Someone explain to me what makes Aaron Curry worth the 3rd pick?

[Mecca]

Since I'm seeing people starting to lean that way I really want to know...he's not a rusher 9 1/2 sacks in 4 years...he has nearly as many INT's as he does sacks over the course of his college career...

Does this mean he's a bad player no it doesn't, but the type of LB he is does not make him worth a top 5 pick. Fathom this Ernie Sims was taken 10 as a traditional 4-3 OLB he's a very nice player...is he a difference maker up in Detroit, he's not. And it can be easily argued that he's more naturally gifted than Curry is..the OLB position in a 4-3 is not a game changing core position.

Not to mention you could sign the #1 LB on the market of FA for half of what you'd have to pay Curry to do the same thing.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Do you agree with Scott Wright that Sanchez is the biggest boom/bust prospect this year?

No I don't, I think Crabtree is the biggest risk player that is going that high.

[notorious]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

I agree. Though the Chiefs have alot of holes to fill and may not want to part with a boat load of picks.

True. This year I do not know if there is that kind of player. Too bad the #3 is a joke so it will be impossible to trade out of it.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Answer this questioned I posed it in the header...

Ernie Sims went 10th, Ernie Sims has sick speed more than Curry does, Sims was the #1 player in his recruiting year...Ernie Sims is more naturally gifted than Curry is...what difference is he making for the Lions?

Scott Wright had Sims as the 13th ranked prospect in 2006. He has Curry as the 2nd. Maybe Curry is just better even though he might not have "sick" speed.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by notorious

Game. Set. Match.

Don't worry it'll get ignored the Ernie Sims example is a huge middle finger to anyone who thinks putting a great LB who doesn't rush the passer on your team will change anything.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Scott Wright had Sims as the 13th ranked prospect in 2006. He has Curry as the 2nd. Maybe Curry is just better even though he might not have "sick" speed.

Ernie Sims was in a better class....don't play dumbass semantics with me, either you are stupid or just acting that way to prove some reerun point.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by Reerun_KC

I agree that anyone drafted in the 1st round is the biggest boom/bust prospect every year, based on financial investment into that said player.

Go back to the kiddie table and write "Herm Sucks" 500 times. You were more intelligent when you stuck to that one topic.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Do you agree with Scott Wright that Sanchez is the biggest boom/bust prospect this year?

I think it's Stafford.

I've said before that I see his ceiling as being perhaps slightly higher than Sanchez's, but his basement being lower.

ChiefsCountry has said that Stafford reminds him of Elway and Sanchez of Aikman. I think this is pretty accurate.

But I just don't see Stafford being "a guy." I think he'll be a homerun or a swing and miss.

[melbar]

Originally Posted by Mecca

You basically tried to argue that draft value doesn't matter, and I showed you that it does and now you're acting confused.

I said what?
No.
I said that if you know a player has talent and they have shown themselves to have a strong skill set you take him. The argument that if scouts had scouted Lewis' skill set or Harrisons skill set better they would have drafted them much higher. Just like Brady at QB. Curry has shown a solid skill set now. He looks to have that kind of talent and is seen as the top defender in the draft. If the QB's are gone, we're set at LT and there isnt a DE you have to look at the other "elite" prospects. I'm sorry but the assertion that LB isnt an important position is wrong. If he looks to be that good you either reach for another position or you solidify one that is a need and happens to have a very good player available.

[Mecca]

And for the record anyone that ever watched Sims play at FSU he was a ****ing monster.

[lazepoo]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Cassel played in zero.

I'm not advocating Cassel by any stretch of the imagination but this fascination with declaring Sanchez as "not ready" has gone overboard.

He was at USC for 4 years. If he had stayed, his stock in the NFL draft may have only dropped. It's tough to beat 1, 2, or 3 overall.

I think you're absolutely right and there's nothing that Sanchez could have learned in another year at USC that he can't learn on an NFL sideline (while making top ten money to boot), but I'm still curious which way we might go if the front office isn't sold on Sanchez.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by melbar

I said what?
No.
I said that if you know a player has talent and they have shown themselves to have a strong skill set you take him. The argument that if scouts had scouted Lewis' skill set or Harrisons skill set better they would have drafted them much higher. Just like Brady at QB. Curry has shown a solid skill set now. He looks to have that kind of talent and is seen as the top defender in the draft. If the QB's are gone, we're set at LT and there isnt a DE you have to look at the other "elite" prospects. I'm sorry but the assertion that LB isnt an important position is wrong. If he looks to be that good you either reach for another position or you solidify one that is a need and happens to have a very good player available.

Address the Ernie Sims point.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Scott Wright had Sims as the 13th ranked prospect in 2006. He has Curry as the 2nd. Maybe Curry is just better even though he might not have "sick" speed.

Scott Wright did say that was in effect saying his pass rush skills are questionable.

He's rated highly because this is not a great draft class.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Cassel played in zero.

I'm not advocating Cassel by any stretch of the imagination but this fascination with declaring Sanchez as "not ready" has gone overboard.

He was at USC for 4 years. If he had stayed, his stock in the NFL draft may have only dropped. It's tough to beat 1, 2, or 3 overall.

And Matt Cassell has been on the bench for 3 years and IMHO he still sucks.

If Pioli thinks Sanchez is the right person I will be happy about. I am not one of those people that don't want a QB I just don't think he is ready to play starting Day one and that is what we need.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Ernie Sims was in a better class....don't play dumbass semantics with me, either you are stupid or just acting that way to prove some reerun point.

You start a thread asking for reasons why Curry is worth a 3rd. When people start to give reasons you get all upset because it doesn't support your view of Sanchez or nothing. The other day you got all offended when someone quetioned Scott Wright's opinions. Now when I point out Wright thinks highly of Curry and ranks him higher, you don't want to hear it.

[kcchiefsus]

Originally Posted by brandon

Wait... I just figured it out.

We're going to take a page out of the Vikings playbook and let our draft timer run out to get better contract leverage. I bet we settle on Curry at 7.

Assuming Stafford is gone and depending on how we view Sanchez as a prospect I almost wouldn't mind doing that. I know it will never happen but I simply don't see many players worth the #3 pick.