Mock Draft 3.0 - 12/17/12

[Scott Wright]

Originally Posted by I_C_DeadPeople

He would be a great pick for the Bengals. Nice selection Scott although it is time to stop the "Bengals draft bad rep guys' routine..it's getting old. Their last 2 or 3 drafts have been stellar and they have even firmly and smartly dealt with Burfict (without spending a draft pick on him which so many predicted they would!!)

Just last year Dre Kirkpatrick, Orson Charles, and Vontaze Burfict.

The Bengals are still taking plenty of chances on guys with character issues.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by Caulibflower

Why draft a guy who's going to play like Alex Smith when you could draft a blue chip pass rusher and sign Alex Smith or someone similar? Or as has been mentioned, take Tyler Wilson at 33rd overall or something? The Bengals sure don't regret that strategy. The Seahawks don't.

name 10 qbs taken in the 2nd or 3rd round in the last decade who led their team to the playoffs.

and again, what guarantee do you have that tyler wilson won't go 25th, when someone trades up? now the chiefs have no qb yet again, and get to go 1-15 for yet another year (or worse, they win 5 or 6 games and miss all the good qbs again, and spend another year with no chance whatsoever of making the playoffs). the seahawks got lucky. a year later and the bengals are fighting to even get into the playoffs.

who are you people even advocating the chiefs take? there's no aj green. there's no calvin johnson. they have talent on their team, at nearly every position, but they have the league's worst collection of qbs. geno smith, even at his bottom floor, is a massive improvement over anything on their roster.


to your edit: that's why the falcons are garbage, right? because they took a "questionable" qb in 2008? they probably should've waited on brian brohm in the second.

[Shane P. Hallam]

Originally Posted by Caulibflower

Why draft a guy who's going to play like Matt Cassel when you could draft an impact player at another position and sign Matt Cassel?

Fixed it circa 2009.

[Caulibflower]

Originally Posted by njx9

name 10 qbs taken in the 2nd or 3rd round in the last decade who led their team to the playoffs.

and again, what guarantee do you have that tyler wilson won't go 25th, when someone trades up? now the chiefs have no qb yet again, and get to go 1-15 for yet another year (or worse, they win 5 or 6 games and miss all the good qbs again, and spend another year with no chance whatsoever of making the playoffs). the seahawks got lucky. a year later and the bengals are fighting to even get into the playoffs.

who are you people even advocating the chiefs take? there's no aj green. there's no calvin johnson. they have talent on their team, at nearly every position, but they have the league's worst collection of qbs. geno smith, even at his bottom floor, is a massive improvement over anything on their roster.


to your edit: that's why the falcons are garbage, right? because they took a "questionable" qb in 2008? they probably should've waited on brian brohm in the second.

I'm not proposing some hard and fast rule, I'm specifically expressing my misgivings about Geno Smith as a no. 1 overall-type prospect, and it doesn't do much to change my mind to say, "Well, who else are they going to pick?" and then, again, pointing to the hole at QB as the most obvious need. I just don't think that means they should necessarily pick a QB with their first pick. If they do, I think Matt Barkley is safer (and much more similar to Matt Ryan than Geno Smith is), and I think Mike Glennon offers both a higher upside and a higher floor than Geno Smith. I'm just not a huge fan. He started off hot, got called "This year's RGIII" a lot on TV early on and in my opinion has ridden on that wave of momentum. He just hasn't blown me away at all. I've been much more impressed with WVU's offense as a whole than Geno Smith individually. If I was KC, I'd feel better about one of those other two.

I agree that teams have to be proactive about the position, but if you want to say Matt Ryan was a "questionable" prospect prospect who proved his coaches right, I'll raise you Gabbert and Ponder. And I could name other first rounders whose teams would be better if their teams had picked some talent we know in retrospect is a great player, but what does that accomplish? You ask me to name 10 2-3rd round QBs in the last decade to lead their teams to the playoffs... I'm not sure why I'd need to name ten names since many playoff teams are the same teams over and over, but Dalton did it last year and probably will again this year, Wilson looks likely this year, and Drew Brees is a pretty easy one (not his team, but nobody made San Diego draft Rivers). Kaepernick looks like he's got the right stuff. There might not be ten, but what does that prove? Makes all the sense in the world that there will be more first rounders leading teams, but in a weak QB year there's plenty of precedent for QB's drafted outside the first having success, or for having success with a veteran.

