Taking an Offensive Player in Round 1

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The only team that's done that with any regularity is the Patriots and that's still just nothing more than having Tom Brady. As a rule, those trade-downs of theirs haven't worked worth a shit. The Seahawks tried doing that as well and got next to nothing for their efforts.

And that's not at all what the Rams have done. Frankly it's not really what the Saints have done either - they stood pat and took Lattimore when we sniped Mahomes. Thomas, Rankins, Peat, Ramzczyk - those guys are just good players they took high. Kamara was a 3rd rounder but that's just making a good pick in a good system.

Teams aren't killing it with these trade downs. Meanwhile the Chiefs are the absolute best example in the entire NFL of the value of spotting your guy, damning the torpedoes and going after him. Getting Mahomes changed this entire franchise. And the Chiefs would've been better served NOT trading back with Jones and having his 5th year option. Ford's 5th year option is the only reason he's on the team this year.

I just completely disagree that teams are showing any kind of obvious tactical advantage by trading back. That demonstrates to me that the play is still to sit there, wait for your target to start dropping and go get his ass. Playing back on your heels is how you end up with some bum like Breeland Speaks instead of giving up more to move up 10 more spots and getting Darius Leonard. Let's say that instead of giving up 54 and 78 to get up to 46 and get the 100 with it, they just give up that 54 and 78 to move up to 34, piss on the 3rd rounder they got as well and take Leonard with the higher 2nd.

I think I'd be okay giving up Speaks and O'Daniel for Darius Leonard....wouldn't you?

Give me the higher end player over another wild-card every single time.

Yeah, that's true.

I get it for sure and I agree that i'll always go for the higher end guy.

But in an ideal setting the Chiefs can hit on both those 2nds this year. That's my whole argument is just for this year with the 2 of them. Normally, I'd never ever trade down, but up.

It is definitely so much easier to get better guys higher. Duh. But the Chiefs need to hit on some of these 2nds and maybe that's clouded my vision as of late.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The only team that's done that with any regularity is the Patriots and that's still just nothing more than having Tom Brady. As a rule, those trade-downs of theirs haven't worked worth a shit. The Seahawks tried doing that as well and got next to nothing for their efforts.

And that's not at all what the Rams have done. Frankly it's not really what the Saints have done either - they stood pat and took Lattimore when we sniped Mahomes. Thomas, Rankins, Peat, Ramzczyk - those guys are just good players they took high. Kamara was a 3rd rounder but that's just making a good pick in a good system.

Teams aren't killing it with these trade downs. Meanwhile the Chiefs are the absolute best example in the entire NFL of the value of spotting your guy, damning the torpedoes and going after him. Getting Mahomes changed this entire franchise. And the Chiefs would've been better served NOT trading back with Jones and having his 5th year option. Ford's 5th year option is the only reason he's on the team this year.

I just completely disagree that teams are showing any kind of obvious tactical advantage by trading back. That demonstrates to me that the play is still to sit there, wait for your target to start dropping and go get his ass. Playing back on your heels is how you end up with some bum like Breeland Speaks instead of giving up more to move up 10 more spots and getting Darius Leonard. Let's say that instead of giving up 54 and 78 to get up to 46 and get the 100 with it, they just give up that 54 and 78 to move up to 34, piss on the 3rd rounder they got as well and take Leonard with the higher 2nd.

I think I'd be okay giving up Speaks and O'Daniel for Darius Leonard....wouldn't you?

Give me the higher end player over another wild-card every single time.

The only time i'd be okay with trading down is in a situation where you can trade down and still get your guy in the same round. Like if you can go from 22 to 27, add a 2nd and still get your guy.

[O.city]

I also think one of those extra seconds could be better served trading for a current player on another roster.

With your thoughts on this DJ being what they are, what do you think about moving some picks for a current player that may need resigned? For instance, Patrick Peterson for our 1st or both 2nds?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

I also think one of those extra seconds could be better served trading for a current player on another roster.

With your thoughts on this DJ being what they are, what do you think about moving some picks for a current player that may need resigned? For instance, Patrick Peterson for our 1st or both 2nds?

I would give up a 2nd but not both and not a 1st. Am not moving that 1st with the cap issues we're going to face in the coming years. That's too valuable and this team has demonstrated an excellent track record on 1st round picks.

This season has proven more than anyone could have expected that we simply don't need to build this squad like it's the Alex Smith era Chiefs were there can't be any holes anywhere. This is a team that can 'make due' at a position or two and use talent elsewhere to patch those holes.

It doesn't NEED to make short-term decisions. They can look at immediate short-term issues and address them with long-term solutions.

