Hypothetical: Chip Kelly LOVES Geno Smith
 

Let's say that Chip Kelly really loves Geno Smith and feels that he is the one QB in this draft who could run his offense. The Chiefs aren't as sold on Geno as some of the members of this board--in fact, they have Geno and Tyler Wilson graded fairly close together.

If the Eagles are willing to trade their #4 pick, their second this year and their first next year for our #1 pick, do you pull the trigger and pick up Wilson with the #4?

Granted, Wilson being there at 4 is not a guarantee, but it is highly likely. Maybe that is why they bring in Alex Smith, insurance.

Personally, I would do it.

I think with some proper coaching from the QB Whisperer, Wilson could be a top notch QB (note: I am a Geno fan).

We have so many holes that could be filled with those two other picks (a high 2nd rounder, and lets face it; the Eagles will suck next year too so that pick should be a high first).

If Wilson can be coached to be a franchise QB, would you trade Geno for him and two other probable starters?

I certainly wouldn't complain, and yeah i'd be ecstatic...as long as we actually got Wilson.

If we trade down to draft a LT....yeah, i'd be pissed.

Wilson goes to the Jags, Barkley to the Raiders, and we're stuck.

NO.

So let's trade down.....past two teams who both need QBs and could take QBs.

**** that shit. If they like Wilson....then take him at #1.

If Kelly falls in love with any QB it's going to be Manuel.

Hypothetical Scenario in which Sorter= GM for KC

Just another day in the office, getting ready for the draft. Sends Pioli an email saying "**** you, pillowbiter."

All of a sudden, a wild phone rings. *ring, ring*

"Hello, this is Sorter. Who's this?"

"Hi Sorter, this is Chip Kelly. I'd like to talk to you about the availability of your first round pick"

"...Could you hang on just one minute for me, Chip? Thanks."

...a minute passes...

*phone picked back up* "Hey Chip, I have someone who'd like to speak to you." (to another person) "Yeah, sure go ahead and tell him"

"Hello Chip, this is Geno Smith. Go **** yourself."

"Any questions Chip?"

Lmao sorter.

Chip Kelly loves Geno, tell him to get bent.

The first three picks will be QBs. Absolutely not.

jokel doesnt even make the top ten. Boom!
Posted via Mobile Device

This makes it a risk we don't get our qb. That's why we wanted the first overall pick. Don't mess around. The qb is more important, worry about te rest later

ROFL at the idiocy in this thread.

Yeah, the draft is really going to go QB, QB, QB with the first three picks.

****ing people baffle me.

I don't care who the Chiefs pick as long as it's the best quarterback in the draft.

This

It's not that it WILL.

It's that it COULD.

Why risk it?

That's reeruned. If you can get Wilson at #4 - and you can - along with the #36 pick and a first next year, then you're reeruned for taking him #1.

There's no way to know that ahead of time. No way.

Yes, in a perfect world you can.


Say you do trade down though to 4, and the Cards call up the Raiders and trade to 3 and take him there. Then you are left with a guy you aren't a high on.


Why risk it.

No. This is the perfect kind of situation where the Chiefs get burned. Happens to us all the time.

I think that is really the problem: there hasn't been a QB who is really head and shoulders above the other QBs in this draft class. I think they are bunched up close enough that the quality of coaching is what will ultimately decide the best QB in this particular draft.

Value.

I meet with CEOs, CIOs, and CTOs in the financial industry all the time.

You know how many of them are more interested in maximizing value vs. minimizing risk?

That's just not true.

In the eyes of the media and fans, there isn't a QB who is head and shoulders above the others.

I guarantee you that by the 1st of April, it will become clear to the media and fans that they were wrong...

It depends on free agency. If the Jags get Alex Smith or Flynn (Bradley would be familiar with both) AND they had Smith, Barkley and Wilson all pretty evenly rated AND they could get Foles in the deal with the Eagles, I think they would have to strongly consider it.

I suppose it depends on how high KC is on Wilson. If they feel like it's literally a toss-up between Geno, Barkley, and Wilson then sure you take the trade.

If they feel like there is one guy and then the rest of them are scrubs, then yes you absolutely take that one guy number 1. IF you feel like he is your guy. Absolutely.

My understanding of this thread was that hypothetically KC wasn't enamored with Geno and looking to trade down.

After Geno, to me it's a toss-up.

It certainly makes drafting Wilson or Barkley less of a gamble when you get the extra picks. Given that the top of the second round is essentially the first round (with guys falling), you're looking at getting potentially 3 first round talents - INCLUDING YOUR QB - simply for not taking a guy you weren't high on anyway.

Couple that with the extra first round pick next year, and I think it's a no-brainer.

You might not be wrong to turn down the trade, but you absolutely have to have a more rational explanation than this.

Looking over the Eagles schedule for next year, it is looking like that first round pick in '14 could be a very high pick as well.

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images...jpg?1358464054

It's not about how you've rated the QBs one against the other, unless you're talking about including Glennon, Manuel, Nassib, and Dysert along with the other 3.

It's about how comfortable you are gambling that you get NONE of the 3 you listed.

While it's not likely that Geno, Wilson, and Barkley go 1-2-3, it's absolutely possible. You're taking a risk that all you're left with is Glennon or some equally shitty option.

Chiefs, Jaguars, Raiders, and Eagles will all be looking for new QBs. Those are the first four picks in the draft. Then you have the Cardinals that might trade up. Both the Browns and Chargers have new regimes and may look for new QBs. Both the Jets and the Buccaneers may also look for a new QB. That's within the top 15. It's idiotic to take the risk and miss out on either Geno, Wilson, or Barkley. Extra draft picks mean doodly shit if you do not have a franchise QB.

Based on what?

The previous 15 years?

It would be hypocritical for me to disagree, so yes, it's possible.

So it comes down to whether it's worth the risk. And I think it is absolutely, positively, 100% worth the risk.

(under this scenario - I still want Geno Smith, dammit.)

I think that is part of the problem: If I recall correctly, Clark has explicitly stated that there isn't a franchise QB in this draft.

Will there be better QBs in next year's draft? I don't know.

Next year's crop looks weaker to me. Especially when you consider that this year's crop had a much better outlook last year.

And what happens if he's gone before #4?

That's when you get into what the Browns GM called the Weeden pick.....a "panicked disaster".

He didn't say that. He said that he won't get a call from Reid/Dorsey saying they were wrong and there's a sure-thing, can't miss prospect in this draft. And he's right.

That doesn't mean you don't take a QB, and I think this whole trade scenario works only if you still take a QB at #4.

The hypothetical is predicated on taking a QB at 4.

I see Barkley, Bray, Glennon, and Wilson as similar value. If I'm willing to pass on Geno, I'm not going to think of missing out one any of the also-rans as a deal breaker.

I'm no higher on Wilson than I am Barkley. To me, they are a distant 2A and 2B behind Geno.

If the Chiefs took Barkley, I would be in no way more disappointed than if they took Wilson.

If they aren't taking Geno, then my emotions go way down.

Barkley + #34, #36, and two firsts next year

Wilson + #34, #36, and two firsts next year.

To me, they're the same.

Hypothetical: Easy answer. You do what the chargers did with Eli and Rivers. You take Geno at number 1. Have the Eagles take Wilson at four and then finalize the trade.

It will certainly be interesting leading up to draft day...Reid and the Eagles were booed for drafting McNabb; I wonder what our reaction will be when the pick is announced.

Winner.

/thread

And that's only if they like Barkley. The OP stated that they had Wilson and Smith rated equally.

So.....what happens when you trade down to #4 and Wilson goes #2 or #3? What the **** do we do then? Do we reach for Barkley (if they don't have him rated as high) or do you take a player that you now have to find a spot for?

What Nirvana said. The answer was so simple.

Okay. How's this for rational?

It's settling. I don't care how small the distance between the QBs is that Andy Reid perceives. Andy Reid needs to take his preferred QB. The QB he wants the most in this entire draft. If that's Wilson, he needs to take Wilson. If that's Barkley, he needs to take Barkley.

There was a pretty small difference between Andrew Luck and RGIII. Luck was a smidge higher on most boards. Let's say the Colts viewed the QB race last year that way, but the Rams (before they traded away the pick) REALLY wanted Luck, and were going to cut Bradford loose either by trade or something else. Should the Colts have accepted a trade down of one spot if they got that kind of deal from St. Louis?

