Would you give up next year's #1 pick for Surtain? [Archive]

Chiefs Pantalones

03-09-2005, 10:05 PM

UteChief

03-09-2005, 10:07 PM

Nope, I would give up this years fourth and next years third or possible second depending on playing time and such.

the Talking Can

03-09-2005, 10:08 PM

no way

Dayze

03-09-2005, 10:11 PM

No. Because the Curse of the Chiefs will only allow them to go 4-12 after making such a deal - thus surrendering a top 5 pick.

:banghead:

Chiefnj

03-09-2005, 10:14 PM

Nope.

WebGem

03-09-2005, 10:18 PM

32nd? ROFL

Bowser

03-09-2005, 10:19 PM

Hell no.

If the Rams can pull off getting Marshall Faulk for a 2nd and a 5th, why can't we do the same for Surtain? This year's second, next year's fifth.

el borracho

03-09-2005, 10:22 PM

Hell no.

If the Rams can pull off getting Marshall Faulk for a 2nd and a 5th, why can't we do the same for Surtain? This year's second, next year's fifth.
I hope you are kidding.

el borracho

03-09-2005, 10:23 PM

Oh, and to answer the question in the thread starter: No.

Bowser

03-09-2005, 10:27 PM

I hope you are kidding.

I'm not saying Faulk and Surtain are the same quality player, if that's what you mean.

Logical

03-09-2005, 10:31 PM

Why on earth would we do that when all we have to do is give up this years number 2. That would be f*cking insane. Carl at least occasionally gets someone like Tony Gonzalez and DT in the first round.

Nightfyre

03-09-2005, 10:32 PM

keg in kc

03-09-2005, 10:33 PM

No. I think NE set the market with the Starks trade, and because of that either our second this year or our first next year is too high. Make it the '06 second and I'm game. I'd even throw in a 5th this year.

Phobia

03-09-2005, 10:34 PM

Absolutely not. I think Surtain could even be cut. Why the hell would we give up a pick?

Archie Bunker

03-09-2005, 10:34 PM

Are you high?

I am :)

Dayze

03-09-2005, 10:35 PM

Are you high?

I wasn't looking at his neck.

http://www.cedmagic.com/featured/demo-program/4759-tommy-chong.jpg

Archie Bunker

03-09-2005, 10:37 PM

The price might reach a 1st if teams start throwing running backs their way(Alexander, James, etc).

Thats why if they were going to do it they should have down it sooner.

el borracho

03-09-2005, 10:38 PM

Hell no.

If the Rams can pull off getting Marshall Faulk for a 2nd and a 5th, why can't we do the same for Surtain? This year's second, next year's fifth.
The current asking price is reportedly this year's 2nd. There is no need to up the offer with additional picks.

Chiefs Pantalones

03-09-2005, 10:39 PM

The price might reach a 1st if teams start throwing running backs their way(Alexander, James, etc).

Thats why if they were going to do it they should have down it sooner.

Exactly.

And it's not like we have a lot of CBs to choose from.

If we don't get a top notch starting CB in FA this year, then the offseason has been a failure.

Bowser

03-09-2005, 10:41 PM

The current asking price is reportedly this year's 2nd. There is no need to up the offer with additional picks.

How about if we save next years fifth, and just throw in Larry Johnson and this years fifth rounder?

*ducking from flying objects*

Archie Bunker

03-09-2005, 10:42 PM

Exactly.

And it's not like we have a lot of CBs to choose from.

If we don't get a top notch starting CB in FA this year, then the offseason has been a failure.

I am starting to think it is going to have to be Law. If its not look for Herndon to sign tomorrow and when Denver matches and Dyson is long gone we can look forward to Chad Scott and rookie starting on opening day. :banghead:

Mr. Laz

03-09-2005, 10:43 PM

fug no...

don't forget that surtain also want a brand new schpankity contract.

Bowser

03-09-2005, 10:44 PM

And no, I would not give up LJ, either. Just wanting to see if Borracho was waiting to pounce.......

:D

Mr. Kotter

03-09-2005, 10:45 PM

No.

Second rounder, yes; no first rounder, UNLESS a long-term reasonable contract could be negotiated. :hmmm:

J Diddy

03-09-2005, 10:46 PM

fug no...

don't forget that surtain also want a brand new schpankity contract.

agreed

I also agree with your post on the other thread, beef up the lb corps play with young secondary. I don't think with a stud lb corps the d would still be at 32.

Phobia

03-09-2005, 10:47 PM

Hell no.

If the Rams can pull off getting Marshall Faulk for a 2nd and a 5th, why can't we do the same for Surtain? This year's second, next year's fifth.

Bowser, about that basement job? I've discounted the price to $20k. When can we start?

Mr. Laz

03-09-2005, 10:48 PM

agreed

I also agree with your post on the other thread, beef up the lb corps play with young secondary. I don't think with a stud lb corps the d would still be at 32.

eggzactly... be "studly" someplace

if the linebackers are great then the safeties can stay back and help the cornerbacks.

right now no level of the defense is good enough to not need help ...we have a chance right now to get one.

sign hartwell!!!!!

go bo

03-09-2005, 10:58 PM

agreed

I also agree with your post on the other thread, beef up the lb corps play with young secondary. I don't think with a stud lb corps the d would still be at 32.well, so far we have one stud (we hope bell will be a stud and an uninjured one as well)...

even if we sign hartwell (which i doubt), our "stud" lb corps might vault our defense all the way up to 29th...

hoo-ray... :( :( :(

of course, 29th is better than we've done lately... :deevee: :deevee: :deevee:

Chan93lx50

03-09-2005, 10:59 PM

You must need some more special education?

J Diddy

03-09-2005, 11:02 PM

well, so far we have one stud (we hope bell will be a stud and an uninjured one as well)...

even if we sign hartwell (which i doubt), our "stud" lb corps might vault our defense all the way up to 29th...

hoo-ray... :( :( :(

of course, 29th is better than we've done lately... :deevee: :deevee: :deevee:

I say and pray 15th.
For crying out loud if the Pats can play secondary with 2 rookies and a wr in nickel then we should be at least ok.

Just depends who they draft. Carl has this thing where he will draft someone who isn't even freaking listed so if he's right he looks like the genious. The only problem is why draft them so high?

digi2fish

03-09-2005, 11:14 PM

32nd? ROFL
sign Hartwell first, maybe...

Fat Elvis

03-09-2005, 11:35 PM

Bowser, about that basement job? I've discounted the price to $20k. When can we start?

I might be interested in getting a basement finished for $20K....

Manila-Chief

03-10-2005, 01:41 AM

How about if we save next years fifth, and just throw in Larry Johnson and this years fifth rounder?

*ducking from flying objects*

For me it determines if Law will return to health or not. I see this as a one shot thing ... this is the year so go all out for it. If Law will be fully healthy then go with him and keep the 2nd. (no, don't expect Kingless to be successful using it ... but just maybe the law of averages catches up with him and he drafts a starter????).

But, Bowser, I agree with you with a little different twist ... trade this years' 5th. and next year's 2nd. We ought to be drafting higher next year.

Rausch

03-10-2005, 01:48 AM

How should I put this...

I'd give my mother, your wife, half of the beer in my fridge, and DV's firstborn to have a CB better than Bartee...

ANY CB...

keg in kc

03-10-2005, 01:50 AM

I'd give my mother, your wife, half of the beer in my fridge, and DV's firstborn to have a CB better than Bartee...I'd offer my wife, but I don't think it would help.

Now if we were trying to land a whole team, she'd get the job done.

alanm

03-10-2005, 01:58 AM

:hmmm:

Me, I'd give up the 2nd rounder the Dolphins are asking for, but if Carl thinks (keyword is "thinks") he can get a good player this time after all these years with the 2nd round pick, then why not give up next year's 1st round pick? If the Chiefs are planning to do so well, that pick won't mean as much because it would be around 25 to 32nd overall.If you think that Surtain would give us the type of production that say... Trent Green has given us. Than I'd say yes. But he'd better than all that and a cherry on top. But then again suppose we suck again and we end up with a Top 10 pick. But Hey!! It's a odd numbered year this season so we shoud have a pretty good record and make the playoffs.
:thumb: :)

philfree

03-10-2005, 03:31 AM

In some years I might give up our 1st rounder for a pro bowl caliber player but not this year. There's to many good prospects that fit our needs in this draft to let go of that pick unless we can truely extort another team to sign over the farm. We need both a vet CB and our 1st round pick if we really want to improve our D. That's for both the short run and the long run.

PhilFree :arrow:

melbar

03-10-2005, 03:34 AM

NO I wouldnt. They need to draft a LB for depth with the 2nd . there will still be some really good talent there...whether we take advantage or not is another Question. BTW we have 3 5th round picks to use for a trade, probably wont though...

teedubya

03-10-2005, 03:41 AM

Why dont we just trade Larry Johnson, and our 2nd rounder for Jason Taylor, Patrick Surtain, and whoever else they want to give us.

chiefs1111

03-10-2005, 06:50 AM

no i wouldnt giove up our number 1 for next year because even if we do well and have a lower round pick we will need it seeing as how we will probably be gutting the team next offseason and will be in a rebuilding mode more than likely.