Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Football Gameplan's 2012 Draft Grades Video - Chiefs

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    194
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 12
    Given: 19

    Default Football Gameplan's 2012 Draft Grades Video - Chiefs


    0 Not allowed!
    [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYzu-2Ykae0"]Chiefs Draft Grades Video[/ame]

    Good evening KC fans!! Here's my Draft Grades video for you guys!

    Enjoy!

    Em

  2. #31
    Member Since
    Jun 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    3,753
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 178
    Given: 51

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    I saw you responded but I'm no longer wasting my time with you. It's obvious to anyone not blinded by their own bias that I've supported my position well and completely owned you in this discussion. I've received more rec in this thread than any other discussion I've had on this board since I arrived seven years ago.

    You've done NOTHING to support you claim that an OG at #11 presents good relative value to draft position. Your claims are based in opinion and salary figures... neither of which are relevant when discussing talent available relative to pick number.

    That being said, this is the last post I'll make on the subject of OG value. Either you don't comprehend the topic with have a firm grasp of the point at hand, or you just believe in black and white that "need filled=good value." Either way, I'm satisfied that I've made my point.

    Bottom line, you are WHOLE HEARTEDLY arguing that taking a starting OG at #44 represents WORSE value than taking a starting OG at #11. There's no arguing with that kind of "logic." You win. Enjoy the last word on the issue.




  3. #32
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,123
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 27
    Given: 26

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post

    That is a pretty telling chart. For a position that there will be two of in the starting 22 positions, and with the only positions behind OG being ILB, after separating them from MLB, it is basically listed as dead last here. Even FB and Center rank higher.

    I agree that many of the starting OGs in The NFL would be OTs that just can't hold a spot on the outside, and are moved inside, where the job is a bit easier.

  4. #33
    Member Since
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,045
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 545
    Given: 747

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    I saw you responded but I'm no longer wasting my time with you.
    Why? I suspect it may because of the difficulty refuting the points that I provided.

    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    It's obvious to anyone not blinded by their own bias that I've supported my position well and completely owned you in this discussion.
    I'll bet money that there's more that don't see it that way than do.

    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    I've received more rec in this thread than any other discussion I've had on this board since I arrived seven years ago.
    So what? That doesn't refute any of the points that I provided as to why DeCastro would have been a good pick at #11, if the Chiefs had gone that route.

    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    You've done NOTHING to support you claim that an OG at #11 presents good relative value to draft position. Your claims are based in opinion and salary figures... neither of which are relevant when discussing talent available relative to pick number.
    That is a crock of BS. We both know that I've provided many valid points as to why it would okay to take DeCastro at #11.

    Talent-wise, many pundits had DeCastro rated in their top 10 as far as BPA.

    Speaking of salary, go look at the contracts that Carl Nicks and Ben Grubbs got from their respective teams they signed with via FA, and then consider that the Chiefs would not have had to pay anywhere near that to DeCastro.

    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    That being said, this is the last post I'll make on the subject of OG value. Either you don't comprehend the topic with have a firm grasp of the point at hand, or you just believe in black and white that "need filled=good value." Either way, I'm satisfied that I've made my point.
    On the contrary, I comprehend it just fine. And speaking of "black and white", it's obvious that your of the black and white mindset that "taking any Guard at #11is stupid", but that is where I don't see it that way -- not when it fills a need & given the fact that DeCastro is the highest rated interior O-Lineman to come out in over a decade. Mike Pouncey went at #15 the year before. DeCastro was a higher rated prospect than he was.

    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    Bottom line, you are WHOLE HEARTEDLY arguing that taking a starting OG at #44 represents WORSE value than taking a starting OG at #11. There's no arguing with that kind of "logic."
    Rubbish!! I never implied any such thing. You are ripping things completely out of context. I said "it would have been a good pick if they had taken DeCastro, if the Chiefs had taken him"

    However, they would have missed out on Poe & how many chances are they going to get to draft a NT candidate with his physical ability?

    What I implied was if Poe had not been on the board, then why not take DeCastro.

    Taking DeCastro , if Poe wasn't available, would have been OK. Getting Poe and Allen was better, to me. You seem to have to have trouble figuring that out, but now you know.

    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    You win. Enjoy the last word on the issue.
    You're saying in one sentence that you've "owned" me in this thread & then in a later sentence telling me that I win ? Sorry but that doesn't quite add up.

    And nobody is trolling here. You've provided your perspective on the draft and I've provided mine. Plain and simple.

