Thread: Chiefs If not #1, where?
View Single Post
Old 01-16-2013, 03:29 PM   #326
SNR SNR is offline
Simply Red's backup vocalist
 
SNR's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Where the hell is SNR
Casino cash: $4578753
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud View Post
Why?

If Dorsey and Reid were to trade for a Flynn or Smith, they'd have an immediate, capable starter, which would allow them to accumulate picks and address serious issues of need. It would also give them breathing room in order to draft a QB in the later rounds and develop him or wait until the 2014 draft.

Just to clarify, I'm not stating that this is my preference. I'm stating that it's an option that either hasn't been discussed or met with such disdain that people are unwilling to discuss.

And again, given the public statements by Dorsey and Reid, I think it's just as likely to happen as taking a QB #1 overall.
Here's an entirely undisdainful (yes, I will make that a real word) explanation of why that strategy is bogus.

The Chiefs need a great QB. That we can all agree on. The purpose of acquiring a younger vet like Flynn is to save draft value at that #1 overall pick and to get the team in a better position either later in the 2013 draft or at any time in the 2014 draft to simply find the right guy that they need. It's basically saying, "Boy, getting this first down is pretty risky. We need to punt so we save on field position, protect our limited game manager QB, and try again next possession, ideally when our defense makes a stop."

Now, when it's 4th and 20 at your own 10 yard line, then that's a pretty smart strategy. You might get lucky and get a defensive TD even, but if you don't you're at least keeping yourself alive to fight another day. And that's kind of the position the Chiefs were in last year in the first round. We played conservative and stayed where we were, and all of a sudden the draft's top 3 QBs were gone. We said, "Well, shitpiss. It doesn't do any good to draft Brandon ****ing Weeden at 11 overall. That's just stupid. Let's take a non QB here."

The problem with doing that this year is there IS no reason to play field position. We have the #1 overall pick. That's the highest position you can get to find your top QB. It doesn't do any good to wait until 2014 when we're not going to have as high a vantage point or decision to pick the right guy. If this were football, we'd be down 3 TDs in the 3rd quarter and have the ball 3rd and 1 from the opponent's 20 yard line. Instead of treating it like 4 down territory, the play being called is the equivalent of a kneel down so we can bring on the field goal kicker and "save the points". In this metaphor, those precious points are "draft value." They're worthless because of the situation. Down 3 TDs. We need TDs (QBs) or at the very least a ****ing first down. It does no good to play for points here.

And yes, it WOULD be one thing if next year had like, 5 Andrew Lucks so there was a pretty good ****ing chance we'd be able to pick one of them and not have to lose out like we did last year. But there's not. There's ****ing Teddy Bridgewater, a much worse prospect than either Geno OR Wilson in my opinion. Call is speculation and assuming the unknowable, but for crying out loud, think about it. You're punting the ball away for TEDDY BRIDGEWATER? WTF makes the Dorsey or Reid think their QB will be there in 2014?

And we can keep playing this game. "Well, what if he IS there in 2014?" Okay, but what if he's ****ing not, which is a very likely scenario?

Ever hear the phrase "one in the hand is worth two in the bush?" That describes this situation perfectly. If we draft a QB at 1, we're getting the best QB in a draft class. There will be other better QBs in future drafts. But we don't know when those will come around. And it's ****ing useless to speculate when that's going to happen.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper16 View Post
I would read an entire blog of SNR breaking down athletes' musical capabilities like draft scouting reports.
Posts: 54,671
SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.SNR is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote