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.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

That "shitty ass reference" just proved you wrong.

What's your M.O.?

To evaluate the best player (in your opinion) for the Chiefs at #3 overall, or too prove Mecca wrong?

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Are you going to take my wager then? You never replied and I've offered twice. Here's a third:

Barring a high profile QB signing or trade, if the Chiefs pass on Sanchez at #3, you get all my casino cash.

If they Sanchez I get yours.

Deal?

I'll take you up on the bet above. (Notice I edited it). I wouldn't mind Sanchez myself I just don't think this staff will take him.

[keg in kc]

Since there was some complaint about the Derrick Johnson comparison, it's time to refresh some memories:

Derrick Johnson may be the most explosive linebacker in the past few years in college football. He routinely makes big plays, and has done so all four years at Texas. Last year as a junior, Johnson racked up 125 tackles with 20 of them for loss, 2 sacks, 4 INT, and 9 pass break ups. His 3 year totals at Texas are amazing: 328 tackles, 46 tackles for loss, 8.5 sacks, 8 INT, and 22 pass break ups.

There aren’t too many linebackers out there that possess the type of physical ability and all around ability on the football field that Johnson has. Johnson is tall, and extremely athletic. He plays sideline to sideline, and has excellent closing speed. He can drop into coverage with ease, and has the ability to make plays on the football in coverage. He is also very good at moving forward towards the passer or stuffing the run. Johnson just has a nose for the football, and is in on every play. He is the type of all around LB every team wishes they could have. link

Derrick Johnson is a very aggressive player with great football instincts. He is an explosive hitter with great closing speed, who rarely misses a tackle. He has blazing top-end speed and plays from sideline to sideline, always taking great angles. He also matches up well with running backs and tight ends in pass coverage. Plays his best in open spaceJohnson is a big-play linebacker who always seems to bring his best efforts in the big games. He has a non-stop motor and plays with a lot of passion. He also has a great attitude, is tough, and has a tremendous work ethic.

Derrick Johnson has had a huge impact on the Longhorn's defense and is undoubtably the best linebacker in this year's class. He will most likely be a top-10 pick in the 2005 NFL Draft. link

Playmaker is best LB prospect since LaVar Arrington link

He was actually statistically better than Curry, and they're almost identical in terms of measurements pre-draft (Curry @5 lbs heavy).

The fact that DJ hasn't been an all pro to this point doesn't change the fact that everything you heard about him heading into the draft was that he was the perfect LB, the best in years, almost word-for-word what you hear about Curry now.

And my point isn't that Curry will be what Johnson is as a pro, it's that Johnson went at 15, even with people talking about him going top 10 or even top 5. Because as good as he was in college, as great an all-around LB prospect as he was, as "can't miss" as people thought he was, THAT'S the positional value of a LB.

Take him top 5 if you want. I wouldn't. Not even if he's Ray Lewis (who went 26) or Brian Urlacher (who went 9).

Because other positions are more valuable.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

I'll take you up on the bet above. (Notice I edited it). I wouldn't mind Sanchez myself I just don't think this staff will take him.

So Sanchez, only? Even if Stafford is there?

Hmmmm.

Two things first: Let's wait until the Combine is complete and B) we need to wait for CanadaKc to respond.

Deal?

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

Since there was some complaint about the Derrick Johnson comparison, .

Right before the draft criticisms began to pop up about Johnson not taking on blocks and running around blockers. It led him to slide in the draft. Curry doesn't seem to have problems with contact, engaging blockers and shedding blocks.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Right before the draft criticisms began to pop up about Johnson not taking on blocks and running around blockers. It led him to slide in the draft. Curry doesn't seem to have problems with contact, engaging blockers and shedding blocks.

Good.

Then he'll be a great pick at #15 overall.

[Chiefnj2]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Good.

Then he'll be a great pick at #15 overall.

If he's a strict coverage LB 15 would be a good spot. If teams think he can play MLB and/or rush as an OLB in a 3-4 then he could be worth a top 5.

[keg in kc]

The Chiefs fan-nation is bizarro-world. People seriously promote the idea of drafting a LB instead of a QB in the top-5, insinuating that it's somehow better to wait and to get a QB in the middle or later rounds, when everywhere else on earth they say you should take a QB early and get a LB later.

