Expect Flurry of First-Round Draft Trades - Page 7

reschief · 04-14-2011, 11:56 AM

Expect flurry of first-round draft trades

08:03 AM ET 04.14 | Stability at quarterback among teams picking in the back half of the draft is likely to directly affect the wheeling and dealing. Of the teams picking from 17-32 in the first round, the only team that really needs a quarterback is Seattle, which is picking 25th. The rest are all set, unless one of those teams plans to look for a quarterback of the future. The quarterback stability of the teams in those spots is why they are there. ... What that should do is set up what could be a wild ride at the back end of the first round, with a flurry of trades. The haves can make deals with the have-nots. "I still think as many as five quarterbacks go in the first round," an NFC general manager said. "You watch. Some of those guys will go late in the round when teams realize they won't all be there in the second, and they have to make moves to get them."

CBSSports.com

Since we're "set" at "quarterback" . . . what are the odds we trade down from 21 and pick up additional picks?

milkman · 04-15-2011, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the Talking Can

it's always about the QB when you're talking Superbowl...with very, very few exceptions

we're stuck have to hope and pretend Cassel is one of those guys...meanwhile, all we can do is try to surround him a couple dozen probowlers and see if that works....the truth is, up to this point, Cassel gives us no margin for error

He can't have a bad OL like Rothleisraper or Manning
He can't have a bad running game like Brady or Manning
He can't have a mediocre defense like Manning or Brees

he's got to have it all for us to have a serious chance...it just makes it harder

How did this myth that Manning had a bad O-Line ever get started?

They had trouble adjusting to 34 defenses, and every time Manning was pressured by the Patriots or the Chargers in the playoffs over the years, Manning has shit himself almost as badly as Cassel.

And the only SB he and the Colts have won is one in which Dominick Rhodes and Joeseph Addai and the defense really stepped up their games.

milkman · 04-15-2011, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Did Jones and Battle retire when I wasn't looking? Jones is NOT a bad back.. he does however require some semblance of run blocking for him to be effective.. JC doesn't. Get a decent C and move Asamoah to a starting spot and Jones will be a FINE RB2 (at least for one more year).

Jone wore down as the season progressed.

The first half of the season, he was really effective, but over the course of the season, his effectiveness diminished to the point that he was totally non productive.

That was not on the O-Line.

We need to improve the O-Line, wothout question, but we can not go into next season with Jones as the #2 RB.

**AustinChief** · 04-15-2011, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Jone wore down as the season progressed.

The first half of the season, he was really effective, but over the course of the season, his effectiveness diminished to the point that he was totally non productive.

That was not on the O-Line.

We need to improve the O-Line, wothout question, but we can not go into next season with Jones as the #2 RB.

You may be right, but it's hard to say that a lack of o-line support didn't contribute to wearing him down both physically and mentally. We won't know until we fix the line. I absolutely think we need a RB3 waiting in the wings (unless you think Battle is the answer) but for NEXT year I think Jones is more than fine.

milkman · 04-15-2011, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief

You may be right, but it's hard to say that a lack of o-line support didn't contribute to wearing him down both physically and mentally. We won't know until we fix the line. I absolutely think we need a RB3 waiting in the wings (unless you think Battle is the answer) but for NEXT year I think Jones is more than fine.

He showed those signs of wear in each of his last two seasons with the Jets, and was a virtual no show in the 09 playoffs.

He's getting older, and simply doesn't have the endurance to be productive for 16 games.

**AustinChief** · 04-15-2011, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

He showed those signs of wear in each of his last two seasons with the Jets, and was a virtual no show in the 09 playoffs.

He's getting older, and simply doesn't have the endurance to be productive for 16 games.

Fair enough, but I'd still say it isn't a "HOLE" but it is a legit "need".. maybe it's just a difference in definitions...

milkman · 04-15-2011, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Fair enough, but I'd still say it isn't a "HOLE" but it is a legit "need".. maybe it's just a difference in definitions...

"Hole"
"Need"

I don't know how you define it, and honestly, can't say I care.

What I do know and care about is that we can not go into next season thinking we can rely on Thomas Jones, and nothing that Battle has done makes me think he''s anything more than a scub.

But there's also no way we should rely on Charles for more than 20 carries a game.

Titty Meat · 04-15-2011, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheWarpath58

People have some serious reading comprehension.

To me, contender means championship.

If you just want to go 9-7 or 10-6 every year, maybe make the playoffs, maybe not, then the positions I mentioned don't need upgrading.

