Here's McShay's latest mock

[cmh6476]

didnt see this actually posted, just a lot of hatin on the dude. I sure as hell hope we don't "settle" cause the right guys don't fall to us...


And a few notes to consider from McShay:
· Darren McFadden is still the top rated prospect on my board but he falls out of the top-five picks in this scenario - partly due to team needs and partly due to character conerns.

· Until there's more information from team doctor's regarding long-term damage, I'm not ready to send DT Glenn Dorsey free-falling.

· OT's Ryan Clady, Chris Williams and Jeff Otah moved up from last time, mostly due to team needs. OLB Keith Rivers, RB Rashard Mendenhall and OG Branden Albert are also on the rise. Conversely, QB Brian Brohm, DE Calais Campbell and OT Sam Baker all fell out of the first round.

· While I still value Brohm as a first-rounder, there simply was not a good fit for the Louisville quarterback in this mock draft. When it's all said and done; my guess is a team like the Falcons, Ravens, Bears or Panthers will trade back into the bottom-half of the first round in order to secure Brohm - similar to the Browns' move drafting Brady Quinn at pick No. 22 overall last year.

Team Record Pick, Position, School Scouts Inc.'s top needs
1. Miami 1-15 QB Matt Ryan, Boston College OL, DT, LB, CB, QB
The odds are high that Miami will be stuck with this pick. After all, no pick in the top-five has been dealt since the 2004 draft. This pick should come down to three players; Ryan, OT Jake Long and DE Chris Long. By no means am I convinced that Ryan is the pick. In fact, if the Dolphins do not sign a tackle in free agency - most specifically Flozell Adams - then Jake Long becomes the logical choice. However, until there's word from Dolphins' camp that John Beck is the quarterback of the future, Ryan makes the most sense. Ryan has all the physical tools of a franchise quarterback and -- more importantly -- he possesses rare intangibles.

2. St. Louis 3-12 DE Chris Long, Virginia DE, OG/OT, CB, OLB, WR
If they draft Jake Long there's a good chance they'll have to move him to right tackle or guard for the next couple of seasons while Orlando Pace finishes out his career. Paying that type of money for a guard (whether it's Alex Barron or Jake Long) is a tough pill to swallow. Glenn Dorsey and Sedrick Ellis have been mentioned with this pick, but the team has blown a lot of money on DT busts in recent years and shouldn't push its luck after scoring with Adam Carriker a year ago.

While nothing seems to fit perfectly here, Chris Long makes the most sense. Long is not a prototypical edge-rusher but he's a dominant playmaker with rare versatility and a motor that never quits. He can serve as a good complement at left end opposite the speedy Leonard Little, who recently reworked his contract.

3. Atlanta 4-12 OT Jake Long, Michigan QB, OT, DT, RB, DS
Ryan should be the Falcons' selection if he's available. If not, it will be a difficult decision between McFadden, Dorsey and Jake Long. The team has needs at all three positions, but upgrading its offensive line is most pressing and Long is without question the safest choice.

4. Oakland 4-11 DT Glenn Dorsey, LSU DT, WR, DE, OT, SLB
The Raiders are financially strapped and will not want to dish out top-five money one year after selecting QB JaMarcus Russell No. 1 overall. If McFadden is still on the board, don't count out a blockbuster between owners Al Davis and Jerry Jones (Cowboys).

The signing of Tommy Kelly gives the Raiders two good defensive linemen. While it certainly frees the team up to go in a different direction with this pick (McFadden?), it does not eliminate Dorsey or Sedrick Ellis from the discussion. Assuming he is cleared medically by team doctors, Dorsey is rated higher than Ellis and should be the pick. He could provide the type of interior disruption the Raiders' defense was lacking a year ago.

5. Kansas City 4-11 OT Ryan Clady*, Boise State LOT, OG, CB, DE, OC
The Chiefs' No. 1 priority this offseason should be solidifying their offensive front. However, with Jake Long off the board in this scenario, Kansas City is faced with the unenviable decision of drafting need versus value. Clady is not a top-five prospect. Nor is any other tackle in this class for that matter. The team ideally would like to trade down and still get Clady, Chris Williams or Jeff Otah, which is a possibility considering RB Darren McFadden, DT Sedrick Ellis and DE/OLB Vernon Gholston are still on the board. If stuck at No. 5, though; the assumption is Kansas City will draft the highest rated tackle on its board.

6. NY Jets 3-12 RB Darren McFadden*, Arkansas NT, WR, LB, OG, RB
McFadden is the value pick. Gholston is the need pick. If presented with this opportunity the Jets should take a page out of the Vikings' book and pull the trigger on McFadden. While he's not a yard-churning bell cow like Peterson, McFadden is an elite athlete with the size, home-running hitting speed and versatility to significantly upgrade the Jets' tired offense from a year ago.


7. New England (via San Fran.) 5-11 DE/OLB Vernon Gholston*, Ohio State LB, CB, DS, OL, RB
The Patriots would like to inject some youth at linebacker, which is why Gholston makes so much sense with this pick. Gholston is a bit inconsistent, but he also is one of the premier pass rushers in the 2008 class and fits perfectly as a rush-linebacker in the Pats' 3-4 scheme.

If Gholston is off the board and if New England can't trade out, the next priority is to find a replacement for Asante Samuel, a free agent who can't be franchised for a second consecutive year.

8. Baltimore 4-11 CB Leodis McKelvin, Troy QB, CB, LOT, ILB, DE/OLB
Unless Ryan slips, Baltimore will need to wait at least a round to address its seemingly endless need for an upgrade at quarterback. Ellis is not an ideal fit for its defensive scheme and he wouldn't fill a need position. However, in this scenario, the USC DT is a strong possibility for a Ravens' organization that is among the league's most disciplined when it comes to drafting for value.

With all that in mind; McKelvin makes the best match. He is the most natural cover corner this class has to offer and he also can provide competition for Yamon Figures in the return game.

9. Cincinnati 7-9 DT Sedrick Ellis, USC DT, TE, DE, LB, OT
Ellis falling to pick No. 9 has to rank among the best-case scenarios for coach Marvin Lewis and the Bengals. The team is starving for defensive playmakers, especially along the front. Ellis, who notched 58 tackles and 8.5 sacks as a senior at USC, could solve many problems for this unit.

10. New Orleans 6-9 OLB Keith Rivers, USC CB, LB, TE, DT, OC
Cornerback and linebacker are the Saints biggest areas of need and Rivers is the best athlete available at those positions. Rivers is a complete linebacker with a very good combination of size, quickness, power and toughness. He also plays with an excellent motor and could quickly emerge as a much-needed leader for the Saints defense.

11. Buffalo 7-9 WR Malcolm Kelly*, Oklahoma DT, CB, WR, LB, TE
Kelly is the type of big receiver the Bills need to add to their roster as a complement to Lee Evans. Kelly is unusually fluid for a bigger wide out and he may have the strongest hands of any player in the 2008 draft.

12. Denver 7-9 OT Chris Williams, Vanderbilt DT, OT, MLB, DS, WR
Williams still needs to get stronger and play with more of a chip on his shoulder, but he is one of the fastest rising players in this class because you simply can't coach his combination of size, mobility and intelligence. Williams would be a fine fit in Denver's zone-blocking scheme.

13. Carolina 7-9 DE Derrick Harvey*, Florida OT, DE, WR, DS, DT
Instead of drafting a young signal caller that will need time to develop, look for the Panthers to bring in veteran competition for Matt Moore, who showed some signs late in the season. Drafting a defensive end like Harvey is a much wiser decision. Harvey is not as explosive as his former teammate Jarvis Moss, who selected 17th overall by the Broncos last year. However, Harvey is a more complete player and should quickly emerge as an impact every-down starter in the NFL.

14. Chicago 7-9 RB Rashard Mendenhall*, Illinois QB, OL, RB, DT, DS
Offensive tackle is certainly a possibility, especially with Clady, Williams and Otah all emerging as solid first-rounds prospects behind Jake Long. However, if Clady and Williams are off the board don't be surprised if GM Jerry Angelo takes advantage of this year's talented crop of running backs by selecting either Mendenhall or Jonathan Stewart with this pick. Either would provide more explosiveness and versatility than the team has seen from its current starter, Cedric Benson.

15. Detroit 7-9 OT Jeff Otah, Pittsburgh OT, OG, CB, DS, DE
The Lions secondary is undermanned and would welcome the services of Aqib Talib or Mike Jenkins with this pick. However, the run on offensive tackles is nearing its end and Otah is the type of mauling right tackle this unit needs in order to raise its level of physicality in 2008.

16. Arizona 8-8 CB Aqib Talib*, Kansas CB, OLB, TE, RB, DE
The Cardinals' most pressing need is at cornerback and the team would have a couple strong prospects to choose from in Talib and Jenkins. Talib tends to gamble too much and his footwork needs some polishing. However, many teams love the potential they see from this 6-foot-1, 202-pound playmaker with 4.4-speed.

17. Minnesota 8-8 WR Limas Sweed, Texas DE, DS, WR, QB, TE
Believe it or not; Minnesota is still in the market for help at wide receiver and defensive end despite investing four first or second round picks in the past four drafts on WR's Troy Williamson (2005) and Sidney Rice (2007), as well as DE's Kenechi Udeze (2004) and Erasmus James (2005). Merling would be a strong consideration but he doesn't project as a pass-rushing difference maker, which is what the Vikings need. Sweed, on the other hand, has the potential to develop into the big, playmaking wide out the team has been looking for since Randy Moss left town. Sweed could emerge as the premier talent from this year's receiver class so long as the wrist injury is behind him.

18. Houston 8-8 RB Jonathan Stewart*, Oregon CB, RB, DS, LOT, DE
The Texans need a featured back to go along with QB Matt Schaub and WR Andre Johnson. Stewart has the bulk, burst and versatility to quickly fill that role. He also could offer a boost in the kickoff return game.

19. Philadelphia 9-7 DE Phillip Merling*, Clemson WR, DE, DS, OT/OG, MLB
OT's Jon Runyan and William Thomas aren't getting any younger, so Otah is a possibility here. The Eagles are also in search of a homerun threat at wide receiver, so don't count out Jackson, either. However, Merling has an outstanding combination of size, quickness and power, which would make him a good fit opposite wide-end Trent Cole in Philadelphia.

20. Tampa Bay 9-7 WR/RS DeSean Jackson*, Cal WR, CB, RB, QB, OC
Sure, Jackson has limitations at 5-foot-10 and 169 pounds. But he's the fastest and most dangerous open-field weapon this class has to offer. If Jackson gets with a creative offensive coach like Gruden at the next level he could emerge as versatile homerun threat.

21. Washington 9-7 WR Devin Thomas*, Michigan State WR, DS, DE, OT, CB
The Redskins top priority is add a playmaking receiver to the roster. There projects to be a run of wide receivers in the bottom-half of the first round, so the Redskins should get involved here before they get shutout. Thomas might not have the ideal size Washington is looking for but he's a well-built wide out with strong hands and excellent run-after-catch ability.

22. Dallas (via Cleveland) 10-6 CB Mike Jenkins, South Florida CB, WR, OT, RB, ILB
Assuming owner Jerry Jones doesn't package picks to trade up, expect Dallas to use its two picks to address needs at corner, receiver, offensive tackle and possibly running back. Jenkins' combination of size, speed and athleticism is outstanding and his recognition skills continue to improve each season. Jenkins also brings versatility to the table as a cornerback that can play some safety and chip in on returns if necessary.

23. Pittsburgh 10-6 OG Branden Albert*, Virginia OC, OT, DE (3-4), RB, OG
The Steelers could use two of their first three picks on offensive linemen. Albert is a massive guard with good feet and a finishers' mentality. While most of his experience is at guard, Albert has the frame to try at tackle in the NFL if a team should so choose.

24. Tennessee 10-6 WR Early Doucet, LSU WR, DE, DT, CB, OC
The Titans need to draft a legitimate weapon for QB Vince Young to target. While Doucet lacks ideal deep-speed, he is a quick, well-built receiver with reliable hands and proven run-after-catch ability.

