Peter King- This would be great

[tooge]

Man I hope this is true. When Snyder gets smitten with a qb, he becomes a dumbass and could give alot away.



Quarterback Mark Sanchez has visited nine teams going into this weekend's draft.
Todd Rosenberg/SI
Peter King's Mailbag
Peter King will answer your questions each week in Monday Morning Quarterback: Tuesday Edition.

Name:

Email:

Hometown:

Question:

SEND


"I like the angle,'' former USC quarterback Mark Sanchez said to me a little after 11 Eastern Sunday night. "I hope it still looks good Saturday. I hope it doesn't blow up on you.''

Draft angles always blow up, and no one sells insurance for my Draft Week 2009 plotline. But here goes: The three most influential men atop the 2009 Draft are Scott Pioli, Dan Snyder and Sanchez. Briefly, why:

Pioli, the rookie Kansas City general manager, has the distinction in this decade of being part of the tradingest draft-day team in the league. Between 2000 and 2008, the Patriots draft room, run by coach Bill Belichick and Pioli, made 28 draft-weekend trades. The Pats traded up 12 times, but more significantly, they traded down 16 times.

In the last 10 days, I've spent hours (only my cell phone company knows how many for sure) foraging for crumbs for my Sports Illustrated mock, in your mailboxes Wednesday and Thursday. And the one thing I've heard on most calls is, "Well, you know Pioli wants to get out of his pick. He wants to trade down.''

It's true. He does want out. There's not a player Kansas City believes is worth third-pick-in-the-first-round money. Do you remember what the third pick got last year? Matt Ryan, the Atlanta quarterback, signed a six-year, $72 million deal, with $34.8 million guaranteed. Pioli can argue until he's Chiefs-crimson in the face, but his pick at three is going to fetch the player $11 million a year, minimum, regardless of position. Pioli's not picking a quarterback, so there's no chance a player at three will be worth that money. My feeling is Pioli woke up this morning with an itchy trigger finger.

Snyder, the Washington owner, has one pick in the top 75, the 13th overall. He was willing to trade that pick plus next year's first-round pick and something else to get Jay Cutler from Denver to replace Jason Campbell at quarterback. That failed, but I'm told Snyder is beyond smitten with Sanchez and will likely pursue him this week. How can he do that? He's going to have to part with either his next two first-round picks, or a slew of picks, including this year's one.

I spoke to someone close to Snyder over the weekend, and this person said Snyder is not going to allow next year's first-rounder to be put in a trade. Maybe. Maybe not. This person also said he thought it was highly unlikely the Redskins could muster up the ammo to go get Sanchez. If Snyder wants to get up to number three to assure himself the shot at Sanchez, he's going to have to bend and give up the to pick in 2010.

One other thing: At the Scouting Combine, Snyder had the not-so-secret dinner with the agent for Albert Haynesworth, Chad Speck? A week later, the Redskins went on to sign Haynesworth, their number one target on the free market, five hours into free-agency.

Last Friday, the last night teams could host, wine and dine players from out of town in their home market, Snyder and vice president Vinny Cerrato took Sanchez out to dinner at an Italian place in downtown D.C. after Sanchez had spent the day with Washington coaches and personnel people. Big deal? Maybe. Maybe not.

Sanchez, the in-demand quarterback, has visited nine teams between one (Detroit) and 19 (Tampa Bay) in the first round. The excitement level on him around the league is ratcheting up. I bet 40 percent of the teams like him better than they do Matthew Stafford, though Stafford's significantly more experienced. As one coach in the top 15 told me Sunday morning: "Sanchez really is an interesting prospect. There's so much he does that's instinctive, and he can make all the throws, even though he doesn't have the arm strength of Stafford. He sort of oozes confidence.''


Peter King on Twitter
Inside info, MMQB sneak peeks, travel updates and more.
http://twitter.com

[The Bad Guy]

Unless he's offering a 1 this year and 3 this year, and a 1 next year, he can fuck himself.

Anyone trading down 10 spots for just a 2 and a 3 should be taken outback and shot.

[raybec 4]

The Skins don't have the ammo to pull the trigger on this trade. They may not have the cap room to sign #3 over all either.

[Gonzo]

To the ship...

The deal is done...

[Coogs]

They may not have the cap room to sign #3 over all either.

Haven't you heard? The Skins do not have a cap. This part is not an issue at all. The ammo part might be though. ;)

[raybec 4]

Haven't you heard? The Skins do not have a cap. This part is not an issue at all. The ammo part might be though. ;)

I forgot that they went to the Carmen Policy school of cap management.

[Deberg_1990]

Hes also going to be in St Louie and KC this week...


"Enjoy the week. I'll be in St. Louis on Wednesday and Thursday, then moving on to Kansas City on Thursday night through the draft. I'm hoping the needy Missouri franchises, picking at two and three, will give me enough news to write about over the weekend."

[Delano]

Unless he's offering a 1 this year and 3 this year, and a 1 next year, he can fuck himself.

Anyone trading down 10 spots for just a 2 and a 3 should be taken outback and shot.

