PDA

View Full Version : Peter King reports Chiefs actively trying to trade out of 3rd pick!



yashi
04-22-2009, 12:58 PM
We've speculated on this a lot, but it looks like Pioli is in fact trying to deal down.


http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/2009/04/sources-chiefs-trying-to-trade-down/

The Kansas City Chiefs are actively trying to trade the third overall pick in this weekend’s draft, a league source close to the situation has just informed me. Whether or not there will be any takers remains to be seen.

This news comes just one day after our own Matt Bowen reported that the St. Louis Rams are trying to trade the second overall selection in this year’s draft.

In addition, I’ve also learned that the Denver Broncos are shopping defensive ends Jarvis Moss and Tim Crowder. Moss, a second year veteran out of the University of Florida, has only started 1 game in the past two seasons. In addition, Moss only amassed 12 tackles in 2008, according to NFL.com. Crowder, a second year vet out of the University of Texas, only appeared in 19 total games for the Broncos since being drafted.

More on these stories as they develop.

EDIT: Ack! I just realized this isn't Peter King, but it seconds his report of the same thing.

wildcat
04-22-2009, 01:03 PM
I have mixed feelings about whether or not I want KC to trade down. On the one hand we could snag Curry or a really good OT at #3, but on the other hand we might be able to fill multiple needs if we trade down. I don't envy Pioli right now. He has some tough decisions to make.

yashi
04-22-2009, 01:05 PM
I have mixed feelings about whether or not I want KC to trade down. On the one hand we could snag Curry or a really good OT at #3, but on the other hand we might be able to fill multiple needs if we trade down. I don't envy Pioli right now. He has some tough decisions to make.

yeah, fortunately for him I don't think there is a wrong choice here and I would be satisfied with either one. I'd LOVE for the 49ers to get in the mix so we can get that 10th pick. That lets us draft ahead of the Donks and we can get Tyson Jackson or potentially Raji if GB decides to go with Jackson.

Of course, a better scenario is if Dan Snyder decides to unload the boat this year and next year to get Sanchez.

Seek
04-22-2009, 01:16 PM
You could probably put any teams in this report. I would be worried if the GM was not actively looking to better their situation with more picks. I would be shocked if the top 10 teams to pick were actively looking for trades.

jap1
04-22-2009, 01:47 PM
yeah, fortunately for him I don't think there is a wrong choice here and I would be satisfied with either one. I'd LOVE for the 49ers to get in the mix so we can get that 10th pick. That lets us draft ahead of the Donks and we can get Tyson Jackson or potentially Raji if GB decides to go with Jackson.

Of course, a better scenario is if Dan Snyder decides to unload the boat this year and next year to get Sanchez.

:bananen_smilies046: Here's to hoping Snyder will pull a Ditka and trade his whole draft away for one player (I still cant get the image of Ditka wearing dreads and smoking a cigar with that Im a genius smile on his face out of my head). We all remember how well that worked out for Ditka. Maybe Sanchez will turn out to be a huge pot head too and quit the NFL to travel Europe and smoke weed.
This trade would be amazing, it would give us a ton of picks, and it would show how stupid the 'skins are ... and my friend is a huge skins fan so I could make fun of him all season!
Snyder and Jerry Jones are fighting to see who will be the next Al Davis.

bigpoppachief
04-22-2009, 04:02 PM
:bananen_smilies046: Here's to hoping Snyder will pull a Ditka and trade his whole draft away for one player (I still cant get the image of Ditka wearing dreads and smoking a cigar with that Im a genius smile on his face out of my head). We all remember how well that worked out for Ditka. Maybe Sanchez will turn out to be a huge pot head too and quit the NFL to travel Europe and smoke weed.
This trade would be amazing, it would give us a ton of picks, and it would show how stupid the 'skins are ... and my friend is a huge skins fan so I could make fun of him all season!
Snyder and Jerry Jones are fighting to see who will be the next Al Davis.

Hey it wouldnt be stupid (WINK WINK) I think they would win the SUPERBOWL Hear that Snyder you would win the super bowl now give us all your picks :D

Pro_Angler
04-22-2009, 04:23 PM
i am scared either way. but if we do trade down a bit Crabtree might still be on the board....

jmlamerson
04-22-2009, 04:29 PM
i am scared either way. but if we do trade down a bit Crabtree might still be on the board....