25. Seattle 10-6 DT Kentwan Balmer, North Carolina ROT, DT, RB, TE, OG
It is unlikely Shaun Alexander ever returns to form and Maurice Morris has proven to be at his best when limited to a complementary role. However, assuming McFadden, Stewart and Mendenhall are all off the board; look for the Seahawks to go in a different direction with pick No. 25 overall. Balmer is a fast-rising prospect with very good size, power and quickness. He would be a welcomed addition to Seattle's thin interior defensive line.

26. Jacksonville 11-5 WR Mario Manningham*, Michigan DE, WR, CB, SS, OL
The Jaguars should use this pick on the best available receiver or pass rusher. Auburn DE/OLB Quentin Groves would be a possibility after he blazed a 4.5-second 40-yard dash. However, Manningham is a better option. He inevitably will slip following his marginal 40 times at the combine, but Manningham is one of the rare receivers that lack elite physical tools but simply know how to separate and make big plays. He could be a steal late in this round.

27. San Diego 11-5 OT Gosder Cherilus, Boston College ROT, NT, DS, CB, RB
The Chargers can select best-available athlete should they choose. However, the right side of their offensive line could use an upgrade and Cherilus projects as a solid starting right tackle in the NFL. Cherilus' stock is on the rise following his impressive showing at the Senior Bowl.

28. Dallas 13-3 RB Felix Jones*, Arkansas CB, WR, OT, RB, DS
If Jerry Jones can't strike a deal for McFadden, he could settle for Arkansas' other first-round running back prospect. Felix Jones is a speedster that could complement RB Marion Barber well, while also providing a homerun threat in the return game.

29. San Francisco (via Indy) 13-3 WR James Hardy*, Indiana WR, OT, OLB, DE, QB
The 49ers need a playmaker at wide receiver to take the attention away from TE Vernon Davis and off of QB Alex Smith. Hardy comes with some baggage and he needs some polishing, but no receiver in this class possesses a more imposing combination of size and natural athleticism.

30. Green Bay 13-3 CB D. Rodgers-Cromartie, Tenn. State CB, OT, DS, TE, PT
QB Brett Farve would certainly welcome the addition of a tight end like USC's Fred Davis, who can stretch the seam and generate yards after the catch. However, the team has a more pressing need in the defensive secondary and Rodgers-Cromartie is one of the fastest rising prospects in the 2008 class right now. The small-school product proved capable of playing with the "big boys" at the Senior Bowl, where he demonstrated outstanding versatility and athleticism playing both free safety and cornerback throughout the week. Rodgers-Cromartie carried that momentum over to the combine, where he turned in one of the best overall performances of all the DB's working out . At this rate, Green Bay will be fortunate if the FCS standout is still available at pick No. 30.

31. New England 16-0 Selection forfeited

32. NY Giants 10-6 LB Dan Connor, Penn State LB, OT, DS, WR, CB
The Giants are in need of a legitimate upgrade at linebacker and Connor is instinctive, tough and versatile enough to contribute either in the middle or on the weak-side immediately.

*Underclassman

[Tribal Warfare]

I stopped reading when I saw Clady at the 5 spot

[cmh6476]

and why the hell does he have us with a team need at DE, if that's what that listing of positions after the pick is :shrug:

[Silock]

We're not reaching to fill need. I don't care what any mock says. If we're at #5 and drafting an O-Lineman, it's going to be Jake Long. Otherwise, it will be BAA.

[htismaqe]

This is like the worst possible scenario...

[htismaqe]

Because we still have a need at DE.

[JBucc]

One of the few picks that would actually piss me off.

[The Bad Guy]

If Donnie Edwards is going to the middle, the Chiefs need to pray for 2 things.

1) Vernon Gholston shoots up the charts into the top 3 at his pro day.
2) That the Raiders want McFadden and not Glen Dorsey

The Chiefs must get a DT if Edwards is in the middle. I really think Long is going to be gone.

[ArrowheadHawk]

Apparently Jake Long is a QB.

[cmh6476]

Because we still have a need at DE.

i'd say WR and DT would be more of a need than DE, even with Wilkerson signing elsewhere. Maybe that's just me...

[cmh6476]

Apparently Jake Long is a QB.


its confusing because the position is listed ahead of the player

[Tribal Warfare]

I didn't know KC went 4-11, and said F*CK this shit wse are gonna play pictionary instead

[ArrowheadHawk]

its confusing because the position is listed ahead of the player


I guess I just focused in on "Michigan QB".

[SBK]

The TV I'll be watching the draft on, wherever that may be, will have a hole in it if we take Clady at 5.

[blueballs]

He's just calling Peterson retarted
move along

[Rain Man]

If the thinking is that we would draft Clady at #5, I would think we would be better off trading down into the 20s and drafting Ryan Clady.

[Coogs]

One of the few picks that would actually piss me off.

Not me. I have only seen the guy play twice, and he looked like he can be a pretty darn good LT. We have to start building this thing somewhere, and Clady would be fine.

[Mecca]

He has need ahead of value.....how sad, taking Clady over Gholston and Ellis would be really stupid.

[Coach]

He has need ahead of value.....how sad, taking Clady over Gholston and Ellis would be really stupid.

I'm in full agreement.

[Pitt Gorilla]

If the thinking is that we would draft Clady at #5, I would think we would be better off trading down into the 20s and drafting Ryan Clady.Yup. Even if we didn't get everything we wanted in return (we wouldn't; we're KC), it would still be better. Extra picks and less money to sign Clady are both good. However, I'd probably take the best player available.

[BigChiefFan]

McShay's mock is amateur at best.

[Mecca]

I want to know why everyone, including some people on this board, think this team needs an OT above all else....

Our entire team is bad it makes no sense to me.

[Coach]

I want to know why everyone, including some people on this board, think this team needs an OT above all else....

Our entire team is bad it makes no sense to me.

I think the fact that our offensive line can't protect anybody worth a crap is a major issue.

That and they couldn't even open any holes for the running backs. The running backs have to create their own holes, and even that, they weren't capable of doing that.

[Mecca]

I think the fact that our offensive line can't protect anybody worth a crap is a major issue.

That and they couldn't even open any holes for the running backs. The running backs have to create their own holes, and even that, they weren't capable of doing that.

You don't reach for needs with top 5 picks, picking top 5 means your entire team blows and anyone you take is gonna play.

[ChiefsCountry]

McShay everytime he is on ESPN talks about need over value, doesnt suprise me at all.

[Bowser]

I'll admit, I was one of those "OFFENSIVE LINEMEN OR BUST" guys back when the season ended, and I still believe that is our biggest need. But if Dorsey or Ellis (or maybe even Gholston) is on the board when we pick, you almost HAVE to pick one of them. What any of those three potentially brings to this defense is as valuable as wheat Jake Long would bring to this offense. Now, if Long is there with those three (which I don't believe will be the case), then you have a problem on your hands. A good one, but a problem nonetheless.

[RustShack]

Williams, Edwards, and Johnson aren't going to be the play making LB's they are "expected" to be unless they have a dominate DT. No offense will have many problems blocking them and busting out huge runs unless we have the dominate DT the Tampa Two needs.

[Bill S Preston]

Why do these idiots keep putting down snapper as a position of need for the Chargers? We have David Binn who is an all pro at the position. The article reeks of laziness, and I think that calling McShay a draft expert is preposterous.

[ChiefsCountry]

I want to know why everyone, including some people on this board, think this team needs an OT above all else....

Our entire team is bad it makes no sense to me.

The Planet supports the BPA more than lot of the other boards. Alot of them want OT in the first real bad.

[CoMoChief]

God damn if we choose Clady at the 5th pick I WILL NOT root for this ****ing team after we have just sit on our asses in FA. This team has WAAAY to many holes to be filled in one draft or possibly 2 or 3. We are going to really have to evaluate talent and hit some home runs in the later rounds to even come close to rebuilding this team. I suspect we really only fill 6-7 holes in the draft in the next 3 years considering most of the 2nd day players probably won't see the field.

[Tribal Warfare]

Alot of them want OT in the first real bad.



they would get grilled without mercy, if they are closed minded to drafting the BPA if thy were posting on ChiefsPlanet

[raybec 4]

and why the hell does he have us with a team need at DE, if that's what that listing of positions after the pick is :shrug:

And no team need at DT what a jackass

[dirk digler]

I want to know why everyone, including some people on this board, think this team needs an OT above all else....

Our entire team is bad it makes no sense to me.

I don't think they feel that way at all. If Jake Long is there it would hard to pass him up but IMO it is stupid to reach for Clady here.

I haven't heard one person advocate for Ryan Clady have you?

[Tribal Warfare]

And no team need at DT what a jackass



yep, KC was 28th in the run defense category also.

[Mecca]

I don't think they feel that all. If Jake Long is there it would hard to pass him up but IMO it is stupid to reach for Clady here.

When I see posts that say "trade down" especially if they follow a mock that shows Jake Long gone, that tells me they are valuing an OT above all else...

[BigChiefFan]

Here's how I see it going down on draft day for the Chiefs...
Miami-Glenn Dorsey
St.Louis-Jake Long
Atlanta-Chris Long
Oakland-McFadden

That leaves with a choice between Gholston or Ellis, IMO, who ya gonna pick?

[dirk digler]

When I see posts that say "trade down" especially if they follow a mock that shows Jake Long gone, that tells me they are valuing an OT above all else...

Good point but I doubt the Chiefs trade down or if they do it will only be 1-2 spots.

If Long is gone they need to take Gholsten or Ellis.

[CoMoChief]

When I see posts that say "trade down" especially if they follow a mock that shows Jake Long gone, that tells me they are valuing an OT above all else...

Jake Long was a better LT than Joe Thomas and he's our biggest need at the time. The other OT after Long are not worthy of a top 5 pick, so either pick the BPA if its not a position you already have established with a good young player, or you trade down and accumulate more picks and stick to your value chart.

[Tribal Warfare]

Here's how I see it going down on draft day for the Chiefs...
Miami-Glenn Dorsey
St.Louis-Jake Long
Atlanta-Chris Long
Oakland-McFadden

That leaves with a choice between Gholston or Ellis, IMO, who ya gonna pick?

Miami, would value Ellis more since he has more versatility with the capability of playing in the 3-4, but yeah see where you are coming from. I'd pick Ellis if those were my options

[ChiefsCountry]

Jake Long was a better LT than Joe Thomas

No he wasnt.

[Mecca]

No he wasnt.

I don't understand how anyone can say Long is better than Thomas, Thomas skillset translates better to the NFL alot better than Long's does. Sure Long is stronger but Thomas has better feet and better quickness...

Thomas is already the best OT taken in the top 10 of the last 7 years, let's not even remotely say Long is better than he is.

[BigChiefFan]

Miami, would value Ellis more since he has more versatility with the capability of playing in the 3-4, but yeah see where you are coming from. I'd pick Ellis if those were my optionsI almost flipped Miami and St. Louis' picks. I can see Parcells taking Jake Long or even Chris Long based on their tenacity and toughness, plus their skill level. I just believe the draft will fall like it always does, based on talent (with a few reaches from teams).

[Mecca]

Miami is going to take Gholston, it's Parcells MO....

[BigChiefFan]

Miami is going to take Gholston, it's Parcells MO....
We'll know soon enough. I still think they lean towards a DT or LT. I think one could make an argument that Jake Long and Dorsey are Parcells type players,too. Even Chris Long is. Parcells has alot of options-it will be interesting to see who they pick.

[ChiefsCountry]

Fox Sports Radio had a Miami guy on tonight - really didnt sound like Miami was going DT for #1. I thinks its going to be Chris Long or Gholston.

[melbar]

I wish dallas would pony up and trade with us to get Mcfadden. We could pick up Clady, Otah, Williams, or Albert. Maybe 2 of the above and or, Rogers-Cromartie or Conner. Then turn around and have a high 2nd round pick. Hell, I wish they wanted a DE and would trade us their 2 1sts for Allen. 3 1st rounders and a high 2nd would be a nice start to the youth movement.

[xbarretx]

I stopped reading when I saw Clady at the 5 spot

qft!

[kcchiefsus]

He's just calling Peterson retarted
move along

And I think Peterson is retarded enough that we will reach for the best available offensive lineman.

