PDA

View Full Version : Who does the Planet want the Chiefs to pick at #3?


ILChief
03-07-2009, 08:14 PM
who do you want

Nightfyre
03-07-2009, 09:04 PM
raji/sanchez

melbar
03-08-2009, 01:04 AM
Curry or Raji

CupidStunt
03-08-2009, 01:43 AM
Whichever pass-rusher Pioli likes best, ideally at No. 7 or 8 but ultimately I'm sure at No. 3.

philfree
03-08-2009, 07:02 AM
It's Curry unless Pioli swings a trade. Curry's hands down the best player in this draft positional value be damned.


PhilFree:arrow:

Go Mizzou & Chiefs
03-08-2009, 09:04 AM
maclin or orakapo

milkman
03-08-2009, 09:17 AM
maclin or orakapo

Holy Shit!

:banghead:

The Bad Guy
03-08-2009, 09:31 AM
maclin or orakapo

Just when you thought they couldn't get any dumber.

Coogs
03-08-2009, 09:35 AM
I was on the Stafford/Sanchez bandwagon, so I am not really sure right now what direction I would like to see us go.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-08-2009, 09:36 AM
A Shane Douglas Quarterback.

suds79
03-08-2009, 09:57 AM
If both QBs are still on the board, I'd be pretty disappointed if they didn't hold that as ransom to trade down.

Then they could still (if they don't drop too far) draft Raji and you have your NT for the 3-4.

... Or this might seem crazy but say they don't have any takers right at that moment. Would it be so bad to still draft Stafford if he is indeed the BPA at the time?

They could always trade later in the draft if they want to.

I would have to think the 49ers at #10 would have to be interested.

Coogs
03-08-2009, 10:08 AM
If we do go to the 3-4, is Raji really a long term solution to the NT position? Or would waiting one year and going with Cody be the better option?

And I agree with you on the QB thing as well. If we remain at #3 and one of the QB is the best player available, I wouldn't really mind if we took that player either.

Short Leash Hootie
03-08-2009, 10:13 AM
I'm officially on the Aaron Curry bandwagon. The dude has all-pro written all over him...I don't give a shit about his "positional value"...if he goes to the pro bowl every year, he's worth the #3 pick.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-08-2009, 10:37 AM
I'm officially on the Aaron Curry bandwagon. The dude has all-pro written all over him...I don't give a shit about his "positional value"...if he goes to the pro bowl every year, he's worth the #3 pick.

A really good, but not great nose tackle is more important to a defense than any Mike backer.

Look at the 49ers. The best MLB in the game, a good DE, a very good corner, and they are 23rd in defense.

Look at the Browns. They have Shaun Rogers, two good inside backers, an underwhelming secondary, no pass rush, and they finished 16th

Coogs
03-08-2009, 11:01 AM
A really good, but not great nose tackle is more important to a defense than any Mike backer.

Look at the 49ers. The best MLB in the game, a good DE, a very good corner, and they are 23rd in defense.

Look at the Browns. They have Shaun Rogers, two good inside backers, an underwhelming secondary, no pass rush, and they finished 16th

But since this is not a 1 year fix, would it be wrong to add a Curry this season and a Cody next season? Wouldn't the 3-4 be more Ravens and Steelers like in the long run?

Short Leash Hootie
03-08-2009, 11:29 AM
A really good, but not great nose tackle is more important to a defense than any Mike backer.

Look at the 49ers. The best MLB in the game, a good DE, a very good corner, and they are 23rd in defense.

Look at the Browns. They have Shaun Rogers, two good inside backers, an underwhelming secondary, no pass rush, and they finished 16th

Then lets hope we can find a really good nose tackle somewhere down the line.

The Bad Guy
03-08-2009, 11:37 AM
A Shane Douglas Quarterback.

The Franchise.

DeezNutz
03-08-2009, 12:01 PM
But since this is not a 1 year fix, would it be wrong to add a Curry this season and a Cody next season? Wouldn't the 3-4 be more Ravens and Steelers like in the long run?

You make a great case about Cody, and you're right: the Chiefs would likely be better served with him than Raji.

With that said, high-quality NT's are tough to find that fit the 3-4, and if Raji grades out, according to the powers that be, he has to be the pick.

We can't hope to be in position to take a specific player next year. There are too many variables. Chiefs could be picking 7th or 8th, and Cody could long be off the board, for example.

Mr. Krab
03-08-2009, 12:02 PM
1st option - trade down a few slots
2nd option - take BPA even if that's a Quarterback

I want the best available player and don't wanna hear this "An OLB isn't a position worth the 3rd pick". We trade down if we can, but we should grab the best player, period.

keg in kc
03-08-2009, 12:02 PM
The best long-snapper or kicker we can find. Positional value be damned.

Mr. Krab
03-08-2009, 12:11 PM
NT B.J. Raji this year and DE George Selvie next year?

Mr. Krab
03-08-2009, 12:12 PM
The best long-snapper or kicker we can find. Positional value be damned.
There's nothing like a good exaggeration to start off the day.

Ultra Peanut
03-08-2009, 12:17 PM
bleh

Ultra Peanut
03-08-2009, 12:18 PM
A Shane Douglas Quarterback.Someone who works at Target?

suds79
03-08-2009, 01:25 PM
I think Cody is going to be just a nasty NT in the NFL but with more & more teams going to the 3-4 eveybody and their mom will be after him.

Who knows where he'll go. We might not get a shot at him.

RustShack
03-08-2009, 01:38 PM
Its going to be Crabtree.

Brock
03-08-2009, 02:21 PM
I think a Pioli type thing to do is to trade down and pick up somebody like Clay Matthews. Most of the players at the top are real mysteries.

ncCHIEFfan
03-08-2009, 02:53 PM
I am not sure who we should or should not get but isn't it exciting having a new front office (that for now I trust) and have no clue what direction we are going!

Mr. Krab
03-08-2009, 03:02 PM
I think Cody is going to be just a nasty NT in the NFL but with more & more teams going to the 3-4 eveybody and their mom will be after him.

Who knows where he'll go. We might not get a shot at him.There are things that we could do this year to give us a better chance at Cody next year. If we trade anyone we could trade for a draft pick next year. If we trade down, we could look for picks next year as well. I believe that the value of a traded draft pick is valued at 1 round lower if it's for next year.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-08-2009, 04:39 PM
People act like Aaron Curry is a surefire can't miss player. I suggest they check out the history of the draft. The safest picks are often no safer than any other pick.

He's basically Derrick Johnson in a weaker draft class for defensive players.

ChiefsCountry
03-08-2009, 04:47 PM
Everrette Brown is the pass rusher but I think #6 is his ceiling where he could go.

philfree
03-08-2009, 04:51 PM
People act like Aaron Curry is a surefire can't miss player. I suggest they check out the history of the draft. The safest picks are often no safer than any other pick.

He's basically Derrick Johnson in a weaker draft class for defensive players.

He's a totally different type player then DJ. IMO people like Curry because they think he's the best player in the draft not because they think he's a safe pick.


PhilFree:arrow:

Basileus777
03-08-2009, 05:02 PM
I didn't really get to see Raji play enough to really get a grip on how I feel he'll pan out as a NT. If he's a legit NT, I'd take him, reach or not. I don't believe trading down is feasible.

old_geezer
03-08-2009, 05:09 PM
At this moment (and I say this because I'm not sure what Pioli will do on the player front before the actual draft) my choices would be;

1. Stafford if he is there at #3, and look for a possible trade partner. But IMO he is the best player available and we don't leave him there for someone else.

2. Aaron Curry - best defensive player available and fixing our defense is going to take more than 1 year or 1 player.

3. B J Raji would not upset me too much if we indeed are going to switch to a 3-4 this year.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-08-2009, 05:13 PM
He's a totally different type player then DJ.

Please back this up.

Mr. Krab
03-08-2009, 05:18 PM
Please back this up.
Just watch Curry play

He might be similar in size but he plays much bigger and more physical. My opinion.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-08-2009, 05:24 PM
Just watch Curry play

He might be similar in size but he plays much bigger and more physical. My opinion.

Same size.
Same speed.
Same measureables
Same role in college.
Same stats.

Played against weaker competition.

There was one negative on DJ, and that was his ability to shed blocks. Curry does that better than him.

However, DJ is a much more fluid and is better in coverage.

Other than that, they are remarkably similar.

Another player that he compares almost identically to is DJ Williams.

Mr. Krab
03-08-2009, 05:28 PM
Same size.
Same speed.
Same measureables
Same role in college.
Same stats.

Played against weaker competition.

There was one negative on DJ, and that was his ability to shed blocks. Curry does that better than him.

However, DJ is a much more fluid and is better in coverage.

Other than that, they are remarkably similar.

Another player that he compares almost identically to is DJ Williams.
You are looking at stats and i am going by watching them play. I don't know what to tell you but i don't find them similar at all.

Sam Hall
03-08-2009, 05:42 PM
Interesting stat: Ray Lewis has 28 career interceptions. Curry had six at Wake Forest and took three to the house.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-08-2009, 05:50 PM
You are looking at stats and i am going by watching them play. I don't know what to tell you but i don't find them similar at all.

How many Wake Forest games did you watch last year?

milkman
03-08-2009, 05:54 PM
Interesting stat: Ray Lewis has 28 career interceptions. Curry had six at Wake Forest and took three to the house.

