Track Dee Ford's Trillions

['Hamas' Jenkins]

The Trillion is a quasi-stat originating from basketball. Grantland writer, and former tOSU benchwarmer, Mark Titus is most famously associated with the stat, but I remember reading about it in SI more than 15 years ago.

Here's how it works: if a player gets into a game and accrues no stats, his stat sheet will read with his minutes played followed by 12 zeros, thus a trillion. Many scrubs have been known to accrue fouls just to avoid the Trillion.

I believe that Dee Ford has been active for every game this season. If that is the case, he has 12 games played, He has accrued stats in two of them. That means that in 10/12 games, Dee has racked up the ignominious stat.

Thus, I propose that we give Dee Ford a new nickname: National Debt.

[JohnnyHammersticks]

You guys are missing the obvious brilliance of the Dee Ford draft pick. The way to confuse your opponents is to do things they're not expecting. Couple the fact that 2014 could go down as the greatest WR draft in NFL history with the shit-show the Chiefs trot out weekly at WR, and EVERYONE was expecting us to draft a WR.

Now look at edge pass rusher. If there was one position on the Chiefs where you could say coming into the 2014 season that we were relatively stacked at, it would be edge rusher.

So the brilliance of the pick is that we passed at a position of need, which was loaded in this years' draft, in order to reach for a guy who plays a position that we didn't need anyone for. The fact that Dee Farce will never see Dee Field is irrelevant, the pick was sheer brilliance. Amazing how you guys are missing this.

[CousinEddie]

Originally Posted by wazu

I actually think he might. Doesn't strike me as a replacement for Hali, though, if that is supposed to be the plan.

No, he's not a replacement for Hali, that will come in the first round this year.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by JohnnyHammersticks

You guys are missing the obvious brilliance of the Dee Ford draft pick. The way to confuse your opponents is to do things they're not expecting. Couple the fact that 2014 could go down as the greatest WR draft in NFL history with the shit-show the Chiefs trot out weekly at WR, and EVERYONE was expecting us to draft a WR.

Now look at edge pass rusher. If there was one position on the Chiefs where you could say coming into the 2014 season that we were relatively stacked at, it would be edge rusher.

So the brilliance of the pick is that we passed at a position of need, which was loaded in this years' draft, in order to reach for a guy who plays a position that we didn't need anyone for. The fact that Dee Farce will never see Dee Field is irrelevant, the pick was sheer brilliance. Amazing how you guys are missing this.

This isn't aimed at you, but your post inspired me to write.

For years I've read the draftniks on this site arguing that you don't draft for need. You draft for the best available player and take into account positional value.

Presumably that's what Dorsey did this year. He took the best player available at an important position. And now it seems that many on the board are saying that we should have drafted based on need.

If someone wants to argue that the best player available was indeed a wide receiver, then we have a valid discussion about draft tactics. But it seems like the real discussion here is the old standby: how do you weigh need versus positional value versus individual player. In this case, I suspect that Dorsey was aware that OLB was a strength and WR was a weakness, so he weighs positional value and individual player potential heavily over need. That should make a lot of people around here pretty happy.

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

This isn't aimed at you, but your post inspired me to write.

For years I've read the draftniks on this site arguing that you don't draft for need. You draft for the best available player and take into account positional value.

Presumably that's what Dorsey did this year. He took the best player available at an important position. And now it seems that many on the board are saying that we should have drafted based on need.

If someone wants to argue that the best player available was indeed a wide receiver, then we have a valid discussion about draft tactics. But it seems like the real discussion here is the old standby: how do you weigh need versus positional value versus individual player. In this case, I suspect that Dorsey was aware that OLB was a strength and WR was a weakness, so he weighs positional value and individual player potential heavily over need. That should make a lot of people around here pretty happy.

I've found this hilarious, too. They all flip flopped on the BPA strategy they always referred to with the packers and steelers etc

Now?

BPA only at positions of need. The draft talk on this site, though, with the draftniks is laughably horrendous so now it's just comedic relief during draft week

[Discuss Thrower]

At the time the Ford pick made some sense given that the team seemed to fall apart without Houston and Hali.

The defense has fallen apart with both of those guys on the field. Clearly the Chiefs are talent deficient everywhere on the team.

BPA. BPA. BPA. BPA. BPA. BPA. BPA. BPA. BPA. BPA. BPA.

If that nets KC an OG, CB, NT, OLB, OT, OG, ILB, P, CB, WR and OG in that particular order than so be it.

The Chiefs cannot put off the rebuild any longer.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

This isn't aimed at you, but your post inspired me to write.

For years I've read the draftniks on this site arguing that you don't draft for need. You draft for the best available player and take into account positional value.

Presumably that's what Dorsey did this year. He took the best player available at an important position. And now it seems that many on the board are saying that we should have drafted based on need.

If someone wants to argue that the best player available was indeed a wide receiver, then we have a valid discussion about draft tactics. But it seems like the real discussion here is the old standby: how do you weigh need versus positional value versus individual player. In this case, I suspect that Dorsey was aware that OLB was a strength and WR was a weakness, so he weighs positional value and individual player potential heavily over need. That should make a lot of people around here pretty happy.

Given the performances of several rookie wideouts, it's fairly obvious Dee Ford was not BPA.

[LoneWolf]

I wonder if Packer fans tracked Aaron Rodgers' trillions. This thread is ****ing stupid and Discuss Thrower's contribution to this thread makes everyone who reads it dumber.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

I wonder if Packer fans tracked Aaron Rodgers' trillions. This thread is ****ing stupid and Discuss Thrower's contribution to this thread makes everyone who reads it dumber.

Did you just say something about Johnny Manziel ?

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by Hog Farmer

Did you just say something about Johnny Manziel ?

He's racked up the trillions this year.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

He's racked up the trillions this year.

I think his show begins next week. They put him in yesterday with 12:00 left in the 4th and he took them down for a score, 8 plays 80 yards. Hoyer didn't get a TD all game.

[Rudy tossed tigger's salad]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

I wonder if Packer fans tracked Aaron Rodgers' trillions. This thread is ****ing stupid and Discuss Thrower's contribution to this thread makes everyone who reads it dumber.

I don't think you understand what a trillion is, idiot. You have to actually play in the game.

[Rudy tossed tigger's salad]

Originally Posted by LoneWolf

He's racked up the trillions this year.

Still clueless

[OnTheWarpath15]

Originally Posted by Hootie 2.0

I've found this hilarious, too. They all flip flopped on the BPA strategy they always referred to with the packers and steelers etc

Now?

BPA only at positions of need. The draft talk on this site, though, with the draftniks is laughably horrendous so now it's just comedic relief during draft week

Not "they all".

One, it could easily be argued that Ford wasn't the BPA regardless of need or position. Many made that exact argument on draft day.

Two, even if you want to have the "position of need" argument, what positions did we NOT need?

Bottom line: Unless you're injured or a QB sitting for a year behind an established vet, a R1 pick should contribute as a rookie.

Look at the guys taken in the first round. There are a LOT of guys who have made significant contributions to their teams. Ford's best known for running away from Frank Gore.

[LoneWolf]

Originally Posted by Rudy lost the toss

Still clueless

The whole concept is ****ing dumb. Currently Dee Ford is playing on special teams only. His opportunity for getting on the stat sheet are minimal.

If someone wants to start a thread talking about Ford's lack of playing time and how he looks like he needs to improve a lot to justify his draft slot, that'd be fine. Trying to skirt around the conversation by using some made up stat like "trillions" is ****ing dumb.

[Hootie]

Welp, consider me on the "wait and see" wagon with Ford. He has a couple of perennial pro bowlers playing, you know, his position and Sutton rotates players about as often as I clean my sheets