I think the thing that will ultimately tip it, and why I probably concede the point to you (at least for now) is that you're right - there isn't another prospect in this draft who screams "ELITE TALENT." So it might be less a matter of not wanting to draft a QB simply to draft a QB as much as a matter of me just not being real high about Geno Smith. I am finding it difficult to think of another prospect who makes more sense, because their passing game is atrocious. I guess maybe that's just Kansas City's ****** luck, that the year they finally get to pick whatever player they want there aren't many exciting QB prospects, and they need one more than they ever have. I do think this is a fairly "deep" draft for second-tier QB prospects, considering the aforementioned Tyler Wilson and some other guys who could go after the first but look to me like they've got some game, despite having one thing or another keeping them from being considered "blue chip" players.

[Caulibflower]

Originally Posted by Shane P. Hallam

Fixed it circa 2009.

Touche, but as I explain a bit more in the above post, the larger objection is really that I think Geno Smith is something like the third-best QB in a QB class that's pretty "meh" to begin with.

[vidae]

The worst thing this team can do is continue to NOT TRY. That just can't be an option anymore.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by Caulibflower

I'm not proposing some hard and fast rule, I'm specifically expressing my misgivings about Geno Smith as a no. 1 overall-type prospect, and it doesn't do much to change my mind to say, "Well, who else are they going to pick?" and then, again, pointing to the hole at QB as the most obvious need. I just don't think that means they should necessarily pick a QB with their first pick. If they do, I think Matt Barkley is safer (and much more similar to Matt Ryan than Geno Smith is), and I think Mike Glennon offers both a higher upside and a higher floor than Geno Smith. I'm just not a huge fan. He started off hot, got called "This year's RGIII" a lot on TV early on and in my opinion has ridden on that wave of momentum. He just hasn't blown me away at all. I've been much more impressed with WVU's offense as a whole than Geno Smith individually. If I was KC, I'd feel better about one of those other two.

sorry, i'll come back to the rest when i have a chance, but it sounds like your bigger issue is geno specifically, not necessarily them going with a qb? i personally think barkley is mediocre, so i can see those misgivings from the other side, in terms of the player specifically.

[SuperPacker]

Originally Posted by vidae

The worst thing this team can do is continue to NOT TRY. That just can't be an option anymore.

Basically this. It's better to try and fail, than to have not tired at all.

A player at a different position isn't going to get the Chiefs to the playoffs. A quarterback could.

[vidae]

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

Basically this. It's better to try and fail, than to have not tired at all.

A player at a different position isn't going to get the Chiefs to the playoffs. A quarterback could.

Yeah, this exactly.

I'm envious of the Raiders and the Browns for at least trying. I don't even care if he's a Jamarcus Russell level bust, because ANYTHING is better than not trying. It's maddening. And it simply has to change.

[San Diego Chicken]

Originally Posted by vidae

Yeah, this exactly.

I'm envious of the Raiders and the Browns for at least trying. I don't even care if he's a Jamarcus Russell level bust, because ANYTHING is better than not trying. It's maddening. And it simply has to change.

Eh, I'll disagree here. Russell was a huge mistake because he went over several blue chip, can't miss type prospects. Lots of people said this at the time. The Raiders would have been much better off with Johnson, Peterson or Thomas in that draft. I don't think it's about "trying" as much as it is making a calculated decision to improve your team. The difference this year is that there are no Petersons or Johnsons in this draft. The best prospects are probably Star, Jones and Joeckel. None of those are really options for KC. So they are forced to pick a QB.

[farfromforgotten]

Let's revisit the Chiefs drafts (rounds 1-3) since 2006, the last time they even selected a QB within the first three rounds.