Interceptions are usualy the reult of a bad pass, bad decison, or poor vision by the QB, and rarely the result of any great effort by the interceptor.

CaliforniaChief
03-08-2009, 05:56 PM
The Curry phenomenon is media-driven. They like guys that are charismatic and do well in the combine. That's a smart kid getting good advice, about to get a good paycheck.

But for us, where we are today...we've gotta get a pass rush. Whether there's a gem at DE or Raji can get the kind of attention in the middle that allows other guys to get into the backfield, that seems to me to be our number one priority.

Spicy McHaggis
03-08-2009, 05:58 PM
Interceptions are usualy the reult of a bad pass, bad decison, or poor vision by the QB, and rarely the result of any great effort by the interceptor.

So it wasn't Bartee's fault!

Man, I feel like an asshole now.

Sam Hall
03-08-2009, 06:00 PM
Interceptions are usualy the reult of a bad pass, bad decison, or poor vision by the QB, and rarely the result of any great effort by the interceptor.

I don't think the interceptions can be taken away from either player.

milkman
03-08-2009, 06:10 PM
So it wasn't Bartee's fault!

Man, I feel like an asshole now.

Clearly you have to be able to move your head and be in position to make the play, however, unless I'm mistaken, Greg Wesley led the Chiefs in interceptions at least once, if not twice.

So, I guess, based on that, we let a great player get away.

Spicy McHaggis
03-08-2009, 06:13 PM
Clearly you have to be able to move your head and be in position to make the play, however, unless I'm mistaken, Greg Wesley led the Chiefs in interceptions at least once, if not twice.

So, I guess, based on that, we let a great player get away.

Truly, the 2000's have been a spectacular era of Chiefs secondary play.

philfree
03-08-2009, 06:20 PM
Please back this up.

The biggest thing that Curry does is take on blocks shed them and then make the tackle. He goes through blockers not around them. I also think has a lower pad level then DJ. I think his mental make up is different too from what I saw in his interview that's on the NFL network.


PhilFree:arrow:

keg in kc
03-08-2009, 06:39 PM
There's nothing like a good exaggeration to start off the day.Somebody woke up on the wrong side of their sense of humor today.

bigdreams1
03-08-2009, 06:44 PM
in an ideal situation we trade down. that is very unlikely though and i would go with Curry if that is the case.

chop
03-08-2009, 06:45 PM
NT B.J. Raji this year and DE George Selvie next year?

How many DL should the Chiefs draft with their top picks? I am getting so tired of them drafting DL and not having much luck.

In just the last few years here is what round and pick we used on a DL:

2008 - 1st Round - Glenn Dorsey


2007 - 2nd Round - Turk McBride
3rd Round - Tank Tyler

2006 - 1st Round - Tamba Haley

2004 - 2nd Round (no first round pick) Junior Siavii

2002 - 1st Round - Ryan Sims
2nd Round - Eddie Freeman

2001 - 3rd Round (no 1st or 2nd picks) Eric Downing

2001 - 2007 The Chiefs used 7 of the 18 picks in the first three rounds on defensive lineman.

2001 - 2008 - The Chiefs used their top overall pick on defensive lineman 5 out of the 8 years.

I am getting tired of them wasting the top draft picks on defensive lineman.

DeezNutz
03-08-2009, 06:53 PM
Interceptions are usualy the reult of a bad pass, bad decison, or poor vision by the QB, and rarely the result of any great effort by the interceptor.

I agree that "usually" this is the case with all INT's, but I think you could state this even more strongly when talking about INT's by LB's.

DeezNutz
03-08-2009, 06:54 PM
How many DL should the Chiefs draft with their top picks? I am getting so tired of them drafting DL and not having much luck.

In just the last few years here is what round and pick we used on a DL:

2008 - 1st Round - Glenn Dorsey


2007 - 2nd Round - Turk McBride
3rd Round - Tank Tyler

2006 - 1st Round - Tamba Haley

2004 - 2nd Round (no first round pick) Junior Siavii

2002 - 1st Round - Ryan Sims
2nd Round - Eddie Freeman

2001 - 3rd Round (no 1st or 2nd picks) Eric Downing

2001 - 2007 The Chiefs used 7 of the 18 picks in the first three rounds on defensive lineman.

2001 - 2008 - The Chiefs used their top overall pick on defensive lineman 5 out of the 8 years.

I am getting tired of them wasting the top draft picks on defensive lineman.

Might as well pretend that the DV years didn't even happen. Herm wasn't exactly a great evaluator of talent, but in comparison to Grandpa, fuck, pretty much anyone looks like a tremendous upgrade.

Halfcan
03-08-2009, 07:00 PM
curry

Mr. Krab
03-08-2009, 08:14 PM
How many Wake Forest games did you watch last year?
3 or 4 games but it's hard to tell because i channel flip so much i don't usually watch the entire game.

Mr. Krab
03-08-2009, 08:15 PM
How many DL should the Chiefs draft with their top picks? I am getting so tired of them drafting DL and not having much luck.

In just the last few years here is what round and pick we used on a DL:

2008 - 1st Round - Glenn Dorsey


2007 - 2nd Round - Turk McBride
3rd Round - Tank Tyler

2006 - 1st Round - Tamba Haley

2004 - 2nd Round (no first round pick) Junior Siavii

2002 - 1st Round - Ryan Sims
2nd Round - Eddie Freeman

2001 - 3rd Round (no 1st or 2nd picks) Eric Downing

2001 - 2007 The Chiefs used 7 of the 18 picks in the first three rounds on defensive lineman.

2001 - 2008 - The Chiefs used their top overall pick on defensive lineman 5 out of the 8 years.

I am getting tired of them wasting the top draft picks on defensive lineman.
We keep drafting them until they stop wasting them and actually get it right, i guess. What choice do we have?

KCUnited
03-08-2009, 09:20 PM
How many DL should the Chiefs draft with their top picks? I am getting so tired of them drafting DL and not having much luck.

In just the last few years here is what round and pick we used on a DL:

2008 - 1st Round - Glenn Dorsey


2007 - 2nd Round - Turk McBride
3rd Round - Tank Tyler

2006 - 1st Round - Tamba Haley

2004 - 2nd Round (no first round pick) Junior Siavii

2002 - 1st Round - Ryan Sims
2nd Round - Eddie Freeman

2001 - 3rd Round (no 1st or 2nd picks) Eric Downing

2001 - 2007 The Chiefs used 7 of the 18 picks in the first three rounds on defensive lineman.

2001 - 2008 - The Chiefs used their top overall pick on defensive lineman 5 out of the 8 years.

I am getting tired of them wasting the top draft picks on defensive lineman.

I get being Todd's son may get a guy a spot, but Tamba sucks. I'm not advocating Curry at 3, but he's DJ with a brain, and DJ with a brain is a pro bowler. I'd take Raji for value at #3.

Blick
03-08-2009, 09:28 PM
Trade down if they can.

If not, I'm good with any of those options except the QB's.

Halfcan
03-08-2009, 09:29 PM
We need a leader on D-Curry sounds like a great leader. BJ sounds like a fatass that has tried really hard lately at the right time. Bust is written all over him. Curry is getting rav reviews. Oh and we need a LB in a very bad way.

Halfcan
03-08-2009, 09:31 PM
We keep drafting them until they stop wasting them and actually get it right, i guess. What choice do we have?

Great thinking-lets use ALL of our picks til we get one. :)

FD
03-08-2009, 09:54 PM
How many DL should the Chiefs draft with their top picks? I am getting so tired of them drafting DL and not having much luck.

In just the last few years here is what round and pick we used on a DL:

2008 - 1st Round - Glenn Dorsey


2007 - 2nd Round - Turk McBride
3rd Round - Tank Tyler

2006 - 1st Round - Tamba Haley

2004 - 2nd Round (no first round pick) Junior Siavii

2002 - 1st Round - Ryan Sims
2nd Round - Eddie Freeman

2001 - 3rd Round (no 1st or 2nd picks) Eric Downing

2001 - 2007 The Chiefs used 7 of the 18 picks in the first three rounds on defensive lineman.

2001 - 2008 - The Chiefs used their top overall pick on defensive lineman 5 out of the 8 years.

I am getting tired of them wasting the top draft picks on defensive lineman.

We tried to make our d-line good, but it is bad. Therefore, we should not try to make it good. Is that about right?

chop
03-08-2009, 10:08 PM
We tried to make our d-line good, but it is bad. Therefore, we should not try to make it good. Is that about right?

Yeah, that is what I said. :shake:

Danman
03-09-2009, 05:32 AM
We keep drafting them until they stop wasting them and actually get it right, i guess. What choice do we have?

And yet, many oppose drafting QBs with top draft choices for the same reason. . . Don't worry, I'm not trying to hijack the thread, though I wanted Sanchez before Cassell. I think the Chiefs are hopeful somebody will fall in love with Curry and want to trade up to get him. I expect us to be big traders with our picks under Pioli.

Brock
03-09-2009, 07:08 AM
And yet, many oppose drafting QBs with top draft choices for the same reason. . ..

That's exactly right. Past draft failures should be irrelevant.

Coogs
03-09-2009, 08:30 AM
We tried to make our d-line good, but it is bad. Therefore, we should not try to make it good. Is that about right?

I have hope that just getting rid of Gun will improve our front 7 big time. I know some will try and pin it on Herm, but we saw the sme thing under DV as well. Gun had all kinds of top draft picks and FA's brought in at his request under both HC's, and did squat with them. And many of those guys went other places and preformed at a level that they did not show here.

