Chiefs vrabel a chief - Page 40

oldandslow · 02-27-2009, 01:24 PM

details to follow

**SAUTO** · 02-27-2009, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Look at the brightside atleast we won't be using a top 5 pick on a LB.

we may not be using a top 5 pick at all this year

keg in kc · 02-27-2009, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Look at the brightside atleast we won't be using a top 5 pick on a LB.

Jesus, dude, don't set us up karmically like that.

I'm I have to sit through a ****ing press conference in late april about how they think curry is going to be a perfect run stuffer in the 3-4 I'm blaming it on your sorry ****ing ass.

Mecca · 02-27-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doomy3

Well, at least you and Darth CarlSatan share this opinion.

I've never thought it was going to happen that just isn't how you build a team. He's from a team that made a living off of FA and low drafted players at the position.

RUSH · 02-27-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief3188

Yeah because that worked out horribly with Derrick Thomas.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 02-27-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I think what you're missing is that they're completely different players. Edwards is an undersized coverage linebacker that plays inside in a 3-4, and we've already got one of those in Derrick Johnson. Vrabel is physically much bigger than Edwards (he's 2 inches taller and probably 25 pounds heavier), who can rush the passer, and he'll play outside in the 3-4. We don't have anybody like that on the roster right now.

Now, don't confuse that for me saying I'm signing off on the trade, I'm just trying to get some things straightened out. He's not Donnie Edwards, at all, by any stretch of the imagination.

Technically, yes, they are different players.

However, I'm fully expecting similar results, except this time, we used a draft pick instead of signing a FA.

More than anything, I'm using Edwards as a comparison from a supposed leadership aspect and age similarities.

As I've said before, if we had signed him as a FA, I'd be Ok with it.

If he was 2 years younger, and we were going to get the 12 sack Vrabel and not the declining Vrabel, I'd be OK with it.

Mecca · 02-27-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chief3188

Yeah because that worked out horribly with Derrick Thomas.

.....For the love of christ again, Aaron Curry is not a pass rusher therefore is he not Derrick Thomas get it?

**doomy3** · 02-27-2009, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

I've never thought it was going to happen that just isn't how you build a team. He's from a team that made a living off of FA and low drafted players at the position.

That's all fine and I understand that position, but this Vrabel signing has absolutely no bearing on the Chiefs drafting or not drafting Aaron Curry.

Mecca · 02-27-2009, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Jesus, dude, don't set us up karmically like that.

I'm I have to sit through a ****ing press conference in late april about how they think curry is going to be a perfect run stuffer in the 3-4 I'm blaming it on your sorry ****ing ass.

I wasn't exactly being serious when I said it but I've never really believed we'd draft Curry.

orange · 02-27-2009, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Look at the brightside atleast we won't be using a top 5 pick on a LB.

You don't actually think the Chiefs see Vrabel as a long term solution, do you?

kcbubb · 02-27-2009, 04:39 PM

Vrabel has got to be pissed. going from the pats to the chiefs??? wow. that has got to suck. I'm not upset about the Vrabel trade. He was probably a good value. I bet we gave up very little for him. Hopefully a 6th rounder. We will definitely need the LB depth with 3-4. I just have a lot more questions now with switching to the 3-4. We now have 4 spots on our weakest position, LB. I know that we are going to be asking a lot of players to move and do things they have never really done before.

Where do we fill all these LB holes?
What is Dorsey's role?
Who's our NT? Tank?
What will Hali play? LB or DE?

This is going to be very scary/interesting.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 02-27-2009, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Vrabel is reported as saying that injuries played no part in his decline in production last year.

Listen, I'm not trying to sway anyone, just voicing my opinion. It is what it is, and it's over. I'd love to see it work out, but since I don't see him playing for 4 more years, I'm not seeing it. He's a rental.

You're right. All the way. Didn't we cover this very topic a day or two ago?
FA's and Trades bringing marginal improvement to hold the fort this year as we keep drafting?

Quite so.

I gotta' go take care of some business, but if Crazy Horsedicksucker keeps ****in' with ya, and yous'd like-a some back up, let me know when I get back; I'm in the mood for a good Planet beat down.

Peace!@

Mecca · 02-27-2009, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orange

You don't actually think the Chiefs see Vrabel as a long term solution, do you?

No...LB is a position where the idea of long term solutions is a little overblown you should be able to cycle guys in, it's the RB of defense.

rad · 02-27-2009, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Fun times, I am out for the afternoon.

I just wanted to take some time to to thank Warpath for even allowing me to post on this thread. Everyone have a moment of silence for him today so we can all appreciate the sacrifice he makes by posting his opinions.

Jeesh, you're a real dick.

Huffman83 · 02-27-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcbubb

Vrabel has got to be pissed. going from the pats to the chiefs??? wow. that has got to suck. I'm not upset about the Vrabel trade. He was probably a good value. I bet we gave up very little for him. Hopefully a 6th rounder. We will definitely need the LB depth with 3-4. I just have a lot more questions now with switching to the 3-4. We now have 4 spots on our weakest position, LB. I know that we are going to be asking a lot of players to move and do things they have never really done before.

Where do we fill all these LB holes?
What is Dorsey's role?
Who's our NT? Tank?
What will Hali play? LB or DE?

This is going to be very scary/interesting.

It's not like what those players were initially doing worked.

crazycoffey · 02-27-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

You're only talking about the risk side of the equation, and not the reward. The risk is obviously greater with any rookie QB taken high (sanchez or stafford or anybody...), but most would argue that the potential reward is also much higher.

Anyway, Sanchez doesn't really fit into what I was talking about. The question I was raising was what the potential reward is, long term, with Cassel himself. And again, I think if you're giving that combination of picks up, you're expecting him to be a star, regardless of what you think about Sanchez or Stafford or anybody else.

No I was talking about both the risk and reward, stafford/sanchez/cassell are all risks and all have potential rewards.

02-27-2009, 01:24 PM
oldandslow Veteran Join Date: Apr 2004 Casino cash: $3773149	vrabel a chief details to follow
Posts: 4,621

02-27-2009, 04:39 PM	#595
kcbubb Veteran Join Date: Nov 2008 Casino cash: $5046719	Vrabel has got to be pissed. going from the pats to the chiefs??? wow. that has got to suck. I'm not upset about the Vrabel trade. He was probably a good value. I bet we gave up very little for him. Hopefully a 6th rounder. We will definitely need the LB depth with 3-4. I just have a lot more questions now with switching to the 3-4. We now have 4 spots on our weakest position, LB. I know that we are going to be asking a lot of players to move and do things they have never really done before. Where do we fill all these LB holes? What is Dorsey's role? Who's our NT? Tank? What will Hali play? LB or DE? This is going to be very scary/interesting.
Posts: 2,555