Arguments for a Left Tackle in the 2010 Draft.

[Saccopoo]

While the vast majority of drafturbators around here think that Branden Albert is doing a remarkable job and had a great last half of the season, some people believe that adding a competent offensive left tackle would be a prudent and viable selection for the Chiefs with their first pick in the 2010 NFL Draft.

Some supporting arguments for a left tackle:

Wes Bunting: Well, after Suh, McCoy and Berry, Russell Okung's a pretty safe pick. Sure, he might not be the sexiest of guys, but honestly Branden Albert was one of the highest rated guards I'd seen and yet he hasn't yet had the type of career because he's be a run-of-the-mill tackle. You'd be surprised how quickly that offensive line would improve if you got a legit offensive tackle in there and kick Branden Albert inside. Some good things could happen.

From Walters 2010 Mock:

Fortunately, Pioli, who is a big believer in positional value, can take Okung without sacrificing too much of his team's payroll into the left tackle position. Albert makes less than $1 million in each of the next two seasons, and was a guard at Virginia anyway.

Okung is the real deal. He could take the Chiefs' offense to the next level, though the team will ultimately struggle in the playoffs because of Cassel's limitations.

From Walters/Matt McGuire's Mock:

Russell Okung - This pick is a no-brainer and barring a huge screw-up, I think we can all be 99-percent assured the Kansas City Chiefs are handcuffed to taking a left tackle at this pick. It will be interesting to see whether it ends up being Okung, Anthony Davis or Bruce Campbell, as the battle for the No. 1 tackle spot is one of the best storylines of the 2010 NFL Draft.

Okung was the most consistent lineman in the nation this year and he will test out on a very high level athletically.

From Draftcountdown:

The Chiefs have plenty of needs and could go in a number of different directions here but their offensive line play has been particularly troubling. In fact, Kansas City ranked among the worst in the league when it comes to sacks allowed. Oklahoma State’s Russell Okung isn’t an elite prospect in the mold of Tony Boselli, Jon Ogden or Orlando Pace but he has clearly emerged as the top offensive tackle in this class and will likely be a Top 10 pick. With good size, long arms, great strength, above-average athleticism and feet as well as top-notch intangibles, Okung is just a very good all-around blocker. Okung could slide into the starting lineup at either left or right tackle for the Chiefs and any investment in keeping franchise quarterback Matt Cassel upright is money well spent.

From Mel Kiper:

I think the Chiefs could use help at safety as well, but Berry likely won't fall this far, and they'd be reaching on either of the two other safeties with first-round grades. Okung could solve two problems, making him a good value -- he could step in at LT and allow the Chiefs to move Brandon Albert to the right side. A pick that can pay immediate dividends for the Chiefs.

From Don Banks/Sports Illustrated:

If Berry should get this far, the Chiefs would be the benefactors, but Okung seems like the right fit in the right spot for Kansas City. The Chiefs have tons of needs, but in Okung they would be getting a franchise left tackle, allowing them to shift Branden Albert back to his more natural right tackle position.

It's damn near a cultural universal!

Also in opposition to people who believe that Branden Albert had a very good last four games, in the Buffalo game, he was penalized three times (tied for most in a game in 2009) and gave up a whopping five quarterback pressures. In the Cincinatti game, he was penalized twice and allow a hit on the quarterback. In actuality, taking out the fluke Denver game, which was a drive block fest as Jamaal Charles racked up a Chiefs single game rushing record, Albert did not perform well in the last quarter of the season. Yes, he didn't give up any sacks, but there were a lot of qb pressures and penalties.

[milkman]

Fortunately, Pioli, who is a big believer in positional value

Really.

A 5 tech at #3 overall last year really serves as evidence to support that claim, doesn't it?

From Walters/Matt McGuire's Mock:

Kansas City Chiefs are handcuffed to taking a left tackle at this pick. It will be interesting to see whether it ends up being Okung, Anthony Davis or Bruce Campbell, as the battle for the No. 1 tackle spot is one of the best storylines of the 2010 NFL Draft.