[philfree]

Even though I think Clady is a reach with the 5th pick in the draft Kiper and McShay both have moved him into the top 10 on their draft boards. I've seen a few other boards that have done the same. If we can't have Jake long, Dorsey, Ellis, C. Long with our pick at #5 trading down a few spots and taking Clady would be fine. The odds of that are slim I know. So if we can't get any of those four palyers or a trade down who do we pick? Gholston? Who?

PhilFree:arrow:

[BigRedChief]

I stopped reading when I saw Clady at the 5 spot
I will hit the roof if they select Clady at the #5 pick. Thats a helluva reach.

[chagrin]

this mock is horrible, with Ellis on the board why on Earth would any GM/Coach reach like this?

[htismaqe]

Not me. I have only seen the guy play twice, and he looked like he can be a pretty darn good LT. We have to start building this thing somewhere, and Clady would be fine.

Not at #5. There's some obvious flaws in his game. If we were picking 20th then fine, we take Clady.

[htismaqe]

I think the fact that our offensive line can't protect anybody worth a crap is a major issue.

That and they couldn't even open any holes for the running backs. The running backs have to create their own holes, and even that, they weren't capable of doing that.

We also gave up well over 4 yards per carry on defense, 23rd in the league.

We have GAPING holes at other areas other than the offensive line.

[PhillyChiefFan]

Does ANYONE still have us taking Long or the Best Player available, because Ryan Clady is a REACH...at best and a future BUST at worst. And if we take him, we'll probably be taking a LT in the 2009 Draft to replace him after signing him to #5 pick money. GREAAATTT!!!

With the #1 pick in the 2009 NFL draft the Kansas City Chiefs select...

[Eleazar]

remind me never to read this mock again

[Chiefnj2]

I still don't get the whole "Clady is a reach" argument when the guy is in everyone's top 10 list of prospects and in some he is ahead of Ellis and Gholston.

[htismaqe]

I still don't get the whole "Clady is a reach" argument when the guy is in everyone's top 10 list of prospects and in some he is ahead of Ellis and Gholston.

Like who?

The highest I've seen him on any list is #10.

He's got good feet but he doesn't play with leverage and isn't strong at the point of attack. He's got many of the same limitations that Brick Ferguson had coming out and we all see how that's gone.

He's absolutely a reach at #5. Best value for Clady would be around pick 12.

[philfree]

I still don't get the whole "Clady is a reach" argument when the guy is in everyone's top 10 list of prospects and in some he is ahead of Ellis and Gholston.

I kinda agree but I guess if there are better players on the board and you pass them up it's a reach. Ellis is ahead of Clady on most boards I've seen and Gholston has jumped ahead too. Let's just hope our scouts get it right this year and we don't end up with a T. Jenkins R. Sims.

PhilFree:arrow:

[philfree]

Like who?

The highest I've seen him on any list is #10.

He's got good feet but he doesn't play with leverage and isn't strong at the point of attack. He's got many of the same limitations that Brick Ferguson had coming out and we all see how that's gone.

He's absolutely a reach at #5. Best value for Clady would be around pick 12.


McShay has him at 7 and ( I stand corrected because I earlier said the Kiper had him in the top 10.) Kiper has him at 11. So to me he'd be a small reach at #5. I'd rather take Ellis or Dorsey over him at #5. Chris Long too! Of course in the best of worlds Jake Long will be there and make it a simple task.

PhilFree:arrow:

[Chiefnj2]

Like who?

The highest I've seen him on any list is #10.



As someone else said, McShay has him at 7 (ahead of Gholston at 9). GM JR. has Clady as the top OT, ahead of Jake Long. Even Mayock had him at 7 (although he had Ellis at 2 and Gholston at 5).

[Coogs]

I still don't get the whole "Clady is a reach" argument when the guy is in everyone's top 10 list of prospects and in some he is ahead of Ellis and Gholston.

Exactly! And I wouldn't be upset if we pick any of the other guys talked about as well on this BB. But I can't see why everyone would go balistic if Clady turns out to be the choice either. The guy is highly rated and the O-Line needs a major overhaul. Sort of makes sense when you want to see if your QB.... Croyle... is the answer over the long haul.

[htismaqe]

As someone else said, McShay has him at 7 (ahead of Gholston at 9). GM JR. has Clady as the top OT, ahead of Jake Long. Even Mayock had him at 7 (although he had Ellis at 2 and Gholston at 5).

The idea that Clady is ahead of Jake Long is ridiculous.

People are enamored with Clady's athleticism, some of them to the point that they're ignoring significant issues with leverage and lower-body strength. He's got "BUST" written all over him.

If they highest you can find him is #7, then he's still a reach at #5.

[htismaqe]

Exactly! And I wouldn't be upset if we pick any of the other guys talked about as well on this BB. But I can't see why everyone would go balistic if Clady turns out to be the choice either. The guy is highly rated and the O-Line needs a major overhaul. Sort of makes sense when you want to see if your QB.... Croyle... is the answer over the long haul.

Clady would be a reach at #5. In order to justify the pick, you'd have to trade down.

And if you're going to do that, why wouldn't you just take someone like Chris Williams instead?

[Chiefnj2]

The idea that Clady is ahead of Jake Long is ridiculous.

People are enamored with Clady's athleticism, some of them to the point that they're ignoring significant issues with leverage and lower-body strength. He's got "BUST" written all over him.

If they highest you can find him is #7, then he's still a reach at #5.

A difference of two spots is now a reach? Last week you were arguing that McBride and Pollard weren't reaches. I can find rankings that had them an easy dozen spots higher.

[StcChief]

I didn't know KC went 4-11, and said F*CK this shit wse are gonna play pictionary instead

Herm pulled out all the TO's with Jets to try and go 5-11......but Pictionary would have been a better option.

[htismaqe]

A difference of two spots is now a reach? Last week you were arguing that McBride and Pollard weren't reaches. I can find rankings that had them an easy dozen spots higher.

Which on of those two was a top 5 pick again?

[patteeu]

If the thinking is that we would draft Clady at #5, I would think we would be better off trading down into the 20s and drafting Ryan Clady.

Yeah, even if it's a straight-up trade of our first pick for their first pick, it would at least save the Chiefs a little money and reduce the chances of a holdout.

[philfree]

The idea that Clady is ahead of Jake Long is ridiculous.
People are enamored with Clady's athleticism, some of them to the point that they're ignoring significant issues with leverage and lower-body strength. He's got "BUST" written all over him.

If they highest you can find him is #7, then he's still a reach at #5.

Agreed but Scott Wright has Clady at 8 as does the GBN. Draft stock.com has him at 7 along with McShay. Kiper has him at 11. I haven't seen any of Rob Rangs stuff this year so I don't know where he has him at but Clady appears to be a top 10 prospect at the moment. But yeah he'd be a small reach at the 5th pick but only a small one. Am I saying we should pick him with that 5th pick in the draft? No! After all my studies I want Jake Long if he's there or Ellis or Dorsey or C. Long. Gholston would be fine too. I won't freak if we pick Clady though because to me it's not a huge reach only a short one.

PhilFree:arrow:

[Eleazar]

McShay has him at 7 and ( I stand corrected because I earlier said the Kiper had him in the top 10.) Kiper has him at 11. So to me he'd be a small reach at #5.

Taking a guy at #5 who you could still get at #11-12-13 is NOT a "small" reach. :eek:

Basically, if we take Clady without trading down, we're flushing a second round pick, because that's what we ought to be getting to move down from 5 to 12.

[htismaqe]

Taking a guy at #5 who you could still get at #11-12-13 is NOT a "small" reach. :eek:

Basically, if we take Clady without trading down, we're flushing a second round pick, because that's what we ought to be getting to move down from 5 to 12.

Exactly.

[Brock]

clady is a huge reach. That would be a stupid, stupid pick, and not at all surprising.

[Eleazar]

clady is a huge reach. That would be a stupid, stupid pick, and not at all surprising.

If we have him targeted, fine, I guess... A first round tackle is going to help us no matter which of them it is.

I'm not going to put it past Carl and Herm to do something retarded, but surely even they know that he'll still be there in the middle of the round.

[htismaqe]

If we have him targeted, fine, I guess... A first round tackle is going to help us no matter which of them it is.

I'm not going to put it past Carl and Herm to do something retarded, but surely even they know that he'll still be there in the middle of the round.

The question is HOW MUCH they're going to help us.

There's a good chance that Clady never develops into a top-flight LT. That's really not acceptable.

[Coogs]

Agreed but Scott Wright has Clady at 8 as does the GBN. Draft stock.com has him at 7 along with McShay. Kiper has him at 11. I haven't seen any of Rob Rangs stuff this year so I don't know where he has him at but Clady appears to be a top 10 prospect at the moment. But yeah he'd be a small reach at the 5th pick but only a small one. Am I saying we should pick him with that 5th pick in the draft? No! After all my studies I want Jake Long if he's there or Ellis or Dorsey or C. Long. Gholston would be fine too. I won't freak if we pick Clady though because to me it's not a huge reach only a short one.

PhilFree:arrow:

Again, exactly! I have seen projections with Clady going as high as NE.... besides us at 5... which means he may not be there at 12 or so as others suggest.

A reach? Possibly. But a huge reach? Does not seem like it.

[Coogs]

The question is HOW MUCH they're going to help us.

There's a good chance that Clady never develops into a top-flight LT. That's really not acceptable.


And you know for a fact that all the other players are sure fire can't miss players?

[htismaqe]

Again, exactly! I have seen projections with Clady going as high as NE.... besides us at 5... which means he may not be there at 12 or so as others suggest.

A reach? Possibly. But a huge reach? Does not seem like it.

It will be if we need another OLT in another 2 or 3 years. We simply can't afford to Ryan Sims this pick.

[htismaqe]

And you know for a fact that all the other players are sure fire can't miss players?

Of course not.

Nobody is "can't miss". But some of them have bigger concerns or more concerns. Clady is one of those guys, he's got a bigger chance of never panning out because his issues aren't learning issues, their physical issues.

[Chiefnj2]

I haven't seen any of Rob Rangs stuff this year so I don't know where he has him at but Clady appears to be a top 10 prospect at the moment.
PhilFree:arrow:

Rang has him at #8.

[Chiefnj2]

Of course not.

Nobody is "can't miss". But some of them have bigger concerns or more concerns. Clady is one of those guys, he's got a bigger chance of never panning out because his issues aren't learning issues, their physical issues.

What is Clady's physical issue?

[htismaqe]

What is Clady's physical issue?

Lacks strength overall, especially in the lower body. That causes him to lose leverage and be forced to concede at the point of attack.

He needs to go to a system like Al Saunders' that will use him alot in space in order to emphasize his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. The Chiefs offense will actually emphasize his weaknesses, especially in the running game.

[Coogs]

Of course not.

Nobody is "can't miss". But some of them have bigger concerns or more concerns. Clady is one of those guys, he's got a bigger chance of never panning out because his issues aren't learning issues, their physical issues.

Yet he is rated just as high or higher than some of the guys being lobbied for on this BB. Agian, I am not saying we have to draft Clady. I just don't think it is going to be that huge of a reach. I have only seen the guy play twice. He looked real good early against Hawaii, then so-so the rest of the game. He look very good in the Bowl game.

Again, I am not waving the Clady pennants. But I do think he is going to be damn good in the NFL based upon what I have seen of him. I will not break my TV set if he is our pick in April.

[Eleazar]

The question is HOW MUCH they're going to help us.

There's a good chance that Clady never develops into a top-flight LT. That's really not acceptable.

I wonder if he could play RT or G if we weren't able to make him work at LT. Not that this would justify picking him or anything.

[Chiefnj2]

The Chiefs offense will actually emphasize his weaknesses, especially in the running game.

How do you know what system the Chiefs are going to use?

[htismaqe]

Yet he is rated just as high or higher than some of the guys being lobbied for on this BB. Agian, I am not saying we have to draft Clady. I just don't think it is going to be that huge of a reach. I have only seen the guy play twice. He looked real good early against Hawaii, then so-so the rest of the game. He look very good in the Bowl game.

Again, I am not waving the Clady pennants. But I do think he is going to be damn good in the NFL based upon what I have seen of him. I will not break my TV set if he is our pick in April.

At this point, I don't have any reason to think Clady is going to be "damn good". Recent history for his type of player has actually been the opposite. He's one of the higher risk players in the 2nd tier.

[htismaqe]

I wonder if he could play RT or G if we weren't able to make him work at LT. Not that this would justify picking him or anything.

No way. He's definitely not stout enough for that. He's a pure LT.

[the Talking Can]

Clady at 5 is a disaster.

Clady isn't even in the same class as Long. Not the same zip code.

[htismaqe]

How do you know what system the Chiefs are going to use?

They just got rid of the last vestiges of Saunders' offense. The head coach's philosophy is WELL known and he's made it clear that he wants to move even further towards a power game. I don't KNOW what type of system they're going to run, but I think we all have a pretty good idea that it's NOT going to be what we've seen in the past.

[Eleazar]

What I found hilarious just now was trying to see when and where we've picked tackles in the last few years.

2007 Herb Taylor Round 6
2005 Will Svitek Round 6
2005 Jeremy Parquet Round 7
2004 Kevin Sampson Round 7
2003 Brett Williams Round 4
2003 Jordan Black Round 5

It's like after Tait and Riley were selected back to back, Carl has had some rule about ever selecting a tackle on day 1.

Then I started adding the other offensive line positions:

2006 Tre Stallings Round 6
2001 Alex Sulfsted Round 6
2000 Darnell Alford Round 6

That is a list of all the offensive linemen we've drafted since 2000. I know that through 2005 or so, we didn't have a lot of needs in that area, but no wonder we're in the spot we are in. Since Roaf retired we've only drafted two offensive linemen, both in round 6

By comparison, since 2000 we've drafted 13 defensive linemen... not that we've gotten much better return.

[Bowser]

What I found hilarious just now was trying to see when and where we've picked tackles in the last few years.

2007 Herb Taylor Round 6
2005 Will Svitek Round 6
2005 Jeremy Parquet Round 7
2004 Kevin Sampson Round 7
2003 Brett Williams Round 4
2003 Jordan Black Round 5

It's like after Tait and Riley were selected back to back, Carl has had some rule about ever selecting a tackle on day 1.

Then I started adding the other offensive line positions:

2006 Tre Stallings Round 6
2001 Alex Sulfsted Round 6
2000 Darnell Alford Round 6

That is a list of all the offensive linemen we've drafted since 2000. I know that through 2005 or so, we didn't have a lot of needs in that area, but no wonder we're in the spot we are in. Since Roaf retired we've only drafted two offensive linemen

By comparison, since 2000 we've drafted 13 defensive linemen... not that we've gotten much better return.

Awesome!

:shake:

[Mr. Laz]

This is like the worst possible scenario...
we need McFadden to go in the top 4 to ensure that this scenario doesn't happen.

[Chiefnj2]

we need McFadden to go in the top 4 to ensure that this scenario doesn't happen.

Add Ryan to the list.

[Mr. Laz]

Add Ryan to the list.
i guess ..... unless u consider that Ryan is a viable pick for us.

[Chiefnj2]

i guess ..... unless u consider that Ryan is a viable pick for us.

That's an interesting question. If Clady is a "reach" because KC drafts at #5 and most draft gurus have him at #7-8, does that mean the Chiefs are idiots if they pass on Ryan or McFadden since a lot of the same gurus have those guys in the top 5?

[Eleazar]

That's an interesting question. If Clady is a "reach" because KC drafts at #5 and most draft gurus have him at #7-8, does that mean the Chiefs are idiots if they pass on Ryan or McFadden since a lot of the same gurus have those guys in the top 5?

Clady is a reach because he'll be there 5-10 picks later. Taking him at 5 throws away a second round pick's worth of value. I don't think we should be any less upset if the Chiefs take Clady at 5 as we would be if they took someone projected to be undrafted with their 2nd round pick.

[eazyb81]

Lacks strength overall, especially in the lower body. That causes him to lose leverage and be forced to concede at the point of attack.

He needs to go to a system like Al Saunders' that will use him alot in space in order to emphasize his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. The Chiefs offense will actually emphasize his weaknesses, especially in the running game.

And you don't think strength can be improved once in the NFL? That's absurd.

Clady has excellent footwork and a great wingspan, two necessities for a great LT. He can put on size while in the league.

I'm not saying that Clady is the best choice or anything, but you don't "know" that Clady will be a bad pick, and most NFL boards have him as a top ten overall prospect. Last year you lambasted Joe Staley, and he went on to have a very good rookie year.

[Mr. Laz]

That's an interesting question. If Clady is a "reach" because KC drafts at #5 and most draft gurus have him at #7-8, does that mean the Chiefs are idiots if they pass on Ryan or McFadden since a lot of the same gurus have those guys in the top 5?

i imagine if the draft was to go the other way leaving Ryan as the one to fall then yes, people would say we were stupid for not taking Ryan considering we don't know what we have a QB.

mcfadden .... meh, not so much considering we already have Larry Johnson.

[Mr. Laz]

Clady is a reach because he'll be there 5-10 picks later. Taking him at 5 throws away a second round pick's worth of value. I don't think we should be any less upset if the Chiefs take Clady at 5 as we would be if they took someone projected to be undrafted with their 2nd round pick.

it's true ... the draft is not just about talent evaluation. It's about the ability to project the way the draft will fall and maximizing your total talent pool by drafting guys in their projected slots.

it's also about moving up and down in the draft to correlate the BPA with team needs and players that fit your system.

[eazyb81]

Clady is a reach because he'll be there 5-10 picks later. Taking him at 5 throws away a second round pick's worth of value. I don't think we should be any less upset if the Chiefs take Clady at 5 as we would be if they took someone projected to be undrafted with their 2nd round pick.

That's just a totally absurd statement, as you don't know for a fact that he will be there 5-10 picks later.

So few draft picks turn out to be studs, so a team should go after who they feel is the best pick while also considering value. Taking a top 10 overall prospect at #5 overall is not a true "reach".

I would be furious if KC thought Clady was the next Willie Roaf, but they passed on him at #5 because the general consensus was that he was only the #8 overall prospect and they couldn't find a trade partner. That would be pure stupidity, but it sound like that is what you would advocate.

[htismaqe]

That's an interesting question. If Clady is a "reach" because KC drafts at #5 and most draft gurus have him at #7-8, does that mean the Chiefs are idiots if they pass on Ryan or McFadden since a lot of the same gurus have those guys in the top 5?

Bad picks and reaches aren't necessarily the same.

Clady, IMO, would be a bad pick wherever we pick him. I don't think he's going to be a top-quality LT in the league. If we pick him at #5, we've compounded the problem by reaching in addition to making a bad pick.

At #5, neither Ryan nor McFadden would be a reach. But they wouldn't necessarily be good picks.

[Eleazar]

That's just a totally absurd statement, as you don't know for a fact that he will be there 5-10 picks later.

If you think he would be picked at #6 you're nuts. From what I have read many people don't even think he's the next best tackle.


So few draft picks turn out to be studs, so a team should go after who they feel is the best pick while also considering value. Taking a top 10 overall prospect at #5 overall is not a true "reach".

Well, why don't we trade our entire draft to move up to #1 then? After all, value doesn't matter, just getting a 'stud' matters.

That would be pure stupidity, but it sound like that is what you would advocate.

If we want Clady, we might be able to trade down 10 spots and get him. If you don't do that, you're an idiot. Those are the kinds of decisions that put franchises where this one is, being so enamored with a questionable player that you spend way more draft value than they are worth.

[htismaqe]

And you don't think strength can be improved once in the NFL? That's absurd.

Sure they can. But we're not talking about the NFL, we're talking about the KANSAS CITY CHIEFS. We've taken several guys over the past few years that have "physical questions" like Clady. Almost without exception, they've failed to pan out. Hell, Junior Siavii had an almost identical criticism amongst scouts regarding his lower body strength.

Clady has excellent footwork and a great wingspan, two necessities for a great LT. He can put on size while in the league.

And what happens if the added size takes away from his positives like footspeed and technique?

I'm not saying that Clady is the best choice or anything, but you don't "know" that Clady will be a bad pick, and most NFL boards have him as a top ten overall prospect. Last year you lambasted Joe Staley, and he went on to have a very good rookie year.

I don't "know" that Clady will be a bad pick, but there are players with just as much upside and much lower risk than Clady that we can pick.

By the way, Joe Staley struggled during summer drills and ended up getting moved to RIGHT TACKLE. I was 100% correct about Joe Staley.

[Chiefnj2]

Comparing Clady to Siavii is a joke. One guy is on everyones top 10 board. The other was 3rd round prospect.

[eazyb81]

If you think he would be picked at #6 you're nuts. From what I have read many people don't even think he's the next best tackle.

And? Everyone has an opinion and you can find links disputing everything in this draft. The general consensus is that Clady is the #2 overall offensive lineman available in this draft.

Well, why don't we trade our entire draft to move up to #1 then? After all, value doesn't matter, just getting a 'stud' matters.

Never said value doesn't matter, it just shouldn't be the "be all, end all". Internet draftniks are so enamored with "value", but the likelihood of a player having a fantastic career is much less than a player disappointing. So if you like a player and the value is reasonable, take him when you have a chance instead of worrying about what some stupid internet draft boards say.


If we want Clady, we might be able to trade down 10 spots and get him. If you don't do that, you're an idiot. Those are the kinds of decisions that put franchises where this one is, being so enamored with a questionable player that you spend way more draft value than they are worth.

Sure, we *might* be able to do that. We also *might* be able to pick up Dorsey if he falls to us in the 2nd or some other ridiculous scenario. But like I said in the previous post, if you think Clady is the next Willie Roaf, you're probably going to take him when you have a chance at him at #5. You have no idea what the other 31 teams have planned, as the Jets may not be interested but someone could easily trade up for him.

Value should certainly be considered, but taking the 7th or 8th overall player at #5 is simply not worthy of being called a reach. You're playing with fire if you try and get too cute, and you could get burned.

[CosmicPal]

If the draft were to pan out that way, I honestly don't see the Chiefs taking Clady. As much as they would like him, I see Herm and Carl going defense if they can't trade down, and I don't see any viable trading partners with the possible exception of Cincy- but Cincy would have to give up too much just to move up four spots.

Therefore, if the draft were to go as McShay anticipates, then I'd see them drafting Vernon Gholston or Sedrick Ellis. Gholston could play DE and/or OLB and I think he'd be a tremendous asset to that defense. Hell, if anything, he'd provide some great depth, but more importantly- the defensive line would have a nice rotation. If I recall correctly, Wilkerson is gone, so Gholston would make sense over Clady.

Athletic defensive linemen who can change the course of a game with a single play are hard to find, and offensive linemen who can block effectively can be found just about anywhere.

[eazyb81]

And what happens if the added size takes away from his positives like footspeed and technique?

What if Dorsey never bounces back from his leg injury? What if Ellis loses speed from playing above 300, or gets pushed around too much being under 300? What if Jake Long doesn't have the footwork to make it as a left tackle? Everyone has legitimate questions, and Clady is no different.


I don't "know" that Clady will be a bad pick, but there are players with just as much upside and much lower risk than Clady that we can pick.

You love to float opinions as fact. I'm sure there are players that *you* think have more upside and are lower risk, as you've made it abundantly clear Clady is your whipping boy this year. The fact of the matter is that Clady is a top ten overall prospect on every legitimate draft board, and is generally considered as the 7th or 8th overall prospect.

By the way, Joe Staley struggled during summer drills and ended up getting moved to RIGHT TACKLE. I was 100% correct about Joe Staley.

LOL, no you weren't. He started all 16 games at RIGHT tackle, like most rookie tackles do. He's moving to the left side this year and by all accounts SanFran was thrilled with his play in his rookie year.

[Eleazar]

if you think Clady is the next Willie Roaf, you're probably going to take him when you have a chance at him at #5. You have no idea what the other 31 teams have planned, as the Jets may not be interested but someone could easily trade up for him.

Yeah, you take Clady at 5, if you're a complete idiot. Your job is to anticipate what other teams are going to do based on their needs and get the most value out of your draft. If you can't do that you've got no business running your team's draft. I know what the excuse will be, oh but we suck at the draft, so we should draft out of fear and take players way above what they're worth to make sure we get the ones we want... Well, incompetence is not a good reason to perpetuate more incompetence.