2006 - Hali (DL), Pollard (DB), Croyle (QB)
2007 - Bowe (WR), McBride (DL), Tyler (DL)
2008 - Dorsey (DL), Albert (OL), Flowers (DB), Charles (RB), Cottam (TE), Morgan (DB)
2009 - Jackson (DL), Magee (DL)
2010 - Berry (DB), McCluster (WR), Arenas (DB), Asamoah (OL), Moeaki (TE)
2011 - Baldwin (WR), Hudson (OL), Houston (LB), Bailey (DL)
2012 - Poe (DL), Allen (OL), Stephenson (OL)

So maybe the argument should be changed to at least draft a QB in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd rounds! Really, look at all of those lineman. How many wins have they added? WRs and TEs drafted. How many wins have they added? You need to hit on a QB... eventually... you've got to try, right?

[Caulibflower]

Originally Posted by farfromforgotten

Let's revisit the Chiefs drafts (rounds 1-3) since 2006, the last time they even selected a QB within the first three rounds.

2006 - Hali (DL), Pollard (DB), Croyle (QB)
2007 - Bowe (WR), McBride (DL), Tyler (DL)
2008 - Dorsey (DL), Albert (OL), Flowers (DB), Charles (RB), Cottam (TE), Morgan (DB)
2009 - Jackson (DL), Magee (DL)
2010 - Berry (DB), McCluster (WR), Arenas (DB), Asamoah (OL), Moeaki (TE)
2011 - Baldwin (WR), Hudson (OL), Houston (LB), Bailey (DL)
2012 - Poe (DL), Allen (OL), Stephenson (OL)

So maybe the argument should be changed to at least draft a QB in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd rounds! Really, look at all of those lineman. How many wins have they added? WRs and TEs drafted. How many wins have they added? You need to hit on a QB... eventually... you've got to try, right?

You're right. There just isn't really anyone better to take this year. If it's me, I think I'd pick Glennon. Geno's got poor footwork, poor pocket awareness, inconsistent accuracy and locks onto his receivers. He does have a good arm, plays hard and has some athleticism.

[vidae]

I've always thought Geno had elite pocket awareness and footwoork. Maybe we're watching different players.

[PossibleCabbage]

Originally Posted by Forenci

My only thing is, do you think Geno is a franchise QB? If he isn't, is it worth setting your team back another 3-4 years? I personally say no. If I don't believe the guy is a difference maker, I would pass on him and wait for a better crop of QB's.

The thing is, with the new rookie pay structure, you're not really "setting your team back 3-4 years" if you swing and miss on a guy high in the draft, regardless of what position. If you draft a QB #1 overall, and he's terrible then you swallow about $22m over four years. Teams make free agency signings worse than that all the time without "setting back their team 3-4 years."

I would have no problems with spending the #1 overall pick on a QB six years in a row if it landed me a QB who actually turned out to be among the upper echelons of NFL signal callers. How else am I going to get one of those?

So if Smith is terrible, then the Chiefs will be picking high enough in a year or two to take another QB who is hopefully better. But there's really no reliable way to get a competent starting QB in this league beyond "drafting one" and that's something the Chiefs have not been doing.

[Caulibflower]

Originally Posted by vidae

I've always thought Geno had elite pocket awareness and footwoork. Maybe we're watching different players.

When I think of having good footwork, I think of a quarterback knowing in advance where his feet would be best positioned to make the throw he needs to make; it's about anticipation and discipline in the face of pressure to keep yourself squared to make the throw you need to make. With Geno, he steps back and basically is running in place, almost. He's constantly shifting his weight back and forth between his feet and bouncing around, and he looks to me like he's looking to run (not necessarily downfield, but to scramble around to another spot he'd rather throw from).

As for the pocket awareness, he just takes quite a few sacks that it seems like he didn't see coming. I also thought I saw him get sacked several times when it looked like there were pretty reasonable open lanes for him to slide into. He has the athleticism to escape pressure from a tools standpoint, but I question how well he keeps track of the action all around him while he's looking to throw.

[RCAChainGang]

Originally Posted by vidae

Yeah, this exactly.

I'm envious of the Raiders and the Browns for at least trying. I don't even care if he's a Jamarcus Russell level bust, because ANYTHING is better than not trying. It's maddening. And it simply has to change.

Why did you have to bring madden into this?