I know you have a massive crush on Crabtree. But Pioli isn't going to draft him. Not at 3. Not at 13. Not at all. Who's your second choice?

greg3564
04-22-2009, 04:33 PM
i am scared either way. but if we do trade down a bit Crabtree might still be on the board....

WR is far down on the list of needs.

yashi
04-22-2009, 04:35 PM
WR is far down on the list of needs.
especially after signing Engram... Bowe, Engram, and Bradley are an above average receiving corps when healthy. One of the few positions on the team that is above average...

honda522
04-22-2009, 04:55 PM
I know you have a massive crush on Crabtree. But Pioli isn't going to draft him. Not at 3. Not at 13. Not at all. Who's your second choice?
Yes. I dont understand why people want to draft an offensive player. We need defensive people so bad its mad.

Yes, we have picked up a few players. But the are all old linebackers. Maybe have 2 years left on their treads. We haven't pikced up any DL.

jmlamerson
04-22-2009, 05:06 PM
Yes. I dont understand why people want to draft an offensive player. We need defensive people so bad its mad.

Yes, we have picked up a few players. But the are all old linebackers. Maybe have 2 years left on their treads. We haven't pikced up any DL.

I see the argument for drafting an OT. We need to protect our young, franchise QB, and we need at least two new linemen to do that effectively in 2009. We need three if the Waters situation goes bad.

And to be fair to Zach Thomas, Mike Vrabel, and Monty Beisel - they are intended to be band-aids, not long term solutions. Our defensive personnel is atrocious. We have no one in our front seven who has proven to be a legitimate NFL starter except DJ. I have no problem paying the three of them a combined $7M/year for the next couple years to mentor the young guys, be field marshals, and to be adequate LBs.

Our DL is our biggest problem. We have no one who's a 3-4 player. Dorsey is a question mark. Tank gets way too much love on these boards - he's another Herm bust, not our future NT. Hali and Turk are too small/weak to be contributors. If our first three draft picks are 3-4 DE/NT/DE, I can't see anyone really complaining that much.

Unless we can get personnel on the DL who can stop the run in 2009, it will be a very long year.

Pro_Angler
04-22-2009, 05:19 PM
WELL WE ALSO DO NOT NEED A LINE BACKER EITHER WE JUST PICKED UP 2 MORE!!!!!!
We could take a o-lineman or better yet a real QB since they wont start thigpen.

jmlamerson
04-22-2009, 05:26 PM
WELL WE ALSO DO NOT NEED A LINE BACKER EITHER WE JUST PICKED UP 2 MORE!!!!!!
We could take a o-lineman or better yet a real QB since they wont start thigpen.

Really, man? Do you seriously believe that or are you just trolling?

DrunkHillbilly
04-22-2009, 05:30 PM
Trolling for some football knowledge!!!!!! WOW!

yashi
04-22-2009, 05:31 PM
We do need a linebacker. I mean if you have 4 future HOF offensive linemen, but your 5th is a donkey, you still need a lineman, right? Likewise, we have 3 legit linebackers right now and nobody to play the 4th position. Granted, there are more pressing needs but it's still a position with a hole in it.

Coach
04-22-2009, 07:08 PM
More breaking news:

The Chiefs and everyone else in the Top 10 are trying to trade down.

Pro_Angler
04-22-2009, 09:17 PM
chiefs are in a good spot at 3 to trade down though. i would hate to trade down to below 12 max though.

chiefnut
04-23-2009, 11:14 AM
there are only two teams that have the ability to trade up with a glaring need for a QB to #3. the first is buffalo, and they don't think they need a QB, the other is the donx. they have 2 first round piks that would make a sweet deal or a first and a second but they have no reason to deal as long as the skins stay behind them. the skins don't have any piks worth enuf to trade up so the donx can just sit there to watch sanchez fall into there laps. the may deal if they are convinced seattle is after sanchez and stafford is already gone, but its unlikely seattle w/take sanchez at #4 so they too will look to trade down. so it donna lookin very good to be tradin down for us CHIEFS don't you know.

