Starting to think the Chiefs will need to trade down... or...

[Direckshun]

Normally I do not advocate this stuff, because I am usually not a fan of trading down in the first round. But I've been looking over the talent in this upcoming draft and I think this might need to be the case.

First, let's take a look at the elite talent that has no chance of making it out of the first round:

QB Andrew Luck, Stanford
QB Robert Griffin, Baylor
WR Justin Blackmon, Oklahoma State
OT Matt Kalil, USC
CB Morris Claiborne, LSU

The remaining top tier talent doesn't really match up value with what we want, with one major exception.

RB Trent Richardson, Alabama
WR Alshon Jeffrey, South Carolina
OT Jonathan Martin, Stanford
OT Riley Reiff, Iowa
OG David DeCastro, Stanford
DT Devin Still, Penn State
DE Quentin Coples, North Carolina
ILB Luke Kuechly, Boston College
CB Dre Kirkpatrick, Alabama
CB Janoris Jenkins, North Alabama

Scott Pioli is a legit believer in draft value, though he has broken with it before when he drafted Eric Berry. I don't think he breaks it two out of three years however, so players like Richardson, DeCastro, and Kuechly don't really seem to warrant a Top 12 pick.

It also seems to eliminate right tackle. It's been two years of Pioli passing over right tackle after right tackle, even with last year's great prospects like Carimi and Castonzo. So I think that takes Martin (who honestly isn't right tackle material to me) and Reiff out of the equation.

Meanwhile, we can eliminate the players that don't fit our defense (Still, Coples).

That leaves us with the corners. You can take Jenkins out of consideration since there is no way Pioli wants a guy with his character questions.

Kirkpatrick is a perfect fit for this team ONLY IF this team lets Brandon Carr walk. If Carr stays on the roster, we really have no need for Kirkpatrick, either.

That leaves me to believe the Chiefs will almost certainly try to trade down until they get a tackle or one of the lesser valued positions (ILB, RB, NT) at a much better value.

[Fansy the Famous Bard]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

So basically Bush, James, Jones, and Benson were picked in the top of the 1st round.

Some productive years between those 4, but none worth a top of the draft pick... RB's just have way too short of a shelf life to spend that type of value. We need a player that will be able to give more than 3 or 4 productive years drafted at the top of our draft.

With that being said, we'll probably get a DE like Melvin Ingram and try to convert him to OLB... or another goddamn TE.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by tredadda

Reread what I wrote. I would be AGAINST the Richardson pick if I felt QB was a priority for this team. It is not.

I read and understood fully what you wrote. The only way to get them to value the QB position is to completely crash and burn. Drafting Richardson VALIDATES their way of thinking. Why in the world would you want to do that?

[dannybcaitlyn]

Hey im all for getting rid of castle, but if you have an elite potential pro bowl RB as in Richardson fall in our laps you take him.. The life span of running back is longer the way teams are using them now. The way we've been scouting and drafting rb's lately I wouldn't trust any choice but Richardson.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by dannybcaitlyn

Hey im all for getting rid of castle, but if you have an elite potential pro bowl RB as in Richardson fall in our laps you take him.. The life span of running back is longer the way teams are using them now. The way we've been scouting and drafting rb's lately I wouldn't trust any choice but Richardson.

Sure, let's give them all of the pieces they need to prolong our misery as long as is humanly possible.

[dannybcaitlyn]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Sure, let's give them all of the pieces they need to prolong our misery as long as is humanly possible.

Lol. I feel your pain.

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by suds79

As much as I like Trent Richardson, RB is a position that can easily be found in the mid rounds to late.

Plus it's a position where your guy will likely be done in 5 years.

Can't invest a first in that.

Agreed.
I'd love to have him, but you just can't go there unless you're a team with few holes.
As anticlimactic as it'll be...give me an Offensive Tackle there.

[jd1020]

Originally Posted by Renegade

So if there is no value for us when pick in the first, what team would see value to trade upto our pick. I just don't see us finding a viable trade partner.

IF Trent Richardson is still on the board when we pick I could see Cleveland as a possible suiter for a trade down. I'm not sure when their 2nd first is but its in the 20-24 range (Falcons pick). I would draft Dontari Poe with that pick while grabbing whatever extra picks we could get from them. I would think they would give up a bit if they were interested. They've severed ties with Hillis and just imagine if they got both RG3 and Richardson.

There are a few mid-late round prospect RB's that I wouldn't mind seeing, like...

Robert Turbin
Vick Ballard
Tauren Poole

[Monty]

Take Richardson. With him and JC in the backfield, the Chiefs can run the draw up the middle with McCluster. The other team will never see it coming...Brilliant!!

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by Renegade

So if there is no value for us when pick in the first, what team would see value to trade upto our pick. I just don't see us finding a viable trade partner.

Jets
Bengals
Browns

[Urc Burry]

Originally Posted by jd1020

IF Trent Richardson is still on the board when we pick I could see Cleveland as a possible suiter for a trade down. I'm not sure when their 2nd first is but its in the 20-24 range (Falcons pick). I would draft Dontari Poe with that pick while grabbing whatever extra picks we could get from them. I would think they would give up a bit if they were interested. They've severed ties with Hillis and just imagine if they got both RG3 and Richardson.

There are a few mid-late round prospect RB's that I wouldn't mind seeing, like...

Robert Turbin
Vick Ballard
Tauren Poole

Would they give up their next years 1st? Because there is a pretty good chance that that would be a top 10 pick

[O.city]

I wouldn't mind taking the RB from Washington. Polk I think, if he is around later in the draft.

[Frankie]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Normally I do not advocate this stuff, because I am usually not a fan of trading down in the first round.

Scott Pioli is a legit believer in draft value,.....

It also seems to eliminate right tackle......

That leaves me to believe the Chiefs will almost certainly try to trade down until they get a tackle or one of the lesser valued positions (ILB, RB, NT) at a much better value.

I love trade downs in some years, staying pat or trade ups in others. This year, I say trade down. My favorite scenario is to see us trade down to about 18 and still get a guy like Tannehill (plus extra picks). Then in the 2nd, I would take Kelechi Osemele and convert him to RT.

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by Micjones

Agreed.
I'd love to have him, but you just can't go there unless you're a team with few holes.
As anticlimactic as it'll be...give me an Offensive Tackle there.

So take a right tackle which you can get in the 4th round over a gamer changer? That doesn't make sense.

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by Omega

Someone should look at SB RBs in the last 10 years and see how many were 1st round picks.

Really doesn't matter.

[Hydrae]

I like the idea mentioned of us trading back into the second round and picking up an extra 1st for next year. We all know we are not drafting a 1st round QB this year but perhaps it would set us up to package the two first round picks to get to the top of the draft next year for someone like Barkley.