Deciding if it is worth it to trade down.

and it is

I think they are with Curry today or yesterday. I've read they have a second interview (not workout) with Curry for two weeks from now. They are supposed to work out Brown and a WR named Taurus Johnson.

http://www.arrowheadpride.com/2009/3...-kansas-city-c

Dwight Freeney speed and quickness:thumb:

Just a question:

Why are you so sold on a guy who started one year on defense for Cincinnati of all teams? A lot of teams are looking at him as a tight end.

Personally, this sounds like a recipe for disaster because he is a long, long way from a "Sure Thing" and the Chiefs have about 20 holes to fill.

I really feel we will trade down and get our 2nd rd pick back.:thumb: Casserly on NFLn was saying he sees us swapping with possibly Seattle or Cleveland depending on what Pioli/Haley value the most.

I saw some of the game film , and the guy made a Pat Swilling spin move that just floored the opposing tackle.I mean if this kid is raw, and he developed that rush move effectively within a year then he has very bright future as an OLB/DE.

Okay, I get that.

But a first? If he doesn't kick ass his first season, people are going to be all over his ass.

I've watched some clips and read reports and honestly, he sounds like a 3rd rounder to me. He has a very high ceiling (if he can get there) but a first, IMO, should be reserved for an immediate starter.

I guess we'll see...

Wait.....


You are advocating taking TE in the top ten?

Are you ****ing high?

Not when I typed that I wasn't.

I like getting the best football player possible, and Gresham is one of, if not the, best tight ends I've ever seen in college. I understand that there is a whole of people around here that like picking position value with their mocks or whathaveyou; e.g., *in the most whiny voice possible* "You don't pick linebackers in the top three!!!! Waaaaaaahhhhhhhh!!", etc.

Personally, I don't give a rat's patootie what position a guy plays. Get the best guy possible unless you got a great guy there already. To take a flyer on a boom/bust guy or a reach just because he plays a certain position that "considered" by some to be more important than another is not very intelligent in my book.

And it's because of this that certain positions are overvalued by the casual fan - positions such as cornerback, wide receiver, rush end, etc. Everyone likes to see replay highlights of a sack, of a douchey touchdown celebration by some Diva level wideout (who would have never have made that touchdown if they didn't get an amazingly good throw from their quarterback - a REAL position of importance), etc.

A football team is the sum of it's parts, and if you can get quality football players who have great instincts and talent at each position, that wins you football games. More often than not, it is the trenches type positions that ultimately win you football games over the long haul than the perceived glamour positions. Give me a top three middle linebacker over a top three rush backer all day long. Same with tight end and wide receiver. Same with safety versus cornerback. It's nice to have a little flash, but the substance has got to be there for a team to win games, and I'm a firm believer that that has to happen in the middle of the field, the trenches before it can happen on the outside "flashy" positions.

I was with you until this. Really? 3-4 ILB > 3-4 OLB? I know where you're coming from and agree for the most part, but I think that's wrong.

If you built a team that way, you'd basically stop the run and then get killed by teams that could throw the ball...

It was a great theory when it wasn't a passing league, now that it is, the highest valued defensive players are, pass rushers.

I think his theory is ok other than I think he's overvaluing some positions that you can get by at with an alright player.

If we trade with Denver, we better rape them like no other. Not just the 12 and 18. But their 12,18,79, and 185th. If Sanchez is really that important to them they can trade away their souls before they get to him. All in favor of us trading down better hope Brady Quinn stays a Brown.

Problem with that point is that the Chiefs, in the last 20 years, had two of the most dominant pass rushers of their day in DT and Jared Allen. Some success in the DT period, none in the JA period.

I fully understand the importance of a decent pass rush, but a good pass rush has to be married to a stable solid defense up the middle. Otherwise, that dominant pass rusher doesn't mean doodlely squat. It's about proper balance. About getting quality, and not necessarily the most dynamic player, but the most fundamentally sound, well rounded player at each position. The sum of the whole is greater than the individual parts. It's why you don't pay Albert Haynesworth like the Redskins did, but instead get good players at a multitude of positions. It takes 11 guys to win a game - on both sides of the ball. I just think building stability up the middle (both sides) is a better way to achieve it than building with the glamour positions. I value a middle linebacker over a ROLB because of that. The MLB might not get the oohs and aahs that a OLB would, but the middle linebacker is doing all the other stuff - supporting the run, calling the defense, dropping in coverage, etc. A very good one will cover a lot of sins by the rest of the defense. However, a bad one or even a mediocre one will cost you a boat load of games because he is required to do so much and a good offense will exploit that a lot more than just having a full back or extra tight end help the LT on a really good pass rusher.

That's just how I see it. There's a lot of different ways to build a football team, and most of them have worked in some capacity.

Well, the NFL doesn't do things that way. Sorry.