PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft What if things play out like this on Draft Day?


Coogs
03-14-2010, 12:11 PM
1. Bradford to Rams
2. Okung to Lions (seems to be gaining more steam daily)
3. McCoy to Buccs (better fit for their defense than Suh?)
4. Clausen to Skins (seems to be gaining steam as well)

And we have Suh and Berry setting there at our pick. Our pick at 5 is worth 1700 points. New England brass dials the phone and offers two trade scenarios...

#22 (780 points)
#44 (470 points)
#47 (440 points)

1690 total points

or...

#22
#44
and Oakland's 1st round pick in next years draft that they own

Do we stay put and take either Suh and try and deal Dorsey? Do we stay put and take Berry? Do we take deal #1 and have 6 picks between 22 and 68 to fill roster spots? Do we take deal #2 to have 5 picks between 22 and 68 to fill roster spots and have 2 chips in next years draft that could both possibly be top 10 variety again in what should be an offensive playmaker draft?

Chocolate Hog
03-14-2010, 12:13 PM
No way Suh falls to 5.

Coogs
03-14-2010, 12:13 PM
Mod's can move this to Draft Planet if you want. I thought that is where I had it. :shrug:

SNR
03-14-2010, 12:14 PM
Why would New England want Suh? I know they just dealt Seymour and all, but Suh's kind of in the same position that Dorsey was. You draft a guy like that to take up blockers? Kind of retarded.

Old Dog
03-14-2010, 12:14 PM
Berry

Coogs
03-14-2010, 12:16 PM
No way Suh falls to 5.

I don't expect it either. But these other scenarios are gaining ground daily. I would hope Pioli and gang have considered a scenario playing out like this just in case, and not be sitting there on draft day dumbfounded if it does.

DeezNutz
03-14-2010, 12:16 PM
I'd take the second offer in a second.

Next year's WR class is going to be sick, and there is the potential for it to be an outstanding QB class, as well.

Factor in that OAK will be terrible, and that sounds like a win.

Chiefshrink
03-14-2010, 12:16 PM
1. Bradford to Rams
2. Okung to Lions (seems to be gaining more steam daily)
3. McCoy to Buccs (better fit for their defense than Suh?)
4. Clausen to Skins (seems to be gaining steam as well)

And we have Suh and Berry setting there at our pick. Our pick at 5 is worth 1700 points. New England brass dials the phone and offers two trade scenarios...

#22 (780 points)
#44 (470 points)
#47 (440 points)

1690 total points

or...

#22
#44
and Oakland's 1st round pick in next years draft that they own

Do we stay put and take either Suh and try and deal Dorsey? Do we stay put and take Berry? Do we take deal #1 and have 6 picks between 22 and 68 to fill roster spots? Do we take deal #2 to have 5 picks between 22 and 68 to fill roster spots and have 2 chips in next years draft that could both possibly be top 10 variety again that in an offensive playmaker draft?

I like the way you think Coogs!!!!:thumb: Either scenario works for me but if I had to pick one I would pass on Suh and take the next Ed Reed!!:thumb:

Coogs
03-14-2010, 12:17 PM
Why would New England want Suh? I know they just dealt Seymour and all, but Suh's kind of in the same position that Dorsey was. You draft a guy like that to take up blockers? Kind of retarded.

I don't know. Just playing what if's.

Chiefshrink
03-14-2010, 12:21 PM
Are there any for sure Top 5 picks? This draft is deep on D so I say always trade down if the deal is fair. We need more talented players.

the Talking Can
03-14-2010, 12:25 PM
you probably take berry

but if not, you take #2...that pick could be the leverage we need the following year to get a QB....

doomy3
03-14-2010, 12:28 PM
I'd take the second offer in a second.

Next year's WR class is going to be sick, and there is the potential for it to be an outstanding QB class, as well.

Factor in that OAK will be terrible, and that sounds like a win.

This. Take deal number 2 in a nanosecond.

Honestly, I know Berry is achieving God-like status on this board, and he is who I want to draft as well. However, Berry is certainly not worth more than that package.

Something like a combination of Earl Thomas, Demaryius Thomas, Blaine Gabbert is worth much more than Eric Berry.

Coogs
03-14-2010, 12:30 PM
you probably take berry (i'd take clausen)

but if not, you take #2...that pick could be the leverage we need the following year to get a QB....

Clausen is gone in this scenario.

The Bad Guy
03-14-2010, 12:31 PM
If we are dropping 17 spots, I want more than an extra 2 and a 1 next year which has the equivalency of a #2 this year.

the Talking Can
03-14-2010, 12:32 PM
Clausen is gone in this scenario.

doh!


right

spanky 52
03-14-2010, 12:32 PM
It would be hard to pass on either Berry or Suh but five picks in the first 50 picks would cure a lot of the Chief's ills. Not likely to happen but it doesn't hurt to dream.

doomy3
03-14-2010, 12:33 PM
I'm honestly shocked that anyone would not take deal number two. So we can take a safety, when there are other safeties in this very class that aren't a huge step down from Berry?

Coogs
03-14-2010, 12:33 PM
If we are dropping 17 spots, I want more than an extra 2 and a 1 next year which has the equivalency of a #2 this year.

Right up until next year when that pick could be a top 10 pick. Then it becomes worth a top 10 pick.

The Bad Guy
03-14-2010, 12:39 PM
Right up until next year when that pick could be a top 10 pick. Then it becomes worth a top 10 pick.

And honestly, there are no guarantees it's in the top 10 Raiders or not.

A few years ago, the Browns moved up 1 spot to take Kellen Winslow and they gave up a #2 to do it. I'm not dropping 17 spots for that compensation.

If they want to move up that much, they would have to throw in both of their second rounders and the Raiders pick next year for me to take it.

Old Dog
03-14-2010, 12:40 PM
If they want to move up that much, they would have to throw in both of their second rounders and the Raiders pick next year for me to take it.

I concur. 17 spots is a hell of a drop.

The Bad Guy
03-14-2010, 12:41 PM
I'm honestly shocked that anyone would not take deal number two. So we can take a safety, when there are other safeties in this very class that aren't a huge step down from Berry?

I think that's all matter of opinion. I think Eric Berry is a rare talent who is heads and shoulders better than any other safety in this class.

The argument of positional value for safeties makes me cringe. They are vital in today's NFL with the emphasis on the passing game. This isn't the 90s NFL.

philfree
03-14-2010, 12:46 PM
1. Bradford to Rams
2. Okung to Lions (seems to be gaining more steam daily)
3. McCoy to Buccs (better fit for their defense than Suh?)
4. Clausen to Skins (seems to be gaining steam as well)

And we have Suh and Berry setting there at our pick. Our pick at 5 is worth 1700 points. New England brass dials the phone and offers two trade scenarios...

#22 (780 points)
#44 (470 points)
#47 (440 points)

1690 total points

or...

#22
#44
and Oakland's 1st round pick in next years draft that they own

Do we stay put and take either Suh and try and deal Dorsey? Do we stay put and take Berry? Do we take deal #1 and have 6 picks between 22 and 68 to fill roster spots? Do we take deal #2 to have 5 picks between 22 and 68 to fill roster spots and have 2 chips in next years draft that could both possibly be top 10 variety again in what should be an offensive playmaker draft?


That's the paln in bold. This draft is deep with talent so a 2nd and a another pick of some kind would do fine. I don't dislike Dorsey but he was drafted by the old regime to play inside so if it's between him and Suh I'll take Suh.

PhilFree:arrow:

melbar
03-14-2010, 12:52 PM
Thats about right...a phenom 4-3 DT drops to us soon after we switch to the 3-4. If we were in 4-3, Dorsey-Suh would be sick in the middle.

Bane
03-14-2010, 12:55 PM
No way Suh falls to 5.

:thumb:
He will never fall that far,so......yeah uh never mind......
IF he were to fall that far,every GM that passed on him should be fired on the spot.
The Rams picking a QB is the only forgivable way I see him not going #1 over all.

DeezNutz
03-14-2010, 12:57 PM
I think that's all matter of opinion. I think Eric Berry is a rare talent who is heads and shoulders better than any other safety in this class.

The argument of positional value for safeties makes me cringe. They are vital in today's NFL with the emphasis on the passing game. This isn't the 90s NFL.

While I don't disagree with this assessment of Berry--dude is fucking sick--I'm making the deal by comparing him to equally rare WR prospects and legit franchise QB options.

If Clausen is on the board, I stay put and take him, as Clausen in the hand is worth more than ___ in the bush.

But the above scenario says otherwise. Additionally, I don't agree with the theory of a first next year being worth a second this year.

We'd be betting on the Raiders to suck, and I'm willing to take that HUGE chance. Every. Fucking. Year (as long as Al continues to run the ship).

The Bad Guy
03-14-2010, 01:03 PM
I'll also say trading a first rounder in just his 3rd season, in 3 different defenses is the way you set your franchise back years upon years.

Glenn Dorsey should be a major part of the Chiefs moving forward.

KCDC
03-14-2010, 01:09 PM
I'd jump either one. We have to forget the NFL draft pick value chart when it comes to the top 5 picks. They are vastly overrated. The only teams (and fans) that think the number 5 pick is really worth 1700, or the number 1 is worth 3000, are the team that owns the pick. Just because the Browns made a stupid move one year does not change the analysis.

Would we give a second round pick to move up to #3? No way. It would be stupid. At #5 we either get Berry or Clausen, and no reason to burn a pick to pick the same guys.

Now then, if we are to take an OL, then there are plenty of good ones in the next 10 picks, so why not get something of value by dropping? If, for some reason, Suh or Clausen is available on our pick and Pioli wants another second rounder to drop a few picks, its probably worth the gamble, as we have so many needs.

Since we have so many needs and there is so much second round talent, I think we should eager for trade opportunities. To fall 17 places and pick up 2 more excellent picks is a great deal, even if we lose Berry.

In scenario #2, we get the Faiders top 10 pick next year, to couple with our own, and we could be well-situated to get our QBOTF. A next year stud and two excellent players for one stud is a no brainer. Or, one stud at safety for 3 excellent players is a darn fine trade for me. With five picks in the first two rounds, we could address every need on the team with one draft. That would have me excited that we don't need three more drafts to be competitive. We could be competitive in one.

Coogs
03-14-2010, 01:15 PM
I concur. 17 spots is a hell of a drop.

It is a big drop. But #22, #44, and #47 is about a wash on points. And The Oakland pick next year is worth a 2nd this year which makes that deal about a wash as well for now. If Oakland wins the Super Bowl, then it essentially becomes a 2nd round pick. But if they falter, it could be worth a top 10 selection next year and at that point becomes a very good deal IMO.

Coogs
03-14-2010, 01:20 PM
I'd jump either one. We have to forget the NFL draft pick value chart when it comes to the top 5 picks. They are vastly overrated. The only teams (and fans) that think the number 5 pick is really worth 1700, or the number 1 is worth 3000, are the team that owns the pick. Just because the Browns made a stupid move one year does not change the analysis.

Would we give a second round pick to move up to #3? No way. It would be stupid. At #5 we either get Berry or Clausen, and no reason to burn a pick to pick the same guys.

Now then, if we are to take an OL, then there are plenty of good ones in the next 10 picks, so why not get something of value by dropping? If, for some reason, Suh or Clausen is available on our pick and Pioli wants another second rounder to drop a few picks, its probably worth the gamble, as we have so many needs.

Since we have so many needs and there is so much second round talent, I think we should eager for trade opportunities. To fall 17 places and pick up 2 more excellent picks is a great deal, even if we lose Berry.

In scenario #2, we get the Faiders top 10 pick next year, to couple with our own, and we could be well-situated to get our QBOTF. A next year stud and two excellent players for one stud is a no brainer. Or, one stud at safety for 3 excellent players is a darn fine trade for me. With five picks in the first two rounds, we could address every need on the team with one draft. That would have me excited that we don't need three more drafts to be competitive. We could be competitive in one.

It does have some interesting merit to it. That is why I tossed this idea out there.

Dave Lane
03-14-2010, 01:23 PM
My first choice would be to take Suh, The guy is a frikking beast. My second choice is the 2nd one with a first next year 2 1st next year would be sweet. I like what Belicheck does in stockpiling future draft picks so really this is pie in the sky anyway. No way he does this with us.

philfree
03-14-2010, 01:25 PM
I'll also say trading a first rounder in just his 3rd season, in 3 different defenses is the way you set your franchise back years upon years.

Glenn Dorsey should be a major part of the Chiefs moving forward.

I don't know that I believe that. I would think passing on a once in a decade type player would be more harmful. Some other team gets better and we tread water. I'm not convinced that Dorsey is going to be anything other then just a guy on our D. I also don't think the handling of one player unless he is a superstar type or a QB would set a franchise back for years. Screwing up 1st round draft picks over and over will though. If it pans out that way and we get to choose Berry or Suh it'll be good problem to have. I'll be good with either one but while Berry is a playmaker I think Suh will be dominate up front and that has more impact on what happens in games. A guy like Suh would be a guy like Berry's best friend.

PhilFree:arrow:

Mr. Laz
03-14-2010, 01:27 PM
#5 to #22 is a long freaking way to trade down ...... looooooooong.

philfree
03-14-2010, 01:28 PM
My first choice would be to take Suh, The guy is a frikking beast. My second choice is the 2nd one with a first next year 2 1st next year would be sweet. I like what Belicheck does in stockpiling future draft picks so really this is pie in the sky anyway. No way he does this with us.

What's next years draft gonna be like? With all the players that came out this year I would think it won't be very deep. I like stockpiling picks but is next year the year to have picks stockpiled for? I don't know I'm jsut wondering.

PhilFree:arrow:

Coogs
03-14-2010, 01:33 PM
What's next years draft gonna be like? With all the players that came out this year I would think it won't be very deep. I like stockpiling picks but is next year the year to have picks stockpiled for? I don't know I'm jsut wondering.

PhilFree:arrow:

For somewhat of an idea, look here...

http://walterfootball.com/draft2011.php

KCDC
03-14-2010, 01:44 PM
The thing I worry about is that Dorsey was described as an absolute can't miss beast. Last year it was Aaron Curry. Everyone listens to this hype and imagines these kind of guys to be the next DT or HoFamer. In reality, I take with a grain of salt all these comparisons. Give me more high level picks anytime. That is the surest way to increase your chance of finding a HoFamer.

DBOSHO
03-14-2010, 01:45 PM
I don't know that I believe that. I would think passing on a once in a decade type player would be more harmful. Some other team gets better and we tread water. I'm not convinced that Dorsey is going to be anything other then just a guy on our D. I also don't think the handling of one player unless he is a superstar type or a QB would set a franchise back for years. Screwing up 1st round draft picks over and over will though. If it pans out that way and we get to choose Berry or Suh it'll be good problem to have. I'll be good with either one but while Berry is a playmaker I think Suh will be dominate up front and that has more impact on what happens in games. A guy like Suh would be a guy like Berry's best friend.

PhilFree:arrow:

Why, in a 3-4 system, would we trade a 4-3 DT for another 4-3 DT? They are the same player.

ChiefsCountry
03-14-2010, 01:48 PM
The question is do you think - Eric Berry is better than Blaine Gabbert & AJ Green? Damn thats a tough one.

Coogs
03-14-2010, 01:49 PM
#5 to #22 is a long freaking way to trade down ...... looooooooong.

Yeah it is. But NE is the one with the stockpiled picks in round 2 and next year, and Walters has them wanting a DE at #22 to fill Seymour's spot, so why not Suh?

22. New England Patriots: Jared Odrick, DE/DT, Penn State

Trading Richard Seymour for Oakland's 2011 first-round pick was a good move - New England will likely have a top-10 pick next April - but the team now has a hole up front, as we all saw when Baltimore gashed this defense in that playoff blowout. Jared Odrick, who had a very solid Combine, will be able to fill Seymour's shoes.

http://walterfootball.com/draft2010_1.php

philfree
03-14-2010, 01:50 PM
Why, in a 3-4 system, would we trade a 4-3 DT for another 4-3 DT? They are the same player.

I think Suh can dominate on the d line regardless of which D he's in. He wouldn't be miss-cast like Dorsey is in 3-4. It's my opinion....Unless Suh isn't as dominate as he seems.

PhilFree:arrow:

doomy3
03-14-2010, 01:53 PM
The question is do you think - Eric Berry is better than Blaine Gabbert & AJ Green? Damn thats a tough one.

Absolutely not.

And really, the question is, is Eric Berry better than Gabbert or Green PLUS Earl Thomas/Anthony Davis/Dan Williams/Mike Iutapi/Bruce Campbell/etc AND Chad Jones/Ricky Sapp/Damian Williams/Demaryius Thomas/Jerry Hughes/etc.

I have no idea how anyone could place the value of Eric Berry, as good as he is, over the value of THREE of those players.

DeezNutz
03-14-2010, 01:59 PM
The question is do you think - Eric Berry is better than Blaine Gabbert & AJ Green? Damn thats a tough one.

That's not even remotely close.

One great safety vs. one equally great WR AND a franchise QB?

The latter. All day. Every day.

The Bad Guy
03-14-2010, 01:59 PM
I think Suh can dominate on the d line regardless of which D he's in. He wouldn't be miss-cast like Dorsey is in 3-4. It's my opinion....Unless Suh isn't as dominate as he seems.

PhilFree:arrow:

Glenn Dorsey was viewed as a huge stud with insane upside as well. He was Suh before Suh was Suh.

milkman
03-14-2010, 02:06 PM
Glenn Dorsey was viewed as a huge stud with insane upside as well. He was Suh before Suh was Suh.

While true, and while Dorsey seems to have transitioned better than most of us expected in this defense. Suh, I believe, and I would imagine many others do also, has more upside as a 34 DE than does Dorsey.

That being said, I'm not trading Dorsey to select another 5 tech in the top 5.

I'm hanging onto Dorsey and taking the second trade scenario.

KChiefs1
03-14-2010, 02:10 PM
Trade Option #2

Ralphy Boy
03-14-2010, 02:12 PM
U take suh and dump tj. Any of u fuggers who argue that point better
not be on the side of drafting a qb at 5. Suh would never fall to 5 under any scenario.
He's far and away the best player in the draft.
If he is there u take him no matter what.
Posted via Mobile Device

philfree
03-14-2010, 02:13 PM
Glenn Dorsey was viewed as a huge stud with insane upside as well. He was Suh before Suh was Suh.

I never thought Dorsey was as dominate as Suh. I don't think he was talked about as a once in a decade type player. I've seen them both play though and I'd take Suh over Dorsey everytime. I want a dominate player on our D line and while Dorsey may be good in 4-3 he'll never be dominate and he certainly will never be dominate in a 3-4. I wish it weren't that way but it is so instead of hanging on I'd rather just find a dominate player and move on.


PhilFree:arrow:

milkman
03-14-2010, 02:16 PM
U take suh and dump tj. Any of u fuggers who argue that point better
not be on the side of drafting a qb at 5. Suh would never fall to 5 under any scenario.
He's far and away the best player in the draft.
If he is there u take him no matter what.
Posted via Mobile Device

Suh might have the potential be the most dominating defensive player in a decade, but taking him in this scenario is shortsighted when you look at the potential of next year's first round to have a franchise QB and a playmaking WR.

The Bad Guy
03-14-2010, 02:18 PM
I never thought Dorsey was as dominate as Suh. I don't think he was talked about as a once in a decade type player. I've seen them both play though and I'd take Suh over Dorsey everytime. I want a dominate player on our D line and while Dorsey may be good in 4-3 he'll never be dominate and he certainly will never be dominate in a 3-4. I wish it weren't that way but it is so instead of hanging on I'd rather just find a dominate player and move on.


PhilFree:arrow:

Yes, Dorsey was thought of as a massively dominant presence and was compared to Warren Sapp when he came out.

I'll give Dorsey some time working with a guy who can actually coach the defensive line before I'm ready to ship him off for 50 cents on the dollar.

philfree
03-14-2010, 02:24 PM
Yes, Dorsey was thought of as a massively dominant presence and was compared to Warren Sapp when he came out.

I'll give Dorsey some time working with a guy who can actually coach the defensive line before I'm ready to ship him off for 50 cents on the dollar.

That's probably what will end up happening and then we'll get to see where that takes us. There's no one way to do it though and I'll hope for the best what ever we do.

PhilFree:arrow:

Dicky McElephant
03-14-2010, 02:26 PM
I'm driving the Berry bandwagon.....and in that situation....you take trade #2. That gives you the opportunity to fill some holes this year and draft two offensive playmakers next year.

FAX
03-14-2010, 02:36 PM
As much as I'd like to add a top 5 player this year, scenario number 2 is simply too tempting to pass up. I'm somewhat doubtful that NE would be forthcoming with such an offer, though.

FAX

Coogs
03-14-2010, 02:41 PM
Suh would never fall to 5 under any scenario.
He's far and away the best player in the draft.
If he is there u take him no matter what.
Posted via Mobile Device

Personally, I really don't see him sliding to #5 either... BUT... all of those first 4 picks are being mentioned more and more frequently. And Suh being what he is just might entice someone like NE to make such a move.

And in all likelyhood, if he gets to #4, Washington will be the ones who end up with a deal like this.

DeezNutz
03-14-2010, 03:03 PM
As much as I'd like to add a top 5 player this year, scenario number 2 is simply too tempting to pass up. I'm somewhat doubtful that NE would be forthcoming with such an offer, though.

FAX

Hell, I wanted to add a top-5 player last year, too.

patteeu
03-14-2010, 03:08 PM
I'd take the second offer in a second.

Next year's WR class is going to be sick, and there is the potential for it to be an outstanding QB class, as well.

Factor in that OAK will be terrible, and that sounds like a win.

DeezNutz speaks for me.

Pasta Giant Meatball
03-14-2010, 03:27 PM
I never thought Dorsey was as dominate as Suh. I don't think he was talked about as a once in a decade type player. I've seen them both play though and I'd take Suh over Dorsey everytime. I want a dominate player on our D line and while Dorsey may be good in 4-3 he'll never be dominate and he certainly will never be dominate in a 3-4. I wish it weren't that way but it is so instead of hanging on I'd rather just find a dominate player and move on.


PhilFree:arrow:

Yeah, Dorsey was talked up just as highly. It would be foolish to give him up at this point.

Fritz88
03-14-2010, 04:24 PM
I have a strong feeling we are trading down this year.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 04:28 PM
Look now, there is a decent chance one of the DT's will fall there but if the Chiefs move down they really can't drop more than 5 spots or they'll freeze themselves out of elite talent.

Fritz88
03-14-2010, 04:34 PM
Looks like http://assets.espn.go.com/i/columnists/williamson_bill_m.jpg changed his opinion

Steve from Woodside, New York wants to know if I think the Chiefs should take Tennessee safety Eric Berry or Oklahoma State left tackle Russell Okung if they have the choice at No. 5.

BW: It’s an interesting question, Steve. Ultimately, I think if Berry is available, Kansas City needs to take him. He looks like he is going to be a sure impact player. Kansas City needs to score with a top pick after taking Glenn Dorsey and Tyson Jackson the past two years in the top five. Neither of those two players made immediate impacts. The left tackle position is very deep. Kansas City could get a good tackle in the second round. Now, if Berry (who should slip past Tampa Bay at No. 3 if St. Louis takes a quarterback at No.1) if off the board, Okung would be a great fit at No. 5.

Pioli Zombie
03-14-2010, 04:38 PM
In a potential blockbuster Saddleback Church has offered Rick Warren and a worship leader to Lakewood Church for Joel Osteen and the Associate Pastor. It is being reported that Saddleback would then move the Associate Pastor to New Life Church for the rights to Ted Haggard should he return.
Posted via Mobile Device

Ralphy Boy
03-14-2010, 05:20 PM
Suh might have the potential be the most dominating defensive player in a decade, but taking him in this scenario is shortsighted when you look at the potential of next year's first round to have a franchise QB and a playmaking WR.

I don't think so. Suh is a sure thing. He is as much of a sure thing as any player in at least 10 years. I'll take the bird in the hand any day over what may or may not play out next year.

Brock
03-14-2010, 05:26 PM
I remember when Dan Wilkinson was a sure thing too.

tmax63
03-14-2010, 05:37 PM
Be real tempted to take Suh and switch back to a 4-3. An interior of Dorsey and Suh and Hali at one end would be 3/4's of the way to an excellent d-line. I know the Chiefs are going 3-4 but do you turn down a top 5-8 or better d-line handed to you?

BryanBusby
03-14-2010, 05:41 PM
I don't think so. Suh is a sure thing. He is as much of a sure thing as any player in at least 10 years. I'll take the bird in the hand any day over what may or may not play out next year.

Suh isn't a sure thing though....

Mr. Laz
03-14-2010, 07:54 PM
U take suh and dump tj. Any of u fuggers who argue that point better
not be on the side of drafting a qb at 5. Suh would never fall to 5 under any scenario.
He's far and away the best player in the draft.
If he is there u take him no matter what.
Posted via Mobile Device
no ... if you stay and take Suh you trade Dorsey, not Jackson, and you try to trade him immediately. For another draft pick and draft a NT ... maybe use Dorsey to trade up and grab Dan Williams.

and you have a defense line like this:

Suh
Dan Williams/Terrance Cody/Cam thomas
Jackson

Dorsey would have more trade value because teams think he will be better in another system.

philfree
03-14-2010, 08:07 PM
no ... if you stay and take Suh you trade Dorsey, not Jackson, and you try to trade him immediately. For another draft pick and draft a NT ... maybe use Dorsey to trade up and grab Dan Williams.

and you have a defense line like this:

Suh
Dan Williams/Terrance Cody/Cam thomas
Jackson

Dorsey would have more trade value because teams think he will be better in another system.

That's the way I would see that scenario playing out. Actually getting guys to play in our 3-4 inststead of hanging on to the last regimes players who don't fit.

PhilFree:arrow:

Coogs
03-14-2010, 09:21 PM
Look now, there is a decent chance one of the DT's will fall there but if the Chiefs move down they really can't drop more than 5 spots or they'll freeze themselves out of elite talent.

I would agree that we may slide past the elite talent in this years draft with this scenario. BUT, with deal #2, you could put 5 damn fine football players on the roster this season, AND, have the potential to have two top 10 picks next year when there is elite offensive skill players available.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 10:10 PM
5 alright players is a good scenario if you're looking for the quick fix way back to 8-8.

Good players with no stars is how you build a playoff loser.

milkman
03-14-2010, 10:17 PM
He isn't looking at it that way.

He's looking longer term and seeing a way to get the elite talent at the most important position in football, and a weapon to complement that.

It's a gamble, cause you don't know how things will play out.

But it's good gamble that will, if it pays off, have the potential to propel the team to elite status.

patteeu
03-14-2010, 10:17 PM
5 alright players is a good scenario if you're looking for the quick fix way back to 8-8.

Good players with no stars is how you build a playoff loser.

Come on. There are plenty of stars that come from the late first and second rounds in the draft. You don't have to take someone in the top 5 to get a star. The more chances you have to take someone in the top two rounds, the more chances you have of identifying a future star. In these trades we're trading 1 chance for 3 chances and in the second option, one of those chances is likely to be a pretty good 1st round pick next year.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 10:18 PM
I personally would not trade out with Berry on the board, he's to good to not pick in my view.

milkman
03-14-2010, 10:21 PM
I personally would not trade out with Berry on the board, he's to good to not pick in my view.

Berry is an elite prospect, no question.

But if I thought I had the chance to get one of the QBs and WRs in nest year's draft, and it means I have to pass on Berry to achieve that, I'm taking that chance.

BryanBusby
03-14-2010, 10:21 PM
You only trade down if you are completely sure that Berry will still be on the board when you're up at your new spot. No exceptions.

milkman
03-14-2010, 10:22 PM
I personally would not trade out with Berry on the board, he's to good to not pick in my view.

And you are always bitching and moaning that the Cheifs play it safe, but in the scenarios presented, you have your balls tucked away.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 10:23 PM
Berry will go with the next pick if the Chiefs trade out...they will have no chance at him if they move.

Here's what you ask yourself is it worth it when you realize who you'll get? If the Chiefs move you go from Eric Berry to Dan Williams or Bulaga, or reaching on a Brandom Graham or Sergio Kindle.

DeezNutz
03-14-2010, 10:24 PM
While I don't dispute the fact that Berry is special and would love to have him on my team, he's beginning to get a tad overstated on this board.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 10:24 PM
And you are always bitching and moaning that the Cheifs play it safe, but in the scenarios presented, you have your balls tucked away.

I think Berry is far to good to be trading down and taking a player who's not close to the same level, giving me an extra pick in the 2nd round for it, is not enough.

Tribal Warfare
03-14-2010, 10:26 PM
pick Berry, unless they are targeting Dan Williams/ Brandon Graham

milkman
03-14-2010, 10:27 PM
I think Berry is far to good to be trading down and taking a player who's not close to the same level, giving me an extra pick in the 2nd round for it, is not enough.

JFC, he's talking about getting another frst round pick in next year's draft as well, one that has a very good chance of being a top ten pick.

I'll fucking pass on Eric Berry if it means I might very well have an opportunity to draft an elite QB and WR prospect next year.

But you go ahead and play it safe, but stop pissing on the Chiefs for doing the same.

BryanBusby
03-14-2010, 10:27 PM
Pick Berry unless they are going to get a sandwhich, come back than pick Berry. Simple as that.

DeezNutz
03-14-2010, 10:28 PM
I think Berry is far to good to be trading down and taking a player who's not close to the same level, giving me an extra pick in the 2nd round for it, is not enough.

Of course. But it's all about next year's first. That's the prime mover here.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 10:34 PM
I was trying to come at this from a logical point, NE wouldn't do this deal, 1 because Suh isn't their kind of lineman. 2 because they don't like paying draft picks and value 2nds and 3 because there is likely to be a rookie cap for the next draft.

If some team is going to offer you an extra 1 then you have to take a look at that, I just think that's really out of the realm of possibility right now.

Toad
03-14-2010, 10:35 PM
Fun to think about, but I agree with FAX. No way NE does either of those deals.

doomy3
03-14-2010, 10:38 PM
While I don't dispute the fact that Berry is special and would love to have him on my team, he's beginning to get a tad overstated on this board.

Glad someone else can see this. Holy shit.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 10:38 PM
The Chiefs trade down options are more likely Cleveland or Buffalo and those have a lot to do with if a QB is still there and if you make those moves you don't get an extra 1 and you lose Berry.

BryanBusby
03-14-2010, 10:39 PM
NE has too many holes out and about to plug up to even consider moving up.

1. Need a DE opposite of Warren. A couple actually....since they lost Green.
2. Desperately need more talent at OLB to rush the passer.
3. Someone to place inside with Meyo
4. Could use some quality youth at RB. Maroney sucks.
5. WR could use some attention, along with the Oline

DeezNutz
03-14-2010, 10:42 PM
Glad someone else can see this. Holy shit.

Yeah, we're starting to talk about the kid as though he's the equal of an elite QB prospect.

He's not.

Absolutely think he could be a defensive force and that safety is underrated, on the whole, but it's still not the single most important position on his side of the ball.

So...a bit more realistic perspective is needed here.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 10:45 PM
Yeah, we're starting to talk about the kid as though he's the equal of an elite QB prospect.

He's not.

Absolutely think he could be a defensive force and that safety is underrated, on the whole, but it's still not the single most important position on his side of the ball.

So...a bit more realistic perspective is needed here.

I don't think the Chiefs are going to get an extra 1, so when I talk about this my thought is simply this.

Would you rather have Dan Williams/Bryan Bulaga/Graham etc plus like a 2 and a 4 or Eric Berry?

milkman
03-14-2010, 10:46 PM
I was trying to come at this from a logical point, NE wouldn't do this deal, 1 because Suh isn't their kind of lineman. 2 because they don't like paying draft picks and value 2nds and 3 because there is likely to be a rookie cap for the next draft.

If some team is going to offer you an extra 1 then you have to take a look at that, I just think that's really out of the realm of possibility right now.

Then you should have said that.

All you said is that you wouldn't pass on Berry.

And the fact is, not a fucking one of us thinks that this scenario has a cahnce in hell of happening, but it doesn't mean that we can't speculate.

Fuck logic.

doomy3
03-14-2010, 10:46 PM
I don't think the Chiefs are going to get an extra 1, so when I talk about this my thought is simply this.

Would you rather have Dan Williams/Bryan Bulaga/Graham etc plus like a 2 and a 4 or Eric Berry?

That's not the question in the thread.

And, to answer your question, yeah I would still very much consider this trade even if it was a first and 2 seconds. I would take Earl Thomas, Jerry Hughes and Demaryious Thomas over one Eric Berry. JMO

milkman
03-14-2010, 10:48 PM
I don't think the Chiefs are going to get an extra 1, so when I talk about this my thought is simply this.

Would you rather have Dan Williams/Bryan Bulaga/Graham etc plus like a 2 and a 4 or Eric Berry?

And we don't give a rat's ass.

We are responding to the scenarios presented.

If you don't want to fucking play, then shut the fuck up.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 10:52 PM
That's not the question in the thread.

And, to answer your question, yeah I would still very much consider this trade even if it was a first and 2 seconds. I would take Earl Thomas, Jerry Hughes and Demaryious Thomas over one Eric Berry. JMO

Is this deal with NE?

If so you won't get Thomas or Hughes.

doomy3
03-14-2010, 10:55 PM
Is this deal with NE?

If so you won't get Thomas or Hughes.

You could very easily get Thomas. Hughes is questionable, you're right.

Point being, there will be many good players at those second round slots this year. I would take a guy like Earl Thomas and two of those guys over Berry.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 10:58 PM
I think Thomas will go somewhere in the area of 15-21. I don't think there is any way Cincy would pass on him if he dropped there. I think 21 to Cincy is his worst case scenario actually. And I think Hughes will be a surprise guy and end up with Arizona or the Jets in the late first.

I get your point about the depth of the draft I just don't think we'd get those guys, Sergio Kindle is possible, Terrence Cody is possible. Wouldn't people go apeshit if we traded down and took Cody...with our first pick?

BryanBusby
03-14-2010, 11:03 PM
Depends where in the first. At 5? I'd watch an exhilarating game of Womens Professional whatever before watching anymore of that draft. Anywhere else in the first? Pretty damn mad.

Mecca
03-14-2010, 11:04 PM
Say 22, if the Chiefs were picking in the 20's Cody becomes a pretty high possibility.

BryanBusby
03-14-2010, 11:13 PM
I'd still be pissed even if they took him in Round 2. I just don't think he's going to be much of a player in the pros.

DeezNutz
03-14-2010, 11:49 PM
I don't think the Chiefs are going to get an extra 1, so when I talk about this my thought is simply this.

Would you rather have Dan Williams/Bryan Bulaga/Graham etc plus like a 2 and a 4 or Eric Berry?

No, I'm not passing on an elite talent for an additional second and fourth-rounder.

That would be strictly a cost-driven move on the part of the Chiefs.

Now, if Clausen and Berry are off the board, yeah, I'll gladly drop.

OnTheWarpath58
03-15-2010, 09:10 AM
Granted, we're still over a month out, but I wouldn't be shocked if it went like this:

Bradford
Suh
McCoy
Okung

Cleveland calls and offers either their R3 or the R3 pick they just got from Oakland to move up to 5 - knowing they have to jump Seattle to get Clausen.

Cleveland takes Clausen. Seattle, who's desperate for an OT, takes Bulaga.

We take Berry and pick up an early 3rd in a deep draft.

Well, I can dream, at least.

Chiefs=Good
03-15-2010, 09:19 AM
The second deal. The depth of this draft would allow us to take a very reasonable player at 22. Also with the top end talent of next years draft class (faiders will probably still suck) would allow us 2 HIGH end talents...

Coogs
03-15-2010, 10:35 AM
And the fact is, not a fucking one of us thinks that this scenario has a cahnce in hell of happening, but it doesn't mean that we can't speculate.

Fuck logic.

This. Heck, I don't even think Suh will reach 5, nor do I think NE would call. BUT, you never know. And I hope our front office people are prepared in some manner before the draft, and maybe have made some phone calls with teams with regards to scenarios just like these just in case. 10 minutes on draft day is a bit late to hammer out deals like these without doing them in advance so to speak.

New England does have a lot of holes. But they also have a lot of picks. And deal #2 still leaves them with #5, #47, and #53 in the first two rounds, plus thier own #1 next year as well.

They are the team with the picks. No other teams could come close to doing anything like this.

This is just something fun to do a month before the draft. And if were to happen this way, I believe I would go with deal number 2 as well... even if Cassel turns out to be a real stud at QB this year and we don't need a QB in next years draft.

Dicky McElephant
03-15-2010, 10:39 AM
Granted, we're still over a month out, but I wouldn't be shocked if it went like this:

Bradford
Suh
McCoy
Okung

Cleveland calls and offers either their R3 or the R3 pick they just got from Oakland to move up to 5 - knowing they have to jump Seattle to get Clausen.

Cleveland takes Clausen. Seattle, who's desperate for an OT, takes Bulaga.

We take Berry and pick up an early 3rd in a deep draft.

Well, I can dream, at least.

I have a feeling that it's going to go 1 of 2 ways.

1st scenario:

Rams - Bradford
Lions - Suh
Bucs - McCoy
Redskins - Clausen

2nd scenario

Rams - Bradford
Lions - Okung
Bucs - Suh
Redskins - Clausen

Coogs
03-15-2010, 10:47 AM
I have a feeling that it's going to go 1 of 2 ways.

1st scenario:

Rams - Bradford
Lions - Suh
Bucs - McCoy
Redskins - Clausen

2nd scenario

Rams - Bradford
Lions - Okung
Bucs - Suh
Redskins - Clausen


Your sceanario 2 is right in line with what I am thinking... except McCoy is said to actually be a better fit for what Tampa likes to do than what Suh would be.

Coogs
03-15-2010, 11:06 AM
Here is another one since we are throwing things out there. Again this requires Suh making it to the #3 spot. And this one goes off for the folks who said they would take Suh and move Dorsey...

Tampa takes Suh...
Skins pass on Berry for whoever...
Chiefs take Berry...

Chiefs swap Berry and Dorsey for Suh and Tampa's two 2nd rounders #35 (560 points) and #42 (490 points). This puts Dorsey's value at the #15 overall pick of the draft.

Just slinging things out there a month ahead of time.

OnTheWarpath58
03-15-2010, 11:34 AM
Not sure if it has been mentioned, but scenario #2 w/Oakland isn't possible.

They gave up their R1 pick for 2011 in the Richard Seymour deal.

Coogs
03-15-2010, 11:36 AM
Not sure if it has been mentioned, but scenario #2 w/Oakland isn't possible.

They gave up their R1 pick for 2011 in the Richard Seymour deal.

NE owns that pick from Oakland. That is the pick I was mentioning, thinking it would turn out to be higher than NE's own pick in 2011.

OnTheWarpath58
03-15-2010, 11:37 AM
NE owns that pick from Oakland. That is the pick I was mentioning, thinking it would turn out to be higher than NE's own pick in 2011.

Sorry, I mis-read the deal. Thought you were dealing with Oakland.

My mistake.

Sweet Daddy Hate
03-15-2010, 02:14 PM
you probably take berry

but if not, you take #2...that pick could be the leverage we need the following year to get a QB....

Holy fuck; I am in both agreement and shock.

Ralphy Boy
03-15-2010, 05:07 PM
Suh isn't a sure thing though....

They never are but Suh is as close to a sure thing as anyone we have seen in a decade.

no ... if you stay and take Suh you trade Dorsey, not Jackson, and you try to trade him immediately. For another draft pick and draft a NT ... maybe use Dorsey to trade up and grab Dan Williams.

and you have a defense line like this:

Suh
Dan Williams/Terrance Cody/Cam thomas
Jackson

Dorsey would have more trade value because teams think he will be better in another system.

I could live with that, but I think that in spite of his size, Dorsey will be a better DE, even in this system, than TJ ever will.

TJ was an abortion of a pick and I hope some day he will prove me wrong.

We are basically the Detroit Lions of the D-line position.
Dorsey = Roy Williams
TJ = Mike Williams
Suh = Calvin Johnson

Mecca
03-15-2010, 05:10 PM
I think Seattle will take Berry if we move, they can grab an OT with their pick at 14.

Detoxing
03-15-2010, 05:13 PM
I think Seattle will take Berry if we move, they can grab an OT with their pick at 14.

I think they go Spiller at #6.

Mecca
03-15-2010, 05:15 PM
I think Spiller is where they go if Berry is gone, if Berry is there I think they take him.

Basically their first pick will be Berry or Spiller depending on who's still there, they'll take OT at 14, the scheme they run is suited to guys like Trent Williams and Charles Brown so no need to take one with their high pick.

MahiMike
03-15-2010, 05:47 PM
SSSSSSSSSUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!


WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!

The_Doctor10
03-15-2010, 07:43 PM
I'd take the second offer in a second.

Next year's WR class is going to be sick, and there is the potential for it to be an outstanding QB class, as well.

Factor in that OAK will be terrible, and that sounds like a win.

From the sounds of things, they won't be giving JaFatass the chance to screw up the team again... Face it, the Raiders have talent on both sides of the ball, and if Tom Cable had decided to start Jeff Garcia last year from day 1, that team probably pushes for a playoff spot.

Not saying the Raiders are Super Bowl bound, but I'm not expecting that Raider pick to be top 10 like many do.

DeezNutz
03-15-2010, 08:01 PM
From the sounds of things, they won't be giving JaFatass the chance to screw up the team again... Face it, the Raiders have talent on both sides of the ball, and if Tom Cable had decided to start Jeff Garcia last year from day 1, that team probably pushes for a playoff spot.

Not saying the Raiders are Super Bowl bound, but I'm not expecting that Raider pick to be top 10 like many do.

But there's the problem. He, or any other HC in Oakland, doesn't possess that level of autonomy.