Chiefs The Chiefs shouldn't select a QB in the 1st round - Page 15

kcbubb · 01-29-2009, 10:52 AM

The Chiefs should sign a free agent QB like Ryan Fitzpatrick. Or, if the Patriots would agree to it, swap first round picks with the Patriots for Matt Cassell.

The only defense in the league that was worse than the Chiefs was the 0-16 Detroit Lions. The Chiefs need, at a minimum, three new starters on defense (2 LB's & DE) if we stay in the 4-3. The Chiefs need defensive talent.

If the Chiefs do not swap first round picks with the Patriots for Cassell, the Chiefs would benefit the most by trading down and acquiring more picks and possibly getting more value out of their first round pick instead of reaching for a player. The Chiefs need defense with their first pick.

**DeezNutz** · 01-29-2009, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

You watch football sitting on your daddy's lap while wearing a sundress. Nobody gives a **** about your patience or your overall lack of knowledge of football you dumb ass cock gobbler.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth CarlSatan

And as far as my watching habits go, I prefer on the bed with your old ladies lips around my cock while I use her ass as a beer holder.
Mother****er.

Generally, this sort of stuff is really annoying, but this exchange made me laugh.

**DeezNutz** · 01-29-2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arc

I'll take "Dumbass Oregon Quarterbacks" for $200, Alex.

This stupid mother****er said his nickname was the pianist, but his teammates just called him the penis.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 01-29-2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arc

I'll take "Dumbass Oregon Quarterbacks" for $200, Alex.

I'm sorry, that category is closed.

May I suggest, "Dumbshits that want to trade down 4 times" for $1000?

Frosty · 01-29-2009, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

This stupid mother****er said his nickname was the pianist, but his teammates just called him the penis.

Who is Joey "5 Pick" Harrington?

rad · 01-29-2009, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darth CarlSatan

Apparently, you don't know shit either mother****er.

What the **** do YOU know about ready?! I didn't realize I was posting on the same board as Vince Lombardi.
And as far as my watching habits go, I prefer on the bed with your old ladies lips around my cock while I use her ass as a beer opener.
Mother****er.

That's would be funnier.

I especially like the "mother****er" at the end. People don't use that enough IMO.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 01-29-2009, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Generally, this sort of stuff is really annoying, but this exchange made me laugh.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYq_P8VJK9U

Ultra Peanut · 01-29-2009, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

Get the QB this year. Get some O-line and LB's with some other picks. Get the DE next year when some very good DE's will be in the draft early... which is in all likelyhood where we will be picking again.

http://walterfootball.com/draft2010.php

Or Spikes or Mays for that matter.

That's preposterous!

**The Franchise** · 01-29-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ultra Peanut

That's preposterous!

I'll take anyone of these guys next year.

Everson Griffen, DE, USC
Carlos Dunlap, DE, Florida
Taylor Mays, S, USC
Brandon Spikes, ILB, Florida
George Selvie, DE, South Florida
Terrence Cody, NT, Alabama - If we go to a 3-4.

PastorMikH · 01-29-2009, 04:52 PM

Seeing this thread on the main page I got to wondering, "I wonder if that article was written by a sportwriter for one of the teams picking 4-7."

Crush · 01-29-2009, 04:54 PM

This thread is 98% n00b. Where's Skip when you need him?

chiefzilla1501 · 01-29-2009, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pestilenceaf23

Someone give me one downside of Sanchez (minus experience)

The knock on him is that he holds onto the ball way too long. Right now, he is Jeff Garcia with a much, much better arm. That's a big knock, because in the NFL, you can't afford to hold onto the ball because you're going to get knocked on your ass 9 times out of 10.

I personally like Sanchez and I actually like him a lot better than Stafford and I think it's because he has the fire to be a leader that I don't see as much in Stafford, but let's not pretend that he's Mr. Perfect.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 01-29-2009, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The knock on him is that he holds onto the ball way too long. Right now, he is Jeff Garcia with a much, much better arm. That's a big knock, because in the NFL, you can't afford to hold onto the ball because you're going to get knocked on your ass 9 times out of 10.

I personally like Sanchez and I actually like him a lot better than Stafford and I think it's because he has the fire to be a leader that I don't see as much in Stafford, but let's not pretend that he's Mr. Perfect.

If his receivers have their routes down, he releases the ball plenty fast. He's not like McNabb back there; can't throw under pressure, can't throw when NOT under pressure, and taking enough time to read the stock report.

chiefzilla1501 · 01-29-2009, 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Even if you ignored the draft value chart, you still have to at least use it as a guide.

kcbubb says "let's trade out of the 3 spot to the 9 spot".

Going by the value chart, if the team at 9 were to trade up, it would take their entire draft, and it still wouldn't be enough.

So, let's ignore it and take what might be fair value in your mind.

Even then, they'd have to give up more than just a couple of picks to make that move.

And the team at the 9 spot isn't going to give up nearly what they should in order to make that move.

It's a stupid ****ing idea, and people around here need to get a ****ing clue.

But let's dive a little further. If the rumor is true that nobody wants to trade into a top 3 pick because they don't want to pay the high salary, then that must also mean that some teams picking in the top 3 pick are somewhat resentful that they have to pick there. ESPECIALLY when the draft class is lousy and you have to pay top-flight money to pay for a guy you don't even want. So here's the million dollar question: if the teams picking in the top 3 often resent the fact that they are "stuck" with a top 3 pick, then why do they set the draft compensation so that it's impossible to trade into the top 3?

I'll make it nice and simple: if teams are flat-out refusing to trade into the top 3 year after year after year after year, that means that the draft chart blows. And you can't tell me for a second that there haven't been teams that have tried to trade out. And you can't tell me that there aren't teams out there that would have traded a decent trade value for a guy like Calvin Johnson or Reggie Bush.

I'm sorry, but people are defending the draft chart. And yet, teams that want to trade out of their spot can't year after year. That is as clear a sign as any that the compensation is ****ed up and needs to be changed.

chiefzilla1501 · 01-29-2009, 05:19 PM

Let me throw out a hypothetical....
New Orleans was obviously willing and ready to trade out of the #9 spot to get Glenn Dorsey. If they were in long negotiations with the Chiefs, that means that they were offering probably offering Kansas City something like a 2nd round pick (in exchange for KC's 4th or 5th round pick). If you're the St. Louis Rams. You are at #2. You obviously don't want Dorsey. And you don't want Matt Ryan. And you don't want McFadden. Those are the three top guys on the board. And so you spend your #2 pick on an overachiever named Chris Long, who is really top 10 material, but definitely not deserving of a top 5 pick.

If you're St. Louis and you knew New Orleans was hot and heavy to trade up for Dorsey, does it matter to you that you're getting a 2nd round pick instead of a first round pick and any other additional pick? The draft chart says that you're getting screwed by about 500 points which is highway robbery. I would even make that trade for a 2nd rounder alone. And so, the Rams overpay for a guy who doesn't belong in the top 5, all because of "trade value."

If you're the Rams in the top 3 and none of the guys who deserve top 5 picks are on the top of your chart, why do you stick around and create a huge wall where it is impossible to trade into? I just don't get it. If the Rams would have traded down, they would have spent half as much money on a solid top 10 pick and had an extra second round pick to boot.

Brock · 01-29-2009, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

But let's dive a little further. If the rumor is true that nobody wants to trade into a top 3 pick because they don't want to pay the high salary, then that must also mean that some teams picking in the top 3 pick are somewhat resentful that they have to pick there. ESPECIALLY when the draft class is lousy and you have to pay top-flight money to pay for a guy you don't even want. So here's the million dollar question: if the teams picking in the top 3 often resent the fact that they are "stuck" with a top 3 pick, then why do they set the draft compensation so that it's impossible to trade into the top 3?

How resentful can they be? They don't even have to draft a player if they don't want to.

01-29-2009, 10:52 AM
kcbubb Veteran Join Date: Nov 2008 Casino cash: $5946719	The Chiefs shouldn't select a QB in the 1st round The Chiefs should sign a free agent QB like Ryan Fitzpatrick. Or, if the Patriots would agree to it, swap first round picks with the Patriots for Matt Cassell. The only defense in the league that was worse than the Chiefs was the 0-16 Detroit Lions. The Chiefs need, at a minimum, three new starters on defense (2 LB's & DE) if we stay in the 4-3. The Chiefs need defensive talent. If the Chiefs do not swap first round picks with the Patriots for Cassell, the Chiefs would benefit the most by trading down and acquiring more picks and possibly getting more value out of their first round pick instead of reaching for a player. The Chiefs need defense with their first pick.
Posts: 2,384

01-29-2009, 04:52 PM	#219
PastorMikH Will KC ever be better? Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Land of Red Dirt & Necks Casino cash: $9925087	Seeing this thread on the main page I got to wondering, "I wonder if that article was written by a sportwriter for one of the teams picking 4-7." __________________
Posts: 20,454

01-29-2009, 04:54 PM	#220
Crush Amateur Poster Join Date: Mar 2004 Casino cash: $4187091	This thread is 98% n00b. Where's Skip when you need him?
Posts: 15,298

01-29-2009, 05:19 PM	#224
chiefzilla1501 In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2008 Casino cash: $654497	Let me throw out a hypothetical.... New Orleans was obviously willing and ready to trade out of the #9 spot to get Glenn Dorsey. If they were in long negotiations with the Chiefs, that means that they were offering probably offering Kansas City something like a 2nd round pick (in exchange for KC's 4th or 5th round pick). If you're the St. Louis Rams. You are at #2. You obviously don't want Dorsey. And you don't want Matt Ryan. And you don't want McFadden. Those are the three top guys on the board. And so you spend your #2 pick on an overachiever named Chris Long, who is really top 10 material, but definitely not deserving of a top 5 pick. If you're St. Louis and you knew New Orleans was hot and heavy to trade up for Dorsey, does it matter to you that you're getting a 2nd round pick instead of a first round pick and any other additional pick? The draft chart says that you're getting screwed by about 500 points which is highway robbery. I would even make that trade for a 2nd rounder alone. And so, the Rams overpay for a guy who doesn't belong in the top 5, all because of "trade value." If you're the Rams in the top 3 and none of the guys who deserve top 5 picks are on the top of your chart, why do you stick around and create a huge wall where it is impossible to trade into? I just don't get it. If the Rams would have traded down, they would have spent half as much money on a solid top 10 pick and had an extra second round pick to boot.
Posts: 49,201