[Forenci]

Originally Posted by njx9

so you intentionally lose as many games as possible for another year and hope that someone next year sucks less? what if you somehow luck into 5 wins, and then you can't get your qb and you're left with the blaine gabbert/christian ponder's of next year?

always, always take a qb if you don't have one. unless it's just an absolutely horrific year (see: 1996 or 1997), you can't afford to wait. it's the most important position on the field, period.

and it's not even like this is 2007 where you're choosing between calvin johnson and brady quinn, when there's a reasonable argument for another player. nothing in the draft would impact the chiefs as much as a real qb.

I agree with you. There is no guarantee they finish in the same position next year, but personally I believe if you don't feel any of these QB's are elite or can be franchise signal caller than it might be best served to take someone else.

Now I do like Geno Smith quite a bit and wouldn't have any issues with having him be the first pick at all. I think he could be a really good player. However, there are arguments to be made against that which is why I brought it up.

Geno is the only QB I would take in the first round, though. Barkley is crap and I'm not a huge fan of Wilson either.

Originally Posted by SuperPacker

Basically this. It's better to try and fail, than to have not tired at all.

A player at a different position isn't going to get the Chiefs to the playoffs. A quarterback could.

I understand that, but if they're selecting another really good player I don't view that as "not trying." They just need to take whoever is best for their team. If that's a QB, so be it or if they feel none of these QB's will be franchise signal callers why waste time and money on them? Don't just take a QB to take a QB. Take them because you think they will be a great quarterback.

Originally Posted by PossibleCabbage

The thing is, with the new rookie pay structure, you're not really "setting your team back 3-4 years" if you swing and miss on a guy high in the draft, regardless of what position. If you draft a QB #1 overall, and he's terrible then you swallow about $22m over four years. Teams make free agency signings worse than that all the time without "setting back their team 3-4 years."

...

Not necessarily. Sometimes it can set you back a lot, even with reduced rookie salaries. Are you going to give up on the guy after one year if he sucks? Doubtful. Two years? Unlikely. Three, possibly.

Heck, sometimes you end up in a worse situation like the Jets. They saw enough from Sanchez early to keep the fans and coaches with the idea that he might turn it around. How long and how much has that held them back?

My philosophy is: draft the player you think is best. Don't just draft a QB because you have a huge need there. If you don't see the player as a franchise quarterback, don't draft him. Not at the number one pick, at least.

[Docta]

You draft the player that makes your team better. Drafting the BPA doesn't always result in that, but need-based drafting doesn't always help either.

The Chiefs don't exactly need an OT or a pass rusher, and the best player might end up being one or the other.

[duesouth]

Not the year to have a high pick is my first thought!

As a Jags fan I think the QB situation will depend on Gene Smith – if he gets canned then I think they will be willing to draft another QB and I think Barkley fits what Mularkey wants to do offensively. More polished than other prospects in this class, but lacking the upside of many.

The Chiefs are in a very tough position – I can’t say I’d want to be the one putting his neck on the block for Geno Smith, especially the way he played in the second half of the year. I might even be tempted to think about Mike Glennon ahead of him, just because he’s better with his eyes. But it depends on whether the Chiefs think you need to be a Tom Brady/Peyton Manning guy who beats you with his head and his arm or a “new wave” mobile RG3/Colin Kaepernick type. Is it just a matter of time before one of the new mobile QB’s wins a Super Bowl, or will they always make costly mistakes like Mike Vick and never win one? Interesting subject.

Some real high ceiling but low floor guys around this year and Mingo might be the best example. Seems to want to get into people and beat them with hand use and power – so isn’t your typical one trick pony speed rusher. But he’s not strong enough so that doesn’t work against better tackles, thus production has been less than ideal. Clearly a fast twitch guy, but you have to question lack of production and I’d be scared to death of touching him that high.

Sam Montgomery isn’t as athletic – long arms and nice frame, but like JPP coming in – needs the right situation. If he gets bad coaching I can see him being a bust and he doesn’t even have the speed of Mingo to fall back on.

In this Draft class I can’t see Te’o lasting that long. Kuechly was 9 in a much better class and Te’o should be a star in team interviews. Certainly I’d not have a problem if my Jags took him at 2 and along with Hankins, probably the only 2 I’m completely comfortable with.

Like Kenny Vaccaro in the first round – seen him ranked 2nd/3rd round – but think he’s got the perfect skill set for a modern day pro safety.

