IMO reaching for Dan Williams at five would be a disaster with taking Okung(or another OT) there the only thing worse.

Berry, OLB and Thomas or Troup would be much much better than reaching for Williams at 5.
Posted via Mobile Device

Okay about everyone realizes we almost have to take Cody at 2A if he's there.

But what if he's gone?

Our defense is going to be terrible again, and we are going to waste another year of proper development if we go 2010 with Edwards or another crap player at NT.

oh let's rehash this again, can we please?! ;)

That's what I'm saying. I mean we can't assume he'll be there at 2.

Perhaps there's other guys in the draft that could fit the bill.

My gut feeling is that if they feel that Cody is going to be a real good NT, you do whatever you have to do to move around to get him.

WTF are you talking about???????

Are you saying that just if we stay put? What if we drop back or trade out and then trade back up to get one?

Point Blank, no matter how the round plays out, you'd "wash your hands of Pioli" for getting the most essential piece to running a 3-4??????

Really don't understand that train of thought.

Also, I don't think that Williams will make it out of the top 12.

Cleveland is picking at 7 and cannot rely on Rogers health.
Buffalo at 9 is switching to a 3-4, if we can convince them to trade up for Clausen, I'd have no problem taking Williams here.
Denver at 10 has Ronald Fields and needs to upgrade.
Miami at 12 is relying on a 35 year old.

Add in the fact that Pittsburgh, NYJ & San Diego are all drafting after them and there is no way that Williams makes it out of the top of the first round and Cody will probably be gone before we draft in the second.

The way I read your statement it almost sounds like by "everyone", you mean "the front office". Almost as if you were sitting in the war room with Haley, Pioli, Crennel & Weis and just telling them that. As if Pioli would just turn to you and reply "Well of course we realize that eazyb, what do we look like?"

Since that's not the case, I have to ask: You have watched how the Chiefs have drafted before, right?

The Chiefs front office has disappointed me too many times in the past.

If they would have drafted Raji last year, this wouldn't be an issue.
If they would have drafted Orakpo, we'd have been able to get some pressure and not rank near dead last in the league.

yes, lets reach for need with a top 5 pick two years in a row. sounds like how you build a winner to me.

This draft isn't like 2004 when Wilfork fell to New England because hardly anyone was running a 3-4 and they were the only team drafting in the first that actually needed a NT.

Which makes moving to a 3-4 in 2009 when your roster was built for a 4-3 all the more stupid.

Giving up a top 5 pick just to make sure you adress one problem is stupid. You take the playmaker at 5 and hope Cody falls to the 2nd. If Cody doesn't fall you take a chance with a guy like Cam Thomas with the late 2nd or early 3rd. Chances are he won't be the big impact tackle we're looking for but I can deal with it for another year if we have Berry ball hawking in the secondary. You take the playmakers when they're there. Reaching on players in the 1st just to fit your system is how you miss out on the impact players this team lacks and needs.

I thought it was obvious that by "everyone" I meant people on Chiefs Planet. I have no idea what the front office thinks, nor does anyone else, so it's a waste of time to speculate too much on that.

Being that I also agree that Williams and Cody will be gone by the Chiefs 2A pick. NC's Cam Thomas would be my pick for NT.

However since he apparently had a good Senior Bowl and I bet he has a good combine...he'll probably get picked up before Cody.

Or the meltdown that could occur will be KC waiting to see if Clausen falls to the late 1st round and uses their 2nd round picks to trade up...which...would make me snap.

Agreed X 10,000

I think that's debatable, especially considering our staff. During his tenure in New England, he traded down on more than one occassion, to address an area of need rather than staying put, picking up additional picks in the process.

If they feel that getting Berry (example only, don't care to debate him being the pick) is more beneficial to the overall team than say; trading our #5 (1700 pts) for Buffalo's #9 (1350), which we use on Dan Williams and we get an additional pick(s) in the process, I'm sure they'll do it.

Whether that's stupid or not is a matter of opinion, but the reason he took TJ last year so high was because he was a position of need and he didn't feel that the first round picks he was getting offers on were high enough to still get him later. Yes, he also didn't think the compensation he was getting in return was high enough either.

Fact is that if he is still following the NE blueprint, that I think most of us believe he is, then he's going to build his line first.

I think if Suh & McCoy go 1 & 2, followed by Bradford & Clausen, we'll be stuck at 5 and few teams if any will want to trade up for Berry. Its one thing to take a safety at 5 and another thing all together to trade up to 5 and take one. If Berry is off the board by 7 and Williams is there, I think Cleveland takes him or Bryant.