PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Moeaki already turning heads


BossChief
05-07-2010, 10:42 PM
http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/tag/_/name/stock-watch-50610

Rising

Tony Moeaki, tight end, Kansas City: The rookie tight end stood out at the teamís rookie minicamp over the weekend. The third-round pick from Iowa has strong pass-catching ability. He reportedly stretched the field well during the camp. That is an aspect of the offense that was missing last season. Kansas City coach Todd Haley has a history of not using the tight end much. However, the fact that Moeaki was taken fairly high in the draft may mean the Chiefs are open to using the tight end more in the passing game. Again itís early, but it appears Moeaki has a chance to add a dimension to Kansas Cityís offense.

HotRoute
05-07-2010, 10:45 PM
This is very good news, i truely hope that he can live up to the hype that he had created for himself before a couple of injuries. He could fit in well in this offense as long as he can stay on the field

KCrockaholic
05-07-2010, 10:46 PM
This guy will be exciting if he can just stay healthy. It's highly unlikely that he does, but if so, we have another weapon.

alanm
05-07-2010, 10:48 PM
To be honest I don't know much about the guy since I live way out in Western Ne. Didn't get to see many Iowa games here. I just hope he left his previous injuries in Iowa City. :thumb:

kcpasco
05-07-2010, 10:55 PM
But I thought this was the worst draft ever?

KCrockaholic
05-07-2010, 10:58 PM
As long as Scott Pioli is our GM every draft is the worst draft EVAR/ CP

BigRock
05-07-2010, 11:00 PM
He's Tony Moeaki, the injury champ.
He turned some heads at the rookie mini-camp.
He stretches the field and his diet is nutritious.
Yes, Tony Moeaki is wrestlicious.

Rudy lost the toss
05-07-2010, 11:10 PM
guessing his rookie year will turn out better than Coffman's

Fish
05-07-2010, 11:16 PM
We'll see if he breaks in half during camp when the hitting starts......

ChiefMojo
05-07-2010, 11:23 PM
Frankly anyones rookie year at TE could be better than Chase's!

KCrockaholic
05-07-2010, 11:25 PM
Coffman has talent. I just don't know if he will ever figure out the NFL. But I'd trade Leonard Pope or Brad Cottam for him anyday.

Scott Pioli
05-07-2010, 11:34 PM
As long as Scott Pioli is our GM every draft is the worst draft EVAR/ CP

It's all a part of the process. You have to bring in guys that aren't necessarily the best at what they do, but the right kind of guy. The kind of guy that fits your system. 10 years ago we won some championships and really brought a community together. There's no reason to think we can't do the exact same thing 10 years later.

We've got our Tom Brady. We've got our Richard Seymour. We have an Ed Reed, a black Wes Welker, the next Devin Hester, and now as you all can see we have the next Tony Gonzalez. Get ready Kansas City, your Chiefs are on the rise!

Mr. Flopnuts
05-07-2010, 11:37 PM
It's all a part of the process. You have to bring in guys that aren't necessarily the best at what they do, but the right kind of guy. The kind of guy that fits your system. 10 years ago we won some championships and really brought a community together. There's no reason to think we can't do the exact same thing 10 years later.

We've got our Tom Brady. We've got our Richard Seymour. We have an Ed Reed, a black Wes Welker, the next Devin Hester, and now as you all can see we have the next Tony Gonzalez. Get ready Kansas City, your Chiefs are on the rise!

ROFL Where's Carl with a rebuttal?

KcMizzou
05-07-2010, 11:38 PM
It's all a part of the process. You have to bring in guys that aren't necessarily the best at what they do, but the right kind of guy. The kind of guy that fits your system. 10 years ago we won some championships and really brought a community together. There's no reason to think we can't do the exact same thing 10 years later.

We've got our Tom Brady. We've got our Richard Seymour. We have an Ed Reed, a black Wes Welker, the next Devin Hester, and now as you all can see we have the next Tony Gonzalez. Get ready Kansas City, your Chiefs are on the rise!You should have just said, "See? I told you. Bitches."

Just sayin'.

alanm
05-07-2010, 11:42 PM
It's all a part of the process. You have to bring in guys that aren't necessarily the best at what they do, but the right kind of guy. The kind of guy that fits your system. 10 years ago we won some championships and really brought a community together. There's no reason to think we can't do the exact same thing 10 years later.

We've got our Tom Brady. We've got our Richard Seymour. We have an Ed Reed, a black Wes Welker, the next Devin Hester, and now as you all can see we have the next Tony Gonzalez. Get ready Kansas City, your Chiefs are on the rise! Where's our Jerry Rice and John Taylor?

Scott Pioli
05-07-2010, 11:53 PM
You should have just said, "See? I told you. Bitches."

Just sayin'.

You have me confused with Todd.

Where's our Jerry Rice and John Taylor?

You simply can't address every position in 1 year. I'd say we should be putting together the final pieces of the puzzle shortly after the 3rd evaluation year.

LaChapelle
05-08-2010, 08:20 AM
It's all a part of the process. You have to bring in guys that aren't necessarily the best at what they do, but the right kind of guy. The kind of guy that fits your system. 10 years ago we won some championships and really brought a community together. There's no reason to think we can't do the exact same thing 10 years later.

We've got our Tom Brady. We've got our Richard Seymour. We have an Ed Reed, a black Wes Welker, the next Devin Hester, and now as you all can see we have the next Tony Gonzalez. Get ready Kansas City, your Chiefs are on the rise!

:facepalm:
Redwings Rising

teedubya
05-08-2010, 08:21 AM
Sylvester Morris was exciting too.... before he got injured.

Hog Farmer
05-08-2010, 08:26 AM
But I thought this was the worst draft ever?

No ! That was last year.

FireDogg
05-08-2010, 08:31 AM
Maybe he got all the injuries out of the way.......

milkman
05-08-2010, 08:33 AM
WooHoo!

We got us a rookie camp All Pro!

BossChief
05-08-2010, 08:40 AM
Never had ligament or tendon problems. Nothing that should be a lingering problem for the kid.

This is football, you cant really avoid getting a broken bone once in awhile.

Reaper16
05-08-2010, 08:42 AM
Never had ligament or tendon problems. Nothing that should be a lingering problem for the kid.

This is football, you cant really avoid getting a broken bone once in awhile.
Moeaki appears to have sucessfully avoided getting a broken bone once in awhile by adopting the strategy of getting a broken bone all of the time.

KCUnited
05-08-2010, 08:43 AM
Next week he'll be turning ankles.

teedubya
05-08-2010, 08:49 AM
Next week he'll be turning ankles.


POW!!

BossChief
05-08-2010, 08:53 AM
Moeaki appears to have sucessfully avoided getting a broken bone once in awhile by adopting the strategy of getting a broken bone all of the time.

LOL

I got nothin

-King-
05-08-2010, 08:57 AM
Moeaki appears to have sucessfully avoided getting a broken bone once in awhile by adopting the strategy of getting a broken bone all of the time.

