Chiefs Likely Looking at #3 Spot in 2009 NFL Draft

by Chris Thorman on Dec 22, 2008 11:35 AM CST in 2008 Kansas City Chiefs Campaign

	Current Record			Projected Record			Projected SOS	Draft Order Spot
Team	W	L	T	W	L	T	Projected SOS	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
Lions	0	15	0	0	16	0	56%	> 99%	^	^	^	^	^	^	^
Rams	2	13	0	2	14	0	53%	X	73%	27%	^	^	^	^	^
Chiefs	2	13	0	2	14	0	53%	X	27%	73%	^	^	^	^	^
Seahawks	4	11	0	4	12	0	50%	X	X	X	64%	19%	4%	14%	< 1%

From our trusted friends at PlayoffStatus.com, it appears that a pending a loss/win by the both Chiefs and the Rams, Kansas City will pick at the #3 position in the first round of the 2009 NFL draft. The Chiefs and Rams, if they do tie, will alternate the 2/3 spots in each round.

This is pretty much what I posted in the FanShot yesterday, with an updated strength of schedule.

Tweet Comment 15 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

well...

stud QB or stud LB…can’t see us going wrong with either pick, we’re deficient in both areas.

Run Run Pass Punt, repeat as needed for 60 min.

by RAM_Doubler on Dec 22, 2008 11:58 AM CST reply actions

Get ready for a lot of Stafford talk

Lions will most likely take Bradford. After him, the best QB available according to every scout and evaluator I’ve heard is Stafford. I hear this. “I know the record’s not great and neither are the numbers, but the kid’s tangibles are out of this world.”

So those of you that think that wins and losses are the only numbers that matter, get ready for your head to asplode.

I’m hoping a darkhorse DE will creep up the boards and we’ll take him. I feel like defensive line is our most glaring hole. The LBs need help, but I don’t trust USC players and the linebackers haven’t been AS HORRIBLE the last few weeks. Williams actually made quite a few plays yesterday.

Ridiculous Upside: All the "Almost NBA" info you can handle!

by Ridiculous Matt on Dec 22, 2008 12:13 PM CST reply actions

Our current group of linebackers should be lined up against the wall and...

well take Johnson, Williams and Boiman off first. We need to bring in 7 more linebackers to camp, however we get them and let these three compete with them for the best 6 out of all of them to play for the Chiefs next year.
I love Laurnaitis as our first pick, but no matter what we need a true middle linebacker with leadership skills to run this defense next year.

We need a future defensive leader, his name is James Laurinaitis and he can be selected in round 1 of the upcoming Draft.

"But what do I know, I’m like an empty room with a large ECHO"

by Lanier63 on Dec 22, 2008 12:34 PM CST up reply actions

DE Michael Johnson, Georgia Tech

Seems to be a consensus top five pick

The linebackers – Cushing, Malauaga, Laraunitis, seem to be considered 13-20 picks.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Dec 22, 2008 1:27 PM CST up reply actions

I've also heard this about Stafford

-poor decision making
-turnover prone
-poor stat production (I would say average at least)

I guess that’s why it’s so hard to predict who will and won’t be good at the next level. Being down here in SEC country, I have never been able to understand the chubby people get for Stafford. Other than his size and arm strength, I don’t see much. He supposedly has great leadership ability (named captain as a sophomore).

I would expect his numbers to improve this season because everyone knew about Knowshon Moreno and skewed their defensive schemes toward him. He played like total ass against Florida this year to boot.

That’s why I’m hoping that Detroit bites on the hype and takes Stafford #1… then Bradford can be ours.

by Ochophosphate on Dec 22, 2008 2:30 PM CST up reply actions

I'm no scout or anything

But my take is pretty similar to yours. I don’t get the hype over Stafford.

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Dec 22, 2008 3:06 PM CST up reply actions

Options

If I kept the pick it would be Bradford if available. I’d take Stafford if I felt really good about him, if not trade down and take Laurenitis. He is a better open field tackler than Maualuga.

by FrankPitts on Dec 22, 2008 1:06 PM CST reply actions

Which teams out there

Are likely to be QB-hungry? Any ~~suckers~~ optimists out there likely to deal us some decent picks for, say, Stafford?

One of the problems with top-5 picks, is that it’s very difficult to get them signed early. Seems to me that makes it difficult to integrate a QB into the team for next season. I dunno – maybe we draft a QB, keep him, and count on Thigpen to start for next season anyway (subject to potential competition, etc.).

by Bleedingredandgold on Dec 22, 2008 7:21 PM CST up reply actions

It's more likely

a team wi try to trade up for one of the promising LTs in this year’s draft. I doubt there will be many takers on a trade for Stafford, but Oher is a different matter. I can see us using him as trade bait.

by Chiefs4Life on Dec 22, 2008 7:50 PM CST up reply actions

What punter do you think we'll take?

Relive Royals History at royalsretro.blogspot.com

by RoyalsRetro on Dec 22, 2008 1:26 PM CST reply actions

..........

To everyone else: “He’s joking, right?”

To: RoyalsRetro: “Youre joking, right?”

We may be "playing to win the game", but it seems like we're coaching to lose.

'09, a new era begins.
For the land of the free and the home of the CHIEFS!

by R2J_24 on Dec 22, 2008 2:15 PM CST up reply actions

If Lauranitis and Malauaga are still there...

around 13-20 then it would be a crime if we didn’t jump back in and get one of them. That is, if we picked a QB or DE with our first pick. I think giving up a pick from the 2010 draft would be feasible (even a first rounder) to get back in and get one of these guys.

by Droppin Deuces on Dec 22, 2008 2:32 PM CST reply actions

So your suggesting

get one of the top three QB’s with the first pick (and pay a gazillion dollars) then trade our 2010 first round pick (a potential top 10 again) for the best MLB available?

We need a future defensive leader, his name is James Laurinaitis and he can be selected in round 1 of the upcoming Draft.

"But what do I know, I’m like an empty room with a large ECHO"

by Lanier63 on Dec 22, 2008 3:30 PM CST up reply actions

The scenario that I would like to see play out

is that we get the best DE at that spot (and pay him a gazillion dollars) and then yes trade our potential top 10 pick for the best MLB available. Would you not use a top 10 pick on either of these guys this year? Why would we not want to speed up the process a little bit if we were to pick up a MLB that would be the anchor of our defense for 8+ years, rather than postponing picking up another good player a year later? We would be able to address our two weakest positions on defense and put ourselves in a better position to win next year, which is the point right? I don’t know why I keep asking questions. I’ll stop now.

by Droppin Deuces on Dec 23, 2008 8:40 AM CST up reply actions

Don't give up on #2 just yet

I don’t know where Playoffstatus.com got thier info, but unless they are factoring in the likelyhood of KC winning Sunday (and to be fair, that may be the case) thier ’s are not valid. If the Bears win tonight (as they are favored), KC and STL will have equal SOS’s heading into the last week.

Then assuming both STL and KC lose (or win LOL) next week, the SOS tiebreaker would come down to the following games:

OAK @ TB
TEN @ IND
NYG @ MIN
CHI @ HOU
WAS @ SF

The Chiefs would be pulling for TB, IND, NYG, CHI and SF. The Rams obviously, would need the other teams to win. Whichever team gets 3 of 5 of the teams they need to win, would get the 2nd pick…and I slightly like the Chiefs matchups (as does Vegas) over the Rams’.

Bottomline, its a lot closer to 50/50 if the Bears win tonight than 73/27.

by kcsno56 on Dec 22, 2008 3:20 PM CST reply actions