From Draftcountdown:

Oklahoma State’s Russell Okung isn’t an elite prospect in the mold of Tony Boselli, Jon Ogden or Orlando Pace but he has clearly emerged as the top offensive tackle in this class

So the sites you are using to support your argument can't even agree on who the actual best prospect is?

[Chiefs=Champions]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

FFS, that is a distracting ****ing sig.

[Hootie]

I have a hard time listening to all the gurus talk about offensive line as if they know it or something...everyone was super against Clady and he's just going to be a perennial pro bowler here on out...

[milkman]

Originally Posted by The Meat Dragon

I have a hard time listening to all the gurus talk about offensive line as if they know it or something...everyone was super against Clady and he's just going to be a perennial pro bowler here on out...

For ****'s sake, why do we have to go through all the same shit with your dumb ass over, and over, and over again?

Clady was a talented LT and was a great fit for the scheme that the Rat ran in Denver.

No one even argued that he wasn't talented.

But the argument was that he wasn't a great downhill blocker (and he still isn't) and wasn't a good fit for the power runnig scheme that Herman ****ing Edwards wanted ot run.

And even though the scheme change wasn't dramatic with Josh McDaniels taking over, Clady did have his struggles in his second season, and his run blocking in that scheme wasn't nearly at the same level as it was in the Rat's scheme.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

WHat does that have to do with Albert?

Oh, I don't know.

Maybe because people want to slide him in to play....guard?

He wasn't drafted to play guard, everyone thinks his skill-set best suits the LT position, and he was drafted as such.

Unfortunately, FindTheOkung either doesn't understand, or wants to even try to understand that you don't give up on a 2nd year player that has had a bad half-season -period - much less for a guy that honestly is pretty much a spitting image of Albert, with with slower feet.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by milkman

Really.

A 5 tech at #3 overall last year really serves as evidence to support that claim, doesn't it?







So the sites you are using to support your argument can't even agree on who the actual best prospect is?

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Oh, I don't know.

Maybe because people want to slide him in to play....guard?

He wasn't drafted to play guard, everyone thinks his skill-set best suits the LT position, and he was drafted as such.

Unfortunately, FindTheOkung either doesn't understand, or wants to even try to understand that you don't give up on a 2nd year player that has had a bad half-season -period - much less for a guy that honestly is pretty much a spitting image of Albert, with with slower feet.

That doesn't prove your point. You asked who was drafted to play guard in the top 15. Herm and Carl drafted him to be the LOT. Just because the new staff doesn't think he fits, doesn't change the fact he was drafted to be a LOT. Nor would it be the first time a top 15 LOT was moved to another position. It happens.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

That doesn't prove your point. You asked who was drafted to play guard in the top 15. Herm and Carl drafted him to be the LOT. Just because the new staff doesn't think he fits, doesn't change the fact he was drafted to be a LOT. Nor would it be the first time a top 15 LOT was moved to another position. It happens.

Not after two years, two HC's and 3 different offensive schemes.

And who other than FindTheOkung thinks the organization thinks he doesn't fit?

Are you telling me that Todd Haley made the kid lose 30 pounds to play LT, and is going to ask him to gain that weight back to try to play inside?

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Not after two years, two HC's and 3 different offensive schemes.

And who other than FindTheOkung thinks the organization thinks he doesn't fit?

Are you telling me that Todd Haley made the kid lose 30 pounds to play LT, and is going to ask him to gain that weight back to try to play inside?

I don't have the faintest idea what Haley will do since he was a complete reerun his first year. As a fan it is all but impossible to judge any offensive player last year because it is inherently unfair for a coach to completely scrap a system a week before the season starts. Haley has also been pretty vague and cryptic about Albert's future role on the team.

I don't know what KC has in Albert. His first year he was protected because the team ran the pistol formation the majority of the year. The 2nd year was a complete mess for everyone. His play improved somewhat the last few games, but I don't think he was great by any means which is what some think. He had a poor game against Buffalo.

At the end of the day I want them to fix the OL. I don't really care how they do it. Albert can play inside, outside or not at all - it doesn't matter to me as long as the OL opens holes and protects the QB.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

I don't have the faintest idea what Haley will do since he was a complete reerun his first year. As a fan it is all but impossible to judge any offensive player last year because it is inherently unfair for a coach to completely scrap a system a week before the season starts. Haley has also been pretty vague and cryptic about Albert's future role on the team.

I don't know what KC has in Albert. His first year he was protected because the team ran the pistol formation the majority of the year. The 2nd year was a complete mess for everyone. His play improved somewhat the last few games, but I don't think he was great by any means which is what some think. He had a poor game against Buffalo.

At the end of the day I want them to fix the OL. I don't really care how they do it. Albert can play inside, outside or not at all - it doesn't matter to me as long as the OL opens holes and protects the QB.

We didn't run the pistol in Week 1 at NE, and I don't recall Richard Seymour registering a single sack.

He allowed 1 sack to John Abraham in Week 3. Not running the pistol.

Albert was holding his own well before the pistol was installed.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

We didn't run the pistol in Week 1 at NE, and I don't recall Richard Seymour registering a single sack.

He allowed 1 sack to John Abraham in Week 3. Not running the pistol.

Albert was holding his own well before the pistol was installed.

He did great for a rookie in weeks 1 and 2. He did not play well against Atlanta and the QB was pressured all day. If you want to annoint him based on his first two weeks in the league, go right ahead.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

He did great for a rookie in weeks 1 and 2. He did not play well against Atlanta and the QB was pressured all day. If you want to annoint him based on his first two weeks in the league, go right ahead.

I'm not annoiting him. No one is.

It just seems that FindTheOkung, and now to some degree, yourself, want to give the kid no credit for playing solid football for 24 out of 32 games, and refuse to consider that a 30 pound weight loss and change in scheme had an effect on the 8 poor games he's played.

And FTR, Albert did not play poorly against Atlanta. He gave up one sack, and was doing a pretty decent job on Abraham. Atlanta's coaching staff must have thought the same, because they decided to match him up with McIntosh in the 2nd half - and was successful.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I'm not annoiting him. No one is.

It just seems that FindTheOkung, and now to some degree, yourself, want to give the kid no credit for playing solid football for 24 out of 32 games, and refuse to consider that a 30 pound weight loss and change in scheme had an effect on the 8 poor games he's played.

And FTR, Albert did not play poorly against Atlanta. He gave up one sack, and was doing a pretty decent job on Abraham. Atlanta's coaching staff must have thought the same, because they decided to match him up with McIntosh in the 2nd half - and was successful.

Can you read? I said it is all but impossible to judge him because of the circumstances he faced his first two years with KC. I understand the scheme set everyone back.

As far as Atlanta is concerned, according to PFF Albert gave up 1 sack, 4 pressures and 1 more hit.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Can you read? I said it is all but impossible to judge him because of the circumstances he faced his first two years with KC. I understand the scheme set everyone back.

As far as Atlanta is concerned, according to PFF Albert gave up 1 sack, 4 pressures and 1 more hit.

Not at all poor for a guy playing his 3rd NFL game at LT, against one of the best, protecting a 3rd string QB.

And personally, I don't think it's impossible to judge him at all.

He's played 8 poor games, all immediately following a scheme change and major weight loss.

The other 24 games of his career, he's ranged from average to solid.

For me, that's enough to consider the LT position locked down for at least another year.

[RustShack]

Is it a coincidence that when Albert got back up to his previous playing weight near the end of the year(muscle this time instead of fat) that he was back to playing like his previous self? You know when he was being labeled as the best LT in that draft over the likes of Long and Clady.