40-Time: 5.05

Strengths:
Very strong and powerful...Extremely active with a non-stop motor...Outstanding quickness with a burst to close...A hard worker with terrific intangibles...Agile and changes directions well...Can penetrate and wreak havoc in the backfield...Stout at the point of attack and can hold his ground versus the run...Has long arms and plays with very good leverage...Has excellent range...Smart with nice awareness and instincts...Has a lot of experience...Versatile and has played all along the line.

Weaknesses:
Size and bulk are merely average...Timed speed is good but not great...Has dealt with some injuries and durability may be a concern...Will not be a good fit in a 3-4 scheme...Was not overly productive from a statistical standpoint...Does not get a great push...Won't physically dominate opponents...Isn't a standout pass rusher.

Notes:
Wore metal braces on his legs as a 3-year old due to severely bowed legs...Split time with future pros Claude Wroten and Kyle Williams early in his career..In '07 he won the Outland Trophy, Bronko Nagurski Award and the Lombardi Award...A player whose impact and contributions can't be judged strictly by numbers since he creates so many opportunities for his teammates...Struggled with a leg injury in 2006 and a knee injury in 2007...Might have been a Top 10 overall pick had he entered the 2007 NFL Draft after his junior season...Can be either a 3-technique or a nose tackle in a 4-3 defense...One of the best defensive tackle prospects to enter the NFL in recent years...Should be a mortal lock for the Top 5 overall picks.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 03:47 PM
He's still not a proven commodity, even in the 4-3.

Yes, that's his best fit, but there's no guarantee he'll excel. He has a chance to be good in the 3-4. It neutralizes his quickness, but we weren't using that anyway.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 03:48 PM
He's still not a proven commodity, even in the 4-3.

Yes, that's his best fit, but there's no guarantee he'll excel. He has a chance to be good in the 3-4. It neutralized his quickness, but he weren't using that anyway.

If we start giving up on guys after one year, we'll be 2-14 for eternity.

ChiefsCountry
03-01-2009, 03:48 PM
I don't think so. He should run the defense that he thinks he can excel with.

There was never a better time to consider a 3-4 alignment. The Chiefs need a ton of players to run a 4-3 effectively, let alone a 3-4. Yes, some players might get pushed out, but filling in the pieces becomes considerably easier. Finding LBs in a 3-4 is really easy. If you find a nose tackle, the rush end becomes easier too.

While I like Dorsey, he's not a guy you build a defense around.

If you stayed in the 4-3 you draft Curry to play SAM, move DJ to Will and then draft Dunlap or Griffin next year and you are set.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 03:50 PM
If you stayed in the 4-3 you draft Curry to play SAM, move DJ to Will and then draft Dunlap or Griffin next year and you are set.

I'm gonna be sick.

Mr. Krab
03-01-2009, 03:50 PM
This is what I love about this place.

One dumbass makes a stupid comment.

Another dumbass comes in to back him up.

Dumbass #1 thinks he's vindicated.

Dumbassery spreads.
Big 14???

bdeg
03-01-2009, 03:53 PM
If we start giving up on guys after one year, we'll be 2-14 for eternity.

It's more giving up on the whole front 7, which I think may be necessary. Our secondary has played well the front 7 just fell apart last season.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 03:53 PM
If you stayed in the 4-3 you draft Curry to play SAM, move DJ to Will and then draft Dunlap or Griffin next year and you are set.

And who's our MLB? What about the bigger(non 3-tech) tackle?

ChiefsCountry
03-01-2009, 03:54 PM
When you dont have a rush defensive end, middle linebacker or SAM backer of course your front seven is going to fall apart. Put a legit NFL starter in those positions and our front seven isnt that bad.

keg in kc
03-01-2009, 03:55 PM
Well, personally, if Curry is gone at three I do a little happy dance.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 03:55 PM
You're talking 2 top 5 draft picks, if we used those on a NT and a rush backer, you'd see a near-complete defense too.

tk13
03-01-2009, 04:16 PM
I don't know, we're talking about a 3-4 linebacker here. I think it's different if we're going to play 4-3, but why can't Curry play in a 3-4? Half the battle with a LB in a 3-4 is confusing the offense with the blitz packages. It's not like a 4-3 down lineman who has to play with his hand on the ground and develop pass rush moves. You're basically telling me you can't teach the guy to chase after the QB?

