drafting Trent Richardson

[jlscorpio]

just saw the 2nd different mock that has us taking T-Rich 2.0 w/our 1st pick. I'm not opposed to it since no all-world DT is available this year. Here's the write up from Foxsports:

11. Kansas City Chiefs*: Trent Richardson, RB, Alabama: The Chiefs lost Jamaal Charles in the second week of the 2011 NFL season, and the offense never rebounded. Charles should be back and healthy next season, but Richardson is the rare running back talent who can completely change an offense. The way this mock draft has unfolded, he’ll be slipping out of the Top 10 — something few scouts or experts expect. A different type of back from Charles, the two could work together to form a dynamic duo in the Kansas City backfield. Though Charles signed a five-year, $32 million extension in 2010, he’s not making the Adrian Peterson/Chris Johnson money you might expect. Richardson, a between-the-tackles grinder, is viewed as a much better pro prospect than his former teammate, Mark Ingram. In the rough-and-tumble AFC West, I love the thought of a Charles-Richardson platoon.

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Not surprised at all. My head has been telling me for weeks that Cassel would be back.

That didn't keep my heart from hoping beyond all hope I was wrong.

Cassel = 10-6 and always competing for a wildcard berth. If your a wildcard, youve got a chance....isnt that what Carl Peterson used to say? : )

[Chiefnj2]

KC doesn't need to use the #11 on a RB to improve the running game. Run blocking was horrible this year.
PFF grades:

Wiegmann: -4.4 (26th out of 35)
Albert: -1.0 (32nd out of 76)
Asamoah: -12.3 (70th out of 77)
Lilja: -3.8 (40th out of 77)
Richardson: -19.5 (76th out 76)

[Chief Faithful]

Rather see a QB or RT selected at 11. If not then move down for extra picks and select a RT or LG later in the 1st.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Rausch

THIS IS NOT OUR BIGGEST NEED.

We spend a 1st on a HB (a position most teams can fill in the 3rd, 4th, or 5th) and I'll be livid...

Agreed, QB is our biggest need by far but,

1. Luck and RGIII will be long gone by the time we pick so unless we trade up for one of them (which is almost a guarantee we won't) there are no other QBs worth the #11 pick unless you want to reach for a Tier II QB at #11.

2. Richardson is a playmaker and if we decide to draft at #11 instead of trade back then give me one of the top playmakers in this draft. We can address our RT situation later unless you feel that a RT is worthy of the #11 pick.

3. We could also use a NT. Are there any worth a #11 pick? Would you reach for one at that spot?

The problem is this team screwed itself by winning those pointless games against the Bears, SD, Indy, and Minn. While those wins "felt good" at the time, they put us in a bad spot. Pioli will most likely not trade up for a stud QB, so unless we draft a Tier II QB and hope he pans out we might be screwed at the position for a few years. We will be better next year because of our talent coming back and an easier schedule. We will miss out on next year's stud QBs as well. It appears that this team wants to win with a good defense, running game and average QB. Since they want to do that, why not get the best RB in the draft?

[suds79]

For everybody who says you can get a RB easily later in the draft, you can say the same thing about RT.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by Rausch

THIS IS NOT OUR BIGGEST NEED.

We spend a 1st on a HB (a position most teams can fill in the 3rd, 4th, or 5th) and I'll be livid...

THE CHIEFS WILL NOT FILL THEIR BIGGEST NEED(QB) WITH THEIR FIRST ROUND PICK. GUARANTEED! What then, do you propose they do instead?

[Brock]

Originally Posted by suds79

For everybody who says you can get a RB easily later in the draft, you can say the same thing about RT.

If the choice is RB or RT, it's a no brainer. But that's probably not the choice.

[the Talking Can]

we already have an elite RB, we don't need two...there is way too much value at RB throughout the draft to spend the #11 on a RB

i mean, i'm not going to freak out if we draft him, he's a good player

but I'd rather trade down and take dontari poe* at NT (even if it's a slight reach)...hell, even a tackle if we trade down (can not believe I'm saying that)

just don't see the results from stacking elite skill players at one position, at least until you have a QB


*Edit

reading around about Poe, I'm not so impressed, a first pick on him would be a reach...so scratch that

[Demonpenz]

Trade Jamaal Charles for a 3rd rounder and this team looks pretty good

1st- Richardson
2nd -Smith RT
3rd - Andre -Center 3rd Mclainson Guard
4th- Johnson- Tight End
5th- Mcarthy - Dlineman
6th-????
7-?????/

That leads us to having a road grating right tackle with richardson. A center and a guard who have proven to have a nasty attitdude. We had some D-line help in the offseason. We draft a tight end that can block and catch a ball or two. Bring back Battle for special teams. That kind of team would be aweful tough to handle when the bad weather rolls around.

[Fansy the Famous Bard]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

KC doesn't need to use the #11 on a RB to improve the running game. Run blocking was horrible this year.
PFF grades:

Wiegmann: -4.4 (26th out of 35)
Albert: -1.0 (32nd out of 76)
Asamoah: -12.3 (70th out of 77)
Lilja: -3.8 (40th out of 77)
Richardson: -19.5 (76th out 76)

I'm surprised to see Asamoah grade out that poorly. Guess I assumed he was better than that, and the problems were with Richardson\Lilja\Wiegs

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

reading around about Poe, I'm not so impressed, a first pick on him would be a reach...so scratch that

Alameda Ta'amu in the 2nd, FTW!

[warpaint*]

Depends on the prospects of JC returning 100%. If the Chiefs believe he's going to be back same as before I'd probably look somewhere else. Otherwise if there is doubt I wouldn't mind taking TR. Dude is going to be really good in the pros I think.

[ModSocks]

So let me get this straight...CP Thinks that we should trout out an offense (that will inevitably be led my Matt Cassel) that features Jackie Battle and a RB who's coming off an ACL surgery who has NEVER carried the load......that's a good idea?

Get real. Look, I hope JC returns 100%, but the odds of that aren't great. On top of that, you really trust a back coming off of ACL surgery to handle 350+ carries?

Because with Cassel at QB, that's what we'll be facing.

Like it or not CP, we need a RB. They should have got one last draft, they didn't, and look what happened.

Richardson would be the BPA at a position of need.

If you think our running game is "fine" then you might as well just stop watching football.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

I'm sure they'll have the podcast up later today. Fescoe asked him directly if his thoughts of Matt Cassel as a QB were the same today as they were when he brought him to KC. That's when he gave the Matt is a good NFL QB and brought up the 27 TD to whatever INT's for 2010 and his last season in New England.

He was then asked about the draft and what pieces he felt the Chiefs needed and stated the Oline needs upgraded and the entire team needs additional depth.

All in vague generalizations of course.

Same shit, different day.

Same GM, different name.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

So let me get this straight...CP Thinks that we should trout out an offense (that will inevitably be led my Matt Cassel) that features Jackie Battle and a RB who's coming off an ACL surgery who has NEVER carried the load......that's a good idea?

Get real. Look, I hope JC returns 100%, but the odds of that aren't great. On top of that, you really trust a back coming off of ACL surgery to handle 350+ carries?

Because with Cassel at QB, that's what we'll be facing.

Like it or not CP, we need a RB. They should have got one last draft, they didn't, and look what happened.

No one has said that. Yes we need help at RB, but that can be found in rounds 4-7 or UDFA.