Kansas City Chiefs GM John Dorsey explains plan for No. 1 pick

[ShowtimeSBMVP]

By Albert Breer
Reporter, NFL.com and NFL Network
Published: April 4, 2013 at 02:28 p.m.
Updated: April 4, 2013 at 02:42 p.m.
0 Likes | 0 Comments


KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- Relaxed and easygoing as he might be on this day, Kansas City Chiefs general manager John Dorsey had to know the question was coming, particularly since West Virginia quarterback Geno Smith's flight into town was already airborne.
Mock draft central


In his first year on the job, Dorsey has the draft's first pick. His move will set the table for everyone else, and his job is to get the most value out of that commodity. The best way to do that, of course, is to generate a market for the pick by manufacturing the impression that the Chiefs, in fact, like everyone.

And as I floated that well-worn idea to Dorsey, his back straightened and he stopped me.

"It's not creating a belief, it's the truth," Dorsey sharply responded. "We've said all along it's a process, and that process will not be finalized, that board will not be set, until four days before the draft. That's the way that whole process works itself out. There are different phases that you go through. I mean, right now, I just walked downstairs and we're in a different phase right now. We're going back as a group and assessing all the different positions."

Still, there's very little question that the focus in Kansas City is squarely on the first pick -- the Chiefs' aren't scheduled to pick again until No. 63 overall -- and that focus is now narrowing.

It wouldn't make much sense for Dorsey and the Chiefs to tip their hand now on exactly who they're targeting, since, again, that might limit the value of the pick itself. But internally, there has been a process of elimination and an identification of "finalists" with the draft three weeks away.

"True contenders?" Dorsey quizzically uttered, before pausing and counting them in his head. "We've gotten it down to four."

*****

There's a shell game to this final phase of it, too.

Yes, the Chiefs brought in Smith, but they already gave up two high picks, including the 34th overall selection in this draft, to acquire Alex Smith from the San Francisco 49ers. That trade, plus the split opinion league-wide on Smith's ability, cast plenty of doubt on the possibility of Kansas City taking the plunge on the West Virginia star -- doubt that Dorsey does his best to dispel.

"There always can be a quarterback," he said. "We're gonna take the best player. I stand by that. And what I use as an example is that we were lucky enough to get Aaron Rodgers (in Green Bay). We were questioned about that, but we stood patiently for three years with him. We can stand patiently another three if we have to. At the end of the day, you want to do what's best for your organization, present and future. And if it happens to be the quarterback, we'll take the quarterback."

On the topic of Smith, Dorsey added: "Physically, he was very impressive at the combine, and we watched his pro day three times. When he threw, it was very impressive."

But if it's not the quarterback? That's where it gets interesting, because the guys who seem like better Chiefs fits aren't exactly being courted in the same manner Geno has been in K.C.

With left tackle Branden Albert's future uncertain, Texas A&M's Luke Joeckel and Central Michigan's Eric Fisher both would seem to be firmly in the mix. Neither is slated to visit. The Chiefs also spent considerable time kicking the tires on Oregon's Dion Jordan and Florida's Sharrif Floyd after the NFL Scouting Combine. Yet, those two aren't scheduled either, at least at this point, to go to Kansas City and meet the brass.

This could all be part of the club gaming the system, and other teams.

Internally, obviously, there are answers to all these questions. Every day, Dorsey sits down with Chiefs head coach Andy Reid at 6:30 in the morning, again at lunch and a final time at night to talk things over. In the final 10 days, the GM says, Reid will become more involved in draft meetings, as the scouts trickle in with their field work complete. The hope is, by then, Dorsey has been sold on one of the four.

"In a second, that could happen," Dorsey explained. "Sitting down and overwhelming somebody with their depth of knowledge of the offensive scheme and how quick they can put it up, and combine that with the on-the-field skills, and you go, 'Holy s---, he's got it.' It could be an interview at the combine, it could be his pro day at the school. There are different variables, and all of a sudden the light goes on and you're going, 'That's the guy!' It happens in a multitude of ways."

Whether that moment of clarity comes or not, Dorsey continued, there needs to "come a point after you sit here and listen to all the scouts, you sit and listen to the coaches, you sit and talk with the medical staff, and then you sit and talk with the head coach, and then you say, 'This is the guy, and here's why.' And everyone says, 'OK.' Then you know that's the guy."

*****

Win a chance to announce a pick live at the 2013 NFL Draft. Enter now!

And if your head isn't spinning quite enough yet, there's also a chance that the Chiefs a) aren't sold on any of the guys there or b) simply believe there's better value drafting eighth or 10th or 12th. In either case, they might test the trade waters.

For now, Dorsey is willing to admit he's open to entertaining the idea.

"Yeah," Dorsey said. "I'm open to what's best for this organization. I know I have the option to take the best player there. But if somebody calls me up and says, 'We're willing to move up, here's what we have to offer,' I see it, weigh it, listen to compensation and make a decision on what's best."

