If you could have him play both sides of the ball and special teams when the need arises/formation called for it, he'd have value.

But not every down, first round value.

The guy has great field vision and uses that very effectively. (Thought he was an excellent running back for the Huskies, maybe even better than he was as a linebacker.)

But he doesn't have the speed as it relates to his size to be truly effective on either side of the ball. He's not Ryan Shazier. He's not Marshawn Lynch. (However, I think he's closer to Lynch than Shazier in terms of his football skills.)

Except he doesn't want to play RB.

I saw that.

That changes though, especially when you are getting blown the **** up and worked over by NFL tackles and tight ends every down.

He gets drafted a lot higher as an OLB than a RB at this point and I assume that's where that's coming from. Once he gets into a system, his biggest value is his versatility and that's why a team is going to pick him up versus just a good OLB.

Shaq plays much faster than that.

Not sure I'd draft him at 18, but I'd love to get him in the 2nd.

I wouldn't spend a pick on him prior to the fourth round.

He's a very good football player, but at the next level, he's a gadget guy at best.

We run a nickel with 3 safeties almost 60% of the time. Shaq would be great as the box guy in those sets.

If we hadn't signed Branch, I'd have brought up Shaq as a guy to keep an eye on awhile ago.

If he goes to a quality situation, he's gonna be a pro bowl quality player.

IMO he's similar to Kam.

That's crazy.

He will be long gone by the end of the second round and I think NE might take him at the end of the first.

He has to go to a team with a coaching staff that understands how to use him.

He might be my favorite player in this draft, do I'm a bit biased.

Just depends how you can or do use said gadget

There's a term for that.


I think it's called dime.

at least it something different

:shrug:

I brought him up in a trade down scenario selection, he wouldn't go 18th

Clay Matthews says "Yo".

I really have no bearing on who the Chiefs will pick this year. It is such a toss-up.

As for me personally, I'm between CB Kevin Johnson and OT Ereck Flowers. I'm leaning toward Johnson.

Wait, Bowser said you don't do this. How can this be?

You seemed to have missed the point entirely

Not surprising

And what point would that be? When someone says "you DON'T draft interior line in the first round" and someone else shows that teams actually do it proves the first person wrong.

In fact, a good general rule of thumb is if anyone says "you don't" do something they are talking out of their ass.

Chiefs: Cameron Irving
Me: Eric Kendricks

Those guys were the missing links on the next championship all those teams won. You ****ing got me.

Good grief.

:facepalm:

So are you being contrarian just because, or do you have a really good reason for taking interior linemen in the first round?

I don't have a good reason, but many teams do. I wouldn't have said anything if you said "I would never draft an interior lineman in the first" it was your definitive "you don't" implying your opinion is fact that I was objecting to.

:hmmm:

The sad thing is that your posts often read like a parody account but as we all know, they're dead serious.

Maybe you're trolling yourself?

2 years ago, Dorsey invested in the present.
Last year he invested in the future.

And this year he's investing in the present.

So, after one year of looking to the future, apparently the future is now.

I am not necessarily advocating drafting a lineman in the 1st round, but I am strongly advocating investing a pick or 2 in the first 4 rounds (5 picks).

Building for the future is fine, and exactly what I would have been doing from the moment I took the reins of this franchise if I were Dorsey.

But he appears to be building for this year, and all the weapons at Smith's disposal are worthless unless you provide him with the best protection possible.

Building for this year, huh?

Then I would surmise giving Alex and the aged Hermano All-Stars a respectable shot before moving on.

Seemed?

This "seems" to be a regular occurrence, as evidenced by his thoughtful responses.

The raiders once drafted a kicker in the first round. They were pretty good at the time too.

Because the Dallas Cowboys herp derp

You are dumb as ****.

I said "you don't" for the reasons I listed - great interior offensive lineman are found regularly throughout the middle rounds, and this draft in particular is heavy with playmakers on the top end. The Chiefs need playmakers desperately on both sides of the ball. I'm not sure why this needs to be explained to you.

And my opinion may not literally be fact in this case, but I'll put my opinion to the test as to which would help this team more - Cam Erving or (name your playmaker here).

TONY ROMO

As I've said many times, I'd rather see the Chiefs "reach" for a skill position player such as Lockett, Agholor, Williams or Dorsett, than pick a Cam Erving (who's too tall, with long arms).

If they're dedicating a first round pick to offensive line, choose Flowers or Collins and let him hold down right tackle for the next five years. It's certainly not "my" first choice but it beats the hell out of wasting a high pick on a center.

go look at the first round (specifically the first 15 picks) and report back

Sanchez / Crabtree>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Jackson

Turd is a turd

What do you have with a Pro Bowl C compared to a Pro Bowl anything else but K, P, FB, and G?

Sacman has a chubby

Yes. How hard is this to understand? This team needs explosion from a draft that is chock full of it at the top.

I'm sure to get a reasonable, objective response from a guy that thinks Russell Wilson is a Top 3 QB - meaning he's better than come combination of Manning, Brady, Brees, Rodgers and Luck.

But because I'm interested in how you'll turn this into another trainwreck, here you go:

Sanchez
Raji
Orakpo
Jenkins
Cushing
Maclin
Mack
Harvin
Oher
Davis
Matthews
Nicks

There's 12 guys - over 40% of the remaining picks in the first round who wouldn't have been any worse than Tyson Jackson - and many would have been MUCH better.

Hindsight is always 20/20

You're right.

Unfortunately for you, guys here were making these comments within seconds of the pick leaving the commissioner's mouth.

God damn the Chiefs were, are, and always will be ****ing morons.

Not really sure who these play makers are after the top ten picks.

But aside from the fact that Erving would be a reach at 18, when I look at this team as it is constructed right now, with Alex Smith as QB,if you have an O-Lineman and a play maker who are rated relatively equally on your board, the O-Lineman is going to do more to help your team.

This team now has play makers, or potential play makers, in Charles, Maclin, Kelce, and DAT.

If Alex Smith can't find them because he isn't protected, then those guys are ging to be play makers who won't get a chance to make plays.

Chiefs pick at #18: La'el Collins
My pick at #18: La'el Collins

*So **** it. La'el Collins it is

He's shown the inability to find them even when he has time. There are a ton of screen caps posted of him missing guys from a clean pocket.

Alex Smith is the enigma in the equation, for sure. Are we getting second half of 2013 Alex, or 2014 Alex? Like OTWP says, good protection for Alex isn't necessarily a sure fire way to increase his production. Hopefully he's out practicing throws on the route tree to Maclin as we speak...

And to Milkman's statement, I don't disagree with your reasoning really at all, I just feel personally that what you can get from a impact athletic position in the first round trumps what you could get from a lineman in the first round (don't break your monitor throwing your Quinoa burger at it, Sacc). Of course every position is hit or miss (Jon Baldwin, Tyson Jackson), but that's just how my feeling towards first rounders have evolved over time.

So, if he can't find play makers even with time, how the hell is he going to find them when he doesn't have time?

But that's my problem.

Erving isn't the Andrew Luck of centers. He's middle of the pack of any top-picked center that comes through the draft any year.

If you want Alex Smith to have good protection, drafting and starting Erving in year one at C isn't the way to do it. We missed that boat when we made the financial decision to let Hudson go to Oakland.

So instead he's being touted as the Swiss Army Knife of offensive linemen. The problem is that like most tools on a Swiss Army Knife, they're often inadequate for the job, and you're almost far better off going into your shed to find the right item. Anything other than cutting open taped boxes makes them kinda bulky and not the best things to use.

If I could be convinced that Erving is a draft-and-start RT, I'd be for it. If I could be convinced that he's a draft-and-start RT who can also dabble at C when we need him, I'd be for it. Right now I see a huge question mark at C where his struggles will cause us to wonder about his career like we are with Eric Fisher if he's ever going to "get it." And as a LT switching to RT, I'd rather just draft La'el Collins and have him kick ass from Day One than deal with that nightmare again.

At least Collins has shown proficiency at both RG and RT, which are easily swapped and require little extra of the player to perform adequately.

From a general perspective, I completely agree with that.

For a smart man, I haven't been able to figure out why it is you can not grasp the concept that I am not arguing specifically for Erving.

I keep forgetting Sac is a vegan.

I think he would be able to chill out more often if he just had a nice juicy steak once in awhile.

or Dorsey is one of these GM that only believes in doing something every other year in FA.

I believe Carl Peterson talked about being one of those guys as well.

No, I understand you're not Direckshun when it comes to Erving. Sorry if it came off that way. I was just talking about why if Dorsey's justification for possibly picking Erving is that he's functional at both spots, meaning we're killing two of Alex's protection problems with one stone, I don't think that's what's going to happen at all. Your comments just sort of jogged that thought.

And that's my position as well, probably better stated.

I completely understand where you're coming from, I'm just not thrilled about doubling down on bad decisions - I can't think of many good teams where the draft decisions are made to bail out a QB.

Most of the good teams didn't make a bad decision at QB.

So why compound that mistake by making another one, simply because of your limited QB?

He's not going to be here forever.

Because, when they finally realize they've made a mistake, the one thing that will help a young QB, if they finally decide to actually make that plunge, is protection.

Dane's draft in 2009 would have been our best bet:
1. Sanchez
2. Max Unger
3. Kraig Urbik

yeah, i googled it...

it is indeed called a dime...

couldn't agree more...

the line must improve substantially, i was glad to see the grubs trade...

Who cares? 6 years ago and a different GM. Write your hate letters to Atlanta if you're so upset

I'm hoping the Broncos take Erving with their first pick, but I doubt he's there. KC should take a WR.

For once I'm finally glad Manning is your QB. It will be a wasted year and his last. And next year the Broncos will be full of deserters. Nobody will want to play there.

Keep moving the goalposts, ****stain.

You said, "hindsight is 20/20"

When reminded that many did not need the benefit of hindsight, your response is "who cares"?

You're making Splatbass look like a competent poster.

Tbh, there are guys complaining about every pick. Dontari Poe was the worst pick ever.

Can't disagree with that, you're right.

But there is a difference between "guys" complaining about every pick and the majority of the board calling Jackson a mistake.

That was one of the rare times this board was nearly united in opinion - until the inevitable flip-flops started.