Go ahead and think he's going to get picked right behind us if you want to I guess. Clearly we still have a problem with lead-based paint in this country.

I'm not a 'draftnik', I just realize that if a player is likely to be around 3 or 4 spots or more later, you would do well to collect that value especially at the top of the first round. Becoming a honk for one particular player causes poor decisions to be made.

[Brock]

I'll buy that Clady compares to Joe Staley. And deserves to be picked in the same neighborhood.

[jspchief]

I really don't see the Chiefs taking Clady. He is a reach at #5. Maybe not a huge reach, but when it comes to the money and talent that goes with picking that early, small reaches become big.

Say what you want about the talent evaluation of our FO, but IMO we've done pretty solid the last few years in the draft. We haven't blown a 1st rnd pick since the Siavii disaster. I really don't feel they'll screw this one up. Personally, I hope it's Jake Long. But if Long isn't there, I don't expect the front office to instantly stick their collective head up their ass.

[eazyb81]

Yeah, you take Clady at 5, if you're a complete idiot. Your job is to anticipate what other teams are going to do based on their needs and get the most value out of your draft. If you can't do that you've got no business running your team's draft.

Yes, your job is to ANTICIPATE, but you're not f'n Miss Cleo. You don't know 100% what others will do, which is why there are surprises every single year in the draft.

I know what the excuse will be, oh but we suck at the draft, so we should draft out of fear and take players way above what they're worth to make sure we get the ones we want... Well, incompetence is not a good reason to perpetuate more incompetence.

Seriously, are you mentally handicapped? Taking Clady at 5 when he is at 8 overall on NFLDC's latest rankings = taking him way above what he's worth? I'm not sure how to respond to that.

Go ahead and think he's going to get picked right behind us if you want to I guess. Clearly we still have a problem with lead-based paint in this country.

Clearly you've played enough Madden that you think you're a real GM now. The posters on this board never cease to amaze me.

[Coogs]

Clady is a reach because he'll be there 5-10 picks later.

How do you know this? I have seen him going at #7 to NE in some projetions as well.

[Eleazar]

Seriously, are you mentally handicapped? Taking Clady at 5 when he is at 8 overall on NFLDC's latest rankings = taking him way above what he's worth? I'm not sure how to respond to that.


http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/news/story?id=2410670

#5 is 1700, #8 is 1400. The difference in value there is one of a pick at the end of the second round.

But, you would prefer we bypass a free second round pick and still get 'our guy', because you fear we are totally unable to assess the chances that the Jets (who just took a tackle in the first round) or Patriots (who already have Matt Light, who started in the pro bowl at left tackle) will pick Clady.

Go ahead, pass up that value. It's the 'safe' play.

[OnTheWarpath15]

How do you know this? I have seen him going at #7 to NE in some projetions as well.

Projections mean shit.

Last year, Brady Quinn was supposedly a Top 10 lock - likely picked by Miami.

We watched him free fall all the way to 22.

It's just a hunch, but I'm betting that by the time it's all said and done, Clady will NOT be the 2nd OT picked.

[Coogs]

Projections mean shit.

Last year, Brady Quinn was supposedly a Top 10 lock - likely picked by Miami.

We watched him free fall all the way to 22.

It's just a hunch, but I'm betting that by the time it's all said and done, Clady will NOT be the 2nd OT picked.

So if not for projections, how does everyone else here know that we can trade down and get Clady?

[OnTheWarpath15]

So if not for projections, how does everyone else here know that we can trade down and get Clady?


I can't speak for anyone who's argued that, but it would seem pretty probable to me.

Let's put the whole issue of how hard it is to trade down aside for a second and ASSUME we could with no issues - for sake of argument.

Take the teams picking behind us:

Jets - Just drafted Ferguson at LT. Longshot to pick Clady with so many other needs.

Patriots - Again, have little/no need. Defensive players will likely be targeted.

Baltimore - MAYBE. Depends on the status of Ogden. But still not likely IMO. More likely to draft for value - Ryan if he drops, otherwise, probably defense as well.

Cincinnati - MAYBE as well. They need defense in the worst way, and this is a defense-heavy Top 15.


Plus, IMO - When it's all said and done, I don't think Clady will be the 2nd OT off the board.

[jspchief]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft06/news/story?id=2410670

#5 is 1700, #8 is 1400. The difference in value there is one of a pick at the end of the second round.

But, you would prefer we bypass a free second round pick and still get 'our guy', because you fear we are totally unable to assess the chances that the Jets (who just took a tackle in the first round) or Patriots (who already have Matt Light, who started in the pro bowl at left tackle) will pick Clady.

Go ahead, pass up that value. It's the 'safe' play.I'm not sure it's as easy as just plugging the numbers into a chart though. Someone has to want to move up to our spot to facilitate our moving down. If Clady is somewhere around #7-#12 on NFL draft boards, that only gives us ~5 teams to try and work out a deal with, and the further back we drop, the lower the chance that he is still there and the smaller the compensation is for taking that chance. Remember dropping out of rnd 1 in 2004? Speculation was that it was for Igor Olshansky, and we ended up with Siavii instead.

Of course, all this discussion assumes that the Chiefs will determine that Clady is the guy they want over all the guys they would pass on. I don't think that will be the case. They may have LT as their highest postional want, but I have no reason to think that will make them over-rate Clady.

[CosmicPal]

Last year, Brady Quinn was supposedly a Top 10 lock - likely picked by Miami.

We watched him free fall all the way to 22.



Some of that has to do with the fact that teams have to shell out more money for a QB in the first round than other positions taken in the same spot. First rounders today, are commanding more and more money, and sometimes a team has to pass a player up simply because they can't afford it.

If you take a QB in the first five picks these days- you better hope to gawd you hit on it. 'Cause if you don't, it profoundly sets back your team.

[Eleazar]

So if not for projections, how does everyone else here know that we can trade down and get Clady?

What I want to know is, WTF is the point of taking Clady too high at 5 just to make sure we get a tackle? If we're going to spend value that way, why aren't we trying to spend value to move up to get Long?

[OnTheWarpath15]

If you take a QB in the first five picks these days- you better hope to gawd you hit on it. 'Cause if you don't, it profoundly sets back your team.

With the bonus/salary structure, that is true of every position on the field.

[Chiefnj2]

So if not for projections, how does everyone else here know that we can trade down and get Clady?

If projections mean shit, maybe KC should move up to draft Clady.

What it boils down to is the fact that some people don't like him.

[OnTheWarpath15]

I don't think they'll be terribly upset if Jake Long is taken before them, and I don't think they'll reach just to fill a need.

If Jake is gone, they'll do the right thing and take Dorsey, Ellis, Gholston, or even Ryan if he's there. I don't see them reaching for a OT anymore than I would expect them to reach for McKelvin, Jenkins or Rodgers-Cromartie at CB.


This is gonna be unpopular, but:

I think THEY think they are perfectly content with McIntosh at LT. And to a degree, they are probably right. When healthy, Mac was more than serviceable. It was the right side of the line that caused the majority of the problems.

I'm betting they've liked what they've saw of Herb Taylor in his limited action, and would bet he's gonna get every opportunity to win the RT job.

That leaves C/G.

Depends on what they think of Niswanger playing Center. If they think he can, then you only have a hole at RG.

Which means you better sign someone in FA, or be content with Tre Stallings.

[htismaqe]

Comparing Clady to Siavii is a joke. One guy is on everyones top 10 board. The other was 3rd round prospect.

I never "compared" him to Siavii. Get real.

[CosmicPal]

With the bonus/salary structure, that is true of every position on the field.

Not as much as a QB. QB is a skill position unlike any other, and you know it.

A QB with the first pick would command almost double the money a DE or DT would command with the same pick. That is why guys like Rodgers surprised everyone by slipping into the mid-rounds, and its why Quinn fell, and it can also happen to Ryan. This trend will continue as long as the agents keep pile-driving those contracts for the rookies.

[Coogs]

What it boils down to is the fact that some people don't like him.

And based off of what? It is not like Clady was on TV every single game, so most here have probably never even seen him play.

[htismaqe]

What if Dorsey never bounces back from his leg injury? What if Ellis loses speed from playing above 300, or gets pushed around too much being under 300? What if Jake Long doesn't have the footwork to make it as a left tackle? Everyone has legitimate questions, and Clady is no different.

Clady's question marks are MUCH more significant than Long's. And because we're talking about the CHIEFS, they're even more emphasized. How many offensive linemen have we developed recently? I'm against taking a guy who's biggest negative is that he needs to be developed.

You love to float opinions as fact. I'm sure there are players that *you* think have more upside and are lower risk, as you've made it abundantly clear Clady is your whipping boy this year. The fact of the matter is that Clady is a top ten overall prospect on every legitimate draft board, and is generally considered as the 7th or 8th overall prospect.

I'm not floating ANYTHING as fact. I've repeatedly said it's my opinion and nothing more. Clady is my whipping boy for a reason, he's got SERIOUS questions that preclude him from being a top 5 pick.

LOL, no you weren't. He started all 16 games at RIGHT tackle, like most rookie tackles do. He's moving to the left side this year and by all accounts SanFran was thrilled with his play in his rookie year.

Most rookie tackles start at right tackle? ROFL

[OnTheWarpath15]

Not as much as a QB. QB is a skill position unlike any other, and you know it.

A QB with the first pick would command almost double the money a DE or DT would command with the same pick. That is why guys like Rodgers surprised everyone by slipping into the mid-rounds, and its why Quinn fell, and it can also happen to Ryan. This trend will continue as long as the agents keep pile-driving those contracts for the rookies.

Those 1st round salaries are slotted.

Regardless of whether pick #5 plays QB or DT, they are going to make just a bit less than the #4 pick, and just a bit more than the #6 pick.

To think that Matt Ryan will get anywhere near double of what the guy below him (or above) gets is absurd.

[jspchief]

What I want to know is, WTF is the point of taking Clady too high at 5 just to make sure we get a tackle?
I don't think the Chiefs are going to take the highest rated LT on the board regardless of talent just because they really want a LT.

But if for some reason they determined that Clady rated comparable to the other players available at that pick, I wouldn't have a problem if they chose not to risk trying to move down.

Obviously this entire discussion is speculative. I guess it's just a matter of what the speculation is for taking Clady is... because they think he's that good, or because they want a LT that bad.

[jspchief]

Those 1st round salaries are slotted.

No they aren't. Most salary negotiations follow a general slotting pattern, but no team or agent is restricted to what they can pay/ask for. And it's highly likely that an agent will expect Ryan to get paid more because he's a QB.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Most rookie tackles start at right tackle? ROFL

Yeah, I liked that one. Comedy gold.

Guess Tony Ugoh, Joe Thomas, D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Marcus McNeill, Micheal Roos and Levi Brown (RT, but is protecting Leinart's blindside) didn't get the memo.

[patteeu]

Here are the last 20 people taken at #5 overall:

Levi Brown OL
A.J. Hawk LB
Cadillac Williams RB
Sean Taylor DB
Terence Newman DB
Quentin Jammer DB
LaDainian Tomlinson RB
Jamal Lewis RB
Ricky Williams RB
Curtis Enis RB
Bryant Westbrook RB
Cedric Jones DE
Kerry Collins QB
Trev Alberts LB
John Copeland DE
Terrell Buckley DB
Todd Lyght DB
Junior Seau LB
Deion Sanders DB
Rickey Dixon DB

I don't care whether the Chiefs take Dorsey, Long, Ellis, Clady, or someone who Mel Kiper has never heard of, but I hope they do better than the average team drafting in this spot because that list is fairly unimpressive to me compared to what I would have guessed you'd get with a top 5 pick.

I was surprised at how many RB's have been taken at #5 recently too. I think we are in nearly unanimous agreement that we don't want the Chiefs to go with McFadden though. At least I hope we are.

[OnTheWarpath15]

No they aren't. Most salary negotiations follow a general slotting pattern, but no team or agent is restricted to what they can pay/ask for. And it's highly likely that an agent will expect Ryan to get paid more because he's a QB.

You're right, no team/agent is restricted from ASKING.

But if anyone thinks that Ryan is going to get double of what the guy ahead of him gets?

C'mon.

Agents can EXPECT whatever they want. Getting it, especially if the players around you have already signed, is another issue entirely.

[CosmicPal]

Those 1st round salaries are slotted.

Regardless of whether pick #5 plays QB or DT, they are going to make just a bit less than the #4 pick, and just a bit more than the #6 pick.

To think that Matt Ryan will get anywhere near double of what the guy below him (or above) gets is absurd.

You seriously fuggen believe that? Yes, of course they're slotted, but a QB picked at the same pick as a DT is still going to command more money. You'd have to be absurd to pay a DT the same money as your QB.

[Brock]

You seriously fuggen believe that? Yes, of course they're slotted, but a QB picked at the same pick as a DT is still going to command more money. You'd have to be absurd to pay a DT the same money as your QB.

you should believe it, it's the truth. Draft picks are slotted, and they're based on what the guy got last year plus whatever increase.

[OnTheWarpath15]

JaMarcus Russell's contract: 6 years, $61M, $32M guaranteed.

Calvin Johnson's contract: 6 years, $64M, $27M guaranteed.

Russell got more money because he was the 1st overall pick. But he didn't get a SIGNIFICANT amount more just because he's a QB.

[Fish]

Here are the last 20 people taken at #5 overall:

Levi Brown OL
A.J. Hawk LB
Cadillac Williams RB
Sean Taylor DB
Terence Newman DB
Quentin Jammer DB
LaDainian Tomlinson RB
Jamal Lewis RB
Ricky Williams RB
Curtis Enis RB
Bryant Westbrook RB
Cedric Jones DE
Kerry Collins QB
Trev Alberts LB
John Copeland DE
Terrell Buckley DB
Todd Lyght DB
Junior Seau LB
Deion Sanders DB
Rickey Dixon DB

I don't care whether the Chiefs take Dorsey, Long, Ellis, Clady, or someone who Mel Kiper has never heard of, but I hope they do better than the average team drafting in this spot because that list is fairly unimpressive to me compared to what I would have guessed you'd get with a top 5 pick.

I was surprised at how many RB's have been taken at #5 recently too. I think we are in nearly unanimous agreement that we don't want the Chiefs to go with McFadden though. At least I hope we are.

What?? What are you expecting? The majority of that list are very good players who are/were big contributors to their team.

[jspchief]

you should believe it, it's the truth. Draft picks are slotted, and they're based on what the guy got last year plus whatever increase.
Nope.

[Brock]

Nope.

I assume you have some exceptions in mind?

[Chiefnj2]

And based off of what? It is not like Clady was on TV every single game, so most here have probably never even seen him play.

Exactly. The most people saw of him was either the Hawaii game or his bowl game. In the Hawaii game he didn't look like a top 10 player. Then, there was nothing to judge him on based on the SR. Bowl and he didn't participate at the combine so those that played and/or particpated received the hype and accolades.

I just find it odd that Clady who is ranked generally 7th-8th would be a reach at #5, but Gholston who is generally ranked 6th-7th would not be a reach.

To everyone that thinks he will be available 10 spots later, last year Levi Brown was generally ranked in the 10-15 spot but was taken at 5 overall. LOT's come off the board quickly.

[jspchief]

I assume you have some exceptions in mind?
It happens almost every year. Whether it's a team wanting to pay a player less because he's at a certain position, or an agent demanding more becuase his client plays a high profile position like QB.

In general, first round signings take a route that resembles slotting. But there is no rookie salary slotting in the NFL.

[el borracho]

What I found hilarious just now was trying to see when and where we've picked tackles in the last few years.

2007 Herb Taylor Round 6
2005 Will Svitek Round 6
2005 Jeremy Parquet Round 7
2004 Kevin Sampson Round 7
2003 Brett Williams Round 4
2003 Jordan Black Round 5

It's like after Tait and Riley were selected back to back, Carl has had some rule about ever selecting a tackle on day 1.

Then I started adding the other offensive line positions:

2006 Tre Stallings Round 6
2001 Alex Sulfsted Round 6
2000 Darnell Alford Round 6

That is a list of all the offensive linemen we've drafted since 2000. I know that through 2005 or so, we didn't have a lot of needs in that area, but no wonder we're in the spot we are in. Since Roaf retired we've only drafted two offensive linemen, both in round 6

By comparison, since 2000 we've drafted 13 defensive linemen... not that we've gotten much better return.

That is what happens when your GM trades away picks to get coaches and just can't wait one more year to get Trent Green.

[Brock]

It happens almost every year. Whether it's a team wanting to pay a player less because he's at a certain position, or an agent demanding more becuase his client plays a high profile position like QB.

In general, first round signings take a route that resembles slotting. But there is no rookie salary slotting in the NFL.

Agree to disagree, I guess.

[htismaqe]

What?? What are you expecting? The majority of that list are very good players who are/were big contributors to their team.

About half of that list is good players/big contributors. The other half were mediocre or less.

The biggest problem is look at the superstars vs. the all-out busts. For every Junior Seau on that list there's TWO Curtis Enis'.

[patteeu]

What?? What are you expecting? The majority of that list are very good players who are/were big contributors to their team.

Rickey Dixon played in fewer games and only started one more game than William Bartee and he ended his career with only 6 interceptions.

John Copeland, Todd Lyght and Terrell Buckley all had pretty productive, long careers but they only made a single pro bowl between them.

Trev Albert was a bust in terms of productivity after starting 7 games in his 3 year career.

Kerry Collins made it to a Super Bowl (I believe) and he got several chances as a starter, but no one looking back on his career will mistake him for a franchise QB.

Cedric Jones only played 2 seasons as a starter and had a grand total of 15 sacks and 1 fumble recovery in his entire career.

Curtis Enis, bust.

Ricky Williams, headcase and washout. He showed just enough promise to torpedo 2 franchises instead of just 1.

Quentin Jammer and Terence Newman are both still playing and starting for their teams but haven't fully lived up to their draft positions, IMO.

The jury is still out, afaic, on Cadillac Williams, A.J. Hawk, and Levi Brown.


I have no complaints about Sean Taylor (without the bleeding to death), LaDainian Tomlinson, Jamal Lewis, Bryant Westbrook, Junior Seau, and Deion Sanders.

I'd call that close to a 50% rate of hitting for a strong player. More like a 25% rate of getting a stud. I would have thought the chances of getting a stud would have been better than that.

[Chiefnj2]

IMHO, draft picks are slotted in terms of guaranteed money/signing bonus. QB's will generally have more escalators built in to give them a higher future paycheck should they start and put up #'s.

[Coogs]

I just find it odd that Clady who is ranked generally 7th-8th would be a reach at #5, but Gholston who is generally ranked 6th-7th would not be a reach.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

[patteeu]

About half of that list is good players/big contributors. The other half were mediocre or less.

The biggest problem is look at the superstars vs. the all-out busts. For every Junior Seau on that list there's TWO Curtis Enis'.

Exactly.

[htismaqe]

Quentin Jammer and Terence Newman are both still playing and starting for their teams but haven't fully lived up to their draft positions, IMO.

Newman has come FAR closer to living up to his position than Jammer. Hell, Jammer came dangerously close to becoming a bust before he finally got back on his feet.

The jury is still out, afaic, on Cadillac Williams, A.J. Hawk, and Levi Brown.

The fact that Tampa Bay has been and continues to be very active in acquiring RB's tells me they're very concerned about Williams' future.

I have no complaints about Sean Taylor (without the bleeding to death), LaDainian Tomlinson, Jamal Lewis, Bryant Westbrook, Junior Seau, and Deion Sanders.

Normally untimely injuries, including death, would be an excuse to be excluded from the "bust" category, but I can't apply it in Sean Taylors case. His off-field problems were known prior to him ever being drafted.

[eazyb81]

Yeah, I liked that one. Comedy gold.

Guess Tony Ugoh, Joe Thomas, D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Marcus McNeill, Micheal Roos and Levi Brown (RT, but is protecting Leinart's blindside) didn't get the memo.

I'll give you Ugoh and McNeill as suitable comps, but Thomas and D'Brick were top 5 picks - you can't compare them to Staley.

Michael Roos started his entire rookie year on the right side, and Levi Brown could barely get on the field as a RT, so it's silly to think he could handle the left side.

It's common knowledge that most NFL teams start rookie tackles out on the right side to get their feet wet, then move them to the left later (see Ogden, Flozell Adams, Marvel Smith, etc).

[CosmicPal]

you should believe it, it's the truth. Draft picks are slotted, and they're based on what the guy got last year plus whatever increase.

We've already established that Sherlock. We're not disagreeing on that. I'm am merely saying the QB position will command more money than a DT picked at the very same pick.

Here, I'll make it simple for you:

Sedrick Ellis and Matt Ryan are both available at #5. If what you say is true, then let's say that you're going to pay that guy at #5 $30 million- regardless of his position. So, you're essentially paying a DT quarterback money or you're getting one hell of a deal for your QB.

In that case, you'd be an idiot not to take the QB because, if it all boils down to money- then you'd have to take the QB because you're getting so much more for the same amount of money as you would had you picked a DT.

Particularly, a DT. Name one DT that plays every play? Not one. Even the best of them aren't capable of going full speed every play. So, paying a DT the same amount of money as a QB for the same draft pick doesn't make sense.

That is why Quinn and Rodgers and future QBs will fall out of the top ten- because they will command more money at their position regardless of how that pick is slotted.

[jspchief]

Agree to disagree, I guess.It happened last year when Condon was getting Brady Quinn signed. Quinn ended up getting a bigger contract than the guy drafted ahead of him.

[Fish]

Rickey Dixon played in fewer games and only started one more game than William Bartee and he ended his career with only 6 interceptions.

John Copeland, Todd Lyght and Terrell Buckley all had pretty productive, long careers but they only made a single pro bowl between them.

Trev Albert was a bust in terms of productivity after starting 7 games in his 3 year career.

Kerry Collins made it to a Super Bowl (I believe) and he got several chances as a starter, but no one looking back on his career will mistake him for a franchise QB.

Cedric Jones only played 2 seasons as a starter and had a grand total of 15 sacks and 1 fumble recovery in his entire career.

Curtis Enis, bust.

Ricky Williams, headcase and washout. He showed just enough promise to torpedo 2 franchises instead of just 1.

Quentin Jammer and Terence Newman are both still playing and starting for their teams but haven't fully lived up to their draft positions, IMO.

The jury is still out, afaic, on Cadillac Williams, A.J. Hawk, and Levi Brown.


I have no complaints about Sean Taylor (without the bleeding to death), LaDainian Tomlinson, Jamal Lewis, Bryant Westbrook, Junior Seau, and Deion Sanders.

I'd call that close to a 50% rate of hitting for a strong player. More like a 25% rate of getting a stud. I would have thought the chances of getting a stud would have been better than that.

You missed my point... probably because I wasn't very clear on it... You could probably look at some of the higher picks in the past drafts as well and find the same averages. The draft is not, and probably will never be a sure thing no matter what number pick. I'm guessing, but you'd probably find a little over 50% with the #3 pick as well...

[OnTheWarpath15]

I'll give you Ugoh and McNeill as suitable comps, but Thomas and D'Brick were top 5 picks - you can't compare them to Staley.

Michael Roos started his entire rookie year on the right side, and Levi Brown could barely get on the field as a RT, so it's silly to think he could handle the left side.

It's common knowledge that most NFL teams start rookie tackles out on the right side to get their feet wet, then move them to the left later (see Ogden, Flozell Adams, Marvel Smith, etc).

I can compare them, because he said "rookie tackles."

Not, "rookie tackles taken in the 1st round, Top 10, etc."

And let's clear up Levi Brown.

RT is LT in that offense, he's protecting Matt Leinart's blindside.

And actually, Ogden played 16 games his rookie season at LG, not RT. He was moved to the LT in 1997.

[htismaqe]

I'll give you Ugoh and McNeill as suitable comps, but Thomas and D'Brick were top 5 picks - you can't compare them to Staley.

Michael Roos started his entire rookie year on the right side, and Levi Brown could barely get on the field as a RT, so it's silly to think he could handle the left side.

