Chiefs Why people are disappointed: Exhibit A - Talent Evaluation - Page 3

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-14-2009, 11:24 AM

Since there seems to be several myths, excuses and some flat-out lies about why some folks are pissed off about this team right now, I thought I'd put together a few threads explaining, as clearly as I can, where people are coming from.

One of the bigger excuses is the infamous, "Pioli inherited a shitty team."

Let me make this clear: I do not disagree.

However, that doesn't excuse the Executive of the Decade for the team being no better now than it was this time last year - and you could make an argument that it is worse.

And one of the reasons why this team still sucks is simple:

The Executive of the Decade missed BADLY on talent evaluation.

I just spent a few minutes researching the transactions Pioli has made since taking the job, and it's even worse than I originally thought.

Counting draft picks, trades and signings, Pioli is responsible for FORTY FIVE new players to this organization.

And of these 45, it's fair to say that only Succop and Chambers are clear upgrades to their predecessors.

Two. Out of forty-five.

That's a whopping 4% success rate.

I'm sorry, but blaming Herm here is ridiculous. The best players on this team are Herm's players.

Looking at the current roster - including the active roster, PS and IR - 54% of the players currently in this organization are Pioli's.

Exactly half of the current starting 22 are Pioli's.

And this team is ONE win better than a 2008 squad that featured Tyler ****ing Thigpen at QB, and employed Gunther Cunningham as the DC.

With the majority being Pioli's hand-picked players.

Let the excuses flow like fine wine.

Discus.

This ought to be fun - let's hit that Millionth post.

tooge · 12-14-2009, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Why is Mike Brown playing over Morgan? Even where it seems they at least have another option they refuse to even try it.

These guys look like boobs.

I would guess it is because either the genius DCord. has told Haley that he gives them the "best chance to win", and Haley has too many other hats to wear to know enough about the D to argue, OR, Morgan isn't a Haley guy and doesn't "do it our way".

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-14-2009, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tooge

I would guess it is because either the genius DCord. has told Haley that he gives them the "best chance to win", and Haley has too many other hats to wear to know enough about the D to argue, OR, Morgan isn't a Haley guy and doesn't "do it our way".

And the other shoe drops. "The Right 53"

Because who needs talent when you have players that don't act out and don't talk back to their coaches.

Mecca · 12-14-2009, 01:29 PM

Right now I'd be happy to not be a Todd Haley guy after what I've seen out of him.

tooge · 12-14-2009, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

C'mon, man.

Hell, Pioli's old team PLAYED the Chiefs. They knew exactly what they had, and what they didn't have. Plus you have pro personnel scouts who scout every NFL team.

Christ, even the FANS knew this roster was talent depleted, and where the holes were.

He wasn't flying blind, here.

He just whiffed. Simple as that.

I agree he wiffed to some degree, but like I said, with the time frame that everything happened, what was he gonna do differently for this year?

keg in kc · 12-14-2009, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I agree, Keg, and good post.

However, just because we all knew this was a multiple year proposition does not make it acceptable to completely waste one of those years.

We are literally no better off than we were this time last year.

You could argue that the team is worse.

So basically, we're starting over, yet again.

I don't think this year was wasted. It was the dump year and the year to get a lot of tape on people for next offseason, several of them players who were let go late in the offseason or during the year. I think they wanted to take a hard look at a lot of young players both on the Chiefs as well as on the Cardinals and Patriots, players they were familiar with and (this is a guess) thought worth a look, and now they have a better idea of what kind of players they are. While there were a few free agents who I think would have made an impact over the long term, I don't think going whole-hog into free agency would have been the right move for this stage of the rebuild. As far as I recall they really only have two new contracts that have long-term ramifications on the squad (Cassel and Jackson) and they should have all kinds of freedom when it comes to spending, not just in 2010 but beyond that. The real issue will be whether the CBA is reworked and what kind of players they'll be able to look at. Like I've said, I think most of the people they brought in were stop-gap and the real moves come later. I think instead of trying to build on a rotten foundation, they decided to tear the whole house down and build new, with a few supports in place so they have enough numbers to actually play games (guys like Brown and Wade and Vrabel and Chambers, etc). And I've been fine with that since the start. The season's gone pretty much exactly the way I thought it would. I'm not a good loser, as they say, so I tend to get pissed as hell the day of a loss, but the sun always rises and so far I've been able to remember what's going on.

Doesn't mean I think they're going fix anything, or that I'm defending anybody, just that I think I have a vague idea of what's going on and I'm going to watch and see what happens. I think it's too early for panic.

Mecca · 12-14-2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tooge

I agree he wiffed to some degree, but like I said, with the time frame that everything happened, what was he gonna do differently for this year?

How about get a player to build around...I don't think that's asking to much.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-14-2009, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tooge

I agree he wiffed to some degree, but like I said, with the time frame that everything happened, what was he gonna do differently for this year?

Are you saying he couldn't have signed Jason Brown? TJ Houshmanzedah? Chris Canty? Michael Boley? Igor Olshansky?

The list goes on and on.

The man took the job in mid-January. It's not like he was hired in early April.

**OnTheWarpath15** · 12-14-2009, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keg in kc

I don't think this year was wasted. It was the dump year and the year to get a lot of tape on people for next offseason, several of them players who were let go late in the offseason or during the year. I think they wanted to take a hard look at a lot of young players both on the Chiefs as well as on the Cardinals and Patriots, players they were familiar with and (this is a guess) thought worth a look, and now they have a better idea of what kind of players they are. While there were a few free agents who I think would have made an impact over the long term, I don't think going whole-hog into free agency would have been the right move for this stage of the rebuild. As far as I recall they really only have two new contracts that have long-term ramifications on the squad (Cassel and Jackson) and they should have all kinds of freedom when it comes to spending, not just in 2010 but beyond that. The real issue will be whether the CBA is reworked and what kind of players they'll be able to look at. Like I've said, I think most of the people they brought in were stop-gap and the real moves come later. I think instead of trying to build on a rotten foundation, they decided to tear the whole house down and build new, with a few supports in place so they have enough numbers to actually play games (guys like Brown and Wade and Vrabel and Chambers, etc). And I've been fine with that since the start. The season's gone pretty much exactly the way I thought it would. I'm not a good loser, as they say, so I tend to get pissed as hell the day of a loss, but the sun always rises and so far I've been able to remember what's going on.

Doesn't mean I think they're going fix anything, or that I'm defending anybody, just that I think I have a vague idea of what's going on and I'm going to watch and see what happens. I think it's too early for panic.

Agree to disagree then I guess. I don't see these "supports" to the foundation you're talking about.

This was the year to begin building that foundation, and here we are 11 months later, and we're still looking at a muddy hole in the ground.

Mecca · 12-14-2009, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Are you saying he couldn't have signed Jason Brown? TJ Houshmanzedah? Chris Canty? Michael Boley? Igor Olshansky?

The list goes on and on.

The man took the job in mid-January. It's not like he was hired in early April.

Nah man, he gets a pass just cause he's not Carl even though he made a bunch of very Carl es

**DeezNutz** · 12-14-2009, 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jAZ

I get the feeling that our roster moves this past season were heavily influenced by the pending uncapped year. In addition, we were all but told to expect less pure talent in exchange for higher football character.

Getting a roster filled with talented high football character players will take several seasons. That's been my expectation from the start.

That said, the one area I've been disappointed with was the lack of a timely priority on the OL.

I agree. Play it safe in '09, and then get ready to go crazy with the ABUNDANCE of talent that will be available if there's an uncapped year.

And talent is overrated in this league. Far, far more important to establish an amendable environment to winning.

Hydrae · 12-14-2009, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Discus.

Javelin

Fritz88 · 12-14-2009, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pestilence

It's going to take a lot to make me happy this offseason. And yes I know that the Chiefs don't give two shits about how I feel or what I want....but I'd like to see 75% of this shit happen.

1. Fire Pendergast and bring in a competent 3-4 defensive coordinator.

2. Hire an offensive coordinator and let him call the plays.

3. Hire a QB coach and actually let him coach the QBs.

4. Bring in competition at the QB position. And I mean actual competition...not another QB that will get 10 reps throughout the offseason and then Cassel gets the job handed to him.

5. Draft a ****ing playmaker in the 1st round. I better not see a defensive lineman or offensive lineman with a top 5 pick.

6. Be active in Free Agency. I know that if it's uncapped that there won't be a lot (if any) good free agents out there. But if it is a capped year....then we better be filling ****ing holes this offseason.

that sounds delicious.

**DeezNutz** · 12-14-2009, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hydrae

Javelin

Nice. Have you seen Cassel throw one of these? Impressive arm strength.

keg in kc · 12-14-2009, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

Agree to disagree then I guess. I don't see these "supports" to the foundation you're talking about.

