Chiefs Late night bullshit: drafting Geno now? Almost as big a coup as getting Montana in 93

Just Passin' By · 03-05-2013, 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peyton's Princess

and to me...

there are two options in the draft

draft a QB #1 overall (don't care if it is Geno or Barkley) since now, with the CBA, you can draft a guy #1 and let him develop for 2 years if that's what you think it'll take for that QB to become the next star NFL QB

or

trade down

and you can't tell me there isn't someone willing to trade up...if you have to trade down to #10 and all you get is a 2nd round pick for it then so be it...

but there is literally no one we need at #1 if we're not taking a QB

Nobody wanted the #3 spot in 2009, so what makes you so sure someone wants #1 in this draft?

Mecca · 03-05-2013, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Nobody wanted the #3 spot in 2009, so what makes you so sure someone wants #1 in this draft?

Rookie cap helps.

Fritz88 · 03-05-2013, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mecca

Rookie cap helps.

2 million difference makes difference with Cap issues.
Posted via Mobile Device

**DaneMcCloud** · 03-05-2013, 01:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Nobody wanted the #3 spot in 2009, so what makes you so sure someone wants #1 in this draft?

That's not true.

Pioli didn't want to trade.

There's always a trade partner.

Hootie · 03-05-2013, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Nobody wanted the #3 spot in 2009, so what makes you so sure someone wants #1 in this draft?

you = dipshit

in 2009 we had to give Tyson Jackson $33M guaranteed

in 2013 the #1 pick gets 4 years and $25M total.

EVERYONE can trade for the #1 now...

it went from an untradeable burden to a totally, 100% tradeable pick.

Shit, if the Baltimore Ravens felt like they needed Luke ****ing Joeckel they could realistically now trade up to #1 from #32 and give us their 2nd, 4th and a 2014 1st and it would literally make sense if they thought he was head and shoulders the best player on the board.

The new CBA made picks 1-5 tradeable assets again.

so why don't you try and use critical thinking before you post again

Just Passin' By · 03-05-2013, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peyton's Princess

you = dipshit

in 2009 we had to give Tyson Jackson $33M guaranteed

in 2013 the #1 pick gets 4 years and $25M total.

EVERYONE can trade for the #1 now...

it went from an untradeable burden to a totally, 100% tradeable pick.

Shit, if the Baltimore Ravens felt like they needed Luke ****ing Joeckel they could realistically now trade up to #1 from #32 and give us their 2nd, 4th and a 2014 1st and it would literally make sense if they thought he was head and shoulders the best player on the board.

The new CBA made picks 1-5 tradeable assets again.

so why don't you try and use critical thinking before you post again

The money has changed, but the difference is still there in a tight cap year, and the trade chart still makes trade ups expensive. You should think before posting. It would be a remarkable challenge for you, but you could probably do it if you really tried.

**RealSNR** · 03-05-2013, 01:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Nobody wanted the #3 spot in 2009, so what makes you so sure someone wants #1 in this draft?

BTW, just wondering if I answered your question earlier, and if you agreed, specifically.

A REAL veteran presence or two on the defensive line is going to be far more beneficial to the Chiefs right now than taking more athletic motor guys with no pass rush moves.

philfree · 03-05-2013, 01:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Nobody wanted the #3 spot in 2009, so what makes you so sure someone wants #1 in this draft?

Because there 6 teams in the top ten of the draft that really need QBs. In the end the only way for half of those teams to get Geno Smith is to trade up to #1. That's the only guaranteed way of getting him.

Just Passin' By · 03-05-2013, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philfree

Because there 6 teams in the top ten of the draft that really need QBs. In the end the only way for half of those teams to get Geno Smith is to trade up to #1. That's the only guaranteed way of getting him.

Bad teams need QBs every year. I'm not saying that it's impossible to think of a team making a trade for the spot, but Hootie's acting as if there's not a doubt about it.

**DaneMcCloud** · 03-05-2013, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Bad teams need QBs every year. I'm not saying that it's impossible to think of a team making a trade for the spot, but Hootie's acting as if there's not a doubt about it.

To me, this issue is this: The Bills, Cardinals, Raiders, Jets and Browns have veteran starting QB's on their roster. Most of those teams have other glaring needs.

Now, does one of those teams fall in love with Barkley or Smith so much that they're willing to avoid filling those holes?

That's the big question.

philfree · 03-05-2013, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

Bad teams need QBs every year. I'm not saying that it's impossible to think of a team making a trade for the spot, but Hootie's acting as if there's not a doubt about it.

No not a sure thing but it's a QB starved league and the other guys in this draft aren't NFL starters without alot of work and still they may not be. I think there's a decent chance someone moves up to #1 for Geno. I'd be glad to trade with the NFC teams. AFC teams have to pay a premium.