For those of you who Think we are taking Berry at #5

**YZILLA** · 03-22-2010, 01:51 PM

Here is an interesting article on taking Berry at #5 :

Peter King Discusses Scott Pioli, Eric Berry and the Dangers of a Top 10 Safety Choice - Arrowhead Pride

**Canada** · 03-24-2010, 12:52 AM

Originally Posted by chief31

Name 'em?

No thanks, I dont care that much about this argument. I just figure if u r gonna compare injuries with players, the comparison should be between players who actually get hit.

**chief31** · 03-24-2010, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by Canada

No thanks, I dont care that much about this argument. I just figure if u r gonna compare injuries with players, the comparison should be between players who actually get hit.

I get that. But it's not so easy to say that "These are the best three at this position.". So I went with QB because noone would argue Manning, Brees, Brady.

That, and I think the fact that Safety is a High contact position is actually part of the issue.

RB would be another position that teams tend to avoid drafting early, more often than not.

And one of the concerns there is health issues and longevity. Same as Safety.

But that may be a good comparison to make.

**brish** · 03-24-2010, 12:48 PM

The question is.. Is Berry such a huge talent that you forget "the rules" on this one?

Some would argue that he is..
Right now I feel like Berry might be the best player available at #5, regardless of what position he plays.

**bwilliams** · 03-24-2010, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by brish

The question is.. Is Berry such a huge talent that you forget "the rules" on this one?

Some would argue that he is..
Right now I feel like Berry might be the best player available at #5, regardless of what position he plays.

For years and years and year, the Chiefs had the greatest TE of all time on their team. Despite having the greatest TE of all time on our team, we never won a playoff game with him. This wasn't Gonzo's fault. He was our best offensive player and always gave 110%. But if your best offensive player is a TE, you aren't going to win anything.

How does this relate? Eric Berry might be the greatest safety of all time. But if our best defensive player is a safety, we aren't winning anything. A safety *can't* by virture of where he is on the football field, be enough of a difference maker.

Everyone likes to talk about Polamalu, Ed Reed, and Bob Sanders. I like all three of those players, and I'd love any of them to be Chiefs. That being said, they've never been the best defensive players on their own teams. They've always had the very strong front-7s that allowed them to be elite.

If we don't get a space eating NT, a pass rushing OLB, and a run-stopping ILB, it doesn't matter who we put in the defensive backfield. Our defense will be near the bottom of the league. Likewise, if we don't get a legit OT, it doesn't matter what burner WR we get because our QB won't have time to throw to him. If we don't upgrade the trenches of the team, we will go 4-12 again.

**brish** · 03-24-2010, 01:23 PM

I hear you BWilliams.. I do..
But im not sure any of the LT's are that much better than Albert, and Im really unsure of which NT would be worth drafting at #5.

I like McClain though.. Looks like a really solid player, and he was a leader in college. Wouldn't mind him either..

Every analyst says that we are in a prime spot to take whatever we like, because we need upgrades everywhere. Then why am I so torn?

**bwilliams** · 03-24-2010, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by brish

I hear you BWilliams.. I do..
But im not sure any of the LT's are that much better than Albert, and Im really unsure of which NT would be worth drafting at #5.

I like McClain though.. Looks like a really solid player, and he was a leader in college. Wouldn't mind him either..

Every analyst says that we are in a prime spot to take whatever we like, because we need upgrades everywhere. Then why am I so torn?

Dan Williams would be the NT we draft at #5. And he's going to be pretty great (IMHO). We'd probably pick Baluga at LT. Albert just isn't a very good LT. He led the league in penalties and Cassel kept getting sacked. Is that all his fault? Of course not. But he needs to be moved to OG where he can anchor our line for the next decade.

Now, what do I think we do? I think we trade down to 9 and pick Dan Williams/Baluga there.

I just know what we *won't* do (for better or worse). And that's draft a safety while our lines are still a mess.

**chief31** · 03-24-2010, 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by bwilliams

For years and years and year, the Chiefs had the greatest TE of all time on their team. Despite having the greatest TE of all time on our team, we never won a playoff game with him. This wasn't Gonzo's fault. He was our best offensive player and always gave 110%. But if your best offensive player is a TE, you aren't going to win anything.

How does this relate? Eric Berry might be the greatest safety of all time. But if our best defensive player is a safety, we aren't winning anything. A safety *can't* by virture of where he is on the football field, be enough of a difference maker.

Everyone likes to talk about Polamalu, Ed Reed, and Bob Sanders. I like all three of those players, and I'd love any of them to be Chiefs. That being said, they've never been the best defensive players on their own teams. They've always had the very strong front-7s that allowed them to be elite.

If we don't get a space eating NT, a pass rushing OLB, and a run-stopping ILB, it doesn't matter who we put in the defensive backfield. Our defense will be near the bottom of the league. Likewise, if we don't get a legit OT, it doesn't matter what burner WR we get because our QB won't have time to throw to him. If we don't upgrade the trenches of the team, we will go 4-12 again.

Gonzalez was possibly the third best player we had on offense, at least during the Roaf years. Roaf and Shields wer both comparable to TG, and in my opinion, both better overall.

Gonzalez is an elite recieving TE, but not as good at blocking. (Though often underrated.) Roaf and Shields were dominant at every aspect of playing their positions.

And, because our best two players on offense were on the o-line, we had an offense that bested any other offense around.

Wish the defense had been able to make similar claims.

**bwilliams** · 03-25-2010, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by chief31

Gonzalez was possibly the third best player we had on offense, at least during the Roaf years. Roaf and Shields wer both comparable to TG, and in my opinion, both better overall.

Gonzalez is an elite recieving TE, but not as good at blocking. (Though often underrated.) Roaf and Shields were dominant at every aspect of playing their positions.

And, because our best two players on offense were on the o-line, we had an offense that bested any other offense around.

Wish the defense had been able to make similar claims.

Absolutely right. I should have specified. When our best players were on the OL (or were priest Holmes) we compiled great records. When our best player was Gonzo (in 2007 and 2008) we went 6-26.

**kckidd8870** · 03-25-2010, 11:49 AM

Look at Pioli's track record for getting o-line in the first round.It just doesnt happen.2008 no o-line in the draft,2007 didn't pick o-line till 5th round,T Clint Oldenburg.In 2006 are guy O'callagan,in the 5th round.2005 he pick T Nick Kaczar in the 3rd round.2004 he didn't get any O-line.2003 he got C Dan Coppen in the 5th.I just can't see it happening guys.

**Ryfo18** · 03-25-2010, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by kckidd8870

Look at Pioli's track record for getting o-line in the first round.It just doesnt happen.2008 no o-line in the draft,2007 didn't pick o-line till 5th round,T Clint Oldenburg.In 2006 are guy O'callagan,in the 5th round.2005 he pick T Nick Kaczar in the 3rd round.2004 he didn't get any O-line.2003 he got C Dan Coppen in the 5th.I just can't see it happening guys.

Nose tackle or a pass rusher is highly likely.