This team WILL NOT win a championship with the Cassel, Jackson or Belcher as full-time starters.

Sorry but I don't see how Jackson is THAT much of a liability. You add a QB, WR, and a NT this team makes it to a few AFC title games.

**AustinChief** · 04-15-2011, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

"Hole"
"Need"

I don't know how you define it, and honestly, can't say I care.

What I do know and care about is that we can not go into next season thinking we can rely on Thomas Jones, and nothing that Battle has done makes me think he''s anything more than a scub.

But there's also no way we should rely on Charles for more than 20 carries a game.

I know you said you didn't care but I'll explain anyway

For me a HOLE is a glaring need where you don't even have a "serviceable" player to fill it. Yes, we could use an upgrade at RB2 but to say that TJ isn't at least serviceable as a #2 RB would be hard to defend. Same with WR3.. plenty of serviceable players there but NOTHING at WR2, which is why WR3 is a need and WR2 is a HOLE. And yes, I make this shit up as I go along.

**Gadzooks** · 04-15-2011, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

How did this myth that Manning had a bad O-Line ever get started?

They had trouble adjusting to 34 defenses, and every time Manning was pressured by the Patriots or the Chargers in the playoffs over the years, Manning has shit himself almost as badly as Cassel.

And the only SB he and the Colts have won is one in which Dominick Rhodes and Joeseph Addai and the defense really stepped up their games.

Nobody shits their pants worse than Manning agaist a 3-4 front. Not even Cassel...

**Bowser** · 02-15-2015, 06:24 PM

Bump.

Holy shit, go ahead and read through this entire thread. Here we are four years later, and what has changed other than the names of players being discussed in this thread.

And be prepared to drop some mud at post #80. ****ing hell.

Discuss Thrower · 02-15-2015, 06:58 PM

What's past is truly prologue.

**The Franchise** · 02-15-2015, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dicky McElephant

So you want Alex Smith then right?

Bam. I hate myself.

Discuss Thrower · 02-15-2015, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bsp4444

I believe he said 4-5 players from being a contender and he is right. 4-5 of the right players. We won 10 games last year, albeit with a soft schedule, but with a better pass rush (DT, OLB) we greatly improve our defense. With a WR, C, RT, we greatly improve our offense. Not that the draft will fall that way, but that would make us a hell of a problem for a lot of teams.

... what's really changed?

**Bowser** · 02-15-2015, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower

... what's really changed?

Nothing. No thing. It's ****ing amazing to me.

Discuss Thrower · 02-15-2015, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bowser

Nothing. No thing. It's ****ing amazing to me.

WR? Still an issue. Two spots on the offensive line? Still an issue. One third of a defenses responsibility? Still an issue.

04-14-2011, 11:56 AM
reschief Starter Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: kansas Casino cash: $10007299	Expect Flurry of First-Round Draft Trades Expect flurry of first-round draft trades 08:03 AM ET 04.14 \| Stability at quarterback among teams picking in the back half of the draft is likely to directly affect the wheeling and dealing. Of the teams picking from 17-32 in the first round, the only team that really needs a quarterback is Seattle, which is picking 25th. The rest are all set, unless one of those teams plans to look for a quarterback of the future. The quarterback stability of the teams in those spots is why they are there. ... What that should do is set up what could be a wild ride at the back end of the first round, with a flurry of trades. The haves can make deals with the have-nots. "I still think as many as five quarterbacks go in the first round," an NFC general manager said. "You watch. Some of those guys will go late in the round when teams realize they won't all be there in the second, and they have to make moves to get them." CBSSports.com Since we're "set" at "quarterback" . . . what are the odds we trade down from 21 and pick up additional picks?
Posts: 619

02-15-2015, 06:24 PM	#100
Bowser sorta mod-ish Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: KC North Casino cash: $3341616	Bump. Holy shit, go ahead and read through this entire thread. Here we are four years later, and what has changed other than the names of players being discussed in this thread. And be prepared to drop some mud at post #80. ****ing hell.
Posts: 100,837

02-15-2015, 06:58 PM	#101
Discuss Thrower "You like to drink?" Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: "I like to drink." Casino cash: $3126869	What's past is truly prologue. __________________ Chiefs 2016 Opponents: Home: JAX, TEN, NO, TB, NYJ. Away: HOU, IND, ATL, CAR, PIT Chiefs 2017 Opponents: Home: BUF, MIA, PHI, WSH, AFC North. Away: NE, NYJ, NYG, DAL, AFC South
Posts: 42,739