PDA

View Full Version : McShay top 10 Mock Draft


Pages : [1] 2 3

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 03:11 PM
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft09/insider/columns/story?columnist=mcshay_todd&id=4020260&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnfl%2fdraft09%2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumnist %3dmcshay_todd%26id%3d4020260

its interesting. Maclin to the Chargers?

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 03:16 PM
If the Chiefs take Curry with Stafford sitting at #3, I'd bet all of my casino cash that Pioli's contract will not be renewed.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 03:17 PM
If the Chiefs take Curry with Stafford sitting at #3, I'd bet all of my casino cash that Pioli's contract will not be renewed.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

The Chiefs will NOT take Stafford...That is why we traded for Matt Cassel. Why do people still want Stafford when our QB situation is fine? Pioli has done a great job so far.

Mecca
03-27-2009, 03:35 PM
I'll be happy when the draft is over so I can stop hearing about the mythical creature that is Aaron Curry.

The Bad Guy
03-27-2009, 03:36 PM
If the Chiefs take Curry with Stafford sitting at #3, I'd bet all of my casino cash that Pioli's contract will not be renewed.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

Here we go again.

The Chiefs aren't taking Stafford. Huff, puff, blow your house down, whatever, but the Chiefs made the statement who they wanted as their QB already.

The Bad Guy
03-27-2009, 03:37 PM
I'll be happy when the draft is over so I can stop hearing about the mythical creature that is Aaron Curry.

I'll be happy when the draft is over so we can stop hearing about all this top talent in the draft for us to be picking instead of Aaron Curry.

Mecca
03-27-2009, 03:41 PM
The Chiefs will NOT take Stafford...That is why we traded for Matt Cassel. Why do people still want Stafford when our QB situation is fine? Pioli has done a great job so far.

If Matt Cassel sucks and Stafford and or Sanchez become outstanding players it won't be looked back upon as a great job...

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 03:43 PM
Here we go again.

The Chiefs aren't taking Stafford. Huff, puff, blow your house down, whatever, but the Chiefs made the statement who they wanted as their QB already.

I didn't say that they had to take Stafford. I said that if Pioli took Curry while Stafford was sitting there at three, his contract would not be renewed.

That's an absolutely terrible error in judgment. With Stafford sitting there at #3, the Chiefs will have numerous option, including trading down.

The Chiefs need SO much help and with only one more "First Day" pick, they'd better better off ignoring the "Value Chart" and grabbing as many picks in return for either Stafford or the #3 spot.

With all of the Chiefs needs offensively and defensively, the Chiefs can't afford to take a guy like Curry.

The Bad Guy
03-27-2009, 03:43 PM
If Matt Cassel sucks and Stafford and or Sanchez become outstanding players it won't be looked back upon as a great job...

What if Sanchez and Stafford aren't outstanding? All I've seen you type is basically how surefire both guys are.

Mecca
03-27-2009, 03:44 PM
What if Sanchez and Stafford aren't outstanding? All I've seen you type is basically how surefire both guys are.

I'd take either one of their chances over Cassel's just me though I guess.

If they all suck then it's a wash.

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 03:44 PM
If Matt Cassel sucks and Stafford and or Sanchez become outstanding players it won't be looked back upon as a great job...

And if Cassel is a pro-bowler for the next few years and Stafford is Jeff George, and Sanchez is Alex Smith I want you to kiss Pioli's butt for not taking either of them.

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 03:45 PM
And if Cassel is a pro-bowler for the next few years and Stafford is Jeff George, and Sanchez is Alex Smith I want you to kiss Pioli's butt for not taking either of them.

Those are completely unfounded "IFS".

Apparently, you know absolutely nothing about either QB.

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 03:46 PM
Lets not let this turn into a Curry Vs Stafford thread. I just thought his mock was very different many peoples. Its an Interesting take.

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 03:47 PM
Those are completely unfounded "IFS".

Apparently, you know absolutely nothing about either QB.

all im seeing is IFS out of Mecca, that was my point. Maybe you didnt get it.

The Bad Guy
03-27-2009, 03:47 PM
I'd take either one of their chances over Cassel's just me though I guess.

If they all suck then it's a wash.

Then it's just you.

I think it's hilarious how you even dismiss the possibilty that Cassel could be any good.

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 03:48 PM
Then it's just you.

I think it's hilarious how you even dismiss the possibilty that Cassel could be any good.

same here.

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 03:52 PM
all im seeing is IFS out of Mecca, that was my point. Maybe you didnt get it.

What?

And if Cassel is a pro-bowler for the next few years and Stafford is Jeff George, and Sanchez is Alex Smith I want you to kiss Pioli's butt for not taking either of them.

First off, Stafford isn't an egotistical headcase like Jeff George, so mark that notion off your list.

Secondly, Sanchez spent 4 full years in the Pro-Style offense at USC and was the #1 ranked high school recruit coming out his senior year. He didn't play in the fucking spread under Urban Meyer like Alex Smith.

Third, I couldn't give two shits if Cassel is a "Pro Bowl QB". Big fucking deal. I want him to be a SUPER BOWL QB.

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 03:53 PM
Lets not let this turn into a Curry Vs Stafford thread. I just thought his mock was very different many peoples. Its an Interesting take.

Oh, so we're not allowed to discuss the players listed in this mock and ridiculous selection at #3?

Gee, thanks.

:rolleyes:

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 03:55 PM
Oh, so we're not allowed to discuss the players listed in this mock and ridiculous selection at #3?

Gee, thanks.

:rolleyes:

lets just ignore pick number 3 in this mock and look around at his other picks. I thought Maclin to the Chargers was very interesting. Maybe he is the slider of this draft?

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 03:58 PM
What?



First off, Stafford isn't an egotistical headcase like Jeff George, so mark that notion off your list.

Secondly, Sanchez spent 4 full years in the Pro-Style offense at USC and was the #1 ranked high school recruit coming out his senior year. He didn't play in the ****ing spread under Urban Meyer like Alex Smith.

Third, I couldn't give two shits if Cassel is a "Pro Bowl QB". Big ****ing deal. I want him to be a SUPER BOWL QB.


Trust me I dont actually think Stafford is Jeff George and I think Sanchez will be much better than Alex Smith. I was just giving an example of the IFS that Mecca likes to make up. I truely believe Stafford is the real deal. Ive scouted him to the best of my abilities, and he can make all the throws. Hes better than Sanchez IMO. But im in no way saying they will be bust.

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 04:01 PM
lets just ignore pick number 3 in this mock and look around at his other picks. I thought Maclin to the Chargers was very interesting. Maybe he is the slider of this draft?

How could he be a slider to #16 when virtually no one has him in the top ten?

The top of this draft, outside of a few outstanding left tackles, sucks.

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 04:04 PM
How could he be a slider to #16 when virtually no one has him in the top ten?

The top of this draft, outside of a few outstanding left tackles, sucks.

most people expect him to go to the Raiders, if not the Raiders, possibly the Jags right after them. falling to 16 would be pretty far for a guy that has been a top 10 pick in most mock drafts.

Pestilence
03-27-2009, 04:08 PM
This basically gives us the perfect opportunity to trade down. Someone will want to trade up if Stafford AND Monroe are available.

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 04:10 PM
most people expect him to go to the Raiders, if not the Raiders, possibly the Jags right after them. falling to 16 would be pretty far for a guy that has been a top 10 pick in most mock drafts.

I've never seen that once in a mock draft.

I've seen Crabtree go to the Raiders but I've never seen Maclin in anyone's Top Ten selections.

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 04:10 PM
This basically gives us the perfect opportunity to trade down. Someone will want to trade up if Stafford AND Monroe are available.

I guess if we trade down we can get Everette Brown and pick up a 2nd rounder maybe and make everyone happy. I dont have a problem with this scenerio as long as it doesnt involve us taking Brown at #3.

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 04:11 PM
This basically gives us the perfect opportunity to trade down. Someone will want to trade up if Stafford AND Monroe are available.

Exactly, which is why I made the statement that Pioli would be gone after his first contract because not trading down with those guys sitting there would show a Matt Millen-like lack of judgment.

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 04:11 PM
I've never seen that once in a mock draft.

I've seen Crabtree go to the Raiders but I've never seen Maclin in anyone's Top Ten selections.

really? Maclin to the Raiders seems to be everyones jift. go check out some of the mocks on NFL.com

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 04:12 PM
I guess if we trade down we can get Everette Brown and pick up a 2nd rounder maybe and make everyone happy. I dont have a problem with this scenerio as long as it doesnt involve us taking Brown at #3.

I'm sorry but Everette Brown excites me even less than Curry.

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 04:14 PM
Davis: Maclin to the Raiders
Dukes: Maclin to the Raiders
Kirwan: Maclin to the Raiders
Wyche: Maclin falling to the Jets

KCrockaholic
03-27-2009, 04:14 PM
I'm sorry but Everette Brown excites me even less than Curry.

This place is confusing...

DaneMcCloud
03-27-2009, 04:33 PM
Davis: Maclin to the Raiders
Dukes: Maclin to the Raiders
Kirwan: Maclin to the Raiders
Wyche: Maclin falling to the Jets

I'm sorry, I don't find any of those guys to be particularly insightful or accurate.

Seriously, I fail to understand why Pat Kirwan is even employed.

Short Leash Hootie
03-28-2009, 01:55 PM
If the Chiefs take Curry with Stafford sitting at #3, I'd bet all of my casino cash that Pioli's contract will not be renewed.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

ROFL

Yeah, the Hunt family has shown to have such a short leash!

wild1
03-28-2009, 02:16 PM
Here we go again.

The Chiefs aren't taking Stafford. Huff, puff, blow your house down, whatever, but the Chiefs made the statement who they wanted as their QB already.

this

BigChiefFan
03-28-2009, 03:49 PM
Just because many believe Cassell is the Chiefs QB of the future and we won't draft one early, doesn't mean people believe that Seattle won't draft a QB. The Chiefs are still sitting pretty.

DaneMcCloud
03-28-2009, 04:00 PM
ROFL

Yeah, the Hunt family has shown to have such a short leash!

The point is that it would show a HUGE error in judgment, which wouldn't likely end with that scenario. And would show that Belichick was the mastermind, not Pioli.

DaneMcCloud
03-28-2009, 04:01 PM
this

How can it be "this" if Haley has publicly stated that there will be an open QB competition?

Pestilence
03-28-2009, 04:15 PM
How can it be "this" if Haley has publicly stated that there will be an open QB competition?

In fact...not only did they say it would be an open competition....but they also stated that they would still be bringing in other participants.

bdeg
03-28-2009, 04:17 PM
Gimme a break, that's coach-speak so Thigpen doesn't go all Cutler. Sure, if Thigpen shows enough in camp to prove that he's a better long-term option than Cassel you play him. But there's a 1% chance of that happening, Haley knows that.

DaneMcCloud
03-28-2009, 04:22 PM
Gimme a break, that's coach-speak so Thigpen doesn't go all Cutler. Sure, if Thigpen shows enough in camp to prove that he's a better long-term option than Cassel you play him. But there's a 1% chance of that happening, Haley knows that.

That's what I thought too the FIRST time I read that Haley made that claim. But since then, he's said the same exact thing in print at least twice (if not three times).

I think that what he believes. That doesn't mean that Cassel won't win the starting job, but Haley has not given the job to him before ever stepping on the field.

Pestilence
03-28-2009, 04:32 PM
Gimme a break, that's coach-speak so Thigpen doesn't go all Cutler. Sure, if Thigpen shows enough in camp to prove that he's a better long-term option than Cassel you play him. But there's a 1% chance of that happening, Haley knows that.

Why does he care if Thigpen goes all Cutler? It's fucking Tyler Thigpen for Christs sake.....not Peyton Manning.

chiefs1111
03-28-2009, 05:08 PM
Crabtree going to the Rams at number 2???? give me a break

bdeg
03-28-2009, 06:04 PM
Why does he care if Thigpen goes all Cutler? It's ****ing Tyler Thigpen for Christs sake.....not Peyton Manning.

