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.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

we already have an elite RB you moron

and no superbowl team in memory has had 2 'elite' backs...

You think JC's knee is going last 350+ carries? You wanna bet your running game on it?

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by GordonGekko

Shit, I'd take 10-6 every year, and you know making the playoffs that many times in a row you'd luck the fuck out eventually and win the SB. It is a numbers game *moneyball.

That worked in the 90's, didn't it?

[Setsuna]

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

we already have an elite RB you moron

and no superbowl team in memory has had 2 'elite' backs...

Damn. Got me on a technicality. I am defeated. Nooooooo!

IDIOT.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Setsuna

Ok man. Let's just say, Chiefs D is stout as hell. Receivers are leet. You have a sick 2 RB tandem and you have a serviceable QB that limits TO. How is that not a recipe for a Superbowl or a deep playoff team? Don't make me laugh.

And don't even think I'm calling Cassel serviceable.

The Chiefs D is stout as hell. It's not the 2000 Ravens or 2002 Bucs, however.

Those just happen to be the ONLY two teams to win Super Bowls in the last 15 years to win a Super Bowl with an elite QB.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Yeah. But this is about drafting a RB, not about whether or not we're drafting a QB.

QB is the obvious answer.

But passing up one of the best talents in the draft because our QB isn't there is not how you build a talented team.

It is if you care about winning it all.

If you care about being a "competitor" rather than a "contender", so that you can fill seats, by all means, draft the elite RB.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Because there is a ton of uncertainty surrounding our elite back. He's not built to handle 350+ carries. Doing so will drive JC into the ground.

That's even if his surgically repaired knee survives his first season back.

I guess i'm one of the few people who doesn't want to hinge our running game on a bum knee and Jackie Battle.

Why hinge your running game on anything at all? The current NFL all but renders the 1st round RB obsolete. Hell, a couple of teams that are the favorites to win it all don't even HAVE a running game.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

It is if you care about winning it all.

If you care about being a "competitor" rather than a "contender", so that you can fill seats, by all means, draft the elite RB.

Just go ahead and say it.

You'd prefer the Chiefs to win one game next season in hopes that Barkley falls in our lap. You'd rather see the Chiefs fail miserably next season.

I want a Franchise QB too.

But we can't predict the future. And with this D, and with Berry and Moeaki and Charles returning, sorry, we still won't be in a position to draft first overall next year even WITH Matt Cassel starting.

This team is far too talented to only win 1-2 games next season.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Why hinge your running game on anything at all? The current NFL all but renders the 1st round RB obsolete. Hell, a couple of teams that are the favorites to win it all don't even HAVE a running game.

ok.

Outside of having an elite QB, teams have to run the football.

The NFL may be slanted right now, but it ain't THAT slanted.

We just watched the Donkeys dismantle Pitts D this past weekend because their running game opened up the passing game for Tebow.

I'll take Bowe/Breaston/Baldwin one on one any day.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Just go ahead and say it.

You'd prefer the Chiefs to win one game next season in hopes that Barkley falls in our lap. You'd rather see the Chiefs fail miserably next season.

I want a Franchise QB too.

But we can't predict the future. And with this D, and with Berry and Moeaki and Charles returning, sorry, we still won't be in a position to draft first overall next year even WITH Matt Cassel starting.

This team is far too talented to only win 1-2 games next season.

Again, you've missed the point.

I don't really CARE what happens next season. It's a lost season, we don't have a QB. If we win 1 game or 8, great, I don't care.

What I do care about is the long-term chances for success.

Drafting Richardson makes next year look more like an 8-win year than a 2-year win for sure.

It also makes the next FIVE years look more like 8-win years than Super Bowl years.

I don't know how else to explain it so that it's clear - we don't have a QB and we're not going to get one this year. However, we need to keep looking.

Drafting a player like Richardson all but guarantees they QUIT looking. We'll spend his entire career looking for the next Cassel or Orton and trying to get by, just the like the Vikings.

[Setsuna]

Who do we draft htis?

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Setsuna

Who do we draft htis?

OT, OG, C, TE, CB, S, ILB, NT...any of those would be fine.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Again, you've missed the point.

I don't really CARE what happens next season. It's a lost season, we don't have a QB. If we win 1 game or 8, great, I don't care.

What I do care about is the long-term chances for success.

Drafting Richardson makes next year look more like an 8-win year than a 2-year win for sure.

It also makes the next FIVE years look more like 8-win years than Super Bowl years.

I don't know how else to explain it so that it's clear - we don't have a QB and we're not going to get one this year. However, we need to keep looking.

Drafting a player like Richardson all but guarantees they QUIT looking. We'll spend his entire career looking for the next Cassel or Orton and trying to get by, just the like the Vikings.

mmmm....The Viking signed a future HOF QB to complement AP. Then, not even one year removed, they drafted a 1st rnd QB.

The Jags, Titans and Chargers are also examples of teams who didn't follow that recipe, so your argument isn't very strong.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

OT, OG, C, TE, CB, S, ILB, NT...any of those would be fine.

Basically, any position that doesn't lead to more points scored, that way offensive failure is almost guaranteed.

We should just cut Charles and let Bowe walk while we're at it. Maybe even dismantle the Defense.

Then there is no way we win more than two games! Success!

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

mmmm....The Viking signed a future HOF QB to complement AP. Then, not even one year removed, they drafted a 1st rnd QB.

The Vikings signed a future HoF QB who almost everybody knew was over-the-hill. They replaced him with someone who was even more spent. They FINALLY drafted a 1st round QB just in time for AP to suffer the worst injury of his career.

Originally Posted by Detoxing

The Jags, Titans and Chargers are also examples of teams who didn't follow that recipe, so your argument isn't very strong.

CJ and MJD's best years are behind them. Neither of them will see a SB with Gabbert or Locker because they waited too long to pull the trigger on the QB.

The Chargers drafted Ryan Matthews AFTER they drafted Phillip Rivers.

My argument holds.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Basically, any position that doesn't lead to more points scored, that way offensive failure is almost guaranteed.

We should just cut Charles and let Bowe walk while we're at it. Maybe even dismantle the Defense.

Then there is no way we win more than two games! Success!

If we want to win a Super Bowl WHILE Charles and Bowe are still here, we should do everything in our power to get them a QB.

Putting a 5-8 year bandaid on the problem and pretending it doesn't exist isn't going to help them.