PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs The offensive line and Pioli's "track record".


htismaqe
05-08-2009, 10:41 AM
I keep seeing posts complaining about the lack of offensive linemen taken in the draft and comments like "The Patriots built up their OL and DL and won the Super Bowl".

Until now I hadn't done much research, but seemed to remember that their actual draft history with offensive linemen wasn't that great. So I did a little digging and here's what I found.

Let's start with the starting offensive lines (LT-RT) during Pioli's tenure:

2008 - Light, Mankins, Koppen, Neal, Kaczur
2007 - Light, Mankins, Koppen, Neal, Kaczur
2006 - Light, Mankins, Koppen, Neal, Kaczur
2005 - Kaczur, Mankins, Koppen, Neal, Ashworth
2004 - Light, Andruzzi, Koppen, Neal, Gorin
2003 - Light, Woody, Koppen, Andruzzi, Ashworth
2002 - Light, Compton, Woody, Andruzzi, Jones
2001 - Light, Compton, Woody, Andruzzi, Randall
2000 - Armstrong, Andruzzi, Woody, Isaia, Williams

And now their OL draft picks during Pioli's tenure:

2000 - Adrian Klemm, G, 2nd
2000 - Greg Randall, T, 4th
2001 - Matt Light, T, 2nd
2001 - Kenyatta Jones, T, 4th
2003 - Dan Koppen, C, 5th
2005 - Logan Mankins, G, 1st
2005 - Nick Kaczur, T, 3rd
2006 - Ryan O'Callaghan, T, 5th
2006 - Dan Stevenson, G, 6th
2007 - Clint Oldenburg, T, 5th
2007 - Corey Hilliard, T, 6th
2007 - Mike Elgin, G, 7th

The pick that makes it all happen was the pick of Matt Light in their 2nd draft. Adrian Klemm missed the entire 2001 season and ended up only starting 10 games his entire time in New England. Greg Randall started 4 games his rookie year and 16 his 2nd, but was replaced in 2002 by Kenyatta Jones, who only lasted 11 games and missed the entire 2003 season.

Their 2 to 3 best picks after Light (Mankins, Kaczur, and to a lesser extent Koppen) came into a line that was already established. Granted Damien Woody was a 1st-round draft pick in 1999 for the previous regime, but Andruzzi was a free agent 2000 as was Compton in 2001, who had already been in the league for almost a decade.

So what does this all mean? To me, it means we shouldn't be real surprised that Pioli didn't go balls-out on the offensive line this offseason. The Patriots real success in building their 2001 offensive line that won the first championship came in the 2001 offseason, not 2000. In fact, their 2000 draft only landed one player of significance - Tom Brady. The rest of the draft is pretty ho-hum.

LaChapelle
05-08-2009, 10:45 AM
2005 - Logan Mankins, G, 1st. shit meet fan.

FAX
05-08-2009, 10:46 AM
Fascinating and insightful information, Mr. htismaqe. I'm trying to grasp the underlying lesson here ...

So ... they were given a Woody and we weren't?

FAX

Ebolapox
05-08-2009, 10:54 AM
2005 - Logan Mankins, G, 1st. shit meet fan.

yeah, and it was a very late first round pick (aka, in the 30's). there's nothing wrong with picking a guard THAT deep into round one if there are no other value positions. however, if they picked a guard in the top ten, they'd have been fucking retarded.

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 10:58 AM
Fascinating and insightful information, Mr. htismaqe. I'm trying to grasp the underlying lesson here ...

So ... they were given a Woody and we weren't?

FAX

Woody was their 1999 1st rounder. Brandon Albert was our 2008 first rounder. They play different positions, but the only thing that tells me is that we won't need Matt Light next year, we'll probably need a guard. They brought in an aging guard to patch the line for a couple of seasons, Mike Compton, and we brought in Mike Goff. The big kicker here is that we didn't have a 2nd-round pick to spend on a guy like they got in Adrian Klemm because we gave it up for Cassel. Other than that, they took an OT in the 4th, we took one in the 5th. I would expect us to draft an OL next year HIGH, like first day, based on what I see here.

And most of all, I wouldn't expect that throwing numbers at the OL this past draft would do THAT much good - Pioli's early history with OL wasn't that great.

cmh6476
05-08-2009, 11:07 AM
It would have been hard to justifying spending our only real likely first-year impact pick in this year's draft on an offensive-lineman, when Albert seems like he's at the least going to be competent at the toughest position on the line for us, and we just locked in a ton of money on the line. Hard to justify having all that money invested in two young offensive linemen with all the other holes on this team that still needed to be filled.

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 11:15 AM
The only other thing I might interject as a counterpoint to my own argument here is that I didn't take my research back beyond 1999, which is somewhat significant considering the Patriots played in the 1997 Super Bowl. The building needed on that team was somewhat different in 2000 than it is here, so there's not a perfect parallel.

CoMoChief
05-08-2009, 11:21 AM
I do not like the tackle out of MU. HORRIBLE pick. I hope I'm wrong.

Cant believe we need a RG more than Claythan needs to get laid, and we continued to pass on Duke Robinson. I will not let that go. Hes a stud and will be stud in this league.

talastan
05-08-2009, 11:30 AM
I do not like the tackle out of MU. HORRIBLE pick. I hope I'm wrong.

Cant believe we need a RG more than Claythan needs to get laid, and we continued to pass on Duke Robinson. I will not let that go. Hes a stud and will be stud in this league.

53 Right guys, not the 53 best..../Pioli. I think it wasn't Duke's talent that made them not take him. They had other needs, and their own draft board set up. Maybe there was something mentally, or in tape that they saw that they didn't like. :shrug: I won't worry about it for a couple of years until we see how this draft class pans out.

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 12:00 PM
I do not like the tackle out of MU. HORRIBLE pick. I hope I'm wrong.

Cant believe we need a RG more than Claythan needs to get laid, and we continued to pass on Duke Robinson. I will not let that go. Hes a stud and will be stud in this league.

Lots of people passed on Duke Robinson. And Mike Goff is our starting RG.

buddha
05-08-2009, 12:05 PM
I do not like the tackle out of MU. HORRIBLE pick. I hope I'm wrong.

Cant believe we need a RG more than Claythan needs to get laid, and we continued to pass on Duke Robinson. I will not let that go. Hes a stud and will be stud in this league.

I disagree with your take on Brown AND while Duke Robinson was a good guard at OU, you fail to understand that he had a top 10 center playing next to him and a top 10 tackle playing on the other side. You and I would probably look good in that situation...well, I know that I would. :D

Robinson's feet are average at best...sorry, it's the truth.

I'm not going to try and change your mind on Brown. Let's see how he does. I think he'll make the team and be a contributer.

FAX
05-08-2009, 12:14 PM
The encouraging thing to note is that (other than Neal, it appears) the Pats' starting OL is comprised of their own draft picks. If we're supposing that Pioli will remain true to form, it seems that, based on Mr. htismaqe's research, we can look forward to a young, talented OL that we drafted in two to three years - the same amount of time Herm had in which he populated the line with run down FAs and marginal guys playing out of their natural position.

Hopefully, Albert will work out at LT. That gives us a head start on rebuilding the OL, at least. And, who knows? Maybe we can see some growth and development out of a couple of other guys already under contract. Either way, I'm pretty sure that Pioli understands the importance of an effective OL. There's an old Italian proverb that states; "Quarterbacks that look like a pool of molasses don't throw passes."

FAX

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 01:03 PM
The encouraging thing to note is that (other than Neal, it appears) the Pats' starting OL is comprised of their own draft picks. If we're supposing that Pioli will remain true to form, it seems that, based on Mr. htismaqe's research, we can look forward to a young, talented OL that we drafted in two to three years - the same amount of time Herm had in which he populated the line with run down FAs and marginal guys playing out of their natural position.

Hopefully, Albert will work out at LT. That gives us a head start on rebuilding the OL, at least. And, who knows? Maybe we can see some growth and development out of a couple of other guys already under contract. Either way, I'm pretty sure that Pioli understands the importance of an effective OL. There's an old Italian proverb that states; "Quarterbacks that look like a pool of molasses don't throw passes."

FAX

The thing is, the first two-three years WEREN'T their draft picks - they were free agents or the previous regime's draft picks - other than Matt Light. By the time they "built" their line for the long haul, they'd ALREADY won a Super Bowl.

kcbubb
05-08-2009, 01:03 PM
do we have anyone else at G besides Goff and Waters???? There doesn't appear to be much depth.

we've got

Albert Taylor
Waters Smith
Niswanger Smith
Goff Smith
McIntosh Brown

makes you miss the days of

Roaf
Shields
Wiegmann
Waters
Tait

Could that have been one of the best offensive lines of all time???

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 01:09 PM
do we have anyone else at G besides Goff and Waters???? There doesn't appear to be much depth.

A bunch of 1st and 2nd-year street free agents. I'm guessing that maybe they thought most of the guys available 4th and after were roughly similar to the bottom-dollar guys they already had.

cmh6476
05-08-2009, 01:38 PM
I want Herb taylor to wint he RT job outright, I think he can be much, much better than McTurnstyle

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 01:40 PM
I want Herb taylor to wint he RT job outright, I think he can be much, much better than McTurnstyle

I think he's infinitely better-suited to be a LT than RT, but I guess we'll see.

cmh6476
05-08-2009, 01:46 PM
I think he's infinitely better-suited to be a LT than RT, but I guess we'll see.

has a successful LT (maybe he's not there yet, but sill) ever not made a successful transition over to the right tackle position?

kcchiefsus
05-08-2009, 01:46 PM
do we have anyone else at G besides Goff and Waters???? There doesn't appear to be much depth.

we've got

Albert Taylor
Waters Smith
Niswanger Smith
Goff Smith
McIntosh Brown

makes you miss the days of

Roaf
Shields
Wiegmann
Waters
Tait

Could that have been one of the best offensive lines of all time???

No shit sherlock, of course it was one of the best.

cmh6476
05-08-2009, 01:48 PM
did Roaf & Tait play together? I though Roaf came after Tait was in Chi.

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 01:51 PM
did Roaf & Tait play together? I though Roaf came after Tait was in Chi.

Tait played one year at RT while Roaf was here.

kcbubb
05-08-2009, 01:54 PM
No shit sherlock, of course it was one of the best.

next time I'll just ask you since you are THE great historian of football offensive lines. So, since you know so much about offensive lines, what are you top 5 best offensive lines of all time??? go ahead.. list them. display your genius!

kcbubb
05-08-2009, 02:10 PM
No shit sherlock, of course it was one of the best.


AND

It is debatable that they were one the best bc they didn't even win a playoff game. shouldn't one of the best offensive lines of all time at least get a playoff win even with a bad defense???

kcbubb
05-08-2009, 02:11 PM
Tait played one year at RT while Roaf was here.


who played RT after him??? was it Jordan Black??

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 02:11 PM
who played RT after him??? was it Jordan Black??

Welbourn I think. I thought it was Spears, but I stand corrected on that.

kcbubb
05-08-2009, 02:16 PM
Welbourn I think. I thought it was Spears, but I stand corrected on that.

welbourn came in 04. so tait played 2 seasons with Roaf??? 02 and 03.

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 05:26 PM
welbourn came in 04. so tait played 2 seasons with Roaf??? 02 and 03.

Yep.

The Bad Guy
05-08-2009, 05:37 PM
AND

It is debatable that they were one the best bc they didn't even win a playoff game. shouldn't one of the best offensive lines of all time at least get a playoff win even with a bad defense???

Here we go again.

The answer is no.

The bad defense didn't force one punt.

If your defense gives up points every time they are on the field, there is no offense that could compensate for such horrific play.

philfree
05-08-2009, 05:45 PM
welbourn came in 04. so tait played 2 seasons with Roaf??? 02 and 03.


For some reason I feel like Tait only played one year at RT with Roaf at LT. Two Seasons at LT under Gunther and then one year at LT with DV and then DV brought in Roaf and Tait moved to RT? After that Tait signed with the Bears.

PhilFree:arrow:

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 05:47 PM
Here we go again.

The answer is no.

The bad defense didn't force one punt.

If your defense gives up points every time they are on the field, there is no offense that could compensate for such horrific play.

One could argue though that they spent so much time crafting said offense that the defense was neglected because of it.

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 05:48 PM
For some reason I feel like Tait only played one year at RT with Roaf at LT. Two Seasons at LT under Gunther and then one year at LT with DV and then DV brought in Roaf and Tait moved to RT? After that Tait signed with the Bears.

PhilFree:arrow:

Not according to Pro Football Reference.

Chaunceythe3rd
05-08-2009, 05:49 PM
We've got a bigger problem than worrying about the O-line. Nobody on that line is going to get any help from Haley. If he doesn't have a Ken Whisenhunt and a Kurt Warner to do his coaching for him (and he doesn't), then we are in big trouble. Talking about Pioli is correct because Haley doesn't have the talent to evaluate or motivate the O-line except by bullying and they won't stand for that.

:shake:

The Bad Guy
05-08-2009, 05:50 PM
What type of help exactly does Ken Wisenhut and Kurt Warner provide the offensive line?

The Bad Guy
05-08-2009, 05:51 PM
One could argue though that they spent so much time crafting said offense that the defense was neglected because of it.

All in all, that defense should have been able to make one or two freaking stops in that Colts game.

JASONSAUTO
05-08-2009, 05:52 PM
What type of help exactly does Ken Wisenhut and Kurt Warner provide the offensive line?

i was about to ask the same thing, is MC back? this guy has said some wierd shit so far

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 05:52 PM
What type of help exactly does Ken Wisenhut and Kurt Warner provide the offensive line?

They do all the coaching for him. Because he doesn't know what he's doing, apparently.

The Bad Guy
05-08-2009, 05:54 PM
They do all the coaching for him. Because he doesn't know what he's doing, apparently.

Hilarious.

That line of thinking is so fucking stupid, I don't even know how to post any sort of rebuttal.

philfree
05-08-2009, 06:15 PM
Not according to Pro Football Reference.

I hadn't referenced anything just trying to remember with my own little melon. Wasn't Tait Guns first 1st round draft pick? Sly Mo being Guns second 1st round pick? I'm not arguing I'm right or anything just trying to remember.


PhilFree:arrow:

Just Passin' By
05-08-2009, 06:16 PM
So what does this all mean? To me, it means we shouldn't be real surprised that Pioli didn't go balls-out on the offensive line this offseason. The Patriots real success in building their 2001 offensive line that won the first championship came in the 2001 offseason, not 2000. In fact, their 2000 draft only landed one player of significance - Tom Brady. The rest of the draft is pretty ho-hum.

I don't know if Pioli is going to be able to get away with developing the O-linemen in the same manner Belichick does. Belichick has a huge edge there, because he's got one of the best O-line coaches in the league working for him, and that coach doesn't go looking for promotion. That mean that he's able to get continuity at that spot in a way that almost no team can. Neal is a perfect example of how it works. The guy was a wrestler in college, but the Patriots were able to take the time to coach him up because the team could afford the luxury of keeping him around and had consistency at the coaching spot. As a matter of fact, they've got another wrestler in camp this year, and this guy's basically never played a down of football in his life.

On the positive side for the Chiefs, even some of those players who didn't thrive have been okay as players. Kenyatta Jones' biggest problem was his sheer stupidity:

Jones pleaded no contest to one count of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and was issued a "continued without a finding" ruling in April after he threw hot water on roommate Mark Paul. If Jones does not violate his one-year probation the case will be dismissed. Paul, who suffered second- and third-degree burns, was sitting on the toilet when he was hit by the water.

The team released him just a few days after the incident happened, but he'd been a starter.

Randall started for both the Patriots and the Texans.

O'Callaghan is a pretty talented player, and he pushed Kazcur for the starting job, but he keeps getting concussions. He may not survive the cut this season, based upon the way the Patriots drafted. They may feel that they just can't take a chance on a guy who gets his bell rung so frequently.

Klemm was just an absolute bust, and he's considered one of the absolute worst picks of the Belichick era.

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 06:17 PM
I hadn't referenced anything just trying to remember with my own little melon. Wasn't Tait Guns first 1st round draft pick? Sly Mo being Guns second 1st round pick? I'm not arguing I'm right or anything just trying to remember.


PhilFree:arrow:

I thought we took Tait in 1998? I honestly can't remember.

And as for referencing instead of trying to remember, I already got slapped down today, ironically on this topic.

I thought Spears replaced Tait at RT when it was the other way around. :D

PGM
05-08-2009, 06:28 PM
We've got a bigger problem than worrying about the O-line. Nobody on that line is going to get any help from Haley. If he doesn't have a Ken Whisenhunt and a Kurt Warner to do his coaching for him (and he doesn't), then we are in big trouble. Talking about Pioli is correct because Haley doesn't have the talent to evaluate or motivate the O-line except by bullying and they won't stand for that.

:shake:

:spock:

Pioli Zombie
05-08-2009, 07:41 PM
This thread makes little sense. On hand its acknowledged how Light, Mankins, Koppen, and Kazur have played on the line, a line on a team that went 18-1 in 2007, btw, but then the record of drafting is so-so because not all of them worked out.
Well no shit. That's drafting in the NFL. No team hits on al of them except maybe the early 70's Steelers.
Posted via Mobile Device

Raised On Riots
05-08-2009, 08:50 PM
This thread makes little sense. On hand its acknowledged how Light, Mankins, Koppen, and Kazur have played on the line, a line on a team that went 18-1 in 2007, btw, but then the record of drafting is so-so because not all of them worked out.
Well no shit. That's drafting in the NFL. No team hits on al of them except maybe the early 70's Steelers.
Posted via Mobile Device

Calm down Scott;:D the Lord MS blesses you.

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 09:01 PM
This thread makes little sense. On hand its acknowledged how Light, Mankins, Koppen, and Kazur have played on the line, a line on a team that went 18-1 in 2007, btw, but then the record of drafting is so-so because not all of them worked out.
Well no shit. That's drafting in the NFL. No team hits on al of them except maybe the early 70's Steelers.
Posted via Mobile Device

Um, we're in YEAR ONE of Pioli's tenure here.

In YEAR ONE of his tenure in New England, they didn't have Light, Mankins, Koppen, OR Kaczur.

THAT is the point of this thread and makes PERFECT sense if you're paying attention.

Pioli Zombie
05-08-2009, 09:18 PM
Um, we're in YEAR ONE of Pioli's tenure here.

In YEAR ONE of his tenure in New England, they didn't have Light, Mankins, Koppen, OR Kaczur.

THAT is the point of this thread and makes PERFECT sense if you're paying attention.

So if you are saying what happened in year one in New England is going to happen in KC then that means in year 2 the Chiefs will win the Super Bowl. Duh

Its still assinine. Pioli is a tad more experienced now that he was the very first year he was at New England. As Belichick has said "Am I a better coach than I was 10 years ago? I better be!"

Ask any Patriot fan if they are pleased with the results of the Patriots drafting.
Posted via Mobile Device

htismaqe
05-08-2009, 09:42 PM
So if you are saying what happened in year one in New England is going to happen in KC then that means in year 2 the Chiefs will win the Super Bowl. Duh

Its still assinine. Pioli is a tad more experienced now that he was the very first year he was at New England. As Belichick has said "Am I a better coach than I was 10 years ago? I better be!"

Ask any Patriot fan if they are pleased with the results of the Patriots drafting.
Posted via Mobile Device

You've COMPLETELY missed the point of the thread.

I've seen several people complain about our draft. We didn't do anything to fix the OL while the Patriots started by building a dominating offensive line.

As the facts clearly show, the Patriots didn't start by building the dominating line that everybody has in their heads. The names you listed off in your previous post - came AFTER they had already won a Super Bowl.

The near panic amongst the fanbase about not drafting any offensive linemen is rooted in Patriot MYTH, not reality.

el borracho
05-08-2009, 09:59 PM
Hmm... I think the concern is as follows:
* all agree the Chiefs' Oline was atrocious in 2008 and needed help
* it was generally accepted that this draft was flush with offensive line talent
* on paper, the Chiefs failed to take advantage of the strength of the draft because the only Olineman they drafted was a 5th round guy nobody had ever heard of.

Now, it certainly isn't any reason to go on any sort of rampage. We are in year one of a rebuild and we could not have gotten everything on our wish list, but it is notable that the Chiefs' went away from the perceived strength of the draft, even when that strength is/was a position of need.

Making matters appear worse, this was not at all a sexy draft for the Chiefs. There were absolutely no draft day heros; no QBOTF; no 6'5, 4.3 WR; no 14 sack-a-season DEs. Just blue-collar worker guys to plug some of the (many) holes. I think most people realize there were too many holes but the draft would appear better on paper if the Chiefs had gone Oline earlier (and with a name) and then selected a more flashy player here and there.

P.S. I'm not saying the Chiefs messed it up, only that it isn't sexy on paper.

Pioli Zombie
05-08-2009, 10:19 PM
You've COMPLETELY missed the point of the thread.

I've seen several people complain about our draft. We didn't do anything to fix the OL while the Patriots started by building a dominating offensive line.

As the facts clearly show, the Patriots didn't start by building the dominating line that everybody has in their heads. The names you listed off in your previous post - came AFTER they had already won a Super Bowl.

The near panic amongst the fanbase about not drafting any offensive linemen is rooted in Patriot MYTH, not reality.
Matt Light and Greg Robinson-Randall were, in fact, the offensive tackles on the 2001 team and were drafted to be so. Klemm didn't work out.
I don't think any team sets out to NOT draft a great OL or DL. All you can go by is a track record.
Before the draft I said people wouldn't like it because fans never could understand Patriot drafts either. After a while you just learned to trust that the players they targeted were picked for a reason and it has generally worked out.
No, Pioli is not the draft day trade manipulator Belichick is, at least not yet. But as far as picking talent there is no reason to not have confidence in his judgement. With his track record if he targeted Jackson and MaGee than they will be solid.
Posted via Mobile Device

Raised On Riots
05-08-2009, 10:22 PM
Matt Light and Greg Robinson-Randall were, in fact, the offensive tackles on the 2001 team and were drafted to be so. Klemm didn't work out.
I don't think any team sets out to NOT draft a great OL or DL. All you can go by is a track record.
Before the draft I said people wouldn't like it because fans never could understand Patriot drafts either. After a while you just learned to trust that the players they targeted were picked for a reason and it has generally worked out.
No, Pioli is not the draft day trade manipulator Belichick is, at least not yet. But as far as picking talent there is no reason to not have confidence in his judgement. With his track record if he targeted Jackson and MaGee than they will be solid.
Posted via Mobile Device


His Peace He gives unto you. :D

htismaqe
05-09-2009, 06:10 AM
Matt Light and Greg Robinson-Randall were, in fact, the offensive tackles on the 2001 team and were drafted to be so. Klemm didn't work out.

2001 wasn't Pioli's first season as GM. 2000 was.

I don't think any team sets out to NOT draft a great OL or DL. All you can go by is a track record.

The reason why I posted this thread. People were referring to his track record with Patriots and somehow trying to suggest this draft didn't "fit". In reality, his track record says we shouldn't freak out just because he didn't draft any linemen. In his first draft with the Patriots, they took a 2nd rounder and a 4th rounder. Furthermore, the best draft picks they had on the OL were 2nd rounders. We didn't have a 2nd-rounder, but we did take a late-round tackle, so we didn't diverge wildly from history.

Before the draft I said people wouldn't like it because fans never could understand Patriot drafts either. After a while you just learned to trust that the players they targeted were picked for a reason and it has generally worked out.

All the more reason to post this - to remind people that there's a method to the seeming madness.

No, Pioli is not the draft day trade manipulator Belichick is, at least not yet. But as far as picking talent there is no reason to not have confidence in his judgement. With his track record if he targeted Jackson and MaGee than they will be solid.

Pioli was late arriving and his head coach was even later. He had to make picks based on the input of the previous regime's scouts. It happens. Furthermore, BB and Pioli weren't big draft day manipulators right out of the gate. People see that Super Bowl in 2001 and mistakenly think Rome was built in a day, when in reality they drafted Tom Brady that year and it was like a bolt of lightning. The team was really "built" by about 2003.

I absolutely agree with you - there's no reason to doubt his judgement. And the purpose of this thread was to show why.

htismaqe
05-09-2009, 06:16 AM
Hmm... I think the concern is as follows:
* all agree the Chiefs' Oline was atrocious in 2008 and needed help
* it was generally accepted that this draft was flush with offensive line talent
* on paper, the Chiefs failed to take advantage of the strength of the draft because the only Olineman they drafted was a 5th round guy nobody had ever heard of.

The RIGHT side of the line was atrocious. One of those pieces, the RG, has already been replace. We drafted a potential RT. So to say we really didn't change anything isn't correct.

Now, it certainly isn't any reason to go on any sort of rampage. We are in year one of a rebuild and we could not have gotten everything on our wish list, but it is notable that the Chiefs' went away from the perceived strength of the draft, even when that strength is/was a position of need.

It think it should be pretty obvious by now that Scott Pioli doesn't care about the "strength" of the draft. It's just like the idea of trading within the division because you might "help" one of your rivals - he doesn't care about that either. We're going to have to get used to the fact that it would appear this guy and the people he have worked with in the past simply don't care about some of the things we have traditionally taken for granted. They care about winning football games, and we can hope like hell that it works.

Making matters appear worse, this was not at all a sexy draft for the Chiefs. There were absolutely no draft day heros; no QBOTF; no 6'5, 4.3 WR; no 14 sack-a-season DEs. Just blue-collar worker guys to plug some of the (many) holes. I think most people realize there were too many holes but the draft would appear better on paper if the Chiefs had gone Oline earlier (and with a name) and then selected a more flashy player here and there.

We really didn't have an earlier pick though. Take a look at Pioli's history again. The guys that are going to make a difference are going to come out of the first and 2nd round. We weren't in a position to take an OL like that this year - we didn't have a 2nd-rounder and we don't have a NEED on the offensive line that would EVER justify using the #3 pick on one.

Pioli Zombie
05-09-2009, 06:19 AM
2001 wasn't Pioli's first season as GM. 2000 was.



The reason why I posted this thread. People were referring to his track record with Patriots and somehow trying to suggest this draft didn't "fit". In reality, his track record says we shouldn't freak out just because he didn't draft any linemen. In his first draft with the Patriots, they took a 2nd rounder and a 4th rounder. Furthermore, the best draft picks they had on the OL were 2nd rounders. We didn't have a 2nd-rounder, but we did take a late-round tackle, so we didn't diverge wildly from history.



All the more reason to post this - to remind people that there's a method to the seeming madness.



Pioli was late arriving and his head coach was even later. He had to make picks based on the input of the previous regime's scouts. It happens. Furthermore, BB and Pioli weren't big draft day manipulators right out of the gate. People see that Super Bowl in 2001 and mistakenly think Rome was built in a day, when in reality they drafted Tom Brady that year and it was like a bolt of lightning. The team was really "built" by about 2003.

I absolutely agree with you - there's no reason to doubt his judgement. And the purpose of this thread was to show why.

Oh. Well that's different

NEVER MIND. :)
Posted via Mobile Device

htismaqe
05-09-2009, 06:25 AM
Oh. Well that's different

NEVER MIND. :)
Posted via Mobile Device

It's cool. Why do you think I kept telling you you missed the point? :)

milkman
05-09-2009, 06:59 AM
I don't think we can look back on these drafts and make any assumptions.

Unless we can go back and see how the value was viewed at the time, we can't really compare.

Just loooking at that 2000 draft, the value at O-Line, in retrospect, was crap.

Will we be able to look back on this draft in 5-10 years and say the same?

milkman
05-09-2009, 07:02 AM
One other thing.

Those Patriot O-Linemen that have been drafted aren't really all that great.

They've been made to look better than they are by Tom Brady, who has an uncanny ability to feel pressure and glide in the pocket away from that pressure.

Raised On Riots
05-09-2009, 01:08 PM
One other thing.

Those Patriot O-Linemen that have been drafted aren't really all that great.

They've been made to look better than they are by Tom Brady, who has an uncanny ability to feel pressure and glide in the pocket away from that pressure.

We've all heard Pioli's draft philosophy about 100 times now. The 2009 draft was relatively "in the zone" of his philosophy, but if you think need didn't take precedence over BPA, you're out of your mind.

And, I watched the NE vs Chiefs game again last night at the Classic Games site. Some observations:

Matt Cassel made the win happen. Brady played that game like his mind was elsewhere. Perhaps on the golf course or getting a hummer from the old lady?
Cassel came in, took control, and though somewhat "Wild Thing w/o his glasses" at first, he settled in and looked way more comfortable than a backup QB with his lack of snap-time should look.
I've warmed up to the idea of Matt; all he has to do now is win me over with his play.

The star of the show was NE's defensive line and LB's. Johnson and Charles might as well have been in the stands eating nachos.

Huard and Croyle; be gone! I don't give a merry blue fuck what Dierdorf, Gumbel, or anyone else has to say:
Several of those "dropsie passes" to Bowe were absolute SHIT.
Bowe FTW!!!!

And finally, how many big plays and touchdowns do I have to watch Bernard Pollard prevent before this guy gets off the hate list? How many times do I have to watch him being the ONE FUCKING GUY that keeps the opponent out of the end zone before he gets some overdue respect from some of you's sacks of shit?!
Pollard FTK!!!
(for the kill)

:evil:

MoreLemonPledge
05-09-2009, 01:13 PM
Matt Cassel made the win happen. Brady played that game like his mind was elsewhere. Perhaps on the golf course or getting a hummer from the old lady?
Cassel came in, took control, and though somewhat "Wild Thing w/o his glasses" at first, he settled in and looked way more comfortable than a backup QB with his lack of snap-time should look.
I've warmed up to the idea of Matt; all he has to do now is win me over with his play.


Hath Hell frozen over?

Raised On Riots
05-09-2009, 01:48 PM
Hath Hell frozen over?

And I saw bigfoot last night too!:D

Pioli Zombie
05-09-2009, 01:57 PM
Most hilarious thing about that game was even when the Chiefs took it down the field at the end you KNEW they weren't going to score.

If you liked Cassell in that game there are a lot better games later. The Jets game, the game at Miami, the game at Oakland after his father passed away, the Arizona game. Etc etc
Posted via Mobile Device

Raised On Riots
05-09-2009, 02:04 PM
Most hilarious thing about that game was even when the Chiefs took it down the field at the end you KNEW they weren't going to score.

If you liked Cassell in that game there are a lot better games later. The Jets game, the game at Miami, the game at Oakland after his father passed away, the Arizona game. Etc etc
Posted via Mobile Device

Good God; Croyle and Huard don't even belong on "Pro's vs Joes".

Buehler445
05-09-2009, 02:11 PM
Good God; Croyle and Huard don't even belong on "Pro's vs Joes".

ROFL Is that show still on? That shit cracked me up!

Pioli Zombie
05-09-2009, 02:13 PM
That first game is a perfect.example of a game the Chiefs win with a QB of Cassel level instead of Croyle, Huard, and Thigpen.
Posted via Mobile Device

Raised On Riots
05-09-2009, 02:17 PM
ROFL Is that show still on? That shit cracked me up!

It's on Spike right now. And football competitions no less!

Raised On Riots
05-09-2009, 02:21 PM
That first game is a perfect.example of a game the Chiefs win with a QB of Cassel level instead of Croyle, Huard, and Thigpen.
Posted via Mobile Device

True. And NE had Bowe double-teamed quite a bit too on red zone pass situations.

FAX
05-09-2009, 07:08 PM
That first game is a perfect.example of a game the Chiefs win with a QB of Cassel level instead of Croyle, Huard, and Thigpen.
Posted via Mobile Device

Or a different offensive philosophy in the second half.

Have I mentioned lately that I friggin' despise Herm Edwards?

FAX

Raised On Riots
05-09-2009, 09:41 PM
And one more thing I forgot to add:

FUCK Wes Welker! For someone that so many have been hyping on, he looked like a turd in a fucking punchbowl in that game.

Take it away...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6BJ3CvPLhs

htismaqe
05-10-2009, 07:26 AM
We've all heard Pioli's draft philosophy about 100 times now. The 2009 draft was relatively "in the zone" of his philosophy, but if you think need didn't take precedence over BPA, you're out of your mind.

I wouldn't call it drafting for need so much as taking their guys above all other concerns.

Raised On Riots
05-10-2009, 03:07 PM
I wouldn't call it drafting for need so much as taking their guys above all other concerns.

Slippery slope. Look at the late rounds. Who would have thought a Corner and an RB with all of the O-line jack that was on the buffet table?

It doesn't matter to me now; I'm beginning to slowly understand where they're headed. The more info I get out of Arrowhead, the more sense( however incrementally )things start to make.:thumb:

doomy3
05-10-2009, 03:21 PM
Slippery slope. Look at the late rounds. Who would have thought a Corner and an RB with all of the O-line jack that was on the buffet table?

It doesn't matter to me now; I'm beginning to slowly understand where they're headed. The more info I get out of Arrowhead, the more sense( however incrementally )things start to make.:thumb:

Uh, you are saying two completely different things. You are saying they were drafting for need more than BPA, then you post that we passed up drafting OL (our biggest position of need along with pass rushers) to draft a CB, which is one of our better positions. Sounds to me like they drafted BPA.

Maybe Pioli didn't feel as strongly as the "O-line jack that was on the buffet table," whatever the fuck that is. Otherwise, he probably would have drafted some of them, but they weren't BPA on his board.

Just Passin' By
05-10-2009, 03:29 PM
Slippery slope. Look at the late rounds. Who would have thought a Corner and an RB with all of the O-line jack that was on the buffet table?

It doesn't matter to me now; I'm beginning to slowly understand where they're headed. The more info I get out of Arrowhead, the more sense( however incrementally )things start to make.:thumb:

Uh, you are saying two completely different things. You are saying they were drafting for need more than BPA, then you post that we passed up drafting OL (our biggest position of need along with pass rushers) to draft a CB, which is one of our better positions. Sounds to me like they drafted BPA.

Maybe Pioli didn't feel as strongly as the "O-line jack that was on the buffet table," whatever the **** that is. Otherwise, he probably would have drafted some of them, but they weren't BPA on his board.

Here's something you'll probably find worth reading if you're looking for a better understanding of what the Belichick/Pioli philosophy is about drafting players:

Q: Do you believe in the concept of drafting for need?

BB: As I said, I think you draft to improve your team. You sign players to improve your team. That encompasses a lot of things, so what you draft is what you see helping your team, both short term and long term, because you expect those players to be here for more than one year. Whether it is four or five years, whatever your commitment is to those players, that's really what you are drafting for. In the end, you need everyone. Whether you draft your number one need or number five need, in a year or two those needs may change. Sometimes you take a player that is best suited for you at the time and sometimes that player happens to be one you also need. You do what is best for your team.

http://patsblog.projo.com/2009/04/bill-belichick-5.html

Some of it is Patriots specific, but there's plenty of good stuff for general reading, as well.

Raised On Riots
05-10-2009, 03:53 PM
Uh, you are saying two completely different things. You are saying they were drafting for need more than BPA, then you post that we passed up drafting OL (our biggest position of need along with pass rushers) to draft a CB, which is one of our better positions. Sounds to me like they drafted BPA.

Maybe Pioli didn't feel as strongly as the "O-line jack that was on the buffet table," whatever the fuck that is. Otherwise, he probably would have drafted some of them, but they weren't BPA on his board.

This so typical of you. Where the fuck did I mention a pass-rusher in that post? I also pay these guys a compliment, and you still go in to douchenozzle mode.
What in THEE fuck is your problem?

doomy3
05-10-2009, 04:00 PM
We've all heard Pioli's draft philosophy about 100 times now. The 2009 draft was relatively "in the zone" of his philosophy, but if you think need didn't take precedence over BPA, you're out of your mind.


Slippery slope. Look at the late rounds. Who would have thought a Corner and an RB with all of the O-line jack that was on the buffet table?

It doesn't matter to me now; I'm beginning to slowly understand where they're headed. The more info I get out of Arrowhead, the more sense( however incrementally )things start to make.:thumb:

Uh, you are saying two completely different things. You are saying they were drafting for need more than BPA, then you post that we passed up drafting OL (our biggest position of need along with pass rushers) to draft a CB, which is one of our better positions. Sounds to me like they drafted BPA.

Maybe Pioli didn't feel as strongly as the "O-line jack that was on the buffet table," whatever the **** that is. Otherwise, he probably would have drafted some of them, but they weren't BPA on his board.

This so typical of you. Where the **** did I mention a pass-rusher in that post? I also pay these guys a compliment, and you still go in to douchenozzle mode.
What in THEE **** is your problem?


It's really not difficult to understand. I went ahead and put all the posts all in one place to make it easier on your retarded ass.

You said that Pioli drafted for need more than BPA.

Then, you said we passed up our biggest need (O-line jack that was on the buffet table," whatever the fuck that is, to draft a CB and a RB.

Clearly, if you were listing our biggest need areas, CB would be at the bottom of the list, and OL and pass rushers would be at the top of the list, right?

So, this dispells your first post of "if you think need didn't take precedence over BPA, you're out of your mind."

See how that works, or do I need to draw a picture for you? Maybe I could find a Youtube link to illustrate it for you, since that seems to be about all you understand.

doomy3
05-10-2009, 04:05 PM
I guess when ROR is owned in a thread, he can at least leave witty and clever neg rep messages.

The offensive line and... 05-10-2009 05:02 PM Raised On Riots Eat shit.

Raised On Riots
05-10-2009, 04:13 PM
It's really not difficult to understand. I went ahead and put all the posts all in one place to make it easier on your retarded ass.

You said that Pioli drafted for need more than BPA.

Then, you said we passed up our biggest need (O-line jack that was on the buffet table," whatever the fuck that is, to draft a CB and a RB.

Clearly, if you were listing our biggest need areas, CB would be at the bottom of the list, and OL and pass rushers would be at the top of the list, right?

So, this dispells your first post of "if you think need didn't take precedence over BPA, you're out of your mind."

See how that works, or do I need to draw a picture for you? Maybe I could find a Youtube link to illustrate it for you, since that seems to be about all you understand.

Okay, I see your point. Are you done being a douche now?

milkman
05-10-2009, 05:57 PM
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Q: Do you believe in the concept of drafting for need?

BB: As I said, I think you draft to improve your team. You sign players to improve your team. That encompasses a lot of things, so what you draft is what you see helping your team, both short term and long term, because you expect those players to be here for more than one year. Whether it is four or five years, whatever your commitment is to those players, that's really what you are drafting for. In the end, you need everyone. Whether you draft your number one need or number five need, in a year or two those needs may change. Sometimes you take a player that is best suited for you at the time and sometimes that player happens to be one you also need. You do what is best for your team.



So Pioli envisions Vrable and Thomas being here for 4-5 years?



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

bevischief
05-10-2009, 06:00 PM
:popcorn:

Just Passin' By
05-10-2009, 06:03 PM
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Q: Do you believe in the concept of drafting for need?

BB: As I said, I think you draft to improve your team. You sign players to improve your team. That encompasses a lot of things, so what you draft is what you see helping your team, both short term and long term, because you expect those players to be here for more than one year. Whether it is four or five years, whatever your commitment is to those players, that's really what you are drafting for. In the end, you need everyone. Whether you draft your number one need or number five need, in a year or two those needs may change. Sometimes you take a player that is best suited for you at the time and sometimes that player happens to be one you also need. You do what is best for your team.



So Pioli envisions Vrable and Thomas being here for 4-5 years?



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

I'm sorry, what round did Pioli draft Thomas in?

Mr. Krab
05-10-2009, 06:09 PM
What some people have said for years, you don't have to have five 1st rounds on the offensive line. Coaching,scheme and stud skill position players are more important.

we have been overspending at the guard position for years, you should be able to use workmanlike type players in the interior of the offensive line. That allows you to save more to spend on QB,WR's and even OT's if you find a good one.

milkman
05-10-2009, 06:13 PM
I'm sorry, what round did Pioli draft Thomas in?

As I read that quote, he seemed to take a broader view than simply the draft, when he said "You sign players to improve your team. That encompasses a lot of things."

Just Passin' By
05-10-2009, 07:18 PM
As I read that quote, he seemed to take a broader view than simply the draft, when he said "You sign players to improve your team. That encompasses a lot of things."

Whether it is four or five years, whatever your commitment is to those players, that's really what you are drafting for.

Clearly the drafting part is what the 4-5 years is about. It should come as no surprise that the team will also look to plug in older veterans for less time. It's been done since Belichick got there (Cox, Phifer, etc....).

htismaqe
05-10-2009, 07:40 PM
That encompasses a lot of things, so what you draft is what you see helping your team, both short term and long term, because you expect those players to be here for more than one year.

This is what I've been talking about since the draft. Sure, there were plenty of guys available in the later rounds that might be immediate upgrades. But if they didn't have much upside, does the chance to upgrade in the short-term outweigh the fact that they don't fit long-term? Probably not.

Marcellus
05-10-2009, 08:06 PM
I think it should be well known by now that the Pats have used free agency and the draft equally depending on the year to build their SB teams.

It really all depends on what is on the market as FA and what's in the draft year to year.

Why people think you can only draft to improve or sign big players in FA to improve is beyond me. It's a combination of what is out there at the time, salary cap considerations, and what your weak points are. Also how good or bad the team is as a whole going into off season.

It also depends on who you have that may lose due to FA. There is not a complete book on this. Both Dallas and San Fran in the 90's did either or year to year. NE has done both.

The Steelers are probably the only team that has used the draft almost exclusively to build their team.

Marcellus
05-10-2009, 08:06 PM
I think it should be well known by now that the Pats have used free agency and the draft equally depending on the year to build their SB teams.

It really all depends on what is on the market as FA and what's in the draft year to year.

Why people think you can only draft to improve or sign big players in FA to improve is beyond me. It's a combination of what is out there at the time, salary cap considerations, and what your weak points are. Also how good or bad the team is as a whole going into off season.

It also depends on who you have that may lose due to FA. There is not a complete book on this. Both Dallas and San Fran in the 90's did either or year to year. NE has done both.

The Steelers are probably the only team that has used the draft almost exclusively to build their team.

Raised On Riots
05-10-2009, 08:09 PM
Jesus Christ; was that the dullest take ever or what?