You want all your players to stay in line. Thigpen said at the end of last season that he has earned the 2009 starting position. He's obviously going to be a little sensitive about being replaced. Do you want a malcontent?

It's not as big of a deal as Cutler obviously, but he's a guy we'd probably want to resign in a few years to keep as a backup.

Sam Hall
03-28-2009, 06:06 PM
Great, another thread where DaneMcCloud proclaims his greatness and rips everyone else.

milkman
03-28-2009, 06:10 PM
Great, another thread where DaneMcCloud proclaims his greatness and rips everyone else.

Give it a rest.

Sam Hall
03-28-2009, 06:13 PM
Give it a rest.

I'm tired of his BS and I'm not putting anyone on ignore. He is the worst kind of poster.

milkman
03-28-2009, 06:16 PM
I'm tired of his BS and I'm not putting anyone on ignore. He is the worst kind of poster.

No, the worst kind of poster is the one that stalks another poster.

You know....you.

Sam Hall
03-28-2009, 06:18 PM
No, the worst kind of poster is the one that stalks another poster.

You know....you.

whatever:rolleyes:

DaneMcCloud
03-28-2009, 06:20 PM
Give it a rest.

Sam has absolutely nothing to add to any conversation about football, so instead, he's decided to stalk me at every turn.

That's quite a life you've got going for yourself, Sam.

:rolleyes:

How embarrassing.

Sam Hall
03-28-2009, 06:24 PM
Sam has absolutely nothing to add to any conversation about football, so instead, he's decided to stalk me at every turn.

That's quite a life you've got going for yourself, Sam.

:rolleyes:

How embarrassing.

You wouldn't say that if I was a full-blown Sanchez supporter.

Just continue telling yourself how awesome you are:rolleyes:

DaneMcCloud
03-28-2009, 06:29 PM
You wouldn't say that if I was a full-blown Sanchez supporter.

Just continue telling yourself how awesome you are:rolleyes:

Keep going, Sam.

I'm sure your parents would be proud. :shake:

Graduate student. ROFL

Sam Hall
03-28-2009, 08:25 PM
Keep going, Sam.

I'm sure your parents would be proud. :shake:

Graduate student. ROFL

I'm sure your parents would be proud if they saw your postsROFL

It's pathetic that you make your points by ripping people:rolleyes:

Sam Hall
03-28-2009, 08:28 PM
I hope the Chiefs draft a Big XII player just to piss you off.

The Bad Guy
03-28-2009, 08:28 PM
The point is that it would show a HUGE error in judgment, which wouldn't likely end with that scenario. And would show that Belichick was the mastermind, not Pioli.

Give me a break. One move is going to point to this before any games are played? That's 100% pure bullshit.

What if he can't trade down? I'm sorry, but there aren't going to be a ton of teams chomping at the bit to trade up to the 3 spot. Not in this draft which is loaded with "doubles".

Seattle could take Stafford, and the rest of the pack would be perfectly content with jumping up in the 6-9 range, paying a lot less in terms of compensation and guaranteed money to take Sanchez.

Scott Pioli's tenure is not going to be defined how he handles the first draft pick he makes as a GM of the Kansas City Chiefs.

The Bad Guy
03-28-2009, 08:30 PM
Crabtree going to the Rams at number 2???? give me a break

Honestly wouldn't shock me.

Who are the Rams going to throw the ball to? Donnie Avery and ???

DeezNutz
03-28-2009, 08:34 PM
Honestly wouldn't shock me.

Who are the Rams going to throw the ball to? Donnie Avery and ???

They don't keep Bulger upright and it won't matter.

Though I'm serious about my comment, it couldn't sound any more ****ing True Fan, which kind of bothers me.

SNR
03-28-2009, 10:02 PM
They don't keep Bulger upright and it won't matter.

Though I'm serious about my comment, it couldn't sound any more ****ing True Fan, which kind of bothers me.It's okay. We know your intentions were good

KCrockaholic
03-28-2009, 11:40 PM
I hope the Chiefs draft a Big XII player just to piss you off.

or 2. :D

RustShack
03-29-2009, 12:56 AM
They don't keep Bulger upright and it won't matter.

Though I'm serious about my comment, it couldn't sound any more ****ing True Fan, which kind of bothers me.

Honestly the same can be said about our QB situation. Also the same argument can be used against us drafting Curry, hes not going to do shit without a Dline.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 01:12 AM
or 2. :D

75% of Chiefs fans are fucking stupid when it comes to football.

And BTW, the Big 12 sucks this year for NFL talent.

Regardless of what Mr. 1-15 Pat Kirwan states.

Pat Kirwan. ROFL

DeezNutz
03-29-2009, 09:52 AM
Honestly the same can be said about our QB situation. Also the same argument can be used against us drafting Curry, hes not going to do shit without a Dline.

Agreed, but at least we have the most important position on the O-line nicely accounted for, and this gives us a big advantage.

Cosmos
03-29-2009, 11:02 AM
75% of Chiefs fans are ****ing stupid when it comes to football.



Actually says a lot about you, IMO.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 12:59 PM
Actually says a lot about you, IMO.

Go fuck yourself, n00b.

keg in kc
03-29-2009, 01:00 PM
Go **** yourself.If I could do that, I'd never leave the house.

DeezNutz
03-29-2009, 01:03 PM
Go **** yourself, n00b.

Justice is swift and decisive.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 01:03 PM
If I could do that, I'd never leave the house.

He's a hermaphrodite.

Short Leash Hootie
03-29-2009, 01:33 PM
The point is that it would show a HUGE error in judgment, which wouldn't likely end with that scenario. And would show that Belichick was the mastermind, not Pioli.

and then Stafford goes on to be the next Ryan Leaf or Tim Couch and then what?

I agree, if Stafford is on the board at #3 and the Chiefs don't trade down...they should draft him to hold the other teams hostage that thought we were bluffing when we said we'd take him at 3 if we couldn't find a trade partner...and then hopefully turn around and pull off a deal similar to what the Chargers did a few years ago with Eli Manning and the Giants.

keg in kc
03-29-2009, 01:53 PM
He's a hermaphrodite.Some guys have all the luck.I agree, if Stafford is on the board at #3 and the Chiefs don't trade down...they should draft him to hold the other teams hostage that thought we were bluffing when we said we'd take him at 3 if we couldn't find a trade partner...and then hopefully turn around and pull off a deal similar to what the Chargers did a few years ago with Eli Manning and the Giants.Esto.

'course it would then be our luck that we're the only team that had him rated above 50.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 02:13 PM
and then Stafford goes on to be the next Ryan Leaf or Tim Couch and then what?

Ryan Leaf? Come the fuck on, Hootie.

Stafford doesn't have emotional issues. Before the draft, there were several psychologists that said the guy was an emotional rollercoaster. There's nothing in Stafford's make up or in his scouting reports to suggest anything similar.

Tim Couch came from the spread offense. He didn't play in the Pro-Style offense and he was injured. There's nothing you can do about an injury but where football acumen is concerned, Stafford and Couch are on opposite ends of the spectrum with regards to the NFL.

I agree, if Stafford is on the board at #3 and the Chiefs don't trade down...they should draft him to hold the other teams hostage that thought we were bluffing when we said we'd take him at 3 if we couldn't find a trade partner...and then hopefully turn around and pull off a deal similar to what the Chargers did a few years ago with Eli Manning and the Giants.

The Giants/Chargers deal was predicated on Rivers being available at #4. They didn't hold anyone "hostage". If Rivers had been gone, Manning would have been a Charger.

I've been saying it for months: If Stafford is there at #3 when the Chiefs pick, they should take whatever deal they can get, regardless of the "Value Chart". This team needs football players.

A shitload of football players.

SNR
03-29-2009, 02:14 PM
and then Stafford goes on to be the next Ryan Leaf or Tim Couch and then what?

I agree, if Stafford is on the board at #3 and the Chiefs don't trade down...they should draft him to hold the other teams hostage that thought we were bluffing when we said we'd take him at 3 if we couldn't find a trade partner...and then hopefully turn around and pull off a deal similar to what the Chargers did a few years ago with Eli Manning and the Giants.I still don't get this line of logic.

What if Aaron Curry is Percy Snow? What if Raji is Ryan Sims? What if? What if?

Mr. Krab
03-29-2009, 02:48 PM
I'm tired of his BS and I'm not putting anyone on ignore. He is the worst kind of poster.
This

Mecca
03-29-2009, 02:49 PM
After this noob season Dane is far from the worst poster, atleast he doesn't stalk people around the forum.

doomy3
03-29-2009, 02:58 PM
After this noob season Dane is far from the worst poster, atleast he doesn't stalk people around the forum.

I agree.

I think your lead is still safe, but he is gaining ground. DCS had the spot on lockdown, but with him gone now, you two can fight over it.

Mecca
03-29-2009, 02:59 PM
I agree.

I think your lead is still safe, but he is gaining ground. DCS had the spot on lockdown, but with him gone now, you two can fight over it.

It's nice to see you have an opinion that is something other than "I dunno" or "I'll defer"

doomy3
03-29-2009, 03:02 PM
It's nice to see you have an opinion that is something other than "I dunno" or "I'll defer"

That's interesting. What have I said that about in a conversation?

BTW, I'm still waiting for a response from you in the "Curry double" thread.

Several have left rep messages saying you won't give a clear answer, or getting an answer from you is like nailing jello to a wall, etc.

That's why it's funny for you to have this response.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 03:05 PM
This

Enjoy fisting yourself, Tom

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 03:06 PM
I agree.

I think your lead is still safe, but he is gaining ground. DCS had the spot on lockdown, but with him gone now, you two can fight over it.

The knowledge and opinions you express are incomparable.

Oops, I meant incomprehensible.

doomy3
03-29-2009, 03:08 PM
The knowledge and opinions you express are incomparable.

Oops, I meant incomprehensible.

Go fuck yourself you self righteous retard.

While you're at it, go run into an AIDS tree while it's on fire.

JFC.









Better?

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 03:18 PM
Go fuck yourself you self righteous retard.

While you're at it, go run into an AIDS tree while it's on fire.

JFC.









Better?

Ah, you're just quoting other people.

I guess that's better than your usual.

KCrockaholic
03-29-2009, 04:23 PM
That's interesting. What have I said that about in a conversation?

BTW, I'm still waiting for a response from you in the "Curry double" thread.

Several have left rep messages saying you won't give a clear answer, or getting an answer from you is like nailing jello to a wall, etc.

That's why it's funny for you to have this response.

Its not worth the attempt....I like Mecca and all, but its impossible to get a direct answer. He atleast every once in a while will have some insightful thoughts, much more than some people like Dane for example.

doomy3
03-29-2009, 04:25 PM
Its not worth the attempt....I like Mecca and all, but its impossible to get a direct answer. He atleast every once in a while will have some insightful thoughts, much more than some people like Dane for example.

I agree with all of this. I just like giving him a hard time.

Cosmos
03-29-2009, 04:27 PM
Enjoy fisting yourself, Tom

North Hollywood, no doubt.

KCrockaholic
03-29-2009, 04:30 PM
I agree with all of this. I just like giving him a hard time.

same here

Mecca
03-29-2009, 04:43 PM
It's not cool to give me a hard time...and I dunno what you guys want me to do other than express how much I really don't like the "top 10" players in this draft.

'Hamas' Jenkins
03-29-2009, 04:59 PM
I hope the Chiefs draft a Big XII player just to piss you off.

That is just pathetic.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 05:00 PM
It's not cool to give me a hard time...and I dunno what you guys want me to do other than express how much I really don't like the "top 10" players in this draft.

They're just a bunch of 20 year old kids with nothing better to do with their time.