Here is hoping the new regime will make players out of the high draft picks we already have on board.

Chiefnj2
03-09-2009, 08:50 AM
Who will KC draft? I think Pioli is a risk averse type person. That explains the Cassel decision. So, I think he will do one of two things at the #3 pick (assuming they keep the pick).

Option 1, protect his investment at QB. GMs and coaches make or break their careers on their QB decisions/indecisions. Cassel was Pioli's first major move. I can't imagine he will be content to protect him with last years OL, nor will he rely on last year's OL to open up holes for the running game and take some pressure off of Cassel. Monroe or Smith seem the likely choices.

Option 2, take the best player available, which is Curry. The lowest risk pick at a position of need. Not great value, but getting a potential pro bowl quality defender never hurts.

DeezNutz
03-09-2009, 09:01 AM
I think Pioli is a risk averse type person.

First of all, no such thing.

But if it's true, as you're applying the above, I hope Pioli is fired this afternoon.

DaKCMan AP
03-09-2009, 09:01 AM
NT B.J. Raji this year and DE George Selvie next year?

There are much better DE's than Selvie who will be available in 2010.

Chief Roundup
03-09-2009, 09:14 AM
Who will KC draft? I think Pioli is a risk averse type person. That explains the Cassel decision. So, I think he will do one of two things at the #3 pick (assuming they keep the pick).

Option 1, protect his investment at QB. GMs and coaches make or break their careers on their QB decisions/indecisions. Cassel was Pioli's first major move. I can't imagine he will be content to protect him with last years OL, nor will he rely on last year's OL to open up holes for the running game and take some pressure off of Cassel. Monroe or Smith seem the likely choices.

Option 2, take the best player available, which is Curry. The lowest risk pick at a position of need. Not great value, but getting a potential pro bowl quality defender never hurts.

Well picking another OL at 3 is risky as well. You may get a good OL but it is a risky move for the team as a whole especially when we can get a RT, RG, C in 3rd and later.

Chiefnj2
03-09-2009, 09:22 AM
Well picking another OL at 3 is risky as well. You may get a good OL but it is a risky move for the team as a whole especially when we can get a RT, RG, C in 3rd and later.

Most teams can get a C, G or ROT in the 3rd or later. KC hasn't done so well trying to fill those positions with later round picks or free agents.

For years KC had a great OL with Roaf and Shields as the cornerstones. It isn't an ideal situation, but if KC takes Monroe and plays him at LOT and moves Albert to G or RT things could be worse.

htismaqe
03-09-2009, 09:35 AM
Option 1, protect his investment at QB. GMs and coaches make or break their careers on their QB decisions/indecisions. Cassel was Pioli's first major move. I can't imagine he will be content to protect him with last years OL, nor will he rely on last year's OL to open up holes for the running game and take some pressure off of Cassel. Monroe or Smith seem the likely choices.

This is precisely why I think Pioli is going to do everything in his power to try and trade down.

He's not gonna take Smith or Monroe. But I do think if he could trade down once, or even twice, we'd take OL with 2 of our 1st-day picks.

ChiefRon
03-09-2009, 09:44 AM
I think the 1st option Pioli would look for would be to trade down. This might work out if Stafford is still on the board, but chances are still slim due to the compensation required to move into the #3 spot.

If unable to trade down, I bet he targets the offensive or defensive line. He has shown a history of using 1 round picks on the defensive line. I include offensive line simply because of the reasoning behind protecting his investment in Cassel.

A LT could explain why no moves have been made to upgrade the offensive line. Maybe he's thinking "Draft Monroe, move Albert to LG, move Waters to C, Move Niswanger to RG, draft RT in 3rd, 4th, or 5th round"?? Sounds far-fetched, but otherwise I have no idea why we didn't target upgrades on the offensive line. If we do sign somebody, maybe that will throw this scenario out the window...

Having said all that, I bet it's Raji. How many 1st rounders did he use to assemble that DL in NE?

Chiefnj2
03-09-2009, 09:52 AM
This is precisely why I think Pioli is going to do everything in his power to try and trade down.

He's not gonna take Smith or Monroe. But I do think if he could trade down once, or even twice, we'd take OL with 2 of our 1st-day picks.

I agree that his primary goal would be to trade down, but since the draft chart is so highly flawed as to the top 3 picks, trading down becomes near impossible. I've said for a while that they should talk to Detroit for the 20th, 33rd, a 3rd and picks in 2010. This way KC could grab a LB or DE with the 20th and a top lineman with the 33rd.

htismaqe
03-09-2009, 10:22 AM
I agree that his primary goal would be to trade down, but since the draft chart is so highly flawed as to the top 3 picks, trading down becomes near impossible. I've said for a while that they should talk to Detroit for the 20th, 33rd, a 3rd and picks in 2010. This way KC could grab a LB or DE with the 20th and a top lineman with the 33rd.

We have to hope Detroit passes on Stafford. If he does, there will be a market for our pick.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-09-2009, 10:57 AM
Most teams can get a C, G or ROT in the 3rd or later. KC hasn't done so well trying to fill those positions with later round picks or free agents.

For years KC had a great OL with Roaf and Shields as the cornerstones. It isn't an ideal situation, but if KC takes Monroe and plays him at LOT and moves Albert to G or RT things could be worse.

Why are you comparing Peterson's picks to Pioli's yet undetermined picks? Whether or not we fanned on OL with Peterson is as relevant as to whether or not we fanned with Steadman.

The fact of the matter is that it's just bad value to spend a top 3 pick on a guy whose LT ceiling is no more than incrementally better, if that, of a guy you spent less money on last year.

If you want to trade down and take an O-lineman with mid-round picks, have at it, but it's just mind-boggling to want to tie up LT money into two players on one line, when you already have one who can play LT at a very high level.

Willie Roaf really fucked up this fanbase.

Ebolapox
03-09-2009, 11:03 AM
We need a leader on D-Curry sounds like a great leader. BJ sounds like a fatass that has tried really hard lately at the right time. Bust is written all over him. Curry is getting rav reviews. Oh and we need a LB in a very bad way.

aundrey bruce got rave reviews in the day. your point is?

Chiefnj2
03-09-2009, 11:15 AM
Why are you comparing Peterson's picks to Pioli's yet undetermined picks? Whether or not we fanned on OL with Peterson is as relevant as to whether or not we fanned with Steadman.

The fact of the matter is that it's just bad value to spend a top 3 pick on a guy whose LT ceiling is no more than incrementally better, if that, of a guy you spent less money on last year.

If you want to trade down and take an O-lineman with mid-round picks, have at it, but it's just mind-boggling to want to tie up LT money into two players on one line, when you already have one who can play LT at a very high level.

Willie Roaf really ****ed up this fanbase.

This years draft is bad value all around the top 10 unless you need a LOT. It isn't a matter of "wanting" to tie up money in another LT. The top players will likely be LOTs and Curry. Under your line of reasoning your only other choice is to reach for someone like Orakpo or Brown. I'd take Monroe over Orakpo, positional value be damned.

Pestilence
03-09-2009, 11:19 AM
This years draft is bad value all around the top 10 unless you need a LOT. It isn't a matter of "wanting" to tie up money in another LT. The top players will likely be LOTs and Curry. Under your line of reasoning your only other choice is to reach for someone like Orakpo or Brown. I'd take Monroe over Orakpo, positional value be damned.

Did we forget about Stafford?

Direckshun
03-09-2009, 11:41 AM
I'm starting to get behind Raji.

Chiefnj2
03-09-2009, 11:43 AM
Did we forget about Stafford?

You think a QB is in play aside from being used as trade bait?

DeezNutz
03-09-2009, 11:48 AM
I'm starting to get behind Raji.

If we stay at 3, I think this is the pick.

And I'm going to vomit when thinking about what this likely means for Dorsey...

StcChief
03-09-2009, 12:02 PM
Trade down.... or Curry

ChiefsCountry
03-09-2009, 12:54 PM
If we stay at 3, I think this is the pick.

And I'm going to vomit when thinking about what this likely means for Dorsey...

Dorsey becomes Ty Warren.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-09-2009, 01:04 PM
Dorsey becomes Ty Warren.

-4 inches.

bowener
03-09-2009, 01:31 PM
I want to pick Jesus at #3.

-4 inches.

I was wondering about Dorsey's height again... He is the same weight, and 1/2 inch shorter than Igor Olshansky.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-09-2009, 01:34 PM
I want to pick Jesus at #3.



I was wondering about Dorsey's height again... He is the same weight, and 1/2 inch shorter than Igor Olshansky.

He's 5 inches shorter than Olshansky.

Pestilence
03-09-2009, 02:09 PM
I want to pick Jesus at #3.



I was wondering about Dorsey's height again... He is the same weight, and 1/2 inch shorter than Igor Olshansky.

Olshansky - 6'6" 309 lbs
Dorsey - 6'1" 297 lbs.

eazyb81
03-09-2009, 05:36 PM
Olshansky - 6'6" 309 lbs
Dorsey - 6'1" 297 lbs.

Yeah there really aren't any good 3-4 DEs that are as short as Dorsey. I'm not convinced he'll be able to do the job as an end in this scheme.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if we traded Dorsey sometime in the next year.

milkman
03-09-2009, 08:43 PM
This years draft is bad value all around the top 10 unless you need a LOT. It isn't a matter of "wanting" to tie up money in another LT. The top players will likely be LOTs and Curry. Under your line of reasoning your only other choice is to reach for someone like Orakpo or Brown. I'd take Monroe over Orakpo, positional value be damned.

