Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 5456542)

I'd love to have 5 picks too, but that's not going to happen. Nobody's going to give up that much to move to our spot.

Originally Posted by kcbubb (Post 5456602)

I agree. But most people on this board would rather have Sanchez than all those picks. My point is they aren't rational about the value of Sanchez. I understand that the QB is the most important position on the field, but a QB can only be as good as the team as he plays on.

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501 (Post 5456581)

I don't understand what's so complicated about this and why I get so much shit for this. A house that was selling for $250,000 three years ago, would you pay $250,000 for that house today? Of course you wouldn't--that house is probably worth about $150,000-$200,000 today. If that's the way I negotiate, I have a great house for you to buy--I would love to sell it to you.

And yet, NFL GMs have standardized the price that they believe every pick is worth from year to year, even though some draft classes are graded as better than others. And so, Calvin Johnson carries the same trade value as Chris Long. I don't understand why this is so difficult to comprehend. You negotiate trade value based on the value of the players left on the board and that value should be different from year to year. And if you are not hot and heavy over anyone you have left, then you have to lower your trade value a bit to trade out of the pick.

When I say the trade chart is dumb, I am saying that it should be used as a guide, but most teams use it as a bible and will not accept any trade unless it strictly matches the chart. And for the record, I have said many times that the trade chart isn't horribly wrong, but in the top 3, the picks are grossly overvalued. That is a stance that most of you agree with, and yet are fighting me tooth and nail over. I'm not saying you hose yourself, but you have to be willing to show teams that you're willing to negotiate, even if that means you don't get full value from the draft chart. Teams are way too reluctant to do that and often times reluctantly reach for a player (i.e. Rams and Chris Long) or take a player they're not excited about (i.e. Alex Smith and the 49ers).

Originally Posted by kcbubb (Post 5456602)

I agree. But most people on this board would rather have Sanchez than all those picks. My point is they aren't rational about the value of Sanchez. I understand that the QB is the most important position on the field, but a QB can only be as good as the team as he plays on.

Originally Posted by RustShack (Post 5456776)

If we trade down then we wouldn't be able to get Stafford or Sanchez tool bag. Teams don't just pass on franchise QB's because some dumbass who doesn't know shit about prospects doesn't like a guy because of where Mel Kiper has him ranked.

Originally Posted by kcbubb (Post 5456910)

Again... You are missing my point. my point was not pass the QB because of the lack of running game. My point is that using Ryan and Flacco as a reason to take Sanchez is incorrect. Just because those players have been successful with their teams doesn't mean that they would have been with us. Nor does it mean that Sanchez will be a franchise QB with the Chiefs. It is a different situation. you have to evaluate it entirely in and of itself. You are also wrong about Kiper. Kiper has Sanchez ranked pretty high. He has the Chiefs selecting him.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 5456930)

You draft a QB based solely on his potential.

If you feel that he can not succeed with the talent, or lack thereof, in place around him, you let him sit and learn for a year while you upgrade the talent.

You don't pass on a potential franchise QB because the rest of your team sucks.

Originally Posted by kcbubb (Post 5456910)

Again... You are missing my point. my point was not pass the QB because of the lack of running game. My point is that using Ryan and Flacco as a reason to take Sanchez is incorrect. Just because those players have been successful with their teams doesn't mean that they would have been with us. Nor does it mean that Sanchez will be a franchise QB with the Chiefs. It is a different situation. you have to evaluate it entirely in and of itself. You are also wrong about Kiper. Kiper has Sanchez ranked pretty high. He has the Chiefs selecting him.

Originally Posted by kcbubb (Post 5456910)

Again... You are missing my point. my point was not pass the QB because of the lack of running game. My point is that using Ryan and Flacco as a reason to take Sanchez is incorrect. Just because those players have been successful with their teams doesn't mean that they would have been with us. Nor does it mean that Sanchez will be a franchise QB with the Chiefs. It is a different situation. you have to evaluate it entirely in and of itself. You are also wrong about Kiper. Kiper has Sanchez ranked pretty high. He has the Chiefs selecting him.

Originally Posted by beach tribe (Post 5457337)

God we get it. You think we should pass on a QB, which is absolutely ignorant. Let's build the team around Thigpen then. A guy who can't even run a pro-style offense.

Originally Posted by ChiefRon (Post 5457395)

But why? To try to make a push for the playoffs or something?

We're thinking long-term rebuilding, and some fans are thinking quick turnaround, a la Atlanta/Miami.