I don't take anything they say seriously (especially when they just attack me instead of attacking my ideas), but I don't mind flipping the shit back their direction.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 05:01 PM
That is just pathetic.

He's a real winner, isn't he?

And he's bragged about being a grad student.

Good grief.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 05:06 PM
Its not worth the attempt....I like Mecca and all, but its impossible to get a direct answer. He atleast every once in a while will have some insightful thoughts, much more than some people like Dane for example.

Oh, then please share all of you insight and knowledge about the upcoming draft!

I betting that'll amount to less than 10 words.

SNR
03-29-2009, 05:06 PM
I agree.

I think your lead is still safe, but he is gaining ground. DCS had the spot on lockdown, but with him gone now, you two can fight over it.Wait. What happened? Did DCS get banned? I missed his "I'm leaving forever" thread

doomy3
03-29-2009, 05:39 PM
Wait. What happened? Did DCS get banned? I missed his "I'm leaving forever" thread

yeah, he got banned for making physical threats to Iowanian. There was a long thread started by Iowanian somewhere.

doomy3
03-29-2009, 05:43 PM
They're just a bunch of 20 year old kids with nothing better to do with their time.

I don't take anything they say seriously (especially when they just attack me instead of attacking my ideas), but I don't mind flipping the shit back their direction.

:spock:

Yeah, that's it.

And I don't know what kind of "ideas" you are talking about exactly, except for posting the :Lin: smilie in every thread where someone mentions a potential draft pick. Or possibly telling everyone how stupid they are unless they want to trade back in the first round to take a CENTER of all things.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 05:51 PM
:spock:

Yeah, that's it.

And I don't know what kind of "ideas" you are talking about exactly, except for posting the :Lin: smilie in every thread where someone mentions a potential draft pick. Or possibly telling everyone how stupid they are unless they want to trade back in the first round to take a CENTER of all things.

Way to take things out of context. :rolleyes:

Please link us to where I've stated that "Everyone" is stupid for not wanting to trade back and take a center.

And once again, you've brought absolutely nothing to the table. You attack Mecca "for fun", you attack me out of context yet you don't bring any forethought to the conversation.

Just like Sam Hall. I can't wait until you start a thread about me, just like he did.

And got bitch-slapped in the process by everyone who posted.

doomy3
03-29-2009, 06:07 PM
Way to take things out of context. :rolleyes:

Please link us to where I've stated that "Everyone" is stupid for not wanting to trade back and take a center.

And once again, you've brought absolutely nothing to the table. You attack Mecca "for fun", you attack me out of context yet you don't bring any forethought to the conversation.

Just like Sam Hall. I can't wait until you start a thread about me, just like he did.

And got bitch-slapped in the process by everyone who posted.

ROFL

I'm not going to post a thread about you. I couldn't care less. As far as Mecca, when he decides to slow down enough to think about what he is posting, he brings some good things to the board. That is much more than what I can see from you. And I bring plenty to the conversations on this board, I am just over typing the same opinions over and over again, which is one place you and I differ.

As far as me taking things out of context, please tell me what other scenario you have not called people stupid in? So far, I have seen you attack people who would draft Curry, Brown, Orakpo, Monroe, Smith, Crabtree at number three. You have attacked anyone who would trade back and take one of these guys saying, "if we trade back, we better be drafting an OL with that pick since the draft is so weak on D."

You had an entire thread calling bdeg stupid and telling him there are no pass rushers in this draft, you routinely call philfree stupid for thinking Curry would be a fine pick, and you post that stupid smilie whenever someone suggests taking Smith/Monroe, and tell them that is the dumbest idea you have ever heard.

I guess, you have abstained from attacking anyone who wants to draft a QB there (big surprise, since the majority of the people in that group wouldn't dare disagreeing with each other), and trading back to take Mack/Unger.

If I have missed something, please let me know.

Sam Hall
03-29-2009, 06:08 PM
He's a real winner, isn't he?

And he's bragged about being a grad student.

Good grief.

My being in grad school has nothing to do with this board:shake:

Sam Hall
03-29-2009, 06:11 PM
Way to take things out of context. :rolleyes:

Please link us to where I've stated that "Everyone" is stupid for not wanting to trade back and take a center.

And once again, you've brought absolutely nothing to the table. You attack Mecca "for fun", you attack me out of context yet you don't bring any forethought to the conversation.

Just like Sam Hall. I can't wait until you start a thread about me, just like he did.

And got bitch-slapped in the process by everyone who posted.

Almost everyone agreed with me in that you're an asshole who attacks people because of their opinions. You're the worst kind of poster.

Sam Hall
03-29-2009, 06:15 PM
Here's Dane once again overreacting

McShay top 10 Mock Draft

03-29-2009 06:08 PM DaneMcCloud

**** you, Samantha. Seriously, if I had a child in Grad School that acted like you, I'd disown your stupid ass. And cut off any funding.

Sam Hall
03-29-2009, 06:18 PM
I call you out because you deserve it.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 06:25 PM
Almost everyone agreed with me in that you're an asshole who attacks people because of their opinions. You're the worst kind of poster.

Excuse me?

I beginning to think you're a fucking psycho.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 06:26 PM
I call you out because you deserve it.


You "call me out" because you're insecure fucking moron with little or nothing better to do.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 06:26 PM
Here's Dane once again overreacting

Go ahead and keep posting rep.

That'll increase your popularity.

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 06:31 PM
ROFL

I'm not going to post a thread about you. I couldn't care less. As far as Mecca, when he decides to slow down enough to think about what he is posting, he brings some good things to the board. That is much more than what I can see from you. And I bring plenty to the conversations on this board, I am just over typing the same opinions over and over again, which is one place you and I differ.

As far as me taking things out of context, please tell me what other scenario you have not called people stupid in? So far, I have seen you attack people who would draft Curry, Brown, Orakpo, Monroe, Smith, Crabtree at number three. You have attacked anyone who would trade back and take one of these guys saying, "if we trade back, we better be drafting an OL with that pick since the draft is so weak on D."

You had an entire thread calling bdeg stupid and telling him there are no pass rushers in this draft, you routinely call philfree stupid for thinking Curry would be a fine pick, and you post that stupid smilie whenever someone suggests taking Smith/Monroe, and tell them that is the dumbest idea you have ever heard.

I guess, you have abstained from attacking anyone who wants to draft a QB there (big surprise, since the majority of the people in that group wouldn't dare disagreeing with each other), and trading back to take Mack/Unger.

If I have missed something, please let me know.

So? What if all you say is true? That I don't agree with taking Curry, Monroe, Crabtree or Brown at #3. It happens to be MY opinion and I still believe that none of those players are impact players that will help the Chiefs long term. Do I need to go into specifics?

As for Bdeg, he and I had an understanding (at least I believe so) that we weren't exactly talking about he same position. Regardless of that conversation between me and Bdeg, I still don't think there's a pass rusher in this draft worthy of #3 overall. There aren't any true defensive ends in the mold of Bruce Smith, Neil Smith, Julius Peppers, Mario Williams, etc.

And yes, I use the "stupid" smilie when I see someone suggest that Monroe or Smith should be taken with the #3 overall because honestly, that's a fucking stupid suggestion.

So, if all of that "bothers you", why not refrain from commenting on my posts or put me on ignore?

Sam Hall
03-29-2009, 06:59 PM
ROFL

ChiefsCountry
03-29-2009, 07:08 PM
I'm waiting for another classic Hillbilly is a racial slur thread.

Sam Hall
03-29-2009, 07:11 PM
I'm waiting for another classic Hillbilly is a racial slur thread.

ROFL

ChiefsCountry
03-29-2009, 07:14 PM
ROFL

I dont know why you are laughing, you looked like a pretty big retard for posting it.

Sam Hall
03-29-2009, 07:18 PM
I dont know why you are laughing, you looked like a pretty big retard for posting it.

You obviously don't understand why it's dumb to call somebody a hillbilly on a freaking message board. There's no sense in it.

Halfcan
03-29-2009, 08:15 PM
Crabtree to the Chiefs with TG and Bowe-would be sick.

DeezNutz
03-29-2009, 08:18 PM
True. I would vomit.

We don't need a smaller Bowe clone, who runs lesser routes.

SNR
03-29-2009, 08:21 PM
Crabtree to the Chiefs with TG and Bowe-would be sick.You haven't been paying much attention to this thread, have you?

Halfcan
03-29-2009, 08:25 PM
You haven't been paying much attention to this thread, have you?

I know we will go D with the pick IF we don't trade down-but we could use some more play makers on the Offense too.

Mr. Krab
03-29-2009, 09:18 PM
<table class="tborder" width="100%" align="center" border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="1"><tbody id="collapseobj_usercp_reputation" style=""><tr><td class="alt1Active" id="p5622726252" width="50%">McShay top 10 Mock Draft (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?p=5622726#post5622726) </td> <td class="alt2" nowrap="nowrap">03-29-2009 04:04 PM</td> <td class="alt1" nowrap="nowrap"> DaneMcCloud (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/member.php?u=252) </td> <td class="alt2" width="50%">Go fuck yourself</td></tr></tbody></table>
Dane is special, you know special in that if Idi Amin and Irma Grese had a kid they would name him Dane special.

Mr. Krab
03-29-2009, 09:21 PM
You "call me out" because you're insecure fucking moron with little or nothing better to do.
Maybe because you seem to design virtually every single one of your post to the biggest asshole you can be. As if it's your very reason for existence on this board. Just a guess on my part though.

SNR
03-29-2009, 09:37 PM
Dane is special, you know special in that if Idi Amin and Irma Grese had a kid they would name him Dane special.Auf Englisch, bitte

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 10:18 PM
Dane is special, you know special in that if Idi Amin and Irma Grese had a kid they would name him Dane special.

Wow, a little bitch complaining about rep.

What's next?

DaneMcCloud
03-29-2009, 10:19 PM
Maybe because you seem to design virtually every single one of your post to the biggest asshole you can be. As if it's your very reason for existence on this board. Just a guess on my part though.

Good guess.

No, honestly? Some people around here get extremely butt-hurt when people disagree with them. It's like they were just kicked in the vagina.

Personally, I don't give a flying fuck what you or anyone else thinks of my posts.

So I'd suggest just putting me on ignore if you don't like what you read.

KCrockaholic
03-29-2009, 11:38 PM
Wow, a little bitch complaining about rep.

What's next?
ROFL

Go ahead and keep posting rep.

That'll increase your popularity.

ROFL

Its so F***in funny. I love it when Dane is on the Rag.

chiefs1111
03-29-2009, 11:58 PM
Crabtree to the Chiefs with TG and Bowe-would be sick.

I think DHB, Bowe and TG would be better.....

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 01:47 AM
I think DHB, Bowe and TG would be better.....

I do as well.

Like Hamas has said, DHB has the biggest boom/bust factor happening among receivers. I'd still take him if the Chiefs managed to move back to #14-21, if he's there.

bowener
03-30-2009, 02:54 AM
I'll be happy when the draft is over so I can stop hearing about the mythical creature that is Aaron Curry.

If he ends up on our team, it will never end.

rad
03-30-2009, 06:53 AM
How could he be a slider to #16 when virtually no one has him in the top ten?

The top of this draft, outside of a few outstanding left tackles, sucks.

Exactly, which is why I made the statement that Pioli would be gone after his first contract because not trading down with those guys sitting there would show a Matt Millen-like lack of judgment.

So the top of the draft sucks, but if Pioli can't find a trade-down partner, he's Millen-esque and would be gone after his first contract.

It's a good thing that you don't own the Chiefs.

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 10:26 AM
So the top of the draft sucks, but if Pioli can't find a trade-down partner, he's Millen-esque and would be gone after his first contract.

It's a good thing that you don't own the Chiefs.

That's not what I'm saying.

