PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Michael Ash's Undeniable Draft Facts


Count Zarth
04-09-2009, 08:44 PM
CURRY BAD!

http://kan.scout.com/2/855237.html

With the NFL draft just two weeks away, we’re in a confusing, speculation-filled period. These five undeniable draft facts should keep you level-headed as we forge ahead into the great unknown.

1) This is not a good year to be drafting high.

A point many have been arguing this offseason was recently driven home by the NFL Network’s Mike Mayock, who told Sports Illustrated, “This is by far the worst year for the top 10 that I've seen.” He explained that teams will be able to draft players around pick #20 that are equal to the players in the top 10, and they won’t come at a high price.

It’s the words “by far” that really stand out. Mayock isn’t merely saying 2009 is a bad draft class for top-echelon players, he’s saying it’s “by far” the worst he’s seen. That has to make you stop and think.

As it relates to Kansas City, that statement seems to suggest two things - the best move the Chiefs could make is trading down, but few teams will be looking to move up. That’s not a good combination.


2) Aaron Curry (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3744699) is not Jack Bauer.

If you’ve spent the last few months tracking what Chiefs fans think about the Wake Forest linebacker, you’ve undoubtedly seen statements like:

- Curry is a once-in-a-lifetime prospect.

- Curry has to be a Chief or the team will regret it forever.

- Curry is the next Derrick Thomas.

And so on and so forth. The Curry legend has almost grown to Bauer or Chuck Norris-like proportions. Any day now I expect talk radio callers to start telling tales of how Curry sleeps with a nightlight. Not because he’s afraid of the dark, but because the dark is afraid of him.

Incidentally, the final item on that list is my favorite. Back around January, the Curry-Thomas comparisons were running wild, until people finally began pointing out how absurd it was to compare someone who only racked up only nine and a half sacks in four years of college to someone who once had seven sacks in a single game.

Rather than backing off the hyperbole, though, the comparison simply shifted and now it seems Curry is being anointed as the next Ray Lewis (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3662152).

When people point out that linebackers aren’t selected near the top of the draft – especially those who don’t rush the quarterback – it only seems to embolden the Curry supporters. That Curry is being talked about as a top three pick in spite of that tradition is taken as proof of his dominance and used as further evidence that he should be the Chiefs’ selection.

In reality, Curry is one of the top draft prospects in a class that’s not particularly strong on top. That’s why his name has been bandied about as a potential top-three pick. Unlike other years, there aren’t enough top prospects to push him back into the 6-12 range where a comparable player would normally go. He’s not a once-in-a-lifetime marvel – he’s the beneficiary of having a weak class around him.

Does any of that mean Curry won’t be a good player in the NFL? Of course not. He may be elite. He’s widely considered among analysts as the draft’s safest pick because he’s talented, makes few mistakes, and seems unlikely to be a bust.

But being “safe” doesn’t make him a perennial Pro Bowler, either. Being “safe” means he could be in the mold of Derrick Johnson (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3698860) – a decent enough player who only comes up big in one or two games a season.

So, please, let’s stop all the Curry insanity. He’s a fine prospect. But if he was half the player some seem to think he is, with the weak state of the top 10, he’d be long gone by the time the Chiefs make their pick.


3) The Chiefs must draft the best players they possibly can.

This seems rather obvious, doesn’t it? But every year there are those who insist that filling a specific need is the more important goal on draft day. That may be true for a team that’s one piece away – a win-now team that could say, “You know, a really good receiver might put us over the top this year.”

But after compiling a grand total of six victories over the last two seasons, the Chiefs are hardly in that position.

This year, the “draft for need” crowd has focused on the Chiefs’ lack of a pass rush. With only 10 sacks last year, they say, the Chiefs’ primary focus should be on finding a pass-rusher, no matter which more-talented prospects they have to skip over in the process.

If the goal of the 2009 draft was to re-simulate the 2008 season and make the Chiefs a little more competitive along the way, drafting a pass rusher would be a good way to go. With a few more sacks, maybe the Chiefs could have won as many as four games. That was what they did when Jared Allen (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=4176250) logged 15.5 sacks in 2007, after all.

Unfortunately for supporters of that method, that isn’t the goal of the draft. The purpose is to make the Chiefs better in 2009 and beyond, something teams accomplish by collecting as many good football players as they can.

There’s no arguing the Chiefs need help when it comes to pressuring the quarterback. But they also need help in other areas. Without a pass rusher worthy of selection at the #3 spot, they don’t have the luxury of ignoring better players and reaching on someone in an effort to patch holes from last year’s ship.

That style of drafting is the equivalent of sticking your finger in the leaky dam, only to watch another leak spring up a few inches from the old one. Then you plug the new leak to see yet another pop up. It’s an endless cycle and you never get ahead of the game.

Of course, there are surely proponents of taking a pass-rusher who don’t fall into this “drafting for need” category. Some may not see a big difference between, say, Aaron Curry and Florida State’s Everette Brown (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3661431), so to them the Chiefs wouldn’t be passing up better players to fill a need. There’s nothing wrong with that.

This reminder is for those who were even advocating a pass rusher before the Matt Cassel (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=4210794) trade, when the debate included the prospect of taking a quarterback. Yes, it’s true – some of the “draft for need” crowd was endorsing their position with the idea that Tyler Thigpen could hold down the fort for another year, because what the Chiefs really needed was more sacks.

If you’ve ever found yourself talking to someone who argues that filling some random need is more important to a team than finding a franchise quarterback, say “That’s nice, Carl,” and ask him how he’s enjoying retirement.

Tomorrow: We examine the draft value chart and the need for a particular player.

Redrum_69
04-09-2009, 08:47 PM
YAY...this must be an early easter!!

More WPI run-on sentences and endless two sentence paragraphs!!

This is why Christ died on the cross...for all of us to break bread and read WPI

Mecca
04-09-2009, 08:47 PM
The top of the draft is actually good, it's no different than any other year the problem is the real value players are things that the Chiefs don't need or made a move for already..

Unless of course we draft another QB which could be possible.

Count Zarth
04-09-2009, 08:50 PM
The top of the draft is actually good, it's no different than any other year the problem is the real value players are things that the Chiefs don't need or made a move for already..

Unless of course we draft another QB which could be possible.

Mike Mayock > You.

No elite DE, no elite WR, no elite RB, no elite CB, no elite S.

Fuck, there isn't even a Kellen Winslow at TE. Didn't he go top 10?

Mecca
04-09-2009, 08:56 PM
Mike Mayock > You.

No elite DE, no elite WR, no elite RB, no elite CB, no elite S.

Fuck, there isn't even a Kellen Winslow at TE. Didn't he go top 10?

Most of those positions don't go in the top 5 anyway...no one should be taking a RB top 5.

Mike Mayock thinks Robert Ayers is gonna be the best defensive player from the draft, it's time to stop citing him he says dumb shit.

There are 4 top level players at franchise positions they're just LT's and QB's.

CrazyPhuD
04-09-2009, 08:57 PM
You know being where it's posted I question the term 'facts' and ROFL at the 'undeniable'

Reerun_KC
04-09-2009, 09:26 PM
The Chiefsplanet Meltdown will be in full force, if Jesus Curry isnt drafted...

keg in kc
04-09-2009, 09:34 PM
The top of the draft is actually good, it's no different than any other year the problem is the real value players are things that the Chiefs don't need or made a move for already..

Unless of course we draft another QB which could be possible.The top of the draft is good? This is a 2-3 player class. Stafford and one or both of the two tackles are top-10 picks. Everybody else is a mid-rounder or lower in a normal year.

wild1
04-09-2009, 09:37 PM
who the hell is michael ash?

Count Zarth
04-09-2009, 09:38 PM
who the hell is michael ash?

A fabulous writer.

Mecca
04-09-2009, 09:39 PM
The top of the draft is good? This is a 2-3 player class. Stafford and one or both of the two tackles are top-10 picks. Everybody else is a mid-rounder or lower in a normal year.

I think Sanchez would be a top 10 pick in 95% of drafts....

BigRock
04-09-2009, 09:40 PM
The final part seems directed right at Adam Teicher. He even brags that he was pimping a pass rusher back when taking a QB was on the table.

keg in kc
04-09-2009, 09:57 PM
I think Sanchez would be a top 10 pick in 95% of drafts....I don't, but let's say he would just for the sake of argument. That's still only 3-4 top 10 picks. I think the draft may be deeper than normal in the low 1st/2nd round grade guys, but it's really shallow at the top. You're going to see players this year drafted in the 40s and 50s who are virtually identical rating-wise to guys taken in the top 20, and probably the top 10.