  5. #34
    Member Since
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,310
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by texaschief View Post
    Spread offenses are based in shotgun formations and 2 to 3 second routes... how the hell can you expect a NT to get through an NCAA caliber Center and then run 8-10 yards to get to the QB in that amount of time? Expecting a 350lb NT to make that kind of disruption play in and play out isn't being fair to that position. The whole point of the spread is to take the DL and pass rush out of the equation while also not needing much of a rushing attack because the short passes are used instead.

    I realize you needed a player "not to like" for your podcast, but this bombardment on Poe needs to be called out for the short-sighted, poor player evaluation that has been attached to Poe since the draft. Poe, like Jackson and Dorsey is going to do EXACTLY what Crennel's 3-4 expects of him. Just like Tyson Jackson isn't a pass-rushing DE, Poe isn't going to be N. Suh. He's going to do exactly what a NT is suppose to do... clog the run lanes, attack with an unrelenting motor, and keep the OL off his LBs, with the occasional QB pressure or sack. To expect anything more from a NT is not fair to the position.

    It's not like the guy was taken in the top 5. There weren't a whole bunch of guys available for the Chiefs to take instead of Poe that would have benefitted this team more, you don't know what type of trade offers were available to the Chiefs to trade down, and being that they got GREAT OL value in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, you can't argue that they should've taken DeCastro who would've represented lesser value at #11 than Poe who fills a hole the Chiefs haven't addressed since implementing the 3-4 when Pioli was hired.

    As I've said before, the difference between DeCastro (who was the only other player the Chiefs could have truly considered at #11) and Allen is MUCH less than the difference between Poe and the second best NT in that draft class. I'm tired of hearing how Poe was a "poor pick" without the author suggesting who they thought the Chiefs SHOULD have picked instead. You can't say a trade up or down would have been better because you don't know what the terms of those trades would have been. You can't say DeCastro because we know the Chiefs got GREAT value in Allen in the 2nd.

    So, since you say Poe wasn't a good pick for the Chiefs, please, tell us ignorant Chiefs fans and front office personnel who would have impacted the franchise better than Poe at pick #11? A pass-rushing DE would've been a luxury pick with Houston and Hali on the team. Kuechly would've been nice but he wasn't available and Poe meant more than any other ILB at #11. WR would've been a luxury pick. No QB at #11 was worth the pick. They don't need RB. They don't need TE. No CBs or Safeties were available (which would've been luxury picks as well)... and despite what some people think, the Chiefs boast some really good DEs... so tell us... who SHOULD the Chiefs have picked?

    They had a perennial hole at NT and got the best NT prospect this draft had to offer. If Poe had gone later to a Pittsburgh or Green Bay team, the "draft experts" would have LOVED this guy for them and would be singing the praises of their respective front offices for "landing a guy who was projected to go in the middle of round 1." Believe me... I'm not a Chiefs "homer." I've been on the fence about Pioli and this front office since the moment he hired Todd Haley. But he has done some GREAT things for this franchise since he fired Haley. Promoting Crennel, his 2012 FA class and this draft are all things Pioli has done to make me, personally feel better about him as the GM of this franchise. There's only so long you can ignore the cornerstone position of the 3-4 defense.

    If anything, this franchise deserves accolades for FINALLY pulling the trigger on one of the most talented NTs to come out in the draft in quite a while. Poe is explosive and quick off the snap. He's incredibly strong and is about to get the benefit of being coached by one of the best DL coaches in the history of the NFL.
    I would have been fine with us taking Fletcher Cox to replace Dorsey and then shopped the heck out of him. Dorsey isn't a true 3-4 DE. He's just used the talent he has to adapt to that role.

    We had the chance to pick up a true 3-4 DE, trade for a guy who more than likely is going to leave next year and pick up Ta'amu who ended up dropping to the 4th round.

    I'm liking the Poe pick a lot better now than when it happened. Then again I was absolutely furious when it happened so I guess there's really no where to go but to deflate a bit. Did the Chiefs take a position of need absolutely. Did they take the best player available...we won't know for several years. But I think with Cox we would have known sooner than we will with Poe.

  6. #35
    Member Since
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    4,045
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 545
    Given: 747

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by OPLookn View Post
    I would have been fine with us taking Fletcher Cox to replace Dorsey and then shopped the heck out of him. Dorsey isn't a true 3-4 DE. He's just used the talent he has to adapt to that role.

    We had the chance to pick up a true 3-4 DE, trade for a guy who more than likely is going to leave next year and pick up Ta'amu who ended up dropping to the 4th round.

