If not #1, where?

[Micjones]

The draftniks keep saying that Geno Smith isn't worth the #1 pick.
None of them say he isn't the top QB in the class though.
If we don't take him at #1 how far is he realistically going to fall?

I see no scenario where he falls out of the Top 10.

So if he's the top QB in a weak class...
QB is our biggest need...
And he's gonna go Top 10 anyway...

Why not at #1?

Am I wrong to say he won't fall out of the Top 10?

Discuss...

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by O.city

No and it's somewhat ironic that Nassib is getting built up after having his bowl performance.

Well, who wouldn't get excited about 11 of 23 passing for 130 yards. It's downright Matt Cassel like. And that guy was a pro QB!

[milkman]

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

i'm all about thresholds....does a guy pass 'some' level of talent at which you could hypothetically build a championship team around him?

for some, it's 'easy': Brady, Manning, Rothleswhatever, Rodgers, presumably Luck

for some it requires more work: Eli, Brees

for some it requires a lot, but they can get there: Flacco, Ryan (broke the seal)

then there is Bradford, Stafford...major ?'s but still with the realm of imagination

but I'd draft ANY of them (in retrospect, obviously)...i'm not concerned with how much work it will take, only that is possible (and not in a Dilfer way)

if you sit around waiting for Luck, you'll be sitting around forever (Chiefs!)...that attitude drives me crazy...you can't win (or even get lucky) if you don't try

and so I would without hesitation draft wilson/smith/barkley...

I'd draft Barkley too.

Just commenting on what I believe his ceiling to be.

[O.city]

I just don't see them going anywhere other than Qb at first overall. Whichever one that may be. Just take him and build around him. Get him what he needs to be successful .

[the Talking Can]

Originally Posted by milkman

I'd draft Barkley too.

Just commenting on what I believe his ceiling to be.

gotcha

i spend so much time yelling about things, i thought I'd clarify my own standards....

[Ace Gunner]

It would be interesting if the Chiefs draft Geno and then Barkley in the second, Jones in the third. I'd welcome that competition If they do draft Geno and Steadman Bailey is there at #33, wow.

[O.city]

One of the knocks I have on bringing in a free agent, from a money stand point, is that you're bringing in a guy who you pretty much know what he is and likely paying him more than a guy who might be more talented, but less experienced.

[NJChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by milkman

It certainly has to factor in.

Otherwise, in the 2012 draft, when the Pack needed defense it was just a lucky coincidence that the best player available when they picked in every round just happened to be a defensive player.

5 straight. I don't think that's a coincidence. To me it's not even a question. Positional value factors in.

Originally Posted by milkman

I'd draft Barkley too.

Just commenting on what I believe his ceiling to be.

To me personally, this is what everything boils down to with where the Chiefs sit right now. In today's NFL, you are just fighting an up hill battle with a "'decent" QB, and basically an impossible battle with anything less. I feel it's more risky to be the team going forward with a set "decent" QB then it is to go forward with a guy that has a high ceiling and possibly low floor. Option 3(Luck, Peyton, Elway) don't exist but once in a blue moon.

So many people are waiting for the guy with the high ceiling and high floor like Luck. I think waiting for that is crazy. I am not talking about people like Dane, who are admitting they haven't watched enough and want to see more. He has admitted, I hope this is the correct summary, that if the potential is there then you do it.

I am not convinced Geno will be a great QB, but I have a strong belief in the height of his ceiling, which makes it the pick for me.

[NJChiefsFan]

Some mention the risk of if the QB busts. Yet there isn't a fear of the other guys they want to draft busting. Yeah when you take a QB you are committing to him for a few years. But have we not done that with Tyson Jackson? Or in the past with Ryan Sims? Either way, this high you are committing a grace period to a player, whether it's QB, LT, or DE. I understand the QB affects the game more, but to me that's an argument why it's worth the risk, not an argument against it.

I am not interested in having a 2010 season. I would risk that season every single time in an attempt to get a real QB.

[Sorter]

Originally Posted by O.city

No and it's somewhat ironic that Nassib is getting built up after having his bowl performance.

I'm just not big on Nassib, btw. They opened the offense up for him early in the year, they lost alot, decided to run the ball alot and take it out of his hands and started winning. Basically, making him a game manager.



It seems like when new Gm's and HC's happen, they obviously want to build the team their way. I like that Reid isnt' going full ***** and forcing things his way, but I do think you have to start by building around the QB. The whole build then try and get a Qb, doesn't work.

I am higher on Nassib than most IMO but his bowl game isn't a reason why.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by milkman

I don't remember the exact questions about Stafford coming out, and I was really high on him.

However, the consensus was that, had Bradford come out, he would have been selected first, not Stafford.

Do you believe that Bradford was a better prospect than Smith?

I think Bradford is a slightly better prospect than Geno, but Geno has a higher ceiling IMO because he can make the big play happen more than Sammy.

[BiscayneBLVD]

Originally Posted by SNR

Here's an entirely undisdainful (yes, I will make that a real word) explanation of why that strategy is bogus.

The Chiefs need a great QB. That we can all agree on. The purpose of acquiring a younger vet like Flynn is to save draft value at that #1 overall pick and to get the team in a better position either later in the 2013 draft or at any time in the 2014 draft to simply find the right guy that they need. It's basically saying, "Boy, getting this first down is pretty risky. We need to punt so we save on field position, protect our limited game manager QB, and try again next possession, ideally when our defense makes a stop."

Now, when it's 4th and 20 at your own 10 yard line, then that's a pretty smart strategy. You might get lucky and get a defensive TD even, but if you don't you're at least keeping yourself alive to fight another day. And that's kind of the position the Chiefs were in last year in the first round. We played conservative and stayed where we were, and all of a sudden the draft's top 3 QBs were gone. We said, "Well, shitpiss. It doesn't do any good to draft Brandon ****ing Weeden at 11 overall. That's just stupid. Let's take a non QB here."

The problem with doing that this year is there IS no reason to play field position. We have the #1 overall pick. That's the highest position you can get to find your top QB. It doesn't do any good to wait until 2014 when we're not going to have as high a vantage point or decision to pick the right guy. If this were football, we'd be down 3 TDs in the 3rd quarter and have the ball 3rd and 1 from the opponent's 20 yard line. Instead of treating it like 4 down territory, the play being called is the equivalent of a kneel down so we can bring on the field goal kicker and "save the points". In this metaphor, those precious points are "draft value." They're worthless because of the situation. Down 3 TDs. We need TDs (QBs) or at the very least a ****ing first down. It does no good to play for points here.

And yes, it WOULD be one thing if next year had like, 5 Andrew Lucks so there was a pretty good ****ing chance we'd be able to pick one of them and not have to lose out like we did last year. But there's not. There's ****ing Teddy Bridgewater, a much worse prospect than either Geno OR Wilson in my opinion. Call is speculation and assuming the unknowable, but for crying out loud, think about it. You're punting the ball away for TEDDY BRIDGEWATER? WTF makes the Dorsey or Reid think their QB will be there in 2014?

And we can keep playing this game. "Well, what if he IS there in 2014?" Okay, but what if he's ****ing not, which is a very likely scenario?

Ever hear the phrase "one in the hand is worth two in the bush?" That describes this situation perfectly. If we draft a QB at 1, we're getting the best QB in a draft class. There will be other better QBs in future drafts. But we don't know when those will come around. And it's ****ing useless to speculate when that's going to happen.

Lmao if you were a GM your team would get the #1 pick every year, and still you wouldn't win more than 2 games, smh. I actually thought you were making some sense until you said you wouldn't draft Bridgewater. You do realize that Teddy Bridgewater would be the best thing to happen to the Chiefs right?

For one the offense he's running in louisville is very similar to Reid's, in terms of its philosophy. Second, I hope you know he would have gone 1st overall in this year's draft. Btw, he's far ahead of RGIII, in terms of being a pocket passing; he's ahead of both Luck and RG when they were sophmores.

Tbh it'd be best if the chiefs didn't waste their picks on a QB this year (@LEAST not the #1 overall) and waited next year. That class is going to be STACKED with quality Quarterbacks.

[evolve27]

Just take Geno. Reid can coach the hell out of him to make him worth the pick at #1.

[Dayze]

if he's rated/projects as a top 10 pick take him.

no one is going to trade with the Chiefs ; everyone knows they're ****ed.

so just take him. There isn't much of a difference between 1 and 10; especially factoring in positional value .

[keg in kc]

Originally Posted by BiscayneBLVD

Tbh it'd be best if the chiefs didn't waste their picks on a QB this year (@LEAST not the #1 overall) and waited next year. That class is going to be STACKED with quality Quarterbacks.

It's like there's a robot doing auto-reply's every year off a list:

1) this is a bad draft for QBs
2) [player x] wouldn't be a top pick any other year
3) [player x] isn't a sure thing, we should draft a tackle, trade down, or preferably both
4) next year is going to be an amazing draft for qbs
5) [player y] will certainly be available next year, or if he isn't [player z] is awesome too
6) this year's [player y] and [player z] become next year's [player x]
7) the cycle never ends. ever.

[BiscayneBLVD]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

It's like there's a robot doing auto-reply's every year off a list:

1) this is a bad draft for QBs
2) [player x] wouldn't be a top pick any other year
3) [player x] isn't a sure thing, we should draft a tackle, trade down, or preferably both
4) next year is going to be an amazing draft for qbs
5) [player y] will certainly be available next year, or if he isn't [player z] is awesome too
6) this year's [player y] and [player z] become next year's [player x]
7) the cycle never ends. ever.

Lol it's not like it isn't true. But on a side note I don't think anyone in their right mind thought this year was gonna be a veryQB friendly draft. 14 class >> 13 class. Simple