So let's draft Monroe.

I mean, it doesn't matter that we'd be using the #3 overall to essentially fill the need at RT.

Positional value be damned.

Chiefnj2
03-10-2009, 07:09 AM
So let's draft Monroe.

I mean, it doesn't matter that we'd be using the #3 overall to essentially fill the need at RT.

Positional value be damned.

Better to have a pro bowl quality RT than a much bigger risk and more likely bust at DE/OLB.

Mr. Krab
03-10-2009, 10:02 AM
So let's draft Monroe.

I mean, it doesn't matter that we'd be using the #3 overall to essentially fill the need at RT.

Positional value be damned.
If they think Monroe is clearly the better talent then they should take him. If it's close, then take the position of bigger need.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-10-2009, 10:46 AM
So, Eugene Monroe will be the highest paid RT in football before he sets a foot on an NFL practice field, when he's never played the position.

That's a great fucking idea

Chiefnj2
03-10-2009, 11:05 AM
So, Eugene Monroe will be the highest paid RT in football before he sets a foot on an NFL practice field, when he's never played the position.

That's a great ****ing idea

If you are worried about the money put Monroe at LT and move Albert to RT. Now you have the 15th pick making RT money. Feel better?

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-10-2009, 11:20 AM
If you are worried about the money put Monroe at LT and move Albert to RT. Now you have the 15th pick making RT money. Feel better?

No.

I'm not convinced that Monroe can play LT appreciably better than Albert.

It's pretty simple:

Albert+the #3 pick (used on a defender or a quarterback)+ 3rd round RT

>

Albert + Monroe, + a 3rd rounder used on some other position.

BigChiefFan
03-10-2009, 11:27 AM
Give me the QB crushing NT, please.

Chiefnj2
03-10-2009, 05:29 PM
When is the last time a 3-4 NT was taken with a top 5 pick?

Go Mizzou & Chiefs
03-10-2009, 05:47 PM
Holy Shit!

:banghead:

i meant trade down and get Maclin or Orakpo

Pablo
03-10-2009, 05:54 PM
i meant trade down and get Maclin or OrakpoI like the way you think, but I wouldn't mind seeing Ziggy Hood or Moore in a Chiefs uni; no thanks to Orakpo.

patteeu
03-10-2009, 05:57 PM
Trade down, Curry, Raji, offensive or defensive lineman in that order.

Blick
03-10-2009, 09:21 PM
No.

I'm not convinced that Monroe can play LT appreciably better than Albert.

It's pretty simple:

Albert+the #3 pick (used on a defender or a quarterback)+ 3rd round RT

>

Albert + Monroe, + a 3rd rounder used on some other position.

So, getting two starters on the offensive line is stupid because we would be paying a RT #3 pick money, but it's OK to pay a backup QB a shitload of money?

No.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-10-2009, 09:31 PM
So, getting two starters on the offensive line is stupid because we would be paying a RT #3 pick money, but it's OK to pay a backup QB a shitload of money?

No.

Yeah, it is, because in two years, that backup will be your franchise QB.

Blick
03-10-2009, 09:43 PM
Yeah, it is, because in two years, that backup will be your franchise QB.

Yeah...except you don't know that for sure.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-10-2009, 09:46 PM
Yeah...except you don't know that for sure.

You don't know that OT is going to make it, either.

BigChiefFan
03-10-2009, 09:50 PM
When is the last time a 3-4 NT was taken with a top 5 pick?
Plenty of DTs go in the top 5, almost every year. NTs are harder to find and with the success of the 3-4, are becoming more in demand each year. I would also say, a NT hasn't been as highly regarded as Raji is, since Ngata.

Also, keep in mind, we can still run the 4-3 and have Raji as the OverTackle and Dorsey as the Under, which also better utilizes Dorsey's skillset. Raji gives us options to play the 3-4 AND the 4-3.

Blick
03-10-2009, 09:58 PM
You don't know that OT is going to make it, either.

I know that the OT would at least start.

htismaqe
03-11-2009, 09:44 AM
I know that the OT would at least start.

No you don't.

DaKCMan AP
03-11-2009, 09:51 AM
I know that the OT would at least start.

Like Trezelle Jenkins?

ChiefRon
03-11-2009, 09:55 AM
I would find it hilarious if we pick Sanchez.

In fact, if we were able to trade down, grab Sanchez, and recoup a 2nd round pick, I would be ecstatic.

It would show me that Pioli is extremely smart and planning for long-term. Keep Cassel on the franchise tender, see how he performs/adjusts to the Haley system, and determine if he is a long-term starter. If so, and Sanchez learns quickly as I expect, you have 2 franchise QBs which can be used to parlay into good compensation next year.

My respect for Pioli would multiply exponentially.

Unfortunately, I just don't think it will happen.

Blick
03-11-2009, 03:00 PM
No you don't.

Yeah...McIntosh is going to beat out the #3 pick.ROFL

Just like Herb Taylor snatched away Albert's LT job...oh wait.

Blick
03-11-2009, 03:02 PM
Like Trezelle Jenkins?

Is Carl Peterson still here?

htismaqe
03-11-2009, 03:52 PM
Yeah...McIntosh is going to beat out the #3 pick.ROFL

Just like Herb Taylor snatched away Albert's LT job...oh wait.

The 3# pick could blow out a knee in OTA's, or have a nervous breakdown and never play again.

Don't be stupid.

htismaqe
03-11-2009, 03:52 PM
Is Carl Peterson still here?

Carl Peterson didn't make Trezelle Jenkins not play well, Trezelle Jenkins did.

Seriously, is this all you have?

KCrockaholic
03-11-2009, 03:59 PM
So why does everyone seem to hate Orakpo so much? I picked Curry because hes the type of player we need. But I think Orakpo will be a pretty good pass rusher in the NFL whether its as an end or LB.

The Bad Guy
03-11-2009, 04:51 PM
I would find it hilarious if we pick Sanchez.

In fact, if we were able to trade down, grab Sanchez, and recoup a 2nd round pick, I would be ecstatic.

It would show me that Pioli is extremely smart and planning for long-term. Keep Cassel on the franchise tender, see how he performs/adjusts to the Haley system, and determine if he is a long-term starter. If so, and Sanchez learns quickly as I expect, you have 2 franchise QBs which can be used to parlay into good compensation next year.

My respect for Pioli would multiply exponentially.

Unfortunately, I just don't think it will happen.

I would punch Pioli in the face if he did this.

If he wanted Mark Sanchez, he would have never traded for Matt Cassel.

htismaqe
03-11-2009, 05:07 PM
So why does everyone seem to hate Orakpo so much? I picked Curry because hes the type of player we need. But I think Orakpo will be a pretty good pass rusher in the NFL whether its as an end or LB.

Orakpo disappeared in big games. He doesn't have a motor really at all and there's concerns he's just flat-out lazy.

Blick
03-11-2009, 06:11 PM
The 3# pick could blow out a knee in OTA's, or have a nervous breakdown and never play again.

Don't be stupid.

The QB you guys want at #3 could be the next Ryan Leaf.

Blick
03-11-2009, 06:24 PM
Carl Peterson didn't make Trezelle Jenkins not play well, Trezelle Jenkins did.

Seriously, is this all you have?

Seriously, are you advocating taking a QB at #3 when we: a) traded for Pioli's guy, b) have to pay Cassel the franchise tender, c) would have to pay a QB taken at #3 an absurd amount of guaranteed money for a guy who hasn't played a down in the NFL and will be a fucking backup, and d) don't have a 2nd round pick?

Wake the fuck up. Pioli is not going to take a QB with the 3rd pick in the draft after he just traded away a high 2nd round pick to get a QB he knows, trusts, and likes.

If he does, I'm going to be right behind The Bad Guy to knock Pioli the fuck out.

htismaqe
03-11-2009, 07:10 PM
Seriously, are you advocating taking a QB at #3 when we: a) traded for Pioli's guy, b) have to pay Cassel the franchise tender, c) would have to pay a QB taken at #3 an absurd amount of guaranteed money for a guy who hasn't played a down in the NFL and will be a ****ing backup, and d) don't have a 2nd round pick?

Wake the **** up. Pioli is not going to take a QB with the 3rd pick in the draft after he just traded away a high 2nd round pick to get a QB he knows, trusts, and likes.

If he does, I'm going to be right behind The Bad Guy to knock Pioli the **** out.

Actually, NO, I'm not advocating taking a QB at #3.

Jump to conclusions much?

Blick
03-11-2009, 07:36 PM
Actually, NO, I'm not advocating taking a QB at #3.

Jump to conclusions much?

So, then why are you arguing with me about taking a QB at #3 vs. getting a player who would LIKELY start.

ChiefRon
03-11-2009, 08:56 PM
I would punch Pioli in the face if he did this.

If he wanted Mark Sanchez, he would have never traded for Matt Cassel.

Why? You like putting all your eggs in one basket?

milkman
03-11-2009, 09:13 PM
So, then why are you arguing with me about taking a QB at #3 vs. getting a player who would LIKELY start.

I'm going to tell you what Htismaque won't.

You are seriously one dumbass fucker.

Blick
03-11-2009, 09:20 PM
I'm going to tell you what Htismaque won't.

You are seriously one dumbass ****er.