There needs to be some serious carl de-programming. It's like stockholm syndrome, or the waterboarding finally broke them.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

The Chiefs fan-nation is bizarro-world. People seriously promote the idea of drafting a LB instead of a QB in the top-5, insinuating that it's somehow better to wait and to get a QB in the middle or later rounds, when everywhere else on earth they say you should take a QB early and get a LB later.

There needs to be some serious carl de-programming. It's like stockholm syndrome, or the waterboarding finally broke them.

Welcome!

Are you new here?

[keg in kc]

No, I just ride the short bus to school.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

If he's a strict coverage LB 15 would be a good spot. If teams think he can play MLB and/or rush as an OLB in a 3-4 then he could be worth a top 5.

How much evidence do you need to see in order to believe that a MLB isn't a good choice in the top 5?

[melbar]

Originally Posted by Mecca

What do you think is more valuable a top 10 QB or having the best cover backer in the league....

If you say cover backer you should ask the Titans how that works out.

If he's a definate top 10. Hell you've been missing the fact that I'm arguing for him IF both QB's are gone. I've laid out 10 positives for the guy 3 times in this thread and the last one is the first response and it was just reaffirming the premise that LB's who dont have sack numbers are useless. OK. Make an argument to prove your point. Why not just go to a full time dime package with some stud CB's? Sure the Colts LB's did nothing till the playoffs but a LB's job isnt just rushing the passer. Most of the rushers arent in the top level of tacklers. so how many tackles makes up for 1 sack? How many int's? FF's? I'd personally love to have a guy who can make an open field tackle or send a guy back to the huddle dreading the next time he gets hit. I think after the QB's Curry would be a nice piece of the Defensive puzzle. You would like a 3rd young CB. So make a reasoned argument for why. Dont just make a blanket statement like "cover LB's arent valuable" and assume that makes it fact. Address the list of attributes I've listed on Curry and why they are invaluable. Or maybe you can just call me stupid and run away. Whatevers easier.

[Frosty]

Originally Posted by keg in kc

The Chiefs fan-nation is bizarro-world. People seriously promote the idea of drafting a LB instead of a QB in the top-5, insinuating that it's somehow better to wait and to get a QB in the middle or later rounds, when everywhere else on earth they say you should take a QB early and get a LB later.

There needs to be some serious carl de-programming. It's like stockholm syndrome, or the waterboarding finally broke them.

Exactly. I don't see what so hard in understanding that Stafford/Sanchez + Cushing/Sintim is much, much better value than Curry + Freeman/Davis/Bomar?

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by melbar

If he's a definate top 10. Hell you've been missing the fact that I'm arguing for him IF both QB's are gone. I've laid out 10 positives for the guy 3 times in this thread and the last one is the first response and it was just reaffirming the premise that LB's who dont have sack numbers are useless. OK. Make an argument to prove your point. Why not just go to a full time dime package with some stud CB's? Sure the Colts LB's did nothing till the playoffs but a LB's job isnt just rushing the passer. Most of the rushers arent in the top level of tacklers. so how many tackles makes up for 1 sack? How many int's? FF's? I'd personally love to have a guy who can make an open field tackle or send a guy back to the huddle dreading the next time he gets hit. I think after the QB's Curry would be a nice piece of the Defensive puzzle. You would like a 3rd young CB. So make a reasoned argument for why. Dont just make a blanket statement like "cover LB's arent valuable" and assume that makes it fact. Address the list of attributes I've listed on Curry and why they are invaluable. Or maybe you can just call me stupid and run away. Whatevers easier.

Almost every team in the league would love to have Patrick Willis. Dude is a ****ing monster.

But these types of players are lunch pail guys. In the top 5, you want a dynamic playmaker. That's not a guy like Willis.

Based on his history, it's not Curry, either.

[DeezNutz]

Originally Posted by arc

Exactly. I don't see what so hard in understanding that Stafford/Sanchez + Cushing/Sintim is much, much better value than Curry + Freeman/Davis/Bomar?

My ****ing idiot formula. Loving it.