ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   NFL Draft I'm going to post this analysis for fun, cause draft talk is all that matters (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=206560)

007 04-25-2009 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MediaCenterJunkie (Post 5704170)
Not really.

The Chiefs are in a ****ed up spot here. Nobody they pick at #3 is worth #3 money. They stall, pick sixth, they pay sixth pick money.

Philip Rivers was selected #4 overall by the Giants, he sat out because he wanted #1 money (even though Eli Manning was taken #1). In the end, he got #4 money.

But he was still picked number 4. Different situation.

No agent is going to let the Chiefs get away with paying number 6 money from the team that picked 3rd.

Buck 04-25-2009 12:26 AM

Minnesota was supposed to pick #7

Jacksonville picked Byron Leftwich at 7
Carolina picked Jordan Gross at 8
Minnesota picked Kevin Williams at 9

Leftwich Rookie Contract - $11 Mil Guaranteed / $30 Mil with incentives
Gross Rookie Contract -$11.5 Mil Guaranteed / $38.5 Mil with incentives
Williams Rookie Contract - $8 Mil Guaranteed / $12.5 Mil with incentives

Sweet Daddy Hate 04-25-2009 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5704139)
Herm didn't destroy our value at 3 and remove our second rounder by trading for a backup quarterback.

How conveniently they've pushed this salient fact from their minds.

We were set. We were so ****ing set to do right and have a phenomenal draft this year. Oh well, let the cluster**** begin.

"In to the breach for God knows what"!!!:doh!:

Buck 04-25-2009 12:30 AM

I found it.

Williams made a lot less than Leftwich and Gross.

KCDC 04-25-2009 01:25 AM

Interesting article. I'd be tempted to take an OT anyway. All 3-4 good ones will be gone by the time Buffalo picks at #11, then you dangle Monroe. They weren't willing to trade up, but now they salivate for having the most NFL ready LT and part with some value by giving us #11 and maybe their second.

ArrowheadMagic 04-25-2009 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5704072)
I want to know why Mayo is the one with the hype when he wasn't the #1 LB in his class...


Yes your boy Rivers, was a better player pre draft. But he got hurt. got to be on the field all 16 games to get the love. Like Rivers a lot. Still think Curry is better than both of them...worth #3? no, but better than moving Albert or drafting Crabtree.

SenselessChiefsFan 04-25-2009 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5704072)
I want to know why Mayo is the one with the hype when he wasn't the #1 LB in his class...

That was the one thing that I went BS when I read it. GM"s would take Mayo NOW over Curry because he proved it last year in the NFL. But, last year, Mayo wasn't the #1 guy and there is no way that Mayo was liked more going into last year's draft than Curry is in this years. Ridiculous.

SenselessChiefsFan 04-25-2009 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 5704142)
I enjoy how when you bring up the point that the Chiefs ruined their value themselves you get met with something like "Cassel rules!"

It is a ridiculous point. The Chiefs are better having Cassel, Vrabel and Curry/Crabtree/Raji/Monroe/Smith/Jackson than they are having Sanchez and whoever they got in the second round.

To me, I don't care what the position is, if the guy is a franchise type offensive or defensive position, it will be worth the #3 pick.

SenselessChiefsFan 04-25-2009 05:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SNR (Post 5704175)
"At least we don't have to take a risk with Matt Cassel. We're getting a proven commodity."


Remember that line? How did that go? All we did was STILL take a risk on an unproven guy (Cassel is unproven, yes. One season does not a QB make) AND further our risk at #3 overall by not drafting a QB.

I don't think that Cassel is unproven. But, I think he is more proven that Sanchez or Stafford. It isn't just about on the field, it is about everything that goes into being a QB. Pioli knows that Cassel is a hard worker.

Don't you think it is a bit ironic that his former offensive coordinator and GM both get into a bidding war for the guy because they want him to be the QB of their team. Yet, Sanchez's coach talks about how Sanchez isn't ready.

I know, I Know, Pete Carroll is just SO competetive that he is willing to submarine his own player's draft prospects even though he has never done anything like that before. I guess Sanchez is the first player he has ever had come out early.

It is ridiculous to assert that the #3 pick is any "more" risky for the Chiefs. QB's are risky like any other position.

kstater 04-25-2009 05:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FAX (Post 5704128)
Damn. Damn. Damn.

Of all the damn years to have the #3 pick. Damn.

This is all Herm's fault.

FAX

Don't worry, with next years class, and this years schedule, next year will be much better when we pick at #3.

SenselessChiefsFan 04-25-2009 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MediaCenterJunkie (Post 5704218)
I found it.

Williams made a lot less than Leftwich and Gross.

Were the lengths of the contracts the same? That may have played a part.

I remembering him holding for the money he 'would have' gotten. I thought he got it.

Don't forget that the Pats typically get their picks into camp on time. Doing something like that would likely cause a holdout.

Pioli Zombie 04-25-2009 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 5704139)
Herm didn't destroy our value at 3 and remove our second rounder by trading for a backup quarterback.

You keep saying this and it makes no sense. How did it destroy the value? Because they aren't now FORCED to draft the guy who nobody really knows how good he'll be to play qb at #3? Did you ever consider Sanchez may be David Klingler or Heath Shuler? Or Matt Leinhart?
Posted via Mobile Device

SenselessChiefsFan 04-25-2009 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioli Zombie (Post 5704380)
You keep saying this and it makes no sense. How did it destroy the value? Because they aren't now FORCED to draft the guy who nobody really knows how good he'll be to play qb at #3? Did you ever consider Sanchez may be David Klingler or Heath Shuler? Or Matt Leinhart?
Posted via Mobile Device

No, of course not. Sanchez is the only QB worth having. Sanchez would wipe his ass with Manning's beard, if Manning could grow a beard.

I wonder if five years from now everyone will really remember where they were on the side of this argument. Other than Mecca, I haven't really paid much attention to who is convinced that Sanchez will be great.

I guess I am going to have to start taking notes on who says what.

htismaqe 04-25-2009 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pioli Zombie (Post 5704380)
You keep saying this and it makes no sense. How did it destroy the value? Because they aren't now FORCED to draft the guy who nobody really knows how good he'll be to play qb at #3? Did you ever consider Sanchez may be David Klingler or Heath Shuler? Or Matt Leinhart?
Posted via Mobile Device

Two of the ex-GMs on NFL Network just said 10 minutes ago that Sanchez is the more NFL-ready of the two QB's available. They seem to think he'll be fine.

And Klingler and Shuler both played in run and shoot offenses in college. There's not a comparison there.

htismaqe 04-25-2009 06:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kstater (Post 5704372)
Don't worry, with next years class, and this years schedule, next year will be much better when we pick at #3.

Better for what?

Certainly not for QB.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:47 AM.

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