I’d take Jesse Williams ahead of John Jenkins. Williams has come on as the season has progressed – starting to use his hands better. Jenkins has gone the other way – partly because he’s stuck out at DE admittedly (Geathers at NT), but still hasn’t shown anything other than being a big body and I don’t think that’s worth a first rounder – especially when you can get someone like Montori Hughes (Tennessee-Martin) on day three to do pretty much the same thing.

Jon Cooper I’d have above Warmack – I might be the only one who thinks that though!! Just think Cooper is far more athletic and I feel Warmack plays too high in pass protection at times.

Sylvester Williams hasn’t had a great year, not sure he’s done enough to be a first round pick. Sharrif Floyd has played much better and I’d take him ahead of Williams and it’s not even close. Same with Short – hasn’t looked as explosive this year for me.

Tough to think Amerson is a first rounder – he’s played flat footed too often and I don’t think he’s a Patriots type – not a press guy like Dowling was coming out. Amerson is a Cover-2 CB or a safety for me.

Don’t see Jesse Williams as a fit in Houston. Yes, they need a NT – but that system demands more of a Jay Ratliff penetrator in what is a one gap defense and Williams doesn’t show too much of that for me. Might be the scheme, but I think taking someone like Floyd who is a one gap three technique for Florida makes more sense.

[farfromforgotten]

Originally Posted by duesouth

Not the year to have a high pick is my first thought!

The Chiefs are in a very tough position – I can’t say I’d want to be the one putting his neck on the block for Geno Smith, especially the way he played in the second half of the year. I might even be tempted to think about Mike Glennon ahead of him, just because he’s better with his eyes. But it depends on whether the Chiefs think you need to be a Tom Brady/Peyton Manning guy who beats you with his head and his arm or a “new wave” mobile RG3/Colin Kaepernick type. Is it just a matter of time before one of the new mobile QB’s wins a Super Bowl, or will they always make costly mistakes like Mike Vick and never win one? Interesting subject.

I don't get this at all. You are comparing Glennon more to the type of QB who is like Brady/Manning and beats you with his head and arm and Smith to mobile QBs like RG3/Kaepernick, right? Smith does not belong in the mobile QB category if you ask me and I trust Smith's "head" more than I do Glennon's. Another thing, RG3 seems to have the brain, mobility, head, and arm to me. To label him as only "new wave" and "mobile" is unfair.

[Halsey]

There's bound to be at least one or two quality starting QBs to come out of the 2013 Draft. It's Draft mythology that every good QB was a flawless prospect coming out of college. Other than Manning and Luck, every QB in the NFL was widely perceived to have major flaws coming out of college. The Chiefs just need to forget what everybody else is saying and try their best to figure out who those guys will be. All this nonsense about getting the "best player" should be put aside until they've done their homework on QBs. Let's not forget that the "best player" often doesn't live up to the huge expectations. Aaron Curry, anyone? Charles Rodgers? Darren McFadden?

[Iamcanadian]

Originally Posted by vidae

Yeah, this exactly.

I'm envious of the Raiders and the Browns for at least trying. I don't even care if he's a Jamarcus Russell level bust, because ANYTHING is better than not trying. It's maddening. And it simply has to change.

I totally agree, take the best QB and if he flops take another one till you get it right.

[Leon Sandcastle]

Originally Posted by Pat Sims 90

Olgetree plays for Georgia, so the Bengals more then likely will take him.

Odell Thurman anyone?

[hybridremix]

Originally Posted by Scott Wright

It's going to be interesting to see where Manti Te'o goes. I have a feeling most teams will have Te'o in the Top 10 on their boards, if not higher, but I could see him slipping just a bit due to the positional value factor. I do think Te'o is a better prospect than Kuechly was though.

Scott, doesn't Te'o compare favorably to guys like Hawk, Curry, and Willis? I know Willis fell out of the top 10, but looking at the draft you have to scratch your head how it happened. Hawk and Curry were both top 5 picks despite being LBs.

[wicket]

Originally Posted by wicket

any chance that the saints draft warmack and kick grubbs to RT, warmack gives the saints exactly what the offense needs, a guard that can man up but also just wont allow the pocket to collapse giving brees the ability to do what he did in previous years instead of struggling to stay alive like he has this year

bumping this question for scott