Mecca
04-09-2009, 10:00 PM
There are alot of likewise players, I think there are 4 elite players at top caliber positions than after that it gets real iffy.

CoMoChief
04-09-2009, 10:07 PM
I think Sanchez would be a top 10 pick in 95% of drafts....

ROFL

beach tribe
04-09-2009, 10:12 PM
Most of those positions don't go in the top 5 anyway...no one should be taking a RB top 5.

Mike Mayock thinks Robert Ayers is gonna be the best defensive player from the draft, it's time to stop citing him he says dumb shit.

There are 4 top level players at franchise positions they're just LT's and QB's.

Ayers very well could be the best D player in this draft. Believe it.

beach tribe
04-09-2009, 10:13 PM
Dude definitely read the planet.

Mecca
04-09-2009, 10:15 PM
ROFL

You're hate of Sanchez is all anyone needs to know about how good he's gonna be.

Count Zarth
04-09-2009, 10:16 PM
I have to say Mecca, if you are wrong about Dirty Sanchez, you will never live it down. It could destroy your previously unsoiled reputation.

Mecca
04-09-2009, 10:26 PM
LOL, it doesn't matter if I am or not at this point.

CoMoChief
04-09-2009, 10:30 PM
You're hate of Sanchez is all anyone needs to know about how good he's gonna be.

I dont hate Sanchez, I just dont think he's top 10 worthy, never have, never will.

He plays the toughest position in the game, has only one season under his belt playing in college in a weaker Pac 10 this past season. The only reason why he's being considered this high is because of the position he plays and after Stafford and him, the talent level at QB drops A LOT. I still laugh at people who think Freeman is a first day pick.

Would I spend a top 10 pick on that? No, its stupid. This is a terrible year to draft in the top 5. There's not really an elite player in this draft. If there is it's at the tackle position.

Mecca
04-09-2009, 10:32 PM
You don't think Stafford is elite either....one of those KC fans who hates QB's eh...

Anyone who would take an hour of out their day to watch Sanchez would immediately realize why he's highly thought of.

CoMoChief
04-09-2009, 10:53 PM
You don't think Stafford is elite either....one of those KC fans who hates QB's eh...

Anyone who would take an hour of out their day to watch Sanchez would immediately realize why he's highly thought of.

I think Stafford would go in any top 10 draft recently. But as a top pick, probably not. This is a horrid year for QB's, probably won't get any better as time goes on by with more and more colleges switching to the spread. Either you will see more of it or versions of it in the NFL or it will eventually die out in college and there will be a lack of NFL QB talent up to that time.

Not to mention Pete Carroll has been said many times that Sanchez isn't ready for the NFL. I would take his coaches word over anyone's word here on Chiefsplanet, simply because he coaches the mother****er and knows more about the game than anyone thats ever posted here. And you can piss on your previous arguments about how he's just pissed because it's causing him a NC. I dont buy that argument one bit. I dont think a coach is going to put his own agenda before a players in that regard. If he's not ready he's not ready. And its not like USC won't be in competition for a National Title anyways. There in the hunt for one every frickin season. USC is a powerhouse, they dont rebuild they reload.

If Sanchez played another year, had a great year, lead his team to a NC, there would be no doubt he would be a top 3 pick next season, perhaps possibly #1 overall.

Fish
04-09-2009, 10:53 PM
A fabulous writer.

A fabulous writer would never compile a complete embarrassment of a sentence such as this:

Back around January, the Curry-Thomas comparisons were running wild, until people finally began pointing out how absurd it was to compare someone who only racked up only nine and a half sacks in four years of college[missing ,??] to someone who once had seven sacks in a single game.


:shake:

Boris The Great
04-09-2009, 10:58 PM
A fabulous writer would never compile a complete embarrassment of a sentence such as this:



:shake:

Thats called poor editing.

Count Zarth
04-09-2009, 11:01 PM
That's actually my fault. I edited a mistake in.

T-post Tom
04-09-2009, 11:04 PM
Great article! :rolleyes:

More undeniable facts:
1) Elton John is gay.
2) Water is wet.
3) Most of us have a neck and can breathe.

This article sucks for many reasons. No offense Claythan. But a few examples:

1. This year's top ten is one of the worst ever because Mike Mayock says so? Really? Someone send Pioli the memo as I'm sure he'll want to realign his draft board based on Mayock's comments. Pioli should hire Mayock as his Asst. GM. Dammit Scott! :cuss:

I guess this means there's no way Sanchez or Stafford EVER become fanchise qbs then. They couldn't carry Matt Ryan's jock strap. Ryan was good, but is it any coincidence that Atlanta tried to protect him with the 2nd highest number or rushing attempts in the NFL with 560? (Chiefs had 379 rushing attempts.) Hey Raji, you're Glen Dorsey's biatch. You'll never be as good as him. Jason Smith & Eugene Monroe: STFU & STFD. You'll never be as talented as Jake Long. Curry & all you rushing LB's will never exceed Vernon Gholston's 13 tackles and 0 sacks in your first year. BANK IT! And you DE's will never match up to last year's #2 pick, Chris Long. He had 4 sacks, motherf*ckers!

Dammit Scott, call Mayock NOW!

2. "Aaron Curry is not Jack Bauer." No shit? "But if he was half the player some seem to think he is, with the weak state of the top 10, he’d be long gone by the time the Chiefs make their pick." Hmmmm, really? Now I thought that DET & STL had absolutley no pressing needs outside of LB. And I also thought that DET & STL valued Curry far above every other prospect since he is exponentially more talented than the entire draft class combined. Yep, you pegged us Chiefs' fans alright. But not just some: all of us.

3. "The Chiefs must draft the best players they possibly can." Thank you for that holy nugget of wisdom. EVERY poster on this board has been saying that all we need is a replacement for JA & we'll be sporting rings. [\Sarcasm] In fact, every single Chiefs' fan that I know has been saying that. The "draft for need crowd" is in full effect. Say yeah. And kudos for the Carl P dig. No better way to ingratiate yourself with Chiefs' fans.

I love lamp.

BigRock
04-09-2009, 11:12 PM
"Aaron Curry is not Jack Bauer." No shit?

3. "The Chiefs must draft the best players they possibly can." Thank you for that holy nugget of wisdom. EVERY poster on this board has been saying that all we need is a replacement for JA & we'll be sporting rings.

You know, I would imagine that things written at WPI are aimed primarly at WPI readers and the people who post on their boards.

But this may be a completely outlandish assumption on my part.

Count Zarth
04-09-2009, 11:14 PM
Those things have been said on THIS board.

T-post Tom
04-09-2009, 11:23 PM
You know, I would imagine that things written at WPI are aimed primarly at WPI readers and the people who post on their boards.

But this may be a completely outlandish assumption on my part.

You are correct. But the perjorative references are regarding Chiefs' fans in general. And you might also assume that those WPI readers are most often Chiefs' fans.

svuba
04-10-2009, 12:07 AM
....................
This article sucks for many reasons. No offense Claythan. But a few examples:

1. This year's top ten is one of the worst ever because Mike Mayock says so? Really? Someone send Pioli the memo as I'm sure he'll want to realign his draft board based on Mayock's comments. Pioli should hire Mayock as his Asst. GM. Dammit Scott! :cuss:

I guess this means there's no way Sanchez or Stafford EVER become fanchise qbs then. They couldn't carry Matt Ryan's jock strap. Ryan was good, but is it any coincidence that Atlanta tried to protect him with the 2nd highest number or rushing attempts in the NFL with 560? (Chiefs had 379 rushing attempts.) Hey Raji, you're Glen Dorsey's biatch. You'll never be as good as him. Jason Smith & Eugene Monroe: STFU & STFD. You'll never be as talented as Jake Long. Curry & all you rushing LB's will never exceed Vernon Gholston's 13 tackles and 0 sacks in your first year. BANK IT! And you DE's will never match up to last year's #2 pick, Chris Long. He had 4 sacks, motherf*ckers!

Dammit Scott, call Mayock NOW!




Well Done. Its not that this draft is weak in terms of top talent, it just isn't obvious yet who those guys are.

Could be Sanchez could be Curry, it could be Billie joe from North Dakota Tech, That is why the draft is such a difficult thing to get right.

I mean Look at Ryan Leaf , Tony Mandarich and Todd Marinovich, Those guys were unquestionably top talent everybody knew it..except they were not.

Tom Brady, Joe Montana, and Johnny Unitas are 2nd day scum, not even in the top 100 players in their respective drafts...They were simply NOT top level talent when drafted.