Care to back that statement up?

DeezNutz
03-11-2009, 09:24 PM
Care to back that statement up?

You don't know whether any player selected at #3 will start.

Stating so unequivocally is foolhardy.

And then you misinterpreted another poster's sentiments.

Thus the insult.

milkman
03-11-2009, 09:26 PM
Care to back that statement up?

Why?

Just go back and read through the thread, and actually try to comprehend what you're reading.

Htismaque isn't making any argument for drafting a QB at #3.

Blick
03-11-2009, 09:33 PM
You don't know whether any player selected at #3 will start.

Stating so unequivocally is foolhardy.

And then you misinterpreted another poster's sentiments.

Thus the insult.

I'm arguing that it's more likely for a non-QB to start than a QB since we have Cassel.

Blick
03-11-2009, 09:36 PM
Htismaque isn't making any argument for drafting a QB at #3.

I know. Hamas did. I disagreed, and Htismaque responded to one of my comments. I assumed he agreed with Hamas. Big deal.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-11-2009, 11:12 PM
Why? You like putting all your eggs in one basket?

I like this guy, but I always want to call him Captain Ron.

You got a problem with that, swab?

Bowser
03-11-2009, 11:30 PM
I hope we get a trade partner so we can trade down. But if we stay at #3, I am liking Curry at that spot. We need linebackers in the worst way right now.

ChiefsCountry
03-11-2009, 11:43 PM
I want a player that will help us win multiple Super Bowls.

KCChiefsMan
03-12-2009, 12:25 AM
Curry or Raji, otherwise trade down.

ChiefRon
03-12-2009, 08:40 AM
I like this guy, but I always want to call him Captain Ron.

You got a problem with that, swab?

Swab, Captain Ron, doesn't matter.

I'm sure I know some of you MF'rs from the games.

I'm the dude bitching about our conservative play-calling and our sucky ass defense and our terrible FO at the top of my lungs....errr, my game-day may be changing this year!

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 08:44 AM
So, then why are you arguing with me about taking a QB at #3 vs. getting a player who would LIKELY start.

Because taking Eugene Monroe at #3 is about the lowest you can get on the value scale. Dumb move.

Both Everette Brown and Curry would start instantly and they both play positions where we actually NEED help.

I hope to God we can trade down, because there's nobody going to be there at #3 that is really good value. But if we're forced to pick, we'd be far better off taking Curry or Brown, or even Raji, than taking Monroe and potentially moving Albert. That's too much money to wrap up in OT's and it WILL prevent us from competing for a championship in the future.

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 08:45 AM
I'm arguing that it's more likely for a non-QB to start than a QB since we have Cassel.

We also have a LT and one that played VERY well last year - as a ROOKIE.

With so many needs, taking another tackle just reeks of playing it safe.

ChiefRon
03-12-2009, 08:49 AM
Seriously, are you advocating taking a QB at #3 when we: a) traded for Pioli's guy, b) have to pay Cassel the franchise tender, c) would have to pay a QB taken at #3 an absurd amount of guaranteed money for a guy who hasn't played a down in the NFL and will be a ****ing backup, and d) don't have a 2nd round pick?

Wake the **** up. Pioli is not going to take a QB with the 3rd pick in the draft after he just traded away a high 2nd round pick to get a QB he knows, trusts, and likes.

If he does, I'm going to be right behind The Bad Guy to knock Pioli the **** out.

And I guess you will be the one bitching about Sanchez going to the pro bowl while we have this debate again in two or three years, if it pans out that way?

We have cap room, we're building for the long-term, why not have a 1 year trial for Cassel, see how he does with handling being a starter from the get-go, and have an insurance policy just in case. Stucture Sanchez's deal so he can be traded after two years if Cassel pans out.

This draft class is not that elite. The only other scenario with value is trading down, everything else seems to be a reach unless you're going to tie up that amount of money in the line instead of the QB...and then what are your options? What can you trade away a highly-paid RT for?

ChiefRon
03-12-2009, 08:53 AM
Because taking Eugene Monroe at #3 is about the lowest you can get on the value scale. Dumb move.

Both Everette Brown and Curry would start instantly and they both play positions where we actually NEED help.

I hope to God we can trade down, because there's nobody going to be there at #3 that is really good value. But if we're forced to pick, we'd be far better off taking Curry or Brown, or even Raji, than taking Monroe and potentially moving Albert. That's too much money to wrap up in OT's and it WILL prevent us from competing for a championship in the future.

I hear Orakpo is moving up quite a bit too.

Curry, Brown, Orakpo, Raji seem to be the most logical choices but none seem worthy.

I agree, trading down offers the best value.

Chiefnj2
03-12-2009, 08:54 AM
Because taking Eugene Monroe at #3 is about the lowest you can get on the value scale. Dumb move.

Both Everette Brown and Curry would start instantly and they both play positions where we actually NEED help.

I hope to God we can trade down, because there's nobody going to be there at #3 that is really good value. But if we're forced to pick, we'd be far better off taking Curry or Brown, or even Raji, than taking Monroe and potentially moving Albert. That's too much money to wrap up in OT's and it WILL prevent us from competing for a championship in the future.

Htis,

If you had a new franchise and you were given the first and 10th pick in this years draft, what would your top 10 draft board look like?

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 08:57 AM
The only other scenario with value is trading down, everything else seems to be a reach unless you're going to tie up that amount of money in the line instead of the QB...and then what are your options? What can you trade away a highly-paid RT for?

I would actually re-word that.

The ONLY scenario that has good value this year is trading down.

Getting Sanchez or Stafford has diminished value because of Cassel. Getting Monroe has diminished value because of Albert. Raji may have diminished value because of the uncertainty with Tank and Dorsey being able to fit the scheme.

Out of Curry, Brown, Orakpo, Raji, and Crabtree, none of them are really worth the #3 pick and all of them would be reaches to some degree.

All of that being said, a slight reach at a position of need where you have NOBODY has more positional value than taking somebody at position of strength just because they're the BPA.

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 08:58 AM
I hear Orakpo is moving up quite a bit too.

Curry, Brown, Orakpo, Raji seem to be the most logical choices but none seem worthy.

I agree, trading down offers the best value.

I don't like guys that move up AFTER the season. I'm not sold on Orakpo at all.

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 09:02 AM
Htis,

If you had a new franchise and you were given the first and 10th pick in this years draft, what would your top 10 draft board look like?

That's a very tough question given some of the info coming out the last few days. Particularly because I think the top of this draft is bad, nearly awful. I have red flags on pretty much everybody. Honestly, I'm taking a chance either way, so I think I would take Jason Smith #1 and see if Stafford or Sanchez (preferrably Sanchez) drops to #10. Although I'd be awfully tempted to take Sanchez at #1 and see if Andre Smith drops to #10.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 09:43 AM
You'd still rather have Andre Smith than Oher?

Chiefnj2
03-12-2009, 10:03 AM
That's a very tough question given some of the info coming out the last few days. Particularly because I think the top of this draft is bad, nearly awful. I have red flags on pretty much everybody. Honestly, I'm taking a chance either way, so I think I would take Jason Smith #1 and see if Stafford or Sanchez (preferrably Sanchez) drops to #10. Although I'd be awfully tempted to take Sanchez at #1 and see if Andre Smith drops to #10.

Would you have Brown and Orakpo on your top 10?

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 10:05 AM
You'd still rather have Andre Smith than Oher?

Didn't even think about Oher - just goes to show you how far he's dropped. :)

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 10:05 AM
Would you have Brown and Orakpo on your top 10?

Brown, yes. Orakpo, maybe.

KCrockaholic
03-12-2009, 10:11 AM
Orakpo disappeared in big games. He doesn't have a motor really at all and there's concerns he's just flat-out lazy.

I know he crushed Oklahoma, played very well against missouri, and was OK against OSU which where all big games.

I dont think anyone can say hes lazy, hes a great physical specimen. Lazy would be Andre Smith. Orakpo is the complete opposite of that.

KCrockaholic
03-12-2009, 10:15 AM
we need to draft Curry, but Raji will probably end up with the Broncs if we dont draft him...Raji would be a perfect fit for the broncos new 3-4, and we are still trying to figure out who our Nose tackle is gonna be.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 11:07 AM
Also... IMO Orakpo is not quick enough to be a speed end or OLB. He doesn't have that great of pass-rush moves, and will mainly rely on his strength at the next level unless he receives great coaching. And Texas players frequently bust. The same could be said of FSU pass-rushers, but the one FSU game I saw Brown was disruptive throughout. High-motor guy with quickness, great pass-rush moves, and from what I hear good character.

Chiefnj2
03-12-2009, 11:13 AM
Boone (who was probably half-drunk - I jest), owned Orakpo.

Chiefnj2
03-12-2009, 11:16 AM
IMO, there are only three top tier players in this years draft: J Smith, Curry and Monroe. 2nd tier: Stafford, Jenkins, Raji. 3rd tier: Sanchez, Brown, Matthews, Oher and Crabtree.

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 11:17 AM
I know he crushed Oklahoma, played very well against missouri, and was OK against OSU which where all big games.

I dont think anyone can say hes lazy, hes a great physical specimen. Lazy would be Andre Smith. Orakpo is the complete opposite of that.

I forgot the OU game, he did dominate that game.

I wasn't all that impressed with him against Mizzou.

He was a virtual non-factor against Ohio State until the 4th quarter when he managed to get his sack because they had to pass. He got absolutely dominated in the 1st half when Wells ran all over them.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 11:18 AM
Well, I definitely have to question Jenkins above Brown, and what exactly is it that you like so much about Clay Matthews to put him in your top 11?

bdeg
03-12-2009, 11:20 AM
And he dominated the OU game because he was facing Loadholt, who has just about the slowest feet of any prospect. You watch Orakpo play and he uses his quickness to get an advantage and then just kind of runs through poor blocks. He doesn't use his hands well and that's not going to fly at the next level.

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 11:23 AM
IMO, there are only three top tier players in this years draft: J Smith, Curry and Monroe. 2nd tier: Stafford, Jenkins, Raji. 3rd tier: Sanchez, Brown, Matthews, Oher and Crabtree.

The more I think about it, the more I think Curry has to be the pick.

Yes, he's a LB and they don't generally go #3 overall. But if you combine his lack of question marks with the fact that the Chiefs have a dire need at that position, he's the only one that makes good sense.

I really hope we can trade down.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 11:25 AM
I hope we trade down too. That said, Brown plays a position we have an ever more dire need for. What are his question marks?

Chiefnj2
03-12-2009, 11:29 AM
Well, I definitely have to question Jenkins above Brown, and what exactly is it that you like so much about Clay Matthews to put him in your top 11?

I only watched 2 or 3 USC games but he seemed to be the player that actually made plays. The hype goes to Maluaga and Cushing, but I don't get it. Rey will make a big hit and then take bad angles for the next few plays. Cushing is one of those workout warriors who, IMO, is already maxed out. Plus watching NFL network the other night they said Cushing was taken out in 3rd down situations at USC. He was only a 2 down player. I didn't know that. I think Matthews will go on to be the best of the three USC linebackers. For his limited amount of starting experience I thought he did a very good job and has a higher ceiling than the other guys.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-12-2009, 11:34 AM
I hope we trade down too. That said, Brown plays a position we have an ever more dire need for. What are his question marks?

He's short and he doesn't have terribly long arms. He's got good speed, but not great, and he's not a really explosive athlete.

None of those things are concerns when isolated, but cumulatively, you might wonder what his upside is. I still think he'll be a really good player, though.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 11:36 AM
I think Rey's got the highest ceiling. With good coaching he could be a beast. I didn't know Cushing was a 2-down player, either. This is all I could find concerning his coverage ability: "He can run with almost anyone and gets to the flats quickly to cover screens. Teams will have trouble overlooking a guy that can play all three LB spots, play a little defensive end and could be perfect for an elephant LB/S kind of role."

Matthews is quick, and I would take him at the bottom of the 1st if I ran a 3-4 and needed an OLB.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-12-2009, 11:36 AM
I only watched 2 or 3 USC games but he seemed to be the player that actually made plays. The hype goes to Maluaga and Cushing, but I don't get it. Rey will make a big hit and then take bad angles for the next few plays. Cushing is one of those workout warriors who, IMO, is already maxed out. Plus watching NFL network the other night they said Cushing was taken out in 3rd down situations at USC. He was only a 2 down player. I didn't know that. I think Matthews will go on to be the best of the three USC linebackers. For his limited amount of starting experience I thought he did a very good job and has a higher ceiling than the other guys.

I don't know about that. Clay Matthews is pretty much totally maxed out in every way conceivable.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 11:40 AM
The only thing that concerns me with Brown is his speed. I'm not worried about height, Harrison and Porter are 2 inches shorter and 1 inch taller, respectively. His arm-length doesn't worry me as much as it would with other players because I believe he'll be able to shed blocks. But he could be quicker. I still think he's quick enough to beat some LT's with his speed. Just not all of them. Now that's not exactly what you want from the #3 pick, but this isn't a good year for the #3.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-12-2009, 11:42 AM
The only thing that concerns me with Brown is his speed. I'm not worried about height, Porter and Harrison are 2 inches shorter and 1 inch taller, respectively. His arm-length doesn't worry me as much as it would with other players because I believe he'll be able to shed blocks. But he could be quicker.

Depends on what you mean by "shedding blocks". From a FB? Sure. From an LT? It's going to be a lot easier to engage him, especially since he doesn't have elite strength.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 11:49 AM
He plays with good strength and has the frame to add more. I assume you're referring to arm-length and not height. He has the same arm-length as Ayers who is 6-3. Longer than Larry English and only a half inch shorter than Orakpo's.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 11:53 AM
Only 5 out of 24 DE's(those who benched and are not named Everette Brown) as listed on NFLDC benched more than him. And he doesn't even need a DE's strength to play OLB.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-12-2009, 11:53 AM
He plays with good strength and has the frame to add more. I assume you're referring to arm-length and not height. He has the same arm-length as Ayers who is 6-3. Longer than Larry English and only a half inch shorter than Orakpo's.

Yeah, but I don't view Ayers, English, or Orakpo as guys with elite potential. Brown is still my #1 DE/OLB in the draft, but he's pretty far behind several prospects of the last few draft classes.

Chiefnj2
03-12-2009, 11:55 AM
He's short and he doesn't have terribly long arms. He's got good speed, but not great, and he's not a really explosive athlete.

None of those things are concerns when isolated, but cumulatively, you might wonder what his upside is. I still think he'll be a really good player, though.

I would say that Brown is explosive.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 11:57 AM
I think he's explosive too. Just not freakish.

Blick
03-12-2009, 12:29 PM
Because taking Eugene Monroe at #3 is about the lowest you can get on the value scale. Dumb move.

Both Everette Brown and Curry would start instantly and they both play positions where we actually NEED help.

I hope to God we can trade down, because there's nobody going to be there at #3 that is really good value. But if we're forced to pick, we'd be far better off taking Curry or Brown, or even Raji, than taking Monroe and potentially moving Albert. That's too much money to wrap up in OT's and it WILL prevent us from competing for a championship in the future.

I pretty much agree.

I want to trade down as well, or take a defensive player at 3 if we have to.

However, I don't know how you can say that Brown and Curry would "start instantly" after telling me that I didn't know if an offensive tackle would start.

I don't mind wrapping up money in OT's if it can give us a potentially dominant offensive line. If we take Raji, we're gonna wrap up a lot of money in DT's. Why is that better?

Taking a 3-4 ILB at 3 isn't super high on the value scale either...which is why most of us want to trade down.

Blick
03-12-2009, 12:36 PM
And I guess you will be the one bitching about Sanchez going to the pro bowl while we have this debate again in two or three years, if it pans out that way?

We have cap room, we're building for the long-term, why not have a 1 year trial for Cassel, see how he does with handling being a starter from the get-go, and have an insurance policy just in case. Stucture Sanchez's deal so he can be traded after two years if Cassel pans out.

This draft class is not that elite. The only other scenario with value is trading down, everything else seems to be a reach unless you're going to tie up that amount of money in the line instead of the QB...and then what are your options? What can you trade away a highly-paid RT for?

I just don't like Sanchez or Stafford enough to do that. I understand where you're coming from, but I wouldn't do it. I don't think Pioli will, either.

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 12:57 PM
I pretty much agree.

I want to trade down as well, or take a defensive player at 3 if we have to.

However, I don't know how you can say that Brown and Curry would "start instantly" after telling me that I didn't know if an offensive tackle would start.

I don't mind wrapping up money in OT's if it can give us a potentially dominant offensive line. If we take Raji, we're gonna wrap up a lot of money in DT's. Why is that better?

Taking a 3-4 ILB at 3 isn't super high on the value scale either...which is why most of us want to trade down.

First, let's separate the two arguments.

#1
You said:
I know that the OT would at least start.

I disagree, we don't KNOW that anybody would come in here and start. Anything could happen between the draft and the beginning of the season. There's no such thing as a "sure thing". Furthermore, an OT would have to compete with Brandon Albert, so there's an INCREASED chance he wouldn't start. There's no guarantee that the top OT's in this draft could play another position (see Ryan Clady) and moving Albert after the year he had is insanely stupid.

#2
When I say Brown or Curry could start instantly, I'm not saying they will. I'm saying they COULD, primarily because they'd have no competition at all at their spot.

Having a dominant line doesn't require TWO left tackles and therein lies the problem. If you spend THAT much money on tackles, the rest of the team suffers because other skill positions (DE, QB, DT, CB) require high dollar contracts as well. And you're right, taking Raji and having the much money tied up in DT would seem to be the same issue. However, I'm assuming that if we take Raji we either:

1) get rid of Dorsey altogether, thus freeing up his salary room or
2) move him to DE, which is another high-dollar position that we have NOBODY at.

Basically it comes down to me not wanting to draft a RT at #3 and that's what we'd be doing. No, ILB isn't good value there, but it's MUCH better value than RT.

ChiefRon
03-12-2009, 01:03 PM
I just don't like Sanchez or Stafford enough to do that. I understand where you're coming from, but I wouldn't do it. I don't think Pioli will, either.

I respect that. And for the record, I don't expect it.

I just happen to put a lot of stock into the "intangibles, competitiveness, and leadership" in a QB and Sanchez seems to have those qualities. I hope I'm wrong since we won't be taking him.

IMO, if you think he is a future star, given the other options, you do it despite trading for Cassel.

crazycoffey
03-12-2009, 01:03 PM
If we stay at 3, I think this is the pick.

And I'm going to vomit when thinking about what this likely means for Dorsey...

why, raji/dorsey/tank on rotation at DT in the 4-3? The giants have three rushing DEs to rotate. The idea is against the meccamists, but at least it's not entirely unplausable...

Blick
03-12-2009, 01:05 PM
First, let's separate the two arguments.

#1
You said:
I know that the OT would at least start.

I disagree, we don't KNOW that anybody would come in here and start. Anything could happen between the draft and the beginning of the season. There's no such thing as a "sure thing". Furthermore, an OT would have to compete with Brandon Albert, so there's an INCREASED chance he wouldn't start. There's no guarantee that the top OT's in this draft could play another position (see Ryan Clady) and moving Albert after the year he had is insanely stupid.

#2
When I say Brown or Curry could start instantly, I'm not saying they will. I'm saying they COULD, primarily because they'd have no competition at all at their spot.

Having a dominant line doesn't require TWO left tackles and therein lies the problem. If you spend THAT much money on tackles, the rest of the team suffers because other skill positions (DE, QB, DT, CB) require high dollar contracts as well. And you're right, taking Raji and having the much money tied up in DT would seem to be the same issue. However, I'm assuming that if we take Raji we either:

1) get rid of Dorsey altogether, thus freeing up his salary room or
2) move him to DE, which is another high-dollar position that we have NOBODY at.

Basically it comes down to me not wanting to draft a RT at #3 and that's what we'd be doing. No, ILB isn't good value there, but it's MUCH better value than RT.

You said Brown or Curry WOULD start instantly. You didn't say that they could start. It's not a big deal, though.

We agree about what the Chiefs should do.

DeezNutz
03-12-2009, 01:06 PM
why, raji/dorsey/tank on rotation at DT in the 4-3? The giants have three rushing DEs to rotate. The idea is against the meccamists, but at least it's not entirely unplausable...

Because if we take Raji, it would be a strong signal that we're going to the 3-4, and I'm not sure where Dorsey would fit.

If we would stay 4-3 or having inklings of continuing to run this in the future, I would not at all be in favor of drafting Raji.

In this case, I'd be more favorable to selecting Curry, assuming a trade down wasn't possible.

ChiefRon
03-12-2009, 01:09 PM
Because if we take Raji, it would be a strong signal that we're going to the 3-4, and I'm not sure where Dorsey would fit.

If we would stay 4-3 or having inklings of continuing to run this in the future, I would not at all be in favor of drafting Raji.

In this case, I'd be more favorable to selecting Curry, assuming a trade down wasn't possible.

Some people seem to think Dorsey could play end in 3-4.

They would probably at least give him a shot.

DeezNutz
03-12-2009, 01:11 PM
Some people seem to think Dorsey could play end in 3-4.

They would probably at least give him a shot.

Maybe.

It doesn't look great on paper, though, when you compare him to other 3-4 DE's.

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 01:42 PM
You said Brown or Curry WOULD start instantly. You didn't say that they could start. It's not a big deal, though.

We agree about what the Chiefs should do.

I apologize for that.

My intention was to convery that neither Brown or Curry would have to compete for a spot, thus increasing their chances of starting to near 100% because they play positions where we have no bodies, let alone talent.

htismaqe
03-12-2009, 01:43 PM
I don't view Dorsey as a 3-4 DE, but apparently the coaches have a spot for him, so who knows.

Maybe they think he can be a NT?

bdeg
03-12-2009, 01:46 PM
I don't view Dorsey as a 3-4 DE, but apparently the coaches have a spot for him, so who knows.

Maybe they think he can be a NT?

That's what I'm hoping.

Blick
03-12-2009, 03:29 PM
I apologize for that.

My intention was to convery that neither Brown or Curry would have to compete for a spot, thus increasing their chances of starting to near 100% because they play positions where we have no bodies, let alone talent.

It's all good.

I understand. I think Curry is more of a need than Brown, and is a better value at 3 if we can't trade down.

We have some waaaaay under the radar candidates on the roster that I'm interested to see in a 3-4 at OLB.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 03:31 PM
Anyone besides Brian Johnston? I wish we hadn't released Eric Walden, he was supposed to be a 3-4 guy.

And why would we need a player who plays the same position DJ does more than we need to improve the pass rush?

Blick
03-12-2009, 03:44 PM
Andy Studebaker is a guy that intrigues me. 6-3 250, 4.6 40, good athleticism, hard working...extremely productive small school guy.

bdeg
03-12-2009, 04:02 PM
Sounds perfect.

Looks like a good player, too. Good call.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzH8IKSNf70

PhillyChiefFan
03-13-2009, 07:10 AM
THIS JUST IN: John Czarnecki from FoxSports.com is a moron:

"The best player in the Draft -
Texas Tech receiver Michael Crabtree. Seattle coach Jim Mora agreed with me that Crabtree is all man. I mean, he appeared to be a man among boys in some college games and that's why he was a two-time winner of the Biletnikoff Award. This former high school quarterback is a cross between Larry Fitzgerald and Michael Irvin and the only negative is that he needs surgery for a foot stress fracture. It means he won't run before the draft, but he still shouldn't drop out of the top five."

WHAT THE F@*K?? Cross between Irvin and Fitzgerald?? Really?
How does he NOT EVEN RUN and is a top 5 pick...after surgery

Can someone please explain to me why analyst's are so high on Crabtree.

Brock
03-13-2009, 11:24 AM
Would it really shock you if Crabtree is a top 5 pick?

crazycoffey
03-13-2009, 02:48 PM
Because if we take Raji, it would be a strong signal that we're going to the 3-4, and I'm not sure where Dorsey would fit.

If we would stay 4-3 or having inklings of continuing to run this in the future, I would not at all be in favor of drafting Raji.

In this case, I'd be more favorable to selecting Curry, assuming a trade down wasn't possible.


Can't we line up in both defensive sets? We probably will anyway.....

Rudy lost the toss
03-13-2009, 03:14 PM
two good inside backers, an underwhelming secondary, no pass rush, and they finished 16th

So you are saying that we need Aaron Curry really bad and holds tremendous draft value? Ive heard he can play inside in the 3-4

BigChiefFan
03-13-2009, 04:57 PM
Can't we line up in both defensive sets? We probably will anyway.....I've been saying the same thing for months- Some think that just because we take Raji, that Dorsey is useless to us and nothing could be further from the truth. Raji IMPROVES the D-line and is THE PREMIER NT in this year's draft, he also improves Dorsey's game, by taking away constant double-teams, no matter where we line Dorsey up.

I can't believe how many can't actually see the skillset on this kid. For God's sake, he is 337 lbs and runs the 40 in 5.12 seconds. He also generates a pass-rush as a Nose Tackle. If you can find a disruptive NT for a 3-4, you've found the more important component of running it successfully. There isn't one player that improves our team more, than a dominant NT would(QB being the exception, however, I believe we've addressed that) and yet some still clamor for a LBer without pass-rush skills.

Rain Man
03-14-2009, 10:09 PM
Andy Studebaker is a guy that intrigues me. 6-3 250, 4.6 40, good athleticism, hard working...extremely productive small school guy.

Wow. Are you a time traveler from the past?


I was watching NFL Network today, and wow - Eugene Monroe really looks impressive.

Raji scares me because he's been rocketing up the charts after the season ended, based on measureables. I never want to draft a guy after he's moved up on measurables.

orange
03-14-2009, 10:11 PM
Wow. Are you a time traveler from the past?


I was watching NFL Network today, and wow - Eugene Monroe really looks impressive.

Raji scares me because he's been rocketing up the charts after the season ended, based on measureables. I never want to draft a guy after he's moved up on measurables.

He moved up mainly on his domination of the Senior Bowl practice week. Be (somewhat) at ease.

Rain Man
03-14-2009, 10:17 PM
He moved up mainly on his domination of the Senior Bowl practice week. Be (somewhat) at ease.


That's better, but still concerning. I'd rather have a guy who dominated his competition so much during the season that he was already a top-ten guy.

DeezNutz
03-14-2009, 10:20 PM
Can't we line up in both defensive sets? We probably will anyway.....

True.

But then you've tied up a tremendous amount of money in two DT's, which probably isn't the smartest thing to do.

If Dorsey were to be capable of moving to end in the 3-4, though, the $ distribution is more logical.

This isn't the end all be all, but only foolish teams wouldn't factor this into the equation when selecting a player.

Essentially, it's the same argument for not drafting another LT. Although Monroe, on his own, certainly justifies a #3 overall selection, it would be a stupid decision by the Chiefs, given the talent on their roster and the future cap implications.

philfree
03-14-2009, 10:25 PM
Judging by the results of this poll the Chiefs will most likely draft Orakpo.


PhilFree:arrow:

KCrockaholic
03-14-2009, 11:42 PM
And he dominated the OU game because he was facing Loadholt, who has just about the slowest feet of any prospect. You watch Orakpo play and he uses his quickness to get an advantage and then just kind of runs through poor blocks. He doesn't use his hands well and that's not going to fly at the next level.

from what ive taken note of, your correct that Orakpo doesnt use his hands well enough when fighting through blocks, but this is a very minor problem IMO, NFL coaches know how to teach players how to use their hands and the swim technique and many other moves. Orakpos only real "move" is the rip. It was fairly effective in college, but pass rushing will not be Orakpos problem in the NFL. His problem will be when he is asked to cover a guy if he is used in the 3-4. He is not a coverage guy, nor is he reliable in stopping the run. But I think over time with good coaching he could become a very good player, and ultimately be a DeMarcus Ware type of pass rusher, without the coverage skills.

