If Curry is gone at the 3 spot...who do we take or what do we do?

[journeyscarab]

Say the Lions draft Curry, Rams draft Smith....do we take Monroe/Orakpo/or drop a few spots to get someone else?

[milkman]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

I never wanted to dump Dorsey. Its Pioli and the Parcells gang that has a raging hard on for the shitty 3-4.

Who is the Pioli and Parcells gang?

Are you referring to the Chiefs new brass or a group on the board?

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by milkman

Who is the Pioli and Parcells gang?

Are you referring to the Chiefs new brass or a group on the board?

Chiefs new brass

[bdeg]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

How many teams move their LOT to ROT when a lefty QB comes in?

It's a fact. A lefty qb didn't jut "come in," they drafted those players to be their cornerstones of the future.

[HC_Chief]

Originally Posted by milkman

I didn't say that.

Albert's value doesn't diminish as LT if we switch schemes.

Of course you knew that's exactly what I mean't.
You just wanted to play dumbass.

Again, how does Albert's "value diminish" in a move to RT? He is not a "natural LT"; he played multiple positions in college. Why do you think he would be incapable of playing RT?

He did pretty well last year at LT. If he stays there, great... but I have little doubt he would do just as well at the right tackle position, allowing KC to draft a LT and bookend their OL for a decade.

The caveat is they are stuck at #3. Drop down, and forget drafting the LT; go LB or DE/OLB.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

I never wanted to dump Dorsey. Its Pioli and the Parcells gang that has a raging hard on for the shitty 3-4.

Why is it shitty? Almost every team that runs it is a top 10 defense.

What's dumber is refusing to change your scheme when there is only one key player on your roster who doesn't fit into it. The Chiefs are practically at square 1 on defense. If there was ever a time in their history to consider moving to a 3-4, last year would have been perfect, but this year is just as good. I like Dorsey, but sorry, a 3-4 defense is a ton easier to build than a 4-3 and it will be worth sacrificing that #5 pick that was wasted, assuming that he doesn't find a role in this defense.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

Again, how does Albert's "value diminish" in a move to RT? He is not a "natural LT"; he played multiple positions in college. Why do you think he would be incapable of playing RT?

He did pretty well last year at LT. If he stays there, great... but I have little doubt he would do just as well at the right tackle position, allowing KC to draft a LT and bookend their OL for a decade.

The caveat is they are stuck at #3. Drop down, and forget drafting the LT; go LB or DE/OLB.

CAN YOU NOT ****ING READ?

This was about how Dorsey's value diminishes as DT as a result of a scheme change.

Albert's value as a LT does not diminish as a result of a scheme change, so he isn't moved to another position.

This has nothing to do with wether he has value as a RT.

This only has to do with his position not being affected as the result of a scheme change.

But teh fact is, if you insist on talking about moving him to RT, his value does diminish because a RT is not as valuable as a LT.

[bdeg]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Why is it shitty? Almost every team that runs it is a top 10 defense.

What's dumber is refusing to change your scheme when there is only one key player on your roster who doesn't fit into it. The Chiefs are practically at square 1 on defense. If there was ever a time in their history to consider moving to a 3-4, last year would have been perfect, but this year is just as good. I like Dorsey, but sorry, a 3-4 defense is a ton easier to build than a 4-3 and it will be worth sacrificing that #5 pick that was wasted, assuming that he doesn't find a role in this defense.

Well said. I did not want to type all that out. Not only is it probably easier to build, the boss thinks it's better. One pick that hasn't proved anything isn't going to change his mind.

[milkman]

Oh, and the fact is that Albert is a natural LT, who just happened to play guard in college because Al Groh didn't believe that Monroe had the athleticism and versatility that Albert possessed to man the guard position in his offense.

But Albert has all the naturaal tools you look for in a LT.

Big, strong, athletic, huge wingspan and "Dancer's feet".

There isn't a single LT in this draft that has all the natural physical tools at LT that Albert has.

[ChiefsCountry]

3-4 easier to find players. You guys are on crack if you think that. There is reason why were ever Parcells goes he takes the same guys around with him.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

Again, how does Albert's "value diminish" in a move to RT? He is not a "natural LT"; he played multiple positions in college. Why do you think he would be incapable of playing RT?

He did pretty well last year at LT. If he stays there, great... but I have little doubt he would do just as well at the right tackle position, allowing KC to draft a LT and bookend their OL for a decade.

The caveat is they are stuck at #3. Drop down, and forget drafting the LT; go LB or DE/OLB.