I was talking about supports in temporary terms, not permanent solutions. Which is why I used the word supports.

Quote:

This was the year to begin building that foundation, and here we are 11 months later, and we're still looking at a muddy hole in the ground.

I don't think we'll be able to tell until 2011 whether Jackson is an actual foundation player or not, because of the nature of his position, but that's what he was brought in to be. Cassel was also brought in to be a foundation player, but they didn't put anything in place around him, so his impact was going to be limited by default. Which doesn't mean I think his play is fine or anything like that, but more on that later.

I don't think you can discount holdovers from Herm just because they're holdovers from Herm. I think Dorsey has shown he can play in this system, although hurting his knee again (if that's what happened yesterday) is troubling. Hali has been fine. Both Flowers and Carr should be starters for a long time. Guys like Gilberry and Studebaker have shown some promise. Page will hopefully come back from IR. All young players with the potential to contribute for years.

I think the defense is not far off from making huge strides (talking in personnel terms). A safety and a couple of linebackers and I could see them moving up 15 or 20 spots in 2010. Although I'm not sure what kind of job Pendergast can do. Time will tell I guess.

The offense is probably going to take longer. They had less to start with, and offense generally always takes longer. The only untouchables right now in my mind are Charles and Bowe. I think Albert's going to be fine in the long term, but as far as I'm concerned the other four spots are going to have to be filled in the next two years, and sooner better than later. I think Pope has played well enough to stay (much to my surprise, honestly). But I think they need 2 receivers, a starter and a slot - I think right now, with Bowe out, they're starting a bunch of 4s. I don't know what they have in Cassel - although the last few weeks have been bad - until they have anybody around him. I've said all along that I don't think anybody could succeed behind center here with this roster, and I believe that as much now as I did in September. The question is whether he could succeed behind the reins of a talented offense, and right now I just don't know. I'm not going to say yes, but I'm also not going to say no. Just...I don't know.

Anyway, I think they have started building the core of the team. It's just hard to see it in the face of the way they play. I think the 2010 offseason will tell us a lot more than the 2009 did, in any case. The personnel department is now completely Pioli guys, there's been a shitton of roster turnover, they have tape on everybody, and I don't think there's any viable excuse for them not to show a great deal of improvement, both on the roster and on the field. They should be a more competitive team, fall somewhere into the league average range of 6-10 to 10-6, and then in 2011 they should be fully in the division race.

Those have been my expectations since the hire was made, and that's what they continue to be, regardless of anything that's happened in 2009.

DaWolf · 12-14-2009, 02:15 PM

There are a few reasons I would give Pioli some more time:

1) Hunt didn't hire him to just come in and "fix" the existing team. He hired him to change the entire culture of the football side of the operations. Pioli said from the beginning that doing this would not happen overnight and that they may have to step back before moving forward. If Clark wanted to stay the course with the roster and culture in place, he should have promoted Kuharic and kept Herm around.

2) Pioli wasn't able to get his own personnel department and scouts set until after the draft, when contracts expired and new hires were available. Now this may not seem like a big deal or it may just be some excuse if you believe all personnel departments are created equally and it is just the top guy who makes all the calls, but I'll be curious to see if there is any difference this coming offseason.

3) Rookies usually can't be fully evaluated their first year. Some rooks look great and just fade after a few years, others bust out in the 2nd or 3rd year. I'm not going to sit here and say we had a great draft by any means, but I think you need to let the class mature a bit more before writing it off.

4) This is not new to Pioli, in New England they did a very similar thing in 2000, taking an 8-8 football team, getting rid of a bunch of guys and signing a bunch of scrubs, and going 5-11, and starting the next year off 1-3 before going on their run. Now they had a better core of veteran players in place to start with than we do, but I think the philosophy is to bring in guys who buy into the "system" and slowly start to build that roster. By year three, a lot of the guys starting or playing significant portions for us now should be valuable depth if the so called "process" works and better and better talent is brought in.

I agree that right now a lot of the moves look bad and we're not much better off than we were to start with. And if we don't have a significant talent influx this offseason, then something is amiss and you can go to the top there, because he's now had enough time not only to get his front office pieces in place, but he's had the time to get a firsthand look at the roster he has and who fits in and who doesn't.

