Trent Richardson update

[saphojunkie]

Didn't see this anywhere, and I couldn't find the Trent Richardson thread. Sorry I'm even a marginally capable detective.

Trent Richardson had surgery on his knee, and won't participate in the combine. However, Chris Mortenson now reporting that he won't even participate in the Alabama pro day.

Those who want him to fall to us at 11 will likely get your wish. They are saying he could fall as low as #21.

The new question is...do you take a risk on him in the top 15?

Chris Mortensen @mortreport
Follow

RB Trent Richardson wont be working out in Bama Pro Day March 7, either. Sometime in March after Scope removed small loose particle in knee

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by Nickel D

Did Jamaal Charles (remember him??) limp into or fall out of an AIDS tree?

Then why do we need another RB when we have needs with more severe priority, like overhauling the OL for example?

Because Jamaal Charles is the only half back we have under contract and he is returning from a torn acl.

Even when healthy, he isn't built to be a 300 carry type back and we usually run the ball around 500 times per year.

[suds79]

Originally Posted by Nickel D

Did Jamaal Charles (remember him??) limp into or fall out of an AIDS tree?

Then why do we need another RB when we have needs with more severe priority, like overhauling the OL for example?

The OL doesn't need overhauled. We just need a RT. We're not talking a starting LT here. We're talking RT. That can be filled anywhere in the draft.

Lets not make it more than it is.

[Brock]

Originally Posted by Nickel D

Did Jamaal Charles (remember him??) limp into or fall out of an AIDS tree?

Then why do we need another RB when we have needs with more severe priority, like overhauling the OL for example?

There are big questions about Jamaal Charles right now. He isn't a given.

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by BossChief

Because Jamaal Charles is the only half back we have under contract and he is returning from a torn acl.

Even when healthy, he isn't built to be a 300 carry type back and we usually run the ball around 500 times per year.

yep

imo Charles should always have a partner RB to lessen the load by taking some inside runs.

[Micjones]

I wouldn't draft him if he were completely healthy.
Not at 11/12.

We have bigger fish to fry.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by Micjones

We have bigger fish to fry.

Like what (Outside of QB)?

Please don't say a lineman.

Especially if you're going to with the "Value @ 11/12" argument.

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Like what (Outside of QB)?

Please don't say a lineman.

Especially if you're going to with the "Value @ 11/12" argument.

Right Tackle. Nose Tackle. Guard/Center.
And if there isn't good value there on Rieff or Martin...trade down.
I wouldn't draft a RB any higher than Round 3.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by Micjones

Right Tackle. Nose Tackle. Guard/Center.
And if there isn't good value there on Rieff or Martin...trade down.
I wouldn't draft a RB any higher than Round 3.

There isn't a Nose tackle in this draft with the kind of talent to warrant a top 20 pick.

And for any argument you can possibly make about NOT selecting a RB that high, you can make the SAME EXACT argument for any OL position outside of LT.

Its ridiculous the double standards people on this forum have in the OL vs RB debate.

If there were ever any position not worthy of a top 15 pick (outside of K, P) it'd be a guard. The same case could be made for RT.

[suds79]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

And for any argument you can possibly make about NOT selecting a RB that high, you can make the SAME EXACT argument for any OL position outside of LT.

This a million times over.

I think its based on the fact that the Chiefs have had some amazing O-lines over the years but it's way overvalued around here.

LT - (worthy of 1st round picks)
RT - (Next in line in order of value but still pretty much filler)
C & G - (just guys)

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

There isn't a Nose tackle in this draft with the kind of talent to warrant a top 20 pick.

Trading down is a viable option. One that Pioli is familiar with.

And for any argument you can possibly make about NOT selecting a RB that high, you can make the SAME EXACT argument for any OL position outside of LT.

Do we have any O-Linemen in the aforementioned need areas as capable as Charles is at Runningback? If not, that's a legitimate argument. We have a CLEAR starter at RB. We have Jack & Shit (and Jack left town) at RT.

If there were ever any position not worthy of a top 15 pick (outside of K, P) it'd be a guard. The same case could be made for RT.

No one is suggesting that we stay in the Top 15.
And it should be noted that QB is a need area that could also be addressed with the #1.

[O.city]

Who would be more valuable to the offensive success of this team, a RT or a rb?

Even more, say Reiff at RT or Richardson at RB?

[Huffman83]

Sooo...2nd round if he's available?

[WV]

Originally Posted by Micjones

We have a CLEAR starter at RB. We have Jack & Shit (and Jack left town) at RT.

If Richardson is there at our pick he would be a huge value pick and it would be silly to let him slip past us. Yes we have a starter coming back at RB, but the only thing CLEAR about it is that he's coming off a torn ACL. There is nothing clear or guaranteed about him returning to prior form.

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by WVChiefFan

If Richardson is there at our pick he would be a huge value pick and it would be silly to let him slip past us. Yes we have a starter coming back at RB, but the only thing CLEAR about it is that he's coming off a torn ACL. There is nothing clear or guaranteed about him returning to prior form.

And if you read the OP you'd know the same is true of Richardson.
There are NEVER any guarantees.

[Micjones]

Originally Posted by O.city

Who would be more valuable to the offensive success of this team, a RT or a rb?

Even more, say Reiff at RT or Richardson at RB?

A good RT.
One who'll help improve both run and pass protection.