The value of a High pick is the right to choose first, if you are a good talent evaluator, you make the right choice. The Idea that there is a shortage of top talent in this draft is ridiculous.

KCDC
04-10-2009, 12:18 AM
I don't think last year's class was any better. Of the top 6, Jake Long was good, as was Matt Ryan. The rest were disappointments. Dorsey, like Curry, was ranked the number 1 stud in the draft -- a monster -- a can't miss. Well, he's not a bust, but he did not play anywhere near that level. I just hope it was poor coaching, but our DL coach is back.

BigRock
04-10-2009, 01:11 AM
So if the top of this year's class isn't weak, why are there stories about the teams picking in that range desperately trying to trade down like rats jumping off a sinking ship?

T-post Tom
04-10-2009, 01:15 AM
If the top of this year's class isn't weak, why are there stories about the teams picking in that range desperately trying to trade down like rats jumping off a sinking ship?

I've heard it both ways. Many are saying the Lions are sold on their pick. Now the Rams supposedly said they'd be willing to trade down. Arrowhead (Fort Knox North) is on lockdown, so who knows. I've heard mixed reports on Seattle and the Bengals. Supposedly the Raiders are staying put with their pick. So who knows? Typical draft speculation while those teams try to jockey for postion. We won't know the truth until after it's done.

googlegoogle
04-10-2009, 02:36 AM
derrick johnson.

your thoughts.

EyePod
04-10-2009, 06:18 AM
WR is a position that we need to improve on. Draft Crabtree. I don't care if he's slow or a product of the spread. He's amazing to watch and will continue to be for years.

wild1
04-10-2009, 06:27 AM
WR is a position that we need to improve on. Draft Crabtree. I don't care if he's slow or a product of the spread. He's amazing to watch and will continue to be for years.

:eek:

bdeg
04-10-2009, 06:30 AM
That's actually my fault. I edited a mistake in.

LMAONow that's an editor.

"Some may not see a big difference between, say, Aaron Curry and Florida State’s Everette Brown, so to them the Chiefs wouldn’t be passing up better players to fill a need. There’s nothing wrong with that. "
This reminds me of what I said on here
QB part doesn't really apply, I was assuming Stafford wouldn't fall and wasn't sold on Sanchez.

Fried Meat Ball!
04-10-2009, 06:32 AM
YAY...this must be an early easter!!

More WPI run-on sentences and endless two sentence paragraphs!!

This is why Christ died on the cross...for all of us to break bread and read WPI

Hey, not that I'm defending WPI. God knows I'm not one to run to their defense... but two sentence paragraphs are a staple of internet articles because research time and again indicates people don't read longer paragraphs. Shorter paragraphs makes the article more "readable" to the average internet viewer.

SenselessChiefsFan
04-10-2009, 06:56 AM
"So, please, let’s stop all the Curry insanity. He’s a fine prospect. But if he was half the player some seem to think he is, with the weak state of the top 10, he’d be long gone by the time the Chiefs make their pick."

Well, 'long gone' is a little hard to believe since the Chiefs have only the third overall pick.

Second, the draft has three legit top five prospects at positions that would normally be selected top five. Stafford, Monroe and Smith. Given that the Lions need a franchise QB, and the Rams desperately need a LT, it says nothing about Curry if he is still there.

On top of that, the Rams and Lions have both at least met with Curry, and depending on the day of the week, have been 'high' on him at different points.

For a LB to be considered by these teams when there are top prospects at value positions, at positions they NEED...... says that the linebacker is viewed as a special prospect.

By the way, DJ had holes in his game when he came out. He was a coverage linebacker that over ran plays, didn't take on blockers and was only an 'okay' tackler.

Curry didn't get asked to rush the passer much. That is the only flaw than anyone can find in his game. He breaks runners down, he takes on blockers, he is a smart player that sees the field well.

I keep looking for the guy that makes more sense at this spot that fills a need... and I just don't see one. I wish I did. I DO think you can get LB's later in the draft. I do think you can get RT's later in the draft.

But, the two best prospects available will 'probably' be Curry and Monroe. At some point, we just have to realize that things aren't always ideal.

LaChapelle
04-10-2009, 07:08 AM
Samuel Clemens is sooo jealous.

htismaqe
04-10-2009, 07:13 AM
At some point, we just have to realize that things aren't always ideal.

