Cool. He's a once-per-five-years project. I just wanted to know.

Serious question. If Stafford isn't there, do you still want to draft a QB with that spot? I don't know that prospects well enough to express an opinion yet, but it'll sure be disappointing if we have a top-three pick and there's no worthy prospect available.

yes, we get a higher pick in every round...think Flowers...think how many times a player we wanted was taken just ahead of us?

Right, but specific to the first round, what do you think? It seems when teams miss on top 5 picks or have to overpay on a reach that it sets them back a lot of times.

Hamas has stated several times he is against a trade to drop down a few slots, even if that means adding some more good talent in this or next draft.

And it always stems from waning "Elite Playmakers." My question is if there aren't really any of those other than Stafford, and there are several guys like Mays, Orakpo, Oher, etc that could be had a little later, wouldn't it make sense to try to move back?

The odds of being able to trade out of a top 5 pick is very very slim, unless you are willing to take less than what your pick is worth.

You are assuming that

A) Stafford is gone
B) Orakpo won't have a top 5 grade
C) That picking 34 instead of 37 has no value.

I'm just asking if a team did want to, and say we could drop to 10 and get value for the pick we were giving up, would you want to this year?

My theory is that the top five picks are overvalued in the draft charts. I could be wrong, but I think that NFL draft chart was originally put together by the Cowboys decades ago. I think the fact that so few organizations make trades out of that spot means that those artificial values are set too high.

There are no other QBs worth a top 15 pick to me in this year's class, unless Mark Sanchez declares. I wouldn't be happy with us spending 3 on him, but I wouldn't be furious.

My personal wants for the Chiefs this year are:

1 Stafford
2 Orakpo
3 Maualuga/Mays

We'll get one of the first two. There's no way St. Louis passes on both a QB and a LT. They'll take one or the other. The real no man's land for us is 4-5, and we are guaranteed top three, so we're good.

And FTR, he's a once every five year type QB. Just like Mario Williams is a once-in-every-five-year type DE and Adrian Peterson a RB, Sean Taylor a S, and Patrick Willis a Mike Backer.

not to sound flippant, but i don't really care about Clark's money...we have a ridiculous amount of cap space, and it goes up every year..as long as you aren't signing lots of vets to long term contracts the cap shouldn't be much of an issue...

i don't know who the next best player is...i haven't watched any of the DE's, so your guess is as good as mine...I've watched Mays and think he is bad ass, but at #2? that's tough...i wouldn't be averse to moving down 2-3 spots, but how often does someone trade for the #2 if it isn't a QB?

in the end, you probably just pick some one and let Clark's bank account worry about it...

The good news is that DE and MLB are positions of crying need.

I'd really hate to spend a top pick on a MLB, but then again I'm sure tired of seeing us get destroyed up the middle.

We're not drafting a MLB. It's going to be a QB or RDE, barring something batshit insane happening.

The challenge is that players are going to get taken ahead of you if you trade down. Like you, I really don't care about Clark's money, so I'd rather have the second-best player in the draft than the fifth-best and the 50th-best or whatever. I'd rather have dense concentrations of talent than breadth of talent.

yeah, ultimately i want the best player we can get even we are perceived to have over paid based on draft position....

we can fill out the roster with the rest of the draft, first round is for finding stars...

I said this before Clark wants a primetime QB, and thus getting a a new regime that will draft him one.

That makes me very happy!