Notice that I'm completely ignoring the issue of value and getting bang for one's draft buck. This is all about the bullshit of accepting 2nd best at the most important position for something like DRAFT PICKS. Every team gets 7 draft picks every year. A team is NEVER going to run out of draft picks. Guess what you can run out of though? Good QBs.

It's the exact same issue as the people who now say, "I'd trade entire DRAFTS if we could have a sure-fire franchise QB in KC for 10 years". Here we've been given our pick of the best QB in an entire draft. He has the potential to be that 10 year franchise QB. And what do we do? Pass on him for an extra CB and DL? Neither of which are guaranteed to be good players.

Never accept 2nd best when it comes to QBs for ****ing draft picks. NEVER EVER.

It's happened how many times? Once?

And that was only because the Chargers were going to draft Manning whether he wanted to play there or not.

yes, but in this HYPOTHETICAL situation, the chiefs do not believe (however erroneously) that Geno was the #1 guy.

I have tried to repeat that in most of my responses to avoid the all-out "Geno or Player X" argument.

For the ****ing record:

I want Geno Smith.

Geno Smith is the most impactful player in this draft.
Geno Smith is the #1 QB in this draft.
Geno Smith can stay with my mom while he looks for a house in Kansas City.
Geno Smith 4 eva.

Now, can we get back to this wonderful, time-wasting, why-the-****-isn't-it-five o'clock-yet hypothetical where the Chiefs get a franchise QB and five top 35 picks over the next two drafts?

NFL history.

I don't think people get this. I, too, am a Geno fan. Early adopter/bandwagoner.

You recall incorrectly.

He never explicitly stated anything remotely like that.

He stated that Dorsey and Reid hadn't told him that there was a QB worth the #1 pick in the draft. When asked if he thought they could tell him that later he said he didn't THINK that would happen.

That was in a radio interview MINUTES after Dorsey was hired, so the comment isn't worth a hill of beans.

Trading out would be the worst possible move this franchise could make. They need to make a statement pick, "this is a new era".

Which, being the franchise that they are, means they'll sign Alex Smith, trade down, and draft a defensive end.

The fact that you would mention Glennon and Bray in the same breath as Barkley and Wilson says quite a bit.

They're not even REMOTELY in the same class.

So address the possibility that they're BOTH gone.

Glennon + #34, #36, and two firsts next year.?

NO ****ING WAY.

Like last year? Going into the season Luck was head and shoulders above everyone else, but by the time the draft rolled around many felt that it was a toss up between him and RG3.

You have a better chance of getting hit by falling space debris than this happening.

The reason the Manning/Rivers trade went down is because the Chargers drafted Manning and he REFUSED TO PLAY THERE. They didn't WANT to trade him.

I already addressed this in my answer:

ROFL

Nobody with any brains thought it was a toss up. NOBODY.

The stuff coming from the Colts was contract posturing, they were NEVER going to pass on Luck.

ROFL

Here is my transcription of what was said:

Anything that takes the certainty that I can draft any Qb I want before any one else gets a chance, to me at this point, isn't worth it.


Hypothetically, what if you trade down and get all those picks but miss your QB and those other picks bust?

Okay, fine.

I think you're being myopic, but I'm not going to fault anyone who comes out off the draft with the QB they think is the best guy.

You could have most likely gotten him as well as some other picks, but it's not the end of the world.

Me? I'd take the trade confident that one of those guys is falling.

I think Geno Smith going to the Eagles will make them a great team.

Therefor receiving their future draft picks could mean that those picks fall in the late teens to twenties. The Eagles will not be drafting in the top 10 again next year with Geno Smith on their team.


The Jags and Raiders will take QB's, leaving the chiefs with garbage..


So no, I would tell Kelly to get bent.

So the chance of missing out on your guy is worth a few extra picks? Do those picks really matter if you miss on your QB?

Okay, I will address the possibility...


Ahem...

There is a 0.0001% chance that Geno Smith, Matt Barkley, and Tyler Wilson are drafted in the first three picks of the 2013 NFL draft.

Now, that is still a possibility, technically, but it is one I am willing to wager against.

So he said "know" instead of "think" but the gist of it remains the same...