brish
04-23-2009, 11:57 AM
there are only two teams that have the ability to trade up with a glaring need for a QB to #3. the first is buffalo, and they don't think they need a QB, the other is the donx. they have 2 first round piks that would make a sweet deal or a first and a second but they have no reason to deal as long as the skins stay behind them. the skins don't have any piks worth enuf to trade up so the donx can just sit there to watch sanchez fall into there laps. the may deal if they are convinced seattle is after sanchez and stafford is already gone, but its unlikely seattle w/take sanchez at #4 so they too will look to trade down. so it donna lookin very good to be tradin down for us CHIEFS don't you know.
Why is it unlikely that Seattly will take Sanchez? Hasselbeck isn't getting any younger, and he has been hurt a lot lately. If they believe that Sanchez will fit their pass oriented westcoast offense then why not take him at 4? Im not saying they are looking to replace Hasselbeck immediately, but in my opinion the timing is pretty good right now. They can sit Sanchez behind Hasselbeck for a few, and I'd say he would be an upgrade to Wallace as the backup? (Wallace is not bad at all, but Sanchez has superior physical attributes..)

Just my thought. :)

jmlamerson
04-23-2009, 12:40 PM
Why is it unlikely that Seattly will take Sanchez? Hasselbeck isn't getting any younger, and he has been hurt a lot lately. If they believe that Sanchez will fit their pass oriented westcoast offense then why not take him at 4? Im not saying they are looking to replace Hasselbeck immediately, but in my opinion the timing is pretty good right now. They can sit Sanchez behind Hasselbeck for a few, and I'd say he would be an upgrade to Wallace as the backup? (Wallace is not bad at all, but Sanchez has superior physical attributes..)

Just my thought. :)

Yeah, Seattle has to be thinking that this is their chance to groom Hasselbeck's successor. Sanchez could sit for the year unless Hasselbeck got hurt. I can't see Sanchez slipping past Seattle.

Which is why some stupid team should trade up with us. The 49ers would be perfect, as we'd be able to get Tyson Jackson, Maualuga, Raji, or Oher, who are just as good/amost as good as their counterparts at the top of the draft at a fraction of the price.

chiefnut
04-23-2009, 01:29 PM
i'm sure seattle is looking at sanchez, but they have other needs and believe that next year will be a QB rich draft. hass' still has more than a few good seasons left if he stays healthy so why push it this year and pay top money on a QB w/only one season experience when next year they may get a higher rated QB at a lower pick and lower price.

Pro_Angler
04-23-2009, 03:52 PM
we wont trade down cause curry goes 31 leaving 2 qb's on the board and the rams arent getting a QB and even if seattle does there is still one more qb left and the trade spot then would be to # 5

Bike
04-24-2009, 11:44 AM
we wont trade down cause curry goes 31 leaving 2 qb's on the board and the rams arent getting a QB and even if seattle does there is still one more qb left and the trade spot then would be to # 5
Agreed. Even if Stafford goes to detroit, I don't see anyone trading up for the 3rd pick...

chief31
04-24-2009, 12:32 PM
Yes. I dont understand why people want to draft an offensive player. We need defensive people so bad its mad.

Yes, we have picked up a few players. But the are all old linebackers. Maybe have 2 years left on their treads. We haven't pikced up any DL.

The defense has already gotten a major boost by the regime change.

I think that coaching was the biggest problem with our '08 defense.

Not that I am real terribly confident in our replacement. But that the Herm/Gun situation was horrible, and made players look even worse than their actual performances.

The two biggest needs for this team, in my opinion, are on O-line and D-line.

If we stay at #3, then there is top notch O-line talent available, but d-line help would be a reach.



We do need a linebacker. I mean if you have 4 future HOF offensive linemen, but your 5th is a donkey, you still need a lineman, right? Likewise, we have 3 legit linebackers right now and nobody to play the 4th position. Granted, there are more pressing needs but it's still a position with a hole in it.

Demorrio Williams.

Everyone seemed to be pretty high on this guy when we got him. And I have no complaints about the guy.

Also, Tamba Hali may be in the mix. (I don't like that idea.)

kcmostwanted
04-24-2009, 06:53 PM
Agreed. Even if Stafford goes to detroit, I don't see anyone trading up for the 3rd pick...