This. This a whole lot.

[FloridaMan88]

Looks like Peter King will be setting up shop in KC to cover the draft:

Enjoy the week. I'll be in St. Louis on Wednesday and Thursday, then moving on to Kansas City on Thursday night through the draft. I'm hoping the needy Missouri franchises, picking at two and three, will give me enough news to write about over the weekend.

[melbar]

ESPN just reported that Sanchez is in SoCal today and the Denver staff is flying there to spend the day with him...

[Dr. Johnny Fever]

I'm starting to think we should draft Sanchez just to piss off the rest of the league.

[SenselessChiefsFan]

Unless he's offering a 1 this year and 3 this year, and a 1 next year, he can **** himself.

Anyone trading down 10 spots for just a 2 and a 3 should be taken outback and shot.

Pioli will take less than what the 'draft chart' calls for, but I am not sure how much less.

[Reaper16]

Someone needs to hit Peter King with two cars while he's in the area.

[raybec 4]

Pioli will take less than what the 'draft chart' calls for, but I am not sure how much less.

Really? You have been so spot on with everything else, I'm amazed you don't have some fantastic insight into this scenario as well.

[RustShack]

I wonder how soon before they update the trade chart? You know its coming soon.

[DaKCMan AP]

Pioli will take less than what the 'draft chart' calls for, but I am not sure how much less.

Go look at the draft day trades the Patriots have made over the past few years. They are usually very consistent with the draft trade value chart.

[Reaper16]

Really? You have been so spot on with everything else, I'm amazed you don't have some fantastic insight into this scenario as well.
LMAO

[SenselessChiefsFan]

Go look at the draft day trades the Patriots have made over the past few years. They are usually very consistent with the draft trade value chart.


Not last year when they dropped in the first round. Pioli is looking to do what's best for his club. He isn't CP, he doesn't have to 'win' every negotiation.

I will be surprised if the Chiefs pick #3. I am hopeful that the Broncos and Redskins both love Sanchez and the Chiefs can cash in.

But, if Pioli is offered anyting within reason, I think he will take it...especially this year.

If he were offered the same deal the Chiefs were offered for the fifth pick last year, I bet he jumps all over it.

[Delano]

I'm starting to think we should draft Sanchez just to piss off the rest of the league.

That sounds like a Pioli move.

http://xs538.xs.to/xs538/09160/nuclearwinterstare954.gif

[DaKCMan AP]

Not last year when they dropped in the first round. Pioli is looking to do what's best for his club. He isn't CP, he doesn't have to 'win' every negotiation.

NO trades #10, #78 = 1500
NE trades #7, #164 = 1526.8

How is that not consistent with the draft trade value chart?

Throwing in a 6th round pick to get the deal done is a lot different than the 200-800 point hit some people want to take in dealing #3 overall.

[bevischief]

Someone needs to hit Peter King with two cars while he's in the area.

ROFL

[Warrior5]

Unless he's offering a 1 this year and 3 this year, and a 1 next year, he can **** himself.

This.

[crazycoffey]

Get'er done, Scott!!!

[htismaqe]

We're gonna get the #13 and next year's 1st rounder, plus a package of other picks in this year's draft, from Washington on Saturday. I can feel it.

[DeezNutz]

We're gonna get the #13 and next year's 1st rounder, plus a package of other picks in this year's draft, from Washington on Saturday. I can feel it.

Did you JI[Y]P?

Is that what you felt?

[beach tribe]

We're gonna get the #13 and next year's 1st rounder, plus a package of other picks in this year's draft, from Washington on Saturday. I can feel it.

Oh lord, I hope you're right.

[the Talking Can]

We're gonna get the #13 and next year's 1st rounder, plus a package of other picks in this year's draft, from Washington on Saturday. I can feel it.

fine by me

skins next years pick is likely to be a top 15, imo

[the Talking Can]

if all this rumor is true..that denver, washington, seattle are interested in sanchez than we have leverage and a very valuable pick

if

[Coogs]

fine by me

skins next years pick is likely to be a top 15, imo

I concur! I'd love to have next years first pick for the Skins for that very reason. I can not see them finishing above anybody in the NFC East at this point.

[raybec 4]

I concur! I'd love to have next years first pick for the Skins for that very reason. I can not see them finishing above anybody in the NFC East at this point.

I bet they finish above Dallas.

[Coogs]

I bet they finish above Dallas.

Maybe, but I wouldn't bet a whole lot on it.

[wazimo]

We're going to trade w/Denver:

KC to Denver #3, #172 = 2224 points
Denver to KC #12, #18 = 2100 points

....Denver drafts Sanchez, KC drafts Tyson Jackson [big enough to play DE in the 3-4] and Mickael Oher (after moving up two spots) [costing us our 5th rounder]. Other possibles are Raji, Maybin, E.Brown, Maualuga. Wishful thinking I know. Our LB corp is still weak but you can't get everything you want in one draft. We will have a ton of money available for the June cuts.

[Warrior5]

Someone needs to hit Peter King with two cars while he's in the area.

ROFL

[RINGLEADER]

Unless he's offering a 1 this year and 3 this year, and a 1 next year, he can **** himself.

Anyone trading down 10 spots for just a 2 and a 3 should be taken outback and shot.

I would tend to agree, but how would you feel about 1 and 3 this year, and 2 and 3 next year?

[DaKCMan AP]

I would tend to agree, but how would you feel about 1 and 3 this year, and 2 and 3 next year?

No. A 2 and 3 next year is equivalent to a 3 and 4 this year.

That'd be trading #3 overall for #13, two 3rds and a 4th. No thanks.

[Coogs]

We're going to trade w/Denver:

KC to Denver #3, #172 = 2224 points
Denver to KC #12, #18 = 2100 points

....Denver drafts Sanchez, KC drafts Tyson Jackson [big enough to play DE in the 3-4] and Mickael Oher (after moving up two spots) [costing us our 5th rounder]. Other possibles are Raji, Maybin, E.Brown, Maualuga. Wishful thinking I know. Our LB corp is still weak but you can't get everything you want in one draft. We will have a ton of money available for the June cuts.

Just curious as to why you think the Chiefs need to add a bit of a sweetner (#172) to the deal, when pick #3 at 2200 points has more value than Denvers combined total? I would think if there is anymore to be involved in this trade, it would come from Denvers side.

[wazimo]

It seems that this is the norm lately. If you look at the various trades over the last year or two. The sweetener normally comes from one of the teams and not neccesary according to the table. This trade would benefit both teams so the sweetener could go the other way. Heck, as long as we get out off pick # 3 and obtain two # 1's I will be happy.

Your point is valid.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

I hope we trade with Washington. Having two 1's next year when it's heavy in defense would be great.

[SBK]

Ok Guys, I think we should trade with Washington like this:

KC gets the #13 and a 4th rounder

Washington gets #3

The draft value chart is out guys, we should take what we can get!

[Brock]

Ok Guys, I think we should trade with Washington like this:

KC gets the #13 and a 4th rounder

Washington gets #3

The draft value chart is out guys, we should take what we can get!

F*ck that.

[raybec 4]

Ok Guys, I think we should trade with Washington like this:

KC gets the #13 and a 4th rounder

Washington gets #3

The draft value chart is out guys, we should take what we can get!

Exactly, and all because Mike Mayock says so.

[Coogs]

Ok Guys, I think we should trade with Washington like this:

KC gets the #13 and a 4th rounder

Washington gets #3

The draft value chart is out guys, we should take what we can get!


Yeah, good point! In fact, since it is the Redskins calling out of the beloved NFC East, and they are short on picks, we should probably not even ask for the 4th rounder. Just #13 for #3 and maybe even toss them in a late rounder for just being able to have the pleasure of doing business with the NFC East.

[tooge]

I'd rather just have them pick sanchez with the #3 then put him on the trading block for whichever team "has" to have him. Then ;you really do have all the leverage. Kind of like haw san diego did it with Eli Manning a few years back.

[raybec 4]

Yeah, good point! In fact, since it is the Redskins calling out of the beloved NFC East, and they are short on picks, we should probably not even ask for the 4th rounder. Just #13 for #3 and maybe even toss them in a late rounder for just being able to have the pleasure of doing business with the NFC East.

That's probably not a bad idea they would be saving us millions you know.

[wazimo]

That is ridiculous. The interest in Sanchez is heating up. I hope he doesn't go to Detroit # 1.

[Mecca]

Ok Guys, I think we should trade with Washington like this:

KC gets the #13 and a 4th rounder

Washington gets #3

The draft value chart is out guys, we should take what we can get!

Sad part is there are people that think we should take that just cause.

[Coogs]

That's probably not a bad idea they would be saving us millions you know.

Exactly! Look across the parking lot. Saving money all those years at Royals stadium by giving away things is the way to go!

[Frankie]

Ok Guys, I think we should trade with Washington like this:

KC gets the #13 and a 4th rounder

Washington gets #3

The draft value chart is out guys, we should take what we can get!

WTF?! Drop 10 valuable spots in the 1st and get a mid 4th for it? Are you nuts?

[Reaper16]

WTF?! Drop 10 valuable spots in the 1st and get a mid 4th for it? Are you nuts?
He was being sarcastic.

[Skyy God]

Ok Guys, I think we should trade with Washington like this:

KC gets the #13 and a 4th rounder

Washington gets #3

The draft value chart is out guys, we should take what we can get!

Overreact much? Just because it might be smart to take slightly less than "fair market value" doesn't mean we're going to get assraped.

[KChiefs1]

<HR>NFL Draft Rumors: If You Fear Mark Sanchez, You May Be In Luck (http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/?p=10393)

April 20, 2009 By: Scott Category: Cleveland Browns (http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/?cat=3)

http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/mark-sanchez-6-212x300.jpg (http://www.waitingfornextyear.com/?p=10393)

With the NFL draft less than a week away, we will likely be inundated with rumor and speculation as to who will go where and at what pick. What GMs are talking trade. And what wide receiver the Lions will take with the first pick overall.