Ho-Lee shit! ROFL ROFL ROFLROFLROFL
Posted via Mobile Device

warpaint*
05-08-2010, 09:04 AM
http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/tag/_/name/stock-watch-50610

Rising

Tony Moeaki, tight end, Kansas City: The rookie tight end stood out at the teamís rookie minicamp over the weekend. The third-round pick from Iowa has strong pass-catching ability. He reportedly stretched the field well during the camp. That is an aspect of the offense that was missing last season. Kansas City coach Todd Haley has a history of not using the tight end much. However, the fact that Moeaki was taken fairly high in the draft may mean the Chiefs are open to using the tight end more in the passing game. Again itís early, but it appears Moeaki has a chance to add a dimension to Kansas Cityís offense.

Get back to me when he's answered the ?s surrounding his durability.

KChiefs1
05-08-2010, 09:10 AM
If the guy can stay healthy he'll be the best TE in the draft.

Hoover
05-08-2010, 09:10 AM
Moeaki was a great pick. Keep talking shit, keep saying that he's an injury waiting to happen, dude is a talent and can play right away.

$hit, everyone is an injury risk. Give the kid a chance.

TheGuardian
05-08-2010, 09:11 AM
These kinds of players always scare me because they are all world in t-shirt and shorts and you get excited and then the real bullets start flying and they are no where to be seen.

Not sayin it will happen, but that seems to be the case generally. I hope he does well, obviously.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 09:11 AM
If the guy can stay healthy he'll be the best TE in the draft.

100% agree.

Rain Man
05-08-2010, 09:11 AM
I'm hoping we'll be seeing Moeaki and not Lesseaki this year.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 09:14 AM
These kinds of players always scare me because they are all world in t-shirt and shorts and you get excited and then the real bullets start flying and they are no where to be seen.

Not sayin it will happen, but that seems to be the case generally. I hope he does well, obviously.

Moeaki is anything but a guy that fits that description.

Whenever he played, he was a big difference maker.

His ONLY detractor was injuries.

If he didnt have an injury history, he would have been a late first guy/early second.

TheGuardian
05-08-2010, 09:19 AM
Moeaki is anything but a guy that fits that description.

Whenever he played, he was a big difference maker.

His ONLY detractor was injuries.

If he didnt have an injury history, he would have been a late first guy/early second.

Awesome. I think we'll all be hoping the injury thing won't be a problem and he can maybe be the "next" Tony.

Chiefs Rool
05-08-2010, 09:26 AM
he's got talent, that's for sure.

whoman69
05-08-2010, 09:36 AM
Some guys just can't avoid injuries. Now taking a chance on a talent in the late 3rd isn't much of a risk to me. If he can avoid the injuries he should add another level to our game.

milkman
05-08-2010, 09:38 AM
Some guys just can't avoid injuries. Now taking a chance on a talent in the late 3rd isn't much of a risk to me. If he can avoid the injuries he should add another level to our game.

Taking a chance by trading up, essentially using a third and fourth round pick, is a huge risk.

If he pans out, great.

If he can't avoid injuries, then we pissed away two draft picks on a gamble.

TheGuardian
05-08-2010, 09:41 AM
Taking a chance by trading up, essentially using a third and fourth round pick, is a huge risk.

If he pans out, great.

If he can't avoid injuries, then we pissed away two draft picks on a gamble.

These are those draft things that make a guy look like a genius or an idiot. Time will tell.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 09:46 AM
Taking a chance by trading up, essentially using a third and fourth round pick, is a huge risk.

If he pans out, great.

If he can't avoid injuries, then we pissed away two draft picks on a gamble.
well, it was a early fourth and a late 5th iirc. NOT a 3rd and 4th.

Well worth the gamble if it works out...4th and 5th are almost always gambles.

TRR
05-08-2010, 09:48 AM
Taking a chance by trading up, essentially using a third and fourth round pick, is a huge risk.

If he pans out, great.

If he can't avoid injuries, then we pissed away two draft picks on a gamble.

Uh no. KC swapped their 4th for a 3rd and gave up a late 5th.
Posted via Mobile Device

BossChief
05-08-2010, 09:49 AM
Uh no. KC swapped their 4th for a 3rd and gave up a late 5th.
Posted via Mobile Device

repost

rwalke10
05-08-2010, 09:49 AM
Recently I read the bios on the new coaching staff. The new Strength and Conditioning Coach Mike Clark has a pretty impressive resume, if anyone can come up with a way to keep Moeaki healthy, it would be him.

(I was gonna post a link to his bio, but CP wouldn't let me)...

milkman
05-08-2010, 09:52 AM
well, it was a early fourth and a late 5th iirc. NOT a 3rd and 4th.

Well worth the gamble if it works out...4th and 5th are almost always gambles.

Uh no. KC swapped their 4th for a 3rd and gave up a late 5th.
Posted via Mobile Device

You're right, I misremembered.

But the point still satnds.

We pissed away two draft picks to take him.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 09:55 AM
No matter how much work you put in, it isn't gonna protect you against having broken bones.

His injuries weren't torn tendons/ligaments that indicate he might have long term lingering effects, or hamstring type stuff that indicates lack of work. He had broken bones, this is football.

penchief
05-08-2010, 10:30 AM
Taking a chance by trading up, essentially using a third and fourth round pick, is a huge risk.

If he pans out, great.

If he can't avoid injuries, then we pissed away two draft picks on a gamble.

I don't understand where you're getting this "third and fourth" round picks from. We traded the last of our fifth round picks to move up from the fourth round.

So we essentially used a fourth and the last of our fifth round picks on him. If you are going to bitch at least get it right.

Edit: Sorry, should have kept reading. This has already been addressed. That said, it seems like people keep claiming we gave up more than we did.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 10:37 AM
Ya know whats fucked up about the Moeaki situation?

SOME here will almost cheer if the kid does get hurt because then they will be "right"

the Talking Can
05-08-2010, 10:38 AM
I'm hoping we'll be seeing Moeaki and not Lesseaki this year.

that's quality

the Talking Can
05-08-2010, 10:39 AM
Ya know whats ****ed up about the Moeaki situation?

SOME here will almost cheer if the kid does get hurt because then they will be "right"

really?

who?

Mr. Flopnuts
05-08-2010, 10:40 AM
Ya know whats fucked up about the Moeaki situation?

SOME here will almost cheer if the kid does get hurt because then they will be "right"

Chiefsplanet is jading you. That's an inaccurate statement.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 10:42 AM
really?

who?

Hopefully, we never find out.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 10:44 AM
Chiefsplanet is jading you. That's an inaccurate statement.

I think I should have bolded and upper cased both SOME and ALMOST, I can see how that can be misunderstood.

el borracho
05-08-2010, 10:46 AM
I'm hoping we'll be seeing Moeaki and not Lesseaki this year.

With our luck, it will be Larryaki or Curlyaki.

philfree
05-08-2010, 10:48 AM
Ya know whats ****ed up about the Moeaki situation?

SOME here will almost cheer if the kid does get hurt because then they will be "right"

Sadly. The guy is a good prospect that hasn't played a down and people are bitching about "pissing away a pick". Why? Seriously why would someone do that at this point in time? I guess because they can!

I don't see the sense in it.

PhilFree:arrow:

the Talking Can
05-08-2010, 10:50 AM
Hopefully, we never find out.

you obviously have some one in mind


if you're going to make that kind of claim, you should have the balls to name names.....

Mr. Laz
05-08-2010, 10:51 AM
If he can stay healthy .......

Pablo
05-08-2010, 10:52 AM
You're right, I misremembered.

But the point still satnds.

We pissed away two draft picks to take him.We could have used those two draft picks to pick up a couple guys that everybody would be all "WTF" and "This wasn't part of my mock!!" about.

philfree
05-08-2010, 10:54 AM
We could have used those two draft picks to pick up a couple guys that everybody would be all "WTF" and "This wasn't part of my mock!!" about.

Well I guess it would have been more fun to piss away the picks seperately. Then we could bitch about two players we should have never drafted instead of just one.


PhilFree:arrow:

Anyong Bluth
05-08-2010, 11:02 AM
Am I the only one that thinks this is just a rehash taken from Teicher's comments in the star / his blog?

Reaper16
05-08-2010, 11:07 AM
Ya know whats fucked up about the Moeaki situation?

SOME here will almost cheer if the kid does get hurt because then they will be "right"
Who? The same fictional entities that you KNOW would have scolded Pioli for passing on DMC if the Eagles took him? The same fictional people who you KNOW would have gotten pissed off had Pioli taken Daryl Washington at 2a?

58kcfan89
05-08-2010, 11:08 AM
No matter how much work you put in, it isn't gonna protect you against having broken bones.

His injuries weren't torn tendons/ligaments that indicate he might have long term lingering effects, or hamstring type stuff that indicates lack of work. He had broken bones, this is football.

I hope those broken bones weren't the type that hinder you in the future. I've broken one wrist & ankle completely and had hairline fractures in the other wrist & ankle. The wrist I broke a long time ago and it very rarely gives me problems, neither do the places where the hairline fractures are. However, the right ankle that I broke still bothers me and is one of the reasons I had to stop playing football in HS, because after almost every practice I couldn't walk the right way.

Anyway, I just hope none of those broken bones were anything that will still bother him. I like the idea of getting a low 1st/high 2nd round talent in the 3rd (even if we had to trade up for him...), especially at a position where Leonard Pope is our best player.

TheGuardian
05-08-2010, 11:35 AM
Ya know whats ****ed up about the Moeaki situation?

SOME here will almost cheer if the kid does get hurt because then they will be "right"

I don't know if this is really true, but it feels true.

CoMoChief
05-08-2010, 11:39 AM
Trade Cottam and Pope, and someone go out and find out what Jason Dunn's up to. He's well rested.

chiefzilla1501
05-08-2010, 11:44 AM
Get back to me when he's answered the ?s surrounding his durability.

And yet Sergio Kindle seems to be the name that most frequently pops up as the guy we passed on in some kind of a big fuck up.

mlyonsd
05-08-2010, 11:47 AM
I wouldn't go so far to say anyone wants to see him get hurt, but I'm guessing there will be some I told you so's if it were to happen.

I see his injuries on the freakish side. The kind a kid that's still growing might get.

If used like he was at Iowa he could be a good weapon. Not tons of catches but clutch ones.

el borracho
05-08-2010, 11:50 AM
I see his injuries on the freakish side. The kind a kid that's still growing might get.

http://a3.twimg.com/profile_images/511265679/brodie_croyle_bigger.jpg

BossChief
05-08-2010, 11:58 AM
Who? The same fictional entities that you KNOW would have scolded Pioli for passing on DMC if the Eagles took him? The same fictional people who you KNOW would have gotten pissed off had Pioli taken Daryl Washington at 2a?

Hey look, maybe I'm wrong in my assessment of SOME of the guys here. Maybe not. I don't want to get into names because honestly I am still formulating my opinions on certain posters here, I dont have anyone pegged yet, but its damn close with some.

Use the search function for the word "playmaker" and read the posts concerning the draft prior to april 22nd. (about to unleash one hell off a run on sentence) Read how frequently it was used and in what context and then tell me I'm wrong in my assessment if you choose to hold a grudge for having a conversation concerning how some think we had a piss poor draft after targeting "playmakers" almost exclusively.

Guys here salivate over guys like Maclin and Desean Jackson, yet were disappointed with the selection of a similar player as a second rounder. I felt that was inconsistent and I posted as such. If you have a problem with it, so be it. I value your opinion, but I can understand your reasons for disagreeing with mine.

Show me a few posts showing some members here that have "clout" pining for players like Troup, Washington or Misi at 2a BEFORE THE DRAFT and I will drop this whole thing and admit Im wrong. Pardon me for not going to revisionist history regarding my opinion. Truth is that if took those guys at 2a, it wouldnt have been accepted with thunderous applause and you know it.

I see a lot of posters that are "no-shows" after wins but cant post enough after losses. A lot of guys that shoot down every ray of hope this team has.

FTR "almost cheering" = "I told you so, Piolis an idiot for drafting this guy"

flame away

BossChief
05-08-2010, 11:59 AM
I wouldn't go so far to say anyone wants to see him get hurt, but I'm guessing there will be some I told you so's if it were to happen.

I see his injuries on the freakish side. The kind a kid that's still growing might get.

If used like he was at Iowa he could be a good weapon. Not tons of catches but clutch ones.

good post

mlyonsd
05-08-2010, 12:00 PM
http://a3.twimg.com/profile_images/511265679/brodie_croyle_bigger.jpg

Exactly. I hope Moeaki's body has matured.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 12:05 PM
and yeah, Croyles injuries werent even comparable to Moeakis'.

Croyle had multiple injuries regarding ligaments and tendons, Moeaki had broken bones.

Reaper16
05-08-2010, 12:14 PM
Hey look, maybe I'm wrong in my assessment of SOME of the guys here. Maybe not. I don't want to get into names because honestly I am still formulating my opinions on certain posters here, I dont have anyone pegged yet, but its damn close with some.

Use the search function for the word "playmaker" and read the posts concerning the draft prior to april 22nd. (about to unleash one hell off a run on sentence) Read how frequently it was used and in what context and then tell me I'm wrong in my assessment if you choose to hold a grudge for having a conversation concerning how some think we had a piss poor draft after targeting "playmakers" almost exclusively.

Guys here salivate over guys like Maclin and Desean Jackson, yet were disappointed with the selection of a similar player as a second rounder. I felt that was inconsistent and I posted as such. If you have a problem with it, so be it. I value your opinion, but I can understand your reasons for disagreeing with mine.

Show me a few posts showing some members here that have "clout" pining for players like Troup, Washington or Misi at 2a BEFORE THE DRAFT and I will drop this whole thing and admit Im wrong. Pardon me for not going to revisionist history regarding my opinion. Truth is that if took those guys at 2a, it wouldnt have been accepted with thunderous applause and you know it.

I see a lot of posters that are "no-shows" after wins but cant post enough after losses. A lot of guys that shoot down every ray of hope this team has.

FTR "almost cheering" = "I told you so, Piolis an idiot for drafting this guy"

flame away

1.) Much of the context in which "playmakers" were advocated over ILB, DT, etc. was in discussion of a top 5 pick. Ignoring that context makes your whole case look poor. Second round is a perfect spot to nab a guy like Washington or Cody, were a team so inclined, the talent and positional value meet up nicely there.

2.) No one would have been upset at, say, Golden Tate at 2a. So why were they upset at DMC? Because DMC is a slot WR, a nonstarter, a player who will be limited in the number of snaps he gets per game (if not by his weight then simply by his position).

3.) Were people talking about Troup, Washington or Misi at 2a before the draft? No, because there were other, better choices for 2a in many people's eyes. Did posters know of them and talk of them in general? Of course. Now I happen to believe that Troup and Misi would have been reaches at 2a, and I would have been mildly perplexed but I could justify the pick. Washington would have been fine. I think that most of the Gang of 16/Drafturbators/SOME would agree with me there.

4.) I don't agree with your assessment that calling Pioli an idiot for his idiotic moves is something that SOME cheer for the chance to do. It doesn't make anyone happy to have a GM who doesn't meet their standards of proficiency. It doesn't make anyone here happy to see the Chiefs lose. You're not the first and you won't be the last to conflate a poster's negativity with relish but it is dissappointing to see just the same.

thebrad84
05-08-2010, 12:14 PM
Didn't Kris "Secret Weapon" Wilson also turn heads in mini-camp? Just sayin...

wazu
05-08-2010, 12:19 PM
Frankly anyones rookie year at TE could be better than Chase's!

Unless they are named Jake O'Connell.

Gadzooks
05-08-2010, 12:27 PM
Didn't Kris "Secret Weapon" Wilson also turn heads in mini-camp? Just sayin...

Kris "Secret Weapon" Wilson is teh shit!!1!!!11! He strikes when least expected.
Thanks Chiefs.:thumb:

warpaint*
05-08-2010, 12:37 PM
Ya know whats ****ed up about the Moeaki situation?

SOME here will almost cheer if the kid does get hurt because then they will be "right"

No offense but that's assinine.

warpaint*
05-08-2010, 12:44 PM
And yet Sergio Kindle seems to be the name that most frequently pops up as the guy we passed on in some kind of a big **** up.

You will have to take that up w/ the guys that wanted SK and are banging on this pick. Whomever they are

DBOSHO
05-08-2010, 12:46 PM
There, without a doubt, will be plenty of "i told you so" comments the first time he doesnt get up after a play.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 12:47 PM
1.) Much of the context in which "playmakers" were advocated over ILB, DT, etc. was in discussion of a top 5 pick. Ignoring that context makes your whole case look poor. Second round is a perfect spot to nab a guy like Washington or Cody, were a team so inclined, the talent and positional value meet up nicely there.

2.) No one would have been upset at, say, Golden Tate at 2a. So why were they upset at DMC? Because DMC is a slot WR, a nonstarter, a player who will be limited in the number of snaps he gets per game (if not by his weight then simply by his position).

3.) Were people talking about Troup, Washington or Misi at 2a before the draft? No, because there were other, better choices for 2a in many people's eyes. Did posters know of them and talk of them in general? Of course. Now I happen to believe that Troup and Misi would have been reaches at 2a, and I would have been mildly perplexed but I could justify the pick. Washington would have been fine. I think that most of the Gang of 16/Drafturbators/SOME would agree with me there.

4.) I don't agree with your assessment that calling Pioli an idiot for his idiotic moves is something that SOME cheer for the chance to do. It doesn't make anyone happy to have a GM who doesn't meet their standards of proficiency. It doesn't make anyone here happy to see the Chiefs lose. You're not the first and you won't be the last to conflate a poster's negativity with relish but it is dissappointing to see just the same.

1) So, because we got playmakers (and IMO "elite" ones) with our first two picks is somehow bad when the only type of player you can never get later in the draft are "playmakers"? I dont get that or how it makes my take poor. If its good to pass on certain guys in the top 5, how is it ANY DIFFERENT at 36? If you can get a guy that can score everytime he touches the ball, you take him. Especially in a extremely deep NT class, but a class that lacked playmaking receivers.

Right or wrong?

2) They said during the scouting combine that Weis was scouting skill position players and he coached Tate in college. The fact that he was thought of as a first rounder and fell to the end of the second and we passed on him (when he is essentially a slot guy that would play the same role as DMC) should tell you how they (and the NFL teams in general) valued those specific players differently that some of us do. Hear any rumors about Philly taking Tate?

3) You can justify those guys but not DMC? I guess I just don't get that. I have no idea who the "gang of 16" are, or specifically who all of the "draftubators" are. If Spiller would have been a better pick than Rolando or Dan Williams, then DMC is a better pick than Washington, Troup or Misi by just using similar logic.

If Im wrong, explain and maybe Ill see it more your way and understand, but as it sits we are a team that had about three playmakers on the whole team (offense and defense combined) in a league that you NEED 7 or 8 minimum to compete. IMO we added 3 or 4 more in that category and did well targeting guys that arent gonna get into trouble while doing so.

4) Some here gave this draft a "D" for crying out loud. IMO that isnt objective at all and is looking for the bad in the situation before realizing how the "money" was spent.

Look, his first year was a fucking abomination. 100% agree with that, but so far this offseason I would have to give Pioli a solid "B" at worst and the only reason I think he didnt deserve a higher grade is my preference for which players I personally wanted. That doesnt mean that the players that were taken were bad choices after learning how those players match up to the elite ones in the league at the position they will play.

KCUnited
05-08-2010, 12:49 PM
No offense but that's assinine.
You must have missed the 'Is the greatest win in your lifetime' thread after last years Steelers game.

chiefzilla1501
05-08-2010, 12:49 PM
1.) Much of the context in which "playmakers" were advocated over ILB, DT, etc. was in discussion of a top 5 pick. Ignoring that context makes your whole case look poor. Second round is a perfect spot to nab a guy like Washington or Cody, were a team so inclined, the talent and positional value meet up nicely there.
That's a bunch of bullshit. So you look for playmakers in the first but suddenly you stop caring about playmakers in the second round? Boss is right on this one--it wasn't about top 5 picks. It's about how great teams need playmakers, period, and how the Chiefs don't and didn't have one. So the uprights moved from this team desperately needing playmakers, to this team needing... only first round playmakers? Does that make sense?

2.) No one would have been upset at, say, Golden Tate at 2a. So why were they upset at DMC? Because DMC is a slot WR, a nonstarter, a player who will be limited in the number of snaps he gets per game (if not by his weight then simply by his position).
Golden Tate probably projects to be a slot receiver. Given McCluster's versatility to play multiple positions, I would bet that McCluster, if he pans out, will see the field a lot more than Tate did. If people don't project McCluster to be a very good slot receiver, that's one thing. But the argument I continually hear is how they hate the role he'll play. And yet, you never, ever, ever, ever heard that same argument about Golden Tate.

3.) Were people talking about Troup, Washington or Misi at 2a before the draft? No, because there were other, better choices for 2a in many people's eyes. Did posters know of them and talk of them in general? Of course. Now I happen to believe that Troup and Misi would have been reaches at 2a, and I would have been mildly perplexed but I could justify the pick. Washington would have been fine. I think that most of the Gang of 16/Drafturbators/SOME would agree with me there.
I think what's more disappointing is the Jesus effect these people have had post-draft. The problem is that people are treating these guys like playmakers. They're not. They play positions of need and yet, they dropped into the second round. Because they have some serious flaws in their game that may or may not be corrected.

4.) I don't agree with your assessment that calling Pioli an idiot for his idiotic moves is something that SOME cheer for the chance to do. It doesn't make anyone happy to have a GM who doesn't meet their standards of proficiency. It doesn't make anyone here happy to see the Chiefs lose. You're not the first and you won't be the last to conflate a poster's negativity with relish but it is dissappointing to see just the same.
Nobody here is saying bad things about negativity. I'm glad people here don't see everything with rose-colored lenses. What boss is pointing to and something I agree with is when the uprights move. Screaming for playmakers in the offseason, and then screaming after the draft that we didn't draft for need. Screaming about drafting a tight end in the fourth for injury issues, then screaming that they passed up on Sergio Kindle despite his major injury issue. Screaming about the Chiefs taking a part-time player, and yet having no problem drafting CJ Spiller in the first to play much less than a full-time role or drafting Golden Tate to play a similar role as McCluster.

It's not about hating negativity. It's about being really inconsistent to suit your position of negativity. It's about a lose-lose no matter what you do.

warpaint*
05-08-2010, 01:00 PM
You must have missed the 'Is the greatest win in your lifetime' thread after last years Steelers game.

Heh, ya I have no idea about that or what it has to do w/ this

BossChief
05-08-2010, 01:04 PM
You must have missed the 'Is the greatest win in your lifetime' thread after last years Steelers game.

It was a question thread, smart guy. NOT a statement.

I even said in that thread it was "right up there" for me, with some of the better wins I had seen from us in relevance to us beating the world champs with a 2 win team but not the best. Im 32 and the list of "huge victories" for us sint as long as I wish it was.

I still say that win was a top five, for me, it was exciting and it had been a long time since we had reason to cheer this team. Flame me for it if you so choose. I get excited after wins, I jump up and down like a kid. I grab women around me and kiss em. I hug strangers when we win, sometimes.

There are much better things to point out if you want reasons to dislike me.

Want some?

I own my fails, I dont dodge them.

I make a mistake, learn from it and move on. I dont act like it never happened.

warpaint*
05-08-2010, 01:05 PM
There, without a doubt, will be plenty of "i told you so" comments the first time he doesnt get up after a play.

I have no doubt about that

That's not even close to the same thing as cheering the event

Any real Chiefs fan would want nothing more than for him to be a productive player for us

All that being said it is fueled to some extent by the fact that many of the TM sunshine pumpers by and large ignore and/or brush aside the questions about his durability raised and just blow pixie dust about his playmaking potential.

aturnis
05-08-2010, 01:05 PM
Taking a chance by trading up, essentially using a third and fourth round pick, is a huge risk.

I think this is an overblown statement. The Chiefs paid 1 point over chart value to make this trade happen. It was a fifth rounder. Unless you are expecting big things from guys like Kendrick Lewis and Cameron Sheffield, I don't see the big deal.

Epic Fail 007
05-08-2010, 01:05 PM
As long as Scott Pioli is our GM every draft is the worst draft EVAR/ CP

ur an asshole,so want carl back huh,idiot

aturnis
05-08-2010, 01:11 PM
We could have used those two draft picks to pick up a couple guys that everybody would be all "WTF" and "This wasn't part of my mock!!" about.

I think you mean "that PICK" not picks. Sorry, really gets old. We only lost ONE PICK.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 01:15 PM
I have no doubt about that

That's not even close to the same thing as cheering the event

Any real Chiefs fan would want nothing more than for him to be a productive player for us

All that being said it is fueled to some extent by the fact that many of the TM sunshine pumpers by and large ignore and/or brush aside the questions about his durability raised and just blow pixie dust about his playmaking potential.

yeah, sometimes I want to make a point and cant find the exact words I want to use to portray my thoughts, so that leads to the statement being misunderstood because I settled on words that didnt fully portray my true thoughts. Its why I quoted a post with good post earlier, it fit what I wanted to say better than what I wrote.

FTR "almost cheering" isnt the same as "cheering" either...and I took Moeaki in the CP mock draft with a 5th round compensatory pick for Atlanta, but had us taking him in mocks I posted back in november in the third and fourth round. I know what his value was (in real life) and understand his injury concerns, I just think we got a good player at about the place in the NFL draft I kinda expected him to go.

It has nothing to do with sunshine and pixie dust, it has to do with the fact that guys taken in the late third and beyond ALL have some kind of concern. I just think the things that are detractors for this kid arent as prevalent as some of the concerns for players we didnt take to make a move for this kid.

aturnis
05-08-2010, 01:15 PM
These kinds of players always scare me because they are all world in t-shirt and shorts and you get excited and then the real bullets start flying and they are no where to be seen.

Not sayin it will happen, but that seems to be the case generally. I hope he does well, obviously.

Obviously you've never seen him play. Making statements like this if you've never seen him play makes you look kind of arrogant. Just wait, if used properly and stays healthy he'll be a stud.

-King-
05-08-2010, 01:17 PM
ur an asshole,so want carl back huh,idiot

Sarcasm....
Posted via Mobile Device

HemiEd
05-08-2010, 01:20 PM
I know he is not a very popular pick with a lot of people, and the position carries a real stigmitism with some, but I really like the pick the more I learn about him.

Reaper16
05-08-2010, 01:29 PM
1) So, because we got playmakers (and IMO "elite" ones) with our first two picks is somehow bad when the only type of player you can never get later in the draft are "playmakers"? I dont get that or how it makes my take poor. If its good to pass on certain guys in the top 5, how is it ANY DIFFERENT at 36? If you can get a guy that can score everytime he touches the ball, you take him. Especially in a extremely deep NT class, but a class that lacked playmaking receivers.

Right or wrong?

2) They said during the scouting combine that Weis was scouting skill position players and he coached Tate in college. The fact that he was thought of as a first rounder and fell to the end of the second and we passed on him (when he is essentially a slot guy that would play the same role as DMC) should tell you how they (and the NFL teams in general) valued those specific players differently that some of us do. Hear any rumors about Philly taking Tate?

3) You can justify those guys but not DMC? I guess I just don't get that. I have no idea who the "gang of 16" are, or specifically who all of the "draftubators" are. If Spiller would have been a better pick than Rolando or Dan Williams, then DMC is a better pick than Washington, Troup or Misi by just using similar logic.

If Im wrong, explain and maybe Ill see it more your way and understand, but as it sits we are a team that had about three playmakers on the whole team (offense and defense combined) in a league that you NEED 7 or 8 minimum to compete. IMO we added 3 or 4 more in that category and did well targeting guys that arent gonna get into trouble while doing so.

4) Some here gave this draft a "D" for crying out loud. IMO that isnt objective at all and is looking for the bad in the situation before realizing how the "money" was spent.

Look, his first year was a fucking abomination. 100% agree with that, but so far this offseason I would have to give Pioli a solid "B" at worst and the only reason I think he didnt deserve a higher grade is my preference for which players I personally wanted. That doesnt mean that the players that were taken were bad choices after learning how those players match up to the elite ones in the league at the position they will play.
1.) I'm not going to fault you if you think that DMC or Arenas are "elite" level playmakers. If you do (which, since you brought up what was being discussed before the draft, you probably didn't think before the draft) then taking them in the second is fine. The people against the picks clearly don't think that they are elite level playmakers. So... no inconsistencies there. We disagree on the impact and value of the second round pciks but no one is being inconsistent in their approach.

2.) I'm not comfortable assuming that Weis had ANY say in the draft process. Sings point may not point to 'no' but they really don't point to 'yes.' It is also fallacious to use the Philly-was-going-to-take-him argument. Should other teams have reached for a player because another team did (see: 2009, Raiders & a Bears rumor, Mike Mitchell)? Let's ignore this whole number because it is problematic and not useful.

3.)Again, depending on how good you think DMC is. He's "elite" in your eyes, so I understand your thought. He's not elite to me and perhaps I'll be proven wrong.

4.)I don't know what this means.

Reaper16
05-08-2010, 01:39 PM
That's a bunch of bullshit. So you look for playmakers in the first but suddenly you stop caring about playmakers in the second round? Boss is right on this one--it wasn't about top 5 picks. It's about how great teams need playmakers, period, and how the Chiefs don't and didn't have one. So the uprights moved from this team desperately needing playmakers, to this team needing... only first round playmakers? Does that make sense?


Golden Tate probably projects to be a slot receiver. Given McCluster's versatility to play multiple positions, I would bet that McCluster, if he pans out, will see the field a lot more than Tate did. If people don't project McCluster to be a very good slot receiver, that's one thing. But the argument I continually hear is how they hate the role he'll play. And yet, you never, ever, ever, ever heard that same argument about Golden Tate.


I think what's more disappointing is the Jesus effect these people have had post-draft. The problem is that people are treating these guys like playmakers. They're not. They play positions of need and yet, they dropped into the second round. Because they have some serious flaws in their game that may or may not be corrected.


Nobody here is saying bad things about negativity. I'm glad people here don't see everything with rose-colored lenses. What boss is pointing to and something I agree with is when the uprights move. Screaming for playmakers in the offseason, and then screaming after the draft that we didn't draft for need. Screaming about drafting a tight end in the fourth for injury issues, then screaming that they passed up on Sergio Kindle despite his major injury issue. Screaming about the Chiefs taking a part-time player, and yet having no problem drafting CJ Spiller in the first to play much less than a full-time role or drafting Golden Tate to play a similar role as McCluster.

It's not about hating negativity. It's about being really inconsistent to suit your position of negativity. It's about a lose-lose no matter what you do.
No, you don't stop caring about playmakers. Some of use see guys like Kindle as being playmakers as much and probably moreso than DMC. Maybe people don't see DMC as having as much an impact as a DT with a late first/early second grade. Maybe people see Tate as a #2 and see him making more of an impact because of it. Goalposts aren't moving. People are just disagreeing on player evaluation. And people are disagreeing strongly on the value of draft picks and the value of rounds. The argument is draft philosophy and the goalposts don't seem to me to be changing. You've got false comparisons going on: Kindle is injured, true, while Moeaki has a long history of injury AND cost two draft picks in a very deep draft to get. Not the same things. Spiller is an NFL RB in many people's estimation, people whose estimation puts DMC as a WR almost strictly. Again, not the same things.

The goalposts can't be said to move if the poles were never connected to form a goalpost in the first place.

Sweet Daddy Hate
05-08-2010, 01:39 PM
It's all a part of the process. You have to bring in guys that aren't necessarily the best at what they do, but the right kind of guy. The kind of guy that fits your system. 10 years ago we won some championships and really brought a community together. There's no reason to think we can't do the exact same thing 10 years later.
(Sure, why NOT?!?!?-RoR)LMAO

We've got our Tom Brady.ROFL We've got our Richard Seymour. We have an Ed Reed, a black Wes Welker, the next Devin Hester, and now as you all can see we have the next Tony Gonzalez.LMAOLMAOLMAO Get ready Kansas City, your Chiefs are on the rise!

ROFLLMAO I love this Mult!

chiefzilla1501
05-08-2010, 01:40 PM
2.) I'm not comfortable assuming that Weis had ANY say in the draft process. Sings point may not point to 'no' but they really don't point to 'yes.' It is also fallacious to use the Philly-was-going-to-take-him argument. Should other teams have reached for a player because another team did (see: 2009, Raiders & a Bears rumor, Mike Mitchell)? Let's ignore this whole number because it is problematic and not useful.
As I've said before, Rick Gosselin is arguably the most in-touch with good sources. And he thought the Chiefs picked them at just the right value. First, the Eagles are a team that doesn't have a rich history of reaching. Second, Pioli mentioned that there were 3 teams interested and that he seemed the least likely to drop to 50 (you can choose to believe/not believe that--of course he'll be biased in saying that). Third, Gosselin said that a lot of teams had McCluster in their top 3 at RB and/or top 3 at WR on their boards. If that's the case, then it sounds like a LOT of teams had McCluster pegged as the RB/WR that was on the top of their boards.

To your first point, it's interesting that so many people accuse Pioli of clinging to the Patriot Way, yet make arguments inconsistent with the Patriot Way. The Patriot Way is that Pioli relies on his coaches to give input on the kinds of players they want. From there, Belichick largely trusted Pioli to make the call on exactly which player to bring in. I don't see how that's any different. Is McCluster a guy that fits what Charlie Weis wants to do? Absolutely. Was he the top guy Weis wanted? Probably not. That doesn't mean Weis wasn't extremely happy to get this guy on his roster.

3.)Again, depending on how good you think DMC is. He's "elite" in your eyes, so I understand your thought. He's not elite to me and perhaps I'll be proven wrong.
I don't think you have to be elite to justify a high second round pick. To that level, I can guarantee that the majority of the people we're pissed about passing up on are nothing more than rotational starters at best. I think it's more than fair to ask why this standard applies to McCluster but it doesn't apply to Tate, who would play a similar role.

Pioli Zombie
05-08-2010, 01:42 PM
No no no no no. He sucks. Mecca said so.

Sure-Oz
05-08-2010, 01:44 PM
He hasnt played a down, i'll wait to judge after the seasons over

Reaper16
05-08-2010, 01:45 PM
As I've said before, Rick Gosselin is arguably the most in-touch with good sources. And he thought the Chiefs picked them at just the right value. First, the Eagles are a team that doesn't have a rich history of reaching. Second, Pioli mentioned that there were 3 teams interested and that he seemed the least likely to drop to 50 (you can choose to believe/not believe that--of course he'll be biased in saying that). Third, Gosselin said that a lot of teams had McCluster in their top 3 at RB and/or top 3 at WR on their boards. If that's the case, then it sounds like a LOT of teams had McCluster pegged as the RB/WR that was on the top of their boards.

To your first point, it's interesting that so many people accuse Pioli of clinging to the Patriot Way, yet make arguments inconsistent with the Patriot Way. The Patriot Way is that Pioli relies on his coaches to give input on the kinds of players they want. From there, Belichick largely trusted Pioli to make the call on exactly which player to bring in. I don't see how that's any different. Is McCluster a guy that fits what Charlie Weis wants to do? Absolutely. Was he the top guy Weis wanted? Probably not. That doesn't mean Weis wasn't extremely happy to get this guy on his roster.


I don't think you have to be elite to justify a high second round pick. To that level, I can guarantee that the majority of the people we're pissed about passing up on are nothing more than rotational starters at best. I think it's more than fair to ask why this standard applies to McCluster but it doesn't apply to Tate, who would play a similar role.
Is that the Patriot Way? I don't know that it is.

I don't think that the standard applies because people see Tate as a possible #2 and a player without durability concerns and a player who isn't a tweener and etc.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 01:52 PM
1.) I'm not going to fault you if you think that DMC or Arenas are "elite" level playmakers. If you do (which, since you brought up what was being discussed before the draft, you probably didn't think before the draft) then taking them in the second is fine. The people against the picks clearly don't think that they are elite level playmakers. So... no inconsistencies there. We disagree on the impact and value of the second round pciks but no one is being inconsistent in their approach.

2.) I'm not comfortable assuming that Weis had ANY say in the draft process. Sings point may not point to 'no' but they really don't point to 'yes.' It is also fallacious to use the Philly-was-going-to-take-him argument. Should other teams have reached for a player because another team did (see: 2009, Raiders & a Bears rumor, Mike Mitchell)? Let's ignore this whole number because it is problematic and not useful.

3.)Again, depending on how good you think DMC is. He's "elite" in your eyes, so I understand your thought. He's not elite to me and perhaps I'll be proven wrong.

4.)I don't know what this means.

I think you misread my post. I never said Arenas was a "elite" level playmaker. I said our first two picks were. Berry and DMC. I like Arenas, but felt we could be better off taking someone else at that pick. My knee jerk reaction to the DMC pick wasnt pleasant. I thought he was no more than a little RB and had little knowledge about his past as a WR. I think he is indeed a "elite" level playmaker and I have faith these guys will use him properly.

2) in the interview they did at the combine, they said that Haley/Weis were scouting the skill guys on o, Muir is scouting the linemen and Romeo is in charge of the defense. It wasn't an "assumption". It was a statement.

The "Philly was gonna take him" argument is absolutely valid in this case. They arguably do the best job in evaluating playmaking talent. Its not even close to the same as mike mitchell and bringing that up shows what lengths you are going to to try and discredit my side of the argument. The way the bears have drafted in the recent years is nothing like the Eagles success in the draft over the same period. DMC gives us not only a playmaker at the slot, but a player that can step in at running back if needed and can give us a spark, at returner, wildcat...the same things that were said of Spiller at 5. Im not saying he is as good as Spiller, he isnt, but he is a very similarly skilled player and a much better value at 36 than Spiller would have been at 5.

3) fair statement

4) what part would you like clarification of?

Sweet Daddy Hate
05-08-2010, 01:52 PM
No no no no no. He sucks. Mecca said so.

Weak, old sauce; try again please! :thumb:

chiefzilla1501
05-08-2010, 01:52 PM
No, you don't stop caring about playmakers. Some of use see guys like Kindle as being playmakers as much and probably moreso than DMC.
Kindle is a guy I wouldn't have minded bringing in. The other guys aren't playmakers. That's what bothers me. They're not remotely close. Misi and Washington have more than a lion's share of issues. Because of Kindle's injury concerns, that makes it a wash for me.

Maybe people don't see DMC as having as much an impact as a DT with a late first/early second grade. Maybe people see Tate as a #2 and see him making more of an impact because of it. Goalposts aren't moving. People are just disagreeing on player evaluation.
Maybe, but not likely. While I have no proof on this, my guess (and it's only a guess) is that the majority of people saw Tate in the slot. It's an educated guess, given that that's where his skill set is best suited.

And people are disagreeing strongly on the value of draft picks and the value of rounds. The argument is draft philosophy and the goalposts don't seem to me to be changing. You've got false comparisons going on: Kindle is injured, true, while Moeaki has a long history of injury AND cost two draft picks in a very deep draft to get. Not the same things.
Umm... not quite. The Moeaki trade, from the trade value chart, costed the Chiefs 70 points in value. The 2a spot we wanted Kindle at was worth 530 points in value. Taking an injured player in the high second is a lot more risky than trading up to take an injury-prone player in the low 3rd. And by the way, I'd be a hell of a lot more concerned about the guy who has a potential microfracture that's going to need work than a guy who's had an injury history that shows no signs of needing further work.

Spiller is an NFL RB in many people's estimation, people whose estimation puts DMC as a WR almost strictly. Again, not the same things.
It is the same thing. People wanted Spiller as a complementary back to Charles. That meant either putting a playmaker like Charles on the bench with less reps or putting a playmaker like Spiller on the bench with less reps. Spiller is undoubtedly a better player, but we're talking about a #5 pick vs. a #37 pick. And people were fine using a #5 on a part-time playmaker, and suddenly the part-time issue becomes a problem at #37?

And also, given that a lot of teams had McCluster as a top 3 RB on their board, I'd be shocked if his role was limited to WR--it's probably just going to be his main area of focus.

The goalposts can't be said to move if the poles were never connected to form a goalpost in the first place.
Don't pass on playmaker vs. needs-based draft
Moeaki being a major injury concern vs. Kindle not (almost 2 rounds earlier)
McCluster being a part-time playmaker vs. drafting Spiller in the top 5 or drafting Tate to probably play a similar position

Reaper16
05-08-2010, 02:29 PM
Kindle is a guy I wouldn't have minded bringing in. The other guys aren't playmakers. That's what bothers me. They're not remotely close. Misi and Washington have more than a lion's share of issues. Because of Kindle's injury concerns, that makes it a wash for me.


Maybe, but not likely. While I have no proof on this, my guess (and it's only a guess) is that the majority of people saw Tate in the slot. It's an educated guess, given that that's where his skill set is best suited.


Umm... not quite. The Moeaki trade, from the trade value chart, costed the Chiefs 70 points in value. The 2a spot we wanted Kindle at was worth 530 points in value. Taking an injured player in the high second is a lot more risky than trading up to take an injury-prone player in the low 3rd. And by the way, I'd be a hell of a lot more concerned about the guy who has a potential microfracture that's going to need work than a guy who's had an injury history that shows no signs of needing further work.


It is the same thing. People wanted Spiller as a complementary back to Charles. That meant either putting a playmaker like Charles on the bench with less reps or putting a playmaker like Spiller on the bench with less reps. Spiller is undoubtedly a better player, but we're talking about a #5 pick vs. a #37 pick. And people were fine using a #5 on a part-time playmaker, and suddenly the part-time issue becomes a problem at #37?

And also, given that a lot of teams had McCluster as a top 3 RB on their board, I'd be shocked if his role was limited to WR--it's probably just going to be his main area of focus.


Don't pass on playmaker vs. needs-based draft
Moeaki being a major injury concern vs. Kindle not (almost 2 rounds earlier)
McCluster being a part-time playmaker vs. drafting Spiller in the top 5 or drafting Tate to probably play a similar position
Minor quibbles:
- Any discussion Spiller at #5 was in draft scenarios where the players that people truly wanted at #5 were already taken. So you maiking that comparison is not useful.
- It was reported that one team thought Kindle needed microfracture surgery. One.
- still agree to disagree re: Tate. Or, ignoring Tate, I can bring up Arreilious Benn.

chiefzilla1501
05-08-2010, 02:43 PM
Minor quibbles:
- Any discussion Spiller at #5 was in draft scenarios where the players that people truly wanted at #5 were already taken. So you maiking that comparison is not useful.
It still goes to the part-time playmakers vs. needs-based draft assessment. I don't see how wanting Spiller over McClain or Okung is much different from wanting McCluster over Misi or Washington.

- It was reported that one team thought Kindle needed microfracture surgery. One.
Correct me if I'm wrong. I read that only one team took him off the board because of the microfracture surgery. That doesn't mean there weren't other teams very concerned about it. He had knee surgery already in 2008. Missed 3 games with a sprained ankle. And now is running around with a potential microfracture that is very often career-limiting. Even if he doesn't have surgery today, that doesn't mean he's not a serious threat to have it later. Not saying he's an injury waiting to happen. I'm just saying it's hypocritical for people to suggest Moeaki was such an injury risk and Kindle is not. I'd be a lot more concerned about Kindle than Moeaki.

- still agree to disagree re: Tate. Or, ignoring Tate, I can bring up Arreilious Benn.
Fine--agree to disagree. Benn is a different story, but I heard the name Tate come up a lot more than Benn.

BossChief
05-08-2010, 02:54 PM
Even if Kindle was fully healthy (which he may or may not be), he is a guy that is a more naturally talented "Tamba Hali". While I like what Hali brings to our defense, he is a liability against the run and Kindle is as well. You cant have two rushbackers that are a liability against the run and expect to compete running a fairbanks 3-4 defense.

I think Kindle is living off the hype Orakpo created when the twos overall games arent comparable IMO. Orakpo is so good because he isnt just a elite talent as a pass rusher, he is fantastic in run support. Kindle is not that guy. He isnt even a good closer as a pass rusher, very similar to Hali in how qbs escape.

Kindle is lucky to have gone to the best situation he could have went into.

mcaj22
05-08-2010, 03:02 PM
I love that people are so high on this guy and he has even more hype or just about the same hype as Eric Berry, McClunker or Agent 5'0'' There is no doubt in my mind everyone should be excited about Berry, McCluster and Arenas as they clearly have the resume to bring something to the table. But this guy barely survived in college to see the field, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets squashed like a bug on prime time television the first game of the season and ride the injury prone roller coaster all season long, I'd be surprised if he even plays 8 games healthy, and if he does I'd consider that a success for him in the NFL but the sad part is people will still hype him up. I'm going to wait on him, and I hope he proves me wrong, but right now the stuff on this guy makes me think he is just a practice/camp/workout warrior, but is like a glass house in an actual game speed, so it feels like false hope. So for now this Moeaki character is filed into the rest of the rag tag scrubs at the TE position the Chiefs now acquired post the TG era. I do hope he works out, but people have been saying that about every TE we have tried to plug in since TG.

chiefzilla1501
05-08-2010, 03:05 PM
I love that people are so high on this guy and he has even more hype or just about the same hype as Eric Berry, McClunker or Agent 5'0'' There is no doubt in my mind everyone should be excited about Berry, McCluster and Arenas as they clearly have the resume to bring something to the table. But this guy barely survived in college to see the field, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets squashed like a bug on prime time television the first game of the season and ride the injury prone roller coaster all season long, I'd be surprised if he even plays 8 games healthy, and if he does I'd consider that a success for him in the NFL but the sad part is people will still hype him up. I'm going to wait on him, and I hope he proves me wrong, but right now the stuff on this guy makes me think he is just a practice/camp/workout warrior, but is like a glass house in an actual game speed, so it feels like false hope. So for now this Moeaki character is filed into the rest of the rag tag scrubs at the TE position the Chiefs now acquired post the TG era. I do hope he works out, but people have been saying that about every TE we have tried to plug in since TG.

I don't know that anyone's hyping him up to be anything more than a potentially good pick for the end of the third round.

mcaj22
05-08-2010, 03:10 PM
I don't know that anyone's hyping him up to be anything more than a potentially good pick for the end of the third round.


With write up's like this one the thread is about? Seems like more than just a good pick for the end of the third round. We drafted Alex Magee in the third round last year and he got nothing close to this in terms of talk before even seeing training camp.

milkman
05-08-2010, 04:03 PM
I don't think you have to be elite to justify a high second round pick. To that level, I can guarantee that the majority of the people we're pissed about passing up on are nothing more than rotational starters at best. I think it's more than fair to ask why this standard applies to McCluster but it doesn't apply to Tate, who would play a similar role.

Because Tate could eventually fill the #2 WR position, where McCluster will never be anything more than a part time toy.

milkman
05-08-2010, 04:05 PM
I think you misread my post. I never said Arenas was a "elite" level playmaker. I said our first two picks were. Berry and DMC. I like Arenas, but felt we could be better off taking someone else at that pick. My knee jerk reaction to the DMC pick wasnt pleasant. I thought he was no more than a little RB and had little knowledge about his past as a WR. I think he is indeed a "elite" level playmaker and I have faith these guys will use him properly.

2) in the interview they did at the combine, they said that Haley/Weis were scouting the skill guys on o, Muir is scouting the linemen and Romeo is in charge of the defense. It wasn't an "assumption". It was a statement.

The "Philly was gonna take him" argument is absolutely valid in this case. They arguably do the best job in evaluating playmaking talent. Its not even close to the same as mike mitchell and bringing that up shows what lengths you are going to to try and discredit my side of the argument. The way the bears have drafted in the recent years is nothing like the Eagles success in the draft over the same period. DMC gives us not only a playmaker at the slot, but a player that can step in at running back if needed and can give us a spark, at returner, wildcat...the same things that were said of Spiller at 5. Im not saying he is as good as Spiller, he isnt, but he is a very similarly skilled player and a much better value at 36 than Spiller would have been at 5.

3) fair statement

4) what part would you like clarification of?

The Philly argument is absolutely not valid.

This team needs full time playmakers, not part time toys.