Chiefs Are 'Badly' Trying To Trade Down To Middle Of First Round

[TRR]

Not sure if it has been posted.....

Chiefs Are 'Badly' Trying To Trade Down To Middle Of First*Round

by Joel Thorman on Apr 18, 2010 10:34 AM CDT in 2010 Campaign

Last year about this time, Michael Lombardi of the National Football Post first reported that the Chiefs were "in love" with LSU DE Tyson Jackson. A few days later and Jackson was the Chiefs pick in the draft.

Now Lombardi reports that the Chiefs are trying like hell to move down in the draft.

"The Chiefs are trying, and I mean really trying, to move down," Lombardi reports. "My sources tell me they'll be willing to go down as far as 15 for the right deal because they feel they can find a player in that range."

It's a fine line between trading down and trading down too far. According to Lombardi, our theory of the Eagles offering up the 24th and 37th picks for the Chiefs fifth pick doesn't look like it's happening. By staying around 15, they can still have a shot at a game changer -- Alabama LB Rolando McClain and Texas S Earl Thomas come to mind here -- as well as picking up extra selections.

That said, who's the Chiefs trading partner? SB Nation's Mocking The Draft takes an excellent look at this situation and comes to the conclusion that San Francisco might be the only team in that area that has a chance of moving up.

Lombardi reports the Chiefs are hoping someone wants to get in line to pick Notre Dame QB Jimmy Clausen.

[Rain Man]

If that's true, then what does it mean? I would think it means they're wanting to go offensive line.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

If that's true, then what does it mean? I would think it means they're wanting to go offensive line.

No, how the hell do you get that from this?

Myopia rules this damn forum sometimes.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Sure they want to trade down.

Why draft a superstar when you can move down, save money, pick a lessor talent, and pick up a couple of 2nd round picks?

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Sure they want to trade down.

Why draft a superstar when you can move down, save money, pick a lessor talent, and pick up a couple of 2nd round picks?

This is pretty much where I stand, too. Trade-downs in my opinion are almost always a bad move.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

This is pretty much where I stand, too. Trade-downs in my opinion are almost always a bad move.

I've been a big supporter of trade downs. But only if....
You get a huge draft compensation

OR

You think there's either a superstar at a lower positional value like Safety or a very good player at a high positional value like 3-4 OLB at that spot

OR

You're absolutely convinced that there are playmakers you need where you sit (like last year, where I think we absolutely should have traded down)

Because there are playmakers we can take, if we trade down, we sure as hell better get good trade value. And we sure as hell better not take a "safe" position like ILB or RT or a second-tier Safety like Thomas.

[teedubya]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

This is pretty much where I stand, too. Trade-downs in my opinion are almost always a bad move.

It worked in 2003, when we traded down to get Larry Johnson... we didn't need any defensive guys like Troy Paluamalu or anything. Especially in 2003 with GRob's awesome D.

[Frankie]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

This is pretty much where I stand, too. Trade-downs in my opinion are almost always a bad move.

Every year presents different good scenarios for a team. If we are one or two superstars away from a SB caliber team then I say stay pat. But if we need a bunch of talented players, you jump on any opportunity for a good trade down that gives you more draft choices. This way you do not bring an expensive superstar into a team that cannot help him. The guy will cost a lot and probably is used up faster than if he has a a good solid team around him. By the time the team is any good, he is no longer viable.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Sure they want to trade down.

Why draft a superstar when you can move down, save money, pick a lessor talent, and pick up a couple of 2nd round picks?

It had better be a pass rusher. And we better get one hell of a value. Otherwise, this is a ridiculously stupid trade.

[sedated]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Sure they want to trade down.

Why draft a superstar when you can move down, save money, pick a lessor talent, and pick up a couple of 2nd round picks?

Yes, because you know exactly what the future holds. Berry will be a hall of famer, right? And no one picked in the late first round will ever be a pro-bowler, right?

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by milkman

No, how the hell do you get that from this?

Myopia rules this damn forum sometimes.

I've been hearing that there are a slew of offensive tackles available, and I hear about only 2 QBs 1 or 2 RBs, there are questions about every receiver, 2 safeties, 1 CB, and maybe a couple of linebackers. Could be that they want Dan Williams and presume he'll slide, but a low-risk move would be assuming they want one of the herd of offensive linemen.

[Mr. Arrowhead]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

If that's true, then what does it mean? I would think it means they're wanting to go offensive line.

I disagree, i think it means we are eying Mcclain or Earl Thomas

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by Mr. Arrowhead

I disagree, i think it means we are eying Mcclain or Earl Thomas

Yah and maybe a RT with the extra pick.

[kysirsoze]

Originally Posted by Mr. Arrowhead

I disagree, i think it means we are eying Mcclain or Earl Thomas

This. And if they trade down for Thomas they better pray he is a star and/or Berry isn't.

[bowener]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

If that's true, then what does it mean? I would think it means they're wanting to go offensive line.

I think it means that Mecca's assessment is correct, that they want Rolando McClain.