ChiefsPlanet
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Saccopoo Memorial Draft Forum (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   SNR's Pipedream Chiefs Mock 04/22 (Now with more trade down!) (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=283157)

The Franchise 04-22-2014 03:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kccrow (Post 10578527)
Wow Pest, if you can do that kind of rape job to the 9ers for our 23rd pick, I vote you new assistant GM in charge of trades....

The realistic trade value for #23 if dropping down to #30 is that we'll also receive #94 (R3) and #170 (R5). That is a far cry from two 2nd round picks.


Edit: As a reference.... Last year the trade from 22 to 30 netted #92 and #198.
ROFL

This wasn't me. The ****ing thing starts out with SNR

kccrow 04-22-2014 03:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 10578562)
ROFL

This wasn't me. The ****ing thing starts out with SNR
Yep lol, I'm not feeling well today and thus cannot READ. :D My bad bro. hahah.

Saccopoo 04-22-2014 03:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pestilence (Post 10578562)
ROFL

This wasn't me. The ****ing thing starts out with SNR
Weird...

I always thought you two were the same guy.

RealSNR 04-22-2014 03:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kccrow (Post 10578527)
Wow Pest, if you can do that kind of rape job to the 9ers for our 23rd pick, I vote you new assistant GM in charge of trades....

The realistic trade value for #23 if dropping down to #30 is that we'll also receive #94 (R3) and #170 (R5). That is a far cry from two 2nd round picks.


Edit: As a reference.... Last year the trade from 22 to 30 netted #92 and #198.
Actually, I think maybe I was smoking crack. For some reason I was thinking about trading down into the 2nd and what would be required to compensate for that drop. Since the 9ers had two second round picks, I threw both of those in without realizing that I had already accounted for a trade down to the bottom of the first, not the top of the second.

I guess if you want to look at this idea with a more realistic lens, then just ignore either the Cody Latimer pick.

Wow, that was a ****up on my part.

Dunerdr 04-23-2014 08:09 AM
I'd jimp

planetdoc 04-23-2014 09:21 AM
like the idea of trading down, but dont think most of those players would be good value.

ct 04-23-2014 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNR (Post 10578593)
Actually, I think maybe I was smoking crack. For some reason I was thinking about trading down into the 2nd and what would be required to compensate for that drop. Since the 9ers had two second round picks, I threw both of those in without realizing that I had already accounted for a trade down to the bottom of the first, not the top of the second.

I guess if you want to look at this idea with a more realistic lens, then just ignore either the Cody Latimer pick.

Wow, that was a ****up on my part.
It was a fun pipedream! I'll give ya that!

My pipedream is Manziel or Bridgewater falls to our pick and we hold it for ransom somebody wanting to jump over Cincy perhaps, and we can squeeze better value for the QB prospect and get a 2nd round pick for moving back a few spots.

Bowser 04-23-2014 10:32 AM
Not that I hate the Charles Sims pick, but I'd switch Sims for a potential sleeper guy at TE there. I think our TE situation is ****ed with Kelce coming off microfracture and Fasano being our #1 guy.

RealSNR 04-23-2014 10:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowser (Post 10580087)
Not that I hate the Charles Sims pick, but I'd switch Sims for a potential sleeper guy at TE there. I think our TE situation is ****ed with Kelce coming off microfracture and Fasano being our #1 guy.
From what I've found, there aren't really any sleeper prospects.

You've got the big three (Ebron, ASJ, Amaro), a couple guys that can do some interesting stuff (Niklas, Fiedorowicz) and a giant crackhead (Colt Lyerla). The rest of the prospects are going to struggle to meddle around with Sean McGrath in terms of what they can do at the next level. There are no basketball-playing raw unbelievably athletic playmaking TEs who are sleepers in this draft. They're all slow ploddy big blocky prospects who will struggle to get open.

planetdoc 04-23-2014 11:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNR (Post 10580132)
There are no basketball-playing raw unbelievably athletic playmaking TEs who are sleepers in this draft.
Kelce's teamate:

Blake Annen
6-4, 247
4.41 forty.
http://www.nfl.com/draft/2014/profil...nen?id=2549907
http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings...2014&genpos=TE

RealSNR 04-23-2014 11:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by planetdoc (Post 10580240)
I should draft him in the 4th round instead of Sims? That's what I was responding to, that Sims is there because the TE talent at that range of the draft is pretty piss poor, unless you need an H-back. If that's the case, then you've got about 57,000 guys to choose from!

planetdoc 04-23-2014 12:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNR (Post 10580254)
I should draft him in the 4th round instead of Sims?
no, but I wouldnt draft sims either.
Here are the RB on my short list

BigCatDaddy 04-23-2014 05:00 PM
Needs more fullback.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:27 AM.
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

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