Chiefs Don't Chiefs need a 2nd or 2 firsts for a successful 2009 draft? - Page 2

chiefsfan1963 · 04-02-2009, 08:08 PM

Is just getting Curry and then waiting for our 2nd pick in the 3rd round sufficient for chiefs to be successful in the 2009 draft? I'm curious what others are thinking regarding the draft. Wouldn't trading our 3rd pick for more picks make more sense rather than pay Curry huge guarantee money. I won't be surprised if Pioli does this.

chiefsfan1963 · 04-02-2009, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigVE

For the first time in years and years I feel like KC is holding the cards and is in a position to be able to make/offer deals and have the advantage instead of the other way around.

I agree no matter how the season ends I am so happy that we finally have a clean slate. No CP and no Herm is so awesome. I'm way patient for this franchise to develop. I think they will turn this around real fast. Looking forward to renewing my NFL Ticket for the first time since 2007!

**Iowanian** · 04-02-2009, 08:45 PM

I guess it depends how you look at it...

If the Chiefs use the first 2 rounds to add 1 starting QB, 1 Defensive Playmaker and another starting OLB to their roster, on paper, you'd have to at least consider that was successful by Chiefs standards. I mean, the 2nd could have gone to the next Jr Siavii.

Deberg_1990 · 04-02-2009, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chiefsfan1963

You don't think he'll be available at the 3rd pick?

Even if he is, what makes you 100% certain the Chiefs will select him? Has Pioli said he will pick him?

Jethopper · 04-02-2009, 09:24 PM

Brown is better.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 04-02-2009, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

If Matt Cassel leads this team to a couple of SB wins in the next ten years, then regardless of any other consideration, it will have been a successful draft.

I would have paid good money to see the look on your face as you typed this.

soundmind · 04-02-2009, 09:48 PM

I can't tell what this Denver/Chicago trade has done for the stock of Sanchez and Stafford, but I get the feeling now that one of them is going #1.

So the real question is the stock price of our #3 pick, assuming the other QB is still there. And honestly, even if he isn't. Then we're talking about pick of the litter at LT. We're really in a badass position. At this point, I think taking Aaron Curry could be a mistake. We'd be smarter to draft Sanchez or Stafford ourselves, if for no other reason than trade value and potential. The #3 pick is going to make too much coin to waste on anything else.

So long story short, I think we'll trade down and gain picks doing it. That or another piece to the puzzle in a wild trade scenario.

Hammock Parties · 04-02-2009, 10:03 PM

I wonder if someone would trade up with us for a LT?

KCrockaholic · 04-02-2009, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Claythan

I wonder if someone would trade up with us for a LT?

As much as I like Albert, I would take Ryan Clady and the 18th pick for our #3 in a heartbeat.

SBK · 04-02-2009, 11:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcrockaholic4life

As much as I like Albert, I would take Ryan Clady and the 18th pick for our #3 in a heartbeat.

Slowly put the crackpipe down.

KCrockaholic · 04-02-2009, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBK

Slowly put the crackpipe down.

He allowed .5 sacks last year and should have been in the pro-bowl. He was immediately one of the best LT's in the league. Having Albert as RG/LG or RT with Clady as the LT would make our O-line from below average to top 5.

SBK · 04-02-2009, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcrockaholic4life

He allowed .5 sacks last year and should have been in the pro-bowl. He was immediately one of the best LT's in the league. Having Albert as RG/LG or RT with Clady as the LT would make our O-line from below average to top 5.

We already have a dope LT, and even if Denver would trade him (never gonna happen) there's no way we'd entertain that trade.

KCrockaholic · 04-02-2009, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBK

We already have a dope LT, and even if Denver would trade him (never gonna happen) there's no way we'd entertain that trade.

So pretend that the offer came up and you where GM. What would you do?

Fairplay · 04-03-2009, 12:04 AM

I won't play pretend but i do think we need do draft a defensive line stud, preferably a DE.

If Pioli trades down a few spots, which i would expect actually. Then a DE and a OT.

But i also would not be surprised if they picked a WR.

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-03-2009, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcrockaholic4life

So pretend that the offer came up and you where GM. What would you do?

Why in hell would Denver give up Clady? Who would be their left tackle, especially after trading their picks to get a QB?

**DaneMcCloud** · 04-03-2009, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fairplay

I won't play pretend but i do think we need do draft a defensive line stud, preferably a DE.

If Pioli trades down a few spots, which i would expect actually. Then a DE and a OT.

But i also would not be surprised if they picked a WR.

There are no defensive line "studs", especially true defensive ends that we know of in this draft. No Bruce Smith, Julius Peppers, Mario Williams, etc.

The draft is absolutely loaded with high quality offensive lineman that would immediately upgrade the Chiefs line (maybe for a decade) but moving down a few spots would still be way, way, way too high for these guys.

DHB could be a possibility at #12-17 but the Chiefs would have to absolutely love him because he's a boom or bust guy.

04-02-2009, 08:08 PM
chiefsfan1963 Veteran Join Date: Oct 2001 Casino cash: $10005060	Don't Chiefs need a 2nd or 2 firsts for a successful 2009 draft? Is just getting Curry and then waiting for our 2nd pick in the 3rd round sufficient for chiefs to be successful in the 2009 draft? I'm curious what others are thinking regarding the draft. Wouldn't trading our 3rd pick for more picks make more sense rather than pay Curry huge guarantee money. I won't be surprised if Pioli does this.
Posts: 1,948

04-02-2009, 08:45 PM	#17
Iowanian Supporter Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Utopia Casino cash: $4648454	I guess it depends how you look at it... If the Chiefs use the first 2 rounds to add 1 starting QB, 1 Defensive Playmaker and another starting OLB to their roster, on paper, you'd have to at least consider that was successful by Chiefs standards. I mean, the 2nd could have gone to the next Jr Siavii.
Posts: 61,554

04-02-2009, 09:24 PM	#19
Jethopper A Great Pick Join Date: Mar 2009 Casino cash: $9776008	Brown is better.
Posts: 1,756

04-02-2009, 09:48 PM	#21
soundmind EB:29 Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Kansas City, MO Casino cash: $10004900	I can't tell what this Denver/Chicago trade has done for the stock of Sanchez and Stafford, but I get the feeling now that one of them is going #1. So the real question is the stock price of our #3 pick, assuming the other QB is still there. And honestly, even if he isn't. Then we're talking about pick of the litter at LT. We're really in a badass position. At this point, I think taking Aaron Curry could be a mistake. We'd be smarter to draft Sanchez or Stafford ourselves, if for no other reason than trade value and potential. The #3 pick is going to make too much coin to waste on anything else. So long story short, I think we'll trade down and gain picks doing it. That or another piece to the puzzle in a wild trade scenario.
Posts: 1,042

04-02-2009, 10:03 PM	#22
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4470478	I wonder if someone would trade up with us for a LT? __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 278,551

04-03-2009, 12:04 AM	#28
Fairplay A certain set of skills Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: texas Casino cash: $10026683 VARSITY	I won't play pretend but i do think we need do draft a defensive line stud, preferably a DE. If Pioli trades down a few spots, which i would expect actually. Then a DE and a OT. But i also would not be surprised if they picked a WR.
Posts: 25,265