ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Earl Thomas a longshot to be a Chief (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=317638)

Chris Meck 09-27-2018 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 13766824)
I forgot about the 2 2nds.

I will also say that we have a 7th -- we swapped 7ths with the 9ers.

1st
2nd
3rd
6th
7th

Still not a great haul. We'll have to trade down from that 3rd or 2nd to accumulate more Day Two action.

**** it. like the 4th and 5th are worth more than a 1, 2, and 3? We don't need projects, we need solid football players. (yes I know, Tyreek and Hunt, blah, blah blah. I'd still rather have a 1, 2, and 3 than two 4ths and 3 6's or some such shit.)

htismaqe 09-27-2018 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Meck (Post 13766841)
**** it. like the 4th and 5th are worth more than a 1, 2, and 3? We don't need projects, we need solid football players. (yes I know, Tyreek and Hunt, blah, blah blah. I'd still rather have a 1, 2, and 3 than two 4ths and 3 6's or some such shit.)

Totally agree. This defense needs playmakers in a bad way. Try to trade a 2nd and 4th or 5th for Thomas, leaving us with 1, 2, and 3. The rest of it is fodder for more trades.

Halfcan 09-27-2018 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe (Post 13766795)
I'd give up the 1st any day. Not impressed with Dee Ford and he's the best analog we have.

I am sure that is what the Seahags are wanting.

If ET plays lights out for us, that #32 pick in the 1st round won't sting too bad. :)

CoMoChief 09-27-2018 10:14 AM

Trade Breeland Speaks for a 4th or 5th rd pick

O.city 09-27-2018 10:16 AM

Yeah, I don't care about a pick after round 4. They're nice if they pan out obviously, but the chances aren't just very good.

O.city 09-27-2018 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun (Post 13766824)
I forgot about the 2 2nds.

I will also say that we have a 7th -- we swapped 7ths with the 9ers.

1st
2nd
3rd
6th
7th

Still not a great haul. We'll have to trade down from that 3rd or 2nd to accumulate more Day Two action.

Man, I mean sure, I'd love to have a 4th and 5th, but you can essentially get those guys as UDFA. Whats the real difference between a 5th and an UDFA?

Halfcan 09-27-2018 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 13766856)
Yeah, I don't care about a pick after round 4. They're nice if they pan out obviously, but the chances aren't just very good.

That late rounds have been good for us- it is the 2 round we keep taking longshot prospects. :shake:

The Franchise 09-27-2018 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halfcan (Post 13766862)
That late rounds have been good for us- it is the 2 round we keep taking longshot prospects. :shake:

Then you take that 2nd round pick and use it to trade up in the 1st for the guy that you want.

O.city 09-27-2018 10:20 AM

That's true.

Whether they trade for Thomas or not, it won't matter if they keep blowing the 2nd and 3rd rounders.

It's ****ing awful. Stop taking projects there like Kpass. Stop taking good football players and putting them at different positions.

Seriously, Speaks was a good football player at Ole Miss. He wasn't a blue chip guy, but he was just a good solid football player on the DL. So lets draft him and make him stand up and do something he's never done.

htismaqe 09-27-2018 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 13766869)
That's true.

Whether they trade for Thomas or not, it won't matter if they keep blowing the 2nd and 3rd rounders.

It's ****ing awful. Stop taking projects there like Kpass. Stop taking good football players and putting them at different positions.

Seriously, Speaks was a good football player at Ole Miss. He wasn't a blue chip guy, but he was just a good solid football player on the DL. So lets draft him and make him stand up and do something he's never done.

:clap:

nychief 09-27-2018 10:24 AM

We aren’t trading for Earl Thomas.

O.city 09-27-2018 10:25 AM

I just hate that.

The teams that consistently draft well don't do it because they take better players. Theres no secret formula.

Take guys and ask them to do what they're good at and develop them to do the rest along the way.

Maybe I'm oversimplifying it or something. It just doesn't seem like rocket surgery.

The Franchise 09-27-2018 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city (Post 13766891)
I just hate that.

The teams that consistently draft well don't do it because they take better players. Theres no secret formula.

Take guys and ask them to do what they're good at and develop them to do the rest along the way.

Maybe I'm oversimplifying it or something. It just doesn't seem like rocket surgery.

The NFL is filled with guys who all want to look smarter than everyone else. Sometimes it works.....more of then than not though....it doesn't.

arrowheadnation 09-27-2018 10:28 AM

Look...I just want to have the chance to moon some of you assholes that night during the Super Bowl celebration down at the P&L district, and I know there’s a lot better chance of it happening with Thomas...so for that reason, just make it work Veach.

O.city 09-27-2018 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pest (Post 13766895)
The NFL is filled with guys who all want to look smarter than everyone else. Sometimes it works.....more of then than not though....it doesn't.

Maybe that's true.

I get looking at what can translate and all. But hell, look how long it's taken them to do it with QB's. Finally that's getting into the league and holy shit, it works. It just doesn't seem like it's that hard to figure out.

Eric Murray was a corner in college, pretty good one. Lets draft him to play safety. Ok, I mean I get it. You don't think he has the foot speed or whatever. Fine.

I get it. I also understand development isn't always a linear line. Maybe he figures it out and plays better. I think he was better against SF than before but he's still having issues.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.