NFL Draft If Curry is gone at the 3 spot...who do we take or what do we do? - Page 19

journeyscarab · 02-28-2009, 11:07 PM

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

**DeezNutz** · 03-01-2009, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

I must be typing in a different language.

It's not that complicated.

The key is being stuck at #3 overall. If that were to happen, a realistic scenario is KC drafting an OT. If an OT is drafted that high, it is typically a LT (RT if your QB is a southpaw).

If that were to happen, what happens to Albert? Now, does that "diminish" him as a player when he has proven he can play any position? No.

Now, you following me camera guy? We're going to do this in real time: if KC TRADES DOWN, the OT scenario odds are greatly diminished. The need for a RT still remains. What does that mean? Bueller? Bueller? It means KC can draft for another need, then address RT at another time. OR, if a stud RT is available when they DO pick, perhaps they take him then. Depends on the position and the player now, doesn't it?

I can draw you a picture if you like.

Let's draft a guy and hope he's as good as the second-year player we already have at the same position.

It would make more sense to draft Stafford/Sanchez.

I see neither scenario as realistic.

milkman · 03-01-2009, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

I must be typing in a different language.

It's not that complicated.

The key is being stuck at #3 overall. If that were to happen, a realistic scenario is KC drafting an OT. If an OT is drafted that high, it is typically a LT (RT if your QB is a southpaw).

If that were to happen, what happens to Albert? Now, does that "diminish" him as a player when he has proven he can play any position? No.

Now, you following me camera guy? We're going to do this in real time: if KC TRADES DOWN, the OT scenario odds are greatly diminished. The need for a RT still remains. What does that mean? Bueller? Bueller? It means KC can draft for another need, then address RT at another time. OR, if a stud RT is available when they DO pick, perhaps they take him then. Depends on the position and the player now, doesn't it?

I can draw you a picture if you like.

The point he makes is that you admitted that RT has less value than LT by stating we could find one (RT) later in the draft.

If we actually had the need for LT, would you suggest that we could simply trade down and find a LT later?

philfree · 03-01-2009, 07:54 PM

The Chiefs had Tait at LT when DV became HC and what did he do? He went and got Roaf and moved Tait to RT building one of the best O lines ever as well as a great offense. I think there will be a better pick then another LT but I could see Pioli not valuing Chiefs past draft picks when building his team.

PhilFree

HC_Chief · 03-01-2009, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Let's draft a guy and hope he's as good as the second-year player we already have at the same position.

It would make more sense to draft Stafford/Sanchez.

I see neither scenario as realistic.

Again, key is how KC's scouting department/front office views Monroe. If they look at him & think "Albert's as good/better", then the scenario is moot anyway, right?

In that instance, assuming Curry is off the board (as indicated in the thread title), we'll probably grab a NT (as has been suggested ad nauseum in this thread), which relegates Dorsey to DE or trade bait.

Best case in all scenarios is KC trades down.

**DeezNutz** · 03-01-2009, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

Best case in all scenarios is KC trades down.

This is what desperately needs to happen. Maybe an outside shot of it coming to fruition with one of the QB's left on the board.

HC_Chief · 03-01-2009, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

This is what desperately needs to happen. Maybe an outside shot of it coming to fruition with one of the QB's left on the board.

Problem is we traded for a QB, so our leverage is lessened. Teams know we aren't a threat to take Stafford/Sanchez, so why trade up that high for one of them?

bdeg · 03-01-2009, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

Problem is we traded for a QB, so our leverage is lessened. Teams know we aren't a threat to take Stafford/Sanchez, so why trade up that high for one of them?

Because Seattle could take one at 4. If Stafford or Monroe fall there might be options as Seattle could take either.

HC_Chief · 03-01-2009, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdeg

Because Seattle could take one at 4. If Stafford or Monroe fall, there might be options as Seattle could take either.

Then here's to Pioli convincing some team that Seattle is DEFINITELY taking Stafford/Sanchez/Monroe and getting us the hell outta the #3 position!

milkman · 03-01-2009, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

The Chiefs had Tait at LT when DV became HC and what did he do? He went and got Roaf and moved Tait to RT building one of the best O lines ever as well as a great offense. I think there will be a better pick then another LT but I could see Pioli not valuing Chiefs past draft picks when building his team.

PhilFree

Tait didn't play up to his billing as the #13 pick in his rookie season, and trading for Roaf was initially designed to bring in a stop gap/mentor.

But Roaf played for longer than expected and Tait hated Carl, so it never worked out according to plan.

Mecca · 03-01-2009, 10:45 PM

I see there is an Oline obsession going on again.

**BigRedChief** · 03-01-2009, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief

Best case in all scenarios is KC trades down.

Yeah, so thats what everyone says but how to pull it off? Whats going to be there at #3 that would entice another team to trade up?

philfree · 03-01-2009, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Tait didn't play up to his billing as the #13 pick in his rookie season, and trading for Roaf was initially designed to bring in a stop gap/mentor.

But Roaf played for longer than expected and Tait hated Carl, so it never worked out according to plan.

I don't know if all that's true. Holmes did rush for 1,500 yards behind Tait the first year DV was HC. DV still devalued a 1st round pick LT by bringing in another LT and moving him to RT. It worked out pretty good offensively speaking. I'm not saying it's what I want but I think it's a possibility looking at what's going on.

PhilFree

**DeezNutz** · 03-01-2009, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigRedChief

Yeah, so thats what everyone says but how to pull it off? Whats going to be there at #3 that would entice another team to trade up?

Luckily the most valuable commodity, a QB.

philfree · 03-01-2009, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Luckily the most valuable commodity, a QB.

Yup! Excuse me...... But yes Stafford could still be on the board and that is trade bait.

PhilFree

Mecca · 03-01-2009, 11:49 PM

You could possibly bait Jacksonville who desperately wants an LT...

And even using the Roaf example the Chiefs did not use a 1st round pick to acquire him.

02-28-2009, 11:07 PM
journeyscarab SHOCKERS BABY! Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Overland Park, KS Casino cash: $1773555	If Curry is gone at the 3 spot...who do we take or what do we do? Say the Lions draft Curry, Rams draft Smith....do we take Monroe/Orakpo/or drop a few spots to get someone else?
Posts: 3,414

03-01-2009, 07:54 PM	#273
philfree Indian Twitter Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Free Agency Casino cash: $-2243802	The Chiefs had Tait at LT when DV became HC and what did he do? He went and got Roaf and moved Tait to RT building one of the best O lines ever as well as a great offense. I think there will be a better pick then another LT but I could see Pioli not valuing Chiefs past draft picks when building his team. PhilFree __________________ [/SIGPIC]
Posts: 16,164

03-01-2009, 10:45 PM	#280
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-742950	I see there is an Oline obsession going on again.
Posts: 115,387

03-01-2009, 11:49 PM	#285
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-742950	You could possibly bait Jacksonville who desperately wants an LT... And even using the Roaf example the Chiefs did not use a 1st round pick to acquire him.
Posts: 115,387