ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Albert/Joeckel perspective (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=272267)

el borracho 04-19-2013 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cdcox (Post 9601820)
How would you feel if the Chiefs had the #2 overall pick and packaged it and Albert for Joeckel? Because that's what the Chiefs are on the brink of doing.

#1 pick = 3000 points
#54 pick = 360 points

difference is 2640 points

#2 pick is worth 2600 points

Chiefs are going to invest 3000 - 360 = 2640 points to replace Albert with Joeckel. It could be a good deal for the Chiefs if 1) Albert is out of the league in two years, 2) Jockel is a HOFer and 3) the alternatives (like Geno) don't have very good careers.

Dorsey's view is probably that we are trading a left tackle and a future pick for a franchise QB while still having a full set of draft picks in 2013. I think everyone would trade Albert for a franchise QB, if that were the case. Problem is the fact that Alex Smith is not a franchise QB so, in reality, you have traded Albert for a backup QB and will promptly waste the number one pick in the draft to replace Albert. So devastatingly disappointing, in particular given the Chiefs history.

KC native 04-19-2013 09:37 AM

This shit is so infuriating. Good LTs can be found in every ****ing year of the draft. We have the 1.1 pick and these ****ing assholes insist on a LT.

Sweet Daddy Hate 04-19-2013 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Smith Fan (Post 9601876)
not necessarily, you arent even factoring the impact that Alex Smith has. Alex Smith, at least for this year, will outplay the 34th pick in the draft. So the value that you gave up, to what you get, will be less. Meaning the Chiefs won.

Dont you think?

Here's your analysis and "impact":

Jokel and Alice: useless bags o' ****.
Posted via Mobile Device

Sweet Daddy Hate 04-19-2013 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wonton Prejudice (Post 9601906)
post is spot on

we are paying a premium price to upgrade from "very good" LT to "hope this guy is elite."

it's like paying a website a premium price for chiefs news you already have.

LMAO I see what you did there...
Posted via Mobile Device

duncan_idaho 04-19-2013 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins (Post 9602125)
Fill in the blank: Albert is the ________ best tackle in the NFL

Fill in the blank: Joeckel will be the _____-best tackle in the NFL.

I'd go with 10th-15th.

Another fun fill-in-the-blank:

Alex Smith is the ______-best QB in the NFL.

I'd go with 15th/16th.

Sweet! We've used the Nos. 1, 34 picks AND Brandon Albert to acquire the 10th-best tackle, 15th-best QB and pick No. 52 in the NFL draft!

patteeu 04-19-2013 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry (Post 9602079)
The chart is from Jimmy Johnson era which is Plan B free agency and before the big money rookies, its came full circle where its probably back to being more accurate.

The chart doesn't account for the fact that some years have a high value player like Andrew Luck in them and some don't. This one doesn't. In other words, the chart value of the first overall pick is too high, not too low as cdcox suggested. That's why the Chiefs are reportedly trying to trade down for a pittance.

Rain Man 04-19-2013 10:37 AM

If you want to [monty python] loooook on the bright si-ide of life [/python], the four offensive linemen selected with the #1 pick in the draft since 1960 were selected to 24 pro bowls so far and named to 15 all-pro teams. To date, 100% of eligible #1 o-linemen are in the Hall of Fame.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L2Wx230gYJw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L2Wx230gYJw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

saphojunkie 04-19-2013 10:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AussieChiefsFan (Post 9601860)
Those are 3 very big "ifs".

I don't want to hear about no mutha****in' IFS. All I want to hear from yo ass is, "you ain't got a problem, Jules. Go back in, chill them n****s out, and wait for the GENO, which should be comin' DI-reck-ly."

Sorter 04-19-2013 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 9603435)
If you want to [monty python] loooook on the bright si-ide of life [/python], the four offensive linemen selected with the #1 pick in the draft since 1960 were selected to 24 pro bowls so far and named to 15 all-pro teams. To date, 100% of eligible #1 o-linemen are in the Hall of Fame.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L2Wx230gYJw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L2Wx230gYJw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

LMAO

saphojunkie 04-19-2013 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC native (Post 9603262)
This shit is so infuriating. Good LTs can be found in every ****ing year of the draft. We have the 1.1 pick and these ****ing assholes insist on a LT.

I think they would argue that good QBs can not be found in every ****ing year of the draft, which is why we are where we are.

I think Geno is the real deal, and I'm frustrated that they don't. This regime now has the unenviable circumstance that their fate is not tied to the player they will draft, but the one they do not. Maybe Geno doesn't fit the scheme. Maybe Reid wouldn't be able to coach him right. But if Geno goes somewhere else and blossoms, Reid's fate will have been sealed before he started his first training camp.

Shit, man. I'd way rather have some influence over my destiny, rather than letting my destiny walk out the door and be controlled by rival.

tyton75 04-19-2013 11:09 AM

What if they want to use the 2nd rounder we would get to take a tackle because there is someone else at the top of the draft that isn't a tackle that they really like?

KCDC 04-19-2013 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 9603429)
Fill in the blank: Joeckel will be the _____-best tackle in the NFL.

I'd go with 10th-15th.

Another fun fill-in-the-blank:

Alex Smith is the ______-best QB in the NFL.

I'd go with 15th/16th.

Sweet! We've used the Nos. 1, 34 picks AND Brandon Albert to acquire the 10th-best tackle, 15th-best QB and pick No. 52 in the NFL draft!

You are being kind. Alex is not in the top half of QBs, notwithstanding the arguments about his wonderful QB rating. His own team didn't even want him. Only a couple of other teams were interested. Does that sound like a top half QB? No

I've argued Alex is the 30th best starting QB, There are a couple clearly worse. However, I have mellowed and am willing to say that there might be 6-12 worse. So, he's probably the 20th/21st best starter (giving him extra credit for ascending the past two years). If you go back a couple of years, he was the 32nd best QB.

Joeckel would be lucky to be the 10-15th best LT in his rookie year.

Fish 04-19-2013 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud (Post 9602069)
I'm not stating that teams haven't held true to the draft chart: I'm stating that it should be no longer relevant.

Football people are ****ing dumb. It's a network of "friends". Once one of these dumbshits figure out that the value has decreased radically due to the new CBA, they'll all fall in line.

Ironic considering that your current views align with those "Football people"...

duncan_idaho 04-19-2013 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCDC (Post 9603512)
You are being kind. Alex is not in the top half of QBs, notwithstanding the arguments about his wonderful QB rating. His own team didn't even want him. Only a couple of other teams were interested. Does that sound like a top half QB? No

I've argued Alex is the 30th best starting QB, There are a couple clearly worse. However, I have mellowed and am willing to say that there might be 6-12 worse. So, he's probably the 20th/21st best starter (giving him extra credit for ascending the past two years). If you go back a couple of years, he was the 32nd best QB.

Joeckel would be lucky to be the 10-15th best LT in his rookie year.

I was being conservative in my hate.

I rank them like this:
No doubt (as in, no one would consider trading one of these guys for Smith):
Brady
Manning
Manning
Brees
Rodgers
Kaerpernick
RGIII
Andrew Luck
Ben Roethlisberger
Russell Wilson
Joe Flacco (call him average if you want, but you're wrong. Flacco has done nothing but win and win playoff games from Day 1)

Unlikely: (GM would be looked at as crazy for swapping them)
Matt Ryan
Cam Newton
Matt Stafford

(Check-in, we're now at 15/30 QBs listed)

Similar:
Matt Schaub
Tony Romo
Philip Rivers
Andy Dalton
Sam Bradford

DaneMcCloud 04-19-2013 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish (Post 9603519)
Ironic considering that your current views align with those "Football people"...

My view? What view? That I don't give a shit? That POV?

Yeah, I don't give a shit that Brendan ****ing Albert, a slightly above average nearly 29 year old tackle for a shitty ****ing football team is being traded for a second round pick.

The ****ing guy was the "anchor" for two 2-14 teams, a 4-12 team, a 7-9 team and a 10-6 team. He's never been under ANY pressure to perform at a high level. He's not playing in New York or Philly or Washington or Dallas or Baltimore. He's played for a shit team and his play has been "okay".

Get the pick and move on. JFC.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:01 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.