We agree on this one.

Clark never said explicitly that there was no franchise QB in this draft.

Like every year, at least recently. QBs are overdrafted by the league, often rounds ahead of where online 'experts' mock them. The idea that we'll be able to pick whoever we want whenever we want isn't impossible by any means, but it also isn't very likely. Based on history.

And actually your RG3 example might just work. Because maybe Wilson's value goes up exactly like his did, and QBs go 1 and 2. I don't know how likely that is, but it has to be a possibility, however remote. And if he doesn't, Oakland is sitting at 3.

It's really like playing Russian roulette, each draft slot you trade back is adding another bullet into the chamber, & your just going to lose.

http://i874.photobucket.com/albums/a...jwxqucspng.jpg

Fine. But based on the Chiefs previous history, I'm not.

And that's basically where the disagreement is.

You think it's a virtual impossibility that QBs go 1-2-3.

Most of us don't think it's worth it to wait to find out.

I'm not the wagering type. I'll take the sure thing.

Totally.

I wasn't trying to correct you. I was trying to agree with you.

I love geno, but you'd be foolish not to take that. With that said I don't think they would give up that much

Yeah, it's not a wrong answer for sure. I'd prefer to gamble on it, because if Geno isn't the sure-fire guy then I don't think there is one.

But every year there are at least 5 teams that need a new QB. And yet they never ever ever go 1 - 2 - 3.

If it were ever to happen, it would have been last year. I just don't think Barkley is going to give any team enough of a boner to trade up to 2 or 3 for him, and the same goes for Wilson.

Maybe one of them, but I just can't see how both manage to garner that much favor from teams.

EDIT: They do go 1 - 2 - 3. I'm full of shit.

Why?

Look at our 2nd round picks over the last 20 years.

I realize Dorsey and Reid are different but if you look at the draft all the way back to 1990 and go through Peterson, Marty, Gunther, Vermeil, Herm, Pioli there's 1 or 2 good 2nd rounders on there and a metric TON of shit.

The need for a QB trumps EVERYTHING ELSE.

Yeah, true.


The thing for me is that of all the times we've just missed out on one, this is the year there is no excuse, no way we miss out by someone else jumping us etc.


Thats pretty much my reasoning. Yeah, if you can trade down and still get your guy, fine. But I just don't want to risk it, not this year.

You'd be confident? I sure as **** wouldn't. By making that trade we're pretty much telegraphing to the entire draft, "HEY GUYS! WE LIKE TYLER WILSON AND WE'RE GONNA PLAY FAST AND LOOSE WITH HIM! I SURE HOPE NOBODY JUMPS AHEAD OF US AND TAKES HIM, FOILING OUR ENTIRE PLAN!"

All it takes is one team who really likes Tyler Wilson and sees what we're trying to do with the Eagles.

And remember who's picking in front of us if we trade back to #4. Oakland. They desperately need more draft picks since this draft is very deep in the middle rounds. With that #3 pick, they're dealing with a team (perhaps Buffalo or someone like that) who REALLY wants Wilson, and who knows what KC is doing. If they don't move, Wilson will be gone. That makes the Raiders pick pretty valuable. They could get a lot for moving down just a few spots. And also consider that they KNOW they'd be ****ing over KC by making that trade. The cherry on top of their perfect draft day maneuver.

Why is it true fans (not labeling you as one) say QBs are too risky, but when it comes to franchise deals like this, nothing is risky enough? Sure, show our hand! What the hell are other teams going to do? We're fiiiine. And if we miss out on Wilson, what's the worst that could happen? We just end up like St. Louis last year, who got in for waaay more than they bargained for, but that's not a big deal, is it?

It would be ironic though, considering the last time (if only time?) that QB went 1-2-3 was when Andy Reid took the second guy off the board in Donovan McNabb.

We aren't telegraphing anything; in the OP Alex Smith has already been brought in for insurance.

Nah, you're right.

If we took this trade, it would have to be because we don't like any of those guys and we signed Alex Smith and are positioning ourselves for drafting a QB down the road.

Not at all what I want, but I think you're right. If you're planning to draft a QB this year, you have to take him #1 and not look back.

You win.

Alex Smith isn't insurance.

He's your starter.