Arrowhead Pride Community Mock Draft -- Pick #5 by the Kansas City Chiefs

by Chris Thorman on Mar 25, 2008 11:47 AM CDT in 2008 Draft Comment 41 comments

And with the #5 overall pick in the 2008 Arrowhead Pride Community Mock Draft, the Kansas City Chiefs select:

USC DT Sedrick Ellis

Tom Bahali with the pick.

After trying to trade this pick for hours the Chiefs are stuck in this situation, do you select the BPA or reach for a need position with Clady? Since this draft is loaded with OT talent the Chiefs select Ellis, who we hope is the last D tackle they will have to select for a while. Ellis will help to instantly take pressure off of the young DB's by adding to an already impressive pass rush.

1. Miami Dolphins - QB Matt Ryan
2. St. Louis Rams - OT Jake Long
3. Atlanta Falcons - DT Glenn Dorsey
4. Oakland Raiders - DE Chris Long
5. Kansas City Chiefs - DT Sedrick Ellis

On the clock: New York Jets (phelps216)

Full list of AP mock draft participants

0 recs | Comment 41 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

nice...

I was thinking today how much we really may not need a DT, but we definitely could use an impact player to solidify our core 7 defense and be done with that for this year(except signing JA, of course). After that the obvious needs to happen...

by wildman040 on Mar 25, 2008 12:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I think we really need a DT

Unless Tank Tyler and Turk McBride are showing off season improvement I'm not seeing.

by Chris Thorman on Mar 25, 2008 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think they will continue to improve

But the thing is we still don't have a good pass rushing DT. Tank is more of a run stuffer because of his strength. They need a 3 technique DT to pass rush which Dorsey or Ellis would fill nicely.

I still don't know what to think about Turk. Maybe we just haven't really seen what he can do yet.

by DJ on Mar 25, 2008 7:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

good pick

He really tore it up during the senior bowl. If that can transfer over to the NFL he will be a game changer.

by kchief1990 on Mar 25, 2008 12:30 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Playing devil's advocate

Why are we so sure about this defensive tackle when we've been so wrong at that position in the draft in the past?

by Chris Thorman on Mar 25, 2008 12:39 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

That's the only thing I

keep coming up with. Sims was supposed to be a sure thing - even the Vikings thought so - and he turned out to be a pile. Does anyone know about the rest of the Trojan line for the past few years?

What about the idea of drafting Gholston and moving Tamba to a rotating end/OLB like Justin Tuck? From what I am hearing, he is one of those can't miss genetic freaks (although Tony Mandarich/Steve Emtmann were too).

by dkugler838 on Mar 25, 2008 1:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ok

your draft compared to the WCG draft.

We have picked the same on 1 spot through the first four.

by Adam T on Mar 25, 2008 1:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

So unpredictable this year

It's one of those years where each pick in the top 10 will probably completely change another team's selection. I'm sure teams are having trouble preparing when there are so many different legitimate possibilities.

by Joel Thorman on Mar 25, 2008 1:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sedrick Ellis Would Be A Good Pick

He's a widebody who'll do some damage to an o-line. If that's what we end up with, I'll be happy. There's absolutely no comparison between him and Ryan Sims.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Mar 25, 2008 2:27 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I think there is one BIG difference between

them. Ellis actually rushes the passer and doesn't just stand there when the ball is snapped.

by Lanier63 on Mar 25, 2008 2:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Also

Sims wasn't anything particularly special in college. He was knocked for being inconsistent...Ellis hasn't been (nor has Dorsey for that matter). Either of the top two defensive tackles would do well for us I think. Heck, I wouldn't be entirely unhappy if the Chiefs snagged McFadden, considering LJ's age and horrible contract.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Mar 25, 2008 2:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Not gonna happen

regardless of LJ's performance, age, or contract - you don't draft a guy with the #5 pick who won't be on the field nearly every play.

by PVChiefsfan on Mar 25, 2008 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The real question for Tom and the Chiefs

What if the the Raiders had taken Sedrick Ellis and all of the guys we are hoping for: J. Long, Glen Dorsey and Sedrick Ellis (plus Ryan, even though for most of us he's not a serious consideration) were taken when the Chiefs came to pick. Who would you have taken?

by DJ on Mar 25, 2008 5:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I would have taken Leodis McKelvin

or Vernon Gholston, not sure which one though.

by Tom Bahali on Mar 25, 2008 8:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If your question includes Ryan

Thats five guys and we have th 5th pick. We would be able to select one of them. I may have read your question wrong however.

by Lanier63 on Mar 26, 2008 9:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

In That Case...

