Chiefs Are 'Badly' Trying To Trade Down To Middle Of First Round

[TRR]

Not sure if it has been posted.....

Chiefs Are 'Badly' Trying To Trade Down To Middle Of First*Round

by Joel Thorman on Apr 18, 2010 10:34 AM CDT in 2010 Campaign

Last year about this time, Michael Lombardi of the National Football Post first reported that the Chiefs were "in love" with LSU DE Tyson Jackson. A few days later and Jackson was the Chiefs pick in the draft.

Now Lombardi reports that the Chiefs are trying like hell to move down in the draft.

"The Chiefs are trying, and I mean really trying, to move down," Lombardi reports. "My sources tell me they'll be willing to go down as far as 15 for the right deal because they feel they can find a player in that range."

It's a fine line between trading down and trading down too far. According to Lombardi, our theory of the Eagles offering up the 24th and 37th picks for the Chiefs fifth pick doesn't look like it's happening. By staying around 15, they can still have a shot at a game changer -- Alabama LB Rolando McClain and Texas S Earl Thomas come to mind here -- as well as picking up extra selections.

That said, who's the Chiefs trading partner? SB Nation's Mocking The Draft takes an excellent look at this situation and comes to the conclusion that San Francisco might be the only team in that area that has a chance of moving up.

Lombardi reports the Chiefs are hoping someone wants to get in line to pick Notre Dame QB Jimmy Clausen.

[Hammock Parties]

I honestly shudder to think what the offseason will be like if we win 7 games.

We'll be right back where we were 10 years ago - going into every offseason thinking we're only a player or two away.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

I don't think that's happening at all, Kevin.

However, there are expectations from having a Top 5 pick.

One would expect to acquire an elite talent or franchise QB with that pick.

There are three elite talents in this draft, and two QB's that fit that description.

Two of those 5 players would be wasted in our scheme, don't fit a need, and hold no value at our pick - especially considering we've spent our last two Top 5 picks on that position.

One of the QB's will likely be off the board.

That leaves one of the elite talents (Berry) and one of the Franchise QB's. (Clausen)

To have a Top 5 pick and come away with neither would be a mistake of epic proportions.

You just can't pass on those types of prospects for lessor talent.

Don't get me wrong. I want Clausen first and if not him, I guess Berry.

My worry, though, is that if Berry comes in and doesn't capture bin Laden by Week 4, people will be on him like they've been on Dorsey. Expectations are way too high right now, in my opinion. And if they draft Clausen, some people will pounce on him every mistake he makes because we didn't draft Berry. And if god forbid they don't draft one of those two guys, he will never get a chance, kind of like Jackson has been treated. It's becoming a no-win situation for anyone that we draft, which is not good.

I may disagree with who we draft, but I will certainly have no ill will against them and will want them to succeed. If we draft Dez Bryant, I'll wince, but I'll root for Dez Bryant to do well. Same with Earl Thomas or Bulaga or Dan Williams or McClain or anybody.

Pioli's not going to do everything exactly the way we would. That may not necessarily mean it's wrong or that he won't be successful.

And I'm not preaching at you, OTW58. I'm preaching at the world.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I think it's from the 10,000 posts stating that Berry is a first-ballot hall of famer and the 12,000 posts stating the Bulaga sucks, Williams sucks, McClain sucks, Clausen sucks, Haden doesn't suck but would be a reach, other Williams sucks, Bryant sucks, and so on.

Well, at #5, the options are limited unless you want to A.) reach or B.) take a player that we don't need. Many of those guys don't suck, they just don't deserve to be drafted in the top 5. Thankfully, there are options at #5 that are perfect for the Chiefs. Options so perfect that it isn't worth trading down to acquire more players of lesser caliber.

[Mr. Laz]

Let me interject here to all the seppuku applicants ... nothing has actually happened yet. This is all prediction and guesswork.

the Chiefs may not be trying to trade down and even if we do maybe the Chiefs are just trying to trade down because they know that Clausen is falling.

who the hell knows

no need to get too mad about Mock-like predictions

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Reaper16

Well, at #5, the options are limited unless you want to A.) reach or B.) take a player that we don't need. Many of those guys don't suck, they just don't deserve to be drafted in the top 5. Thankfully, there are options at #5 that are perfect for the Chiefs. Options so perfect that it isn't worth trading down to acquire more players of lesser caliber.

It's the interesting thing about picking high. You naturally get bracketed into an extremely small pool of players. Not that that's always a bad thing, or that it's a bad thing in 2010 for the Chiefs, but it seems like it happens, whereas in the #10 spot you have a wider array as the talent distribution starts spreading.

I'm absolutely not advocating trading down, though. If you can take an elite player, you take the elite player.

[Mecca]

Why am I not surprised, truth be told I doubt teams will be willing to give up that much to move this year, when a class has depth no one wants to part with their 2nd round pick.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

And I'm not preaching at you, OTW58. I'm preaching at the world.

Oh, so this post was directed at me? Well, I heard you.

And you're wrong.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by DeezNutz

Oh, so this post was directed at me? Well, I heard you.

And you're wrong.

At least 40 percent of it was directed at China and India.

[Tribal Warfare]

Tis the time of misinformation, also Lombardi reported that KC signed Cassel to a 30 million dollar guaranteed contract on draft day when he didn't sign shit yet.

[Rain Man]

I realize that this is crazy talk, but I have to say, the more I read about C.J. Spiller, the more intrigued I become. Would we draft a guy who could line up with Charles for a "lightning and even more lightning" backfield, and then also solve our kick return problems?


(Ducking and running for cover.)

[Mr. Laz]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

At least 40 percent of it was directed at China and India.

you know they couldn't understand what you said though

[Pushead2]

I want the draft to come and then it'll be months of bitching of who we didn't take. Yessssssssssssssssss........

[beer bacon]

It would be nice if people could wait to lose their shit until after we screw up our draft.

What sort of a pick in the first half round would we need to get to Graham?

[beer bacon]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Why am I not surprised, truth be told I doubt teams will be willing to give up that much to move this year, when a class has depth no one wants to part with their 2nd round pick.

The only way we could get a decent trade is if some team is terribly desperate for whoever is left at #5. Otherwise everyone is going to be looking to add more 2nd and 3rd rounders in this draft just like we are.

[Reaper16]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I realize that this is crazy talk, but I have to say, the more I read about C.J. Spiller, the more intrigued I become. Would we draft a guy who could line up with Charles for a "lightning and even more lightning" backfield, and then also solve our kick return problems?


(Ducking and running for cover.)

He's worth the pick. Dude is pretty legit. There are worse options at #5.