The top of the draft does suck. But it Pioli deserves the genius title that everyone here has seemingly granted him, I'd expect that he do something more with the Chiefs in his first draft than send the #34 overall pick for one aging player and one huge question mark QB, only to turn around and another left tackle or a cover linebacker when a potential franchise QB is available to draft or trade.

I find it odd that it was okay to question Herm and his decisions from day one but Pioli is somehow untouchable, just because he worked with the NFL's brightest coach.

I hope some of that magic wore off on Pioli but I'm skeptical under proven otherwise.

philfree
03-30-2009, 10:40 AM
That's not what I'm saying.

The top of the draft does suck. But it Pioli deserves the genius title that everyone here has seemingly granted him, I'd expect that he do something more with the Chiefs in his first draft than send the #34 overall pick for one aging player and one huge question mark QB, only to turn around and another left tackle or a cover linebacker when a potential franchise QB is available to draft or trade.

I find it odd that it was okay to question Herm and his decisions from day one but Pioli is somehow untouchable, just because he worked with the NFL's brightest coach.

I hope some of that magic wore off on Pioli but I'm skeptical under proven otherwise.


Aging player? He's just now hitting his prime. It's o.k. to question Pioli's moves but why do you always have to distort one of the facts in stating your position? The thing about Cassel, Stafford and Sanchez is that they are all potential franchise QBs. You may not want to accept that but it's true. It's also true that they all have alot of questions to answer when it comes to playing QB in the NFL. Cassel has shown that he can take the pressure to an extent which in the minds of Pioli and Haley seems to be pretty important.

PhilFree:arrow:

doomy3
03-30-2009, 10:46 AM
Aging player? He's just now hitting his prime. It's o.k. to question Pioli's moves but why do you always have to distort one of the facts in stating your position? The thing about Cassel, Stafford and Sanchez is that they are all potential franchise QBs. You may not want to accept that but it's true. It's also true that they all have alot of questions to answer when it comes to playing QB in the NFL. Cassel has shown that he can take the pressure to an extent which in the minds of Pioli and Haley seems to be pretty important.

PhilFree:arrow:

I'm pretty sure the aging player he was talking about was Vrabel. Cassel was the question mark QB.

philfree
03-30-2009, 10:47 AM
I'm pretty sure the aging player he was talking about was Vrabel. Cassel was the question mark QB.

If I misread then forgive me.


PhilFree:arrow:

doomy3
03-30-2009, 10:51 AM
If I misread then forgive me.


PhilFree:arrow:


Oh, I could care less. I just figured I would try to save you from the next post from Dane that was sure to tell you how stupid you are and that you lack reading comprehension. Hopefully now that the error has been pointed out, he will be able to refrain even though I know how hard that is for him.

kcbubb
03-30-2009, 04:01 PM
That's not what I'm saying.

The top of the draft does suck. But it Pioli deserves the genius title that everyone here has seemingly granted him, I'd expect that he do something more with the Chiefs in his first draft than send the #34 overall pick for one aging player and one huge question mark QB, only to turn around and another left tackle or a cover linebacker when a potential franchise QB is available to draft or trade.


What proof do you have that a cover linebacker is not a top 5 value in this year's draft?

htismaqe
03-30-2009, 04:21 PM
What proof do you have that a cover linebacker is not a top 5 value in this year's draft?

http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftlinebackers.php

http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftpicks.php

Teams have NEVER coveted LB's in the top 5. EVER.

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 04:28 PM
What proof do you have that a cover linebacker is not a top 5 value in this year's draft?

Well to be honest, there's far more proof that you're drooling fucking idiot.

Gee, I'm sorry I wounded your vagina with my words.

Stupid, little Cunt.

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 04:31 PM
It's a good thing that you don't own the Chiefs.

Why, do you think that if I owned the Chiefs, there combined record the past two seasons of 6-26 would be worse?

:D

kcbubb
03-30-2009, 04:52 PM
Well to be honest, there's far more proof that you're drooling ****ing idiot.

Gee, I'm sorry I wounded your vagina with my words.

Stupid, little ****.

your words say more about you than me. Curry will be taken top 5. And I'm sure that you will say the GM is an idiot. And we should believe you bc you are definitely smarter than NFL GMs.

Mecca
03-30-2009, 04:53 PM
your words say more about you than me. Curry will be taken top 5. And I'm sure that you will say the GM is an idiot. And we should believe you bc you are definitely smarter than NFL GMs.

You can be smarter than an NFL Gm and not be working in the NFL...that argument is really tired it's like saying we should never have opinions because how dare we question GM's.

kcbubb
03-30-2009, 04:54 PM
Why, do you think that if I owned the Chiefs, there combined record the past two seasons of 6-26 would be worse?

:D

have you ever played football? why don't stick to acting, hollywood. :)

kcbubb
03-30-2009, 04:59 PM
You can be smarter than an NFL Gm and not be working in the NFL...that argument is really tired it's like saying we should never have opinions because how dare we question GM's.

that wasn't my point. none of this is obvious and I'm definitely not stupid for thinking that Curry is a top 5 value in a weak draft. A lot of respectable people have Curry valued highly.

His arrogance is what I was pointing out. It's ridiculous. It really shows his insecurity and possible problems with his mother. Maybe a problem with his father or authority figure.

There is nothing wrong or stupid for asking for proof that Curry is not worth the #3 pick. There is something wrong with his reaction.

htismaqe
03-30-2009, 05:00 PM
your words say more about you than me. Curry will be taken top 5. And I'm sure that you will say the GM is an idiot. And we should believe you bc you are definitely smarter than NFL GMs.

And ten years from now, when the defense built around Curry is middle-of-the-road and he's become a solid but not spectacular player like Derrick Johnson, it will be proven that he's smarter than most NFL GMs.

Mecca
03-30-2009, 05:00 PM
Well Mike Mayock also has Robert Ayers as his 5th best player, I'd tell him straight to his face that he a total moron for that.

htismaqe
03-30-2009, 05:01 PM
that wasn't my point. none of this is obvious and I'm definitely not stupid for thinking that Curry is a top 5 value in a weak draft. A lot of respectable people have Curry valued highly.

His arrogance is what I was pointing out. It's ridiculous. It really shows his insecurity and possible problems with his mother. Maybe a problem with his father or authority figure.

There is nothing wrong or stupid for asking for proof that Curry is not worth the #3 pick. There is something wrong with his reaction.

I provided you with two links that contain the proof you asked for, and you acknowledged neither.

Methinks that you asking for "proof" is not sincere.

kcbubb
03-30-2009, 05:01 PM
Many great non rushing LBs have been taken in the top ten. In a weak draft, it is not inconceivable that the position could have top 5 value. Curry will have top 5 value this year. He is the most widely agreed upon player in this draft.

Mecca
03-30-2009, 05:02 PM
Many great non rushing LBs have been taken in the top ten. In a weak draft, it is not inconceivable that the position could have top 5 value. Curry will have top 5 value this year. He is the most widely agreed upon player in this draft.

Lets hear some examples of the players you're referencing.

htismaqe
03-30-2009, 05:04 PM
Many great non rushing LBs have been taken in the top ten. In a weak draft, it is not inconceivable that the position could have top 5 value. Curry will have top 5 value this year. He is the most widely agreed upon player in this draft.

WE DO NOT HAVE A TOP TEN PICK.

Again, I gave you proof. 3 non-rusing LBs in TWO DECADES.

You're obviously not interested in "proof".

kcbubb
03-30-2009, 05:04 PM
http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftlinebackers.php

http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftpicks.php

Teams have NEVER coveted LB's in the top 5. EVER.

your post actually supports taking Curry. and yes they have coveted LBs in the top 5. AJ Hawk was taken 5th by the Packers in 2006. Can you take that back or apologize or something?????

Mecca
03-30-2009, 05:06 PM
And that AJ Hawk pick looks pretty shitty right now, you think that's a good argument?

htismaqe
03-30-2009, 05:13 PM
your post actually supports taking Curry. and yes they have coveted LBs in the top 5. AJ Hawk was taken 5th by the Packers in 2006. Can you take that back or apologize or something?????

You know, I generally try to refrain from posting stuff that's personally inflammatory, but you're either an idiot or you're deliberately trying to start shit.

You obviously did not read those links, especially since one of them says in the VERY FIRST PARAGRAPH that he's defending his decision not to put Curry to the Lions, Rams, or Chiefs in his mock draft.

He then goes on to show historical precedent for why ILB's are never chosen in the top 5 and with good reason.

I'm not going to apologize to you because you're flat-out LYING to defend your side of the argument.

htismaqe
03-30-2009, 05:14 PM
The last 2 paragraphs from the 2nd link:

I'm not saying Curry is going to be a bust. I'm just pointing out that NFL front offices have since realized that linebacker isn't one of the most valuable positions.

The reason a linebacker hasn't been chosen first overall since 1988 is because NFL general managers and scouts have become wiser as the draft process has evolved. Well, most general managers. The Lions have clearly been an exception to that rule. So maybe Curry has a legit shot to go No. 1 after all.

You owe ME an apology, bubb.

orange
03-30-2009, 06:28 PM
The last 2 paragraphs from the 2nd link:


About that whole article: it's bullshit.

Let's look at this mathematically.

- In every draft you can guarantee at least one QB will be taken in the first five picks. That's a given - you can look it up if you want. So you're really looking at only 40 top five picks in a decade available for other players.

- There are 22 positions that can be drafted for; three of them are linebackers. So, random chance would suggest a 3/22 chance of a linebacker at each draft pick. (3/22) * 40 available picks = 5.45 expected linebacker picks in a decade. Given the over-representation of left tackles and second quarterbacks in the top five, we can round down to 5 expected linebackers.

- When Curry is drafted at #3, that will make 3 top-five linebackers in the decade - NOT decidedly different than the random-chance expectation; a bit on the under side, but not enough to indicate a strong bias. Essentially, linebackers are drafted in the top five as often as any but the premium positions (QB, LT). The author's numbers simply don't support his conclusion.


Furthermore, let's look at another of the writer's statements: "...the only linebacker chosen in the top three since 1998 was LaVarr Arrington in 2000. And it has to be noted that the man who took Arrington was none other than Daniel Snyder - an owner with a horrendous track record when making NFL personnel decisions." Snyder may indeed have a record of horrendous decisions, but Arrington wasn't one of them. He was a three-time ALL-PRO until coaching/contract problems and injuries ruined him. You would think that someone writing "analysis" of football would know that.

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 06:51 PM
His arrogance is what I was pointing out. It's ridiculous. It really shows his insecurity and possible problems with his mother. Maybe a problem with his father or authority figure.

You're quickly proving that you are one of the biggest fucking assholes to ever post on the 'Planet.

The only problem I have is with little fucking cocksuckers like yourself that pretend to be Dr. Phil and Ron Wolf, all wrapped up into one little piece of shit.

Go fuck your mother. Again.

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 06:51 PM
You owe ME an apology, bubb.

He owes everyone an apology.

Just for making us endure his asinine comments.

DeezNutz
03-30-2009, 07:17 PM
Have we all agreed that it's best to select Aaron Obama in a couple of weeks? The most powerful player, in the world...

googlegoogle
03-30-2009, 07:21 PM
Is a OLB more important than a DT that can penetrate and stop the run?

DeezNutz
03-30-2009, 07:27 PM
About that whole article: it's bullshit.

Let's look at this mathematically.

- In every draft you can guarantee at least one QB will be taken in the first five picks. That's a given - you can look it up if you want. So you're really looking at only 40 top five picks in a decade available for other players.

- There are 22 positions that can be drafted for; three of them are linebackers. So, random chance would suggest a 3/22 chance of a linebacker at each draft pick. (3/22) * 40 available picks = 5.45 expected linebacker picks in a decade. Given the over-representation of left tackles and second quarterbacks in the top five, we can round down to 5 expected linebackers.

