Is Darren McFadden a better back for the Chiefs than LJ?

[Logical]

Poll Forthcoming

[Son of Logical]

I really like LJ as a runner, I like the fact that he can run over you or run past you, but with all that said I wish we had let him go, and we could sign Mcfadden. From what I have seen of him there is something special there. I know he has not played a down in the NFL so I won't argue that he is better then LJ, but from the outside looking in he looks like has the potential to be.

In the end we have LJ, and we can't draft Mcfadden. At this point I am praying for Dorsey, and would be pleased with Ellis.

[markk]

until the next walter payton comes along i'm not going to be convinced that any running back is worth a top 5 pick

[nychief]

Originally Posted by markk

until the next walter payton comes along i'm not going to be convinced that any running back is worth a top 5 pick

did you watch Adrian Peterson?

[Son of Logical]

Originally Posted by Brock

"What makes sense" is upgrading talent across the board. This team has one, ONE good linebacker.

I think that remains to be seen, I think Williams could end up being pretty good. That could also be more hoping then knowing though. I am not convinced about Ghoulston at all, he has not impressed me enough to be a top 5 pick. So tell me this would Ghoulston be a better upgrade for us then Dorsey would be? We have so many areas of need why not take a position that compliments more positions i.e. DT makes LB's look better, and if they get pressure they make the CB's look better. Build both lines first, then pick up skill players, that is the way to build a team. The game is won in the trenches.

[Frazod]

Dumping a top 5 pick on a RB after we just signed Johnson to a huge contract = STUPID.

Dumping a top 5 pick on a QB when we have no idea how Croyle could perform behind a decent offensive line = STUPID.

Using the obviously already lost 2008 season to evaluate Croyle's performance and Johnson's performance, and then drafting a QB or RB next year if needed = NOT STUPID.

Hope this clears things for everybody.

[Brock]

Originally Posted by Titanman64

I think that remains to be seen, I think Williams could end up being pretty good. That could also be more hoping then knowing though. I am not convinced about Ghoulston at all, he has not impressed me enough to be a top 5 pick. So tell me this would Ghoulston be a better upgrade for us then Dorsey would be? We have so many areas of need why not take a position that compliments more positions i.e. DT makes LB's look better, and if they get pressure they make the CB's look better. Build both lines first, then pick up skill players, that is the way to build a team. The game is won in the trenches.

I'm not arguing Gholston vs. Dorsey. I'm arguing that not drafting whatever position because "we're all stocked up" is freaking stupid.

[Son of Logical]

Originally Posted by Brock

I'm not arguing Gholston vs. Dorsey. I'm arguing that not drafting whatever position because "we're all stocked up" is freaking stupid.

I am arguing that I think it is freaking stupid to draft at a position where it is not the best upgrade for your team. Especially, when the better upgrade would be a player that has proven himself to be dominant and the other player has not.

[Brock]

Originally Posted by Titanman64

I am arguing that I think it is freaking stupid to draft at a position where it is not the best upgrade for your team. Especially, when the better upgrade would be a player that has proven himself to be dominant and the other player has not.

You need to stop focusing on "best position". There is no best position. On a team this shitty, there are only "best players". If Gholston is the best player they can get where they're drafting, they should draft him.

[Chief Wiggum]

I voted no. I agree I don't think either back will be worth $.02 if our line isn't better and LJ can't block for shite, but he's a proven commodity and has the body to work the running style Herm likes to run.

[Son of Logical]

Originally Posted by Brock

You need to stop focusing on "best position". There is no best position. On a team this shitty, there are only "best players". If Gholston is the best player they can get where they're drafting, they should draft him.

Number 1, I think Dorsey or Ellis is better then Ghoulston. So, I am for drafting the best player available.

Number 2, You draft the best player available that will do the most to upgrade your team. If you have two players of equal ability at different positions you draft the position that will be the best upgrade for you team. If you have mediocre LB, and suck as DT/OT/OG/CB/DE you draft a player in the latter of the group. That makes the best sense for your team.

[blueballs]

LJ is Ill-Logical's own personal viagra

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by oaklandhater

better then LJ yes but not so much better that we should use our 5th pick on him.

Same.

[Brock]

Originally Posted by Titanman64

Number 1, I think Dorsey or Ellis is better then Ghoulston. So, I am for drafting the best player available.

Number 2, You draft the best player available that will do the most to upgrade your team. If you have two players of equal ability at different positions you draft the position that will be the best upgrade for you team. If you have mediocre LB, and suck as DT/OT/OG/CB/DE you draft a player in the latter of the group. That makes the best sense for your team.

I've already explained I'm not arguing Gholston vs. Your Favorite Player. I don't care about that argument. You apparently think this team is serviceable at one or more positions. It really isn't. It just isn't. The DL is not good, the LB corps needs a lot of help, the secondary is a shambles. It literally doesn't matter what position they choose in the draft, they all suck. Stop trying to get this team back to 8-8 as quickly as possible, it isn't going to happen this year, probably not next year either.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Ill-Logical

I agree with this but Gholston is the player likely to be left otherwise and he is not a fit on our defense.

We're guaranteed to have a shot at 2 of the following: C. Long, Dorsey, Ryan, Gholston, Ellis in addition to McFadden (assuming he's still there). Even if the Chiefs decide Gholston doesn't fit our defense, which I'm not so sure is the case, that means we have another premier alternative to McFadden available. Throw in the possibility that a trade might be available and there's no reason to spend #5 on McFadden. IMO, the worst case is that we have Ryan, McFadden, and Gholston available to us which should make the #5 pick interesting to a few teams in the 6-10 range if we can't decide which of the 3 we like better.

[Logical]

Originally Posted by patteeu

We're guaranteed to have a shot at 2 of the following: C. Long, Dorsey, Ryan, Gholston, Ellis in addition to McFadden (assuming he's still there). Even if the Chiefs decide Gholston doesn't fit our defense, which I'm not so sure is the case, that means we have another premier alternative to McFadden available. Throw in the possibility that a trade might be available and there's no reason to spend #5 on McFadden. IMO, the worst case is that we have Ryan, McFadden, and Gholston available to us which should make the #5 pick interesting to a few teams in the 6-10 range if we can't decide which of the 3 we like better.

I do not consider Ryan a value pick or a BAA at #5 so I eliminate him. The best situation for us is someone above us does a major reach and takes him otherwise I see Dorsey, Long, Long and Ellis going in the top 4 picks leaving us choosing between those three (blyech) so I eliminated Ryan (personal bias) and Gholston (does not fit our scheme) and ended up asking this question.