I mean he can't be held up by blockers every time of course but it's not like you're gonna be asking him to develop a bunch of Reggie White pass moves. You're gonna line him up all over the field and try to outsmart the offensive line with your blitz packages. Can he be smart enough to drop back in coverage when asked is the bigger question to me.

I mean we'd need a big DT too like Raji, but we need people all over the field. That's the same issue as on the offensive line... we've spent so many picks at these positions. It doesn't make a lot of sense to move Albert over, and it doesn't make a lot of sense to give up on guys like Tank and Dorsey, but we're going to have to do something.

Either way, people make their typical arrogant arguments, when in reality we need both a run stuffing DT, and a rush LB. When Parcells joined the Patriots he spent a #4 pick on McGinest. And Belichick spent top ten picks on guys like Seymour and Mayo. It's not an either/or thing.

Mr. Krab
03-01-2009, 04:23 PM
Well, personally, if Curry is gone at three I do a little happy dance.
Who do you want then? I don't think he was asking about your personal aerobic habits.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-01-2009, 04:23 PM
I don't know, we're talking about a 3-4 linebacker here. I think it's different if we're going to play 4-3, but why can't Curry play in a 3-4? Half the battle with a LB in a 3-4 is confusing the offense with the blitz packages. It's not like a 4-3 down lineman who has to play with his hand on the ground and develop pass rush moves. You're basically telling me you can't teach the guy to chase after the QB?
.

Your rush backer is going to face the left tackle. He better have some damn nice pass rushing moves, or he's gonna get his ass whipped.

Mr. Krab
03-01-2009, 04:25 PM
I don't know, we're talking about a 3-4 linebacker here. I think it's different if we're going to play 4-3, but why can't Curry play in a 3-4? Half the battle with a LB in a 3-4 is confusing the offense with the blitz packages. It's not like a 4-3 down lineman who has to play with his hand on the ground and develop pass rush moves. You're basically telling me you can't teach the guy to chase after the QB?

I mean he can't be held up by blockers every time of course but it's not like you're gonna be asking him to develop a bunch of Reggie White pass moves. You're gonna line him up all over the field and try to outsmart the offensive line with your blitz packages. Can he be smart enough to drop back in coverage when asked is the bigger question to me.

I mean we'd need a big DT too like Raji, but we need people all over the field. That's the same issue as on the offensive line... we've spent so many picks at these positions. It doesn't make a lot of sense to move Albert over, and it doesn't make a lot of sense to give up on guys like Tank and Dorsey, but we're going to have to do something.

Either way, people make their typical arrogant arguments, when in reality we need both a run stuffing DT, and a rush LB. When Parcells joined the Patriots he spent a #4 pick on McGinest. And Belichick spent top ten picks on guys like Seymour and Mayo. It's not an either/or thing.
If Curry can develop into a legit pass rusher he can be a perfect 3-4 OLB. He will be better than Suggs.

That said, the pass rushing part is the most important and hardest to develop.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 04:53 PM
That's the problem. He has no practice at the most difficult aspect of the position, whereas guys like Everette Brown have been battling left tackles for years and have developed those skills.

tk13
03-01-2009, 04:56 PM
I don't disagree that he's a bit raw in that regard. But he's strong, fast, physical, smart, produced in college, and considered a fairly intelligent guy that will be a good leader. Sounds exactly like a Patriots LB to me.

Mr. Krab
03-01-2009, 04:57 PM
That's the problem. He has no practice at the most difficult aspect of the position, whereas guys like Everette Brown have been battling left tackles for years and have developed those skills.It's true, but if Curry doesn't become a legit pass rusher he is still by all accounts going to be a very good traditional linebacker. That means he will be taken too high in the draft but not a total loss.

Moderate risk, Very high reward

bdeg
03-01-2009, 04:57 PM
Oh ya, he's a perfect Patriots ILB. But the pats would never spend the #3 on an ilb.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 05:00 PM
That's the problem. He has no practice at the most difficult aspect of the position, whereas guys like Everette Brown have been battling left tackles for years and have developed those skills.

Yes, but we would definitely need to trade down if we were considering him. At #3 he would be a HUGE reach.

tk13
03-01-2009, 05:02 PM
Oh ya, he's a perfect Patriots ILB. But the pats would never spend the #3 on an ilb.
I know. But your other option is taking a DT which is also a risky proposition in the top 5, or taking a safer pick on the offensive line, which will cause half the board's brain to explode.

