Restating the obvious, Dorsey learned from Ted Thompson

[philfree]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

I don't even "hate" what they gave up for him.

I think it's EXTREMELY disingenuous to try and sell people on the "What would Ted Thompson do" angle when Ted Thompson never traded 2 high draft picks for his QB.

I'm not the one talking out of both sides of my mouth. I'm not the one saying they HAD to trade for Alex Smith (for any number of reason last year) but that the long-term approach is to build through the draft.

This is not, and never has been since the day the season ended, about what I wanted. I wanted Geno Smith. I was wrong. I didn't want Alex Smith. I again, was wrong.

This isn't about being mad or being unhappy about what the Chiefs are (or aren't) doing. This isn't about them following (or not following) the blueprint that I want the team to take.

This is about the CLEAR and OBVIOUS differences between what the Chiefs did last year and what they're doing this year. People that explain them away as somehow complimentary are simply choosing to ignore reality.

Last year was the first year of a new regime. They went and got a QB and then signed some middle of the road FAs in hopes of turning things around in their first year. Some people have decided that meant we are in a "win now" mode and that we would go after more FAs and not just middle of the road guys. People actually thinking the Chiefs were going to go all in in year two of the new regime and sign more FAs got a reality check. So the clear and obvious difference this year is we didn't need to trade for a QB and the FAs we've talked with signed elsewhere. It's not really that much different at all. I'm more disturbed that we haven't signed Houston, Berry and Alex Smith to new deals and not having restructured a guy like Flowers. I expected that and then for us to look at middle of the road FAs or FA steals like we got with Schwartz last year. It does suck watching the Donks load up while we stay conservative though.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by philfree

Last year was the first year of a new regime. They went and got a QB and then signed some middle of the road FAs in hopes of turning things around in their first year. Some people have decided that meant we are in a "win now" mode and that we would go after more FAs and not just middle of the road guys. People actually thinking the Chiefs were going to go all in in year two of the new regime and sign more FAs got a reality check. So the clear and obvious difference this year is we didn't need to trade for a QB and the FAs we've talked with signed elsewhere. It's not really that much different at all. I'm more disturbed that we haven't signed Houston, Berry and Alex Smith to new deals and not having restructured a guy like Flowers. I expected that and then for us to look at middle of the road FAs or FA steals like we got with Schwartz last year. It does suck watching the Donks load up while we stay conservative though.

There's a little wrench in the gears though, in the form of those 2 picks given up for Alex Smith. I don't care if you spent those 2 picks on a 27-year old John Elway, you still have to surround him with talent. If you're not going to pick-up anything other than marginal depth in free agency, you have to get playmakers in the draft.

If Dorsey is a good GM, those 2 picks equal 2 solid starters. Given the standard probabilities for all teams in the draft, 2 solid starters is basically almost one entire draft.

That doesn't mean that they won't be successful. They've just essentially cut off their nose to spite their face. 2 steps forward, one step back. However you want to look at it.

I'm not saying Alex Smith was a bad move. I'm not saying two picks was too much to give up.

All I'm saying is that giving up those 2 picks make the rest of the "plan" that much harder to execute, thus the probability said "plan" working goes down...

[philfree]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

There's a little wrench in the gears though, in the form of those 2 picks given up for Alex Smith. I don't care if you spent those 2 picks on a 27-year old John Elway, you still have to surround him with talent. If you're not going to pick-up anything other than marginal depth in free agency, you have to get playmakers in the draft.

If Dorsey is a good GM, those 2 picks equal 2 solid starters. Given the standard probabilities for all teams in the draft, 2 solid starters is basically almost one entire draft.

That doesn't mean that they won't be successful. They've just essentially cut off their nose to spite their face. 2 steps forward, one step back. However you want to look at it.

I'm not saying Alex Smith was a bad move. I'm not saying two picks was too much to give up.

All I'm saying is that giving up those 2 picks make the rest of the "plan" that much harder to execute, thus the probability said "plan" working goes down...

A little perhaps but not as much as not having a quality starting QB. If this regimes success hinges off a late 2nd round draft pick then we're screwed anyway. IMO you're overvaluing a 2nd round draft pick and undervaluing Alex Smith. I'd take a quality QB over an unknown 2nd round pick any day. And I too hated the Smith trade at first. I like it now.

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

All I'm saying is that giving up those 2 picks make the rest of the "plan" that much harder to execute, thus the probability said "plan" working goes down...

I mentioned this a few hours ago, but in terms of discussing how it effects the "plan" (whatever that is) with regards to Alex Smith, it's actually only one pick. He isn't losing access to two playmakers because of the trade. Only one. Because he himself is the other. It's a two for one trade, not a two for zero trade. I know you know this, but it's a point that needs to be made.

In essence, it really boils down to what they're losing out of this year's 2nd round. This is the only time they really get nothing.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I mentioned this a few hours ago, but in terms of discussing how it effects the "plan" (whatever that is) with regards to Alex Smith, it's actually only one pick. He isn't losing access to two playmakers because of the trade. Only one. Because he himself is the other. It's a two for one trade, not a two for zero trade.

So, in essence, it really boils down to what they're losing out of this year's 2nd round.

Fair enough. That's why I said "two steps forward, 1 step back".

It's a net gain, for sure.

[temper11]

Originally Posted by philfree

Last year was the first year of a new regime. They went and got a QB and then signed some middle of the road FAs in hopes of turning things around in their first year. Some people have decided that meant we are in a "win now" mode and that we would go after more FAs and not just middle of the road guys. People actually thinking the Chiefs were going to go all in in year two of the new regime and sign more FAs got a reality check. So the clear and obvious difference this year is we didn't need to trade for a QB and the FAs we've talked with signed elsewhere. It's not really that much different at all. I'm more disturbed that we haven't signed Houston, Berry and Alex Smith to new deals and not having restructured a guy like Flowers. I expected that and then for us to look at middle of the road FAs or FA steals like we got with Schwartz last year. It does suck watching the Donks load up while we stay conservative though.

this.