Quote:
Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan
To call it stupid is silly. Anytime you have an opportunity to upgrade a position on your team, doing so is not stupid.
I am not sold, absolutely not sold on taking a OT at the spot. Nor, do I think the Chiefs will do so. However, if they do, I won't categorize the move as stupid.
We could go through the entire history of the NFL and look at Super Bowl teams and come up with the fact that Super Bowl winners, on average don't have more than one first rounder at ANY Position.
So, does that mean that a team 'shouldn't' have more than one first rounder at any position?
Every year is different. I hope that they don't select an OT, but I will understand the thinking if they do.
|
This is just reeruned.
First of all, it's a bad argument to even suggest that the #2 LT in this class would be an upgrade over Albert at that position.
Secondly, let's assume that you call that a wash, assume that he can be as good, or better, and you move Albert inside. You've then spent a #3 pick on incrementally (if it works out perfectly) improving your blindside, and improving your interior line or bookend by a sizable margin. Meanwhile, you could spend a third round pick on a player who could play RT at a pro bowl level, and compensate him at 1/30th the rate of the guy you would take at three.
Again, I ask.
Would you rather dump 60 Million into Eugene Monroe, and move Albert and his decent salary to RT or LG, or 2 million into a RT in the third round, and draft someone at three who could possibly anchor the defense, or be a franchise signal caller for the next decade, and give you the opportunity to offload Cassel for more than what you paid for him?