The new GM spent the last 22 seasons working his way up through the Packers' personnel department. The average draft slot for Green Bay during that span? No. 20. Not only has Dorsey not worked for a team picking first before, but he's only been a part of the process with four top-10 picks in his entire scouting career: CB Terrell Buckley (No. 5 overall in 1992), Jamal Reynolds (10, 2001), A.J. Hawk (5, 2006) and B.J. Raji (9, 2009).

That makes these waters a bit uncharted for him. He knows there are different dynamics with it. He mentioned Rodgers again as a model of a player who handled the kind of pressure the first pick will be under (though he wasn't the first pick, he was replacing a legend), and said, "I think any one of the four guys that we're targeting right now can handle that."

He's also aware that, as a first-time GM, his actions on this pick will loom large when his prowess as a decision-maker is assessed.

At least outwardly, though, he's trying to look at the top pick like any other selection.

"A personnel guy always wants to get his pick right," Dorsey said. "We live that every year. We want to make sure the pick is right. This one happens to be the first pick in the draft. We're gonna try to make it right. You guys can put the pressure on us -- 'Holy crap, it's the No. 1 pick!' It's the No. 1 pick. We're gonna do the best we can."

And as the process typically proves, getting the most out of a top pick often goes far beyond simply identifying a top player



Albert Breer ‏@AlbertBreer 1m

Nugget from my KC/Dorsey story -- Geno visited Chiefs. But Joeckel, Fisher, Floyd, Jordan aren't slated to. #Poker http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap

[Sorter]

[Bewbies]

Originally Posted by patteeu

Or it could mean that if they see enough promise in a guy they take in the later rounds, he could ride the bench for a few years before realizing his full potential.

I really think the most likely meaning of anything that any GM says during this pre-draft period is probably nothing. I think most of their public statements are meaningless. The big thing that might distinguish one GM from another is how willing they are to tell an outright lie as opposed to just misleading without technically lying. We have very little to gauge John Dorsey with in that regard.

In the later rounds? Aaron Rodgers wasn't taken in the later rounds...

[AlexSmithDynasty]

Originally Posted by Gravedigger

You were a hypocrite by telling him he's a cherry picker, when everyone on this board cherry picks in order to prove their opinion. You keep talking about McShay's opinion, or Mayock's opinion, or whatever draft expert's opinion of Geno Smith in order to tell people that Geno isn't the guy because nobody has him ranked until the middle or late first round. Would this be "CHERRY PICKING" information from draft "experts" in order to prove your opinion that Geno won't be the guy?... seems eerily similar.

Also if you think his opinion is incorrect or stupid, then you used his logic in order to say that because Joeckel is the #1 pick by Kiper that he must be BPA. You just watched the guy you thought was an idiot jump off a bridge, mocked him for it, then jumped off in the same exact way he did.

Here's my quote:

Originally Posted by AlexSmithDynasty

By the logic your applying to try and prove Geno's talent that logic would have Joeckel as best player available because Kiper has him mocked #1 to the Chiefs.

Notice I say by the logic he's applying (I should have said you're not your, grammatical error), this would indicate that using his logic Joeckel would be BPA. Nowhere did I say I believe Joeckel to be BPA. Using someone's logic to refute their position is a technique used to invalidate said position. I'm not cherry picking when there is literally not a single analyst or expert who says Geno is the best player available, cherry picking would be if 99% of analysts said Geno was the best player available and I chose the 1 person who didn't to try and prove my point.

He took Kiper's mock draft to try and say Kiper had a high opinion of Geno and contrasted that with a statement that apparently Kiper said about Joeckel being a mid-round talent in a different draft year (there's also no source for this and Kiper has Joeckel #4 on his big board and doesn't have Geno even ranked in the top 25). It's comparing apples to oranges, he was asked about what Kiper said about Geno and he chose to cite the mock draft which is just a prediction and not what Kiper actually said about Geno which is that he wouldn't take him in the first round.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by dtchiefs4life

I totally understand the thinking of taking a top young LT when Albert is on the franchise tag and missed 4 games last year due to a back injury. I would still take the QB at 1. The reward is much higher than the LT though. Would you rather have Matt Ryan or Jake Long? Im not saying Geno is rated like Matt Ryan. Just using the QB v LT comparison to a few years ago.

If you're talking Jonathan Ogden v. Tony Banks, you fire your GM if he was stupid enough to take Banks. If you're talking Peyton Manning v. Kyle Turley, you fire your GM if he doesn't take Manning. In between those sorts of opposites is where GMs stand or fall. There's no automatic call in a year like this one.

[Mother****erJones]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

If you're talking Jonathan Ogden v. Tony Banks, you fire your GM if he was stupid enough to take Banks. If you're talking Peyton Manning v. Kyle Turley, you fire your GM if he doesn't take Manning. In between those sorts of opposites is where GMs stand or fall. There's no automatic call in a year like this one.