Okay, that last one may be more wishful thinking than anything, but even here at WFNY have we been discussing as much “talk” as we can. We can’t put much credence into pre-draft rumors as these are mostly a mirage. This morning, Mike Greenberg had a great point that there is nothing to gain by telling the truth at this stage; coaches and GMs have everything to gain by telling a lie.

But with all of this said, Browns fans that fear the team selecting USC’s Mark Sanchez with the fifth overall selection may want to choose to believe a recent piece by Peter King (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/04/20/draft/index.html?eref=si_topstories) over at Sports Illustrated.
[Scott] Pioli, the rookie Kansas City general manager, has the distinction in this decade of being part of the tradingest draft-day team in the league. [...] Snyder, the Washington owner, has one pick in the top 75, the 13th overall. He was willing to trade that pick plus next year’s first-round pick and something else to get Jay Cutler from Denver to replace Jason Campbell at quarterback. That failed, but I’m told Snyder is beyond smitten with Sanchez and will likely pursue him this week.
The thinking is that Scott Pioli doesn’t feel that any player in this draft is worth a double-figure signing bonus that would come with the third overall pick. Snyder, on the other hand, is not afraid to pay anyone an exorbanent amount of money as he recently gave $100 million to defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth. Would adding Sanchez to the mix help or hurt Washington’s claim of “Off-Season Champs (http://misterirrelevant.com/index.php/2009/04/16/dmv-skins-want-sanchez-oh-hell-no/)?”

There has also been some thinking that all of the Eric Mangini-Pete Caroll-Mark Sanchez talk over the last week or so may actually be a way to get others to do such a thing. If the team does in fact want Aaron Curry (whom is widely considered the safest selection in the top 10 - and this team can ill afford to miss here), having Kansas City move out of third slot is crucial. If Washington does in fact move up, you can just picture Mangini and George Kokinis high-fiving. But not so fast…

The down side to this is that Seattle (selecting fourth) recently traded away their Pro Bowl linebacker Julian Peterson to the Lions. Since they now have a hole at SAM, Curry could actually be a fairly ideal selection for them assuming that they cannot find an heir apparent to their veteran quarterback Matt Hasselbeck. It’s too bad that we can’t have a Universal Draft like Michael Silver put together. I’d love to have DeMarcus Ware with the fifth selection (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Ar.tIDGc.cDxsryNfGfPl35DubYF?slug=ms-thegameface041709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns).

As of now, consensus mock drafts have both Baylor’s Jason Smith and Georgia’s Stafford in the top five. The question marks fall in three through 10, as any of the following will be up for grabs: Curry, Eugene Monroe, Michael Crabtree, BJ Raji, Sanchez and even Andre Smith. Lane Adkins has recently inserted Tyson Jackson (http://cle.scout.com/2/857969.html) in to the mix - even though most mock’s have the LSU DE/OLB coming off of the board in the mid-to-late teens. If one thing is for certain, it’s that no one really knows what’s going to happen.

But one thing appears to be less likely than last week: Mark Sanchez may not be there at five by the time the Browns draft. For better or worse.

[KChiefs1]

Washington sniffing around Seattle's No. 4 pick? (http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/seahawks/2009/04/17/washington_snif.html)

Posted by Danny O'Neil (http://search.nwsource.com/search?sort=date&from=ST&source=ST&byline=Danny%20O%27Neil)

The Washington Post's Jason La Canfora says Washington and the New York Jets are two teams interested in moving up in the draft order to choose USC quarterback this report right here (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/2009-nfl-draft/more-on-orakpo-and-sanchez.html). Washington currently holds the No. 13 overall pick.
"I continue to hear that the Skins' primary focus is to move up to draft USC quarterback Mark Sanchez ... Moving up for Sanchez will likely require that the Redskins move to the third or fourth spot. Both Kansas City and Seattle are amenable to dealing down, according to sources. The New York Jets, who pick at 17, are the other team highly motivated to move up and get Sanchez. "Several sources have suggested the Redskins have begun to send out feelers on what it might take to get Seattle's pick, and the Seahawks, at this stage, would likely seek two first-round picks on the high end. That was a price the Redskins were willing to pay for Chad Johnson last year and Jay Cutler a few weeks back, although neither deal was completed."
-- Jason La Canfora, Washington Post
La Canfora points out it's unlikely a trade would be done until the day before the draft. It's probably safe to take that a step further even. If Washington is trading up specifically to get Sanchez, then Washington is going to wait until it's sure that Sanchez is available before pulling the trigger.

[htismaqe]

La Canfora points out it's unlikely a trade would be done until the day before the draft. It's probably safe to take that a step further even. If Washington is trading up specifically to get Sanchez, then Washington is going to wait until it's sure that Sanchez is available before pulling the trigger.

There's NO chance that a deal will get done any sooner than when Goodell is standing on the stage. If the Skins trade with Seattle or KC any earlier than that, they've basically told the Jets or Broncos that they need to work a deal with the Rams.

