Chiefs Are 'Badly' Trying To Trade Down To Middle Of First Round

[TRR]

Not sure if it has been posted.....

Chiefs Are 'Badly' Trying To Trade Down To Middle Of First*Round

by Joel Thorman on Apr 18, 2010 10:34 AM CDT in 2010 Campaign

Last year about this time, Michael Lombardi of the National Football Post first reported that the Chiefs were "in love" with LSU DE Tyson Jackson. A few days later and Jackson was the Chiefs pick in the draft.

Now Lombardi reports that the Chiefs are trying like hell to move down in the draft.

"The Chiefs are trying, and I mean really trying, to move down," Lombardi reports. "My sources tell me they'll be willing to go down as far as 15 for the right deal because they feel they can find a player in that range."

It's a fine line between trading down and trading down too far. According to Lombardi, our theory of the Eagles offering up the 24th and 37th picks for the Chiefs fifth pick doesn't look like it's happening. By staying around 15, they can still have a shot at a game changer -- Alabama LB Rolando McClain and Texas S Earl Thomas come to mind here -- as well as picking up extra selections.

That said, who's the Chiefs trading partner? SB Nation's Mocking The Draft takes an excellent look at this situation and comes to the conclusion that San Francisco might be the only team in that area that has a chance of moving up.

Lombardi reports the Chiefs are hoping someone wants to get in line to pick Notre Dame QB Jimmy Clausen.

[Tribal Warfare]

Another thing it was Gil Brandt that first broke the Tyson Jackson story, and not Lombardi.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

So here are my choices given those options.....

1) Trade down and use the first two or three picks on defense. I think Croyle is a match stick waiting for someone to break him so you draft a QB you've scouted probably no sooner than the third round. I'm a firm believer defense is what takes you to the playoffs so sue me.

I don't want to go 10-6 and get to the playoffs. Been there, done that. I want to win in the playoffs. You sort of need a QB to do that.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

I don't want to go 10-6 and get to the playoffs. Been there, done that. I want to win in the playoffs. You sort of need a QB to do that.

My argument to that is we had him, his name was Gannon, and if Marty DF had played him instead of Grbac we'd not only have won that game but probably the SB.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

My argument to that is we had him, his name was Gannon, and if Marty DF had played him instead of Grbac we'd not only have won that game but probably the SB.

That may well be true. But what does that have to do with the Chiefs' current situation or the 2010 draft?

[Amnorix]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

If that's true, then what does it mean? I would think it means they're wanting to go offensive line.

What it really means is that they think the cost/value ratio in the 10-15 range is better than at the 5 spot. In other words, the quality of players they expect to hvae available at the 5 spot isn't that much better than in the 10-15 range -- and certainly not enough to offset the dramatically higher price tag that the 5 pick will carry.

[philfree]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

What it really means is that they think the cost/value ratio in the 10-15 range is better than at the 5 spot. In other words, the quality of players they expect to hvae available at the 5 spot isn't that much better than in the 10-15 range -- and certainly not enough to offset the dramatically higher price tag that the 5 pick will carry.

I don't think we're going O line.

Amnorix, you should have a feel for Pioli so IYO who's he likely wanting with the Chiefs 1st pick?


PhilFree

[Chiefs4ever25]

Originally Posted by luv

No way I would put McCoy that high.

McCoy could be a HUGE bust

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

That may well be true. But what does that have to do with the Chiefs' current situation or the 2010 draft?

Yeah I didn't get what you were saying at first so my bad. You have a valid argument Cassel isn't the guy. I'm on the side that doesn't think he's been given enough of a chance. Especially since Pioli picked him up and believes in him. At this point I'll take Pioli over anyone on this board. If it were Herm I wouldn't think that way at all.

I'd still be hedging my bets filling other holes at this point in rebuilding makes more sense than reaching for Clausen.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

Yeah I didn't get what you were saying at first so my bad. You have a valid argument Cassel isn't the guy. I'm on the side that doesn't think he's been given enough of a chance. Especially since Pioli picked him up and believes in him. At this point I'll take Pioli over anyone on this board. If it were Herm I wouldn't think that way at all.

How long did it take you to distrust Herm's judgment?

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

How long did it take you to distrust Herm's judgment?

Apples and oranges because as soon as Carl hired Herm I knew we were F'd.

Not just because Carl did the hiring but I never saw Herm as being a SB coach even as a Jet.

[FAX]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

What it really means is that they think the cost/value ratio in the 10-15 range is better than at the 5 spot. In other words, the quality of players they expect to hvae available at the 5 spot isn't that much better than in the 10-15 range -- and certainly not enough to offset the dramatically higher price tag that the 5 pick will carry.

Yep. My guess is that they're thinking along the lines that, although it would be great to have a few pro-bowl-bound playmakers on the club, we have too many holes to fill right now with serviceable role players.

Maybe, just maybe, after we fill out the roster, we will start adding the impact players we're going to need. Say, around 2020.

FAX

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

Apples and oranges because as soon as Carl hired Herm I knew we were F'd.

Not just because Carl did the hiring but I never saw Herm as being a SB coach even as a Jet.

herm made idiotic decisions while with the jets, most people knew what he was to start with
Posted via Mobile Device

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by mlyonsd

IThose that want pickle boy believe Cassel will never amount to a playoff win. Valid argument. But I think if you choose Clausen you must also admit to the fact the Chiefs will give Cassel two more years to prove himself, unless of course he starts peeling wallpaper off of Arrowhead and eating it.

No way in hell Cassel gets two more years UNLESS he's a completely different QB on the field this year (i.e., no more QB ratings of 14, 35, 58 & 65).

I seriously doubt he can change everything at age 27 in one year, but we'll see.

[TheGuardian]

We're not drafting Clausen. people.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

No way in hell Cassel gets two more years UNLESS he's a completely different QB on the field this year (i.e., no more QB ratings of 14, 35, 58 & 65).

I seriously doubt he can change everything at age 27 in one year, but we'll see.

i can agree with this post. i think he will be better but i wont bitch if our pick is clausen for a backup plan.
Posted via Mobile Device