Yep. Realize that things aren't ideal and take a QB instead of Curry.

htismaqe
04-10-2009, 07:15 AM
Those things have been said on THIS board.

Yep.

JASONSAUTO
04-10-2009, 07:15 AM
Those things have been said on THIS board.

so are you saying this "great writer" copies his stories from chiefsplanet then makes people PAY to read them???

King_Chief_Fan
04-10-2009, 07:20 AM
WR is a position that we need to improve on. Draft Crabtree. I don't care if he's slow or a product of the spread. He's amazing to watch and will continue to be for years.:shake: wow, just wow

notorious
04-10-2009, 08:28 AM
WR is a position that we need to improve on. Draft Crabtree. I don't care if he's slow or a product of the spread. He's amazing to watch and will continue to be for years.

Oh no.

Count Zarth
04-10-2009, 07:55 PM
I tell you what. I'd rather trade down and lose 400 points than draft Eugene M'fing Monroe. Or chicken Curry.

http://kan.scout.com/2/855507.html

4) The draft value chart can be thrown out the window.

The thought of the Chiefs trading down and picking up more selections along the way is one of the draft’s most appealing possibilities. But thanks to the weak state of the top 10, the top picks aren’t worth as much as they normally are.

Reports say the Detroit Lions have called teams in an attempt to move their #1 pick. The St. Louis Rams have said they’re willing to listen to offers for the spot at #2. Other teams in the top 10 have reportedly made attempts to move back, as well.

That means the Chiefs can’t afford to be a slave to the value chart if they want to move down. It’s common sense – your house might have been worth $500,000 a few years ago, but if the foundation has since cracked, the roof is damaged, and the yard is turning to swampland, are you still going to expect someone to pay $500,000 for it?

There’s no guarantee that teams will be interested in moving up to the top of the draft as it is. So if the Chiefs can actually find a partner who might be willing, do you expect the team to overcharge them?

Take, for example, the Philadelphia Eagles. With two first-round picks and the recent revelation that the team has taken an interest in offensive tackle Eugene Monroe (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3934892), Chiefs fans have zeroed in on the Eagles as a popular trading partner. Since Monroe will be long gone by the time Philly picks in the late first round, logic would suggest they’re at least considering the idea of moving up.

For the sake of discussion, let’s say the Eagles are interested in the Chiefs’ pick. If you look at the draft value chart, the #3 pick is worth 2,200 points. If you add up the value of the Eagles’ two first rounders (#21 and #28) and their second-round pick (#53), it equals 1,830 points. That’s well short of 2,200.

In other words, to follow the values set by the chart, the Eagles would have to gut their entire draft to move up that high. That’s not going to happen. If Philly – a team with two first-round picks – can’t afford to do it, there’s little chance of anyone outside the top 10 being able to move into the Chiefs’ spot. That drastically reduces KC’s chances of moving down.

But Scott Pioli (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3933332) undoubtedly knows this, which is why you can expect the value chart to be tossed aside.

Going back to our Eagles trade scenario, let’s say that in exchange for the #3 spot, Philly offered the Chiefs both their first-round picks and their third rounder. That deal wouldn’t come remotely close to satisfying the trade chart. But do you really think Pioli would dismiss it for that reason?

That deal would allow the Chiefs to pick up two late first rounders, which – if you recall Mayock’s opinion that players just as good as those in the top 10 will be available around pick #20 – could prove to be better value than the #3 pick itself. The second of those two selections would basically replace the pick the Chiefs traded to New England, and they would add an extra third-round pick in the process. Plus, using one of those first rounders, Pioli could try to trade back again and acquire even more picks.

Such a trade would be blasphemy for those who swear by the value chart. But by making such moves, Pioli could end up landing the Chiefs a glut of extra draft picks, easily coming out ahead in the deal.

The notion of trading with the Eagles is attractive because they hold more than one pick in the first round, but the value chart theory holds true no matter who the other team is. If a team is willing to take less than the chart suggests, it makes them a more attractive trading partner and opens up far more possibilities.

So when you’re daydreaming about possible draft-day trades over the next two weeks, don’t be a slave to the value chart, because Pioli surely won’t be. Of course, if the Chiefs are talking about a trade with a division rival like Denver, all bets are off.


5) The Chiefs have to draft someone.

For all the talk about draft value, and who is or isn’t worth taking with the #3 pick, the sad truth is that no matter how badly the Chiefs want to trade down, they might not be able to move from that spot. Trades into the top five are rare as it is, and with a weak class at the top of the draft, there’s no assurance that another team will want to jump that high and take on the financial responsibilities that go along with a top pick.

The one player who may be an exception to that is USC quarterback Mark Sanchez (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3654542). If Georgia quarterback Matt Stafford goes #1 to Detroit, the amount of quarterback-needy teams and the lack of top quarterback prospects may create a situation where teams are willing to overspend to make sure they get their man.

But would they want to move up as high as #3 for Sanchez, insuring they would have to pay him more than the Falcons gave Matt Ryan (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=4265381) last year? Obviously, it would depend on how they’ve rated him.

It Stafford does go #1, the Chiefs may be able to guarantee themselves a trade-down by drafting Sanchez themselves and dangling him in front of the teams who need a quarterback. At least one of the teams hoping a quarterback falls to their spot should be willing to work out a deal, and the Chiefs taking Sanchez off the board would allow them more time to field offers and negotiate terms than the standard 10-minute draft window.

But unless that risky and fairly cut-throat scenario plays out, the Chiefs may be stuck drafting with the third pick. In the event they are, we all know the cases that have been made against certain players:

- Linebackers shouldn’t go high, especially if they aren’t pass rushers.

- It would be absurd to draft a right tackle (or to move Branden Albert (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3542598)).

- Michael Crabtree (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3749361) isn’t on the level of other receivers that have been taken in the top three.

- It’s too early to take B.J. Raji (http://kan.scout.com/a.z?s=115&p=8&c=1&nid=3898154).

We could go on all day.

But if the Chiefs are stuck at #3, all of that will have to be set aside. The Chiefs will have to take somebody, and in all likelihood that person won’t be good value for the #3 spot in the draft.

We just have to hope that they make the pick count.

Raised On Riots
04-10-2009, 08:43 PM
Most of those positions don't go in the top 5 anyway...no one should be taking a RB top 5.

Mike Mayock thinks Robert Ayers is gonna be the best defensive player from the draft, it's time to stop citing him he says dumb shit.

There are 4 top level players at franchise positions they're just LT's and QB's.

This. And you'll notice how, since this year's insanity started, that Jason Smith has rarely moved from his spot on the overall mock boards. When the Chiefs traded for the First Messiah, it threw a wrench in these guys works, and they've been blindly pulling pud since.

The Chiefsplanet Meltdown will be in full force, if Jesus Curry isnt drafted...

How dare you mock the Second Messiah!


LOL, it doesn't matter if I am or not at this point.

No shit, and put me on that train too. Walter's latest has him going to Jacksonville.

I think Stafford would go in any top 10 draft recently. But as a top pick, probably not. This is a horrid year for QB's:rolleyes:, probably won't get any better as time goes on by with more and more colleges switching to the spread. Either you will see more of it or versions of it in the NFL or it will eventually die out in college and there will be a lack of NFL QB talent up to that time.


Well, at least I don't want to fully throw bricks at you. You're learning!:clap:

Yep. Realize that things aren't ideal and take a QB instead of Curry.

I proclaim htismage the True Messiah of Chiefs Planet.o:-)

StcChief
04-10-2009, 08:54 PM
who the hell is michael ash?Arthur Ash's evil twin brother. :)

BigRock
04-10-2009, 09:02 PM
The part on the trade chart is hilarious, since, correct me if I'm wrong, Clueless Nick came out in the last few days saying the complete opposite of that. Talking about how Pioli would milk the #3 spot for all it was worth, and if other teams were willing to take less to move down it's because they don't have a brilliant GM like we do.

Count Zarth
04-10-2009, 09:12 PM
Everyone has their own opinion.

All that and a 2nd round pick will get you Brian Waters + a bag of chips.

Ultra Peanut
04-10-2009, 09:23 PM
ROFLThe mere fact that you're laughing at that statement tells me how right it is.

KCrockaholic
04-10-2009, 11:15 PM
You're hate of Sanchez is all anyone needs to know about how good he's gonna be.

ROFL whats funny is that you say this same thing regarding Matt Cassel and the Broncos wanting him. Yet the Broncos are also interested in Mark Sanchez. So what does that say about Sanchez then? Oh it doesnt count right.