    I'm liking the Poe pick a lot better now than when it happened. Then again I was absolutely furious when it happened so I guess there's really no where to go but to deflate a bit. Did the Chiefs take a position of need absolutely. Did they take the best player available...we won't know for several years. But I think with Cox we would have known sooner than we will with Poe.
    Good points and I also didn't like the Poe selection at first, but after a couple of minutes, I took a couple of steps back and realized that there was still 7 more picks to come and that the selection of Poe didn't make or break the entire 2012 draft for the Chiefs.

    It also dawned on me that the Chiefs were not going to get many chances to draft a NT candidate with the type of physical ability that Poe has. Plus, it's going to be a whole different world in KC than it was at Memphis, as far as what Poe is being asked to do.

    Also, I remember back in 1996 when the Dolphins took Baylor DE Daryle Gardener at #20 & he wasn't any more productive in college than Poe was, but had great physical ability. The Fins put him at DT and he was a far better player in the NFL, than he ever was in college. The point being, that a player CAN be a better player in the NFL than they were in college.

    I've seen many posts around the web stating along the lines that the Chiefs "couldn't justify taking Poe at #11", but however, I suspect they are doing so without considering what the Chiefs got in rounds 2 through 7, the FA's they signed, and the players they already have on their roster.

  7. #36
    Member Since
    Jun 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    3,753
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 178
    Given: 51

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by OPLookn View Post
    I would have been fine with us taking Fletcher Cox to replace Dorsey and then shopped the heck out of him. Dorsey isn't a true 3-4 DE. He's just used the talent he has to adapt to that role.

    We had the chance to pick up a true 3-4 DE, trade for a guy who more than likely is going to leave next year and pick up Ta'amu who ended up dropping to the 4th round.

    I'm liking the Poe pick a lot better now than when it happened. Then again I was absolutely furious when it happened so I guess there's really no where to go but to deflate a bit. Did the Chiefs take a position of need absolutely. Did they take the best player available...we won't know for several years. But I think with Cox we would have known sooner than we will with Poe.
    I was an advocate for shopping Dorsey before free agency even started so that perhaps the Chiefs could fill the spot in free agency or the draft. It's not because I think Dorsey isn't a serviceable 3-4 DE, but because I think teams who play with 4-3 defenses would've payed a premium for a guy like Dorsey to play DT. Dorsey would probably be a dominant 4-3 DT. However, with Dorsey still on the roster when their first round pick came up, it would be harder to justify taking another DE with their first pick than taking even an OG. There's not even a hole at the position with Dorsey and Jackson entrenched.

    A lot of people like to evaluate 3-4 DEs by how much pressure they put on the QB. But the more you look at Crennel's particular style of 3-4, his DL seems to be more about stopping the run than creating pressure, essentially turning them into hand on the ground LBs while relying on his OLBs to get to the QB and creating pressure up the middle with blitzes by his CBs and safeties.

    If you have an impact NT who can hold his ground, it basically takes away the middle for a team to run through. When you have the kind of beef that Jackson, Dorsey, and Poe-Powe bring, all collapsing down on the 4 middle gaps, it basically shuts down the middle of the field. If a team wants to run outside, they first need to dodge the pass rushing Hali or Houston and then HOPE they can outrun Derrick Johnson and whoever lines up next to him, to the edge. This is why you see Dorsey and Jackson at the top of the run-stopping DEs in the league. If they can get substantial impact from the PO's at NT, this defense could lead the league in rushing defense. Don't discount the speed the Chiefs have at ILB... that's obviously a crucial part of the success.

    The Chiefs are getting what they want out of their DEs. There's a case to be made that the Chiefs may not be getting the most value out of Dorsey that they COULD be, but he's doing what they ask of him and throwing away the good in pursuit of the perfect probably isn't a good way to go... ESPECIALLY considering the Chiefs filled a perennial hole at NT instead of another DE they'd have to wait a couple years to impact the game while STILL having a hole at NT. Ta'amu WOULD have been a nice pick in the 4th even with the Poe selection in the first. I liked Ta'amu a lot and would've been thrilled to see him in Red.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Similar Threads

  1. Football Gameplan's 2012 NFL Mock Draft Video - March
    By EmDiggy in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-22-2012, 11:15 PM
  2. Football Gameplan's 2012 NFL Mock Draft Video - January
    By EmDiggy in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-23-2012, 02:34 PM
  3. Football Gameplan's 2012 NFL Midseason Mock Draft Video
    By EmDiggy in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-31-2011, 07:33 PM
  4. Football Gameplan's Draft Grades Video - Kansas City Chiefs
    By EmDiggy in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-14-2011, 08:20 PM
  5. Football Gameplan's Draft Grades Video - Kansas City Chiefs
    By EmDiggy in forum KC Chiefs News and Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-11-2010, 03:00 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •