Chiefs A few Chiefs' draft questions - Page 9

chiefzilla1501 · 11-01-2009, 10:15 AM

-I just realized that one major mistake people are making is assuming that the Chiefs are going to have a top 5 pick. I think it's very possible that Tampa, St. Louis, Cleveland, and Tennessee could pick higher than us. If that's the case, Berry and Suh are taken off the board. Is Cody a bad pick in this case? I actually think he'd be a great pick if those guys are off the board.
-If the Chiefs end up at #5 or #6, do you entertain a trade down? I think the Chiefs could trade down and still get Mays or Cody. And these two draft slots are attractive enough to trade out of
-If Berry and Suh are off the board, is there a player that teams would actually trade up for? I don't want Bradford at all, but is he a player teams would trade up for? What about Dunlap out of Florida?
-If Jimmy Claussen declares (which I don't think he will), is he worth the pick? My opinion--I would even trade up and take him. I think this kid is going to be the best QB prospect in years.
-If Jake Locker declares, is he worth a look? He looks like he'll be a real good QB, but I can't help but think he's going to be Brady Quinn or maybe a less mobile, slightly more accurate version of Cassel

**BossChief** · 11-01-2009, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

So, essentially you linked us to sites of people that wanted to shed Bruce Smith in the best possible light?

That wanted to make a case for him as a better DE than Reggie White, without actually having a ****ing clue?

Bruce Smith's sacks came in a 43 set.

no I just remember nowing they ran a 3-4 and when asked I simply punched in Bruce Smith 3-4 defense and then linked the page so you guys could choose which one to go off of.

I had no dog in this fight

this was zilla arguement, I simply posted that there were in fact a handfull of players that did reach the benchmarks he threw out there.

I even said I didnt agree with his side of it, but I guess I got it somehow pined to me, its cool though I have thick skin and its really not that big a deal.

I even went as far as to state clearly that both players never played the 5tec, but that evidently wasnt good enough not to get hazed, so Ill take it like a man and move on. No sweat off my nuts.

**BossChief** · 11-01-2009, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rausch

So was I!

That's why they made ****ing SUPER TECMO BOWL!

best game ever

Coogs · 11-01-2009, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

The Rams beat the Lions--somebody had to win the game. Just like the Redskins beat two winless teams. There's still a very good chance the Chiefs pick around 5 or 6.

Possibly, but I don't think it is a MAJOR MISTAKE to assume it could be a top 5 pick at this point. We look pretty crappy so far.

chiefzilla1501 · 11-01-2009, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Merriman's coming off of major knee reconstruction. Did you really expect that after one year he'd be exactly the same?

And secondly, whether you know if or not, those guys you mentioned played for the Chargers, not Cowboys.

Glad you're more interested in pointing out typos than actually looking at the meat of the argument.

If 5-technique DEs are so unimportant, as you claim, then how come you never, ever, ever hear about a 3-4 defense willing to part ways with a productive DE... unless they felt like they could get better?

chiefzilla1501 · 11-01-2009, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

Possibly, but I don't think it is a MAJOR MISTAKE to assume it could be a top 5 pick at this point. We look pretty crappy so far.

No, I think there's a decent chance of it. It's just that most people who have been analyzing the draft seem pretty certain about it. Because if the Chiefs pick at 5 or 6, good chance Berry is off the board. And he seems to be one of the main can't miss guys for the Chiefs. If he's off the board, it's interesting to evaluate who would make the most sense.

**BossChief** · 11-01-2009, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Why do I care about your age? You're the ****ing moron that compared Neil & Bruce Smith to Tyson Jackson. JFC.

I compared the ****ing situations not the players.

Stick with the facts, man.

is all this really all that big of a deal?

geez man, you're overreacting if I ever saw overreacting.

**DaneMcCloud** · 11-01-2009, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Glad you're more interested in pointing out typos than actually looking at the meat of the argument.

If 5-technique DEs are so unimportant, as you claim, then how come you never, ever, ever hear about a 3-4 defense willing to part ways with a productive DE... unless they felt like they could get better?

Really?

Well, the Cowboys and Chargers are two teams just this offseason that let their 3-4 5-tech's go.

Your claim is invalid.

milkman · 11-01-2009, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Glad you're more interested in pointing out typos than actually looking at the meat of the argument.

If 5-technique DEs are so unimportant, as you claim, then how come you never, ever, ever hear about a 3-4 defense willing to part ways with a productive DE... unless they felt like they could get better?

because, in spite of the fact that the 5 tech and NT play in the trenches, their skills don't erode as quickly as the second and third level players in a defense.

Those positions, like RB, rely on quickness and speed, and those qualities don't last.

**DaneMcCloud** · 11-01-2009, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

is all this really all that big of a deal?

geez man, you're overreacting if I ever saw overreacting.

You shouldn't be a part of a debate in which you have no knowledge of what's being debated.

You tried to use Google as a basis to backup your worthless claim.

Instead, you should have kept your mouth shut, listened and learned.

**Saul Good** · 11-01-2009, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Really?

Well, the Cowboys and Chargers are two teams just this offseason that let their 3-4 5-tech's go.

Your claim is invalid.

How have their defenses done since then?

chiefzilla1501 · 11-01-2009, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Really?

Well, the Cowboys and Chargers are two teams just this offseason that let their 3-4 5-tech's go.

Your claim is invalid.

These are the two examples you want to use? The 18th and 22nd ranked defenses?

The Chargers got rid of 2 of their Defensive Linemen and their defense looks absolutely horrendous. The Cowboys downgraded from Canty to Olshansky and, oh guess what? Big surprise. Their defensive ranking has dropped from #8 to #22. And oh by the way, that stud OLB... Demarcus Ware? Yeah, he lines up behind Olshansky. And he is on pace for 10 sacks, which is half the number of sacks he has in 2008.

**DaneMcCloud** · 11-01-2009, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

These are the two examples you want to use? The 18th and 22nd ranked defenses?

The Chargers got rid of 2 of their Defensive Linemen and their defense looks absolutely horrendous. The Cowboys downgraded from Canty to Olshansky and, oh guess what? Big surprise. Their defensive ranking has dropped from #8 to #22. And oh by the way, that stud OLB... Demarcus Ware? Yeah, he lines up behind Olshansky. And he is on pace for 10 sacks, which is half the number of sacks he has in 2008.

Hey ****o, you're the one that made claim.

Eat it.

**DaneMcCloud** · 11-01-2009, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saul Good

How have their defenses done since then?

You're obviously missing his point.

chiefzilla1501 · 11-01-2009, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

because, in spite of the fact that the 5 tech and NT play in the trenches, their skills don't erode as quickly as the second and third level players in a defense.

Those positions, like RB, rely on quickness and speed, and those qualities don't last.

That's a fair argument. I'm not saying that it's a bulletproof argument. But the claim was that teams find starting 3-4 5-technique DEs to be unimportant, and yet the good teams rarely ever let their starting D-linemen walk away.

chiefzilla1501 · 11-01-2009, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You're obviously missing his point.

Yes, you're absolutely correct.

The fact that the two defenses that made the decision to downgrade their DEs are fielding piss-poor defenses is obviously hurting my argument on the importance of 5-techniques.

And you're right, we should be basing our personnel decisions on what two declining 3-4 defenses are doing. Perhaps we should model our offense after the Cleveland Browns.

11-01-2009, 10:15 AM
chiefzilla1501 In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2008 Casino cash: $-1625503	A few Chiefs' draft questions -I just realized that one major mistake people are making is assuming that the Chiefs are going to have a top 5 pick. I think it's very possible that Tampa, St. Louis, Cleveland, and Tennessee could pick higher than us. If that's the case, Berry and Suh are taken off the board. Is Cody a bad pick in this case? I actually think he'd be a great pick if those guys are off the board. -If the Chiefs end up at #5 or #6, do you entertain a trade down? I think the Chiefs could trade down and still get Mays or Cody. And these two draft slots are attractive enough to trade out of -If Berry and Suh are off the board, is there a player that teams would actually trade up for? I don't want Bradford at all, but is he a player teams would trade up for? What about Dunlap out of Florida? -If Jimmy Claussen declares (which I don't think he will), is he worth the pick? My opinion--I would even trade up and take him. I think this kid is going to be the best QB prospect in years. -If Jake Locker declares, is he worth a look? He looks like he'll be a real good QB, but I can't help but think he's going to be Brady Quinn or maybe a less mobile, slightly more accurate version of Cassel
Posts: 51,599