Thread: Is this kind of Draft repeatable?
View Single Post
Old 05-04-2008, 08:27 PM   #15
the Talking Can the Talking Can is offline
Supporter
 
the Talking Can's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: street
Casino cash: $9122208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla View Post
No, I don't, but I think the Chiefs' philosophy was solid. In past years, teams would take the players we would have, likely, loved to have right before we chose. Little things like that can impact an entire draft. What if Oakland had taken Dorsey? I assume we would have traded down, but what if we had no takers? What if the run on o-linemen had started earlier or the Lions wouldn't deal? Recall the 2000 draft when the Chiefs really wanted Shawn Alexander and Seattle took him a few picks before us (we picked up SlyMo). Then, in 2004 the Seahawks, again, took Olshansky a pick ahead of us, allowing/inducing our selection of Junior Siavii (nice, huh?). In 2002, the Colts took Triplett one pick ahead of KC, and we selected Eddie Freeman. While neither pick was outstanding, it was thought that KC would take Triplett and settled for Freeman.

In each case, a pick just prior to ours really seemed to leave us scrambling. This year, that could have been Chris Williams, but the Chiefs remained calm and we fortunate to pluck Albert. If he had been off the board, I'd hate to think we would have reached for Otah or Baker.
milkman nailed it...the sorry picks you recount were a result of reaching for a position after the guy we wanted was gone...we would never have picked Charles or Morgan under DV....

sticking to your draft board is how you avoid disaster...

you need a high pick to get this much talent..but, as you said, our apparent philosophy will reward us with stronger drafts over time....something the True Fan "draft more OL!" crowd will never understand....
__________________
Clark Hunt: "Thank god for the Dominican pool boy"
Posts: 51,585
the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.the Talking Can is obviously part of the inner Circle.
     Reply With Quote