- When Curry is drafted at #3, that will make 3 top-five linebackers in the decade - NOT decidedly different than the random-chance expectation; a bit on the under side, but not enough to indicate a strong bias. Essentially, linebackers are drafted in the top five as often as any but the premium positions (QB, LT). The author's numbers simply don't support his conclusion.


Furthermore, let's look at another of the writer's statements: "...the only linebacker chosen in the top three since 1998 was LaVarr Arrington in 2000. And it has to be noted that the man who took Arrington was none other than Daniel Snyder - an owner with a horrendous track record when making NFL personnel decisions." Snyder may indeed have a record of horrendous decisions, but Arrington wasn't one of them. He was a three-time ALL-PRO until coaching/contract problems and injuries ruined him. You would think that someone writing "analysis" of football would know that.

orange, you're a high-quality poster, but this is flawed logic and an example of how numbers can be twisted to support any purpose.

I'm not going to break down this entire post, but I'll focus instead upon point one--since a QB is always taken we're really talking about 4 slots in the top 5. Stop there.

This is similar to line of argumentation that coaches often parrot about, "If you don't count those 2 big plays..."

You have to count it. It's there, and the reason why it's there is an important piece of evidence to the larger argument, both when talking draft and shit-fucking performances.

rad
03-30-2009, 07:28 PM
Why, do you think that if I owned the Chiefs, there combined record the past two seasons of 6-26 would be worse?

:D

Maybe, but I know there would have been 2 different GM's and coaching staffs.

FIRE EVERYBODY!!!!!

orange
03-30-2009, 07:36 PM
orange, you're a high-quality poster, but this is flawed logic and an example of how numbers can be twisted to support any purpose.

I'm not going to break down this entire post, but I'll focus instead upon point one--since a QB is always taken we're really talking about 4 slots in the top 5. Stop there.

This is similar to line of argumentation that coaches often parrot about, "If you don't count those 2 big plays..."

You have to count it. It's there, and the reason why it's there is an important piece of evidence to the larger argument, both when talking draft and shit-****ing performances.

I'm just saying that there's no bias against linebackers. There IS a strong and obvious bias toward QBs (and a less strong one toward left tackles) that pushes the numbers down for every other position. The author's claim that there is a strong bias against linebackers is unsupportable. The picks that are left after the annual QB run break toward linebacker just as much as statistically expected.


... again...


I'm not going to break down this entire post, but I'll focus instead upon point one--since a QB is always taken we're really talking about 4 slots in the top 5. Stop there.


Looking quickly at the other link posted above we see EIGHT OUT OF TEN QB's at #1, and a second QB in the top three picks four times. I'd say that's prima facie evidence of strong bias toward QB without going any farther (into the top five picks and beyond like the linebacker link does).


Furthermore, I don't believe there's any realistic chance the Chiefs will draft a QB in the first round this year - not anymore - so they're looking at what's left; and in what's left, there is NO historical "positional value" argument against picking a linebacker.

DeezNutz
03-30-2009, 07:39 PM
I'm just saying that there's no bias against linebackers. There IS a strong and obvious bias toward QBs (and a less strong one toward left tackles) that pushes the numbers down for every other position. The author's claim that there is a strong bias against linebackers is unsupportable.

I take it as just another variant on the positional value argument.

Saying that there's a bias against (essentially cover) backers is not too different from saying there's a bias against a G or a TE.

orange
03-30-2009, 07:55 PM
I take it as just another variant on the positional value argument.

Saying that there's a bias against (essentially cover) backers is not too different from saying there's a bias against a G or a TE.

I edited a bunch of more stuff into that previous post - you might have missed it because of the page break. Sorry about that; I didn't realize you were still "live."

I expect you could make a case that there is a bias against G or TE (maybe C as well), but it wouldn't be a strong one in any case because of the small sample size.

bdeg
03-30-2009, 07:57 PM
I'm just saying that there's no bias against linebackers. There IS a strong and obvious bias toward QBs (and a less strong one toward left tackles) that pushes the numbers down for every other position. The author's claim that there is a strong bias against linebackers is unsupportable. The picks that are left after the annual QB run break toward linebacker just as much as statistically expected.




Let's look at this mathematically.

5.45 expected linebacker picks in a decade. Given the over-representation of left tackles and second quarterbacks in the top five, we can round down to 5 expected linebackers.

- When Curry is drafted at #3, that will make 3 top-five linebackers in the decade - NOT decidedly different than the random-chance expectation

2(historically), does not equal the "statistical expectation" of 5. It's not a large enough sample to say anything conclusively, but I'd like to see you run the odds of only 2 LB's being selected top 10 in 10 years if it's valued equally with all positions minus QB and LT. I'd guess it's around 10%.

DeezNutz
03-30-2009, 08:00 PM
Looking quickly at the other link posted above we see EIGHT OUT OF TEN QB's at #1, and a second QB in the top three picks four times. I'd say that's prima facie evidence of strong bias toward QB without going any farther (into the top five picks and beyond like the linebacker link does).


Furthermore, I don't believe there's any realistic chance the Chiefs will draft a QB in the first round this year - not anymore - so they're looking at what's left; and in what's left, there is NO historical "positional value" argument against picking a linebacker.

Still speaks to positional value, from my perspective. Does that mean bias? No, that suggests a negative connotation.

It's an evaluation of the risk/reward associated with certain positions and how difficult they are to find through any other avenue.

Top LT or QB = too damn difficult to obtain outside of the draft to have faith about one's ability to accomplish the task.

Getting a cover backer, relatively easy, especially in comparison. Does this mean that this acquisition would be at the level of a (insert any name, but for the sake of argument, we'll say...)Curry? No, absolutely not.

I'd drop the use of "bias."

It's not a "bias" for not drafting a punter #1 overall, for example. It's simply a realization that this type of move would be monumentally stupid.

orange
03-30-2009, 08:05 PM
2(historically), does not equal the "statistical expectation" of 5. It's not a large enough sample to say anything conclusively, but I'd like to see you run the odds of only 2 LB's being selected top 10 in 10 years if it's valued equally with all positions minus QB and LT. I'd guess it's between around 10%.

It's going to be 3 - you know that, don't you? ;)

The thing is, like you say, the sample size is so small one pick can and will make a huge adjustment. If someone wanted to grab a list of ALL the top ten picks (over a longer period than ten years, as well) they could run a real analysis of frequency of picks for each position.

The author on that WalterFootball link didn't do that. His quick and dirty argument simply tries to justify his predetermined position - but it doesn't, really. The numbers just aren't there.

I'm quite convinced that the only significant bias in the top picks is pro-QB, and that it is so dramatic it outweighs every other consideration.

bdeg
03-30-2009, 08:15 PM
Yes most likely 3, but you would've said Alan Branch was a lock two years ago.

I didn't bother to read the article, not a huge fan of his anymore.

The QB bias is without question the greatest, but I believe everything's got a relative value. An elite pass rusher is still worth more than an elite inside linebacker.

bdeg
03-30-2009, 08:35 PM
I want to compare the draft positions pass-rushers defined as 3-4 OLBs, 4-3 DE's, and undertackles as opposed to 3-4 ILB's and 4-3 lb's.

That's 5 positions vs 5 positions, but I wonder what % of players coming out fall into these categories. More players, more elite players, more top picks. And I don't really feel like doing all that math right now.

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 09:38 PM
have you ever played football? why don't stick to acting, hollywood. :)

Why don't you fuck off?

Who IS this fucking dickhead?

milkman
03-30-2009, 09:43 PM
Why don't you **** off?

Who IS this ****ing dickhead?

Hey!

Why don't YOU fuck off?


OK.
Got that out there.

I didn't want to miss out on ALL of the fun.

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 09:51 PM
Hey!

Why don't YOU fuck off?


OK.
Got that out there.

I didn't want to miss out on ALL of the fun.

LMAO

I seem to attract all of the psycho n00bs lately.

Hey, I wonder if this dude is really a chick?

THAT would make sense!

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 09:51 PM
Still speaks to positional value, from my perspective. Does that mean bias? No, that suggests a negative connotation.

It's an evaluation of the risk/reward associated with certain positions and how difficult they are to find through any other avenue.

Top LT or QB = too damn difficult to obtain outside of the draft to have faith about one's ability to accomplish the task.

Getting a cover backer, relatively easy, especially in comparison. Does this mean that this acquisition would be at the level of a (insert any name, but for the sake of argument, we'll say...)Curry? No, absolutely not.

I'd drop the use of "bias."

It's not a "bias" for not drafting a punter #1 overall, for example. It's simply a realization that this type of move would be monumentally stupid.

This type of post is ruining the board.

Go away.

DeezNutz
03-30-2009, 10:02 PM
This type of post is ruining the board.

Go away.

:cuss:

Hey! Fuck you!!!

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 10:18 PM
:cuss:

Hey! Fuck you!!!

I got that little note twice today.

ROFL

DeezNutz
03-30-2009, 10:37 PM
I got that little note twice today.

ROFL

You've been the lightning rod lately, bud.

I know you won't sweat it, though.

DaneMcCloud
03-30-2009, 10:44 PM
You've been the lightning rod lately, bud.

I know you won't sweat it, though.

It truly and deeply offends me that some posters, especially new members who really haven't gotten to know me, continually pick on me. It really hurts.
































ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL


Bring it ON, Motherfuckers!

KCrockaholic
03-30-2009, 10:52 PM
Can we delete this thread or something? McDouchebag is ruining the thread.

kcbubb
03-31-2009, 08:17 AM
And that AJ Hawk pick looks pretty shitty right now, you think that's a good argument?

I think Hawk will be a good player, but it really doesn't matter. It is proof that the position has had top 5 value recently. And he is a non rushing LB.

I can't use Akili Smith's failure to prove that QBs aren't a good position to draft or that the QB position doesn't have value.

I understand that your opinion is that you don't value ILB early in the draft and I understand and respect that, BUT most NFL teams do value them and have taken them early.

I also appreciate the posters who disagree with me and can make an argument without calling me a **#$***%. I think it shows a lack of intelligence to not be able to articulate your reasoning. And just post obscenities. I don't get on here to post to just find people to agree with me. I enjoy reading others opinions and the reasons for them.

I don't enjoy reading *#%@*#$@! And I really don't think anyone else does either. It only serves the purpose of making the person who posts it feel good. So, if you want to express your feeling of #$%*#@#$ toward me. Just PM me and save everyone else the misery.

And Mecca, I know you don't normally do the #$*%@#. You have strong opinions but you have reasons for them.

keg in kc
03-31-2009, 08:26 AM
most NFL teams do value them and have taken them early.Sure, if my "most" you mean "a couple" or by "do value them and have taken them" you mean "don't value them and haven't taken them".

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 08:58 AM
I understand that your opinion is that you don't value ILB early in the draft and I understand and respect that, BUT most NFL teams do value them and have taken them early.

And yet you've provided absolutely ZERO proof.

I provided AMPLE evidence to support the other side and you didn't even respond. The only person that did respond basically surmised that the whole premise is UNPROVEABLE. In now way did he prove your side of the argument, but rather that my side of the argument can't be supported by the data.

Seriously, I'm done with this. Arguing with you is like arguing with a brick wall. You're not even listening to what's being said, you just keep repeating the same thing over and again no matter what.

kcbubb
03-31-2009, 09:11 AM
And yet you've provided absolutely ZERO proof.

I provided AMPLE evidence to support the other side and you didn't even respond. The only person that did respond basically surmised that the whole premise is UNPROVEABLE. In now way did he prove your side of the argument, but rather that my side of the argument can't be supported by the data.

Seriously, I'm done with this. Arguing with you is like arguing with a brick wall. You're not even listening to what's being said, you just keep repeating the same thing over and again no matter what.

I understand that you don't buy my top 10 value being closer to 5 value in this draft. But I believe Curry is a better prospect than the players below. And this draft is worse than the drafts below. Especially 2007, a few of those players were judged at the time to be once in 10-20 year type of players.

And if you want to see positional value go to those drafts and look at what players were taken around those players. Look at the value relative to the players available. Curry is definitely not a top 5 value in 2007, but he is in 2009.

How about this:

2006 Draft
AJ Hawk #5 pick

2007 Draft
Patrick Willis #11 pick

2008 Draft
Keith Rivers #9 pick
Jerod Mayo #10 pick

kcbubb
03-31-2009, 09:16 AM
remember, htismaqe that Pioli took Mayo in 08. He was considered a reach by many at the time. Mayo was predicted by many to be taken 15-20. I'm assuming that you like Pioli bc he's in your sig.

rad
03-31-2009, 09:40 AM
The ham sandwich theorem takes its name from the case when n = 3 and the three objects of any shape are a chunk of ham and two chunks of bread — notionally, a sandwich — which can then each be bisected with a single cut (i.e., a plane). In two dimensions, the theorem is known as the pancake theorem of having to cut two infinitesimally thin pancakes on a plate each in half with a single cut (i.e., a straight line).

The ham sandwich theorem is also sometimes referred to as the "ham and cheese sandwich theorem", again referring to the special case when n = 3 and the three objects are

1. a chunk of ham,
2. a slice of cheese, and
3. two slices of bread (treated as a single disconnected object).

The theorem then states that it is possible to slice the ham and cheese sandwich in half such that each half contains the same amount of bread, cheese, and ham. It is possible to treat the two slices of bread as a single object, because the theorem only requires that the portion on each side of the plane vary continuously as the plane moves through 3-space.

The ham sandwich theorem has no relationship to the "squeeze theorem" (sometimes called the "sandwich theorem").

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 09:53 AM
I understand that you don't buy my top 10 value being closer to 5 value in this draft.

I don't buy it because it's utter unadulterated bullshit.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 09:54 AM
remember, htismaqe that Pioli took Mayo in 08. He was considered a reach by many at the time. Mayo was predicted by many to be taken 15-20. I'm assuming that you like Pioli bc he's in your sig.

Did he take Mayo in the top five? If he didn't, then it's IRRELEVANT.

Mayo isn't making $50M or more...

kcbubb
03-31-2009, 10:00 AM
who's the Calvin Johnson of this class???? and how often is there a prospect like that?

kcbubb
03-31-2009, 10:01 AM
the best player in the 09 draft would probably be the 4th or 5th pick in the 07 draft.

kcbubb
03-31-2009, 10:05 AM
it's not IRRELEVANT. It show Pioli's value of an ILB. He would rather reach for a player he liked at that position(ILB) than take another position of need (CB). It shows value.

Whether you like it or not. It is very probable that Pioli will take Curry because he has shown that he values the position.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 10:14 AM
it's not IRRELEVANT. It show Pioli's value of an ILB. He would rather reach for a player he liked at that position(ILB) than take another position of need (CB). It shows value.

Whether you like it or not. It is very probable that Pioli will take Curry because he has shown that he values the position.

The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the difference, especially in $$$, between the #3 pick and the #10 pick should tell everybody what they need to know about you.

It IS irrelevant and no amount of you saying it is relevant is going to make it relevant.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 10:19 AM
Jerrod Mayo signed a 5-year deal worth $18.9M with $13.8M guaranteed.

Matt Ryan signed a 6-year deal worth SEVENTY TWO MILLION with THIRTY FOUR POINT SEVEN FIVE MILLION guaranteed.

The 2006 and 2007 #3 overall picks got $23M and $26M guaranteed.

DaneMcCloud
03-31-2009, 10:26 AM
I don't buy it because it's utter unadulterated bullshit.

He's a fucking loon, looking for attention.

I'd suggest you stop wasting your time replying to this moronic imbecile.

Saccopoo
03-31-2009, 10:38 AM
kcbubb's argument is completely valid by way of showing that Pioli does value the SAM/ILB position. Htis is struggling to comprehend the positional pay for just such a position that a player will be compensated for with the #3 pick in the current NFL rookie/draft.

As long as the Chiefs select at the #3 pick, I hope that they get the very best player at a position of need that they can. If that's a SAM backer, then so be it. There is nothing that they can do about the rookie pay scale at this point, so someone is going to get paid #3 money regardless of the position that they play. I'd rather it be going to someone that they consider the best player for the team at that pick than reaching for a position that typically demands such positional pay.

Structure the rookie pay scale like they do in the NFL, with the first round slotted specific salary, then a flat rate on the subsequent rounds and you rectify a lot of problems. However, it currently is what it is and I hope that the Chiefs don't piss away the #3 pick on a guy who is a large reach in this draft because some dork can't pull his nose out of the "draft value chart" or refuses to pick a certain position because typically that position doesn't get paid as much as others. Just get the best player available that will immediately help the team and be a high level contributor for a very long time (barring any unforseen injuries).

As many people have noted, the Chiefs have a lot of holes to fill. This is not the time to be reaching for potential or worrying about what positions get paid what and base your pick on such trivialities. They need contributors immediately. They got two in Vrabel and Cassell already. The linebacking corps was unquestionably the worst position on the Chiefs last season. Whether that was coaching (which I'm tending to believe was the case in being forced to run a Gun Blitz/Herm Cover Two hybrid that didn't ever mesh) or the players, it is still a position of significant concern. The other is the offensive line. That means that the Chiefs will be looking at players such as Curry, Orakpo, Maybin, Brown, Johnson, Monroe, J. Smith, A. Smith, and Oher almost exclusively with the #3 pick. A reach type pick they would be T. Jackson or Raji for the D-line. A dark horse type pick would be Crabtree or Maclin. But that's about it. Out of those players, who is the best player at the greatest position of need for the Chiefs? It sure looks like Curry to me.

A trade down/swap with the Eagles so that they can jump up for Monroe would be a possibility, and the Chiefs could pick up an edge rusher like Sintim or English and some additional picks later in the draft would also be an attractive scenario.

DaneMcCloud
03-31-2009, 10:41 AM
kcbubb's argument is completely valid by way of showing that Pioli does value the SAM/ILB position.


You know, this "Pioli values" bullshit is just out of hand. The needs of the New England Patriots are FAR different than the needs of the Kansas City Chiefs. What may appear as "value" to one team may have absolutely no value to another team.

And furthermore, his argument makes absolutely no sense.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 10:57 AM
kcbubb's argument is completely valid by way of showing that Pioli does value the SAM/ILB position. Htis is struggling to comprehend the positional pay for just such a position that a player will be compensated for with the #3 pick in the current NFL rookie/draft.

kcbubb has demonstrated that Pioli values the SAM/ILB position with the TENTH pick. He in no way has demonstrated that he values that same position with the #3 overall pick. I'm not struggling with anything.

Just get the best player available that will immediately help the team and be a high level contributor for a very long time (barring any unforseen injuries).

Hey we're on the same page. Too bad that player is more likely to be Matt Stafford or Eugene Monroe than Aaron Curry.

A trade down/swap with the Eagles so that they can jump up for Monroe would be a possibility, and the Chiefs could pick up an edge rusher like Sintim or English and some additional picks later in the draft would also be an attractive scenario.

Now we're talking.

Saccopoo
03-31-2009, 11:00 AM
You know, this "Pioli values" bullshit is just out of hand. The needs of the New England Patriots are FAR different than the needs of the Kansas City Chiefs. What may appear as "value" to one team may have absolutely no value to another team.

And furthermore, his argument makes absolutely no sense.

The Patriots, when they drafted Mayo, certainly had less of a need at linebacker than what the Chiefs current situation demands. Just looking at it from that perspective, do you feel that the Chiefs taking Curry at #3 is any more of a stretch than the Patriots taking Mayo at the #10? I certainly do not, and as such, I don't see it as much of a stretch for the Chiefs to seriously consider Curry, who seems to have the athleticism and speed and size to effectively play the multiple role LB such as Vrabel did up in NE in a hybrid type defense utilizing both 3-4 and 4-3 looks. Considering that we will be playing a hybrid, Curry's value escalated slightly because of it, IMHO. Versatility and adaptability are going to be valued on this defense. Curry seems to offer that, at least more that players such as Brown, Maybin, Johnson and Orakpo. I agree that with having DJ being close to the same player, it's a bit of a doubling up, and it remains to seen if DJ just was hamstringed by the bad defense and can actually be consistently good in a normal defense. If that's the case, then Curry would be an illogical pick unless he ends up being looked at as a Vrabel type of guy that can play anywhere very effectively.

I wouldn't mind Monroe at the spot either. I know that people are going to go nuts about sliding Albert over to the RT spot if that happened, but it would certainly help to shore up the right side of the O-line, which was pathetic last season.

KCrockaholic
03-31-2009, 11:09 AM
The Patriots, when they drafted Mayo, certainly had less of a need at linebacker than what the Chiefs current situation demands. Just looking at it from that perspective, do you feel that the Chiefs taking Curry at #3 is any more of a stretch than the Patriots taking Mayo at the #10? I certainly do not, and as such, I don't see it as much of a stretch for the Chiefs to seriously consider Curry, who seems to have the athleticism and speed and size to effectively play the multiple role LB such as Vrabel did up in NE in a hybrid type defense utilizing both 3-4 and 4-3 looks. Considering that we will be playing a hybrid, Curry's value escalated slightly because of it, IMHO. Versatility and adaptability are going to be valued on this defense. Curry seems to offer that, at least more that players such as Brown, Maybin, Johnson and Orakpo. I agree that with having DJ being close to the same player, it's a bit of a doubling up, and it remains to seen if DJ just was hamstringed by the bad defense and can actually be consistently good in a normal defense. If that's the case, then Curry would be an illogical pick unless he ends up being looked at as a Vrabel type of guy that can play anywhere very effectively.

I wouldn't mind Monroe at the spot either. I know that people are going to go nuts about sliding Albert over to the RT spot if that happened, but it would certainly help to shore up the right side of the O-line, which was pathetic last season.

Very well thought out post....most of you guys dont understand how dominant Curry is going to be at this level. This is the most NFL ready player to come into the draft in the last 5 years besides Joe Thomas.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 11:24 AM
The Patriots, when they drafted Mayo, certainly had less of a need at linebacker than what the Chiefs current situation demands.

ILB was listed as the #1 or #2 need of the Pats (along with CB) on over 90% of the draft websites out there. Do a Google search.

Just looking at it from that perspective, do you feel that the Chiefs taking Curry at #3 is any more of a stretch than the Patriots taking Mayo at the #10?

ABSO-FREAKING-LUTELY. A stretch to the tune of almost $25M more for an ILB.

Considering that we will be playing a hybrid, Curry's value escalated slightly because of it, IMHO.

Will we? They haven't said anything definitive - it's all speculation.

I wouldn't mind Monroe at the spot either. I know that people are going to go nuts about sliding Albert over to the RT spot if that happened, but it would certainly help to shore up the right side of the O-line, which was pathetic last season.

About the only scenario worse than being forced to settle for Curry at #3 is this one.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 11:25 AM
Very well thought out post....most of you guys dont understand how dominant Curry is going to be at this level. This is the most NFL ready player to come into the draft in the last 5 years besides Joe Thomas.

See this is what I'm talking about.

Why isn't Curry's name Jesus, since he can walk on water and all?

RustShack
03-31-2009, 11:33 AM
So the Patriots drafted Mayo in 2000? I know people aren't dumb enough to compare us to what the Patriots do now.

KCrockaholic
03-31-2009, 11:38 AM
Its not like my opinions are biased. I dont like Wake Forest at all. Im not from Fayetteville, NC. I didnt go to E.E. Smith HS with him or anything (Tank Tyler did though). Ive scouted him during the last 1 quarter of his Junior year and his entire season year. Im not just makin sh*t up. I know what im talking about with just how good Curry is going to be.