KCrockaholic
03-14-2009, 11:46 PM
Andy Studebaker is a guy that intrigues me. 6-3 250, 4.6 40, good athleticism, hard working...extremely productive small school guy.

Good player. Not a Jared Allen though, we need to keep searching again for that one.

bdeg
03-15-2009, 04:53 AM
from what ive taken note of, your correct that Orakpo doesnt use his hands well enough when fighting through blocks, but this is a very minor problem IMO, NFL coaches know how to teach players how to use their hands and the swim technique and many other moves. Orakpos only real "move" is the rip. It was fairly effective in college, but pass rushing will not be Orakpos problem in the NFL. His problem will be when he is asked to cover a guy if he is used in the 3-4. He is not a coverage guy, nor is he reliable in stopping the run. But I think over time with good coaching he could become a very good player, and ultimately be a DeMarcus Ware type of pass rusher, without the coverage skills.

Some NFL teams probably agree with you about Orakpo. Maybe he was poorly coached, but when he has had one more year than Brown and developed about 1/5 of the pass rush talent, does that not make you question how quick he'll pick things up and progress at the NFL? That could be said of a lot of players, and I'm sure some of them will turn out fine. I think Brown's much safer while having a higher upside(due to first step). You're right about Orakpo having a lot of trouble making that transition to OLB, which is part of why I think he's really a DE.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-15-2009, 05:15 AM
Wow. Are you a time traveler from the past?


I was watching NFL Network today, and wow - Eugene Monroe really looks impressive.

Raji scares me because he's been rocketing up the charts after the season ended, based on measureables. I never want to draft a guy after he's moved up on measurables.

Raji rocketed up the draft board because he dominated the Sr. Bowl. His measureables are extraordinarily average.

htismaqe
03-15-2009, 05:39 AM
True.

But then you've tied up a tremendous amount of money in two DT's, which probably isn't the smartest thing to do.

If Dorsey were to be capable of moving to end in the 3-4, though, the $ distribution is more logical.

This isn't the end all be all, but only foolish teams wouldn't factor this into the equation when selecting a player.

Essentially, it's the same argument for not drafting another LT. Although Monroe, on his own, certainly justifies a #3 overall selection, it would be a stupid decision by the Chiefs, given the talent on their roster and the future cap implications.

If we take Raji, that means Dorsey is either 1) changing positions or 2) gone.

Either way, we wouldn't have too much money locked up in two DT's.

htismaqe
03-15-2009, 05:40 AM
Some NFL teams probably agree with you about Orakpo. Maybe he was poorly coached, but when he has had one more year than Brown and developed about 1/5 of the pass rush talent, does that not make you question how quick he'll pick things up and progress at the NFL? That could be said of a lot of players, and I'm sure some of them will turn out fine. I think Brown's much safer while having a higher upside(due to first step). You're right about Orakpo having a lot of trouble making that transition to OLB, which is part of why I think he's really a DE.

Orakpo played at Texas. While that doesn't guarantee anything, history gives him about a 90% chance of being a complete waste.

Chiefnj2
03-15-2009, 07:36 AM
If we take Raji, that means Dorsey is either 1) changing positions or 2) gone.

Either way, we wouldn't have too much money locked up in two DT's.

Rookie contracts have affordable yearly salaries. It's the signing bonus which is outrageous. The money is locked up.

Blick
03-15-2009, 12:55 PM
Wow. Are you a time traveler from the past?

Maybe. Why?

BigChiefFan
03-15-2009, 02:12 PM
I would say Raji's 42 tackles, 16 tackles for a loss of yardage, and his 8 sacks, in just last year's season alone, already made him a blue-chip NFL rookie prospect. The dominating Senior Bowl performance and solid combine measurables cemented him as a top 10 pick, probably top 5.

Rain Man
03-15-2009, 02:24 PM
Maybe. Why?


I was pushing for Studebaker in last year's draft, but the Eagles took him. The Chiefs then signed him off their practice squad.


You may have already known that, but it just confused me to see him mentioned in a draft thread. At any rate, I too have high hopes for Studebaker and would love to see him rise to become a situational pass rusher for us.

Rain Man
03-15-2009, 02:26 PM
Raji rocketed up the draft board because he dominated the Sr. Bowl. His measureables are extraordinarily average.

Really?

This whole thing is confusing then. So one week of good performance is now pushing him up compared to both the combine AND his entire college career?

Blick
03-15-2009, 02:55 PM
I was pushing for Studebaker in last year's draft, but the Eagles took him. The Chiefs then signed him off their practice squad.


You may have already known that, but it just confused me to see him mentioned in a draft thread. At any rate, I too have high hopes for Studebaker and would love to see him rise to become a situational pass rusher for us.

Cool. I mentioned Studebaker because I made a comment that the Chiefs may have some talented pass rushers on the roster that are being overlooked and someone asked for an example. I brought up pass rushers because I think I was talking about the Chiefs needing a guy like Aaron Curry over guys like Everette Brown and Orakpo.

Rain Man
03-15-2009, 03:03 PM
Cool. I mentioned Studebaker because I made a comment that the Chiefs may have some talented pass rushers on the roster that are being overlooked and someone asked for an example. I brought up pass rushers because I think I was talking about the Chiefs needing a guy like Aaron Curry over guys like Everette Brown and Orakpo.


Gotcha. I hadn't read farther back in the thread to get the context.

I was excited that we picked him up. I hope he gets a chance in training camp. At the same time, I'm not sure that I would change my first-round pick on the hopes that he'll be "the guy".

orange
03-15-2009, 09:05 PM
Really?

This whole thing is confusing then. So one week of good performance is now pushing him up compared to both the combine AND his entire college career?

He was practicing and dominating against other blue-chippers who were also trying to impress the scouts.

During a college season, any player is lucky to play 2 guys like that. Of course, he'll see them every week in the NFL.

htismaqe
03-16-2009, 08:05 AM
Rookie contracts have affordable yearly salaries. It's the signing bonus which is outrageous. The money is locked up.

The signing bonus is, but that's not relative to his position, that's relative to his draft position.

Chiefnj2
03-16-2009, 08:42 AM
Really?

This whole thing is confusing then. So one week of good performance is now pushing him up compared to both the combine AND his entire college career?

Raji went up during the year. It's tough to find monthly rankings during the college year, but PFW has theirs up. By way of comparison to see how some players rise/fall/stay the same (overall ranking followed by name):

September 08
1. Laurinaitis
2. Curry
3. Monroe
4. Rey
13. J. Smith
94. Raji

October 08
1. Curry
3. Monroe
4. Rey
6. Laurinaitis
9. J. Smith
29. Raji

November 08
1. Curry
3. Monroe
5. J. Smith
7. Rey
9. Raji
11. Laurinaitis

December 08
1. Curry
3. Monroe
4. J. Smith
7. Rey
8. Laurinaitis
10. Raji

February 09
1. Curry (+1 from September)
2. J. Smith (+11)
6. Monroe (-3)
19. Raji (+75)
21. Rey (-17)
24. Laurinaitis (-23)

crazycoffey
03-16-2009, 10:06 AM
why did laurinaitis fall so far, so fast? What has Raji done to rise so far/fast in the same time?

Chiefnj2
03-16-2009, 10:20 AM
why did laurinaitis fall so far, so fast? What has Raji done to rise so far/fast in the same time?

Why did Raji rise so fast?

I believe he was academically ineligible in 2007. He entered 2008 without having played a year, so he wasn't ranked very high. In 2006 he played well but was suspended a game for punching a player. He put up huge numbers in 2008.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-16-2009, 10:38 AM
Laurinaitis is a slow finesse backer who is physically maxed out and got all of his stats from jumping piles rather than making the tackles himself.

Chiefnj2
03-16-2009, 10:56 AM
Laurinaitis will be a solid, but unspectacular pro. He's smart and he's a good tackler, he's just not a big impact player.

bdeg
03-16-2009, 11:19 AM
He's basically a poor man's DJ.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-16-2009, 11:20 AM
Laurinaitis will be a solid, but unspectacular pro. He's smart and he's a good tackler, he's just not a big impact player.

I don't disagree with that, but I'm not taking him with one of my first two picks.

Chiefnj2
03-16-2009, 12:24 PM
He's basically a poor man's DJ.

I think he's like Posluszny of the Bills.

bdeg
03-16-2009, 01:17 PM
I think Pos is a little less athletic, isn't he?

Chiefnj2
03-16-2009, 02:26 PM
I think Pos is a little less athletic, isn't he?

I don't think so. Their combine numbers for the 40, bench, shuttle and 3 cone are virtually identical.

Rain Man
03-16-2009, 10:45 PM
Thanks for post 205, Chiefsnj2. That's quite interesting.

bdeg
03-16-2009, 11:04 PM
I don't think so. Their combine numbers for the 40, bench, shuttle and 3 cone are virtually identical.

You're pretty far off with this.

_______DJ _ Pos
40 ___ 4.52 4.70
20 ____2.66 2.73
shuttle 3.93 4.2

Chiefnj2
03-17-2009, 07:32 AM
You're pretty far off with this.

_______DJ _ Pos
40 ___ 4.52 4.70
20 ____2.66 2.73
shuttle 3.93 4.2

I was comparing Pos and Laurinaitis.

bdeg
03-17-2009, 11:32 AM
How did I not realize that....... Oh ya I got an early start on the festivities today:)