ESPN's Clayton: Chiefs-Bills trade at #11?

[dj56dt58]

If we move up to 11 and he's there, the guy I want is Cromartie Rogers

[Archie Bunker]

Clayton was just on ESPN and said as soon as the Allen trade went through the Chiefs started trying to move up into the high teens to grab Albert. He seemed to think the Chiefs/Bills trade had a good chance of happening.

How picks would that jump cost the Chiefs?

[Hammock Parties]

Originally Posted by Archie Bunker

Clayton was just on ESPN and said as soon as the Allen trade went through the Chiefs started trying to move up into the high teens to grab Albert. He seemed to think the Chiefs/Bills trade had a good chance of happening.

How picks would that jump cost the Chiefs?

I'm guessing a third-rounder plus something else. 17 to 11 is 300 points.

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by Archie Bunker

Clayton was just on ESPN and said as soon as the Allen trade went through the Chiefs started trying to move up into the high teens to grab Albert. He seemed to think the Chiefs/Bills trade had a good chance of happening.

How picks would that jump cost the Chiefs?

#17 and #66.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by Archie Bunker

Clayton was just on ESPN and said as soon as the Allen trade went through the Chiefs started trying to move up into the high teens to grab Albert. He seemed to think the Chiefs/Bills trade had a good chance of happening.

How picks would that jump cost the Chiefs?

To move from #17 to #11 (300pt difference) we would likely need to give up #73 (225pts) and #105 (84pts).

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

To move from #17 to #11 (300pt difference) we would likely need to give up #73 (225pts) and #105 (84pts).

Not interested for a 3rd AND 4th.

Stay put.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Not interested for a 3rd AND 4th.

Stay put.

I don't think it's worth it either. One of the OT's or a better player will be there at #17.

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

I don't think it's worth it either. One of the OT's or a better player will be there at #17.

Yep.

You've got Williams, Albert, Otah and Clady to pick from.

11 picks between the 5th and 17th.

IMO, the only teams that I'd worry about taking an OLman:

Denver
Carolina
Chicago

And Carolina would be foolish not to take either Harvey or Mendenhall with their pick if available.

One, if not two of those OLmen will be there.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yep.

You've got Williams, Albert, Otah and Clady to pick from.

11 picks between the 5th and 17th.

IMO, the only teams that I'd worry about taking an OLman:

Denver
Carolina
Chicago

And Carolina would be foolish not to take either Harvey or Mendenhall with their pick if available.

One, if not two of those OLmen will be there.

Yep, I was looking at the order and those are the only 3 I'd expect to grab one. I would doubt Carolina would too since they have the tag on Jordan Gross. Chicago could go with a lot of different options.

[DT Fan]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Yep.

You've got Williams, Albert, Otah and Clady to pick from.

11 picks between the 5th and 17th.

IMO, the only teams that I'd worry about taking an OLman:

Denver
Carolina
Chicago

And Carolina would be foolish not to take either Harvey or Mendenhall with their pick if available.

One, if not two of those OLmen will be there.

I could see NE taking Albert and Baltimore taking a linemen if Ryan is gone.

The nightmare scenario at 17 is if Albert, Clady (who I don't like), Otah, and Williams are all gone and McKelvin, Rogers-Cromartie and Jenkins are gone, plus Harvey is also gone.

If we were picking in the top 16, we'd be guaranteed one of those guys even if Rivers falls out of the top 16 (which I think could happen)

But at 17, I think there's an outside chance that the top 5 OTs and the top 3 CBs are all off the board.

That would leave us choice of:
-- Taking a chance on Talib a CB.
-- Reaching for a linemen like Cherilus
-- Wasting a pick on Merling
-- Or surprising everyone by taking a WR or even a QB.

I think I'd rather see us move up from 17 to make sure we get one of those OL or CBs. I suppose by the 10th pick we'll have a good idea whether someone will fall down to us (if Rivers is still on the board after New Orleans, then I'll be worried).

[tomahawk kid]

Originally Posted by Archie Bunker

Clayton was just on ESPN and said as soon as the Allen trade went through the Chiefs started trying to move up into the high teens to grab Albert. He seemed to think the Chiefs/Bills trade had a good chance of happening.

How picks would that jump cost the Chiefs?

Can someone explain to me why in the fuck we want to draft a guy who wasn't good enough to play LT IN COLLEGE, to play LT in the NFL?

Am I missing something here? This guy scares the shit out of me. Sounds like typical pre-draft hype for a guy who'll bust in the pro's.

[Brock]

Originally Posted by tomahawk kid

Can someone explain to me why in the fuck we want to draft a guy who wasn't good enough to play LT IN COLLEGE, to play LT in the NFL?

Am I missing something here? This guy scares the shit out of me. Sounds like typical pre-draft hype for a guy who'll bust in the pro's.

It seem a lot of teams think he's a LT. IMO, he's a safer pick than Clady even if he's just left at guard.

[tomahawk kid]

Originally Posted by Brock

It seem a lot of teams think he's a LT. IMO, he's a safer pick than Clady even if he's just left at guard.

What makes you think that? Level of competition?

[Brock]

Originally Posted by tomahawk kid

What makes you think that? Level of competition?

Yes, that's just my opinion. He's never faced players of the caliber that Jake Long has. The guy just screams bust to me.

[tomahawk kid]

Originally Posted by Brock

Yes, that's just my opinion. He's never faced players of the caliber that Jake Long has. The guy just screams bust to me.

Understood.

I'm just more comfortable drafting a guy to play the position he played in college.