KCrockaholic
03-31-2009, 11:39 AM
So the Patriots drafted Mayo in 2000? I know people aren't dumb enough to compare us to what the Patriots do now.

Who the hell said that?

Mecca
03-31-2009, 11:40 AM
If you want to use the Patriots as an example when they were building their team they used their high picks on defensive linemen...

And for the record I don't in anyway see Curry as a better prospect than Willis, Rivers, or Mayo, I think he's similar to Hawk and he didn't produce at the college level the same way Hawk did.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 11:42 AM
Its not like my opinions are biased. I dont like Wake Forest at all. Im not from Fayetteville, NC. I didnt go to E.E. Smith HS with him or anything (Tank Tyler did though). Ive scouted him during the last 1 quarter of his Junior year and his entire season year. Im not just makin sh*t up. I know what im talking about with just how good Curry is going to be.

ROFL

Can you tell me what the lottery numbers are too?

bdeg
03-31-2009, 11:42 AM
The Patriots, when they drafted Mayo, certainly had less of a need at linebacker than what the Chiefs current situation demands. Just looking at it from that perspective, do you feel that the Chiefs taking Curry at #3 is any more of a stretch than the Patriots taking Mayo at the #10? I certainly do not, and as such, I don't see it as much of a stretch for the Chiefs to seriously consider Curry, who seems to have the athleticism and speed and size to effectively play the multiple role LB such as Vrabel did up in NE in a hybrid type defense utilizing both 3-4 and 4-3 looks. Considering that we will be playing a hybrid, Curry's value escalated slightly because of it, IMHO. Versatility and adaptability are going to be valued on this defense. Curry seems to offer that, at least more that players such as Brown, Maybin, Johnson and Orakpo. I agree that with having DJ being close to the same player, it's a bit of a doubling up, and it remains to seen if DJ just was hamstringed by the bad defense and can actually be consistently good in a normal defense. If that's the case, then Curry would be an illogical pick unless he ends up being looked at as a Vrabel type of guy that can play anywhere very effectively.

I wouldn't mind Monroe at the spot either. I know that people are going to go nuts about sliding Albert over to the RT spot if that happened, but it would certainly help to shore up the right side of the O-line, which was pathetic last season.

Good post, and ya I'm still being optimistic about DJ I think he was better before Gun started coaching the LB's. You lost me at Monroe though..... It would just be such a waste when we can fill that hole at a much lower price.

Mecca
03-31-2009, 11:43 AM
Derrick Johnson is just soft I'm not sure any amount of coaching will ever change his passive demeanor.

And I think it was pretty well known the Pats would take a LB last year since their organization devalues the CB position. I still believe they were taking Rivers and the Bengals jacked them.

kcbubb
03-31-2009, 11:48 AM
speaking of $$$$.... who got paid more, Matt Ryan or Jake Long???? draft position is not the only indicator of compensation. Curry is probably the best option for negotiating less money because of his position. You probably pay more at that pick for any of the other players mentioned because of the position they play.

RustShack
03-31-2009, 11:49 AM
Who the hell said that?

Well if your comparing what the Chiefs should do with the Patriots, it should be the rebuilding Patriots not the Patriots of the last five years.

kcbubb
03-31-2009, 11:50 AM
Derrick Johnson is just soft I'm not sure any amount of coaching will ever change his passive demeanor.

And I think it was pretty well known the Pats would take a LB last year since their organization devalues the CB position. I still believe they were taking Rivers and the Bengals jacked them.

so you are saying that the pats value ILB more than CB???? if that is so, how do you think the pats, not you personally, would value the defensive positions from greatest to least???

Mecca
03-31-2009, 11:51 AM
speaking of $$$$.... who got paid more, Matt Ryan or Jake Long???? draft position is not the only indicator of compensation. Curry is probably the best option for negotiating less money because of his position. You probably pay more at that pick for any of the other players mentioned because of the position they play.

That's what happens when you get a contract in place before the draft....right now the Dolphins look like they made the wrong pick.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 11:52 AM
speaking of $$$$.... who got paid more, Matt Ryan or Jake Long???? draft position is not the only indicator of compensation. Curry is probably the best option for negotiating less money because of his position. You probably pay more at that pick for any of the other players mentioned because of the position they play.

Joe Thomas got $23M guaranteed at that spot 2 years ago. No matter who we pick, they're going to be getting a contract roughly 2 to 3 times (or more) the size of Jerrod Mayo's contract.

You're grasping at straws now.

Mecca
03-31-2009, 11:53 AM
Joe Thomas got $23M guaranteed at that spot 2 years ago. No matter who we pick, they're going to be getting a contract roughly 2 to 3 times (or more) the size of Jerrod Mayo's contract.

You're grasping at straws now.

You basically make Curry one of the highest paid if not the highest paid player on your team, at a position that isn't that valuable....it's like having the face of your franchise be a tight end, oh shit.

kcbubb
03-31-2009, 11:54 AM
so, you don't agree that if we draft a QB at #3 that the QB gets paid more than the ILB if we draft an ILB?????

how is that grasping for straws???? that's just stating the facts... why do you have such disdain for facts???

Chiefnj2
03-31-2009, 11:56 AM
I don't get the fact that people are getting hung up on the money at #3. If KC can't trade out of the spot they are going to have to pay someone. 98% of the board doesn't think it should be a LOT. That leaves the best defensive player in Curry, or taking a lower ranked player because you are more comfortable paying a DT/NT (Raji), OLB (Orakpo), or WR (Crabtree).

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 11:56 AM
so, you don't agree that if we draft a QB at #3 that the QB gets paid more than the ILB if we draft an ILB?????

Where do you get this shit? Where did I EVER SAY that a QB wouldn't get more money than any other position? Seriously, where do you get it?

how is that grasping for straws???? that's just stating the facts... why do you have such disdain for facts???

You bringing up completely irrelevant comparisons and trying to pass them off as "facts" is the very definition of grasping at straws.

Mecca
03-31-2009, 11:58 AM
I don't get the fact that people are getting hung up on the money at #3. If KC can't trade out of the spot they are going to have to pay someone. 98% of the board doesn't think it should be a LOT. That leaves the best defensive player in Curry, or taking a lower ranked player because you are more comfortable paying a DT/NT (Raji), OLB (Orakpo), or WR (Crabtree).

I guess the salary cap doesn't matter, paying the complimentary positions a bunch of money will screw you over.

Chiefnj2
03-31-2009, 11:59 AM
I guess the salary cap doesn't matter, paying the complimentary positions a bunch of money will screw you over.

What screws you over worse is missing on your first round pick. So Mecca, who are you taking at #3?

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 11:59 AM
I don't get the fact that people are getting hung up on the money at #3. If KC can't trade out of the spot they are going to have to pay someone.

I've said it a dozen times.

If you can't trade down and there's nobody else there worth the pick, by all means take Curry. I've never suggested that they should AVOID Curry.

He just shouldn't be their FIRST choice. He's not a "no-brainer".

Mecca
03-31-2009, 12:00 PM
Look if they get backed into a corner and have to take him that's one thing but he shouldn't be the #1 player or first option on the board by any means like some people seem to think.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 12:01 PM
Look if they get backed into a corner and have to take him that's one thing but he shouldn't be the #1 player or first option on the board by any means like some people seem to think.

Exactly.

Saccopoo
03-31-2009, 12:01 PM
ABSO-FREAKING-LUTELY. A stretch to the tune of almost $25M more for an ILB.

Unfortunately, there's nothing that can be done about that. It is what it is. That's why I've said it's going to be difficult for the Chiefs to trade out of it. Not impossible, but difficult.

Will we? They haven't said anything definitive - it's all speculation.

True, and with our current roster I think we'll be seeing more 4-3 than 3-4 if it is a hybrid type system. I like the 4-3 better anyway. It's easier to play, less demands on smaller players and easier to find serviceable players for the various positions. Heck, I'd like to see a bit of the 4-6 myself looking at the Chiefs roster, and I don't know why you don't see more of it in this pass happy day and age of the NFL.

About the only scenario worse than being forced to settle for Curry at #3 is this one.

But Monroe at the #3 spot for the Chiefs is not beyond the realms of possibility and would make some sense considering how poorly our right side of the O-line played (predicting a switch by Albert to RT as he's a bit more stout than Monroe, who seems to be a natural LT).

As I stated, I don't think Derrick Johnson is a lost cause and he's pretty much the same player that Aaron Curry is. Albert played well at LT last season, and we got Cassell as our quarterback. The scenario that makes the most sense is a trade down, with the Eagles looking like the team most likely to do that with their two first round picks and a desperate need at the offensive tackle position. I could see them wanting to move up to get Monroe/Smith/Smith/Oher potentially. Chiefs move down, get a player such as Sintim, English, Johnson, Mack, Oher, Britton, Beatty, Robinson, Sean Smith, Bey, Harvin, Laurinaitis, Maualuga, et al., and a pick or two later in the draft.

KCrockaholic
03-31-2009, 12:02 PM
I guess the salary cap doesn't matter, paying the complimentary positions a bunch of money will screw you over.

and we dont have the millions to spend? Did you forget that we have more cap room than any other team in the NFL?

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 12:03 PM
Unfortunately, there's nothing that can be done about that. It is what it is. That's why I've said it's going to be difficult for the Chiefs to trade out of it. Not impossible, but difficult.

True, and with our current roster I think we'll be seeing more 4-3 than 3-4 if it is a hybrid type system. I like the 4-3 better anyway. It's easier to play, less demands on smaller players and easier to find serviceable players for the various positions. Heck, I'd like to see a bit of the 4-6 myself looking at the Chiefs roster, and I don't know why you don't see more of it in this pass happy day and age of the NFL.

But Monroe at the #3 spot for the Chiefs is not beyond the realms of possibility and would make some sense considering how poorly our right side of the O-line played (predicting a switch by Albert to RT as he's a bit more stout than Monroe, who seems to be a natural LT).

As I stated, I don't think Derrick Johnson is a lost cause and he's pretty much the same player that Aaron Curry is. Albert played well at LT last season, and we got Cassell as our quarterback. The scenario that makes the most sense is a trade down, with the Eagles looking like the team most likely to do that with their two first round picks and a desperate need at the offensive tackle position. I could see them wanting to move up to get Monroe/Smith/Smith/Oher potentially. Chiefs move down, get a player such as Sintim, English, Johnson, Mack, Oher, Britton, Beatty, Robinson, Sean Smith, Bey, Harvin, Laurinaitis, Maualuga, et al., and a pick or two later in the draft.

Agree with pretty much all of this.

Mecca
03-31-2009, 12:04 PM
and we dont have the millions to spend? Did you forget that we have more cap room than any other team in the NFL?

Dude I don't give a fuck about right now I give a fuck about 4 years from now when Curry has a 8 million dollar base and we have to pay a rusher or something like that.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 12:04 PM
and we dont have the millions to spend? Did you forget that we have more cap room than any other team in the NFL?

Just because you have shitloads of money today doesn't mean it's smart to light it on fire or wipe your ass with it. Because you want to have money TOMORROW too.

Chiefnj2
03-31-2009, 12:06 PM
Look if they get backed into a corner and have to take him that's one thing but he shouldn't be the #1 player or first option on the board by any means like some people seem to think.

So you are now of the position that if KC stays at #3 they should take Curry?

OnTheWarpath58
03-31-2009, 12:06 PM
Dude I don't give a fuck about right now I give a fuck about 4 years from now when Curry has a 8 million dollar base and we have to pay a rusher or something like that.

Just because you have shitloads of money today doesn't mean it's smart to light it on fire or wipe your ass with it. Because you want to have money TOMORROW too.

Seriously.

Quit.

Making.

Sense.

DeezNutz
03-31-2009, 12:06 PM
Why isn't Curry's name Jesus, since he can walk on water and all?

Curry lovers are going to take this as an insult.