Every decision should be made over a 5-year return because with Mahomes we can ALWAYS win. If we had Smith and needed a perfect defense and had an aging QB who we needed to win with before he aged out of viability, I'd be more inclined to do so. But with Mahomes, I'm simply not going to go crazy trying address the 'now'.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I would give up a 2nd but not both and not a 1st. Am not moving that 1st with the cap issues we're going to face in the coming years. That's too valuable and this team has demonstrated an excellent track record on 1st round picks.

This season has proven more than anyone could have expected that we simply don't need to build this squad like it's the Alex Smith era Chiefs were there can't be any holes anywhere. This is a team that can 'make due' at a position or two and use talent elsewhere to patch those holes.

It doesn't NEED to make short-term decisions. They can look at immediate short-term issues and address them with long-term solutions.

Every decision should be made over a 5-year return because with Mahomes we can ALWAYS win. If we had Smith and needed a perfect defense and had an aging QB who we needed to win with before he aged out of viability, I'd be more inclined to do so. But with Mahomes, I'm simply not going to go crazy trying address the 'now'.

That's a little bit to where I've shifted, especially lately.

I was looking around at free agency and such and while i'm guessing they're enamored with Earl Thomas, there are a couple other guys i'd be more interested in.

I think you may have to sign Ford first off, likely tag him atleast. I kind of like Brandon graham but he may be a little redundant.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by O.city

That's a little bit to where I've shifted, especially lately.

I was looking around at free agency and such and while i'm guessing they're enamored with Earl Thomas, there are a couple other guys i'd be more interested in.

I think you may have to sign Ford first off, likely tag him atleast. I kind of like Brandon graham but he may be a little redundant.

Are we going to have the cap space though? You figure that we're either going to tag Ford or give him a new deal. Hill is going to need a new deal, as well as Jones (yes, you don't need to do them right now).

As it stands right now, we'll have roughly $37 million in cap space. Tag Ford and now you're down to $22 million.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

That's a little bit to where I've shifted, especially lately.

I was looking around at free agency and such and while i'm guessing they're enamored with Earl Thomas, there are a couple other guys i'd be more interested in.

I think you may have to sign Ford first off, likely tag him atleast. I kind of like Brandon graham but he may be a little redundant.

I've said for most of this season that if I could get Ford signed with a $16 million/season AAV and a bail at 3 years, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

That horse has left the barn though. I still say discuss a LTC but if you can't get it done this year, you cannot get it done at all. Do NOT tag the man and then make a deal the following season. For the love of all things holy, please FINALLY learn something from Houston and Berry.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I've said for most of this season that if I could get Ford signed with a $16 million/season AAV and a bail at 3 years, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

That horse has left the barn though. I still say discuss a LTC but if you can't get it done this year, you cannot get it done at all. Do NOT tag the man and then make a deal the following season. For the love of all things holy, please FINALLY learn something from Houston and Berry.

Yeah, I'd tag him for a year and look to draft a replacement. Ideally you've got Speaks and Tanoh but i'm not overly excited there.

I'm also talking myself into signing Sheldon Richardson. Is that bad.

[O.city]

That's also why I'm not sure I'd scoff at the idea of a high end offensive player in the first round.

Hell, I'm talking myself into a RB in the late 30's.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

That's also why I'm not sure I'd scoff at the idea of a high end offensive player in the first round.

Hell, I'm talking myself into a RB in the late 30's.

Well that's just stupid.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Well that's just stupid.

Not a 30 year old RB.

But a late first round pick on a RB? I dunno. No?

Maybe a 2nd?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

Not a 30 year old RB.

But a late first round pick on a RB? I dunno. No?

Maybe a 2nd?

No. Damien Williams is just further proof of what a monumental waste of resources a 1st round RB would be with this staff and this roster.

There are positions we struggle to make work well even WITH fantastic talent. RB ain't one of 'em. We can turn 3rd rounders and/or UDFA's into viable starters. Why the hell would we ever throw a 1st rounder at one when even a reliable veteran back costs dick on the open market and a guy like CJ Anderson - who was literally unemployed 6 weeks ago - can dominate a post-season game.

Quit it, dammit. You're just wrong here.

[carcosa]

Originally Posted by O.city

Not a 30 year old RB.

But a late first round pick on a RB? I dunno. No?

Maybe a 2nd?

Only way I do that is if a Gurley or Barkley level talent fell to 32... but there are still too many teams stupid enough to take RBs early in the 1st for that to ever happen. And even if it did happen, I'd only take the RB if there weren't a clear starter in a more valuable position.

[O.city]

Preston Smith is interesting at OLB and Z'Darius Smith.

[The Franchise]

No ****ing RBs until Round 4 or later.