Pioli may well be in over his head, and maybe he's not going to be able to get it done here. The biggest thing I have against him right now is not on the personnel front, but on the coaching hire front. Haley is bugging me more and more every week. I think the biggest reflection on a roster that isn't improving is the quality of the coaching. I don't care who you have playing, good coaches will always get their guys to improve as the year goes on. We're sinking. And we could arguably have three more wins with a better prepared football team. So if there are not some big changes on the staff this offseason, I don't think Pioli will have much of a chance even if he has an A+ draft this offseason...

12-14-2009, 11:24 AM
OnTheWarpath15 MVP Join Date: Sep 2005 Casino cash: $2021115	Why people are disappointed: Exhibit A - Talent Evaluation Since there seems to be several myths, excuses and some flat-out lies about why some folks are pissed off about this team right now, I thought I'd put together a few threads explaining, as clearly as I can, where people are coming from. One of the bigger excuses is the infamous, "Pioli inherited a shitty team." Let me make this clear: I do not disagree. However, that doesn't excuse the Executive of the Decade for the team being no better now than it was this time last year - and you could make an argument that it is worse. And one of the reasons why this team still sucks is simple: The Executive of the Decade missed BADLY on talent evaluation. I just spent a few minutes researching the transactions Pioli has made since taking the job, and it's even worse than I originally thought. Counting draft picks, trades and signings, Pioli is responsible for FORTY FIVE new players to this organization. And of these 45, it's fair to say that only Succop and Chambers are clear upgrades to their predecessors. Two. Out of forty-five. That's a whopping 4% success rate. I'm sorry, but blaming Herm here is ridiculous. The best players on this team are Herm's players. Looking at the current roster - including the active roster, PS and IR - 54% of the players currently in this organization are Pioli's. Exactly half of the current starting 22 are Pioli's. And this team is ONE win better than a 2008 squad that featured Tyler ****ing Thigpen at QB, and employed Gunther Cunningham as the DC. With the majority being Pioli's hand-picked players. Let the excuses flow like fine wine. Discus. This ought to be fun - let's hit that Millionth post.
Posts: 60,758

12-14-2009, 01:29 PM	#33
Mecca Hockey Town Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Kansas City, Missouri Casino cash: $-782950	Right now I'd be happy to not be a Todd Haley guy after what I've seen out of him.
Posts: 115,406

12-14-2009, 02:15 PM	#45
DaWolf Cry havoc... Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10007725	There are a few reasons I would give Pioli some more time: 1) Hunt didn't hire him to just come in and "fix" the existing team. He hired him to change the entire culture of the football side of the operations. Pioli said from the beginning that doing this would not happen overnight and that they may have to step back before moving forward. If Clark wanted to stay the course with the roster and culture in place, he should have promoted Kuharic and kept Herm around. 2) Pioli wasn't able to get his own personnel department and scouts set until after the draft, when contracts expired and new hires were available. Now this may not seem like a big deal or it may just be some excuse if you believe all personnel departments are created equally and it is just the top guy who makes all the calls, but I'll be curious to see if there is any difference this coming offseason. 3) Rookies usually can't be fully evaluated their first year. Some rooks look great and just fade after a few years, others bust out in the 2nd or 3rd year. I'm not going to sit here and say we had a great draft by any means, but I think you need to let the class mature a bit more before writing it off. 4) This is not new to Pioli, in New England they did a very similar thing in 2000, taking an 8-8 football team, getting rid of a bunch of guys and signing a bunch of scrubs, and going 5-11, and starting the next year off 1-3 before going on their run. Now they had a better core of veteran players in place to start with than we do, but I think the philosophy is to bring in guys who buy into the "system" and slowly start to build that roster. By year three, a lot of the guys starting or playing significant portions for us now should be valuable depth if the so called "process" works and better and better talent is brought in. I agree that right now a lot of the moves look bad and we're not much better off than we were to start with. And if we don't have a significant talent influx this offseason, then something is amiss and you can go to the top there, because he's now had enough time not only to get his front office pieces in place, but he's had the time to get a firsthand look at the roster he has and who fits in and who doesn't. Pioli may well be in over his head, and maybe he's not going to be able to get it done here. The biggest thing I have against him right now is not on the personnel front, but on the coaching hire front. Haley is bugging me more and more every week. I think the biggest reflection on a roster that isn't improving is the quality of the coaching. I don't care who you have playing, good coaches will always get their guys to improve as the year goes on. We're sinking. And we could arguably have three more wins with a better prepared football team. So if there are not some big changes on the staff this offseason, I don't think Pioli will have much of a chance even if he has an A+ draft this offseason...
Posts: 6,798