[SAUTO]

There's NO chance that a deal will get done any sooner than when Goodell is standing on the stage. If the Skins trade with Seattle or KC any earlier than that, they've basically told the Jets or Broncos that they need to work a deal with the Rams.

now THAT would be hilarious, let snyder trade with seattle and then let us assrape some other team for the three to get ahead of washington(actually snyder MAY be that stoopid:D)

[Coogs]

But one thing appears to be less likely than last week: Mark Sanchez may not be there at five by the time the Browns draft. For better or worse.

Then trade up to #3 to get him. Good greif! If the Browns are going to get Sanchez, they are probably going to deal Quinn for a first round pick, and if they deal Edwards for another first round pick, then they should have plenty of ammo. They also have two 2nd round picks. If they want Sanchez trade up and get him.

[milkman]

I think we should give Snyder the #3 overall for their #13 and Marques Hagans.

[SAUTO]

I think we should give Snyder the #3 overall for their #13 and Marques Hagans.

ROFL

[Nightfyre]

Mmmm im dreaming of a scenario in which we acquire Edwards to swap picks with the Browns. Carry on.

[SAUTO]

Mmmm im dreaming of a scenario in which we acquire Edwards to swap picks with the Browns. Carry on.

that would work for us. well except for the drops:D but if haley could get them on the juggs machine and get through that then...

[SBK]

Mmmm im dreaming of a scenario in which we acquire Edwards to swap picks with the Browns. Carry on.

That would be awesome. He's a total douche that lead the league in drops, and he wants $10,000,000 a year. Great move!!!

[Mecca]

Mmmm im dreaming of a scenario in which we acquire Edwards to swap picks with the Browns. Carry on.

I seriously doubt they'd do that, they can likely get a 1st and something else straight up for Edwards.

[Nightfyre]

I seriously doubt they'd do that, they can likely get a 1st and something else straight up for Edwards.

I'm just thinking they can make something work. This would be miraculous for a couple reasons: First: Braylon Edwards would be perfect opposite Bowe. Second: Haley could maximize their usage. Third: We would still have ammunition with which we could move down and substantially improve the defense.

[aturnis]

if all this rumor is true..that denver, washington, seattle are interested in sanchez than we have leverage and a very valuable pick

if

Eh, eh eh...don't forget about Cleveland.

[Coogs]

The Browns also have pick 36 and 50 in the 2nd round. #5 (1700 points) and #36 (550 points) would be pretty nice.

[MoreLemonPledge]

Obligatory "SHAUN ROGERS!!!!!!!!1" post...

[ChiefsCountry]

Washington would be an ideal spot for Sanchez. First of all he would be in the NFC, we only see once every 4 years unlike Denver. Also I would rather have a first round pick next year in a defense heavy draft. But for Redskins, they would have Campbell play out this year as he is a free agent. If he blows up they franchise his ass or ship him out, if he sucks Sanchez is ready.

[htismaqe]

The Browns also have pick 36 and 50 in the 2nd round. #5 (1700 points) and #36 (550 points) would be pretty nice.

We need to trade down further than #5, IMO.

[Frankie]

He was being sarcastic.

OH!!,.... Well that's very different,....... NEVER MIND!


http://affordablehousinginstitute.org/blogs/us/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/imagesemily-2-small.jpg

[Frankie]

Washington sniffing around Seattle's No. 4 pick?

Why would they sniff at some NFC team's ass when our ass is in the AFC?

[DrRyan]

This would be about as good as it gets if the Redskins trade this year's first round pick, a third this year and their first round pick next year.

If they(or other teams) are unwilling to make a trade happen, draft Sanchez and hold him for ransom. The Redskins, Jets, Bucs, Vikings, Jags, 49ers and Donkeys would all have lost the option of getting a true QBOTF(I am not sold on Freeman one bit) and one of them will pony up to make the trade.

[Hydrae]

We need to trade down further than #5, IMO.

Curry more palatable at 5 then at 3? Raji is probably still there as well. And now you have your 2nd round pick back for whoever has slid.

[KChiefs1]

We need to trade down further than #5, IMO.

I've seen teams do this...

trade down to #5...then trade with it to #8 then trade down with it to #10....you could probably add several picks just by doing this gradually instead with one team. I remember some team doing this...

[Pioli Zombie]

No. A 2 and 3 next year is equivalent to a 3 and 4 this year.

That'd be trading #3 overall for #13, two 3rds and a 4th. No thanks.

As Chris Rock would say, are you out your #*?*# mind??

This year the value at #13 isn't a lot lower than the #3. In fact, because of the money you have to dish out to #3 you might be better off at #13. Then you add 2 threes and a four. With Scott Pioli picking, not Carl Peterson. That's 4 players. I'd do that in a heartbeat. But of course I'd rather have either #13 and next years first round or Denvers #12 and #18
Any of the deals would be a GREAT day for the KC Chiefs
Posted via Mobile Device

[Hootie]

I say take Sanchez at #3 and then play hardball with the other teams...worst case scenario we have two QB's...best case scenario we get a monster deal from 9 teams bidding against one another.

[Hootie]

I've seen teams do this...

trade down to #5...then trade with it to #8 then trade down with it to #10....you could probably add several picks just by doing this gradually instead with one team. I remember some team doing this...

we should keep doing it until we get every pick in the 2nd round

[Hootie]

I'd say the success rate of a player in the 3rd round is what (I'm talking about quality starter, not necessarily pro bowler, but not something shitty like Tank Tyler)...15%?

Drafturbators are so obsessed with picks...

[Mecca]

If you hit on 3rd rounders at a 15% rate you're team will never win anything....you're 1st 3 picks need to hit at a consistent rate.

[Hootie]

If you hit on 3rd rounders at a 15% rate you're team will never win anything....you're 1st 3 picks need to hit at a consistent rate.

well what is the league wide success rate?

25%

35%

[Mecca]

well what is the league wide success rate?

25%

35%

Um depends on the teams honestly, if you hit on 2nd and 3rd round picks at a Carl Peterson rate you're going to fail.

I can't really give you a profound percentage unless you want to start looking at good teams that would tell you the rate you need to hit at.

[EyePod]

Not last year when they dropped in the first round. Pioli is looking to do what's best for his club. He isn't CP, he doesn't have to 'win' every negotiation.

I will be surprised if the Chiefs pick #3. I am hopeful that the Broncos and Redskins both love Sanchez and the Chiefs can cash in.

But, if Pioli is offered anyting within reason, I think he will take it...especially this year.

If he were offered the same deal the Chiefs were offered for the fifth pick last year, I bet he jumps all over it.

Why does this guy have positive rep? I've never heard him say anything good.

[EyePod]

I'd say the success rate of a player in the 3rd round is what (I'm talking about quality starter, not necessarily pro bowler, but not something shitty like Tank Tyler)...15%?

Drafturbators are so obsessed with picks...

Tank ate up double teams last year. Isn't that his job?

[Mecca]

Why does this guy have positive rep? I've never heard him say anything good.

That's a pretty good question....it's one of life's mysteries I think.

I could probably make him red with 1 neg rep if I wanted to though.

[Pioli Zombie]

Assuming Jesus is the only untouchable, I would consider dealing Moses, Daniel, David and John the Baptist for Paul, Peter,John and the 2 Marys.
Posted via Mobile Device

[MahiMike]

Even if we don't get full value for #3, who cares? It's better than overpaying someone and we'll get a 2'fer. It's almost like a 3some!

[splatbass]

NO trades #10, #78 = 1500
NE trades #7, #164 = 1526.8

How is that not consistent with the draft trade value chart?

Throwing in a 6th round pick to get the deal done is a lot different than the 200-800 point hit some people want to take in dealing #3 overall.

The draft chart is a guideline, it wasn't carved on stone tablets and handed down on the mountain to Moses. If Pioli can get what he thinks is the best deal available for the team he should take it, regardless of the draft chart, especially considering he doesn't feel there are any players that are worth picking at #3.

[ChiefsCountry]

Here is the deal I would do:
#3 for #13, #80, Redskin's first round pick next year, and Malcolm Kelly.

[Mecca]

EW why would you want Malcolm Kelly?

[Miles]

Why does this guy have positive rep? I've never heard him say anything good.

Nor sensible.

[ChiefsCountry]

EW why would you want Malcolm Kelly?

or Devin Thomas doesn't matter which.

[Mecca]

or Devin Thomas doesn't matter which.

Actually it does...

If you weren't aware, Kelly is the guy who ran bad 40's after one of which in front of a bunch of team reps threw a temper tantrum...a doctor basically said he had the worst knee's that he'd ever seen and wasn't sure he could even be cleared to play at all..

And then he proceeded to sit on IR all of last year, Malcolm Kelly has no NFL future.

[ChiefsCountry]

Actually it does...

If you weren't aware, Kelly is the guy who ran bad 40's after one of which in front of a bunch of team reps threw a temper tantrum...a doctor basically said he had the worst knee's that he'd ever seen and wasn't sure he could even be cleared to play at all..

And then he proceeded to sit on IR all of last year, Malcolm Kelly has no NFL future.

Good to know.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Looks like Peter King will be setting up shop in KC to cover the draft:

"Then let's go find him and kill him and get rid of the sonofabitch."

['Hamas' Jenkins]

well what is the league wide success rate?

25%

35%

The Colts hit a higher percentage than that with their 5th round picks.

[Pioli Zombie]

Here's what I think I think I'm thinking. Peter King should get the red ball in the mouth treatment that Marcellus got in Pulp Fiction.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Coogs]

We need to trade down further than #5, IMO.

We could always shop #5 if we land there.

#1 Lions - Stafford
#2 Rams - Smith
#3 Browns - Sanchez
#4 Seahawks _________


The Seahawks can not take everybody. Monroe, Curry, Crabtree. Maybe someone would want to jump up a spot or two to get one of these players. :shrug:

[DaKCMan AP]

The draft chart is a guideline, it wasn't carved on stone tablets and handed down on the mountain to Moses. If Pioli can get what he thinks is the best deal available for the team he should take it, regardless of the draft chart, especially considering he doesn't feel there are any players that are worth picking at #3.

You can make unsupported claims all you like, however if you look at past history most teams follow the draft chart closely. The Patriots and Pioli have made many draft trades that adhere to the value chart.

[DaKCMan AP]

As Chris Rock would say, are you out your #*?*# mind??

This year the value at #13 isn't a lot lower than the #3. In fact, because of the money you have to dish out to #3 you might be better off at #13. Then you add 2 threes and a four. With Scott Pioli picking, not Carl Peterson. That's 4 players. I'd do that in a heartbeat. But of course I'd rather have either #13 and next years first round or Denvers #12 and #18
Any of the deals would be a GREAT day for the KC Chiefs
Posted via Mobile Device

If the Chiefs traded #3 for #13, 2 3rds and a 4th I'd be pissed.

[Pioli Zombie]

If the Chiefs traded #3 for #13, 2 3rds and a 4th I'd be pissed.

Ok. Why?
Posted via Mobile Device

[DaKCMan AP]

Ok. Why?
Posted via Mobile Device

Because we're giving up a lot of value. You can argue until you're blue in the face that this draft class is weak and that #3 is not much better than #13 but you have nothing to back that up with. Show me where a top-5 pick has EVER been traded for such low compensation. Although, contrary to evidence, some like to believe the draft value chart is nothing more than a guideline, teams consistently follow it. More importantly, Pioli's draft trades with the Patriots closely adhere to it.

[Pioli Zombie]

Because we're giving up a lot of value. You can argue until you're blue in the face that this draft class is weak and that #3 is not much better than #13 but you have nothing to back that up with. Show me where a top-5 pick has EVER been traded for such low compensation. Although, contrary to evidence, some like to believe the draft value chart is nothing more than a guideline, teams consistently follow it. More importantly, Pioli's draft trades with the Patriots closely adhere to it.

Fair enough. I was just wanting to know your reasoning. I'm just looking at it as 4 players for 1 with the guy they are getting at 13 just about as good as 3. Pioli is good at making 3rd and 4th round picks mean something. Koppen, Samuel, Wilson etc.
Posted via Mobile Device

[tooge]

So, what is wrong with the plan of drafting sanchez if nobody is willing to trade? San Diego did it with great success with Manning.

[SAUTO]

So, what is wrong with the plan of drafting sanchez if nobody is willing to trade? San Diego did it with great success with Manning.

i would guess that the deal was already agreed to, providing rivers was still on the board

[htismaqe]

This year the value at #13 isn't a lot lower than the #3.

Absolutely, unequivocally, 100% WRONG.

The VALUE at #13 is infinitely BETTER than at #3. You're going to get a player that is only MARGINALLY less-talented and you're going to get them at ONE SIXTH the money.

[splatbass]

You can make unsupported claims all you like, however if you look at past history most teams follow the draft chart closely. The Patriots and Pioli have made many draft trades that adhere to the value chart.

If Pioli doesn't feel that there is anyone at #3 that has #3 value, and the only trade offers he gets are less than the chart says they should get, then he has a choice. Draft a player that doesn't have #3 value or make a trade for less than #3 value. Ether way he isn't getting #3 value, so he has to pick what he thinks is the best deal for the team.

Sometimes you have to take what you can get. If he thinks getting more picks will give him more (at less than chart value) than he will get picking someone at #3 then he will (and should) take it.

[Nightfyre]

Ya know, the more I think about it, the more I like the braylon edwards scenario. Maybe we trade our first for their second this year, first next year, and edwards. Thoughts?
Posted via Mobile Device

[DaKCMan AP]

Ya know, the more I think about it, the more I like the braylon edwards scenario. Maybe we trade our first for their second this year, first next year, and edwards. Thoughts?
Posted via Mobile Device

Why would you want a WR that can't catch?

[Nightfyre]

Haley will make him catch.
Posted via Mobile Device

[L.A. Chieffan]

nobody wants a high draft pick i heard it yo.

[kcbubb]

Absolutely, unequivocally, 100% WRONG.

The VALUE at #13 is infinitely BETTER than at #3. You're going to get a player that is only MARGINALLY less-talented and you're going to get them at ONE SIXTH the money.

wrong... winning is more important to the owners than players salaries. and the difference in 3 and 13 is likely the difference in Eugene Monroe and Andre Smith. Smith is extremely risky.

or maybe Sanchez and Freeman. I don't think Freeman will go that high, but you get the point.

[htismaqe]

wrong... winning is more important to the owners than players salaries. and the difference in 3 and 13 is likely the difference in Eugene Monroe and Andre Smith. Smith is extremely risky.

The difference between say Curry and Malaluga isn't worth the money. And if you don't think they care about such things, I can't do anything but laugh.

That's beyond stupid.

[Pioli Zombie]

Ya know, the more I think about it, the more I like the braylon edwards scenario. Maybe we trade our first for their second this year, first next year, and edwards. Thoughts?
Posted via Mobile Device

Holy God that would be a GREAT trade if it happened.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Brock]

wrong... winning is more important to the owners than players salaries.

ROFL

[Pioli Zombie]

Is it me or in the film Aaron Curry looks too small to be a dominant mlb. He athletic and all fine but......
Posted via Mobile Device

[raybec 4]

Why would you want a WR that can't catch?

you mean ANOTHER wr that can't catch?

[Chiefaholic]

Ok Guys, I think we should trade with Washington like this:

KC gets the #13 and a 4th rounder

Washington gets #3

The draft value chart is out guys, we should take what we can get!

You're a retard

[Pioli Zombie]

I like cheese
Posted via Mobile Device

[ct]

If Pioli doesn't feel that there is anyone at #3 that has #3 value, and the only trade offers he gets are less than the chart says they should get, then he has a choice. Draft a player that doesn't have #3 value or make a trade for less than #3 value. Ether way he isn't getting #3 value, so he has to pick what he thinks is the best deal for the team.

Sometimes you have to take what you can get. If he thinks getting more picks will give him more (at less than chart value) than he will get picking someone at #3 then he will (and should) take it.

This

[kcbubb]

ROFL

I should probably rephrase that a little. Really, it depends on the owner first. Look at a guy like the Redskins owner. He obviously will spend whatever it takes to win. Jerry Jones is somewhat similar.

Winning also increases profit which in turn negates the high salaries. I would say that overall teams are definitely more concerned with winning that with salaries but balancing the salaries is something they are concerned with. But to say that the 13th pick is more valuable the 3rd pick is obviously not true because if it were the chiefs would just pass up the pick and pick when the value was best suited to them.

and by the way, what's with the shoes???

[kcbubb]

The difference between say Curry and Malaluga isn't worth the money. And if you don't think they care about such things, I can't do anything but laugh.

That's beyond stupid.

I never said they don't care. I said that #3 is worth a lot more than #13 even with the difference in pay. Could you see the chiefs swapping for the #13 pick straight up???? of course not. If they were equal value that would be fair, but it is obviously not, so they wouldn't make the trade. The higher salary does not decrease the value that much.

[Brock]

I should probably rephrase that a little. Really, it depends on the owner first. Look at a guy like the Redskins owner. He obviously will spend whatever it takes to win. Jerry Jones is somewhat similar.

Those two aren't what I consider to be owners who are models for today's game. They think spending more money than anyone else means winning. It doesn't work that way.

[htismaqe]

I never said they don't care. I said that #3 is worth a lot more than #13 even with the difference in pay. Could you see the chiefs swapping for the #13 pick straight up???? of course not. If they were equal value that would be fair, but it is obviously not, so they wouldn't make the trade. The higher salary does not decrease the value that much.

The PICKS aren't equal value.

The PLAYERS are.

And you just wait, you're gonna see top 10 picks traded this year for alot less points than they would have gotten in the past because NOBODY wants to pay Ferrari prices for these Chevy Malibus.

You're not truly this dense, are you?

[milkman]

i would guess that the deal was already agreed to, providing rivers was still on the board

The Chargers and Giants negotiated right until the last minute, but could not come to an agreement.

The Chargers took Manning and forced the Giants hand.

[milkman]

You're a retard

Actually, I believe that you're the retard, since you missed the obvious sarcasm of that post .

[DTLB58]

Why would you want a WR that can't catch?

Especially since that would give us the WR's that finished 1 and 2 in drops last year.

[kcbubb]

The PICKS aren't equal value.

The PLAYERS are.

And you just wait, you're gonna see top 10 picks traded this year for alot less points than they would have gotten in the past because NOBODY wants to pay Ferrari prices for these Chevy Malibus.

You're not truly this dense, are you?


hmmm... so the picks don't equal the players chosen with the picks. don't think so and there is a big difference, especially at three. the third pick gives you Raji, Monroe, Sanchez, Crab or Curry. the next player at those positions is a significant drop off.

[whoman69]

Teams are waiting to get Sanchez if he falls out of the top 4 because that's where the big money is. Its been a long time since someone traded up into that range because the price has become so high. Washington may have the only owner that doesn't have to worry about those bonuses, but even they would be severely hamstrung if Sanchez comes in and fails. Anyone know what Campbell is making? If its too much there's no way they could afford both he and Sanchez on the roster. That means Sanchez has no time to learn the trade, he is in there from week one.

[eazyb81]

The #3 for the #13, their 3rd this year, and next year's 1st.

Done and done.

[The Bad Guy]

The #3 for the #13, their 3rd this year, and next year's 1st.

Done and done.

Their first next year or the Bears first?

Either way, I want both their firsts to move up this year.

[ChiefsCountry]

Their first next year or the Bears first?

Either way, I want both their firsts to move up this year.

Thats the Redskins not the Donks.

[ChiefsCountry]

QB is the only positon where even a top 5 pick's pay is in line with the position. Every legit starting QB makes a boat load of cash and owners are willing to pay it.

[Frankie]

Really, it depends on the owner first. Look at a guy like the Redskins owner. He obviously will spend whatever it takes to win. Jerry Jones is somewhat similar.

I don't like either one, but Jerry Jones likes to win, while Snyder likes to collect toys.