PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Would You Greg Little?


BigCatDaddy
04-29-2011, 08:40 AM
If he slips to the our pick in the 2nd do you still pull the trigger on this guy? We are still really thin at WR and Little, Baldwin, and Bowe could give us one of the most dynamic WR's core for years to come. With Charles at RB that's a lot of weapons on the offense.

We could still come back and take Powe and Sheppard in the 3rd to sure up the DT and MLB spot and possibly get that RT in the 4th. That lives the only major hole at OLB which hopefully Sheffield can step up and take and of course FA eventually to any remainging holes.

Would you... the whole thing?

ChiefGator
04-29-2011, 08:44 AM
I would Torrey Smith, if somehow he fell. I might Hankerson as well.

But those guys won't drop to us obviously. But, I would.

Chiefnj2
04-29-2011, 08:51 AM
Yes. In a heart beat.

eazyb81
04-29-2011, 08:53 AM
No. Stupid waste of resources.

BPA is great, but only to an extent.

COchief
04-29-2011, 08:58 AM
NO! NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT

Chiefnj2
04-29-2011, 09:07 AM
WR is still a need for KC. The rules favor a passing game, so you need to be at least 3 deep. The rumblings of King and Gretz on Bowe not being around for a 2nd contract are bothersome. If you have Little or Smith or Hankerson rated ahead of Houston/Sheard/Ayers/Reed/OL then take them.

iowachieffan
04-29-2011, 09:10 AM
NO! NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT

We have 2 3rd round picks and there will still be good NT available during that round.

BigCatDaddy
04-29-2011, 09:11 AM
NO! NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT NT

I addressed this with Powe in the 3rd. The only other NT that might go in the 2nd is Ellis.

COchief
04-29-2011, 09:11 AM
WR is still a need for KC. The rules favor a passing game, so you need to be at least 3 deep. The rumblings of King and Gretz on Bowe not being around for a 2nd contract are bothersome. If you have Little or Smith or Hankerson rated ahead of Houston/Sheard/Ayers/Reed/OL then take them.

This message approved by Matt Millen.

I think we have way too many holes to be blowing picks on luxuries like WR when our Oline, NT, and LBs could use attention. I sure would love to have Mt Cody (or Raji instead of Jackson but that's another scenario) instead of the stupid little offensive toy they drafted last year.

COchief
04-29-2011, 09:13 AM
I addressed this with Powe in the 3rd. The only other NT that might go in the 2nd is Ellis.

Fair enough, I am hoping they go BPA on Oline, LB, and maybe RB if it means the end of the Thomas Jones era.

BigCatDaddy
04-29-2011, 09:13 AM
WR is still a need for KC. The rules favor a passing game, so you need to be at least 3 deep. The rumblings of King and Gretz on Bowe not being around for a 2nd contract are bothersome. If you have Little or Smith or Hankerson rated ahead of Houston/Sheard/Ayers/Reed/OL then take them.

And injuries do occur.

The Packers chose Nelson at the top of the 2nd despite having Driver and Jennings so it has some merrit.

BigCatDaddy
04-29-2011, 09:15 AM
Fair enough, I am hoping they go BPA on Oline, LB, and maybe RB if it means the end of the Thomas Jones era.

C is the only position that I think needs to be addressed right now in the draft and I would like to see Taylor taken in the later rounds. Asamoah, Albert, Lilja and Richardson will be fine for now.

COchief
04-29-2011, 09:16 AM
And injuries do occur.

The Packers chose Nelson at the top of the 2nd despite having Driver and Jennings so it has some merrit.

I see your point, however please don't compare our team to complete teams. We played a complete team in the playoffs and were completely outclassed. The upper echelon teams (Steelers, Pack, Ravens, Jets, Pats) can afford to go strictly BPA, IMO we are nowhere near that level yet.

milkman
04-29-2011, 09:20 AM
I see your point, however please don't compare our team to complete teams. We played a complete team in the playoffs and were completely outclassed. The upper echelon teams (Steelers, Pack, Ravens, Jets, Pats) can afford to go strictly BPA, IMO we are nowhere near that level yet.

We aren't a complete team to be sure, and this lockout came at the worst possible time for the continued development of this team.

However, if this team had receivers in that playoff game, they would have had a chance to compete.

I'm not sure I would make the selection, but it wouldn't be the worst decision for this team.

BigCatDaddy
04-29-2011, 09:23 AM
I see your point, however please don't compare our team to complete teams. We played a complete team in the playoffs and were completely outclassed. The upper echelon teams (Steelers, Pack, Ravens, Jets, Pats) can afford to go strictly BPA, IMO we are nowhere near that level yet.

No, but by taking Little you now have 1 more complete part set for the future. You are pretty good in the secondary and WR's core. If you finish what the draft I laid out you only have 2 holes to fill on the defense with DE and OLB. You might need a T and C which can be address fairly easy.

COchief
04-29-2011, 09:32 AM
We aren't a complete team to be sure, and this lockout came at the worst possible time for the continued development of this team.

However, if this team had receivers in that playoff game, they would have had a chance to compete.

I'm not sure I would make the selection, but it wouldn't be the worst decision for this team.

Agreed, however I am basing my opinion that our 1st round WR should start. We have weak starters on our team in many areas (C RT ILB OLB NT) that I think you fill before adding "backup" (yes I know 3rd WRs play a bigger role) type players. This is why the two 2nd round picks last year pissed me off, I felt they were luxuries we couldn't afford yet. However, at least they both added the return ability which added some value even though they weren't "starters". To sum up, I'd say if the WR was an exceptional value I would agree, but only if there wasn't any probable immediate starters at one of our positions of need.

Chiefnj2
04-29-2011, 09:37 AM
This message approved by Matt Millen.

I think we have way too many holes to be blowing picks on luxuries like WR when our Oline, NT, and LBs could use attention. I sure would love to have Mt Cody (or Raji instead of Jackson but that's another scenario) instead of the stupid little offensive toy they drafted last year.

In today's NFL wide receivers aren't luxuries, they are necessities.

Chiefnj2
04-29-2011, 09:39 AM
The upper echelon teams (Steelers, Pack, Ravens, Jets, Pats) can afford to go strictly BPA, IMO we are nowhere near that level yet.

Did the upper echelon teams become "upper echelon" by going position of need, or strict BPA. We know how the Pats did it. Jets appear to go BPA as well taking a CB in the first last year when they had Revis and Cromartie. The Ravens took the best athlete last night even though he had red flags up the wahzoo.

Saccopoo
04-29-2011, 09:43 AM
No.

We just got the big, dynamic, stretch the field, crossbar killing red zone threat receiver - picking Little would be slightly redundant. Besides, Little does have some character issues that I think puts him outside the possibility of the Chiefs selecting him.

With guys like Sam Acho (OLB), Rod Hudson (C), Ben Ijalana (RT), Akeem Ayers (OLB) and Ryan Williams (RB) potentially there for the Chiefs in the second round, I think that they need to look somewhere other than WR.

However, I wouldn't mind a sure hands, possession type receiver in the third or fourth like Austin Pettis or Vincent Brown.

BigCatDaddy
04-29-2011, 09:45 AM
No.

We just got the big, dynamic, stretch the field, crossbar killing red zone threat receiver - picking Little would be slightly redundant. Besides, Little does have some character issues that I think puts him outside the possibility of the Chiefs selecting him.

With guys like Sam Acho (OLB), Rod Hudson (C), Ben Ijalana (RT), Akeem Ayers (OLB) and Ryan Williams (RB) potentially there for the Chiefs in the second round, I think that they need to look somewhere other than WR.

However, I wouldn't mind a sure hands, possession type receiver in the third or fourth like Austin Pettis or Vincent Brown.

Fair enough, but I really think we need to hit WR again in this draft.

Micjones
04-29-2011, 09:47 AM
No, no, no! We need OLB or NT help in Round Two!

DaKCMan AP
04-29-2011, 09:48 AM
No. Again, like Hankerson, but even moreso, Little does not complement Bowe and Baldwin. He's another big, physical WR. If we grab another wideout it should be a faster, quicker, shifty guy who lines up in the slot and finds holes in the secondary. Little, Bowe, Baldwin, and Hankerson are all guys you line up on the outside.

notorious
04-29-2011, 09:57 AM
Little, Baldwin, and Bowe could give us one of the most dynamic WR's core for years to come.


I love your enthusiasm, but I will believe it when I see it.


I never trust any draft pick to work out, much less excel.

BigCatDaddy
04-29-2011, 10:10 AM
I love your enthusiasm, but I will believe it when I see it.


I never trust any draft pick to work out, much less excel.

Right, which is why I said "could" instead of "would".

El Jefe
04-29-2011, 10:37 AM
No.

We just got the big, dynamic, stretch the field, crossbar killing red zone threat receiver - picking Little would be slightly redundant. Besides, Little does have some character issues that I think puts him outside the possibility of the Chiefs selecting him.

With guys like Sam Acho (OLB), Rod Hudson (C), Ben Ijalana (RT), Akeem Ayers (OLB) and Ryan Williams (RB) potentially there for the Chiefs in the second round, I think that they need to look somewhere other than WR.

However, I wouldn't mind a sure hands, possession type receiver in the third or fourth like Austin Pettis or Vincent Brown.

Good post.

Mr. Laz
04-29-2011, 10:40 AM
strict BPA in the 2nd round and i don't really care what position it is, outside of Kicker/Punter.

we can use a quality player just about anywhere

milkman
04-29-2011, 10:46 AM
I'll tell you, I didn't watch college football this past season as much as I have in the past, which is the reason I haven't discussed any of thes players.

But the receiver I am most intrigued with that remains in this draft is Edmund Gates.

Where is expected to be picked, and how does he fit with Bowe and Baldwin?

Specifically, does he he a skillset that would work in the slot?

DaKCMan AP
04-29-2011, 10:48 AM
I'll tell you, I didn't watch college football this past season as much as I have in the past, which is the reason I haven't discussed any of thes players.

But the receiver I am most intrigued with that remains in this draft is Edmund Gates.

Where is expected to be picked, and how does he fit with Bowe and Baldwin?

Specifically, does he he a skillset that would work in the slot?

What I don't like about Gates is he's a development project. He doesn't run good routes, has ok hands, and needs to get stronger. He is a burner, though. To me, he seems like more of a typical Raider's type reach/pick. We'd have to get him in the 4th or lower, IMO. I want guys who can come in and contribute immediately with our 3rds.

Coach
04-29-2011, 10:51 AM
I'm open to anything, but the Chiefs have alot of holes to fill. I mean, besides the obvious NT and probably a OLB/ILB depending on the situation, I still feel that KC still need some depth for safety play (remember how bad the safety position was when Lewis got hurt?) and some o-linemen as well as a back-up RB (Thomas Jones isn't getting it done too much) as well as a back-up QB (Brokie? Damn)

milkman
04-29-2011, 10:52 AM
What I don't like about Gates is he's a development project. He doesn't run good routes, has ok hands, and needs to get stronger. He is a burner, though. To me, he seems like more of a typical Raider's type reach/pick. We'd have to get him in the 4th or lower, IMO. I want guys who can come in and contribute immediately with our 3rds.

I knew from what I had seen and heard that he was a project, so I was hoping he was projected 4th or later.

Mr. Laz
04-29-2011, 11:00 AM
I'm open to anything, but the Chiefs have alot of holes to fill. I mean, besides the obvious NT and probably a OLB/ILB depending on the situation, I still feel that KC still need some depth for safety play (remember how bad the safety position was when Lewis got hurt?) and some o-linemen as well as a back-up RB (Thomas Jones isn't getting it done too much) as well as a back-up QB (Brokie? Damn)
what don't the Chiefs need?

QB - Yes
WR - Yes
OT - Yes
OG - If water leaves, yes
C - Yes, big time
RB - Yes (a little bit)
TE - probably not, but if they are going to run a lot, double TE's would work

DE - Probably can't considering but there is a need
NT - YES, big time
LB - Yes (ILB and OLB)
CB - not really but you can never have too many
S - Depends on how much you like Lewis, still need backups because we've had a lot of injuries back there

2 maybe 3 positions on entire team where we don't have a real need.

BPA baby

MoreLemonPledge
04-29-2011, 11:33 AM
It will be addressed in FA.

Pasta Giant Meatball
04-29-2011, 04:48 PM
No.

We just got the big, dynamic, stretch the field, crossbar killing red zone threat receiver - picking Little would be slightly redundant. Besides, Little does have some character issues that I think puts him outside the possibility of the Chiefs selecting him.

With guys like Sam Acho (OLB), Rod Hudson (C), Ben Ijalana (RT), Akeem Ayers (OLB) and Ryan Williams (RB) potentially there for the Chiefs in the second round, I think that they need to look somewhere other than WR.

However, I wouldn't mind a sure hands, possession type receiver in the third or fourth like Austin Pettis or Vincent Brown.

Agree 100 percent.