PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft 2011 Draft Piorities: Pick Three


Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:21 PM
Poll forthcoming

I'd go with NT, WR, OLB....with OT and C "next." Backup/QOTF would be a late round target.

Pick three/four in the draft, and get the other two in FA.

Thoughts? :shrug:

Mr. Laz
01-10-2011, 01:24 PM
not real difficult

NT,WR,LB

honorable mention to OT

that said, we can use more talent pretty much everywhere

LiL stumppy
01-10-2011, 01:25 PM
I will see we don't need a NT as bad as people think. Maybe in the third. I havn't seen stats but our run D looked pretty good all year. We need OLB in the first, WR in FA or the second. And then we need a C/RT. Games are won up front and we have a few positions that can be upgraded to help us out.

I am still not sold on Cassel. The first half of the year he sucked, then he had a few games where he actually stepped up in the pocket and threw the ball, then the past few weeks hes but awful. Not like the first 8 games, like he is confident in what he is doing, but isn't doing it right.

Our biggest need is an OLB in my opinion, Vrable is done, too slow.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:26 PM
Damn, screwed up my own vote....meant to pick NT over OT. OT, as Laz says would be 4th.

Frosty
01-10-2011, 01:26 PM
NT, C and WR. The Chiefs are soft in the middle of both lines.

MahiMike
01-10-2011, 01:29 PM
Everything up the middle; C, NT, ILB

Get a proven WR in FA.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:30 PM
NT, C and WR. The Chiefs are soft in the middle of both lines.

Yeah, C needs addressed soon. If not in FA, maybe in the 4th-6th round....depending on value available.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 01:30 PM
NT, C and WR. The Chiefs are soft in the middle of both lines.

I am going to write an unnecessarily wordy sentence to show the rest of the CP community that I agree with this post, since we will almost assuredly not be selecting a QB, early in the draft, anytime soon.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:31 PM
Everything up the middle; C, NT, ILB

Get a proven WR in FA.

I could settle for this. :toast:

Saul Good
01-10-2011, 01:31 PM
Everything up the middle; C, NT, ILB

Get a proven WR in FA.

This looks to be one of the deepest WR drafts in years. Why would we look to FA to fill the spot?

Saul Good
01-10-2011, 01:32 PM
I am going to write an unnecessarily wordy sentence to show the rest of the CP community that I agree with this post, since we will almost assuredly not be selecting a QB, early in the draft, anytime soon.

This post is in line with my thinking as well.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:34 PM
This looks to be one of the deepest WR drafts in years. Why would we look to FA to fill the spot?

I understand your point....but WR are among those whose NFL success is hardest to predict.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 01:35 PM
Depending on which WRs drop to our pick in round 1, it could very easily be that the best choice at this point will be a center, and this would be absolutely fine.

Improve this position and our line will look MUCH better.

El Jefe
01-10-2011, 01:37 PM
NT, WR, C.
I would take these two in 1-2 and wouldn't complain.
1) Von Miller
2)Jerrel powe

I think if Powe is there in the second it's a no brainer.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:37 PM
Depending on which WRs drop to our pick in round 1, it could very easily be that the best choice at this point will be a center, and this would be absolutely fine.

Improve this position and our line will look MUCH better.

I can agree with that, but then we better address C and NT in the next two-three rounds...and hope an OLB falls to us later.

Hydrae
01-10-2011, 01:38 PM
NT, C and WR. The Chiefs are soft in the middle of both lines.

Probably in a different order (WR, NT, C) but I agree with these three choices as being the most important to target in this off season.

Or simply, THIS!

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 01:39 PM
I can agree with that, buthen we better address C and NT in the next two-three rounds...and hope an OLB falls to us later.

Unless we get incredibly lucky, it's going to be very difficult for us to get starting-caliber players at all of these positions in the draft (C, WR, NT, OLB).

I think it's a certainty that we could get the first, and we should be able to accomplish 1 of the next three. From there, we need Pioli to perform like the highest paid GM in the league.

El Jefe
01-10-2011, 01:39 PM
Probably in a different order (WR, NT, C) but I agree with these three choices as being the most important to target in this off season.

Or simply, THIS!

1) Baldwin/J.Jones
2) Powe
3) I wonder if O'dowd will be there?

El Jefe
01-10-2011, 01:42 PM
Unless we get incredibly lucky, it's going to be very difficult for us to get starting-caliber players at all of these positions in the draft (C, WR, NT, OLB).

I think it's a certainty that we could get the first, and we should be able to accomplish 1 of the next three. From there, we need Pioli to perform like the highest paid GM in the league.

We may be able to get Baldwin or Julio Jones in the first, and maybe Powe in the 2nd.

CupidStunt
01-10-2011, 01:43 PM
1. QB

2. NT

3. WR

Saul Good
01-10-2011, 01:44 PM
Unless we get incredibly lucky, it's going to be very difficult for us to get starting-caliber players at all of these positions in the draft (C, WR, NT, OLB).

I think it's a certainty that we could get the first, and we should be able to accomplish 1 of the next three. From there, we need Pioli to perform like the highest paid GM in the league.

There will be an immediate starter at WR available in the first or second where we pick and likely an immediate starter at C in the first or second. (I'm not convinced that we need an immediate starter at C, though.)

I haven't looked closely enough to see what NT would be available in the first, but if there is a potential starter available, you have to look there first. There simply aren't enough NTs to go around.

eazyb81
01-10-2011, 01:45 PM
I can agree with that, but then we better address C and NT in the next two-three rounds...and hope an OLB falls to us later.

No stud OLB will fall to us past the 3rd round that can be counted on to be an upgrade over what we already have.

We have lots of holes, but only a few can be filled via this year's draft. Hopefully some will be filled in free agency, but the last few offseasons do not give me much hope on that front.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:46 PM
1. QB

2. NT

3. WR

QB just ain't gonna happen...unless you mean late round backup/QBOTF.

As bad as Cassel looked in a couple of games, another WR and better protection would solve much of it. Pioli ain't bailing on him, yet. Another year like this....maybe. But not yet.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 01:46 PM
We may be able to get Baldwin or Julio Jones in the first, and maybe Powe in the 2nd.

While this sounds intriguing, definitely, I believe that C and NT are the two biggest areas of need on this team. In that order, actually.

Remember that DMC was drafted to be a slot WR, and he must develop. Brokaki was also a hell of a first-year player. Great addition. So I think we have some potential here for further growth.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:47 PM
No stud OLB will fall to us past the 3rd round that can be counted on to be an upgrade over what we already have.

We have lots of holes, but only a few can be filled via this year's draft. Hopefully some will be filled in free agency, but the last few offseasons do not give me much hope on that front.

Yeah, if we don't nab one by round three...it would most likely come via FA.

Chiefnj2
01-10-2011, 01:47 PM
Everything goes out the window if Hali's contract isn't extended.

I wouldn't address it in round 1, but in round 2 I'd start looking at another HB. Either Haley and Weis were complete morons all year in not giving Charles the ball more, or the guy just can't handle the NFL. If the latter, KC needs a consistent HB.

Just Passin' By
01-10-2011, 01:47 PM
NT
WR
C


But the team really needs help all along the o-line, and at OLB, too. With the Chiefs having been at the bottom of the spending barrel in recent years, this would be a good year to spend some money on decent (and youngish) free agents and really help that offensive line.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 01:48 PM
There will be an immediate starter at WR available in the first or second where we pick and likely an immediate starter at C in the first or second. (I'm not convinced that we need an immediate starter at C, though.)

I haven't looked closely enough to see what NT would be available in the first, but if there is a potential starter available, you have to look there first. There simply aren't enough NTs to go around.

Seriously? IMO, the interior of the o-line was porous all year because Wiegman could get dominated at the point. Even when he wasn't tossed on his ass, he was tossed back, collapsing the pocket.

I think we're in desperate need of a C.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 01:48 PM
Our center is currently playling LG for us, so that's not a priority.

There aren't any viable QB prospects that are going to fall to us in the mid-20s and while I'd be actively looking to upgrade, it's not realistic.

As such, this seems easy: NT, WR and LOLB

I could see swapping WR and NT, but the NT does so much to help us across the board. Someone mentioned the fact that our run defense was solid, but this was only because we sold out with Johnson and Belcher. With a good NT, those guys can do more in coverage to avoid the ass-kickings over the middle.

The NT is the most important position in this defense and we don't have one. That's my target if one falls. However, as this draft appears to be better for WRs and OLBs, I think I'd end up drafting a WR as we're likly to get a better talent at our draft slot there.

Just as long as our first goes to one of those positions, I'm happy.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:49 PM
Everything goes out the window if Hali's contract isn't extended.

I wouldn't address it in round 1, but in round 2 I'd start looking at another HB. Either Haley and Weis were complete morons all year in not giving Charles the ball more, or the guy just can't handle the NFL. If the latter, KC needs a consistent HB.

Middle round RBs seem to transition better than they use to....so if Charles and Jones are both back next year, I'd say that would be the earliest we go that route...unless someone falls in our laps.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 01:50 PM
Our center is currently playling LG for us, so that's not a priority.


Disagree. I'm not putting any faith in a 34-year-old lineman. Could he serve as a stopgap for our stopgap QB next season? Sure, I suppose. But we need actually to fix the problem.

El Jefe
01-10-2011, 01:50 PM
Everything goes out the window if Hali's contract isn't extended.

I wouldn't address it in round 1, but in round 2 I'd start looking at another HB. Either Haley and Weis were complete morons all year in not giving Charles the ball more, or the guy just can't handle the NFL. If the latter, KC needs a consistent HB.

In round 2????? No way on earth I would consider that, HB's can be had deep in the draft, I bet we could get Mikel Leshoure in the 4th if were that desperate.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:51 PM
Our center is currently playling LG for us, so that's not a priority...

If by that you mean Asomoah...then we have a hole to fill, soon, where Waters now plays.

El Jefe
01-10-2011, 01:52 PM
Our center is currently playling LG for us, so that's not a priority.There aren't any viable QB prospects that are going to fall to us in the mid-20s and while I'd be actively looking to upgrade, it's not realistic.

As such, this seems easy: NT, WR and LOLB

I could see swapping WR and NT, but the NT does so much to help us across the board. Someone mentioned the fact that our run defense was solid, but this was only because we sold out with Johnson and Belcher. With a good NT, those guys can do more in coverage to avoid the ass-kickings over the middle.

The NT is the most important position in this defense and we don't have one. That's my target if one falls. However, as this draft appears to be better for WRs and OLBs, I think I'd end up drafting a WR as we're likly to get a better talent at our draft slot there.

Just as long as our first goes to one of those positions, I'm happy.

You aren't talking about Old Man River Waters are you? I do however agree with you on the NT.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 01:54 PM
Disagree. I'm not putting any faith in a 34-year-old lineman. Could he serve as a stopgap for our stopgap QB next season? Sure, I suppose. But we need actually to fix the problem.

Sure, draft one and keep looking.

At the same time, are you okay using our first on Pouncey if Miller or Jones are on the board?

It's a question of priority - those 3 positions simply have nobody on our roster that can play them with any degree of competency. Waters can play C at a high level for another 2 or 3 seasons. We can keep trying to develop guys, but the question was 'priority'.

I don't see how you can say that getting a developmental C is a bigger priority that getting the NT that our defensive front needs, the WR that our limited QB needs or the LB that will get Mike Vrabel the hell off the field. If you see Studebaker as that guy, more power to you. But if Von Miller's there in the first, I'm not passing on him for Studebaker.

In a perfect world we get our long-term C in the 5th round and smile all the way to the bank, but that's not the question. Those 3 positions absolutely have to be filed. If we can do that, move Waters to C and Asomoah to LG to buy a couple of seasons (and think of how big Waters playing alongside Asomoah would be for his development), that's a no-brainer, IMO.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:55 PM
....I could see swapping WR and NT, but the NT does so much to help us across the board. Someone mentioned the fact that our run defense was solid, but this was only because we sold out with Johnson and Belcher. With a good NT, those guys can do more in coverage to avoid the ass-kickings over the middle.

The NT is the most important position in this defense and we don't have one. That's my target if one falls....

If there is a NT worthy of the pick, yeah....I'd agree. Anyone know who the NT prospects are...most likely to fall into the late first round? Are they worthy? :shrug:

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 01:56 PM
If there is a NT worthy of the pick, yeah....I'd agree. Anyone know who the NT prospects are...most likely to fall into the late first round? Are they worthy? :shrug:

I haven't done a lot of homework on it yet, but it appears this is a very good draft for WR prospects and not a great one for NTs.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 01:57 PM
I haven't done a lot of homework on it yet, but it appears this is a very good draft for WR prospects and not a great one for NTs.

Yeah, I need to do some homework there too....only I was hoping it would wait another week or so. Heh.

Saul Good
01-10-2011, 01:57 PM
Seriously? IMO, the interior of the o-line was porous all year because Wiegman could get dominated at the point. Even when he wasn't tossed on his ass, he was tossed back, collapsing the pocket.

I think we're in desperate need of a C.

I think we need one, but not enough to select one over a NT or WR. We did lead the league in rushing and were one of the best in the league in terms of fewest sacks allowed. It's a need, but "desperate" is a bit of an overstatement IMO.

NT is a more important position, and it's a harder position to fill, as there simply aren't enough human beings in the world who are that size.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 02:00 PM
If I'm drafting a C in round 1, he cannot be "developmental." He must be day 1/game 1 starter. Not Pouncey, though, as I believe he'll be a guard.

I think that Stefen Wisniewski will end up going in the first, and this might be a wise choice.

Powe in round 2, perhaps? And I'd be happy. I'm of the mindset that we must get stronger up the middle on both sides of the ball. This should be priority #1. As I addressed in my previous post, some options in the passing game should continue to improve.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 02:02 PM
If I'm drafting a C in round 1, he cannot be "developmental." He must be day 1/game 1 starter. Not Pouncey, though, as I believe he'll be a guard.

I think that Stefen Wisniewski will end up going in the first, and this might be a wise choice.

Powe in round 2, perhaps? And I'd be happy. I'm of the mindset that we must get stronger up the middle on both sides of the ball. This should be priority #1. As I addressed in my previous post, some options in the passing game should continue to improve.

So NT/LOLB in round 1, C in round 2 and WR in FA?

I wouldn't hate that, but I'd prefer just go with the best O-lineman available in R2. In my eyes, RT is an even more glaring weakness than C.

I just see a high draft being spent on a C being more of a luxury item than anything. Kinda like spending the 34th overall on a scat-back kick returner (okay, low blow...sorry).

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 02:04 PM
I'm surprised OLB isn't getting more votes...Vrabel has been a stand-up guy but is, hopefully, done. And I don't want to depend on Studebaker being the answer there. Assuming we can keep Hali, we still need to add one or two OLBs. Next to NT, it's the most important position in that front seven.

CupidStunt
01-10-2011, 02:05 PM
QB just ain't gonna happen...unless you mean late round backup/QBOTF.

As bad as Cassel looked in a couple of games, another WR and better protection would solve much of it. Pioli ain't bailing on him, yet. Another year like this....maybe. But not yet.

You asked for my opinion on the top 3 priorities. Right?

I know Pioli won't sack up and try to find the next Brady, not the next Brad Johnson, but that's what I'd do, and what I'd like them to do.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 02:06 PM
So NT/LOLB in round 1, C in round 2 and WR in FA?

I wouldn't hate that, but I'd prefer just go with the best O-lineman available in R2. In my eyes, RT is an even more glaring weakness than C.

I just see a high draft being spent on a C being more of a luxury item than anything. Kinda like spending the 34th overall on a scat-back kick returner (okay, low blow...sorry).

Yeah, I'd be cool with that, too. The one thing is that most Chiefs fans are in relative agreement about the biggest needs facing this team. We're arguing more nuanced points about when and where to address them.

Certainly, Pioli is aware of all of this and has the situation in hand, right? But...we've had these exact same holes since '09, so a bit of skepticism is needed.

(and we still need a QB, but I digress.)

Saul Good
01-10-2011, 02:06 PM
So NT/LOLB in round 1, C in round 2 and WR in FA?

I wouldn't hate that, but I'd prefer just go with the best O-lineman available in R2. In my eyes, RT is an even more glaring weakness than C.

I just see a high draft being spent on a C being more of a luxury item than anything. Kinda like spending the 34th overall on a scat-back kick returner (okay, low blow...sorry).

I think there will be a WR available in the third round who would normally be a mid-second round player. There are just that many good ones in this draft.

El Jefe
01-10-2011, 02:06 PM
There will be an immediate starter at WR available in the first or second where we pick and likely an immediate starter at C in the first or second. (I'm not convinced that we need an immediate starter at C, though.)

I haven't looked closely enough to see what NT would be available in the first, but if there is a potential starter available, you have to look there first. There simply aren't enough NTs to go around.

About.com has these NT's coming out:
1) Nick Fairley (no thank you,he's a piece of trash IMO)
2) Phil Taylor (Baylor)
3) Jarvis Jenkins (clemson)
4) Stephen Paea (Oregon State)
5) Jerrell Powe (Ole Miss)
6) Marvin Austin (NC)
7) Sione Fua (Stanford)

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 02:08 PM
You asked for my opinion on the top 3 priorities. Right?

I know Pioli won't sack up and try to find the next Brady, not the next Brad Johnson, but that's what I'd do, and what I'd like them to do.

Fair enough. I'm just trying to be realistic, I guess.

Pestilence
01-10-2011, 02:09 PM
So NT/LOLB in round 1, C in round 2 and WR in FA?

I wouldn't hate that, but I'd prefer just go with the best O-lineman available in R2. In my eyes, RT is an even more glaring weakness than C.

I just see a high draft being spent on a C being more of a luxury item than anything. Kinda like spending the 34th overall on a scat-back kick returner (okay, low blow...sorry).

I'll probably get shit on for this.....but I'd look at Lee Evans in FA this year. The Bills are going to let him go and he'd be a damn good deep threat opposite of Bowe.

Chiefnj2
01-10-2011, 02:10 PM
About.com has these NT's coming out:
1) Nick Fairley (no thank you,he's a piece of trash IMO)
2) Phil Taylor (Baylor)
3) Jarvis Jenkins (clemson)
4) Stephen Paea (Oregon State)
5) Jerrell Powe (Ole Miss)
6) Marvin Austin (NC)
7) Sione Fua (Stanford)

There is also a kid from Hampton.

CupidStunt
01-10-2011, 02:11 PM
Bump NT up, WR up and add any of ILB/OLB/OL to the 3rd spot for true realism. They're very interchangeabe, IMO. They seem to vary from week to week. Probably OL overall, and interior first.

Sofa King
01-10-2011, 02:11 PM
I WIN I WIN!


i correctly picked the top three choices! that means i know whats best for this team.


I expect to be given the "bestest and smartiest chiefs planet poster" award by the end of today.

Saul Good
01-10-2011, 02:12 PM
About.com has these NT's coming out:
1) Nick Fairley (no thank you,he's a piece of trash IMO)
2) Phil Taylor (Baylor)
3) Jarvis Jenkins (clemson)
4) Stephen Paea (Oregon State)
5) Jerrell Powe (Ole Miss)
6) Marvin Austin (NC)
7) Sione Fua (Stanford)

I'd be all over Fairley. I like a NT with a mean streak.

MOhillbilly
01-10-2011, 02:12 PM
I'll probably get shit on for this.....but I'd look at Lee Evans in FA this year. The Bills are going to let him go and he'd be a damn good deep threat opposite of Bowe.

whos gonna throw him the deep ball? har.har.har.

Pestilence
01-10-2011, 02:13 PM
I'd be all over Fairley. I like a NT with a mean streak.

To bad he's going to be a top 10 pick.

Saul Good
01-10-2011, 02:13 PM
To bad he's going to be a top 10 pick.

I agree, but I'd be all over him if he slips.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 02:13 PM
Yeah, I'd be cool with that, too. The one thing is that most Chiefs fans are in relative agreement about the biggest needs facing this team. We're arguing more nuanced points about when and where to address them.

Certainly, Pioli is aware of all of this and has the situation in hand, right? But...we've had these exact same holes since '09, so a bit of skepticism is needed.

(and we still need a QB, but I digress.)

I'm pretty sure we needed a NT, a WR and an OLB in the 2nd round of last season's draft when Cody, Benn and Washington were there to fit those needs perfectly.

AND YET!

But hey, thank God we filled those nickle corner, kick returner and team mascot roles nicely. And at least we got made our NFL mandated quote of former team captains (that's a rule, right?).

I'll be honest - I have no faith at all in Pioli actually addressing the needs listed above. They're the same needs he ignored in the last draft.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 02:14 PM
I WIN I WIN!


i correctly picked the top three choices! that means i know whats best for this team.


I expect to be given the "bestest and smartiest chiefs planet poster" award by the end of today.

Several of us picked WR, NT, and OLB (if you overlook my mis-vote.) You'll have to share. :harumph:

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 02:15 PM
I hear you, dude, which is exactly why it will be frivolous to get too caught up in the draft talk again this off-season.

I'm going to talk about it a lot, don't get me wrong, but I'm going to try to approach the whole thing with a greater sense of emotional detachment.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 02:16 PM
I'll probably get shit on for this.....but I'd look at Lee Evans in FA this year. The Bills are going to let him go and he'd be a damn good deep threat opposite of Bowe.

I like Evans.

The problem is that he's less of a 'deep threat' than he is a 'go route threat'.

Evans doesn't run deep routes, per se. He runs go routes. Cassel can't really hit one of those for shit. As such, a 'go threat' doesn't do us much good.

What I'd like to find is someone like Julio Jones that has the speed to stretch the field but will also run deep crossing routes or seam routes. Evans doesn't really do that. To steal from the Eagles, Evans is like DeSean Jackson whereas Jones would be more like a Jeremy Maclin.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 02:18 PM
I'd be all over Fairley. I like a NT with a mean streak.

Yeah, all these "I wouldn't take Fairley" folks are a little out to lunch, IMO.

What Fairley did in that GA game was borderline a couple of times, unlucky once and flat out dirty once. Y'know what? That's a ratio I can live with.

Fairly is going to be a damn monster, but he's not going to be there when we pick.

Sofa King
01-10-2011, 02:22 PM
Several of us picked WR, NT, and OLB (if you overlook my mis-vote.) You'll have to share. :harumph:

well ok.... but i'm only sharing the "bestiest" part of the award....

Just Passin' By
01-10-2011, 02:22 PM
Yeah, all these "I wouldn't take Fairley" folks are a little out to lunch, IMO.

What Fairley did in that GA game was borderline a couple of times, unlucky once and flat out dirty once. Y'know what? That's a ratio I can live with.

Fairly is going to be a damn monster, but he's not going to be there when we pick.

The only problem with taking a NT (I picked that as one of the 3 priorities) is the development curve at the position. If this team takes a NT high, and he takes Raji's development arc, for example, he won't really be ready until sometime in year 2.

Imagine the weeping and gnashing of teeth around here if that were to happen.

Steron
01-10-2011, 02:23 PM
NT, WR, DE

Sofa King
01-10-2011, 02:23 PM
I'll probably get shit on for this.....but I'd look at Lee Evans in FA this year. The Bills are going to let him go and he'd be a damn good deep threat opposite of Bowe.

When has evans done anything consistently?

For awhile he was overrated... now he's not even rated...



go young... or go breaston if they actually don't resign him..

MOhillbilly
01-10-2011, 02:23 PM
fua video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St0Zyeh43ow

Extra Point
01-10-2011, 02:24 PM
OG, ILB, NT. Hope we fill some needs and get an OC, without having to give away too many picks.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 02:25 PM
The only problem with taking a NT (I picked that as one of the 3 priorities) is the development curve at the position. If this team takes a NT high, and he takes Raji's development arc, for example, he won't really be ready until sometime in year 2.

Imagine the weeping and gnashing of teeth around here if that were to happen.

Not really, man. The same people whom you probably believe to be the most reactional on this site are the same ones who consistently defended Dorsey and argued for patience. Why? Because unlike a player like Jackson, Dorsey had the resume out of college to warrant belief in his upside.

There are some echoes here to the QB discussion from yesterday. Past history of individual players matters.

Pestilence
01-10-2011, 02:26 PM
When has evans done anything consistently?

For awhile he was overrated... now he's not even rated...



go young... or go breaston if they actually don't resign him..

Dude.....I don't expect any player from the Bills to be consistent on that team. Ownership sucks. Coaching sucks.

Evans was never consistent because he was usually getting double covered because he was their only threat for the longest time. I'm not saying that he's a #1 WR.....but he couldn't hurt to bring in. It's not like our WR core is fucking exceptional.

Frosty
01-10-2011, 02:27 PM
About.com has these NT's coming out:
1) Nick Fairley (no thank you,he's a piece of trash IMO)
2) Phil Taylor (Baylor)
3) Jarvis Jenkins (clemson)
4) Stephen Paea (Oregon State)
5) Jerrell Powe (Ole Miss)
6) Marvin Austin (NC)
7) Sione Fua (Stanford)

I love Paea to death but there is no way that he is a NT. He's a pass rushing 4-3 DT.

I wouldn't mind Fua.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 02:29 PM
Not really, man. The same people whom you probably believe to be the most reactional on this site are the same ones who consistently defended Dorsey and argued for patience. Why? Because unlike a player like Jackson, Dorsey had the resume out of college to warrant belief in his upside.

There are some echoes here to the QB discussion from yesterday. Past history of individual players matters.

Yeeup.

Jackson - I shit on immediately because he was terrible from the jump. Ditto Cassel and McCluster. I really don't feel like I've mis-fired on any of that nor am I worried that I will.

Dorsey, DJ and Carr, I've defended them almost their entire careers because you frequently saw flashes that we knew they just had to develop.

The folks that are often quick to disparage the critical as "impatient" are usually the same folks that just assume anyone being critical is doing so as part of a wholesale hatred of the organization. That's just not the case. I'm patient with a lot of guys and lose hope quickly on others. If we bring in a NT that shows promise (i.e. Raji), I would gladly give him time to develop and I'm sure most of the other 'reactionaries' would do the same.

SCTrojan
01-10-2011, 02:29 PM
I picked WR, NT and OLB. But it's more about another pass rusher - whatever position that comes from.

Pestilence
01-10-2011, 02:30 PM
There is also a kid from Hampton.

Kenrick Ellis.

MOhillbilly
01-10-2011, 02:30 PM
I love Paea to death but there is no way that he is a NT. He's a pass rushing 4-3 DT.

I wouldn't mind Fua.

Dude looks way small for a under / 2 tech..do not want fua.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 02:32 PM
The folks that are often quick to disparage the critical as "impatient" are usually the same folks that just assume anyone being critical is doing so as part of a wholesale hatred of the organization. That's just not the case. I'm patient with a lot of guys and lose hope quickly on others. If we bring in a NT that shows promise (i.e. Raji), I would gladly give him time to develop and I'm sure most of the other 'reactionaries' would do the same.

Painting with a broad brush is easier because it requires almost no critical thinking.

Be happy! Trust! You're not a GM! Franchise QBs don't grow on trees! Oh, like you could do better?!!

Coogs
01-10-2011, 02:36 PM
My top 2 priorities in the unrestricted (won't even go restricted, as that requires draft pick compensation) FA market would be...

Santana Moss WR Redskins
Aubrayo Franklin NT 49ers

Then in the draft I would work on the O-line and the LB's.

Maybe something like this for now...

1st Pouncey C Florida
2nd Barksdale OT LSU
3rd Thomas RB KSU
4th Moch OLB Nevada
5th Harvey ILB Marshall

Just Passin' By
01-10-2011, 02:37 PM
The folks that are often quick to disparage the critical as "impatient" are usually the same folks that just assume anyone being critical is doing so as part of a wholesale hatred of the organization. That's just not the case. I'm patient with a lot of guys and lose hope quickly on others. If we bring in a NT that shows promise (i.e. Raji), I would gladly give him time to develop and I'm sure most of the other 'reactionaries' would do the same.

The "I thought he sucked from the get-go" is a poor excuse for not giving players the usual development time, and Raji only made one start as a rookie. But the howls of internet posters should not be a deterrent for Pioli. If there's a top NT prospect, he should definitely think very seriously about taking that player.

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 02:38 PM
1 BPA
2 BPA
3-5 OL
6-7 dont really care...

Sofa King
01-10-2011, 02:40 PM
Dude.....I don't expect any player from the Bills to be consistent on that team. Ownership sucks. Coaching sucks.

Evans was never consistent because he was usually getting double covered because he was their only threat for the longest time. I'm not saying that he's a #1 WR.....but he couldn't hurt to bring in. It's not like our WR core is ****ing exceptional.

personally, i think he'd much of an upgrade over the crap we currently have on our team.


I won't be pissed if we get him, but i won't expect big plays outta him.

MOhillbilly
01-10-2011, 02:41 PM
i think this NT draft talk is dumb. Get a OLB and have lewis step up & 2/3rds of the middle gets fixed.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 02:43 PM
The "I thought he sucked from the get-go" is a poor excuse for not giving players the usual development time, and Raji only made one start as a rookie. But the howls of internet posters should not be a deterrent for Pioli. If there's a top NT prospect, he should definitely think very seriously about taking that player.

It's not an excuse if it's accurate.

It's not hard to see when players simply lack the ability to excel at this level. When watching Jackson, I will concede that I absolutely see an NFL player there. He's a big guy with legitimate athletic ability. However, he's also a complete idiot and a bit of a loafer.

He's never going to live up to his draft pick. It's just not going to happen. My saying that from the moment the pick was made is hardly unfair gnashing and wailing. It's a statement of belief based on what I've seen. Would you prefer we all just sit around singing Kumbayah until a player's third season?

If the criticism is unreasonable (i.e. Petro's "Barry is a Bust" campaign) call it as such. If the criticism turns out to be inaccurate ("Carr is worthless, cut his ass"), point that out as well.

But if someone calls a spade a spade very early on and this assertion turns out to be accurate, what's unfair about that?

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 02:44 PM
1 BPA
2 BPA
3-5 OL
6-7 dont really care...

Wow.

We could end up with a truly horrific draft under this approach. I mean an absolutely abysmal one.

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 02:48 PM
Wow.

We could end up with a truly horrific draft under this approach. I mean an absolutely abysmal one.

:thumb:

That is why I am not a draftabulator....


1 BPA (WR, NT or OLB)
2 BPA (WR, NT, OLB or RB)
3-5 OL
6-7 both QB's

Hows that one for ya?

MOhillbilly
01-10-2011, 02:49 PM
Im gonna beat the drum for OLB all off season. An upgrade in team speed and a everydown tandum at safety will make this D lethal.

KC Tattoo
01-10-2011, 02:49 PM
I don't think our linebacker chore is as much of a need. Belcher and Studebaker sure have potential. They need the extra playing time, think Vrabel held us back some for that with Studebaker. Also I'd like to see if Cameron Shffield is going to be around next year and what he can bring.

I'd like us to draft a LB in latter rounds but, WR, C, & QB are major needs.

I'd be ok with Cassel starting the season & see how that goes. However we shouldn't have to wait around on him to be that guy he hasn't lived up to the billing to be. If it's going to be an 18 week season all the more reason to draft a QB. Wouldn't hurt to pick up fresh legs for a HB somewhere in the draft also. We should be looking at best possible players through out the draft and not settle on position of need, i kind of like that idea.

Center should be ut most top pryority for FA and draft. I'm not a FA fan for the most part, but center position you got to have a guy to rely on from start to finish.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 02:50 PM
:thumb:

That is why I am not a draftabulator....


1 BPA (WR, NT or OLB)
2 BPA (WR, NT, OLB or RB)
3-5 OL
6-7 both QB's

Hows that one for ya?

Well if we take a RB in the 2nd round, I'll kill a kitten. And taking 3 lineman in one draft is putting a lot of eggs in one basket.

But otherwise, I suppose it's not the worst thing I've ever seen.

MOhillbilly
01-10-2011, 02:53 PM
http://www.optimumscouting.com/scout-s-notes/articles/2011-nfl-draft-rankings-top-3-4-outside-linebackers.html

http://nflsoup.com/?p=6258

article/rankings on 3-4 olbs. seniors only.

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 02:55 PM
Well if we take a RB in the 2nd round, I'll kill a kitten. And taking 3 lineman in one draft is putting a lot of eggs in one basket.

But otherwise, I suppose it's not the worst thing I've ever seen.


Granted that could all change after the FA period...

And yes, if they replace some OL in FA, then some of those wants / requests could change for sure...

But since were just counting draft and not the FA period... Then that would be my wish list for now..


We do seriously have to get another running back.. Jones is old and it showed. Charles is proving that he can not be the main man... He fumbles to easy AND is always dinged... The last thing I want some Moron to say is "give Charles more carries"

Chiefnj2
01-10-2011, 02:56 PM
http://www.optimumscouting.com/scout-s-notes/articles/2011-nfl-draft-rankings-top-3-4-outside-linebackers.html

http://nflsoup.com/?p=6258

article/rankings on 3-4 olbs. seniors only.

In other words, it's a pretty poor senior class of OLBs.

Just Passin' By
01-10-2011, 02:58 PM
It's not an excuse if it's accurate.

It's not hard to see when players simply lack the ability to excel at this level. When watching Jackson, I will concede that I absolutely see an NFL player there. He's a big guy with legitimate athletic ability. However, he's also a complete idiot and a bit of a loafer.

He's never going to live up to his draft pick.

Just look at the top 12 players taken. It was a crappy top to the draft, one of the worst in recent years. That was understood going into the draft, and it's part of why it was basically impossible to trade down at the top for a non-quarterback. Hell, Belichick looked at the draft and traded out of the first round, because he thought the sweet spot in the draft made that the right way to go. I talked about the Chiefs taking Raji at the time, and I still think that would have been a good selection for the team, but the nonsense about living up to a draft pick is just that.

My saying that from the moment the pick was made is hardly unfair gnashing and wailing. It's a statement of belief based on what I've seen. Would you prefer we all just sit around singing Kumbayah until a player's third season?

Of course it's unfair gnashing and wailing. Whether you like the pick or not, it's made. At that point, you evaluate honestly. You don't look for every single flaw and crack on a guy over it. For crying out loud, you could take any of the top 5 candidates for rookie of the year and shred them if you wanted to. That doesn't mean that it makes sense to be doing it.

If the criticism is unreasonable (i.e. Petro's "Barry is a Bust" campaign) call it as such. If the criticism turns out to be inaccurate ("Carr is worthless, cut his ass"), point that out as well.

But if someone calls a spade a spade very early on and this assertion turns out to be accurate, what's unfair about that?

Because if you did like the pick, you'd be singing Kumbaya whether or not the guy was playing like shit. The Sanchez fellatio crew have been a great example of that.

MOhillbilly
01-10-2011, 02:58 PM
I don't think our linebacker chore is as much of a need. Belcher and Studebaker sure have potential. They need the extra playing time, think Vrabel held us back some for that with Studebaker. Also I'd like to see if Cameron Shffield is going to be around next year and what he can bring.



I think they both suck and studebaker in coverage is a joke.

kc rush
01-10-2011, 03:00 PM
Assuming that we are stuck with Cassel (no matter how I vote), I clicked WR, NT and OLB. If we can pickup Fitzgerald, I would go with C, NT and OLB (not necessarily in that order).

HemiEd
01-10-2011, 03:01 PM
QB, NT and Center would be my top three priorities.

Since they are going to be keeping Cassel around, how about
WR
NT
Center
OL/center
OLB
OL
That being said, I just hope they go with BPA every time, but they won't.

patteeu
01-10-2011, 03:01 PM
I'll probably get shit on for this.....but I'd look at Lee Evans in FA this year. The Bills are going to let him go and he'd be a damn good deep threat opposite of Bowe.

No way. I'd make an exception for a star in his prime like Fitzgerald, but there is no way I'd build around another aging veteran like Lee Evans, Chris Chambers, or Bobby Wade.

Chiefnj2
01-10-2011, 03:01 PM
Sleeper 2nd round outside linebacker - Mason Foster. Huge bowl game over the Huskers.

MOhillbilly
01-10-2011, 03:01 PM
In other words, it's a pretty poor senior class of OLBs.


IDK looks like some good athletic prospects to me. Have to wait until the draft ramps up to see where they are slotted.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 03:01 PM
Granted that could all change after the FA period...

And yes, if they replace some OL in FA, then some of those wants / requests could change for sure...

But since were just counting draft and not the FA period... Then that would be my wish list for now..


We do seriously have to get another running back.. Jones is old and it showed. Charles is proving that he can not be the main man... He fumbles to easy AND is always dinged... The last thing I want some Moron to say is "give Charles more carries"

I love the way Charles was used this year. In fact, I think it was almost perfect.

And you're right, Jones aged in dog years throughout the season. He was absolutely useless by about week 12 and got no better from there.

That said - good backs slide every single season. From Foster to Blount to McClain, etc... - It's not hard to find a nice powerful runningback with a bit of speed that can go out there and run the ball a handful of times/gm.

In 2 seasons, if we draft/develop well over the next couple years, perhaps a 1st/2nd round back is a nice idea. But right now we have much bigger fish to fry.

the Talking Can
01-10-2011, 03:02 PM
The "I thought he sucked from the get-go" is a poor excuse for not giving players the usual development time, and Raji only made one start as a rookie. But the howls of internet posters should not be a deterrent for Pioli. If there's a top NT prospect, he should definitely think very seriously about taking that player.

jesus god, does the sanctimonious bullshit from you ever stop?


and to top it off, you literally don't know what you're talking about when it comes to chiefs players and their histories on this board...

you are literally ignorant on the subject


for all that is holy shut the fuck up

Chiefnj2
01-10-2011, 03:03 PM
I love the way Charles was used this year. In fact, I think it was almost perfect.

.

Perfect, until the team really needed him.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 03:04 PM
Of course it's unfair gnashing and wailing. Whether you like the pick or not, it's made. At that point, you evaluate honestly.

That's exactly what's been done.

There are many people that think any criticism or evaluation of a rookie is unfair or dishonest because "he just needs more time!!!!" and sometimes that's just assinine.

Sometimes a bad player is just bad from the get go.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 03:06 PM
Perfect, until the team really needed him.

Charles appeared to have been injured when he did a dumb thing and tried to run someone over on the sideline.

Look at how he was used in the 2nd quarter. It appears to me the plan was to keep him fresh during the regular season and take the governor off a bit during the post-season. He appeared on his way to that kind of game before the Refs let the Ravens dogpile him and he made a poor decision on the sidelines.

Just because the plan didn't go to script doesn't mean it wasn't a good plan. He was fresh and at his best for the playoff run. Then he got injured - shit happens.

Chiefnj2
01-10-2011, 03:08 PM
Charles appeared to have been injured when he did a dumb thing and tried to run someone over on the sideline.

Look at how he was used in the 2nd quarter. It appears to me the plan was to keep him fresh during the regular season and take the governor off a bit during the post-season. He appeared on his way to that kind of game before the Refs let the Ravens dogpile him and he made a poor decision on the sidelines.

Just because the plan didn't go to script doesn't mean it wasn't a good plan. He was fresh and at his best for the playoff run. Then he got injured - shit happens.

It was a dumb plan. Fuck keeping people "fresh". Do the Pats keep Brady fresh? KC got lucky San Diego floundered down the stretch.

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 03:10 PM
I love the way Charles was used this year. In fact, I think it was almost perfect.

And you're right, Jones aged in dog years throughout the season. He was absolutely useless by about week 12 and got no better from there.

That said - good backs slide every single season. From Foster to Blount to McClain, etc... - It's not hard to find a nice powerful runningback with a bit of speed that can go out there and run the ball a handful of times/gm.

In 2 seasons, if we draft/develop well over the next couple years, perhaps a 1st/2nd round back is a nice idea. But right now we have much bigger fish to fry.

Depending on the FA signing, But if we fill some needs in FA. Then I have no issues spending pick 2 or 3 on a RB... They are a dime a dozen and we could find another Charles in rd 3.

Its really hard to get a feeling for the draft without knowing or seeing what the FA plans are...

Once that is done, then we can hammer out the Picks and hopefully have another solid year...

the Talking Can
01-10-2011, 03:10 PM
i picked NT/WR/RT (though you could argue C is as needy as RT)

..i can't believe we're going in to year 3 of 3-4 with Edwards as NT....imagine our D with Raji instead of Jackson...

i would love to get Powe, but doubt he last till the low 2nd

we need a FA WR and a draft pick WR...

take the best OL/WR/3-4LB available in the 1st....



we need a late round rb, or a vet FA pickup too..jones is toast...

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 03:11 PM
It was a dumb plan. **** keeping people "fresh". Do the Pats keep Brady fresh? KC got lucky San Diego floundered down the stretch.

Yes, a quarterback and a RB are the exact same animal.

I mean no team in the league has instituted a timeshare at RB. None of them.

Did we not enter the playoffs with a rested Jamaal Charles playing some of his best football of the year? Yes, yes we did. And was Charles not a guy that was subject to getting dinged up all season? Why yes, yes he was.

So I'm flummoxed that some people seem hell-bent on ignoring the wisdom in doing what we could to ensure that our most dangerous weapon was available for the most important part of our season.

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 03:12 PM
Perfect, until the team really needed him.

Sorry, as bad as everyone WANTS him to be the answer, Charles isnt going to be the type of back you lean on when you need him... He history is starting to prove it to us...

They might wanted to run him Herm style and rape his ass for 40 carries sunday.. But didnt happen and now we know why...

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 03:13 PM
It was a dumb plan. **** keeping people "fresh". Do the Pats keep Brady fresh? KC got lucky San Diego floundered down the stretch.

whats that have to do with Charles getting hurt? This really isnt making sense....

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 03:14 PM
i picked NT/WR/RT (though you could argue C is as needy as RT)

..i can't believe we're going in to year 3 of 3-4 with Edwards as NT....imagine our D with Raji instead of Jackson...

i would love to get Powe, but doubt he last till the low 2nd

we need a FA WR and a draft pick WR...

take the best OL/WR/3-4LB available in the 1st....



we need a late round rb, or a vet FA pickup too..jones is toast...

I am very interested in seeing if the Chiefs are going to be players in the FA period this year...

Chiefnj2
01-10-2011, 03:16 PM
Yes, a quarterback and a RB are the exact same animal.

I mean no team in the league has instituted a timeshare at RB. None of them.

Did we not enter the playoffs with a rested Jamaal Charles playing some of his best football of the year? Yes, yes we did. And was Charles not a guy that was subject to getting dinged up all season? Why yes, yes he was.

So I'm flummoxed that some people seem hell-bent on ignoring the wisdom in doing what we could to ensure that our most dangerous weapon was available for the most important part of our season.

You can't run the guy 400 times a year, I get that. But, you also can't be afraid to use your best players. If he's their playmaker, he has to be ready when they need him. In the future, without one of the weakest schedules in the league, they'll need him a lot more. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like he's up to the task.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2011, 03:17 PM
Charles appeared to have been injured when he did a dumb thing and tried to run someone over on the sideline.

Look at how he was used in the 2nd quarter. It appears to me the plan was to keep him fresh during the regular season and take the governor off a bit during the post-season. He appeared on his way to that kind of game before the Refs let the Ravens dogpile him and he made a poor decision on the sidelines.

Just because the plan didn't go to script doesn't mean it wasn't a good plan. He was fresh and at his best for the playoff run. Then he got injured - shit happens.

I'm calling bullshit on Charles being injured.

Upon further review, you're absolutely right, IMO.

Neither you nor I believe in the bullshit excuse that Charles was injured.

So I just went back and charted every snap Charles took on offense AFTER the supposed injury.

Charles was on the field for 15 snaps after the "injury."

2 carries, including the infamous 4th and a foot.

He was sent into a pass route 5 times, being targeted once, with that being a 15 yard reception.

He was used in pass protection EIGHT times. He picked up a rusher on 3 occasions - against Jameel McClain, Haruki Namamura and Danelle Ellerbe. He whiffed on a pickup attempt on LaDarius Webb.

15 snaps.

3 touches.

Injury my ass.

the Talking Can
01-10-2011, 03:18 PM
I am very interested in seeing if the Chiefs are going to be players in the FA period this year...

seems to me they have to....we need more help at WR than a rookie can provide...we need more help/depth at OL too

you could bag a vet RB for reasonable $$$

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 03:19 PM
seems to me they have to....we need more help at WR than a rookie can provide...we need more help/depth at OL too

you could bag a vet RB for reasonable $$$

If that happens then it sets up for drafting some Line help in the first few rounds...

bevischief
01-10-2011, 03:20 PM
I'm calling bullshit on Charles being injured.

I think it was the Weis flu...

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 03:20 PM
I'm calling bullshit on Charles being injured.

Then what?

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 03:20 PM
I'm calling bullshit on Charles being injured.

As is certainly your prerogative.

But do you really believe they froze him out? I think coaches have some serious egos to them, but I don't think so poorly of them that I truly believe they were icing Charles for the sake of assuaging their own egos.

There is nothing to be gained by sitting him, especially not when they showed they would use him repeatedly early in the game (to great success no less).

If you don't like the injury explanation, what explanation do you like?

When you hear hoofprints, don't go looking for zebras. The conspiracy angles are pretty damn farfetched. Meanwhile, Charles stopped getting the rock after he put his head down and tried to lay out a tackler. Immediately afterward he was laying on the sideline for a spell, never to return to heavy usage.

Occam's razor speaks quite loudly here, IMO.

Just Passin' By
01-10-2011, 03:20 PM
jesus god, does the sanctimonious bullshit from you ever stop?


and to top it off, you literally don't know what you're talking about when it comes to chiefs players and their histories on this board...

you are literally ignorant on the subject


for all that is holy shut the **** up

Shut the fuck up, you flip-flopping douchebag. I know what I'm talking about regarding what's happened since I've been here, which is what I was referring to, and what DJ's and I were posting about.

Reerun_KC
01-10-2011, 03:20 PM
I still they they paniced....

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2011, 03:23 PM
As is certainly your prerogative.

But do you really believe they froze him out? I think coaches have some serious egos to them, but I don't think so poorly of them that I truly believe they were icing Charles for the sake of assuaging their own egos.

There is nothing to be gained by sitting him, especially not when they showed they would use him repeatedly early in the game (to great success no less).

If you don't like the injury explanation, what explanation do you like?

When you hear hoofprints, don't go looking for zebras. The conspiracy angles are pretty damn farfetched. Meanwhile, Charles stopped getting the rock after he put his head down and tried to lay out a tackler. Immediately afterward he was laying on the sideline for a spell, never to return to heavy usage.

Occam's razor speaks quite loudly here, IMO.

Dude, he didn't sit. That's the thing.

You're telling me was was too injured to get the ball - while getting it 3 times, including on the most important play of the game to that point - but he was OK enough to be used EIGHT times in pass protection, picking up the blitz 3 times and fanning once?

If he was hurt, as Haley has implied, he shouldn't have been on the field. He certainly shouldn't have been used in pass protection.

But he was on the field. Quite a bit, in fact.

We just quit using him for anything productive.

Just Passin' By
01-10-2011, 03:24 PM
That's exactly what's been done.
No, it's not. Come on, you know that. Jackson and Cassel never stood a chance with a group here, and the bitching about McCluster has been like that, although to a lesser extent.


There are many people that think any criticism or evaluation of a rookie is unfair or dishonest because "he just needs more time!!!!" and sometimes that's just assinine.

Sometimes a bad player is just bad from the get go.

I agree with this. One extreme is as bad as the other.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 03:28 PM
Dude, he didn't sit. That's the thing.

You're telling me was was too injured to get the ball - while getting it 3 times, including on the most important play of the game to that point - but he was OK enough to be used EIGHT times in pass protection, picking up the blitz 3 times and fanning once?

If he was hurt, as Haley has implied, he shouldn't have been on the field.

But he was on the field. Quite a bit, in fact.

We just quit using him for anything productive.

I'm saying we stopped using him heavily.

If you've got a guy out there nursing a stinger, a concussion or a bum hip (who the hell knows what he hurt), then you don't stop using him entirely - you just stop using him as heavily.

I ask again - what's your explanation? Are you really just going to say "They were too stupid to know he's good..." -- seriously? C'mon, they ran the guy heavily during their offense's most productive period. Oh, and he nearly set a record for YPC. The staff knows he's good. Alternatively -- do you believe Weis and/or Haley were trying to prove a point? Because I'm pretty sure you don't prove anything by pissing down your leg in a playoff game. I don't think icing Charles proves anything.

If you're going to say the simplest explanation is inaccurate, you have to proffer a reasonable alternative. To this point, I've yet to see one. What I know is that he was used heavily for a spell of effective football. Then he lowered his should to deliver a hit against a bigger guy, got treatment on the sideline and was not used nearly as frequently for the rest of the game (nor was he as effective when he was being used).

If he was out there in pass pro, perhaps it was a decoy effect. If he was getting the ball on the 4th down, perhaps it was because that was one of those times where you go to your ace, even if you think he only has a carry or two left in him.

The alternatives just don't make a lot of sense.

El Jefe
01-10-2011, 03:30 PM
http://www.optimumscouting.com/scout-s-notes/articles/2011-nfl-draft-rankings-top-3-4-outside-linebackers.html

http://nflsoup.com/?p=6258

article/rankings on 3-4 olbs. seniors only.

I've said it often and I'll say it again, give me Von Miller.

MOhillbilly
01-10-2011, 03:31 PM
I've said it often and I'll say it again, give me Von Miller.

yup, just have to wait and see.

DJ's left nut
01-10-2011, 03:32 PM
No, it's not. Come on, you know that. Jackson and Cassel never stood a chance with a group here, and the bitching about McCluster has been like that, although to a lesser extent.



I agree with this. One extreme is as bad as the other.

Not true at all.

How many folks came around over the last 4-5 weeks and said "Y'know - maybe Cassel isn't that bad. I apologize, I'm on the wagon", etc, etc....

A lot of people got into Cassel's corner when he performed. Had he performed early, they'd have gotten in there even sooner. Had he continued to perform, they wouldn't have left.

When the man plays quarterback like an NFL player - he gets credit for it. When he shit the bed, well that was called what it was.

As for Jackson - who the hell knows? He's sucked for his entire career, except for spits and starts of productivity which are usually noted in a game thread or a post-game thread. If he does that for any appreciable period of time, it will be commended as well.

I'm just not interested in this argument - it's simply not supportable. Guys that come in here and perform tend to get credit for it. Players that do not, don't. And there's no shortage of crow eaten either.

DN is right - you're painting with a broad brush, and not even doing that very well.

jd1020
01-10-2011, 03:40 PM
I'm going with QB, NT, WR (in that order). I don't care what anyone says about "never gonna happen." I feel we need to get a quality QB and not someone thats gonna be drafted in the 4th or later round to backup a backup. This draft is also stacked with WR's so its not the end of the world to pick up a sleeper like Pettis. Pittsburgh seems to be in a pickle with extending Woodley with the CBA situation and he could very likely end up a FA.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2011, 03:41 PM
I'm saying we stopped using him heavily.

If you've got a guy out there nursing a stinger, a concussion or a bum hip (who the hell knows what he hurt), then you don't stop using him entirely - you just stop using him as heavily.

I ask again - what's your explanation? Are you really just going to say "They were too stupid to know he's good..." -- seriously? C'mon, they ran the guy heavily during their offense's most productive period. Oh, and he nearly set a record for YPC. The staff knows he's good. Alternatively -- do you believe Weis and/or Haley were trying to prove a point? Because I'm pretty sure you don't prove anything by pissing down your leg in a playoff game. I don't think icing Charles proves anything.

If you're going to say the simplest explanation is inaccurate, you have to proffer a reasonable alternative. To this point, I've yet to see one. What I know is that he was used heavily for a spell of effective football. Then he lowered his should to deliver a hit against a bigger guy, got treatment on the sideline and was not used nearly as frequently for the rest of the game (nor was he as effective when he was being used).

If he was out there in pass pro, perhaps it was a decoy effect. If he was getting the ball on the 4th down, perhaps it was because that was one of those times where you go to your ace, even if you think he only has a carry or two left in him.

The alternatives just don't make a lot of sense.

If he's so injured that there's no use for him, get him off the field. Don't play 10 on 11.

I'm not saying Haley's stupid. I'm not saying they don't know how good JC is.

I'm saying they panicked in a tight game, and followed mistakes by making bigger mistakes. You just raped a team for 100 yards rushing in the first half, then start slinging the ball all over the yard.

Like I said, he guy played after said "injury."

If he was hurt badly enough to not be a factor, he shouldn't have been on the field.

But he was. Quite a bit. But on 8 of his 15 snaps after, he was used in pass protection - something he's not real good at to begin with.

If he's healthy enough to be on the field, then he's healthy enough to be used as a weapon, not ignored.

Just Passin' By
01-10-2011, 03:42 PM
Not true at all.

How many folks came around over the last 4-5 weeks and said "Y'know - maybe Cassel isn't that bad. I apologize, I'm on the wagon", etc, etc....

A lot of people got into Cassel's corner when he performed. Had he performed early, they'd have gotten in there even sooner. Had he continued to perform, they wouldn't have left.

When the man plays quarterback like an NFL player - he gets credit for it. When he shit the bed, well that was called what it was.

He performed all year long. People finally gave him credit in week 16. They then proceeded to shit on him all over again right after that. That's just covering their asses and then bashing all over again.

As for Jackson - who the hell knows? He's sucked for his entire career, except for spits and starts of productivity which are usually noted in a game thread or a post-game thread. If he does that for any appreciable period of time, it will be commended as well.

I'm just not interested in this argument - it's simply not supportable. Guys that come in here and perform tend to get credit for it. Players that do not, don't. And there's no shortage of crow eaten either.

DN is right - you're painting with a broad brush, and not even doing that very well.

I don't know who DN is, but this has been going on for the past 2 years, and I'm not painting with a broad brush at all. It's been obvious to witness, and the board split over it.

However, this stuff is not the topic here, so I'll drop it.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 03:48 PM
I don't know who DN is

Don't be coy; you know DeezNutz.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2011, 03:49 PM
He performed all year long. People finally gave him credit in week 16. They then proceeded to shit on him all over again right after that. That's just covering their asses and then bashing all over again.

10/22 - 68 yards - 1 TD - 0 INT

16/28 - 176 yards - 0 TD - 2 INT

16/29 - 156 yards - 0 TD - 0 INT

14/26 - 152 yards - 1 TD - 0 INT

17/31 - 196 yards - 1 TD - 0 INT

11/33 - 115 yards - 0 TD - 2 INT

9/18 - 70 yards - 0 TD - 3 INT



Yeah, he performed all year long.

Some games he performed poorly, some he performed pretty average, some games he performed well.

DeezNutz
01-10-2011, 03:53 PM
That's only 41% of the games this season. Too little to worry about. Luckily, '09 was stellar, but that's everyone else's fault.

OnTheWarpath58
01-10-2011, 03:53 PM
That's only 41% of the games this season. Too little to worry about. Luckily, '09 was stellar, but that's everyone else's fault.

LMAO

ChiefsCountry
01-10-2011, 03:59 PM
I've said it often and I'll say it again, give me Von Miller.

He doesn't fit the mold for an OLB in the Patriots style of defense.

ChiefsCountry
01-10-2011, 04:01 PM
Also how come a dumbass Patriot fan defends Cassel more than any Chief fan. It just puzzles the hell out of me. I guess we all should go to PhinHaven and just tell them how lucky they are to have Thigpen.

jd1020
01-10-2011, 04:01 PM
He doesn't fit the mold for an OLB in the Patriots style of defense.

He'll probably be going earlier than expected anyways with the Texans hiring Phillips.

Saul Good
01-10-2011, 04:09 PM
Im gonna beat the drum for OLB all off season. An upgrade in team speed and a everydown tandum at safety will make this D lethal.

As long as we don't have a Nose, it doesn't really matter who we have at OLB because he's going to have to cover for our NT instead of being used to his potential.

googlegoogle
01-10-2011, 05:52 PM
STEPHEN PAEA, DT, OREGON ST.

Mr. Kotter
01-10-2011, 06:40 PM
I'm going with QB, NT, WR (in that order). I don't care what anyone says about "never gonna happen." I feel we need to get a quality QB and not someone thats gonna be drafted in the 4th or later round to backup a backup. This draft is also stacked with WR's so its not the end of the world to pick up a sleeper like Pettis. Pittsburgh seems to be in a pickle with extending Woodley with the CBA situation and he could very likely end up a FA.

Well, one in five agree with you...so you aren't alone that's for sure.

Pioli Zombie
01-10-2011, 07:19 PM
Since the Chiefs are obviously set at QB for years and at WR they need to either draft a defensive tackle or draft a left tackle and move Albert to right tackle.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-10-2011, 07:22 PM
#1 is QB
#2 is NT
#3 is OLB/WR, they really are interchangeable needs. We don't need a 16 sack guy or a 100 catch WR, we need an 8-10 sack guy or a burner who will catch 55 balls and average about 17 YPC.

Pioli Zombie
01-10-2011, 07:31 PM
#1 is QB
#2 is NT
#3 is OLB/WR, they really are interchangeable needs. We don't need a 16 sack guy or a 100 catch WR, we need an 8-10 sack guy or a burner who will catch 55 balls and average about 17 YPC.
Yeah who wants 16 sacks when you can have 8 or 100 catches when you can have 55? Wait........WHAT???????

Saul Good
01-10-2011, 07:33 PM
Yeah who wants 16 sacks when you can have 8 or 100 catches when you can have 55? Wait........WHAT???????

By your logic, I guess we need a 200 catch guy and a 50 sack guy.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-10-2011, 07:35 PM
Yeah who wants 16 sacks when you can have 8 or 100 catches when you can have 55? Wait........WHAT???????

I'm not saying you'd pass those up, I'm saying those needs aren't as pressing as the need for a QB. Not even close really.

We need a #2 WR with deep speed and a LOLB in the LaMarr Woodley mold.

NT is a bigger need than either one of those, and QB is the biggest by far.

Pioli Zombie
01-10-2011, 07:39 PM
By your logic, I guess we need a 200 catch guy and a 50 sack guy.
No No No. The Chiefs need a solid guy who can get them a guaranteed 3 sacks and a 30 catch guy who will get 53.5 Yards a catch. And a shiticle qb who you can bet your bottom dollar will get 3,000 yards every fucking season NO MATTER WHAT!

Pioli Zombie
01-10-2011, 07:42 PM
I'm not saying you'd pass those up, I'm saying those needs aren't as pressing as the need for a QB. Not even close really.

We need a #2 WR with deep speed and a LOLB in the LaMarr Woodley mold.

NT is a bigger need than either one of those, and QB is the biggest by far.
I actually agree. You have to have a solid NT to even think playing a 3-4. In a perfect world they are Vince Wilfork,Larry Fitzgerald, and a decent QB away from greatness.

Bewbies
01-10-2011, 07:49 PM
I'm not saying you'd pass those up, I'm saying those needs aren't as pressing as the need for a QB. Not even close really.

We need a #2 WR with deep speed and a LOLB in the LaMarr Woodley mold.

NT is a bigger need than either one of those, and QB is the biggest by far.

:thumb:

el borracho
01-10-2011, 08:25 PM
Well, QB would be my draft priority every year until we get an elite one. Unfortunately, I don't believe the Chiefs will a) be in a position to get an elite prospect nor b) be inclined to do so.

Second biggest priority would be a WR to replace Dwayne "No Show" Bowe.

Third priority would be a legit NT.

aturnis
01-11-2011, 02:28 AM
First of all, this should have been a public poll. Second, I am VERY surprised there weren't more votes for OLB. One of our top two needs if you ask me.

1. WR
2. OLB
3. C/NT/OT

aturnis
01-11-2011, 02:38 AM
I'm not saying you'd pass those up, I'm saying those needs aren't as pressing as the need for a QB. Not even close really.

We need a #2 WR with deep speed and a LOLB in the LaMarr Woodley mold.

NT is a bigger need than either one of those, and QB is the biggest by far.

I'm not saying we don't need a QB, b/c even if one were in the Cassel camp, we still obviously need to replace Brodie. Plus, we all know Cassel will get another year. I don't think we take a QB early and I definitely don't think we should, mostly b/c I don't like many of the top guys at all in this draft, and the guys who MIGHT be alright, will not be around.(Gabbert, Newton) I'd really rather take a guy later. WR/OLB are my interchangeable 1 and 2. A guy like Foles won't be there in the 3rd. So I say QB, for me, would be 4th round or later.

Yes, I am an Iowa fan, but I also know we could do A LOT worse(Mallet) than Stanzi. As a backup and a guy to groom, he offers a lot of potential. I'd love to see us take him late if he's sure to get drafted. If not, I pray they get him as a UDFA.

Phobia
01-11-2011, 02:47 AM
This looks to be one of the deepest WR drafts in years. Why would we look to FA to fill the spot?

I think outside of QB or offensive linemen, WR takes the longest to develop into a dependable starter. While there are exceptions, most the good ones break out in year 3.

salame
01-11-2011, 02:55 AM
cam thomas lol

Phobia
01-11-2011, 03:05 AM
KC got lucky San Diego floundered down the stretch.

Lucky? I would submit Clark Hunt got lucky in his wallet and he was the only one. KC got exposed badly.

Wallcrawler
01-11-2011, 05:40 AM
Wide receiver has to be addressed. Theres just no way around it. Bowe was completely invisible in the biggest game of the season and there was absolutely nobody else to throw the football to. The offense cant be as one dimensional as it was this season and have success next year. We need a guy, (or two) that can help open up this passing attack and actually get some separation from the defenders.


Defensively, we need a pure nosetackle. A big, badass, pocket collapsing nosetackle that is going to take away that ability for the opposing QB to step up when Hali comes screaming off the edge to destroy him albeit in the clutches of a full on sleeper hold. A guy who commands two blockers in the running game and helps protect for our linebackers. We get that, this defense improves immensely, immediately.


The third for me is a tossup. I selected OLB to get another pass rusher to complement Hali, but just as badly is the need for a Center. Wiegmann had a good run, but its over.

Saul Good
01-11-2011, 06:27 AM
I think outside of QB or offensive linemen, WR takes the longest to develop into a dependable starter. While there are exceptions, most the good ones break out in year 3.

We don't need one to breakout next year. Plenty of guys are good enough to be a solid #2 as rookies before developing into #1s in their second or third years. There are numerous examples of this in the last few seasons.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 06:31 AM
We don't need one to breakout next year. Plenty of guys are good enough to be a solid #2 as rookies before developing into #1s in their second or third years. There are numerous examples of this in the last few seasons.

You can argue that with this teams offensive gameplan we dont need one to sit a year.

Mr. Kotter
01-11-2011, 09:21 AM
I'm not saying you'd pass those up, I'm saying those needs aren't as pressing as the need for a QB. Not even close really.

We need a #2 WR with deep speed and a LOLB in the LaMarr Woodley mold.

NT is a bigger need than either one of those, and QB is the biggest by far.

I'm not convinced Cassel is the answer, but given the dearth of quality proven QBs in the NFL in general....I don't think "replacing" him will be easy. I think it's more likely that better protection, and a threat opposite Bowe can make him a legitimate NFL quarterback--not unlike Trent Green.

A year ago, our Oline was dogshit; and our receivers were abysmal. This year, the Oline improved to mediocre/serviceable....and our recieving corp remained abysmal, or got worse. Yet as a team we made progress (though not a real 6 game improvement.) I'm convinced it is easier to find another legit WR or two, and a couple of O-linemen....than it would be to find a franchise QB.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-11-2011, 10:39 AM
It's not as hard to find a QB as some think. Until you have a QB who can put a team on his back and win the game when all the chips are on the table, that's the biggest need on your team.

kysirsoze
01-11-2011, 10:53 AM
I'm surprised OLB isn't getting more votes...Vrabel has been a stand-up guy but is, hopefully, done. And I don't want to depend on Studebaker being the answer there. Assuming we can keep Hali, we still need to add one or two OLBs. Next to NT, it's the most important position in that front seven.

I voted for OLB, but I could see pursuing one in free agency. Actually my dream acquisition would be Manny Lawson assuming SF doesn't lock him up. It's my understanding he'll be a UFA, but I may not be up to date on his contract status.

I also voted for QB, only because it's what I wish would happen, not because it's realistic. It will take Cassel being exposed by a brutally tough schedule to get him off his throne, IMO. Here's hoping for a miracle year of development or QBOTF 2012.

Saul Good
01-11-2011, 10:54 AM
It's not as hard to find a QB as some think. Until you have a QB who can put a team on his back and win the game when all the chips are on the table, that's the biggest need on your team.

If Luck changes his mind and falls to us, pick him. Until then, let's focus on building a team that doesn't force the QB to win by himself.

Chiefnj2
01-11-2011, 10:57 AM
It's not as hard to find a QB as some think. Until you have a QB who can put a team on his back and win the game when all the chips are on the table, that's the biggest need on your team.

If Newton falls I bite the bullet and take him. Let him sit a year while someone works with making him more of a pocket QB.

Mr. Kotter
01-11-2011, 11:00 AM
It's not as hard to find a QB as some think. Until you have a QB who can put a team on his back and win the game when all the chips are on the table, that's the biggest need on your team.

There are only so many franchise QBs: Peyton Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Rothlesberger, Ryan, maybe Rivers and Bradford...and there's a drop off to the Flacco, (young) Hasselbeck, Vick, Romo, Sanchez, Eli Manning, Freeman level....and a bigger drop off after that. I think Cassel can belong in the second group, with another WR and better protection.

On a brighter note, if Cassel is as bad as critics think and our schedule as tough as it initially seems it could be (and our "improvement" this year as much of a fraud as some claim,) then we could be in a position to draft Luck (or a top ten pick, anyway) next year, afterall. Heh.

Frosty
01-11-2011, 11:02 AM
Unless Cassel gets hit by truck or something between now and April, I see zero chance of the Chiefs drafting anything other than a late round development QB.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 11:04 AM
With teams like the 49ers, Titans, and Vikings drafting ahead of us, realistically, the only QB I see falling to us would be Gabbert/Locker. I can hope that the Vikings end up with Orton and Gabbert falls to us with the Dolphins picking Locker.

Mallet - 49ers
Newton - Titans
Gabbert/Locker - Vikings/Dolphins

I think either Gabbert/Locker fall farther than expected. Gabbert is getting really overrated right now. He's got the arm and scrambles well but his accuracy and footwork suck. Locker just plain sucked this year.

Gabbert is really the only QB I like as a first round pick. He plays in a spread offense and has work to do but he isnt a gimmick QB like Newton/Locker and Mallet shits himself just alittle bit less than Cassel.

Chiefnj2
01-11-2011, 11:04 AM
There are only so many franchise QBs: Peyton Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Rothlesberger, Ryan, maybe Rivers and Bradford...and there's a drop off to the Flacco, Vick, Romo, Sanchez, Eli Manning, Freeman level....and a bigger drop off after that.

On a brighter note, if Cassel is as bad as critics think and our schedule as tough as it initially seems it could be (and our "improvement" this year as much of a fraud as some claim,) then we could be in a position to draft Luck (or a top ten pick, anyway) next year, afterall. Heh.

You've proven his point. To be consistently competitive you need a franchise QB.

Mr. Kotter
01-11-2011, 11:07 AM
You've proven his point. To be consistently competitive you need a franchise QB.

Then, heck, I guess we should hope we go 0-16 next year then, eh? ;)

DeezNutz
01-11-2011, 11:22 AM
On a brighter note, if Cassel is as bad as critics think and our schedule as tough as it initially seems it could be (and our "improvement" this year as much of a fraud as some claim,) then we could be in a position to draft Luck (or a top ten pick, anyway) next year, afterall. Heh.

I once posted that my hope from the Cassel trade was the unintended consequence of the mistake. At the time, I said that maybe it would put us in position to select Barkley, which ironically could be a possibility.

patteeu
01-11-2011, 11:24 AM
If Luck changes his mind and falls to us, pick him. Until then, let's focus on building a team that doesn't force the QB to win by himself.

Yep.

'Hamas' Jenkins
01-11-2011, 11:53 AM
If Luck changes his mind and falls to us, pick him. Until then, let's focus on building a team that doesn't force the QB to win by himself.

That's a false dichotomy. Picking a QB with a #1 doesn't eliminate every other draft pick you could potentially make in either that year or future years, nor does it eliminate the possibility of adding depth via FA.

milkman
01-11-2011, 11:55 AM
He performed all year long. People finally gave him credit in week 16. They then proceeded to shit on him all over again right after that. That's just covering their asses and then bashing all over again.

No, he didn't "perform" all year.

He sucked ass for most of teh first half of the season.

I jumped on his bandwagon when I saw him actually doing things an NFL QB should be doing, i.e., using good mechanics when dropping back and making throws, stepping up in the pocket, making actual reads and calling audibles.

While others have returned to bashing him, which is their right, because he did regress, I remain on his bandwagon, because I saw those things for the first time in his career, and I believe that he finally has the building blocks to grow into a consistent NFL QB that you can win with.

OnTheWarpath58
01-11-2011, 11:57 AM
1. QB

2. QB

3. QB


It'll never happen, though. We're stuck with Cassel for at least another year or two, maybe more.

Knowing that, I go NT, ILB, OLB, WR, in no particular order, with C and OT not far behind.

patteeu
01-11-2011, 11:58 AM
That's a false dichotomy. Picking a QB with a #1 doesn't eliminate every other draft pick you could potentially make in either that year or future years, nor does it eliminate the possibility of adding depth via FA.

Using your most valuable pick on a guy who may not be any better than the guy you already have isn't a good way to address any of the glaring deficiencies that surround that guy.

patteeu
01-11-2011, 11:58 AM
1. QB

2. QB

3. QB




LOL, and then there's this.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 12:01 PM
Using your most valuable pick on a guy who may not be any better than the guy you already have isn't a good way to address any of the glaring deficiencies that surround that guy.

This draft is fuckin staaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacked at WR. Are you going to draft a OL with the 1st pick? Nope. So what other position on offense besides OL and WR do the Chiefs need help with where using a 1st round pick on wouldn't be completely retarded? QB.

OnTheWarpath58
01-11-2011, 12:02 PM
LOL, and then there's this.

Well, we're not talking about the most important position on the team, are we?

No coincidence that 6 of the remaining 8 teams are QB'd by 1st round picks.

Or we could just sit around for another decade hoping that our 7th round career backup becomes an elite QB, just because Tom Brady did.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 12:04 PM
Well, we're not talking about the most important position on the team, are we?

No coincidence that 6 of the remaining 8 teams are QB'd by 1st round picks.

Or we could just sit around for another decade hoping that our 7th round career backup becomes an elite QB, just because Tom Brady did.

Tom Brady did it his first year as a starter and here we are 3 years later praising a QB who didn't take a 16-0 team to the playoffs :deevee:

Saul Good
01-11-2011, 12:12 PM
This draft is ****in staaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacked at WR. Are you going to draft a OL with the 1st pick? Nope. So what other position on offense besides OL and WR do the Chiefs need help with where using a 1st round pick on wouldn't be completely retarded? QB.

When a draft is stacked at WR, you take a WR if you need a WR. We could get a WR that might go top 10 in other years because there are so many studs.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 12:14 PM
When a draft is stacked at WR, you take a WR if you need a WR. We could get a WR that might go top 10 in other years because there are so many studs.

That wasnt my point... We can look else where with the 1st pick and get a WR in the 2nd/3rd and still end up with a solid WR to lineup opposite of Bowe. With so many people rising the draft charts WR's like Baldwin might not be looking at a 1st round selection anymore.

Halfcan
01-11-2011, 12:20 PM
Head Coach
O cordinator
QB
3 good WR's

Saul Good
01-11-2011, 12:31 PM
That wasnt my point... We can look else where with the 1st pick and get a WR in the 2nd/3rd and still end up with a solid WR to lineup opposite of Bowe. With so many people rising the draft charts WR's like Baldwin might not be looking at a 1st round selection anymore.

You have to look at the value of the slot. If there is a WR that would normally grade out as a top 10 pick, you take him if he falls to you. Getting a high first talent with a low first is a better deal than getting a high second talent with a late second. Compare the draft value charts if you want to see how big that difference is.

kcfanXIII
01-11-2011, 12:32 PM
Top priority should be NT. That doesn't really mean we should draft one in the first round, but they need to have one targeted. A true nose tackle will elevate the whole defense. Vrabel is about to retire(if i had to guess) and Im not sold on belcher in pass coverage, so linebacker is a need, inside and out. There is a need at Wr and interior O-line. Need a center who doesn't have trouble maintaining weight down the stretch. A more physical center turns this run game up to 11. Less finesse and more smashmouth please. Also a playmaking wide receiver who isn't too small to play every down.

Address these needs and we could compete and defend the AFCW crown.

patteeu
01-11-2011, 01:37 PM
This draft is ****in staaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacked at WR. Are you going to draft a OL with the 1st pick? Nope. So what other position on offense besides OL and WR do the Chiefs need help with where using a 1st round pick on wouldn't be completely retarded? QB.

Why limit their first pick in the draft to offense? And then, why exclude 7/12ths of the possible positions that one might select on offense? If you have a more sensible question for me, I'd be glad to entertain it.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 01:38 PM
Why limit their first pick in the draft to offense? And then, why exclude 7/12ths of the possible positions that one might select on offense? If you have a more sensible question for me, I'd be glad to entertain it.

I'm not limiting anything.... Holy reading comprehension.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 01:40 PM
You have to look at the value of the slot. If there is a WR that would normally grade out as a top 10 pick, you take him if he falls to you. Getting a high first talent with a low first is a better deal than getting a high second talent with a late second. Compare the draft value charts if you want to see how big that difference is.

So you would take a player in the 1st that you could take later in the draft? Ya... Thats about the most retarded thing I've ever heard of. That's something Josh McDaniels does.

patteeu
01-11-2011, 01:41 PM
Well, we're not talking about the most important position on the team, are we?

No coincidence that 6 of the remaining 8 teams are QB'd by 1st round picks.

Or we could just sit around for another decade hoping that our 7th round career backup becomes an elite QB, just because Tom Brady did.

Your argument doesn't even support your position. If your theory is that it's so important to draft a QB in the 1st round, why are you wasting a 2nd and a 3rd on QB too?

Seriously, there's a reason no modern era team has ever drafted QB, QB, QB in the first 3 rounds of the draft and it's not because no one, before you, was ever smart enough to think of it.

patteeu
01-11-2011, 01:43 PM
That wasnt my point... We can look else where with the 1st pick and get a WR in the 2nd/3rd and still end up with a solid WR to lineup opposite of Bowe. With so many people rising the draft charts WR's like Baldwin might not be looking at a 1st round selection anymore.

Drafting away from a draft's strength, when you have needs at those areas of strength, doesn't sound like a brilliant idea to me either. Tyson Jackson disagrees with me though so you've got that going for you.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 01:43 PM
Your argument doesn't even support your position. If your theory is that it's so important to draft a QB in the 1st round, why are you wasting a 2nd and a 3rd on QB too?

Seriously, there's a reason no modern era team has ever drafted QB, QB, QB in the first 3 rounds of the draft and it's not because no one, before you, was ever smart enough to think of it.

I'm going to go out on a limb that his 1. 2. 3. comment with QB listed next to them was to emphasize the importance of a QB and not him thinking we should draft a QB 3 rounds in a row.

DeezNutz
01-11-2011, 01:45 PM
Your argument doesn't even support your position. If your theory is that it's so important to draft a QB in the 1st round, why are you wasting a 2nd and a 3rd on QB too?

Seriously, there's a reason no modern era team has ever drafted QB, QB, QB in the first 3 rounds of the draft and it's not because no one, before you, was ever smart enough to think of it.

Ummm...I believe you've missed the point of the hyperbole. What are the three most important factors in real estate?

1. Location
2. Location
3. Location

What position do we need?

1. Quarterback
2. Quarterback
3. Quarterback

patteeu
01-11-2011, 01:45 PM
I'm not limiting anything.... Holy reading comprehension.

Did you not discount the idea of drafting OL or WR with the first round pick? I think you did.

This draft is ****in staaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacked at WR. Are you going to draft a OL with the 1st pick? Nope. So what other position on offense besides OL and WR do the Chiefs need help with where using a 1st round pick on wouldn't be completely retarded? QB.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 01:45 PM
Drafting away from a draft's strength, when you have needs at those areas of strength, doesn't sound like a brilliant idea to me either. Tyson Jackson disagrees with me though so you've got that going for you.

Ya. Lets draft someone like Baldwin just because before guys like Blackmon busted on the scene he was targeted to go top 15. Now he's projected as maybe bouncing to the second. But by all means lets take him at 21 instead of perhaps trading down and taking him later.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 01:47 PM
Did you not discount the idea of drafting OL or WR with the first round pick? I think you did.

You're a dumbass and can't comprehend what you read.

patteeu
01-11-2011, 01:49 PM
You're a dumbass and can't comprehend what you read.

:LOL: OK. Hit me up when you figure out how to dumb your question down enough for it to make sense.

milkman
01-11-2011, 01:49 PM
You're a dumbass and can't comprehend what you read.

Perhaps he can't comprehend what he read in your post because you're a dumbass that writes poorly.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 01:49 PM
:LOL: OK. Hit me up when you figure out how to dumb your question down enough for it to make sense.

I already did in previous posts generated at dumbasses in your IQ range.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 01:50 PM
Perhaps he can't comprehend what he read in your post because you're a dumbass that writes poorly.

Or perhaps he decided to not read the entire conversation and only came in at the end to look like a moron just like you.

milkman
01-11-2011, 01:53 PM
Or perhaps he decided to not read the entire conversation and only came in at the end to look like a moron just like you.

No.

It's you.

You haven't yet clearly made a point.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 01:54 PM
No.

It's you.

You haven't yet clearly made a point.

I believe I have. It's posted in this thread. If you can't find it might I suggest visiting your local Wally-world for an eye check?

patteeu
01-11-2011, 02:07 PM
I believe I have. It's posted in this thread. If you can't find it might I suggest visiting your local Wally-world for an eye check?

I understood all along that OTW58 was using hyperbole. I honestly don't understand the point you were trying to make.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 02:13 PM
That wasnt my point... We can look else where with the 1st pick and get a WR in the 2nd/3rd and still end up with a solid WR to lineup opposite of Bowe. With so many people rising the draft charts WR's like Baldwin might not be looking at a 1st round selection anymore.

Here you go bud. I'll quote it for ya.

This was all directed at someone shooting down the idea of going after a QB in round 1. That's why I was only focused on the offensive side of the ball. We can afford to pick a QB in the first, if one falls or we trade up for one, and still walk away with every single need. There are still going to be WR's when our second or third pick comes around, because there are so many of them, that will be more than serviceable opposite Bowe. No one is picking OL in the first because there are far more important and game changing positions in football...

All caught up now?

Halfcan
01-11-2011, 02:20 PM
Perhaps he can't comprehend what he read in your post because you're a dumbass that writes poorly.

:LOL:LMAO

patteeu
01-11-2011, 02:22 PM
Here you go bud. I'll quote it for ya.

This was all directed at someone shooting down the idea of going after a QB in round 1. That's why I was only focused on the offensive side of the ball. We can afford to pick a QB in the first, if one falls or we trade up for one, and still walk away with every single need. There are still going to be WR's when our second or third pick comes around, because there are so many of them, that will be more than serviceable opposite Bowe. No one is picking OL in the first because there are far more important and game changing positions in football...

All caught up now?

Thanks, I read that the first time. I don't understand why you insist that we draft an offensive player with that first pick though. I also don't understand why you take OL off the table. I understand, but don't agree with, your rationale for waiting to take a WR later in the draft.

Here are the positions I'd lean toward in the first round: WR, OL, LB, NT. If a guy as coveted as Andrew Luck somehow fell to us, I'd be willing to take him just like I'd be willing to take an unbelievable value at CB, RB, or DE. It would be hard for me to consider taking a TE, FB, or S with that pick. I'm not particularly interested in trading up. I'd trade down if we got a favorable return and if we believe the guy we want will still be there when we pick.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 02:28 PM
Thanks, I read that the first time. I don't understand why you insist that we draft an offensive player with that first pick though.

Where am I INSISTING we draft offense in round 1? :facepalm:

patteeu
01-11-2011, 02:35 PM
Where am I INSISTING we draft offense in round 1? :facepalm:

You asked me a question about what position we should take with our first round pick and you limited it to offense (minus WR or OL). Do I need to quote you again?

jd1020
01-11-2011, 02:36 PM
You asked me a question about what position we should take with our first round pick and you limited it to offense (minus WR or OL). Do I need to quote you again?

I answered my own question. I wasnt asking you a damn thing. Quote away, idiot.

MOhillbilly
01-11-2011, 02:39 PM
hahahahahaahaaaaaa. comedy.

patteeu
01-11-2011, 02:44 PM
I answered my own question. I wasnt asking you a damn thing. Quote away, idiot.

Don't quote my posts and then address your question to "you" if you don't want it to look like you're asking me a question. Beyond that, it's not the greatest of ideas to ask stupid questions and answer them yourself with stupid answers, in general, but if that's your thing, knock yourself out.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 02:46 PM
Don't quote my posts and then address your question to "you" if you don't want it to look like you're asking me a question. Beyond that, it's not the greatest of ideas to ask stupid questions and answer them yourself with stupid answers, in general, but if that's your thing, knock yourself out.

Thanks for pointing that out. I'll be sure to consider your level of dumbassery next time I quote you.

Saul Good
01-11-2011, 02:53 PM
Here you go bud. I'll quote it for ya.

This was all directed at someone shooting down the idea of going after a QB in round 1. That's why I was only focused on the offensive side of the ball. We can afford to pick a QB in the first, if one falls or we trade up for one, and still walk away with every single need. There are still going to be WR's when our second or third pick comes around, because there are so many of them, that will be more than serviceable opposite Bowe. No one is picking OL in the first because there are far more important and game changing positions in football...

All caught up now?

I'm all caught up on my daily dose of stupid. I especially enjoyed the part about how nobody drafts OL in the first round. Also, your strategy of getting two mediocre players instead of an elite player and a mediocre player was illuminating.

jd1020
01-11-2011, 02:55 PM
I'm all caught up on my daily dose of stupid. I especially enjoyed the part about how nobody drafts OL in the first round. Also, your strategy of getting two mediocre players instead of an elite player and a mediocre player was illuminating.

Ya. Getting Baldwin at 21 is clearly more elite than getting someone like Baldwin later in the first or early second. My bad.

Mr. Kotter
01-11-2011, 04:15 PM
Well, at least no one's accused Pioli of being a Nazi for trading the farm for Cassel....that I'm aware of anyway. 200+ posts without Godwin's Law....and a QB discussion. Nice. Heh.

scott free
01-19-2011, 04:48 PM
Without going through the thread, would any of you draftnicks be kind enough to tell me who the top DT prospects are this year?

It seems like free agency may not be the cure for NT from what i've read here at the Planet, Aubrayo Franklin is a decent possibility but not a true stud, Ngata is a pipe dream, no way baltimore lets him get away.

What young firebrand can we draft?

ChiefsCountry
01-19-2011, 04:55 PM
Without going through the thread, would any of you draftnicks be kind enough to tell me who the top DT prospects are this year?

It seems like free agency may not be the cure for NT from what i've read here at the Planet, Aubrayo Franklin is a decent possibility but not a true stud, Ngata is a pipe dream, no way baltimore lets him get away.

What young firebrand can we draft?

Jerrell Powe out of Ole Miss is the man we should be looking at.

scott free
01-19-2011, 04:59 PM
Jerrell Powe out of Ole Miss is the man we should be looking at.

Thanx CC, i'll look him up.

Sweet Daddy Hate
01-19-2011, 05:17 PM
Whatever we do, DO NOT DRAFT A QB OR QB DEPTH./stasis-lover.

BigMeatballDave
01-19-2011, 05:24 PM
I didnt vote QB because, realistically, its just not happening.

salame
01-19-2011, 05:26 PM
I didnt vote QB because, realistically, its just not happening.

Would you want Locker?
I think he is all that is going to be there in the 1st
We probably won't even draft a developmental QB

BigMeatballDave
01-19-2011, 05:36 PM
Would you want Locker?
I think he is all that is going to be there in the 1st
We probably won't even draft a developmental QBI'm all for drafting a QB, I just dont see Pioli doing it now.

Sweet Daddy Hate
01-19-2011, 05:41 PM
Would you want Locker?
I think he is all that is going to be there in the 1st
We probably won't even draft a developmental QB

Or sign a Vet. We must not undermine delicate ego's and confidence.