Quote:
Originally Posted by the Talking Can
so how does williams compare to raji from last year?
still puzzled, just on position, that we took jackson over raji....though i assume they had concerns about his long term work ethic....or something
|
If memory serves, Raji had a failed drug test. I'm going to stereotype and say that it's not a good thing to give a bunch of money to a fatass that likes to smoke weed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoMoChief
I would ****ing be livid as hell if we took him at 5. 15...ok, but not at 5, especially when Berry is sitting there.
|
You better warm up to the idea then.
We've been talking about this for over a month.
For the record, I don't necessarily think Williams is worth the #5 pick, but as I've said before, I think we'll pick him and I think he would benefit us more than Berry in the short term. (Seeing as we're ranked 31st against the run and around 22nd against the pass). I don't think he's a better NT than Berry is FS, I just think the NT position is more important in a 3-4. I'd prefer to slide down a few spots and get him but that might not be an option.
There are a couple of scenarios where we could move back and get him and I think both of those scenarios are likely to occur. Berry & Clausen both being there at 5 could allow us to trade back with Cleveland, who I think would like to have Berry and might be willing to trade up for him.
If he's not the guy we want, you take the trade EVEN if there is a slight loss of point value. The point value chart is overrated and not worth much more than the paper its printed on. For evidence of that, just look and see what happens when you go by it, like we must have last year when we didn't trade back and took TJ at 3. Its a reference/starting point. There is still a negotiation that has to take place. If pick 5 is worth 1700 and pick 7 is worth 1500, I don't think you should NOT make the trade just because you only can get a 4th & 5th in return (88+38.5=126.5). That 4th rounder could end up being your starting center for the next 10 years. Either way, don't reach on a player just because you can't get the appropriate value out of your pick. You especially don't fugg up royally and pay a kid way more than he's worth just because you are stuck and can't get "appropriate value" to trade down.
Draft goes as follows
1 STL Bradford
2 DET Suh
3 TAM McCoy
4 WAS Okung
5 CLE Berry (via trade)
6 SEA Trent Williams
7 KC...if Clausen is there and they aren't going to take him anyway, try to swing another trade with Buffalo. BUF takes Clausen
8 OAK Who the f@ck knows, probably someone like Jacoby Ford
9 KC Dan Williams
If we slid back 4 spots and only picked up two 4th round picks, I'd be happy because I believe Williams is the guy they'll pick either way.
In this scenario, I wouldn't be shocked if we called Buffalo and the following occured:
Pioli "Hey Chan, Jimmy is here and we've had a couple of calls about trading down but we wanted to talk to you first. Do you want him? The kid is going to be a stud you know."
Chan "Gee Scott you know I do and you kind of owe me one for having to work for that dickhead last year. How about our 1st, 4th & 5th?"
Pioli "Sounds good Chan, take good care of him, we debated about taking him ourselves but we really need to work on our defense."
Chan "Will do Scott, thanks a million. You're swell."
Chan immediately hangs up the phone and phones in the pick.
Roger Goodell "There has been a trade between Kansas City and Buffalo. With the 9th pick the Buffalo Bills select Dan Williams, Defensive Tackle"
Pioli "Chan you motherf@cker! What the hell?"
Chan "Scott you take good care of Jimmy, I hear he's going to be a stud"
There you have it Clausen fan's, the most likely scenario I can see us drafting Jimmy is because of a screw up.