Schefter: Chiefs are high on Ricky Stanzi

[Cassel>Manning]

He said it on the new ESPN Insiders show with Mort, Clayton, and Schefter. Said that Stanzi has caught the eye of the Chiefs and that he could be ahead of Brady Quinn on the depth chart.

BossChief has a better summary....

[themanwithnoname]

Originally Posted by NJChiefsFan

Because Boss Chief made the comment that the Chiefs nailed the pick, and he started saying they didn't nail it because the other guys were there. If you read all the posts in context, he isn't really making a fuss over it. He took exception with the "nailed it" phrase, not so much the Moeaki is a good player. Atleast thats how I took all these posts.

Originally Posted by mcaj22

I'm not making a fuss out of it. Someone said that Tony Moeaki was this great nailed value pick that a group of like 5 fans or buddies on here predicted and take pride in, and then compared that to the value of Justin Houston.

I was just pointing out the two are not comparable. Justin Houston is actual value, there is no LBer or player better than him where or around he was picked in his slot. Meanwhile, you have guys that will have much better careers statistically than Moeaki picked after him in Graham and Hernandez. It doesnt matter if their quarterbacks are better. You are evaluating the draft pick and their NFL production as a player, how else do evaluate a draft pick? Based on hope and hype? That's silly.

I think Moeaki is a good player, but all things considered, trading up for him, other players in that round better, etc, it's just a better draft class and a heavy TE class and it's hard to argue the value for that in my opinion. I even said, it could just be a GOOD PICK for that round/draft, where as it's being talked about as some genius draft pick that ***** got perfect.

Ok, I read you better. See my last post, which I think explains my point better. Sorry for the hyperbole.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by NJChiefsFan

Because Boss Chief made the comment that the Chiefs nailed the pick, and he started saying they didn't nail it because the other guys were there. If you read all the posts in context, he isn't really making a fuss over it. He took exception with the "nailed it" phrase, not so much the Moeaki is a good player. Atleast thats how I took all these posts.

That's not it.

When I said we "nailed it" it was in terms of how we saw him as a player fitting into the draft.

Dane and I said many many times that Moeaki was a first round quality player with big injury concerns. We also stated multiple times that the injuries were almost exclusively broken bones on fluke plays that shouldn't effect his future durability.

Those types of players usually fall to the mid/late second (like Gronk did because of injury concerns with his back) and for us to get him in theate third was "nailing the value" same as I claimed when we picked Justin Houston (who didn't go to Iowa tmk)

I said as much because most of cp saw Moeaki as a guy that never had outstanding numbers and wasn't rated any higher than around the 17 best tight end of his class...along with the injury concerns.

I saw him as a late second/early third rounder (that I took in the late 5th in the cp mock because I understood the value the board put on this player.)

[mcaj22]

Originally Posted by themanwithnoname

They're even better value, at this point. Should we come back and say you're a moron if Graham and Hernandez have season ending injuries? What happens if somehow Brady or Brees goes down and their production plummets? I could see second guessing stuff like missing Aaron Rodgers or even Clay Matthews, but second guessing what appears to still have been a solid pick is just morose. We've already got plenty of things to second guess. Should we start thinking we should have taken Earl Thomas instead of Berry?

If this was an obvious no brainer choice, I'd be with you on the criticism of this pick, but that is not the case at all, so this whole discussion is just silly.

I think the convo transitioned from Stanzi/Iowa players in the NFL (and the Iowa fan base being homers) and I brought up Tony Moeaki's production as a joke, and then someone mentioned Nate Keading, Robert Gallery and the scary chance that ***** will draft a tackle from Iowa every season lol.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by mcaj22

How else do you evaluate a late round pick then as value? Other than production? We can sit here all day and hope and pray what Tony Moeaki could be, but if he is going to keep getting injured then where's the value?

As much bragging as you want to do about how good Justin Houston is, how else can you or I make that brag about Houston in 3rd other than his production and play on the field that we saw last season, making that pick worth every penny for its slot.

It's no different than when people do the opposite, you "evaluate" a draft BUST based on production no? When a player plays crap and is picked high do you not call them a bust? Is that not production? How is that not fair? Oh because the Pats and Saints have good QBs? Well imagine that, positional players being much better because they have GOOD QBs. In the end it all circles back toMatt ****ing Cassel doesn't it. You can have all the hype and talent like Tony Moeaki in the world on the Chiefs and it doesnt mean dick because Cassel will limit their true potential, production, etc. And that's the price you pay for having a dog shit QB. Good thing defensive players can still go out and "get theirs" without wondering if Matt Cassel will only give them 2 catches for 20 yards.

towards the end of this, you start to get it.

[KCrockaholic]

I for one, can't wait to watch Stanzi in pre-season. I like the kid a lot. 5th round pick, whatever, he's the best QB on this team.

[NJChiefsFan]

Originally Posted by BossChief

That's not it.

When I said we "nailed it" it was in terms of how we saw him as a player fitting into the draft.

Dane and I said many many times that Moeaki was a first round quality player with big injury concerns. We also stated multiple times that the injuries were almost exclusively broken bones on fluke plays that shouldn't effect his future durability.

Those types of players usually fall to the mid/late second (like Gronk did because of injury concerns with his back) and for us to get him in theate third was "nailing the value" same as I claimed when we picked Justin Houston (who didn't go to Iowa tmk)

I said as much because most of cp saw Moeaki as a guy that never had outstanding numbers and wasn't rated any higher than around the 17 best tight end of his class...along with the injury concerns.

I saw him as a late second/early third rounder (that I took in the late 5th in the cp mock because I understood the value the board put on this player.)

Ok. Anyway I like Moeaki and the rest was all just splitting hairs, a misunderstanding, or both.

[themanwithnoname]

Really, what we should have been saying is, instead of McCluster we could have had 2 of the 3 guys. Imagine that and then cry a single Indian tear for the reality.

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by themanwithnoname

Really, what we should have been saying is, instead of McCluster we could have had 2 of the 3 guys. Imagine that and then cry a single Indian tear for the reality.

We could have had Mt Cody at 36

To me, that would have been perfect.

Even though he didn't go to Iowa.

[themanwithnoname]

Originally Posted by BossChief

We could have had Mt Cody at 36

To me, that would have been perfect.

Even though he didn't go to Iowa.

I know, rampant speculation, but I prefer Poe, so while I would have preferred plenty of players over McCluster, I don't hate that we passed on Cody. I think Poe is more likely to be the ideal player this defense needs. I think we need a guy with quickness that can hopefully rush the QB from that spot. I guess you could argue Cody at nose and Poe at end though. Really I think what it comes down to is, being a Chiefs fan, I'm just hopeful that Poe becomes one of those guys that when second guessing drafts people go, how could those other teams have passed on that guy?

In my mind, Poe is going to be a mix of Dan Saleaumua and Neil Smith. Not as flashy as Smith (and hopefully won't jump to the ****ing Broncos and win rings), but he'll be there to fall on Tamba's strip-sacks like they used to for DT. Wow, ok now this is just getting ridiculous, time to call it a night.

[mcaj22]

Originally Posted by themanwithnoname

Really, what we should have been saying is, instead of McCluster we could have had 2 of the 3 guys. Imagine that and then cry a single Indian tear for the reality.

my favorite is instead of wasting a 2nd round pick on Matt Cassel we could have had ____ in the 2009 draft.

I like imagining James Laurinaitis next to Derrick Johnson on this team. Fun.

[Rausch]

He'll finish at the no 2 spot.

[ChiefsNow]

If Stanzi beats out Quinn, when Quinn already knew the offence, That tells me Stanzi has a good chance of being pretty damn good.

[Rausch]

Originally Posted by ChiefsNow

If Stanzi beats out Quinn, when Quinn already knew the offence, That tells me Stanzi has a good chance of being pretty damn good.

This reminds me of the Gannon/Girlbac argument.

Girlbac had more talent but Gannon had the team...

[evolve27]

Originally Posted by BossChief

In football, you either have it or you don't in the bigger games and Stanzi always did enough to win those games in college.

His stats against ranked teams were phenomenal.

I don't see that just going away, but it's possible.

That's what they said about McCluster.

[durtyrute]

Originally Posted by KCrockaholic

I for one, can't wait to watch Stanzi in pre-season. I like the kid a lot. 5th round pick, whatever, he's the best QB on this team.

All this and a bag of chips