I guess my point is picking a top 5 DT is just about like picking a LB. You don't see it a lot. A lot of good DT's are taken in the 5-15 range, just like rush LB's.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 05:02 PM
Yes, but we would definitely need to trade down if we were considering him. At #3 he would be a HUGE reach.
Debatable. You woulda said the same thing last year with the pats taking Mayo at 10, no? He was considered a lower-mid 1st.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 05:06 PM
I know. But your other option is taking a DT which is also a risky proposition in the top 5, or taking a safer pick on the offensive line, which will cause half the board's brain to explode.

I guess my point is picking a top 5 DT is just about like picking a LB. You don't see it a lot. A lot of good DT's are taken in the 5-15 range, just like rush LB's.

OL is out of the question

Outside of QB, I don't really see any other positions more worthy of being taken in the top 5 than those 2.

LT, DT/NT, pass rusher are my top positions besides QB. Probably CB, WR next.

Mr. Krab
03-01-2009, 05:07 PM
Pretty much our choices as they sit now.

Eugene Monroe
B.J. Raji
Aarron Curry
Trade down

tk13
03-01-2009, 05:09 PM
I think trading down probably makes the most sense, but we do have to be prepared if that doesn't happen. I wouldn't take a lesser deal just to move down. And a lot of people say we can't take a LB at 3, that's too high. They are probably right. So we should take a DT. Which makes no sense cause that's the same thing. DT's go in the top 5 slightly more often, and most of them have bombed. The last decade of top 5 DT's include guys like Dorsey, Dewayne Robertson, Gerard Warren, Darrell Russell, Dan Wilkinson? Guys like that. That's no better than the group of LB's in the top 5. You have more success with those guys in the 5-15 range... that's where you find guys like Sapp, Henderson, Stroud, Merriman, Ware, etc. Vince Wilfork was taken in the 20's.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 05:12 PM
I don't know think you can go by that... You just have to trust your scouting department to get the best guy in the class, ya know?

Yes I agree trading down is the best option, but you can't count on that. I don't think anyone i going to want the pick. If it happens great, if not it's either Raji or Brown. Neither one is perfect at this spot, we'll see what happens.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 05:13 PM
And if all the best players are picked in the 10-15 range WHY would you not want to reach for Brown who is rated by many to be in that range?

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 05:16 PM
And if all the best players are picked in the 10-15 range WHY would you not want to reach for Brown who is rated by many to be in that range?

Orakpo would be the choice at #3.

And oh, the waiiilllllinngggggg......

bdeg
03-01-2009, 05:18 PM
He is terrible. Compare the tapes. Orakpo runs through shitty blocks, Everette Brown sheds them with authority.

Cornstock
03-01-2009, 05:18 PM
Draft the Tree of Crabs or the Roe of Mun

Tribal Warfare
03-01-2009, 05:18 PM
The last decade of top 5 DT's include guys like Dorsey, Dewayne Robertson, Gerard Warren, Darrell Russell.

Yeah, because he died in his prime

Mr. Krab
03-01-2009, 05:19 PM
Orakpo would be the choice at #3.

And oh, the waiiilllllinngggggg......Every time i saw Orakpo play, he pretty much disappeared.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 05:21 PM
Every time i saw Orakpo play, he pretty much disappeared.

Just wait til you see him in the NFL.

JASONSAUTO
03-01-2009, 05:26 PM
Just wait til you see him in the NFL.

or not(because he disappeared)

bdeg
03-01-2009, 05:29 PM
haha I was going to add "if he makes the field" but must have forgot.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 05:29 PM
I don't know think you can go by that... You just have to trust your scouting department to get the best guy in the class, ya know?

Yes I agree trading down is the best option, but you can't count on that. I don't think anyone i going to want the pick. If it happens great, if not it's either Raji or Brown. Neither one is perfect at this spot, we'll see what happens.

Both are necessary components IF we do indeed switch to the 3-4. Most prospect rankings have these guys as second or third options at their position. The key you guys seems to have picked up on is how they are projected to play in a 3-4. Both are projected to do their best in that scheme. Again, third or fourth best at their position.... draft either one at #3 overall and heads will turn. Expect a lot of shitty draft grades.

Grades be damned. If it works best & it is what our new FO/braintrust thinks is best, so be it. So far, so good as their performance has gone thus far.

Chiefnj2
03-01-2009, 05:32 PM
They put Levi Brown on the right side on purpose because Leinart is left-handed,therefore his blindside is the right.

How many teams move their LOT to ROT when a lefty QB comes in?

milkman
03-01-2009, 05:38 PM
So if we stay at #3, don't trade down, as the roster stands today, the "studious draft experts" would take Raji?

And what do we do w/ Dorsey? Chuck him in the garbage? Seems to me we're doing worse with him than what you're bemoaning wrt Albert.

The difference is that Albert doesn't become virtually worthless in a new scheme.

Dorsey, in a switch to a 34, doesn't have a position.

He's a smallish DT, whose athleticism and quicks should be used to shoot gaps, get penetration in the backfield and disrupt plays.

He doesn't have the size to be a space eater in the middle of a 34 to take on double teams and keep LBs clean to make plays.

He also doesn't have the ideal size (read short) to be a DE in a 34, though that is where he will probably be moved.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 05:39 PM
The difference is that Albert doesn't become virtually worthless in a new scheme.

Dorsey, in a switch to a 34, doesn't have a position.

He's a smallish DT, whose athleticism and quicks should be used to shoot gaps, get penetration in the backfield and disrupt plays.

He doesn't have the size to be a space eater in the middle of a 34 to take on double teams and keep LBs clean to make plays.

He also doesn't have the ideal size (read short) to be a DE in a 34, though that is where he will probably be moved.

Albert at RT = worthless? Really?

I had not realized the right side of the OL was so insignificant. thanks for the update! :thumb:

ChiefsCountry
03-01-2009, 05:40 PM
Albert at RT = worthless? Really?


Pretty freaking stupid is what it is.

milkman
03-01-2009, 05:40 PM
So the odd man out then becomes? Hali? Tyler? McBride?

Again, we're chucking one of our high DL drafts.

The only high draft pick really worth a damn that we'd be chucking is Dorsey.

Hali is just a body

Tyler has the frame to add weight and be a contributor as a NT to spell whoever we pick up to start there, IMO, and McBride can play DE in 34.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 05:42 PM
Pretty freaking stupid is what it is.

Mmm hmm, so much dumber than dumping the #5 overall pick last season. Yeah, sure. Thanks for your input. No, seriously, it made us all the smarter for having read it.

ChiefsCountry
03-01-2009, 05:44 PM
Mmm hmm, so much dumber than dumping the #5 overall pick last season. Yeah, sure. Thanks for your input. No, seriously, it made us all the smarter for having read it.

I never wanted to dump Dorsey. Its Pioli and the Parcells gang that has a raging hard on for the shitty 3-4.

milkman
03-01-2009, 05:47 PM
Albert at RT = worthless? Really?

I had not realized the right side of the OL was so insignificant. thanks for the update! :thumb:

I didn't say that.

Albert's value doesn't diminish as LT if we switch schemes.

Of course you knew that's exactly what I mean't.
You just wanted to play dumbass.

Mr. Krab
03-01-2009, 05:48 PM
I still the Dorsey can be productive as a RDE in a 3-4 because the OLB will lineup outside and push him inside, as if he was a 3 technique in a 4-3.

milkman
03-01-2009, 05:49 PM
I never wanted to dump Dorsey. Its Pioli and the Parcells gang that has a raging hard on for the shitty 3-4.

Who is the Pioli and Parcells gang?

Are you referring to the Chiefs new brass or a group on the board?

ChiefsCountry
03-01-2009, 05:50 PM
Who is the Pioli and Parcells gang?

Are you referring to the Chiefs new brass or a group on the board?

Chiefs new brass

bdeg
03-01-2009, 05:53 PM
How many teams move their LOT to ROT when a lefty QB comes in?

It's a fact. A lefty qb didn't jut "come in," they drafted those players to be their cornerstones of the future.

HC_Chief
03-01-2009, 05:56 PM
I didn't say that.

Albert's value doesn't diminish as LT if we switch schemes.

Of course you knew that's exactly what I mean't.
You just wanted to play dumbass.

Again, how does Albert's "value diminish" in a move to RT? He is not a "natural LT"; he played multiple positions in college. Why do you think he would be incapable of playing RT?

He did pretty well last year at LT. If he stays there, great... but I have little doubt he would do just as well at the right tackle position, allowing KC to draft a LT and bookend their OL for a decade.

The caveat is they are stuck at #3. Drop down, and forget drafting the LT; go LB or DE/OLB.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2009, 06:03 PM
I never wanted to dump Dorsey. Its Pioli and the Parcells gang that has a raging hard on for the shitty 3-4.

Why is it shitty? Almost every team that runs it is a top 10 defense.

What's dumber is refusing to change your scheme when there is only one key player on your roster who doesn't fit into it. The Chiefs are practically at square 1 on defense. If there was ever a time in their history to consider moving to a 3-4, last year would have been perfect, but this year is just as good. I like Dorsey, but sorry, a 3-4 defense is a ton easier to build than a 4-3 and it will be worth sacrificing that #5 pick that was wasted, assuming that he doesn't find a role in this defense.

milkman
03-01-2009, 06:03 PM
Again, how does Albert's "value diminish" in a move to RT? He is not a "natural LT"; he played multiple positions in college. Why do you think he would be incapable of playing RT?

He did pretty well last year at LT. If he stays there, great... but I have little doubt he would do just as well at the right tackle position, allowing KC to draft a LT and bookend their OL for a decade.

The caveat is they are stuck at #3. Drop down, and forget drafting the LT; go LB or DE/OLB.

CAN YOU NOT FUCKING READ?

This was about how Dorsey's value diminishes as DT as a result of a scheme change.

Albert's value as a LT does not diminish as a result of a scheme change, so he isn't moved to another position.

This has nothing to do with wether he has value as a RT.

This only has to do with his position not being affected as the result of a scheme change.

But teh fact is, if you insist on talking about moving him to RT, his value does diminish because a RT is not as valuable as a LT.

bdeg
03-01-2009, 06:06 PM
Why is it shitty? Almost every team that runs it is a top 10 defense.

What's dumber is refusing to change your scheme when there is only one key player on your roster who doesn't fit into it. The Chiefs are practically at square 1 on defense. If there was ever a time in their history to consider moving to a 3-4, last year would have been perfect, but this year is just as good. I like Dorsey, but sorry, a 3-4 defense is a ton easier to build than a 4-3 and it will be worth sacrificing that #5 pick that was wasted, assuming that he doesn't find a role in this defense.

Well said. I did not want to type all that out. Not only is it probably easier to build, the boss thinks it's better. One pick that hasn't proved anything isn't going to change his mind.

milkman
03-01-2009, 06:07 PM
Oh, and the fact is that Albert is a natural LT, who just happened to play guard in college because Al Groh didn't believe that Monroe had the athleticism and versatility that Albert possessed to man the guard position in his offense.

But Albert has all the naturaal tools you look for in a LT.

Big, strong, athletic, huge wingspan and "Dancer's feet".

There isn't a single LT in this draft that has all the natural physical tools at LT that Albert has.

ChiefsCountry
03-01-2009, 06:07 PM
3-4 easier to find players. You guys are on crack if you think that. There is reason why were ever Parcells goes he takes the same guys around with him.

chiefzilla1501
03-01-2009, 06:10 PM
Again, how does Albert's "value diminish" in a move to RT? He is not a "natural LT"; he played multiple positions in college. Why do you think he would be incapable of playing RT?

He did pretty well last year at LT. If he stays there, great... but I have little doubt he would do just as well at the right tackle position, allowing KC to draft a LT and bookend their OL for a decade.

The caveat is they are stuck at #3. Drop down, and forget drafting the LT; go LB or DE/OLB.

Because it's common knowledge that you put your best lineman at left tackle and you put a much lower-grade linemen on the right side. The left tackle has to have extremely quick feet because defenses always put their most explosive pass rusher on the blind side of the quarterback. That's why guys like Jonathan Ogden, Willie Roaf, Walter Jones, etc... are the ones who get the limelight and they all play left tackle. NO TEAM will put their best tackle on the right side. None. That's why teams use very high draft picks consistently on left tackles, but most tackles that grade out as right tackles at best always end up going around the late first at best.

It requires an entirely different skill set. Right tackles don't have to be outstanding because they usually have a tight end lined up next to them to provide them help. The left tackle, on the other hand, is almost always put on an island and has to go one-on-one with a pass rusher. And because they usually square up against the defense's second-best pass rusher, they usually don't have to be that quick. Most defenses will put up a bigger pass rusher against a RT because they know the DE will have to chip against both a RT and a TE. The point being that a player as talented as Albert would be wasted in a RT role because that's a position that usually gets a lot of help from the TEs and usually lines up against inferior pass rushers anyway. In a guard role, it's even a bigger waste of his talents because guards simply are not as important as tackles.