Expect Flurry of First-Round Draft Trades

[reschief]

Expect flurry of first-round draft trades

08:03 AM ET 04.14 | Stability at quarterback among teams picking in the back half of the draft is likely to directly affect the wheeling and dealing. Of the teams picking from 17-32 in the first round, the only team that really needs a quarterback is Seattle, which is picking 25th. The rest are all set, unless one of those teams plans to look for a quarterback of the future. The quarterback stability of the teams in those spots is why they are there. ... What that should do is set up what could be a wild ride at the back end of the first round, with a flurry of trades. The haves can make deals with the have-nots. "I still think as many as five quarterbacks go in the first round," an NFC general manager said. "You watch. Some of those guys will go late in the round when teams realize they won't all be there in the second, and they have to make moves to get them."

CBSSports.com

Since we're "set" at "quarterback" . . . what are the odds we trade down from 21 and pick up additional picks?

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

He played in 1 playoff game. I guess he can never get better. IIRC the BEST player fumbled and couldn't convert a 4th a 1.

That 4th and 1 playcall was an absolute joke, and the fact that you even mention it as some sort of failure by Charles just shows how disingenuous you are.

[Barret]

Silly question, even with the hiring of Zorn, does the lock out cause Cassell to regress since he has no one helping him with his issues he has?

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Barret

Silly question, even with the hiring of Zorn, does the lock out cause Cassell to regress since he has no one helping him with his issues he has?

Awesome.

More excuses for a 28 year old QB.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Barret

Silly question, even with the hiring of Zorn, does the lock out cause Cassell to regress since he has no one helping him with his issues he has?

Regress?

Probably not, but he certainly needed this time to work with Zorn to hope for any continued progression going into next season.

I just think it's a ****ing travesty that we even have to discuss this with a QB that's nearly 30 ****ing years old.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by milkman

That 4th and 1 playcall was an absolute joke, and the fact that you even mention it as some sort of failure by Charles just shows how disingenuous you are.

It's also a bit disingenuous not to realize that there were legitimate factors affecting Cassell, such as not having a WR worth a damn to pass to outside of Bowe.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

It's also a bit disingenuous not to realize that there were legitimate factors affecting Cassell, such as not having a WR worth a damn to pass to outside of Bowe.

You haven't been paying attention.

I have discussed Cassel's improvement, and what he needs to continue to progress, which includes better weapons.

But what he needs more than anything is continued work on mechanics and reads.

[Coogs]

Originally Posted by milkman

That 4th and 1 playcall was an absolute joke, and the fact that you even mention it as some sort of failure by Charles just shows how disingenuous you are.

I don't recall what the 4th and 1 call was. But go up to the Chiefs Links tab at the top of the page. Go down to the Classic Games link. On there is the game against the Raiders at Oakland. We had six 2nd and 1 or 3rd and 1 situations, and got nothing. First several were run attempts where the O-line got obliterated. We went to the pass because of that, and same result... zero conversions on short yardage.

The O-line has to be upgraded big time. IMO before the WR's, because without the threat of being able to run the ball in short yardage situations, we will not be able to pass either, no matter who the WR's are.

[ModSocks]

Originally Posted by Coogs

The O-line has to be upgraded big time. IMO before the WR's, because without the threat of being able to run the ball in short yardage situations, we will not be able to pass either, no matter who the WR's are.

As true as that it is, it's a double edged sword. If we have the threat of a passing game, teams won't be so inclined to stack the box, thus relieving the stress on the O-line.

If they addressed either with the 1st pick, I wouldn't complain.

[the Talking Can]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

He played in 1 playoff game. I guess he can never get better. IIRC the BEST player fumbled and couldn't convert a 4th a 1.

that's a dumb comparison...

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Awesome.

More excuses for a 28 year old QB.

I read that as a question. Not an excuse.
Posted via Mobile Device

[the Talking Can]

Originally Posted by milkman

One could argue that Emmit Smith was the best player on his team when the Cowboys were dynastic in the nineties (I would argue otherwise, but that's another discussion).

But aside from Smith, the best player on every one of the dynastic teams through the years has always been the QB.

And I know there are people who would argue that Terry Bradshaw wasn't, but he was far better than most people recognize, and was the only one that adapted to changes in system as his offense evolved through the dynastic years.

it's always about the QB when you're talking Superbowl...with very, very few exceptions


we're stuck have to hope and pretend Cassel is one of those guys...meanwhile, all we can do is try to surround him a couple dozen probowlers and see if that works....the truth is, up to this point, Cassel gives us no margin for error

He can't have a bad OL like Rothleisraper or Manning
He can't have a bad running game like Brady or Manning
He can't have a mediocre defense like Manning or Brees

he's got to have it all for us to have a serious chance...it just makes it harder

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Originally Posted by bsp4444

I believe he said 4-5 players from being a contender and he is right. 4-5 of the right players. We won 10 games last year, albeit with a soft schedule, but with a better pass rush (DT, OLB) we greatly improve our defense. With a WR, C, RT, we greatly improve our offense. Not that the draft will fall that way, but that would make us a hell of a problem for a lot of teams.

4-5 players = 25% of our starting team , geez we suck

[Coogs]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

As true as that it is, it's a double edged sword. If we have the threat of a passing game, teams won't be so inclined to stack the box, thus relieving the stress on the O-line.

If they addressed either with the 1st pick, I wouldn't complain.

I tend to agree, but by the same token the O-line has to be able to give the RB a crease at some point no matter how many guys are up front on defense. In goal line/short yardage situations, guys like Marcus Allen were able to convert nearly every time with just a tiny gap to slip through. Charles is a good enough back to do the same, but there was just no room at all to slither through.

[Barret]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Awesome.

More excuses for a 28 year old QB.

I am not trying to make an excuse for him. But I am wondering if that is going through the Head Coach and GM's mind when they are looking at the draft.

If Zorn was brought in to assist Cassel and had the time to keep him up to par or manageable then as a GM I might look later in the draft for a back up if they aren't bringing Croyle or Palko back.

But if Cassel has no direction or assistance in the off season and the last few games played showed that he is falling back into old habits of being a shitty QB, then as a GM wouldn't you have to put a backup / future QB higher in the pecking order then 4th or 5th rounder?

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

I read that as a question. Not an excuse.
Posted via Mobile Device

He asked it as a question.

Guarantee it will be used at some point, by someone - if not many people - as an excuse.

Assuming there's a season, of course.