Yes but none of these OTs are prospects of Ogden, Pace or Roaf. This is why we hired Dorsey. We'll see which decision he makes. It's likely he's already made that decision with the Smith trade. So, we'll see.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by dtchiefs4life

Yes but none of these OTs are prospects of Ogden, Pace or Roaf. This is why we hired Dorsey.

That's what I've been saying. There's no real sense for the "GENO!" crowd to go all in on the QB when the QBs aren't liked in this draft. It may be that G. Smith turns out to be elite, but there's nothing sure fire in this draft, so there's no need for this to be a repeat of the 2009 horseshit.

Interestingly, to me, is how the Chiefs have approached the usual top spots for high drafting

QB - Traded for A. Smith, signed Daniels
DE/OLB (pass rushers) - Already have Hali and Houston
OT - Let Winston go, only the tag for Albert
WR - Signed Bowe longterm, brought in Avery as well
CB - Still have Flowers, added Smith and Robinson

When I look at it like that, the only position I don't see clear starter(s) is at OT. That doesn't guarantee the Chiefs will draft that way, but it would fit the puzzle. Of course, if they think G. Smith's the real deal, they should take him regardless, but they've really set it up so that they're pretty well covered with at least theoretically starting-caliber talent at most spots.

[Mother****erJones]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

That's what I've been saying. There's no real sense for the "GENO!" crowd to go all in on the QB when the QBs aren't liked in this draft. It may be that G. Smith turns out to be elite, but there's nothing sure fire in this draft, so there's no need for this to be a repeat of the 2009 horseshit.

Interestingly, to me, is how the Chiefs have approached the usual top spots for high drafting

QB - Traded for A. Smith, signed Daniels
DE/OLB (pass rushers) - Already have Hali and Houston
OT - Let Winston go, only the tag for Albert
WR - Signed Bowe longterm, brought in Avery as well
CB - Still have Flowers, added Smith and Robinson

When I look at it like that, the only position I don't see clear starter(s) is at OT. That doesn't guarantee the Chiefs will draft that way, but it would fit the puzzle. Of course, if they think G. Smith's the real deal, they should take him regardless, but they've really set it up so that they're pretty well covered with at least theoretically starting-caliber talent at most spots.

Yes, I agree. As I've been saying it's not about Geno. It's about the top QB prospect. I would just like to try taking the top QB prospect and draft a first round QB for the first time since 1983. For me, it's not about taking a QB just to take one. We have a chance to take the best one in this draft. That's all I've been saying all along.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by dtchiefs4life

Yes, I agree. As I've been saying it's not about Geno. It's about the top QB prospect. I would just like to try taking the top QB prospect and draft a first round QB for the first time since 1983. For me, it's not about taking a QB just to take one. We have a chance to take the best one in this draft. That's all I've been saying all along.

You keep saying that it's not about taking a QB just to take one, but that's exactly what you're advocating in the bolded part. It's been the hangup of this place for years. Taking a QB prospect in the first round doesn't help if he's Blaine Gabbert. Just ask the Jaguars fans.

[Canofbier]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

You keep saying that it's not about taking a QB just to take one, but that's exactly what you're advocating in the bolded part. It's been the hangup of this place for years. Taking a QB prospect in the first round doesn't help if he's Blaine Gabbert. Just ask the Jaguars fans.

This exactly - you beat me to it.

[Mother****erJones]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

You keep saying that it's not about taking a QB just to take one, but that's exactly what you're advocating in the bolded part. It's been the hangup of this place for years. Taking a QB prospect in the first round doesn't help if he's Blaine Gabbert. Just ask the Jaguars fans.

You dont know if he is. These OTs could be Robert Gallery or Jason Smith.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by dtchiefs4life

You dont know if he is. These OTs could be Robert Gallery or Jason Smith.

Now you're back to rinsing and repeating. You claim you're not saying precisely what you're saying. And now you're just setting up your usual arguments.

How you don't see this is fascinating to ponder.

[Molitoth]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

You keep saying that it's not about taking a QB just to take one, but that's exactly what you're advocating in the bolded part. It's been the hangup of this place for years. Taking a QB prospect in the first round doesn't help if he's Blaine Gabbert. Just ask the Jaguars fans.

Blaine Gabbert was a meh prospect.

Geno Smith isn't.


But I suppose that is all subjective.

[Chiefnj2]

Dorsey is full of crap. No private workouts with 4 of the 5 top talents and people think he is doing a careful job? They have their board set.

I also think they are 100% confident in Alex Smith and Daniels. If they were truly concerned about QB, even 3 years down the road, they'd be bringing in Manual, Nassib and Glennon for workouts.

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by Molitoth

Blaine Gabbert was a meh prospect.

Geno Smith isn't.


But I suppose that is all subjective.

According to report after report, Geno Smith is a meh prospect.

[Nightfyre]

So who is the fantastical QB you will draft next year?