Because it's common knowledge that you put your best lineman at left tackle and you put a much lower-grade linemen on the right side. The left tackle has to have extremely quick feet because defenses always put their most explosive pass rusher on the blind side of the quarterback. That's why guys like Jonathan Ogden, Willie Roaf, Walter Jones, etc... are the ones who get the limelight and they all play left tackle. NO TEAM will put their best tackle on the right side. None. That's why teams use very high draft picks consistently on left tackles, but most tackles that grade out as right tackles at best always end up going around the late first at best.

It requires an entirely different skill set. Right tackles don't have to be outstanding because they usually have a tight end lined up next to them to provide them help. The left tackle, on the other hand, is almost always put on an island and has to go one-on-one with a pass rusher. And because they usually square up against the defense's second-best pass rusher, they usually don't have to be that quick. Most defenses will put up a bigger pass rusher against a RT because they know the DE will have to chip against both a RT and a TE. The point being that a player as talented as Albert would be wasted in a RT role because that's a position that usually gets a lot of help from the TEs and usually lines up against inferior pass rushers anyway. In a guard role, it's even a bigger waste of his talents because guards simply are not as important as tackles.

[HC_Chief]

Originally Posted by milkman

CAN YOU NOT ****ING READ?

This was about how Dorsey's value diminishes as DT as a result of a scheme change.

Albert's value as a LT does not diminish as a result of a scheme change, so he isn't moved to another position.

This has nothing to do with wether he has value as a RT.

This only has to do with his position not being affected as the result of a scheme change.

But teh fact is, if you insist on talking about moving him to RT, his value does diminish because a RT is not as valuable as a LT.

That's because the discussion has been about what we do if we're stuck at #3. Looking at the talent available and the positional needs, Monroe is the BPA who fits a need.

People have argued for Raji, and with sound logic, but it does EXACTLY what you're railing on: makes Dorsey a wasted #5 overall. Maybe he can play DE in a 3-4, maybe not. Chances are he becomes a backup/has no role at all and becomes trade fodder (good luck getting much value there when you consider where we took him).

You HAVE insinuated Albert's value is diminished.... when you talk about how RT is not as valuable. I disagree with that assessment! Our OL is in SERIOUS need at RT. If we are stuck at #3, cannot trade out, and don't wish to waste Dorsey, it is not inconceivable we draft Monroe and move Albert.

If we can trade down, all bets are off. Forget Monroe... the dude will be gone anyway, and we have many more needs. We can pick up a RT in later rounds.

[HC_Chief]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Because it's common knowledge that you put your best lineman at left tackle and you put a much lower-grade linemen on the right side. The left tackle has to have extremely quick feet because defenses always put their most explosive pass rusher on the blind side of the quarterback. That's why guys like Jonathan Ogden, Willie Roaf, Walter Jones, etc... are the ones who get the limelight and they all play left tackle. NO TEAM will put their best tackle on the right side. None. That's why teams use very high draft picks consistently on left tackles, but most tackles that grade out as right tackles at best always end up going around the late first at best.

It requires an entirely different skill set. Right tackles don't have to be outstanding because they usually have a tight end lined up next to them to provide them help. The left tackle, on the other hand, is almost always put on an island and has to go one-on-one with a pass rusher. And because they usually square up against the defense's second-best pass rusher, they usually don't have to be that quick. Most defenses will put up a bigger pass rusher against a RT because they know the DE will have to chip against both a RT and a TE. The point being that a player as talented as Albert would be wasted in a RT role because that's a position that usually gets a lot of help from the TEs and usually lines up against inferior pass rushers anyway. In a guard role, it's even a bigger waste of his talents because guards simply are not as important as tackles.

Bolded is the key. If our scouts do not believe Monroe would be a BETTER LT than Albert, whom we already know can play well at many positions along the line, then no worries, right? Monroe would not even be in consideration at #3.

How do they rate Monroe -v- Albert? We'll find outif we are stuck at #3.

[The Buddha]

Originally Posted by ChiefsCountry

3-4 easier to find players. You guys are on crack if you think that. There is reason why were ever Parcells goes he takes the same guys around with him.

I always though it was because he gets annoyed at having to teach new players his style.

I am confused, though. What's the difference between a 3-4 MLB and a 4-3 ILB? Do you look for different things? Also, what about the difference between a 3-4 OLB and a 3-4 ILB. Do the outside guys really rush more than the inside guys, cause it seems like when I watch NE, you never know which of the LBs are gonna blitz. It looks very even to me.

[sedated]

.

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

You HAVE insinuated Albert's value is diminished.... when you talk about how RT is not as valuable. I disagree with that assessment! Our OL is in SERIOUS need at RT.

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

We can pick up a RT in later rounds.

[HC_Chief]

Originally Posted by sedated

.

You ignored the key component: whether we're stuck at #3 or can trade down.

Willful ignorance = stupidity