CMU QB Dan LeFevour says he has had in-depth talks w/ Chiefs

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by milkman

I'm not sure that your question has any value in this discussion.

I don't like any of the "first round" QBs in this draft.

However, if the Cheifs believe there's a QB that has that kind of value, and they pass on him because they already have Cassel in place, then I think they are playing a osing hand.

I believe that Cassel has the potential to be a solid game manager, but if I also believed that Jimmy Clausen or Sam Bradford were potential franchise QBs, I'd draft them, Cassel be damned.

The question has value because, in this case, it got you to acknowledge that reasonable people can differ on whether any given draft class has a guy that you can expect to be a 10-12 year window-creating franchise QB. We can agree on the idea that if such a prospect is available then any team should draft him at the very first opportunity unless they already have their 10-12 year guy and he's young enough that it's too early to draft a replacement. (And in some cases, maybe you draft the replacement anyway and trade one of the two).

It's too easy to look back and say that the Chiefs screwed up in a particular year by passing on a guy who ended up panning out. Maybe you've got an exceptional eye for QBs so I'm leaving you out of this, but with the availability of hindsight there are a lot of people out there who would say that they wanted Drew Brees with our first in 2001 without admitting that they also wanted Jim Druckenmiller with our first in 1997. All I'm saying is that picking a franchise QB isn't as easy as so many people around here make it out to be so the question becomes how much of a flyer are you willing to take? In hindsight, Drew Brees is arguably a better pick than Trent Green, but Tony Gonzalez is unarguably a better pick than Jim Druckenmiller.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by patteeu

The question has value because, in this case, it got you to acknowledge that reasonable people can differ on whether any given draft class has a guy that you can expect to be a 10-12 year window-creating franchise QB. We can agree on the idea that if such a prospect is available then any team should draft him at the very first opportunity unless they already have their 10-12 year guy and he's young enough that it's too early to draft a replacement. (And in some cases, maybe you draft the replacement anyway and trade one of the two).

It's too easy to look back and say that the Chiefs screwed up in a particular year by passing on a guy who ended up panning out. Maybe you've got an exceptional eye for QBs so I'm leaving you out of this, but with the availability of hindsight there are a lot of people out there who would say that they wanted Drew Brees with our first in 2001 without admitting that they also wanted Jim Druckenmiller with our first in 1997. All I'm saying is that picking a franchise QB isn't as easy as so many people around here make it out to be so the question becomes how much of a flyer are you willing to take? In hindsight, Drew Brees is arguably a better pick than Trent Green, but Tony Gonzalez is unarguably a better pick than Jim Druckenmiller.

2001 is a messy example. Media members saw Grandpa's board, and Brees was listed at the top.

Holmes, however, has said in interviews that the team told him that if the Green acquisition didn't go down, they were going to select McAllister and thus wouldn't sign Priest.

Who knows...

And you're right about the duplicity of some using hindsight. But here's all that matters to me: the upside of drafting and developing your own franchise QB is so great that this franchise MUST take that risk.

Yeah, Druckenmiller sucked and we had a HOF TE. A TE, mind you. Personally, I'll take the risk to acquire a franchise QB every. single. day. Assuming I believe said player grades out appropriately, of course.

If that means I miss out on a TE or a G, I'm sure many in the KC market will lament it, but...dems da breaks.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by patteeu

The question has value because, in this case, it got you to acknowledge that reasonable people can differ on whether any given draft class has a guy that you can expect to be a 10-12 year window-creating franchise QB. We can agree on the idea that if such a prospect is available then any team should draft him at the very first opportunity unless they already have their 10-12 year guy and he's young enough that it's too early to draft a replacement. (And in some cases, maybe you draft the replacement anyway and trade one of the two).

It's too easy to look back and say that the Chiefs screwed up in a particular year by passing on a guy who ended up panning out. Maybe you've got an exceptional eye for QBs so I'm leaving you out of this, but with the availability of hindsight there are a lot of people out there who would say that they wanted Drew Brees with our first in 2001 without admitting that they also wanted Jim Druckenmiller with our first in 1997. All I'm saying is that picking a franchise QB isn't as easy as so many people around here make it out to be so the question becomes how much of a flyer are you willing to take? In hindsight, Drew Brees is arguably a better pick than Trent Green, but Tony Gonzalez is unarguably a better pick than Jim Druckenmiller.

Here's the thing.

Nothing I say or do really matters.

The fact is, I didn't like Brees in that draft.

I never thought he'd be anything more than a marginal starter, at best.

But it's not my job to make these decisions, and according to reports, the Chiefs had Brees at the top of their draft board until they traded for Green.

I didn't like the trade for Green either, because I don't like short term solutions to the QB position (or most positions for that matter).

I bitched about the decision, and had they not traded for Green, I would have bitched about the decision to draft Brees.

But, when it's all said and done, I would have gotten over the decision to draft Brees, given what he has become.

Now that it's all said and done as it relates to Green, I still bitch about that trade, because in the end, it turned out to be a short term solution, as I expected.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by milkman

Here's the thing.

Nothing I say or do really matters.

The fact is, I didn't like Brees in that draft.

I never thought he'd be anything more than a marginal starter, at best.

But it's not my job to make these decisions, and according to reports, the Chiefs had Brees at the top of their draft board until they traded for Green.

I didn't like the trade for Green either, because I don't like short term solutions to the QB position (or most positions for that matter).

I bitched about the decision, and had they not traded for Green, I would have bitched about the decision to draft Brees.

But, when it's all said and done, I would have gotten over the decision to draft Brees, given what he has become.

Now that it's all said and done as it relates to Green, I still bitch about that trade, because in the end, it turned out to be a short term solution, as I expected.

That's admirably honest of you to admit that you weren't on the Brees bandwagon in advance (those who keep better track of these things might have already known it, I suppose, but still I commend you). I agree with you that it's the professional's job to recognize talent better than we do so to some extent hindsight criticism is deserved.

I'd always heard the story that the Chiefs would have drafted McAllister if they hadn't traded their 1st away so my conclusion is that they must not have thought of Brees as a legit franchise guy. To them, he appears to have been the best among a bunch of prospects.