RustShack
03-31-2009, 12:08 PM
and we dont have the millions to spend? Did you forget that we have more cap room than any other team in the NFL?

If you waste a lot of money on complementary positions your players at a valuable position are going to want even more.

KCrockaholic
03-31-2009, 12:08 PM
Just because you have shitloads of money today doesn't mean it's smart to light it on fire or wipe your ass with it. Because you want to have money TOMORROW too.

No matter who we pick at #3 it will be around the same price. In fact Curry will probably be cheaper than any other player at the #3 spot. Its not like we can just draft a guy and keep all our money. It doesnt matter who we take, its gonna cost.

OnTheWarpath58
03-31-2009, 12:08 PM
Curry lovers are going to take this as an insult.

It's no more insulting than the fawning they do over a player they've never seen play outside a YouTube highlight clip, yet speak of as the single-greatest player to ever play LB in the NCAA.

Mecca
03-31-2009, 12:09 PM
If you waste a lot of money on complementary positions your players at a valuable position are going to want even more.

We're talking about people that don't realize shit like this, we just spent basically 10 years having our best player be a fucking Tight End, think about that.

Mecca
03-31-2009, 12:10 PM
It's no more insulting than the fawning they do over a player they've never seen play outside a YouTube highlight clip, yet speak of as the single-greatest player to ever play LB in the NCAA.

All I ever ask is for people to be honest about the prospects, he's not the best LB prospect in a decade he's not even the best LB prospect of the last 12 months.

KCrockaholic
03-31-2009, 12:10 PM
So you are now of the position that if KC stays at #3 they should take Curry?

Well if they dont draft Sanchez/Brown/Raji Then they should probably take Curry if they have too.

KCrockaholic
03-31-2009, 12:11 PM
All I ever ask is for people to be honest about the prospects, he's not the best LB prospect in a decade he's not even the best LB prospect of the last 12 months.

So what makes Jarrod Mayo and Keith Rivers better than Aaron Curry? Dont tell me its because Rivers and Mayo played at big schools...Rivers could still easily be a product of great players around him at USC.

OnTheWarpath58
03-31-2009, 12:13 PM
All I ever ask is for people to be honest about the prospects, he's not the best LB prospect in a decade he's not even the best LB prospect of the last 12 months.

I know that.

You know that.

Parker knows that.

However, the people who HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN HIM PLAY don't know that.

I have a hard time taking anyone seriously when all they do is piggyback their opinions from someone like Kiper or Mayock, or get all their "scouting video" from a fucking YouTube clip.

God forbid people actually WATCH these guys play and form their OWN opinions.

KCrockaholic
03-31-2009, 12:14 PM
I know that.

You know that.

Parker knows that.

However, the people who HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN HIM PLAY don't know that.

I have a hard time taking anyone seriously when all they do is piggyback their opinions from someone like Kiper or Mayock, or get all their "scouting video" from a ****ing YouTube clip.

God forbid people actually WATCH these guys play and form their OWN opinions.


I dont know? Has anyone else on here watched every Wake game from this past season?

Mecca
03-31-2009, 12:16 PM
So what makes Jarrod Mayo and Keith Rivers better than Aaron Curry? Dont tell me its because Rivers and Mayo played at big schools...Rivers could still easily be a product of great players around him at USC.

I would consider him a similar prospect to Mayo...outside of Mayo actually had played inside and outside in college so he showed more position versatility and I think Mayo moves a little more fluid but nothing really giant there.

Now I consider Rivers a better prospect, his school pedigree is better, he started for 3 years at a top school. he while not being quite as big is much more fluid and fast on the field and his coverage skills are much better. Curry is more physical at the point and plays the run a bit better but that is essentially why Rivers is a prototypical weakside backer and Curry is a prototypical strong side backer.

orange
03-31-2009, 12:17 PM
You basically make Curry one of the highest paid if not the highest paid player on your team, at a position that isn't that valuable....it's like having the face of your franchise be a tight end, oh shit.


Don't be absurd. Your $16 million/year QB is far and away your highest paid player. Whoever is picked at #3 won't be a patch on him.

Coogs
03-31-2009, 12:18 PM
I dont know? Has anyone else on here watched every Wake game from this past season?

I wished I would have watched at least 1 game Wake Forrest played. I had a couple of opportunities last fall, but watched a different game instead. I would love to be able to get in on this discussion, but I have no clue! :banghead:

Saccopoo
03-31-2009, 12:19 PM
Derrick Johnson is just soft I'm not sure any amount of coaching will ever change his passive demeanor.

And I think it was pretty well known the Pats would take a LB last year since their organization devalues the CB position. I still believe they were taking Rivers and the Bengals jacked them.

He has spurts where he shows to be dominant. Then disappears. Judging by how miserable all the Chiefs were under the Gun/Herm defensive debacle, particularly the linebackers, I'm willing to give the players the benefit of the doubt. I like to go back to Eddie Kennison, who stated that the biggest thing people don't know/realize about the NFL is that 75-80% of the players in the league could be stars/Pro Bowl level players if given the opportunity in the right system. I believe he's correct in that you see numerous undrafted free agents rise to the top every single year. Johnson has the speed and size to dominate, and has done so on the rare occasions. However, he does disappear. You don't want that from your "best" linebacker.

If the Chiefs can't trade out, which I'd like to see more than anything, would I be happy with Curry? You betcha. I don't think he disappears in a game, nor would he play soft. Is he Brooks or Lewis? Probably not. More like Hawk or Willis, with the potential to develop into an All-Pro level player. I wouldn't mind that one bit. I also wouldn't mind Monroe, who was good enough at the LT spot in college to keep Albert at guard. Our current RT situation is downright scary, and anything to help that would be welcomed. Is he the second coming of Willy Roaf or Anthony Munoz? Most likely not, but seems like he is a pretty good player who will start and produce from the first game on.

If the Chiefs are forced to pick at the #3, neither Curry nor Monroe would be a bad pick by any stretch. I know neither are a sexy pick, but I don't want sexy. I want quality production from day one with the potential to develop into the top 10% of players at their position in the league. I think that both will give you that potential.

Mecca
03-31-2009, 12:21 PM
Don't put Hawk and Willis together, Willis has been a playmaking LB while Hawk has been a disappointment.

RustShack
03-31-2009, 12:22 PM
Hypothetically we do draft Curry, I think we would use the 4-3 a lot more than we do the 3-4. Curry and DJ as the OLB's and Dorsey at UT, but could Vrable play MLB or he be best served at RE?

Chiefnj2
03-31-2009, 12:23 PM
For those against taking Curry with the #3 pick - who do you draft at #3. Please don't use the cop-out I'll trade down answer. Who do you draft?

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 12:23 PM
No matter who we pick at #3 it will be around the same price. In fact Curry will probably be cheaper than any other player at the #3 spot. Its not like we can just draft a guy and keep all our money. It doesnt matter who we take, its gonna cost.

Absolutely it's gonna cost.

Some positions are worth it and some aren't. Simple as that.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 12:23 PM
I dont know? Has anyone else on here watched every Wake game from this past season?

I saw him play probably 8 or 9 times over the past 2 seasons.

Furthermore, just because you watched every game doesn't mean you knew what you were watching.

I mean, none of us are scouts, are we?

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 12:24 PM
Don't be absurd. Your $16 million/year QB is far and away your highest paid player. Whoever is picked at #3 won't be a patch on him.

He's tagged. We're on the hook for 1 year and 1 year only.

Mecca
03-31-2009, 12:24 PM
I have a better question, why did no one ever talk about Curry, even draft sites until Mike Mayock blew him on NFL network?

Seriously I question how many people around here even knew who he was 4 months ago...Curry was a projected 12-20 player until the season ended that bugs me.

OnTheWarpath58
03-31-2009, 12:24 PM
I saw him play probably 8 or 9 times over the past 2 seasons.

Furthermore, just because you watched every game doesn't mean you knew what you were watching.

I mean, none of us are scouts, are we?

Same here.

Calling Curry the best LB prospect of the last 10 years proves to me that he has no clue as to what he's watching.

OnTheWarpath58
03-31-2009, 12:25 PM
I have a better question, why did no one ever talk about Curry, even draft sites until Mike Mayock blew him on NFL network?

Seriously I question how many people around here even knew who he was 4 months ago...Curry was a projected 12-20 player until the season ended that bugs me.

And boom goes the dynamite.

RustShack
03-31-2009, 12:25 PM
Oh and I heard this rumor about someone being friends with Turk McBride or being friends with one of his friends or something. But supposedly Turk is going to be our OLB in the 3-4 :spock:

Mecca
03-31-2009, 12:27 PM
Oh and I heard this rumor about someone being friends with Turk McBride or being friends with one of his friends or something. But supposedly Turk is going to be our OLB in the 3-4 :spock:

Turk McBride playing 3-4 OLB is more funny than Tamba Hali doing it.

orange
03-31-2009, 12:28 PM
He's tagged. We're on the hook for 1 year and 1 year only.

If you keep him for year two, it's at 110% salary - or you can let him walk and throw away that second round pick (-). I don't think that's very likely, do you? I believe they traded for him because they actually want him.

OnTheWarpath58
03-31-2009, 12:28 PM
Oh and I heard this rumor about someone being friends with Turk McBride or being friends with one of his friends or something. But supposedly Turk is going to be our OLB in the 3-4 :spock:

http://i41.tinypic.com/2gwgp4j.jpg

philfree
03-31-2009, 12:28 PM
Dude I don't give a **** about right now I give a **** about 4 years from now when Curry has a 8 million dollar base and we have to pay a rusher or something like that.


I think that's hogwash. You have no clue about how the contract for who ever we draft will be written. Seeing how todays contracts are all about guaranteed money and signing bonuses I would imagine that there's real good chance that this contract will be frontloaded and regardless of that if in year four of the contract you give the guy a new contract with some signing bonus money and it'll be all good. It happens all the time in the NFL and this will be no different. IMO using the money as a reason to not draft Curry, well it isn't a good reason.


PhilFree:arrow:

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 12:28 PM
The ONLY person I've heard mention Turk McBride and OLB in the same sentence is Eric Hicks.

He's a 3-4 DE and he was when he was drafted.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 12:29 PM
If you keep him for year two, it's at 110% salary - or you can let him walk and throw away that second round pick (-).

Or if we draft a QB and decide to change directions, we can trade him. There's a myriad of options, so don't act like we're locked into anything.

Mecca
03-31-2009, 12:29 PM
Asking people who were all for paying Tony Gonzalez, Priest Holmes and Larry Johnson to understand money in relation to position is asking alot I've realized.

htismaqe
03-31-2009, 12:30 PM
And to address the edit you made after I replied, I absolutely DO think they want him. That doesn't mean I have any clue what they're going to do. I mean I'm sure they wanted him in New England too, but it's all about value to the TEAM.

Coogs
03-31-2009, 12:31 PM
I have a better question, why did no one ever talk about Curry, even draft sites until Mike Mayock blew him on NFL network?

Seriously I question how many people around here even knew who he was 4 months ago...Curry was a projected 12-20 player until the season ended that bugs me.

That is one reason I never watched Wake Forrest football games. I knew we were going to be picking near the top of the draft, so I spent my Saturdays watching my favorite teams first, and then teams that I thought might have players the Chiefs might be drafting players from early in the draft.

RustShack
03-31-2009, 12:31 PM
I'm pretty shocked that Haley didn't go to Curry's Pro Day if they did want him. Especially given Haleys scouting/draft background and his fathers.

philfree
03-31-2009, 12:32 PM
I have a better question, why did no one ever talk about Curry, even draft sites until Mike Mayock blew him on NFL network?

Seriously I question how many people around here even knew who he was 4 months ago...Curry was a projected 12-20 player until the season ended that bugs me.


That's more hogwash. Mayock had Curry at the top of his draft board at the beginning of the season.


PhilFree:arrow: