PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Drafting DeCastro at 11th overall, really?


Pages : [1] 2 3 4

Buckweath
03-21-2012, 10:50 AM
In 2010 and 2011, The Chiefs respectively selected Jon Asamoah as the 68th overall pick and Rodney Hudson as the 55th overall pick. Both guys, especially Asamoah have shown that they can potentially become among the best guards (or center in Hudson`s case) in the league. As a matter of fact, I have seen an analyst rank Asamoah as the 8th best guard in the NFL in 2011.

This makes it pretty clear in my mind that Pioli can find good guard prospects in round 2 or beyond. Now why do so many of you want to draft DeCastro with a high 1st round pick, even if the guy is one of the best guard prospect in recent times? Seriously, DeCastro wouldn`t compensate for Cassell`s deficiencies and IMO no matter how good of an Oline we try to build, our offense will always be limited with Cassell under center, even if we are to have the best Oline in the NFL.

Now it`s not impossible that our defense becomes the best in the league as soon as this year and thus our 1st round pick should definitly be a defensive prospect.

Gravedigger
03-21-2012, 10:54 AM
Decastro at G Asamoah at G Hudson at C for the next half a decade... What's so hard to see?

suds79
03-21-2012, 11:00 AM
Decastro at G Asamoah at G Hudson at C for the next half a decade... What's so hard to see?

I think his point was you could also say

(any mid round Guard), Asamoah at G Hudson at C for the next half a decade.

Dicky McElephant
03-21-2012, 11:00 AM
Decastro at G Asamoah at G Hudson at C for the next half a decade... What's so hard to see?

You can grab an OG in the 2nd-3rd round range.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 11:00 AM
I'm not sure how I feel about moving Hudson to C.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 11:02 AM
We are going to be a running team that uses play action to make Cassel look like a legit QB. To do that we need an outstanding oline. Decastro would give us that.

Besides that who else are we going to draft at 11?

I think a top 12 pick should start day one. So what starting positions do we have available?

WR? - Nope
RB - Nope
OT- Nope
QB - Sure, but there will not be a starting QB to draft.
OG - Yes
C - Yes, if we move Hudson to G.
TE - Nope
FB - Whatever

Defense

DLine - Yes, but draft doesn't have a guy who fits our system that would warrant that high of a pick.

LB - Maybe, kind of like the OG position, could find way to improve.

CB - Nope - Need depth, not starters.
S - Nope -Need depth, not starters.

I see our needs as OG, DLine, NT, LB because thats were we could plug someone in.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 11:03 AM
I'm not sure how I feel about moving Hudson to C.

Then you need Kontz at the bottom of RD 1.

Dave Lane
03-21-2012, 11:03 AM
The good / bad news is we are set at a ton of positions. So unless you want to reach for Tannehill at #11 I don't know where to go thats better. A trade down would be most awesome. If we could trade down to top of the 2nd for a extra first next year that would be a fantastic possibility to get a good QB.

Richardson at #11 would be better but I'm betting he's gone.

Micjones
03-21-2012, 11:04 AM
We can draft a Guard in the Middle Rounds.

Detoxing
03-21-2012, 11:07 AM
Decastro at G Asamoah at G Hudson at C for the next half a decade... What's so hard to see?

I agree. I wouldn't have a problem with it, really. I know others would a have a problem with the whole positional value thing, but with this roster being at the point that it's at, i don't feel like that's as important as it was in years past.

If DeCastro is the best player on your board and he fits a position of need, then go for it.

Poe isn't worthy of #11 and even Tannehill is a reach, though I'd welcome that pick as well for obvious reasons.

This is the first draft in a long time where i can say i don't really care what the Chiefs do as long it's not a significant reach ala Tyson Jackson.

suds79
03-21-2012, 11:08 AM
Honestly you'd be better off simply taking the best available pass rusher vs a Guard IMO.

They just don't matter all that much and can be found in the mid rounds.

But I'd like to see the Chiefs trade down more than anything.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 11:08 AM
I think Richardson and Tannehill are gone by 11.

As for the "get a guard later" argument. The FA market for top guards actually justifies the pick.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 11:08 AM
Then you need Kontz at the bottom of RD 1.

I would be good with moving down for him.

What's the opinion of Hudson? Is he a better G or C?

Dicky McElephant
03-21-2012, 11:09 AM
I would be good with moving down for him.

What's the opinion of Hudson? Is he a better G or C?

Honestly....I'd rather leave him at G. He played guard in college and he did well when he played guard last year. Trade down if you can and draft Konz.

suds79
03-21-2012, 11:10 AM
I would be good with moving down for him.

What's the opinion of Hudson? Is he a better G or C?

I don't think anybody has seen enough of him to know. I'm not all that concerned with it to be honest. We know he's starting next year.

The Bad Guy
03-21-2012, 11:12 AM
I'd rather keep Hudson at guard and draft Konz by trading down.

spanky 52
03-21-2012, 11:13 AM
I think Richardson and Tannehill are gone by 11.

As for the "get a guard later" argument. The FA market for top guards actually justifies the pick.

Lot of truth here. I'll be happy with a 10 year player at guard.

CHENZ A!
03-21-2012, 11:14 AM
Don't care, take the BPA all day.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 11:15 AM
Honestly you'd be better off simply taking the best available pass rusher vs a Guard IMO.

They just don't matter all that much and can be found in the mid rounds.

But I'd like to see the Chiefs trade down more than anything.
Yeah, the guard position doesn't matter. You can find them cheap in the middle rounds. If that was true then how do you explain this?

Steve Hutchinson 7 years 49 million in 2006
Alan Faneca 5 year 40 million in 2008
Carl Nicks 5 years 45 million in 2012
Ben Grubbs 5 years 36 million in 2012

The price tags for OG's in increasing. Why do people want to draft LT, QB, and now G's?

Because there is a financial advantage when you can lock up the position under a rookie contract. Drafting DeCastro is as mush as a business decision as it would be a football decision.

Bump
03-21-2012, 11:17 AM
I'm totally down to draft DeCastro, the only way we'll do shit this season is running the ball. A good oline usually equals success. Taking a chance on a linebacker is a little risky there and the only other option I see is drafting Tannehill or trading down and taking someone like Brockers or Hightower, which would probably be ideal.

Bump
03-21-2012, 11:18 AM
Honestly you'd be better off simply taking the best available pass rusher vs a Guard IMO.

They just don't matter all that much and can be found in the mid rounds.

But I'd like to see the Chiefs trade down more than anything.

They don't matter that much? C'MON MAN

JFC

Extra Point
03-21-2012, 11:21 AM
I'm with Hoover on this. Maneri's still on contract, isn't he?

suds79
03-21-2012, 11:21 AM
They don't matter that much? C'MON MAN

JFC

They don't. Trailing only behind FB, Centers & Guards are the least important positions on that side of the ball.

If they did, they would be drafted higher a lot more often. Lets not pretend we're talking LTs here.

Bump
03-21-2012, 11:23 AM
They don't. Trailing only behind FB, Centers & Guards are the least important positions on that side of the ball.

If they did, they would be drafted higher a lot more often. Lets not pretend we're talking LTs here.

ok, that's pretty stupid dude.

GordonGekko
03-21-2012, 11:24 AM
A freaking guard anywhere near the 1st round is a bonafide Cincinnati Bengal blow of a draft choice right there. No way they draft a guard 1st round, that would be crasy!!!

suds79
03-21-2012, 11:26 AM
ok, that's pretty stupid dude.

Expand on that. Come on. Which part?

Are Guards and Centers not the least important positions behind FB on O? Can't deny that.

Do Guards not typically get drafted very high?

You're trying to pretend that positional value doesn't matter. It does. I know this is KC so everybody in this area has a hard on for trying to build the best possible O line ever but get real. It's a non impact position.

Where did Will Shields get drafted? Where did Carl Nicks get drafted? Want to play the game of great Guards and where they were drafted? I'll play. Lets see who wins.

GordonGekko
03-21-2012, 11:29 AM
Expand on that. Come on. Which part?

Are Guards and Centers not the least important positions behind FB on O? Can't deny that.

Do Guards not typically get drafted very high?

You're trying to pretend that positional value doesn't matter. It does. I know this is KC so everybody in this area has a hard on for trying to build the best possible O line ever but get real. It's a non impact position.

Where did Will Shields get drafted? Where did Carl Nicks get drafted? Want to play the game of great Guards and where they were drafted? I'll play. Lets see who wins.

Add Brian Waters to that argument. A guard at the 11th pick overall just screams to the fans that the franchise not trying to compete.

Brock
03-21-2012, 11:30 AM
I'm totally down to draft DeCastro, the only way we'll do shit this season is running the ball. A good oline usually equals success. Taking a chance on a linebacker is a little risky there and the only other option I see is drafting Tannehill or trading down and taking someone like Brockers or Hightower, which would probably be ideal.

OK, that's pretty stupid dude.

loochy
03-21-2012, 11:30 AM
A guard at the 11th pick overall just screams to the fans that the franchise not trying to compete.

So does consistently having an awful quarterback with no attempts to upgrade

Detoxing
03-21-2012, 11:33 AM
Yeah, the guard position doesn't matter. You can find them cheap in the middle rounds. If that was true then how do you explain this?

Steve Hutchinson 7 years 49 million in 2006
Alan Faneca 5 year 40 million in 2008
Carl Nicks 5 years 45 million in 2012
Ben Grubbs 5 years 36 million in 2012

The price tags for OG's in increasing. Why do people want to draft LT, QB, and now G's?

Because there is a financial advantage when you can lock up the position under a rookie contract. Drafting DeCastro is as mush as a business decision as it would be a football decision.

Truth.

suds79
03-21-2012, 11:33 AM
I'm totally down to draft DeCastro, the only way we'll do shit this season is running the ball. A good oline usually equals success.

Having a healthy Jamaal Charles = success.

Amazing how when we had a talent like that, he averaged 6+ yards per carry. Oline must have been pretty good. Good for us.

Then he gets hurt and our Oline is crap and we need a Guard ASAP. Weird.

loochy
03-21-2012, 11:34 AM
Having a healthy Jamaal Charles = success.

Amazing how when we had a talent like that, he averaged 6+ yards per carry. Oline must have been pretty good. Good for us.

Then he gets hurt and our Oline is crap and we need a Guard ASAP. Weird.

Imagine how good he would be with a better guard?

Brock
03-21-2012, 11:35 AM
Yeah, the guard position doesn't matter. You can find them cheap in the middle rounds. If that was true then how do you explain this?

Steve Hutchinson 7 years 49 million in 2006
Alan Faneca 5 year 40 million in 2008
Carl Nicks 5 years 45 million in 2012
Ben Grubbs 5 years 36 million in 2012

The price tags for OG's in increasing. Why do people want to draft LT, QB, and now G's?

Because there is a financial advantage when you can lock up the position under a rookie contract. Drafting DeCastro is as mush as a business decision as it would be a football decision.


That's nonsense. Those guys all had to prove they could play before getting paid like that. Look at where they were drafted.

Rausch
03-21-2012, 11:37 AM
I wouldn't be jumping up and down about it but at least it makes more sense than Tyson fucking Jackson...

RustShack
03-21-2012, 11:38 AM
You can find a good guard in the middle rounds just like you can with any other position. But odds are you aren't finding the best guard since Hutchinson like DeCastro is.

RustShack
03-21-2012, 11:40 AM
Anyone who doesn't want DeCastro is a major hypocrite if they didn't like the Jackson pick either.

Brock
03-21-2012, 11:41 AM
Anyone who doesn't want DeCastro is a major hypocrite if they didn't like the Jackson pick either.

What? ROFL

suds79
03-21-2012, 11:41 AM
You can find a good guard in the middle rounds just like you can with any other position.

Would you say Carl Nicks is "good"? I'd say he's considered the best Guard in the league.

I'm not so sure about that "just like any other position" comment either. Look at LTs & QBs.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 12:28 PM
That's nonsense. Those guys all had to prove they could play before getting paid like that. Look at where they were drafted.
You are missing the point.

Brock
03-21-2012, 12:31 PM
You are missing the point.

Don't clarify what your point is or anything.

CupidStunt
03-21-2012, 12:50 PM
It's embarrassing, honestly. But typical of a fanbase like the Chiefs'.

11 is still the spot to grab a LT, WR, DE or CB, unless a QB with questions drops.

WhiteWhale
03-21-2012, 02:01 PM
You can find a good guard in the middle rounds just like you can with any other position. But odds are you aren't finding the best guard since Hutchinson like DeCastro is.

Hey, KC found the best guard of an entire decade in the mid-rounds.

Chiefnj2
03-21-2012, 02:08 PM
Grab Martin to play LT and move Albert inside. This way you used the pick on a LT and people will be happy it wasn't a guard.

O.city
03-21-2012, 02:10 PM
Or just take Decastro and don't give a damn what the fans think.




I don't get the harm in taking a guard with this much potential that high, when there isn't any other player that warrants the spot.


If Decastro is the best prospect available for our pick, take him

ChiefsandO'sfan
03-21-2012, 02:16 PM
Tony Pauline‏@TonyPaulineReply
Retweet


Philadelphia Eagles ran the LB drills at Boston College pro-day...Carolina Panthers & KC Chiefs most represented..

Bump
03-21-2012, 02:38 PM
you can find good players at later rounds for any position. I'd rather take the safe choice here, I don't care for Poe and unless a top 10 talent falls to us, I'd take DeCastro or trade down at this point.

xztop12
03-21-2012, 02:41 PM
You guys have to keep in mind what separates DeCastro from a midround guard is his ability to pull. He is so good at pulling at you can scheme around that and it factors in to how you call the O

Hoover
03-21-2012, 02:43 PM
Don't clarify what your point is or anything.
Your argument in bogus. No one in the draft is proven.

Guard is probably the safest position to draft high. So while the Bucs pay Nick's 50 mil, we can get a top guard for 5 years for nickels on the dollar

Direckshun
03-21-2012, 03:11 PM
Yes, really.

DeCastro is a 10 year All Pro guard, and will not bust.

If you want an elite run game, DeCastro is your pick.

Otherwise, go with the passrush.

Chocolate Hog
03-21-2012, 03:14 PM
The average Guard is selected at 24 but is it a reach if said player is a pro bowler every year?

Brock
03-21-2012, 03:14 PM
Your argument in bogus. No one in the draft is proven.

Guard is probably the safest position to draft high. So while the Bucs pay Nick's 50 mil, we can get a top guard for 5 years for nickels on the dollar

That explains why there have been so many guards taken high. Are you kidding? My argument is perfectly sound, it has to do with value, which you apparently don't get.

suds79
03-21-2012, 03:14 PM
The average Guard is selected at 24 but is it a reach if said player is a pro bowler every year?

Jamaal if healthy will be sending a lot of our O-linemen to the probowl no matter who they are.

But to answer your question. No. I won't be livid if the Chiefs take Decastro. I just think we can get similar production from someone with a lower pick.

IMO our Oline play is based more on having Jamaal than who is our Guard. We have Jamaal? They'll look great. We don't, then there will be problems.

Chocolate Hog
03-21-2012, 03:15 PM
Jamaal if healthy will be sending a lot of our O-linemen to the probowl no matter who they are.

Nope.

Mr_Tomahawk
03-21-2012, 03:17 PM
I just hope Cousins is off the board in the 2nd rnd before our pick.

I am hearing to much about our interest in him and seeing one too many mocks with him going to us.

Do not want.

Cousins = Cassel 2.0

NJChiefsFan
03-21-2012, 03:22 PM
Its all relative to what else is there at #11. Lets say the Chiefs don't see any real value at 11 but they also can't trade back because nobody wants to be at 11. What do you do? Do you take a player you aren't sure about over a Guard because you can get a guard later? Especially if you think DeCastro is a lock and the others are big risks.

In the end if KC can't move back they need to take BPA. They can fill guard later if they feel there is a better talent at 11, but if they think DeCastro is the most talented player there and they can't move back they should take him.

Brock
03-21-2012, 03:24 PM
Its all relative to what else is there at #11. Lets say the Chiefs don't see any real value at 11 but they also can't trade back because nobody wants to be at 11. What do you do? Do you take a player you aren't sure about over a Guard because you can get a guard later? Especially if you think DeCastro is a lock and the others are big risks.

In the end if KC can't move back they need to take BPA. They can fill guard later if they feel there is a better talent at 11, but if they think DeCastro is the most talented player there and they can't move back they should take him.

There will be better value than a guard at 11. That's a certainty.

tredadda
03-21-2012, 03:24 PM
If you can get an elite player at #11 you get it, especially if you can use it, regardless of where you are supposed to draft a potition. If Richardson is there, you get him. If he is not and DeCastro is, you get him. This "you can get a good guard in later rounds" argiment is silly. Outside of Richardson, the other elite players in this draft will be gone by our pick. So unless we reach on a player, you go with an elite one.

tredadda
03-21-2012, 03:26 PM
That explains why there have been so many guards taken high. Are you kidding? My argument is perfectly sound, it has to do with value, which you apparently don't get.

Most guards weren't taken high because pre lockout it was hard to justify giving a rookie guard 20-30 million with half or so guaranteed. Now with the rookie cap, a high pick guard is less costly.

tredadda
03-21-2012, 03:26 PM
There will be better value than a guard at 11. That's a certainty.

Like?

Brock
03-21-2012, 03:27 PM
Most guards weren't taken high because pre lockout it was hard to justify giving a rookie guard 20-30 million with half or so guaranteed. Now with the rookie cap, a high pick guard is less costly.

It may be less costly, but it's still a low impact position.

No. Absolutely not. Pick a defensive player.

NJChiefsFan
03-21-2012, 03:28 PM
There will be better value than a guard at 11. That's a certainty.

Who are you thinking about? If there is they should take it. We should be doing BPA all draft long. Especially if you believe that winning a SB is the goal and that we can't do that this year with the current QB situation.

tredadda
03-21-2012, 03:30 PM
It may be less costly, but it's still a low impact position.

No. Absolutely not. Pick a defensive player.

Which one? What elite player on defense will be available at #11? Or should we reach so as to not take a guard?

suds79
03-21-2012, 03:30 PM
I had some fun and looked back at past drafts. Wanted to know the last time a Guard went top 15.

Had to go all the way back to the 1997 draft before I found my man. Chris Naeole drafted #10 out of Colorado to the Saints. I'm sure they thought he was a lock for the probowl every year also.

It's just not smart to take a Guard at 11. That's not what championship teams do.

Brock
03-21-2012, 03:32 PM
It's just not smart to take a Guard at 11. That's not what championship teams do.

This. Wake up, people.

tredadda
03-21-2012, 03:33 PM
I had some fun and looked back at past drafts. Wanted to know the last time a Guard went top 15.

Had to go all the way back to the 1997 draft before I found my man. Chris Naeole drafted #10 out of Colorado to the Saints. I'm sure they thought he was a lock for the probowl every year also.

It's just not smart to take a Guard at 11. That's not what championship teams do.

Championship teams also have great QBs. Should we reach on Tannehill at #11?

Dayze
03-21-2012, 03:33 PM
if DeCastro, Richardon, and Hightower are there at 11 and can't trade down, I'm taking Hightower.

however, I feel only DeCastro (of those 3) will be there.

edit...Hightower or Upshaw.

Brock
03-21-2012, 03:34 PM
Which one? What elite player on defense will be available at #11? Or should we reach so as to not take a guard?

Are you trying to tell me you can't think of one?

Dayze
03-21-2012, 03:34 PM
Championship teams also have great QBs. Should we reach on Tannehill at #11?

I don't think anyone here is advocating Tannehill as a great qb IMO

milkshock
03-21-2012, 03:35 PM
I had some fun and looked back at past drafts. Wanted to know the last time a Guard went top 15.

Had to go all the way back to the 1997 draft before I found my man. Chris Naeole drafted #10 out of Colorado to the Saints. I'm sure they thought he was a lock for the probowl every year also.

It's just not smart to take a Guard at 11. That's not what championship teams do.

Leonard Davis #2 2001 draft.

Nightfyre
03-21-2012, 03:36 PM
Hightower barely belongs in the first round discussion, let alone at 11. I assume you have him pegged to be our thumper? Talk about hypocrisy with respect to positional value.

Dayze
03-21-2012, 03:38 PM
Hightower barely belongs in the first round discussion, let alone at 11. I assume you have him pegged to be our thumper? Talk about hypocrisy with respect to positional value.

my point was if we can't trade out and have to reach, I'd rather reach for one of those than a guard. that's all.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 03:42 PM
What defensive player would be draft at 11 that would start from day one?

One can make the same argument about LB's as some make about guards.

Dayze
03-21-2012, 03:43 PM
What defensive player would be draft at 11 that would start from day one?

One can make the same argument about LB's as some make about guards.

that's true/fair.

I would rather go defense than offense at that scnerio.
Kirkpatrick would be interesting as well.

edit - I think it would be easier for a LB/defender to grasp the game, than an OL grasping the offense etc. At least right out of the gate anyway.

Nightfyre
03-21-2012, 03:45 PM
If we are going to reach, make it on a position that counts. NT, DE, or OLB.

Assuming the following players are taken:
1) Luck
2) Griffin
3) Kalil
4) Richardson
5) Claiborne
6) Blackmon
7) Ingram
8) Tannehill
9) Reiff
10) Coples

I think my top 3 available prospects for KC are:
1) Brockers
2) Perry
3) DeCastro


I really think you have to trade down in that scenario if at all possible. Maybe somebody really wants Poe?

Bewbies
03-21-2012, 03:47 PM
Leonard Davis #2 2001 draft.

Drafted to play LT.

Dayze
03-21-2012, 03:47 PM
If we are going to reach, make it on a position that counts. NT, DE, or OLB.

Assuming the following players are taken:
1) Luck
2) Griffin
3) Kalil
4) Richardson
5) Claiborne
6) Blackmon
7) Ingram
8) Tannehill
9) Reiff
10) Coples

I think my top 3 available prospects for KC are:
1) Brockers
2) Perry
3) DeCastro


I really think you have to trade down in that scenario if at all possible. Maybe somebody really wants Poe?

Absolutely agree.

LOCOChief
03-21-2012, 03:53 PM
There will be better value than a guard at 11. That's a certainty.

O really

Brock
03-21-2012, 03:55 PM
O really

Uh.....yeah.

whoman69
03-21-2012, 04:02 PM
Decastro at 11 would be less a reach then Tannehill. If you can't trade down, you don't take a lesser talent at another position that you don't really need or doesn't fit our system.

ChiefaRoo
03-21-2012, 04:03 PM
It's Poe Poe fo' sho' sho'

Assuming Tannewhatshisface and Richardson are gone.

Buckweath
03-21-2012, 04:19 PM
Everybody should remember that Jamaal Charles exceptional and was the 2nd rushing leader in 2010 running 6.4 YPC behind the likes of Lilja, Wiegmann and Richardson. If anything, Charles proved in 2009 and 2010 that he can be a great RB even when running behind an average Oline.

As for the Tannehill vs DeCastro argument, let`s not forget that Tannehill is raw but still has great potential. If he reaches his full potential, which may be unlikely but still, he can be the difference between a Superbowl or not. DeCastro, I don`t care how good he can become, will never be the difference between a Superbowl or not.

I personnally would be looking for the best NT, DE or OLB in that order at 11th overall. But, I sure wouldn`t mind Tannehill.

RustShack
03-21-2012, 04:31 PM
Yeah lets pass up a perennial Pro Bowl guard and draft a lesser player at a bigger position of need. How is that different than how we "reached" on Jackson who plays a big position we needed? Especially when it was the weakest draft in NFL history.

Its a hell of a lot easier to "reach" on players now that there is a rookie pay scale. If you even want to call easily one of the best players in the draft a "reach"

As for the dude that said we drafted a HOF Guard in the middle rounds, Patriots drafted a HOF QB in the sixth so whats your point? One of our best RB's in Chiefs history was undrafted, you can find great players anywhere. So take the best players you can get anywhere you can get them.

Nightfyre
03-21-2012, 04:42 PM
Yeah lets pass up a perennial Pro Bowl guard and draft a lesser player at a bigger position of need. How is that different than how we "reached" on Jackson who plays a big position we needed? Especially when it was the weakest draft in NFL history.

Its a hell of a lot easier to "reach" on players now that there is a rookie pay scale. If you even want to call easily one of the best players in the draft a "reach"

As for the dude that said we drafted a HOF Guard in the middle rounds, Patriots drafted a HOF QB in the sixth so whats your point? One of our best RB's in Chiefs history was undrafted, you can find great players anywhere. So take the best players you can get anywhere you can get them.
To assume that every position on the field is absolute folly. Great guards are routinely drafted in mid-rounds. Quarterbacks are not, so your analogy doesn't hold against any modicum of scrutiny. A hall of fame guard mitigates one player on the field. A hall of fame pass rusher can shut down an entire offensive system. A hall of fame 5 tech occupies two to three players on any given play and disrupts an entire offensive game plan.

RustShack
03-21-2012, 05:06 PM
To assume that every position on the field is absolute folly. Great guards are routinely drafted in mid-rounds. Quarterbacks are not, so your analogy doesn't hold against any modicum of scrutiny. A hall of fame guard mitigates one player on the field. A hall of fame pass rusher can shut down an entire offensive system. A hall of fame 5 tech occupies two to three players on any given play and disrupts an entire offensive game plan.

Cool story man. So you would rather just have an OK player with the #11 pick than someone who will likely be the best guard in the NFL just because its not a sexy position?

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:06 PM
There are busts at every position. Their are players who don't even get drafter that end up in the hall of fame. This argument that just because good/great guards can be found in the middle rounds so you should never draft one high is nonsense because you can make the same argument for a number of positions.

These are the questions that we should focus on.

Is there a 3/4 DE's that is worthy of the 11th pick?
Is there a 3/4 NT that is worthy of the 11th pick?
Is there a 3/4 LB worthy of the 11th pick?

Would any of the above have a chance to win a starting position over an existing Chief? If not, then we are drafting for depth, which isn't a bad thing, but questionable due to the high pick.

What is the bust rate on the player that we would draft at 11?

Are there other positions of need that could be available?

What happens if Reiff is sitting there are 11? Albert is in a contract year after the season? Do we want to pay Albert franchise LT money or not? If not, then a guy like Reiff makes a lot of sense. If we think we are going to tag him or try and extend him, then it doesn't.

I get the sense that some of you are anti-guard because you just want more weapons on defense. The problem as I see it is that a pick like that might not be able to get the playing time because we already have 1st round talent at DL (2) LB (2) CB (1) S (1). I know the D lineman have not lived up to their billing, but if we are going to invest another 1st round pick there, that player better be able to beat them out for the starting spot.

O.city
03-21-2012, 05:07 PM
If Charles can or did do what he did last year with a mediocre line, why not put a great one if front of him?



I don't "want" to take a guard that early. I would much rather trade back and take Konz and grab some extra picks. But just because we want to trade back doesn't make it happen.

Brock
03-21-2012, 05:08 PM
Yeah lets pass up a perennial Pro Bowl guard and draft a lesser player at a bigger position of need. How is that different than how we "reached" on Jackson who plays a big position we needed? Especially when it was the weakest draft in NFL history.

Its a hell of a lot easier to "reach" on players now that there is a rookie pay scale. If you even want to call easily one of the best players in the draft a "reach"

As for the dude that said we drafted a HOF Guard in the middle rounds, Patriots drafted a HOF QB in the sixth so whats your point? One of our best RB's in Chiefs history was undrafted, you can find great players anywhere. So take the best players you can get anywhere you can get them.

Your argument appears to be "we screwed up a few years ago, so let's do it again". No thanks.

Also, you guys keep bringing up the rookie wage scale as a reason to play it safe. It isn't. It's a reason to gamble on players with a higher ceiling, yes, that may not contribute immediately, but over the long haul, add a lot more to the team than a freaking guard.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:12 PM
I don't want to really take a guard at 11 either, but I want to take a player that will make an instant impact for the team and help maintain continuity on the line for years to come. For as good as our line may be, we have not really invested much in it in terms of draft picks. Only one first rounder (Albert). The Hudson and Asamoah picks have been great, but lets also not forget that when they become free agents we may have to let them walk. You can't franchise every position, especially on the line. Getting a guy like Decastro fills a current need, and allows us not to be forced to make bad financial decisions in the future.

RustShack
03-21-2012, 05:13 PM
I can under stand why you would a OK guard and good pass rusher over a great guard and good pass rusher. If there was a great player at a good position yeah your argument makes total more sense than reaching on a guard. Problem is, there isn't. If there was a great NT or whatever, yeah you take them. Its stupid to reach for a position when you can get someone as good as DeCastro.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:16 PM
If there was anyone on the DL that I thought could help our defense I'd be all for it. I just don't see it.

KCDC
03-21-2012, 05:16 PM
You don't take a safety early either, right? But, when you find an elite talent, you grab it (e.g. Berry). When you find an elite guard, you can take him at #11 if you must. Sure, you can find adequate guards later. You can find adequate players at any position. The key is to look for elite players at whatever position you can. If you build an elite line, any QB or RB will be significantly better.

philfree
03-21-2012, 05:21 PM
DeCastro is the safest pick.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:21 PM
I don't know why a line that has only two elite players would be a bad thing.

LT Albert - Elite
LG Asamoah - Adequate
C Hudson - Adequate
RG Decastro - Elite
RT Winston - Adequate

I actually thing Hudson, Asamoah, and Winston are more than adequate, but I'm looking at their draft investment.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 05:22 PM
I don't want to really take a guard at 11 either, but I want to take a player that will make an instant impact for the team and help maintain continuity on the line for years to come. For as good as our line may be, we have not really invested much in it in terms of draft picks. Only one first rounder (Albert). The Hudson and Asamoah picks have been great, but lets also not forget that when they become free agents we may have to let them walk. You can't franchise every position, especially on the line. Getting a guy like Decastro fills a current need, and allows us not to be forced to make bad financial decisions in the future.

When they become free agents? We're supposed to find replacements for players drafted last year and the year before?

jspchief
03-21-2012, 05:23 PM
Both guys, especially Asamoah have shown that they can potentially become among the best guards (or center in Hudson`s case) in the league.

Lol wut?

Maybe getting a little ahead of yourself

milkman
03-21-2012, 05:25 PM
You don't take a safety early either, right? But, when you find an elite talent, you grab it (e.g. Berry). When you find an elite guard, you can take him at #11 if you must. Sure, you can find adequate guards later. You can find adequate players at any position. The key is to look for elite players at whatever position you can. If you build an elite line, any QB or RB will be significantly better.

With the rules slanted so much to passing the ball, the value of safety is increased.

If you can get a safety that has the ability to drop down in the box and the speed to get back in coverage from the box, you have a guy that can be a real difference maker.

Guard, no matter how good, is not a difference maker.

You take difference makers high in the draft.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:27 PM
When they become free agents? We're supposed to find replacements for players drafted last year and the year before?
The need is to replace Lilja.

What i was saying above is that we might have to let a player like Asamoah go when he becomes a free agent. Having Decasto already in the fold makes that an easy decision, and we can draft a replacement in the middle rounds in future years.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:28 PM
With the rules slanted so much to passing the ball, the value of safety is increased.

If you can get a safety that has the ability to drop down in the box and the speed to get back in coverage from the box, you have a guy that can be a real difference maker.

Guard, no matter how good, is not a difference maker.

You take difference makers high in the draft.
Yes, but what difference maker can we draft on the D in this year's draft?

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 05:29 PM
The need is to replace Lilja.

What i was saying above is that we might have to let a player like Asamoah go when he becomes a free agent. Having Decasto already in the fold makes that an easy decision, and we can draft a replacement in the middle rounds in future years.

So we're supposed to draft a Guard at 11 so that we can move a Guard to Center?

htismaqe
03-21-2012, 05:30 PM
With the rules slanted so much to passing the ball, the value of safety is increased.

If you can get a safety that has the ability to drop down in the box and the speed to get back in coverage from the box, you have a guy that can be a real difference maker.

Guard, no matter how good, is not a difference maker.

You take difference makers high in the draft.

What difference makers are there? Do we draft a pass rusher when we already have Houston and Hali? Do we draft a CB when we already have Flower, Routt, and Arenas? Do we draft a WR when we already have Bowe, Baldwin, and Breaston?

#11 is no-man's land in this draft.

Dicky McElephant
03-21-2012, 05:32 PM
DeCastro is the safest pick.

Robert Gallery was a safe pick.

philfree
03-21-2012, 05:33 PM
Robert Gallery was a safe pick.

So DeCastro = Gallery?

I guess I don't get your point.

jspchief
03-21-2012, 05:33 PM
Lilja, Weigmann, and Asomoah were all bad in the run game last year. Our interior running game is bad.

Will Charles help that some? Sure, but we weren't very good in short yardage in '10 either.

Does Asomoah's play suffer playing next to Weigmann and Richardson? Very likely.

I'm not outright saying we should.go G/C in rnd 1, but anyone who thinks the interior of our line is set is crazy.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:34 PM
So we're supposed to draft a Guard at 11 so that we can move a Guard to Center?
Hudson is a center

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:34 PM
What difference makers are there? Do we draft a pass rusher when we already have Houston and Hali? Do we draft a CB when we already have Flower, Routt, and Arenas? Do we draft a WR when we already have Bowe, Baldwin, and Breaston?

#11 is no-man's land in this draft.
THIS

htismaqe
03-21-2012, 05:35 PM
Robert Gallery was a safe pick.

1) He was the #3 overall pick, not #11.
2) He was drafted by the RAIDERS. Look at how many decent players they ruin.
3) He was actually pretty decent once they moved him inside.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 05:35 PM
Hudson is a center

When has he played Center?

Detoxing
03-21-2012, 05:36 PM
Hudson is a center

Technically Hudson is a guard atm, and played Guard most of last season.

Dicky McElephant
03-21-2012, 05:37 PM
So DeCastro = Gallery?

I guess I don't get your point.

You said that DeCastro is the safest pick.....just like all the talk heads that said Gallery was a safe pick. And Gallery fucking busted....hard.

milkman
03-21-2012, 05:38 PM
What difference makers are there? Do we draft a pass rusher when we already have Houston and Hali? Do we draft a CB when we already have Flower, Routt, and Arenas? Do we draft a WR when we already have Bowe, Baldwin, and Breaston?

#11 is no-man's land in this draft.

Yes.

And we seem to find ourselves in no-man's land in the draft quite frequently, don't we?

philfree
03-21-2012, 05:39 PM
You said that DeCastro is the safest pick.....just like all the talk heads that said Gallery was a safe pick. And Gallery ****ing busted....hard.

Do you think DeCastro is going to bust? Is that what you're saying? Or that the draft is a crapshoot?

If Tannehill is there I'd draft him. IMO the Chiefs can afford to gamble and if they lose it's not going to be a major setback.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:40 PM
Well he player fu@king OT, so then lets put him there I guess.

My lord, the dude is versatile, if the Chiefs think he's a center, I assume they know their shit.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 05:40 PM
Do you think DeCastro is going to bust? Is that what you're saying? Or that the draft is a crapshoot?

If Tannehill is there I'd draft him. IMO the Chiefs can afford to gamble and if they lose it's not going to be a major setback.

Then don't draft a Guard.

Detoxing
03-21-2012, 05:40 PM
Well he player fu@king OT, so then lets put him there I guess.

My lord, the dude is versatile, if the Chiefs think he's a center, I assume they know their shit.

When did the Chiefs say he was a center?

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:42 PM
Do you think DeCastro is going to bust? Is that what you're saying? Or that the draft is a crapshoot?

If Tannehill is there I'd draft him. IMO the Chiefs can afford to gamble and if they lose it's not going to be a major setback.
Agree with this.

Here is how I view it.

1. If Tannehill is there draft him.
2. We should also try and trade down.
3. If we can't trade down, then we should take Decastro.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:43 PM
When did the Chiefs say he was a center?
On their fu@king website

http://www.kcchiefs.com/team/roster.html

philfree
03-21-2012, 05:44 PM
Then don't draft a Guard.

Well.......

that's why I said draft Tannehill. Don't go with the apparent safe pick.

Detoxing
03-21-2012, 05:44 PM
On their fu@king website

http://www.kcchiefs.com/team/roster.html

Calm down bro.

Dicky McElephant
03-21-2012, 05:44 PM
Like I've said. If we draft Tannehill....say goodbye to Stanzi.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 05:44 PM
If saying so is all it takes, we've got a franchise QB.

jspchief
03-21-2012, 05:45 PM
On their fu@king website

http://www.kcchiefs.com/team/roster.html

Pwnt

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:45 PM
well you keep busting my balls on a player who was drafted as a center and who is listed as a center.

Detoxing
03-21-2012, 05:46 PM
well you keep busting my balls on a player who was drafted as a center and who is listed as a center.

Keep busting your balls? lol. I made one comment and then asked you a question.

Brock
03-21-2012, 05:46 PM
well you keep busting my balls on a player who was drafted as a center and who is listed as a center.

"Busting your balls"? My, what thin skin you have.

bricks
03-21-2012, 05:47 PM
Like I've said. If we draft Tannehill....say goodbye to Stanzi.

They won't...They'll draft either an offensive or defensive lineman or linebacker.

philfree
03-21-2012, 05:48 PM
Like I've said. If we draft Tannehill....say goodbye to Stanzi.

Maybe. I'd like to see Stanzi get a chance but I wouldn't pass on Tannehill that being the case.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:49 PM
You said why would we convert a guard to a center so that we could draft a guard. You were talking out of your ass.

Look, I don't think we need to draft Decastro, but we don't need to draft a lot of positions. Decastro makes sense because he fills a need now and in the future. I'm very flexible on this draft, but if we are stuck at 11, I think Decastro makes the most sense, that is all.

jspchief
03-21-2012, 05:50 PM
They won't...They'll draft either an offensive or defensive lineman or linebacker.

Considering 90% of this year's top players appear to be linemen, its almost inevitable.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 05:51 PM
They won't...They'll draft either an offensive or defensive lineman or linebacker.
LOL, whatever. You guys want a defense player I get it, but you have yet to make your case on who makes sense at 11. That is all. I'd love to see who you like and why they deserve to be the pick at 11.

Brock
03-21-2012, 05:51 PM
What difference makers are there? Do we draft a pass rusher when we already have Houston and Hali? Do we draft a CB when we already have Flower, Routt, and Arenas?.

yes. yes.

htismaqe
03-21-2012, 05:54 PM
They're not going to draft Tannehill at #11 as well they shouldn't.

What's crazy is that he might actually go BEFORE we pick. Just goes to show you what panic does to NFL draft boards.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 05:55 PM
You said why would we convert a guard to a center so that we could draft a guard. You were talking out of your ass.

Look, I don't think we need to draft Decastro, but we don't need to draft a lot of positions. Decastro makes sense because he fills a need now and in the future. I'm very flexible on this draft, but if we are stuck at 11, I think Decastro makes the most sense, that is all.

Tell me the last time he snapped the ball.

Detoxing
03-21-2012, 05:55 PM
You said why would we convert a guard to a center so that we could draft a guard. You were talking out of your ass.

Look, I don't think we need to draft Decastro, but we don't need to draft a lot of positions. Decastro makes sense because he fills a need now and in the future. I'm very flexible on this draft, but if we are stuck at 11, I think Decastro makes the most sense, that is all.

Uhmmm...No i didn't, but ok.

I am well aware of Hudson's versatility and his position in college.

You said Hudson was a Center. I said technically, he was a guard, because the Chiefs played him at Guard for the majority of the snaps. Then you showed me that they plan on playing him at C for this upcoming season.

There was no "ball busting" anywhere.

Follow along.

jspchief
03-21-2012, 05:57 PM
Tell me the last time he snapped the ball.

You should ask the Chiefs coach that listed him as a center on their current roster.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 05:59 PM
You should ask the Chiefs coach that listed him as a center on their current roster.

This is the same franchise that kept trying to turn Safeties into Corners. Centers snap the ball. When was the last time Hudson snapped the ball? I honestly don't know.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 06:01 PM
Hudson started 47 games in college. He started 47 games at Guard.

I'm not a math whiz, but that doesn't leave a lot of starts at other positions.

Nightfyre
03-21-2012, 06:02 PM
They're not going to draft Tannehill at #11 as well they shouldn't.

What's crazy is that he might actually go BEFORE we pick. Just goes to show you what panic does to NFL draft boards.

I think it would be better to take a flier on Osweiler later than Tannehill at 11. JMO. However, if you can trade back and Tannehill is still there, it becomes tempting.

philfree
03-21-2012, 06:11 PM
They're not going to draft Tannehill at #11 as well they shouldn't.

What's crazy is that he might actually go BEFORE we pick. Just goes to show you what panic does to NFL draft boards.

Show's how valuable QBs are.

How's Tannehill stand up to Locker, Gabbert and Ponder? Dalton too I guess.

Tannehill is a sit for awhile prospect but what's wrong with that when your draft is wide open? It's time to make the pick if he's still there.

All that said I can see lot's of good coming from this draft even if we don't draft Tannehill.

Who's your pick again?

Micjones
03-21-2012, 06:14 PM
Show's how valuable QBs are.

How's Tannehill stand up to Locker, Gabbert and Ponder? Dalton too I guess.

Tannehill is a sit for awhile prospect but what's wrong with that when your draft is wide open? It's time to make the pick if he's still there.

All that said I can see lot's of good coming from this draft even if we don't draft Tannehill.

Who's your pick again?

I definitely wanna see this team draft Tannehill if he's there. My only reservation is 2013 will present a better QB class and if we take Tannehill this year it might make us think twice about grabbing a better prospect next year.

bricks
03-21-2012, 06:14 PM
LOL, whatever. You guys want a defense player I get it, but you have yet to make your case on who makes sense at 11. That is all. I'd love to see who you like and why they deserve to be the pick at 11.

Im not sure too be honest?

I like DeCastro, but if they draft DeCastro, this most likely means Hudson is going to play center. And who knows how he'll adjust to the position?

I will say, I do think they need to faocus on the interior of the Oline though. Its clear Lilja, Wiegmann are weak points and need to go. Im very happy with the Eric Winston signing and I think Pioli has the right idea in wanting to fix the Oline.

If they decided to trade down, accumulate picks and draft a center like Konz, that would be a very intriguing option. Of course this all depends on what they decide to do with Hudson? I think Hudson would make a good left guard, but who knows how he'll perfom at center?

The safer bet would prolly be to trade down and draft a natural center and place Hudson at left guard. But hey, what do I know? Let just wait and see what happens?

I like the idea of fixing the Oline, now, if they could get their heads out of their asses at the QB situation, they may be on to something? But you know what, I think the Olineman is the safer pick anyway, KC is not the place to draft and develop a QB prospect imo.

Okie_Apparition
03-21-2012, 06:18 PM
Cassel/Palko/Stanzi
Cassel/Stanzi/Tannehill
I don't see any major upset

jspchief
03-21-2012, 06:19 PM
This is the same franchise that kept trying to turn Safeties into Corners. Centers snap the ball. When was the last time Hudson snapped the ball? I honestly don't know.

Do you think our coaches have checked to see if he can play center?

Dicky McElephant
03-21-2012, 06:19 PM
They will not go into next season with Cassel and two rookie QBs on the roster.

Okie_Apparition
03-21-2012, 06:21 PM
Seems even all across the board to me

htismaqe
03-21-2012, 06:36 PM
Show's how valuable QBs are.

How's Tannehill stand up to Locker, Gabbert and Ponder? Dalton too I guess.

Tannehill is a sit for awhile prospect but what's wrong with that when your draft is wide open? It's time to make the pick if he's still there.

All that said I can see lot's of good coming from this draft even if we don't draft Tannehill.

Who's your pick again?

Locker and Ponder both had at least 3 full seasons as starters, starting 40 and 35 games respectively. Gabbert only had 26 starts, which is closer to Tannehill's 20.

Tannehill isn't just a "sit for a while" prospect. He's a "sit for 2 or 3 years and he STILL might not develop" prospect. We have shit coaching and a shit starting QB - not exactly the best place to mentor someone who is SO raw.

As for who I would draft, the list is too long. I like pass rushers, safety, offensive line, you name it.

I'm just not a fan of Trent Richardson or Tannehill.

htismaqe
03-21-2012, 06:37 PM
I definitely wanna see this team draft Tannehill if he's there. My only reservation is 2013 will present a better QB class and if we take Tannehill this year it might make us think twice about grabbing a better prospect next year.

Yep.

I'd rather pass on Tannehill and get a more solid prospect next year.

Okie_Apparition
03-21-2012, 06:49 PM
Rookie contract are for only 4 years
some of these guys will just start to get before negotiations start

philfree
03-21-2012, 06:53 PM
Yep.

I'd rather pass on Tannehill and get a more solid prospect next year.

We don't know if we'll be in any better position to draft a QB next year then we are this year with Tannehill. Looking at what went on last year with the QBs in the draft with QBs being reached for a team will have to be drafting top ten to have a chance at one. Or trade up. IMO you have to take them when they're available. Tannehill may not even be available.:shrug:

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:01 PM
Do you think our coaches have checked to see if he can play center?

Checked? What does that even mean? Is there a blood test for that, or is it more like figuring out if a kitten is a male or a female?

He never started a game at Center in college. I don't think he has ever even snapped the ball in the NFL.

We're talking about drafting a Guard higher than any guard has been drafted in 15 years so that we can move a player that hasn't started a game anywhere other than Guard since at least high school to Center. What am I missing here?

TRR
03-21-2012, 07:01 PM
Hudson started 47 games in college. He started 47 games at Guard.

I'm not a math whiz, but that doesn't leave a lot of starts at other positions.

Hudson was projected out of college as a Center and took all of his combine positioning drills as a Center. All of his practice time last year came as a Center and I believe he spent most of the Preseason games last season as the 2nd team Center.
Posted via Mobile Device

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:02 PM
Hudson was projected out of college as a Center and took all of his combine positioning drills as a Center. All of his practice time last year came as a Center and I believe he spent most of the Preseason games last season as the 2nd team Center.
Posted via Mobile Device

Great. When was the last time he started a game at Center?

whoman69
03-21-2012, 07:08 PM
Show's how valuable QBs are.

How's Tannehill stand up to Locker, Gabbert and Ponder? Dalton too I guess.

Tannehill is a sit for awhile prospect but what's wrong with that when your draft is wide open? It's time to make the pick if he's still there.

All that said I can see lot's of good coming from this draft even if we don't draft Tannehill.

Who's your pick again?

You're basing that off of one year where Ponder went too high to the Vikings who had no other choice since Favre retired. Tannehill is not a first round talent, QB or no.

jspchief
03-21-2012, 07:09 PM
Checked? What does that even mean? Is there a blood test for that, or is it more like figuring out if a kitten is a male or a female?

He never started a game at Center in college. I don't think he has ever even snapped the ball in the NFL.

We're talking about drafting a Guard higher than any guard has been drafted in 15 years so that we can move a player that hasn't started a game anywhere other than Guard since at least high school to Center. What am I missing here?Well, obviously someone in the Chiefs organization chose to list him as a center on their current roster. I don't want to put words in your mouth but you seem to be suggesting that no one knows whether or not he's capable of playing center.

I'm trying to figure out if you believe that KC has someone on their staff that may have some sort of knowledge that would lend them to believe he could play center. Or maybe they just call him a center because he's kind of shaped like one?

I was under the impression that KC had designs on him playing center all along. Maybe they've been giving him snaps in practice? I doubt that moving Hudson to center would happen solely because we drafted another guard. I would have to assume that a professional football coach had some kind of opinion that played a part in the move.

philfree
03-21-2012, 07:13 PM
You're basing that off of one year where Ponder went too high to the Vikings who had no other choice since Favre retired. Tannehill is not a first round talent, QB or no.

True I guess but Tannehill will be drafted in the 1st round. He has 1st round tools he just doesn't have the experience you'd like.

The Chiefs can wait till all things are perfect to draft a franchise QB, of course that will be when they go 1-15. Another 40 years:shrug:

TRR
03-21-2012, 07:14 PM
Great. When was the last time he started a game at Center?

High School. He was rated the 17th best center in the nation. Also played snaps at center in college but only "started" games at guard and left tackle.

He is athletic enough to easily make the transition to center. As the other poster said, the KC staff had a year of evaluating him in preseason and day in/day out in practice as a center. He was drafted as a center. He can play center. He will play center.
Posted via Mobile Device

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:20 PM
Well, obviously someone in the Chiefs organization chose to list him as a center on their current roster. I don't want to put words in your mouth but you seem to be suggesting that no one knows whether or not he's capable of playing center.

I'm trying to figure out if you believe that KC has someone on their staff that may have some sort of knowledge that would lend them to believe he could play center. Or maybe they just call him a center because he's kind of shaped like one?

I was under the impression that KC had designs on him playing center all along. Maybe they've been giving him snaps in practice? I doubt that moving Hudson to center would happen solely because we drafted another guard. I would have to assume that a professional football coach had some kind of opinion that played a part in the move.

I'm sure someone has looked at him and determined that he can play Center. They made that evaluation on something other than him actually playing the position, though.

I don't doubt that he can play the position. He's a Guard, though. That's all he's ever really played since high school when he was a 3* recruit at Center and FSU moved him to Guard.

If we need a Center, we should draft a Center. We shouldn't do it with the 11th pick in the draft, though.

jspchief
03-21-2012, 07:22 PM
If we need a Center, we should draft a Center. I think the point you're missing is the team doesn't feel that we need a center.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:23 PM
High School. He was rated the 17th best center in the nation. Also played snaps at center in college but only "started" games at guard and left tackle.

He is athletic enough to easily make the transition to center. As the other poster said, the KC staff had a year of evaluating him in preseason and day in/day out in practice as a center. He was drafted as a center. He can play center. He will play center.
Posted via Mobile Device

He never started a game at LT in college. He only started games at Guard in college. He was a good Center in high school, but he wasn't some stud 5* recruit. He was a 3* Center, but somehow we're certain enough that this translates to being NFL caliber Center that we're willing to draft a Guard with the 11th overall pick in the draft so he can move there. Sounds like a plan.

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:23 PM
I think the point you're missing is the team doesn't feel that we need a center.

How much do you want to bet that they don't think we need a Guard with the #11 pick in the draft?

jspchief
03-21-2012, 07:29 PM
How much do you want to bet that they don't think we need a Guard with the #11 pick in the draft?Zero dollars and your life.

Regardless of how I feel about using the #11, I don't feel that they will avoid drafting a guard due to us having Hudson. The exception being if they were to draft Konz. You act like drafting a guard is going to cause a shuffling of the roster, and I don't believe that to be the case.

TRR
03-21-2012, 07:29 PM
He never started a game at LT in college. He only started games at Guard in college. He was a good Center in high school, but he wasn't some stud 5* recruit. He was a 3* Center, but somehow we're certain enough that this translates to being NFL caliber Center that we're willing to draft a Guard with the 11th overall pick in the draft so he can move there. Sounds like a plan.

You are wrong on the Left Tackle remark. "2007: Started 10 of Florida State's 13 games with nine starts coming at the left guard position and one at the left tackle position in the Music City Bowl.".

Like it or not the plan is to start Hudson at center....His natural position coming out of high school. He had all of last season to prepare as well. Whether we draft another guard to replace Lilja is a different story. Hudson isn't being moved...He was drafted to play center from the beginning. End of story.
Posted via Mobile Device

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:36 PM
You are wrong on the Left Tackle remark. "2007: Started 10 of Florida State's 13 games with nine starts coming at the left guard position and one at the left tackle position in the Music City Bowl.".

Like it or not the plan is to start Hudson at center....His natural position coming out of high school. He had all of last season to prepare as well. Whether we draft another guard to replace Lilja is a different story. Hudson isn't being moved...He was drafted to play center from the beginning. End of story.
Posted via Mobile Device

End of story? Okay, Romeo. Let's draft a Guard at #11. We'll make him the highest Guard drafted since future HOFer Chris Naeole.

Guards win Super Bowls. It's always been that way. It's almost become cliche, but the team with the best Guard play usually wins. Games come down to turnovers and Guards...etc., etc., etc.

jspchief
03-21-2012, 07:37 PM
End of story? Okay, Romeo. Let's draft a Guard at #11. We'll make him the highest Guard drafted since future HOFer Chris Naeole.

Guards win Super Bowls.someone is moving the goal posts

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:39 PM
someone is moving the goal posts

I'm not moving shit. Drafting a Guard at 11 is asinine. Doing it when you've got a perfectly good Guard that you just drafted with a high pick the season before is worse. Doing it so that you can move said Guard to a position he hasn't started a single game at since high school is full-on truefan.

TRR
03-21-2012, 07:39 PM
End of story? Okay, Romeo. Let's draft a Guard at #11. We'll make him the highest Guard drafted since future HOFer Chris Naeole.

Guards win Super Bowls. It's always been that way. It's almost become cliche, but the team with the best Guard play usually wins. Games come down to turnovers and Guards...etc., etc., etc.

Talk about moving the goal posts??? That's not even the discussion we are having. I chimed in because you were up in arms about how Hudson can't play center.
Posted via Mobile Device

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:41 PM
Talk about moving the goal posts??? That's not even the discussion we are having. I chimed in because you were up in arms about how Hudson can't play center.
Posted via Mobile Device

Where did I say that he can't play Center? He might be able to play QB for all I know. What I do know is that he's a perfectly capable Guard. I don't doubt that we'll move him to Center if we're forced to it. We're not going to do it because we drafted a Guard at #11, though. Even the Chiefs aren't that stupid.

TRR
03-21-2012, 07:43 PM
I'm not moving shit. Drafting a Guard at 11 is asinine. Doing it when you've got a perfectly good Guard that you just drafted with a high pick the season before is worse. Doing it so that you can move said Guard to a position he hasn't started a single game at since high school is full-on truefan.

Saul....KC didn't select a guard last draft. They drafted a center. Hudson went in to the draft as a center, wanted to be known as a center and KC took him AS A CENTER. That's the point we are trying to make. Hudson only filled in at guard last season because the line depth was awful and he is capable.
Posted via Mobile Device

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:46 PM
Saul....KC didn't select a guard last draft. They drafted a center. Hudson went in to the draft as a center, wanted to be known as a center and KC took him AS A CENTER. That's the point we are trying to make. Hudson only filled in at guard last season because the line depth was awful and he is capable.
Posted via Mobile Device

Q: Did you spend much time with the Chiefs before the draft?

RODNEY HUDSON: “I did some at the Combine.”

Q: You didn’t come to Kansas City at all?

HUDSON: “No sir.”

Q: Does this surprise you at all that you wound up here?

HUDSON: “I don’t know if it surprised me, I am just excited for the opportunity.”

Q: What do you know about the offensive line situation here?

HUDSON: “I don’t know anything particularly, I am just trying to come in there and work hard.”

Q: What position do you feel is best for you in the NFL, guard or center?

HUDSON: “I don’t know. Whatever the coaches ask me to do I am just going to put all of my effort into it and be the best that I can.”

Q: Which position do you play best?

HUDSON: “I played left guard at Florida State the most, I have been a four-year starter. I feel like I could play center also. Like I said, I am just going to come in and whatever they ask me to play, do it to the best of my ability.”

Saul Good
03-21-2012, 07:47 PM
We drafted a Center who never started a game at Center in college and never took a snap at Center in his Rookie season.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 08:10 PM
Talk about moving the goal posts??? That's not even the discussion we are having. I chimed in because you were up in arms about how Hudson can't play center.
Posted via Mobile Device
oh noes you didn't, DON'T ever claim that he's "up in arms."

Hudson is a center, but the the time he has spent practicing the position with the Chiefs doesn't matter. All that matters is games started, and since he played a little guard last season, he's locked in at being a guard.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 08:12 PM
Is Wiki also states that he is a center.

tredadda
03-21-2012, 08:51 PM
With the rules slanted so much to passing the ball, the value of safety is increased.

If you can get a safety that has the ability to drop down in the box and the speed to get back in coverage from the box, you have a guy that can be a real difference maker.

Guard, no matter how good, is not a difference maker.

You take difference makers high in the draft.

Rules are slanted towards throwing the ball, agreed. But who throws it? The QB. What's the fastest way to said QB? Straight up the middle. Who protects that? Your guards, and center. Why not make those positions elite when we have a golden opportunity to do it? If there were other positions we needed more that would be there at #11 and actually worth that pick then by all means go that way. Like if there was an elite QB or NT, then you get those over a guard, but since there won't be, then get an elite guard as we could use one.

milkman
03-21-2012, 08:56 PM
Rules are slanted towards throwing the ball, agreed. But who throws it? The QB. What's the fastest way to said QB? Straight up the middle. Who protects that? Your guards, and center. Why not make those positions elite when we have a golden opportunity to do it? If there were other positions we needed more that would be there at #11 and actually worth that pick then by all means go that way. Like if there was an elite QB or NT, then you get those over a guard, but since there won't be, then get an elite guard as we could use one.

When the NFL starts to line up the elite pass rushers on the inside, then you can spend a high pick on the interior positions on the O-Line.

I'd bet fewer than 6 sacks and 25 pressures came on the interior against the Chiefs.

Simplicity
03-21-2012, 09:10 PM
Dre Kirkpatrick anyone?

Austin Ed
03-21-2012, 09:26 PM
Everyone wanted Carl Nicks. Why not a younger version that will make the O Line better for years to come? BTW, what position did Brian Waters, Will Shields and Ed Budde play?

Dayze
03-21-2012, 09:27 PM
Dre Kirkpatrick anyone?

I'd take that

Brock
03-21-2012, 09:29 PM
Everyone wanted Carl Nicks. Why not a younger version that will make the O Line better for years to come? BTW, what position did Brian Waters, Will Shields and Ed Budde play?

Where was Carl Nicks drafted? Where were Brian Waters, Will Shields, and Ed Budde drafted? The answer matters, believe it or not.

BossChief
03-21-2012, 09:37 PM
Our best case scenario this draft is if a guy like Trent Richardson falls to us and a team like the Bengals (or even the Steelers after losing Mendenhall for most of or all of next season) wants to move up from 17 to take him.

We move back to 17 and either add a mid second rounder this year or another first next year.

If Richardson falls to us, we could probably push for next years first.

Then, you guys can jack off to guys like DeCastro all you want, but Id prefer a guy like Barron from Alabama at 17.

MahiMike
03-21-2012, 09:49 PM
REALLY! And you'll thank me in 20 yrs when DeCastro is accepting his HOF nomination.

SPchief
03-21-2012, 10:28 PM
Cassel/Palko/Stanzi
Cassel/Stanzi/Tannehill
I don't see any major upset

Brady Quinn

Okie_Apparition
03-21-2012, 10:37 PM
He has quit on the Broncos
that's always a plus

Austin Ed
03-21-2012, 10:38 PM
Where was Carl Nicks drafted? Where were Brian Waters, Will Shields, and Ed Budde drafted? The answer matters, believe it or not.

You're wrong here. The original point of the thread was that an OG, no matter how good, is not worth a #11 pick. That point is incorrect as shown by guards such as Nicks, Waters, Shields and Budde. Regardless of their original draft position, who wouldn't take any one of them with an 11 pick? I certainly would. Many draft analysts and scouts believe DeCastro will inevitably be that type of player. I agree. Therefore, if DeCastro equals Nicks/Waters/Shields/Budde, then he is worth the #11 pick. Yes, lightning can strike and you can score a Hall of Fame guard in later rounds but you can also score a Hall of Fame QB in later rounds (e.g., Dawson, Brady). However, if the consensus of experts is that DeCastro is probably heading toward a HOF career as an OG, then he is worth the Chief's 11. (BTW, only Budde was a first round draft pick of the three Chiefs guards. However, as stated, that fact is irrelevant to the point I was making.)

milkman
03-21-2012, 10:41 PM
You're wrong here. The original point of the thread was that an OG, no matter how good, is not worth a #11 pick. That point is incorrect as shown by guards such as Nicks, Waters, Shields and Budde. Regardless of their original draft position, who wouldn't take any one of them with an 11 pick? I certainly would. Many draft analysts and scouts believe DeCastro will inevitably be that type of player. I agree. Therefore, if DeCastro equals Nicks/Waters/Shields/Budde, then he is worth the #11 pick. Yes, lightning can strike and you can score a Hall of Fame guard in later rounds but you can also score a Hall of Fame QB in later rounds (e.g., Dawson, Brady). However, if the consensus of experts is that DeCastro is probably heading toward a HOF career as an OG, then he is worth the Chief's 11. (BTW, only Budde was a first round draft pick of the three Chiefs guards. However, as stated, that fact is irrelevant to the point I was making.)

Lenny Dawson was a 5th overall pick.

DeezNutz
03-21-2012, 10:44 PM
Lenny Dawson was a 5th overall pick.

Someone else's 5th overall pick, which is much less risky!

BossChief
03-21-2012, 10:52 PM
How dumb is it to call a guy HOF when he hasn't even taken a snap yet in the NFL?

I mean, really.

He is a good guard, but lets not get carried away here.

It would be a horrendous pick at 11.

Brock
03-21-2012, 10:56 PM
You're wrong here. The original point of the thread was that an OG, no matter how good, is not worth a #11 pick. That point is incorrect as shown by guards such as Nicks, Waters, Shields and Budde. Regardless of their original draft position, who wouldn't take any one of them with an 11 pick? I certainly would. Many draft analysts and scouts believe DeCastro will inevitably be that type of player. I agree. Therefore, if DeCastro equals Nicks/Waters/Shields/Budde, then he is worth the #11 pick. Yes, lightning can strike and you can score a Hall of Fame guard in later rounds but you can also score a Hall of Fame QB in later rounds (e.g., Dawson, Brady). However, if the consensus of experts is that DeCastro is probably heading toward a HOF career as an OG, then he is worth the Chief's 11. (BTW, only Budde was a first round draft pick of the three Chiefs guards. However, as stated, that fact is irrelevant to the point I was making.)

No, you are wrong. Even surefire "can't miss" guards aren't drafted at 11. Do a history check, it's a fact.

Brock
03-21-2012, 10:56 PM
How dumb is it to call a guy HOF when he hasn't even taken a snap yet in the NFL?

I mean, really.

He is a good guard, but lets not get carried away here.

It would be a horrendous pick at 11.

WTF are you talking about he's the next (insert player who was drafted 2 rounds later).

Austin Ed
03-21-2012, 10:58 PM
Lenny Dawson was a 5th overall pick.

OK. Substitute Montana----3rd round pick.

DeezNutz
03-21-2012, 10:59 PM
How dumb is it to call a guy HOF when he hasn't even taken a snap yet in the NFL?

I mean, really.

He is a good guard, but lets not get carried away here.

It would be a horrendous pick at 11.

He'll go top 20, I bet, and the elite talent in this draft class is weak, so it's tough to describe this potential pick as "horrendous," though I understand the logic behind the comment.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 10:59 PM
Things change dude. When FA guards are breaking the bank, the willingness to draft them higher in the draft also happens.

Its not like we want to draft a place kicker in round one like the Raiders did.

BIG K
03-21-2012, 11:02 PM
REALLY! And you'll thank me in 20 yrs when DeCastro is accepting his HOF nomination.

And I hope he is inducted with a team other than the Chiefs. If the chiefs waste a pick that high on a guard, I will be done with them......LT, sure if they need it which they don't. Guard, no way......

DeezNutz
03-21-2012, 11:02 PM
Things change dude. When FA guards are breaking the bank, the willingness to draft them higher in the draft also happens.

Its not like we want to draft a place kicker in round one like the Raiders did.

FA guards are getting exceptionally rich contracts because the vets sold out the n00bs in the last collective bargaining agreement, so this doesn't have a direct correlation to positonal value.

Austin Ed
03-21-2012, 11:26 PM
Lenny Dawson was a 5th overall pick.

No, you are wrong. Even surefire "can't miss" guards aren't drafted at 11. Do a history check, it's a fact.

Watch and see. If we don't take him at 11, another team will take him shortly thereafter and he will go on to a very good to great career. Neither I nor anyone else is saying that DeCastro is a sure fire HOF guard any more than folks are saying that Luck is a sure fire HOF QB. However, the clear potential is definitely there for both Luck and DeCastro to be playing in Pro Bowls together. The basic point I have been trying to make is that while a QB with acknowldged Pro Bowl potential is definitely worth a #1, an OG with acknowledged Pro Bowl potential is worth an 11. Do a history check? OK. John Hannah was the overall #4. Please reply

BossChief
03-21-2012, 11:28 PM
Look, if there was a fucking ELITE nose guard in our division...or a Warren Sapp quality inside rusher...I could somewhat justify the pick.

There isn't.

Pass rusher or secondary would be far better value than any guard at 11.

Brock
03-21-2012, 11:34 PM
Watch and see. If we don't take him at 11, another team will take him shortly thereafter and he will go on to a very good to great career. Neither I nor anyone else is saying that DeCastro is a sure fire HOF guard any more than folks are saying that Luck is a sure fire HOF QB. However, the clear potential is definitely there for both Luck and DeCastro to be playing in Pro Bowls together. The basic point I have been trying to make is that while a QB with acknowldged Pro Bowl potential is definitely worth a #1, an OG with acknowledged Pro Bowl potential is worth an 11. Do a history check? OK. John Hannah was the overall #4. Please reply

ROFL yeah, I'm sure if you go back into the 70s, you can find a punter drafted in the top 10. It has no relevance to today, or even the past 30 years. No, an acknowledged guard with pro bowl potential is not worth an 11. There have been many guards with acknowledged pro bowl potential and in the past 25 years 1 went top 10.

Hoover
03-21-2012, 11:38 PM
Look, if there was a fucking ELITE nose guard in our division...or a Warren Sapp quality inside rusher...I could somewhat justify the pick.

There isn't.

Pass rusher or secondary would be far better value than any guard at 11.
we play 10 out of division games. We also need to run the shit out of the ball to win with our current QB

Austin Ed
03-21-2012, 11:54 PM
ROFL yeah, I'm sure if you go back into the 70s, you can find a punter drafted in the top 10. It has no relevance to today, or even the past 30 years. No, an acknowledged guard with pro bowl potential is not worth an 11. There have been many guards with acknowledged pro bowl potential and in the past 25 years 1 went top 10.
Do a "history check" but make it recent history. Oh, OK (but I am getting tired of doing your bidding). Both Logan Mankins and Ben Grubbs were first round picks. BTW, I named John Hannah for two reasons. First, most commentators consider him the best OG of all time. Second, he had the same type of "can't miss" buzz as DeCastro when coming into the league. Made sense back then to take him at #4. Makes sense now to take DeCastro at 11.

Warpaint69
03-22-2012, 06:42 AM
DeCastro is being underrated because he's a guard. Had he played LT instead it would change many people's outlook dramatically and his stock would then be out of the roof. DeCastro is an elite prospect and is one of the best offensive linemen in this draft, probably a better player than many of the top rated OT's in this draft. He's rated lower only because he was a guard.

Its a general rule of thumb that defensive linemen not named Suh are not major difference makers in their rookie season and sometimes take up to 3 years to develop. NT is a need, but drafting Poe questions still remain. When will he develop into the difference maker needed? Is he better suited as a 3-4 DE or a NT? Its a pick that you may not see much production out of, can the fan base deal with that?

I personally think Tannehill is overrated simply because the QB class falls off the map after Luck and RGIII. I won't argue the kid as talent, its just another situation where he's going to tote a clipboard for quite awhile before being a starter.

As far as drafting a DE, its the same as Poe, when will this player make a difference? Few of them seem to be initial terrors as pass rushers. I could be wrong?

Fitzpatrick could be the pick, but my guess is Routt would get the start. Routt's contract is set up where the Chiefs can cut bait after one season. So a corner could be a logical pick.

Bewbies
03-22-2012, 07:51 AM
Like Tannehill or not, it is hilarious to see people advocate a guard over a QB at 11.

suds79
03-22-2012, 08:04 AM
Like Tannehill or not, it is hilarious to see people advocate a guard over a QB at 11.

This is KC you know. ;) The land of fans clamoring to build the greatest O-line ever. Much like the early 2000s. You know. That team that won all those championships?

the Talking Can
03-22-2012, 08:06 AM
You're wrong here. The original point of the thread was that an OG, no matter how good, is not worth a #11 pick. That point is incorrect as shown by guards such as Nicks, Waters, Shields and Budde. Regardless of their original draft position, who wouldn't take any one of them with an 11 pick? I certainly would. Many draft analysts and scouts believe DeCastro will inevitably be that type of player. I agree. Therefore, if DeCastro equals Nicks/Waters/Shields/Budde, then he is worth the #11 pick. Yes, lightning can strike and you can score a Hall of Fame guard in later rounds but you can also score a Hall of Fame QB in later rounds (e.g., Dawson, Brady). However, if the consensus of experts is that DeCastro is probably heading toward a HOF career as an OG, then he is worth the Chief's 11. (BTW, only Budde was a first round draft pick of the three Chiefs guards. However, as stated, that fact is irrelevant to the point I was making.)

my head hurts....somehow I think you just proved that 3+8=K

why would you take a player in the 1st when you could get him in the 3rd?

you wouldn't...and pioli won't, thankfully

suds79
03-22-2012, 08:10 AM
However, if the consensus of experts is that DeCastro is probably heading toward a HOF career as an OG, then he is worth the Chief's 11.

So now not only are we to assume this guy is a for sure probowler year and year out, we should get him tailored for Canton?

Wow. Ricky Stanzi thinks this guy gets too much credit for haven't proven anything yet.

Saul Good
03-22-2012, 08:16 AM
You're wrong here. The original point of the thread was that an OG, no matter how good, is not worth a #11 pick. That point is incorrect as shown by guards such as Nicks, Waters, Shields and Budde. Regardless of their original draft position, who wouldn't take any one of them with an 11 pick? I certainly would. Many draft analysts and scouts believe DeCastro will inevitably be that type of player. I agree. Therefore, if DeCastro equals Nicks/Waters/Shields/Budde, then he is worth the #11 pick. Yes, lightning can strike and you can score a Hall of Fame guard in later rounds but you can also score a Hall of Fame QB in later rounds (e.g., Dawson, Brady). However, if the consensus of experts is that DeCastro is probably heading toward a HOF career as an OG, then he is worth the Chief's 11. (BTW, only Budde was a first round draft pick of the three Chiefs guards. However, as stated, that fact is irrelevant to the point I was making.)

So your point is that if he's a HOF Guard, he's worth the #11 overall pick. Great. What if he's not?

The last time a pure Guard was inducted into the HOF was 2 decades ago. In order to make the pick worthwhile, he would literally have to be one of the 10 best Guards in league history.

Even that wouldn't make him a steal. Its not like anyone would have traded two first rounders for Will Shields in his prime.

Warpaint69
03-22-2012, 08:48 AM
Like Tannehill or not, it is hilarious to see people advocate a guard over a QB at 11.

With the current QB situation in Miami, Miami having Tannehill's former head coach as there new OC also has been a coordinator at many stops in his career, and Miami picking at #9. Thats something we all need to pay attention to. If they don't draft Ryan Tannehill, the reds flags are going to go shooting up, and I'm going to be pretty concerned as to why they didn't want him. If his former head coach doesn't push hard for him to be drafted now being the OC at Miami especially with a pretty lack luster group of QB to work with, there's something very damn wrong.

Warpaint69
03-22-2012, 08:54 AM
So your point is that if he's a HOF Guard, he's worth the #11 overall pick. Great. What if he's not?

The last time a pure Guard was inducted into the HOF was 2 decades ago. In order to make the pick worthwhile, he would literally have to be one of the 10 best Guards in league history.

Even that wouldn't make him a steal. Its not like anyone would have traded two first rounders for Will Shields in his prime.

With Cassel as the QB its going to be all about the run game and everyone in the league knows this. It may sound pretty dumb to draft what is considered an elite caliber guard, but your going to face a loaded box every Sunday. Lilja has already proven that he's not a mauler, a physical guard, or a player that can provide legit push at the point of attack. If the Chiefs want to be a player in the AFC West and have any chance of winning even a single playoff game the offensive line is going to have to be the strength.

Saul Good
03-22-2012, 08:56 AM
With Cassel as the QB its going to be all about the run game and everyone in the league knows this. It may sound pretty dumb to draft what is considered an elite caliber guard, but your going to face a loaded box every Sunday. Lilja has already proven that he's not a mauler, a physical guard, or a player that can provide legit push at the point of attack. If the Chiefs want to be a player in the AFC West and have any chance of winning even a single playoff game the offensive line is going to have to be the strength.

I agree. Let's go get ourselves a really good Guard...in the 3rd round.

O.city
03-22-2012, 08:58 AM
If I'm drafting an olineman in the first, it's Konz.


I know a G is overpicked at 11, a C is way overpicked. But we have a guy that was as good in college at G as Decastro and wasn't in front of a once in a lifetime QB.


Even if I could only get an extra 3rd, I'd trade back a little and take Konz.

Dayze
03-22-2012, 09:03 AM
honestly, I hope someone wants to trade up with us. but, I'm not sure who that would be, and for what player. I guess that'll shake out on draft day.

Chiefnj2
03-22-2012, 09:11 AM
2-3 years down the road nobody cares about positional value. It's an afterthought. The only thing that matters is how good of a player the pick is. If the player is really good, nobody cares about value. If the guy under-performs positional value is added on as a reason to be mad "he sucks AND it was a horrible value".

Saul Good
03-22-2012, 09:14 AM
If I'm drafting an olineman in the first, it's Konz.


I know a G is overpicked at 11, a C is way overpicked. But we have a guy that was as good in college at G as Decastro and wasn't in front of a once in a lifetime QB.


Even if I could only get an extra 3rd, I'd trade back a little and take Konz.

That would be ideal. Does anyone know if Konz is actually a Center? It looks like he played Center in college, but he might actually be a Punter or a cheerleader or a ticket taker.

Its recently been brought to my attention that what position players actually play has no bearing on what position they actually are.

Warpaint69
03-22-2012, 09:16 AM
If I'm drafting an olineman in the first, it's Konz.


I know a G is overpicked at 11, a C is way overpicked. But we have a guy that was as good in college at G as Decastro and wasn't in front of a once in a lifetime QB.


Even if I could only get an extra 3rd, I'd trade back a little and take Konz.

Hudson isnt a mauler, hes a technician. He best fits at center.

Saul Good
03-22-2012, 09:18 AM
2-3 years down the road nobody cares about positional value. It's an afterthought. The only thing that matters is how good of a player the pick is. If the player is really good, nobody cares about value. If the guy under-performs positional value is added on as a reason to be mad "he sucks AND it was a horrible value".

So if 5 years down the road, we've got a Probowl Guard, and a team a spot or two behind us has a Probowl QB, DT, or DE, you think we will have made a good pick?

Bewbies
03-22-2012, 09:23 AM
KC, where G's are surefire HOF's worthy of the 11th pick in the draft and QB's are best left to be drafted by someone else.

tredadda
03-22-2012, 09:24 AM
And I hope he is inducted with a team other than the Chiefs. If the chiefs waste a pick that high on a guard, I will be done with them......LT, sure if they need it which they don't. Guard, no way......

Dumbest post in a while. So you are saying you don't want a HOF player (not saying he will be, but using your logic here) because of his position and where he was drafted? If we got him and if he ends up being a HOF player, no one will remember many years from now where he was drafted nor will they think he was a wasted pick. Besides this year there are no players we HAVE to take at 11. The positions we need to fill big time are QB and NT and with QB the only two worth an 11 pick will be gone and no NT is worth a 11 pick. We could use a Guard though. It is not a huge need, but a need nonetheless.

tredadda
03-22-2012, 09:25 AM
FA guards are getting exceptionally rich contracts because the vets sold out the n00bs in the last collective bargaining agreement, so this doesn't have a direct correlation to positonal value.

That could be said about any position. If teams will break the bank to sign a guard then their value is more important than some on here are willing to admit.

Saul Good
03-22-2012, 09:26 AM
KC, where G's are surefire HOF's worthy of the 11th pick in the draft and QB's are best left to be drafted by someone else.

Where next year's QB crop always looks better than this year's, and we're perpetually drafting in no-man's land, so positional value is besl ignored.

tredadda
03-22-2012, 09:27 AM
Look, if there was a ****ing ELITE nose guard in our division...or a Warren Sapp quality inside rusher...I could somewhat justify the pick.

There isn't.

Pass rusher or secondary would be far better value than any guard at 11.

This year, but it would be ignorant to think that can't change in a year or two.

Chiefnj2
03-22-2012, 09:29 AM
So if 5 years down the road, we've got a Probowl Guard, and a team a spot or two behind us has a Probowl QB, DT, or DE, you think we will have made a good pick?

If you draft a pro bowl player it is a good pick.

tredadda
03-22-2012, 09:30 AM
Like Tannehill or not, it is hilarious to see people advocate a guard over a QB at 11.

It's even more hilarious to see people advocating a 2nd round caliber QB at #11 primarily because the QB class he is in is extremely weak.

Saul Good
03-22-2012, 09:31 AM
That could be said about any position. If teams will break the bank to sign a guard then their value is more important than some on here are willing to admit.

Teams are signing FA Guards to bid contracts because other teams are letting their Guards walk because they can be replaced in the middle rounds of the draft.

When teams start franchising Guards over LTs, DEs, WRs, QBs, etc., you let me know.

Hoover
03-22-2012, 09:34 AM
I'm worried that a defensive pick at 11 would be another Tyson Jackson type reach. I'll pass.

Hoover
03-22-2012, 09:35 AM
Teams are signing FA Guards to bid contracts because other teams are letting their Guards walk because they can be replaced in the middle rounds of the draft.

When teams start franchising Guards over LTs, DEs, WRs, QBs, etc., you let me know.
You are so full of shit dude.

NO let Nicks go and signed Grubbs for 5 years 36 million.

Dayze
03-22-2012, 09:36 AM
I'm worried that a defensive pick at 11 would be another Tyson Jackson type reach. I'll pass.

Dre Kirkpatrick? I think he might be a good value at 11.
but yeah....I want to avoid DL at 11.

tredadda
03-22-2012, 09:38 AM
Teams are signing FA Guards to bid contracts because other teams are letting their Guards walk because they can be replaced in the middle rounds of the draft.

When teams start franchising Guards over LTs, DEs, WRs, QBs, etc., you let me know.

The point is if Guards could always be had in the later rounds other teams would not be signing FA guards to big contracts. They would just get theirs in the mid to late rounds. But they do sign veteran guards to big contracts meaning they hold more value than many like you will admit as I previously stated.

philfree
03-22-2012, 09:39 AM
It's even more hilarious to see people advocating a 2nd round caliber QB at #11 primarily because the QB class he is in is extremely weak.

Get used to it because it's probably going to be happening every year with draftees getting more sensical contracts.

Tannehill has as much physical talent as Luck and Griffin he just doesn't have the next ten starts and the tape that goes with it. That makes it hard to evalute the guy as a first rounder. This is no different then Sanchex only having 16 starts except Tannehill has more ability.

tredadda
03-22-2012, 09:39 AM
I'm worried that a defensive pick at 11 would be another Tyson Jackson type reach. I'll pass.

Who cares how far we reach as long as we don't draft an elite talent there because he is a guard. That is foolish, reaching on the other hand is not.

Saul Good
03-22-2012, 09:40 AM
You are so full of shit dude.

NO let Nicks go and signed Grubbs for 5 years 36 million.

They let the best Guard in the league walk, and it was terribly hard to replace him, right?

No, wait. It turns out one of the five best Guards in the league was a free agent as well, so they just signed him instead. That was easy.

HighChief
03-22-2012, 09:44 AM
I think you have to draft impact players. A backup rusher is not going to have as much impact as a starting G on this must run the ball to have success offence! Draft the G and run JC and PH til they cant rush no more lol

tredadda
03-22-2012, 09:44 AM
Get used to it because it's probably going to be happening every year with draftees getting more sensical contracts.

Tannehill has as much physical talent as Luck and Griffin he just doesn't have the next ten starts and the tape that goes with it. That makes it hard to evalute the guy as a first rounder. This is no different then Sanchex only having 16 starts except Tannehill has more ability.

The QB crop next year projects to be better overall. Are we so desperate for a QB that we will roll the dice on a major gamble (and yes, Tannehill is a major gamble drafted at #11 because he shows "potential") when he is only shooting up draft boards because of the overall weakness of this class? Had Barkley and Jones not decided to go back to school fans here would be going Tanne-who? And Jones sucks! This guy would be easily a 2nd rounder had they declared and now suddenly he is worth a #11? That smells of desperation. I want a QB as bad as the next. I was on the S4L bandwagon for a while and I was a big advocate for giving whatever it took to get RGIII, but Tannehill is not worth a #11 pick, not even close.

suds79
03-22-2012, 09:53 AM
Lets look at how some recent SB winners (that is the team to aspire to right?) have done it? Where do they value Guard play?

Giants:
David Diehl – Round 5 pick 160
Chris Snee – Round 2 pick 34

Packers:
TJ Lang – Round 4 pick 109
Josh Sitton – Round 4 pick 135

Saints:
Carl Nicks – Round 5 pick 164
Jahri Evans – Round 4 pick 108


That and no Guard has been taken in the top 15 for 10+ years.

Saul Good
03-22-2012, 09:53 AM
I think you have to draft impact players. A backup rusher is not going to have as much impact as a starting G on this must run the ball to have success offence! Draft the G and run JC and PH til they cant rush no more lol

Are Chiefs fans the only fanbase in the NFL that would advocate drafting a Guard because we need an impact player?

When I think of "impact players" I think of Guards. \Chiefsfans

Dayze
03-22-2012, 09:54 AM
Lets look at how some recent SB winners (that is the team to aspire to right?) have done it? Where do they value Guard play?

Giants:
David Diehl – Round 5 pick 160
Chris Snee – Round 2 pick 34

Packers:
TJ Lang – Round 4 pick 109
Josh Sitton – Round 4 pick 135

Saints:
Carl Nicks – Round 5 pick 164
Jahri Evans – Round 4 pick 108


That and no Guard has been taken in the top 15 for 10+ years.

Boom.

Pasta Giant Meatball
03-22-2012, 09:54 AM
Horrible idea

Chiefs=Good
03-22-2012, 09:57 AM
I will be PISSED if we draft a guard at 11. Atleast trade down...

Saul Good
03-22-2012, 09:57 AM
Lets look at how some recent SB winners (that is the team to aspire to right?) have done it? Where do they value Guard play?

Giants:
David Diehl – Round 5 pick 160
Chris Snee – Round 2 pick 34

Packers:
TJ Lang – Round 4 pick 109
Josh Sitton – Round 4 pick 135

Saints:
Carl Nicks – Round 5 pick 164
Jahri Evans – Round 4 pick 108


That and no Guard has been taken in the top 15 for 10+ years.

So you're telling me we should draft a Guard 107 spots higher than the average Guard on those teams was taken, right? There's simply no other way to interpret that data.

Coogs
03-22-2012, 09:58 AM
If we are going to roll with Cassel at QB, then I think DeCastro at #11 is a real possibility. His pocket awareness and reading of defenses are his biggest deficiencies as a QB by far. He actually can make a decent throw when all the stars and planets are alligned on a given play.

If Bowe signs his contract, then we are set at all of the receiver positions including TE. His RB's are as good as he could ask for running, blocking, and receiving.

All he needs is a line that can give him the extra time he needs to progress through his reads.

Now, thing with this is, if Stanzi or Quinn get a legit shot to compete for the starting QB spot with the starting first string... :shrug:

Chiefnj2
03-22-2012, 10:02 AM
Lets look at how some recent SB winners (that is the team to aspire to right?) have done it? Where do they value Guard play?

Giants:
David Diehl – Round 5 pick 160
Chris Snee – Round 2 pick 34

Packers:
TJ Lang – Round 4 pick 109
Josh Sitton – Round 4 pick 135

Saints:
Carl Nicks – Round 5 pick 164
Jahri Evans – Round 4 pick 108


That and no Guard has been taken in the top 15 for 10+ years.

When were the Giants, Saints and Packers left tackles drafted? Did KC overvalue left tackle when it took Albert?

Chiefs=Good
03-22-2012, 10:02 AM
If we are going to roll with Cassel at QB, then I think DeCastro at #11 is a real possibility. His pocket awareness and reading of defenses are his biggest deficiencies as a QB by far. He actually can make a decent throw when all the stars and planets are alligned on a given play.

If Bowe signs his contract, then we are set at all of the receiver positions including TE. His RB's are as good as he could ask for running, blocking, and receiving.

All he needs is a line that can give him the extra time he needs to progress through his reads.

Now, thing with this is, if Stanzi or Quinn get a legit shot to compete for the starting QB spot with the starting first string... :shrug:

Fuck that. Draft a pass rusher or best available skill player. a guard will do jack for us. a pro bowl guard is like having the best punter and kicker combo in the league - who gives a shit

suds79
03-22-2012, 10:03 AM
When were the Giants, Saints and Packers left tackles drafted? Did KC overvalue left tackle when it took Albert?

LT is a whole different ballgame from Guard.

I have no problem taking LTs in the 1st and high.

Chiefs=Good
03-22-2012, 10:03 AM
When were the Giants, Saints and Packers left tackles drafted? Did KC overvalue left tackle when it took Albert?

Left tackle >>>>>> guard

Chiefs=Good
03-22-2012, 10:04 AM
If we re did that draft we should have taken freeman any way. because u ****ed up once is no excuse to allow u to do it again.

Coogs
03-22-2012, 10:06 AM
Fuck that. Draft a pass rusher or best available skill player. a guard will do jack for us. a pro bowl guard is like having the best punter and kicker combo in the league - who gives a shit

I'm not saying I am in favor of it. I am just saying if we are going to roll with Cassel at QB, then Decastro being our pick at #11 might happen.

suds79
03-22-2012, 10:07 AM
I'm not saying I am in favor of it. I am just saying if we are going to roll with Cassel at QB, then Decastro being our pick at #11 might happen.

Who knows what Scott is thinking. You might be right. Scott might also think "I've feel confident I can easily fill those interior guys in the mid rounds."

And he'd be right.

philfree
03-22-2012, 10:09 AM
The QB crop next year projects to be better overall. Are we so desperate for a QB that we will roll the dice on a major gamble (and yes, Tannehill is a major gamble drafted at #11 because he shows "potential") when he is only shooting up draft boards because of the overall weakness of this class? Had Barkley and Jones not decided to go back to school fans here would be going Tanne-who? And Jones sucks! This guy would be easily a 2nd rounder had they declared and now suddenly he is worth a #11? That smells of desperation. I want a QB as bad as the next. I was on the S4L bandwagon for a while and I was a big advocate for giving whatever it took to get RGIII, but Tannehill is not worth a #11 pick, not even close.

Yes we are and we're in a good position to do it.

Chiefs=Good
03-22-2012, 10:10 AM
I'm not saying I am in favor of it. I am just saying if we are going to roll with Cassel at QB, then Decastro being our pick at #11 might happen.

The only thing thats going to hide cassels lack of talent is a new qb. if u feel the need to provide a crutch for your qb get a new one! I understand ur saying it may happen (even if u dont want it to) but it would be a foolish move.

Coogs
03-22-2012, 10:27 AM
The only thing thats going to hide cassels lack of talent is a new qb. if u feel the need to provide a crutch for your qb get a new one! I understand ur saying it may happen (even if u dont want it to) but it would be a foolish move.

I am not arguing with your point. Fact is, Orton exposed Cassel big time.

DeCastro is a starting OG from the moment he is picked. A mid-round OG may or may not be. See Hudson/Asamoah. Cassel is our QB. I am not going to be shocked if DeCastro is our pick.

Chiefs=Good
03-22-2012, 10:38 AM
Yer i agree and how sad is that!? Imo weve already got two starting guards. i happen to think pioli will do everything in his power to trade down and hell take a centre as some point. Keeping hudson at guard is a smart move imo.

Coogs
03-22-2012, 11:09 AM
Yer i agree and how sad is that!? Imo weve already got two starting guards. i happen to think pioli will do everything in his power to trade down and hell take a centre as some point. Keeping hudson at guard is a smart move imo.

I'm not sure who might be there that would prompt another team to trade up, but let's say Cleveland goes QB at #4, and Richardson is there at #11. A couple of trade scenario's...

Cleveland... acquiring more picks for us...
#11 and #44... worth 1720 points
#22, #37,#68, and #100 (?)... worth 1680 points

Cincinnati... swap of picks
#11 and #44... still 1720 points
#17 and #21... 1750 points

O.city
03-22-2012, 11:09 AM
Didn't we try and trade up last year to take Pouncey, a C?



I think Konz will be the pick.

tredadda
03-22-2012, 11:16 AM
This is a f'in stupid argument. Normally you don't draft a guard at #11 when you have other pressing needs and that talent is available. I could understand if we needed a LT and chose DeCastro over Kalil, that would be stupid. If we needed a QB and chose DeCastro over Luck, again stupid. Right now this team has two major holes QB and NT. We can reach at #11 to fill either one of them which is as stupid as can be or get an elite player at a position that could use an upgrade. It amazes me that people pissed and moaned about drafting TJ @ #3 even though his position was a major need, but openly advocate drafting Poe or Tannehill even though both are major reaches. Let's not forget that Stanford, with their best QB prospect since Elway, was primarily a running team and DeCastro was a major reason for that. Because of our current QB situation, we will again be a running team and we could use a player like DeCastro who would help anchor this line till we get our QB next year. This is all assuming that we can't trade out of the #11 pick and are forced to pick there.