It's common knowledge that most NFL teams start rookie tackles out on the right side to get their feet wet, then move them to the left later (see Ogden, Flozell Adams, Marvel Smith, etc).

Teams start out LT's at right either because they either couldn't cut it at left tackle or they were filling a need.

For every one Marvel Smith out there there's two Jordan Gross' out there.

[eazyb81]

I can compare them, because he said "rookie tackles."

Not, "rookie tackles taken in the 1st round, Top 10, etc."

And let's clear up Levi Brown.

RT is LT in that offense, he's protecting Matt Leinart's blindside.

And actually, Ogden played 16 games his rookie season at LG, not RT. He was moved to the LT in 1997.

Exactly, I did say "most". If we include Thomas and D'Brick, then we're going to include every scrub tackle drafted in the 6th and 7th round as well. You're crazy if you think the majority of tackles start from the get-go on the left side.

Again, thanks for pointing out the simple concept of a RT blocking for a LT, but the fact remains that he plays RT, so I'm not sure why you continue to beat that to death. That's just another point that helps support my argument.

The original point of this discussion was that the same guys on here that are bagging on Clady did the same to Staley last year. You were wrong on Staley, because he had a great rookie year and is taking over at left tackle this year. Why should anyone trust your opinion on Clady over others this time around?

[htismaqe]

The original point of this discussion was that the same guys on here that are bagging on Clady did the same to Staley last year. You were wrong on Staley, because he had a great rookie year and is taking over at left tackle this year. Why should anyone trust your opinion on Clady over others this time around?

1) People wanted Staley last year to provide immediate impact at LT. Those of us "bagging" on him said he wasn't going to play LT right away and we were ONE HUNDRED PERCENT correct.

2) Just because he's being moved to LT doesn't mean he's going to be good at it.

[OnTheWarpath15]

1) People wanted Staley last year to provide immediate impact at LT. Those of us "bagging" on him said he wasn't going to play LT right away and we were ONE HUNDRED PERCENT correct.

2) Just because he's being moved to LT doesn't mean he's going to be good at it.


Beat me to it.

[Mecca]

Taking Ryan Clady at 5 would be like taking Levi Brown at 5, which I still to this day consider a horrendous pick.

Valuing positions over talent....the first time I suspect Clady to even get into the discussion about being picked is when the Broncos and Panthers come up to pick.

If you take a player with as many questions as Clady has at 5 odds are you just set your franchise back several years because he's never going to play to his contract. Taking an OT top 5 means that guy better be a dominant player, you need to look at alot more than just some draft sites overall board to realize the odds of that aren't good.

[Coogs]

Taking Ryan Clady at 5 would be like taking Levi Brown at 5, which I still to this day consider a horrendous pick.

Valuing positions over talent....the first time I suspect Clady to even get into the discussion about being picked is when the Broncos and Panthers come up to pick.

If you take a player with as many questions as Clady has at 5 odds are you just set your franchise back several years because he's never going to play to his contract. Taking an OT top 5 means that guy better be a dominant player, you need to look at alot more than just some draft sites overall board to realize the odds of that aren't good.

Time will tell. I am not beating the drum saying we need to select Clady if Long is gone... or if Long is still there for that matter... but it seems as if some folks here are saying Clady is a real reach at 5 and many other players are not and that we should draft value at all costs. In that case in this scenario we should be taking McFadden, as he is the highest rated player available.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Time will tell. I am not beating the drum saying we need to select Clady if Long is gone... or if Long is still there for that matter... but it seems as if some folks here are saying Clady is a real reach at 5 and many other players are not and that we should draft value at all costs. In that case in this scenario we should be taking McFadden, as he is the highest rated player available.

That's debatable.

[Mecca]

McFadden gets devalued because his position lacks longevity and isn't hard to fill....

I have question marks about Jake Long as a top 5 pick, Ryan Clady as a top 5 pick is enough to make you wanna blow up your car.

[BigChiefFan]

Give me value over need everytime. This team is coming off a 4-12 season and they've purged the roster since then. If some can't understand that taking the best player available over REACHING for need is what needs to be done, than they need to have their heads examined. Of course we have needs, but we have needs at virtually EVERY position on the field. Take the best player available or see the reprecussions of having average players at exuberent contracts-that's not a great way to build a team.

[TEX]

Clady at # 5??????? PLEASE NO! What a R-E-A-C-H. In a year with more OL talent he's not even in the top 10. Teams get in trouble when they pick for need - even when that need is as huge as the Chiefs for O-lineman. I hope at # 5 they pick the best available athlete. If Clady's really their guy (and I hope NOT) , hopefully they can trade down and still get him plus another pick...

[Coogs]

That's debatable.

From the very first sentence of this whole thread...


And a few notes to consider from McShay:
· Darren McFadden is still the top rated prospect on my board

[Coogs]

Clady at # 5??????? PLEASE NO! What a R-E-A-C-H. In a year with more OL talent he's not even in the top 10.

And again... Clady is rated the 7th or 8th best prospect by several draft guru's.

[Mecca]

From the very first sentence of this whole thread...

Todd McShay is a retard so umm whats your point?

[Coogs]

McFadden gets devalued because his position lacks longevity and isn't hard to fill....

I have question marks about Jake Long as a top 5 pick, Ryan Clady as a top 5 pick is enough to make you wanna blow up your car.


Not me. I could live with Clady. And I could live with several other options as well.

[eazyb81]

And again... Clady is rated the 7th or 8th best prospect by several draft guru's.

Why even bother....none of these guys are going to respond to your point.

Gholston would be a fantastic pick as the #6 overall prospect, yet Clady would be a horrendous pick that would set the franchise back for years even though he's the #7/8 overall prospect. :rolleyes:

[htismaqe]

And again... Clady is rated the 7th or 8th best prospect by several draft guru's.

Because people are in love with his athleticism and footwork. He's like a TE in in a tackle's body.

The problem is that guys with his lack of strength have generally disappointed as NFL LT's.

[Mecca]

Why even bother....none of these guys are going to respond to your point.

Gholston would be a fantastic pick as the #6 overall prospect, yet Clady would be a horrendous pick that would set the franchise back for years even though he's the #7/8 overall prospect. :rolleyes:

Who says I agree with those rankings..

I consider Gholston a top 5 prospect and Clady bordering the 2nd to 3rd tier of the top 15.

[htismaqe]

Why even bother....none of these guys are going to respond to your point.

Gholston would be a fantastic pick as the #6 overall prospect, yet Clady would be a horrendous pick that would set the franchise back for years even though he's the #7/8 overall prospect. :rolleyes:

They've responded over and over.

There's a difference between pick value and whether or not a player is GOOD.

Clady would be a reach at #5, there's absolutely no doubt about it, because the highest ratings you've found for him are #7. That's roughly equivalent to a 2nd-round pick in terms of value.

And that doesn't even take into account anything about his talent...

[eazyb81]

The problem is that guys with his lack of strength have generally disappointed as NFL LT's.

Potentially, but Joe Thomas came out with similar strength and was an All Pro his first year.

[Chiefnj2]

Why even bother....none of these guys are going to respond to your point.

Gholston would be a fantastic pick as the #6 overall prospect, yet Clady would be a horrendous pick that would set the franchise back for years even though he's the #7/8 overall prospect. :rolleyes:

Exactly! Plus, if the #1 - #3 guy in McFadden fell to #5 he'd be a reach as well. It's basically limited to # 4-#6 provided 4-6 are Dorsey, Ellis or Gholston. Anything else is a reach or improper valuation.

[Mecca]

I've already explained the McFadden thing 100 times.

[eazyb81]

They've responded over and over.

There's a difference between pick value and whether or not a player is GOOD.

So then would you agree that your analysis of Clady is significantly different than the general consensus from reputable NFL Draft experts?

Clady would be a reach at #5, there's absolutely no doubt about it, because the highest ratings you've found for him are #7. That's roughly equivalent to a 2nd-round pick in terms of value.

And that doesn't even take into account anything about his talent...

Okay, then Gholston, Ellis, and Ryan would be a reach as well. Thanks for clearing that up.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Okay, then Gholston, Ellis, and Ryan would be a reach as well. Thanks for clearing that up.

Huh?

How can those 3 be a reach when they are all considered Top 5 prospects?

I've yet to see Clady's name attached to anything that says "Top 5 prospect."

[eazyb81]

Huh?

How can those 3 be a reach when they are all considered Top 5 prospects?

I've yet to see Clady's name attached to anything that says "Top 5 prospect."

Where are they considered top 5 overall prospects? Please provide a link, and not to a mock draft.

On the latest NFLDC rankings, Gholston is ranked 5, Ellis is 6, and Ryan is 7. So I guess that means Gholston would be fine for us, but Ellis or Ryan would certainly be a reach. Is that correct, or are the rules changed for them?

[Mecca]

Where are they considered top 5 overall prospects? Please provide a link, and not to a mock draft.

On the latest NFLDC rankings, Gholston is ranked 5, Ellis is 6, and Ryan is 7. So I guess that means Gholston would be fine for us, but Ellis or Ryan would certainly be a reach. Is that correct, or are the rules changed for them?

Is he not allowed to have his own view of who the top 5 are? I certainly do...just because draft site disagrees doesn't mean we're wrong...want an example...

I thought Antonio Cromartie was a top 5 player....no site did..who was right who was wrong?

[eazyb81]

Is he not allowed to have his own view of who the top 5 are? I certainly do...just because draft site disagrees doesn't mean we're wrong...want an example...

OF COURSE he can! That's the entire point, just like others here can choose to not be upset with a Clady pick.

But it's absurd for you and a couple others to constantly trash Clady and say that he would be a horrendous reach that would destroy the franchise when people who get paid to rank players simply don't agree with you.

Please keep your own opinion, but be more open-minded especially when there is evidence that points to the contrary.

[Tribal Warfare]

But it's absurd for you and a couple others to constantly trash Clady and say that he would be a horrendous reach that would destroy the franchise when people who get paid to rank players simply don't agree with you.




What I saw in the Hawaii game acknowledges's my opinion that Clady would be a BIGTIME reach. He got Pwned in that game

[htismaqe]

So then would you agree that your analysis of Clady is significantly different than the general consensus from reputable NFL Draft experts?

Apparently you missed a key point.

My analysis of Clady is almost IDENTICAL to everybody else's. If I were a team that had good offensive coaching and a history of developing players like Clady, I wouldn't have nearly as much problem taking him. But we're talking about the Chiefs. Do you trust the Chiefs to develop players? Taking a player like Clady, that needs development and coaching, seems to me like a big waste of a pick.

Okay, then Gholston, Ellis, and Ryan would be a reach as well. Thanks for clearing that up.

I've seen Gholston as high as #1 overall on some boards. Same with both Ellis and Ryan. I have seen Clady NO HIGHER than 7th.

[htismaqe]

Exactly! Plus, if the #1 - #3 guy in McFadden fell to #5 he'd be a reach as well. It's basically limited to # 4-#6 provided 4-6 are Dorsey, Ellis or Gholston. Anything else is a reach or improper valuation.

I never said McFadden would be a reach so you can stop that any time.

The ONLY player I have discussed here is Clady.

[htismaqe]

Potentially, but Joe Thomas came out with similar strength and was an All Pro his first year.

I'll give you that.

[Fish]

OF COURSE he can! That's the entire point, just like others here can choose to not be upset with a Clady pick.

But it's absurd for you and a couple others to constantly trash Clady and say that he would be a horrendous reach that would destroy the franchise when people who get paid to rank players simply don't agree with you.

Please keep your own opinion, but be more open-minded especially when there is evidence that points to the contrary.

Actually.... this article and several others that have the Chiefs taking Clady say right away that it would be a reach. They just think we'll do it anyway. They're not disagreeing with the notion of it being a reach, they just think that Carl Peterson is too stupid to do anything but reach....

[Archie Bunker]

Actually.... this article and several others that have the Chiefs taking Clady say right away that it would be a reach. They just think we'll do it anyway. They're not disagreeing with the notion of it being a reach, they just think that Carl Peterson is too stupid to do anything but reach....

Bingo. Every mock always has the "even though Clady would be a reach here we expect the Chiefs to take the next available OT" type disclaimer when the Chiefs pick Clady.