Wrong...I believe Pioli would be able to get something done. I read somewhere that stated that Pioli would be happy to trade out of #3 even if the point compensation didn't exactly match.

Here are some teams that have shown interest in Sanchez:
Seahawks
Cleveland
Jags(minimal)
49ers(minimal)
Donkeys
Redskins
NY Jets
Tampa Bay Bucs

That's 8 teams that are will probably try to leap-frog each other for Sanchez.

Remember that Cleveland wouldn't hesitate to trade Brady Quinn and Skins would also trade Jason Cambell.

From ESPN:
The most serious interest in Sanchez, a USC product, is coming from the Seattle Seahawks (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=sea) at No. 4; the Cleveland Browns (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=cle) at No. 5; the Washington Redskins (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=was) at No. 13; and the New York Jets (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=nyj) at No. 17. Several current veteran quarterbacks, including Brady Quinn (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=10466) of the Browns and Jason Campbell (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=8440) of the Redskins, would be on the block should either team select Sanchez.

------just my thought
If a Team like the skins really wanted Sanchez... why don't we just trade spots w/ them + Jason Cambell can come too... We can then trade Jason Cambell to another team that needs a solid QB for a 2nd round draft pick + more if possible (a first would be great but that's probably not happening).
Our #3 pick - 2200 points

Skins #13 pick - 1150 points

Difference - 1050 pionts (equivalent to #15 in 1st round)

Send jason cambell along and we trade him for... let's say a 2nd round draft pick ~500 points and 4th ~ 100 points... total the value to be about 1600-1800 point range...

Not exactly equal to 2200 points but (as mentioned above) Pioli said he'd bargain w/ people who were interested...
This gets us out of paying top 3 money...
Gives us a chance to draft the best player available (whether on O or D)
and we get a 2nd round pick back...

and gives the Skins the guy they want...

Just my thought.. Not the best but reasonable

Pro_Angler
04-24-2009, 07:06 PM
Wrong...I believe Pioli would be able to get something done. I read somewhere that stated that Pioli would be happy to trade out of #3 even if the point compensation didn't exactly match.

Here are some teams that have shown interest in Sanchez:
Seahawks
Cleveland
Jags(minimal)
49ers(minimal)
Donkeys
Redskins
NY Jets
Tampa Bay Bucs

That's 8 teams that are will probably try to leap-frog each other for Sanchez.

Remember that Cleveland wouldn't hesitate to trade Brady Quinn and Skins would also trade Jason Cambell.

From ESPN:
The most serious interest in Sanchez, a USC product, is coming from the Seattle Seahawks (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=sea) at No. 4; the Cleveland Browns (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=cle) at No. 5; the Washington Redskins (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=was) at No. 13; and the New York Jets (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/clubhouse?team=nyj) at No. 17. Several current veteran quarterbacks, including Brady Quinn (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=10466) of the Browns and Jason Campbell (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=8440) of the Redskins, would be on the block should either team select Sanchez.

------just my thought
If a Team like the skins really wanted Sanchez... why don't we just trade spots w/ them + Jason Cambell can come too... We can then trade Jason Cambell to another team that needs a solid QB for a 2nd round draft pick + more if possible (a first would be great but that's probably not happening).
Our #3 pick - 2200 points

Skins #13 pick - 1150 points

Difference - 1050 pionts (equivalent to #15 in 1st round)

Send jason cambell along and we trade him for... let's say a 2nd round draft pick ~500 points and 4th ~ 100 points... total the value to be about 1600-1800 point range...

Not exactly equal to 2200 points but (as mentioned above) Pioli said he'd bargain w/ people who were interested...
This gets us out of paying top 3 money...
Gives us a chance to draft the best player available (whether on O or D)
and we get a 2nd round pick back...

and gives the Skins the guy they want...

Just my thought.. Not the best but reasonable

Don't forget this is if Curry isn't taken #1 overall which might happen and if it does then i don't see us trading down????

Bike
04-26-2009, 02:37 PM
Wrong...I believe Pioli would be able to get something done.

WRONG

Just my thought.. Not the best

RIGHT

Chiefster
04-26-2009, 02:39 PM
...Didn't transpire.