During the entire DV era, mock draft after mock draft had the Chiefs taking a WR in rd 1 and it never happened so I don't put much stock in all the Chiefs are taking an OT @ 5 come hell or high water hype I'm hearing. I see no way a defensive minded coach like Herm is going to pass on Dorsey or Ellis when he knows badly the team needs a real DT.

[patteeu]

You missed my point... probably because I wasn't very clear on it... You could probably look at some of the higher picks in the past drafts as well and find the same averages. The draft is not, and probably will never be a sure thing no matter what number pick. I'm guessing, but you'd probably find a little over 50% with the #3 pick as well...

That may well be true. Obviously, this low success rate was surprising to me, but I don't claim to be a draft expert and it's been a while since the Chiefs drafted this high (with the close exception of the year they traded up to get Ryan Sims from 8th overall).

I don't think I'm alone though because I've seen several people comment about how a guy taken at the 5th overall spot ought to be a team mainstay for years to come.

[Coogs]

I also would not be at all dissapointed if the Chiefs were to go offensive line with their first three picks.

Either Long or Clady in the 1st
Albert in the 2nd
Pollack in the 3rd

Might not be ideal for most here, but I could live with it. See if Tank and Turk are worth their draft status from last season. If they are, that goes further to making us a better team in 2009.

[htismaqe]

I also would not be at all dissapointed if the Chiefs were to go offensive line with their first three picks.

Either Long or Clady in the 1st
Albert in the 2nd
Pollack in the 3rd

Might not be ideal for most here, but I could live with it. See if Tank and Turk are worth their draft status from last season. If they are, that goes further to making us a better team in 2009.

Settings ourselves up just like the Vermeil years...

[OnTheWarpath15]

I also would not be at all dissapointed if the Chiefs were to go offensive line with their first three picks.

Either Long or Clady in the 1st
Albert in the 2nd
Pollack in the 3rd

Might not be ideal for most here, but I could live with it. See if Tank and Turk are worth their draft status from last season. If they are, that goes further to making us a better team in 2009.

That would be great if Albert actually lasted that long (he likely won't come close) and Pollack wasn't a HUGE reach in the 3rd.

[Coogs]

That would be great if Albert actually lasted that long (he likely won't come close) and Pollack wasn't a HUGE reach in the 3rd.

I have seen Albert going in the 1st, and sliding into the 2nd. If he makes it to us in the 2nd, I would not mind the pick at all. In fact, I think it would make a lot of sense. And here is a bit from the Walters 4 round mock draft. It was the 71st pick of the draft, which belong to the Bills right after our 3rd round pick...

Buffalo Bills: Mike Pollak, C, Arizona State
The Bills need help with their interior offensive front, and Mike Pollak is probably the best inside lineman in this draft class.

[Coogs]

Settings ourselves up just like the Vermeil years...
Not really. I don't see us being real good in 2008. Just as well put together the O-Line, and let them gel together for a season. Then add the defensive playmaker in the 2009 draft. Somebody like George Seive from South Florida.

[OnTheWarpath15]

I have see Albert going in the 1st, and sliding into the 2nd. If he makes it to us in the 2nd, I wuold not mind the pick at all. In fact, I think it would make a lot of sense. And here is a bit from the Walters 4 round mock draft. It was the 71st pick of the draft, which belong to the Bills right after our 3rd round pick...

Buffalo Bills: Mike Pollak, C, Arizona State
The Bills need help with their interior offensive front, and Mike Pollak is probably the best inside lineman in this draft class.


Interesting.

Walter might be the only place I've seen him going before the 4th/5th round.

He wasn't in Scott Wright's Top 100 (basically 1st 3 rounds) and was 123rd according to the Huddle Report, which mean he could possibly be there when we use Miami's pick in the 5th.

[ChiefsCountry]

I also would not be at all dissapointed if the Chiefs were to go offensive line with their first three picks.

Either Long or Clady in the 1st
Albert in the 2nd
Pollack in the 3rd

Might not be ideal for most here, but I could live with it. See if Tank and Turk are worth their draft status from last season. If they are, that goes further to making us a better team in 2009.

This team was horrible, we have more needs than just OL.

[Coogs]

This team was horrible, we have more needs than just OL.

Most definately. But you have to start somewhere. And if the draft has really good offensive linemen available at our first three picks, why not? An offense that can move the ball helps our defense. Maybe more than a stud DT could.

[ChiefsCountry]

An offense that can move the ball helps our defense. Maybe more than a stud DT could.

See 2002 to 2005 Kansas City Chiefs.

[Coogs]

See 2002 to 2005 Kansas City Chiefs.

First off, I think this defense is already better than that defense. The only thing holding this defense back is Gun... but that is another story.

Second, this offense is nothing like the offense from 2002 to 2005. That was a quick strike offense. This is going/supposed to be a ball control offense that eats up the clock. With no holes for LJ to run through (even though Kolby Smith found them) this offense will go no where without upgrading the line big time.

Third, the Croyle expirement needs a fair chance to succeed. Otherwise, the 2009 draft could be as big of a crap shoot as this one could be.

[Coogs]

BTW, here is the link to Walter's mock draft...

http://walterfootball.com/draft2008.php

[BigChiefFan]

First off, I think this defense is already better than that defense. The only thing holding this defense back is Gun... but that is another story.

Second, this offense is nothing like the offense from 2002 to 2005. That was a quick strike offense. This is going/supposed to be a ball control offense that eats up the clock. With no holes for LJ to run through (even though Kolby Smith found them) this offense will go no where without upgrading the line big time.

Third, the Croyle expirement needs a fair chance to succeed. Otherwise, the 2009 draft could be as big of a crap shoot as this one could be.
Coogs,
I think most agree we need a substantial upgrade on the O-line, but the draft is deep at O-Line this year, we should play the cards we are dealt and play to the strengths of the draft. We should be able to get some starters in the 2nd round or later on O-line. I think Ellis, Gholston, or Dorsey should be our focus, if one should be there.

[Coogs]

Coogs,
I think most agree we need a substantial upgrade on the O-line, but the draft is deep at O-Line this year, we should play the cards we are dealt and play to the strengths of the draft. We should be able to get some starters in the 2nd round or later on O-line. I think Ellis, Gholston, or Dorsey should be our focus, if one should be there.

Trust me, I would not be upset with any of those three. I also will not be upset with Clady. Not at all.

[htismaqe]

Most definately. But you have to start somewhere. And if the draft has really good offensive linemen available at our first three picks, why not? An offense that can move the ball helps our defense. Maybe more than a stud DT could.

This draft has really good offensive linemen available at our 2nd two picks. The talent likely to be available at #5 is slanted heavily towards defense, and if Jake Long's OFF the board, picking an offensive lineman at #5 should be out of the question.

[cadmonkey]

I have a question. Is McShay's opinion more respected than Mel Kiper's now? The only reason I ask is because I never see Kiper anymore, and the past few drafts Todd's mock drafts have actually been more corect than Mel's.

[BigChiefFan]

I have a question. Is McShay's opinion more respected than Mel Kiper's now? The only reason I ask is because I never see Kiper anymore, and the past few drafts Todd's mock drafts have actually been more corect than Mel's.
I think McShay is in over his head. I don't respect his opinion in the least.

[OnTheWarpath15]

I think McShay is in over his head. I don't respect his opinion in the least.

Agree.

Personally, I think ESPN's draft coverage/analysis is EXTREMELY overrated.

[Coogs]

I have a question. Is McShay's opinion more respected than Mel Kiper's now? The only reason I ask is because I never see Kiper anymore, and the past few drafts Todd's mock drafts have actually been more corect than Mel's.

Kiper is still out there. You just have to pay to read what he is thinking.

[Chiefnj2]

I have a question. Is McShay's opinion more respected than Mel Kiper's now? The only reason I ask is because I never see Kiper anymore, and the past few drafts Todd's mock drafts have actually been more corect than Mel's.

I think ESPN decided to phase out Kiper by bringing McShay in. With 60 days to the draft it is all about doing whatever you can to get ratings. Expect to see lots of shifts and changes in the rankings.

[htismaqe]

I think ESPN decided to phase out Kiper by bringing McShay in. With 60 days to the draft it is all about doing whatever you can to get ratings. Expect to see lots of shifts and changes in the rankings.

Yep. Alot of movement on players that aren't doing anything right now.

That's why it's very important to get a snapshot of rankings right after the Bowl games end...

[Frosty]

Agree.

Personally, I think ESPN's draft coverage/analysis is EXTREMELY overrated.

I agree and also think their draft day coverage has gotten pretty bad. Has anyone watched the NFL Network's draft day coverage? Is it better?

[Chiefnj2]

Yep. Alot of movement on players that aren't doing anything right now.

That's why it's very important to get a snapshot of rankings right after the Bowl games end...

This week everyone will have there post-combine list come out. Guys that worked out well will shoot up (Gholston, Zuttah), guys that worked out poorly will drop (Manningham, Flowers maybe even Ellis) and guys that didn't work out will drop (Dorsey, Clady). Then every two weeks after pro days certain guys will rise again. Clady will likely go up based on preliminary reports of his pro day yesterday.

[Chiefnj2]

I agree and also think their draft day coverage has gotten pretty bad. Has anyone watched the NFL Network's draft day coverage? Is it better?

You'd think that with the competition both networks would have improved their coverage, but IMO it has gone down. I thought the combine coverage was annoying. You don't need a huge ticker on the bottom giving mayock's top 5 and they spent too much time on the bench and 40 instead of the drills. Plus, how many times do I need to see the commentators throwing a football around the stadium.

[htismaqe]

This week everyone will have there post-combine list come out. Guys that worked out well will shoot up (Gholston, Zuttah), guys that worked out poorly will drop (Manningham, Flowers maybe even Ellis) and guys that didn't work out will drop (Dorsey, Clady). Then every two weeks after pro days certain guys will rise again. Clady will likely go up based on preliminary reports of his pro day yesterday.

Sure, but the pro-day workouts are weighted even more heavily to the player than the combine is. Everything is metered and controlled and sterile.

It's not football at all, which is what these guys should be evaluated on.

[jspchief]

This draft has really good offensive linemen available at our 2nd two picks. The talent likely to be available at #5 is slanted heavily towards defense, and if Jake Long's on the board, picking an offensive lineman at #5 should be out of the question.
Deep for offensive linemen, but not neccessarily for LTs.

I'll openly admit that I want Jake Long over any of those D-linemen. The simple reason being that I don't believe the gap in talent is all that big and LTs are always harder to find. Marcus Stroud, Shaun Rogers, Kris Jenkins, and Corey Williams were all on the market this year... name one tackle in that class that was available.

[htismaqe]

Deep for offensive linemen, but not neccessarily for LTs.

I'll openly admit that I want Jake Long over any of those D-linemen. The simple reason being that I don't believe the gap in talent is all that big and LTs are always harder to find. Marcus Stroud, Shaun Rogers, Kris Jenkins, and Corey Williams were all on the market this year... name one tackle in that class that was available.

Actually it's deep for OT's. Just about every scout that I've read and heard, including Bill Kuharich, says the crop of interior linemen is about average. But the OT class in one of the deepest in a long time.

Kuharich also said that the gap between Dorsey and Ellis and all the other DT's was MUCH wider than the gap betwene Long and everybody else.

[htismaqe]

There's also a typo in my post.

If Jake Long's OFF the board, picking an offensive lineman at #5 should be out of the question.

[ChiefsCountry]

Marcus Stroud, Shaun Rogers, Kris Jenkins, and Corey Williams were all on the market this year... name one tackle in that class that was available.

Historically production for DT's drop off considerablly when they are on their second team.

[jspchief]

Historically production for DT's drop off considerablly when they are on their second team. I agree. And historically good LTs never hit FA.

Does that mean I want LT at #5 at all cost? No. But it does give Jake Long the edge over the DTs IMO.

[htismaqe]

I agree. And historically good LTs never hit FA.

Does that mean I want LT at #5 at all cost? No. But it does give Jake Long the edge over the DTs IMO.

It all depends on Dorsey's injury concern. If he's healthy, he's clearly better than Long. Of course, if he's healthy, he probably won't be available when we pick. Then again, Long probably won't be there either.