...if all of those guys were taken I think you've got to go for Chris Long. Then you can look at trading Jared Allen or, worst-case scenario, you've got his replacement in case King Carl alienates him and he leaves as a free agent.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Mar 25, 2008 5:24 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

1st round guy

Whoever you draft #5 overall (for the exception of a QB) pretty much HAS to start.

If they draft a DE #5 overall that almost commits them to dealing away Allen. There's no way you sign a guy that early in the draft and have him sit on the bench.

I think I would have to pass on C. Long or Gholston unless I was almost positive I wasn't going to be able to sign Allen. Could take a CB or something (I wouldn't reach for Clady though, not impressed with him at all).

by DJ on Mar 25, 2008 5:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okay heres the deal

If Jake Long, Matt Ryan, and both Dorsey and Ellis are gone then there are a couple of things that would/could happen.

Trade down to someone looking for McFadden or C. Long. We may not be able to get what we deserve for that pick but trading down has several benefits that have been tirelessly discussed here.

Or, if we draft Chris Long then that's another problem. Because you know what happens when we draft him? Jared Allen's trade value plummets. It's the same thing with people who say trade LJ and draft McFadden. Once we draft McFadden or Long, everyone knows we're severely financially handi-capped at one position and will probably need to deal one. Knowing that we have to deal one no one is going to offer us any of the outlandish deals we've been discussing.

Jake Long or one of the DTs. Preferably J. Long but either DT would work and one of those three are likely to be there at #5.

by Joel Thorman on Mar 25, 2008 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

The difference

The difference between the C. Long / Allen scenario and the McFadden / LJ scenario is that if you have C. Long and Allen, you can only play one or the other and teams will know you're going to get rid of Allen.

With McFadden / LJ, you can just run 2 back sets like a supercharged Jaguars and still use both players.

by DJ on Mar 25, 2008 7:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And be looking at a ton of money at one position

Now, I have nothing to back this up because I have no idea but I would suspect that Taylor/Jones-Drew wouldn't have $60-$70 million committed between them. That's what LJ/DMC would be.

Believe me I would love to see this backfield. I was even in favor of it and said so here before. But I'm beginning to realize that putting that much money towards two players is a huge risk. I would rather solidify the line so we can put just about anyone back there and put up huge numbers. That's asking a lot since I'm comparing this to a line that had two probable Hall of Famers on it but I agree with the philosophy.

by Joel Thorman on Mar 25, 2008 9:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You're right of course

Paying running backs that much money is not a good thing, having two guys making that much would be pretty rough.

With as many OTs as there are in this draft, I'm not crazy about reaching for one at #5 just because we need one.

I think I would probalby go with what Tom said and just take whoever I thought the best CB in the draft was.

by DJ on Mar 25, 2008 9:48 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

#5 Pick Should Only Be Used on Top Five Talent

Pretty much anyone besides Ellis, Dorsey, the Longs, and possibly McFadden are going to be a reach for us at number 5. Ryan simply doesn't appear to be worth it...not with our line the way it is. McFadden would have value if we're planning on dumping LJ for some prospects (which wouldn't make me sad at all). If Chris Long falls to us at #5 because the other guys took Dorsey, Ellis and Jake Long, I think you absolutely have to draft him and trade either Allen or Hali (although that would get really pricey if you kept Allen and Long). You're talking about getting a DE with a comparable skill set to Allen only three or four years younger. And Allen is going to have a lot of trade value if we can send him to a team where he's willing to agree to an extension before the deal goes through...he could be worth a mid-first round pick with maybe a decent prospect and/or lower draft pick chucked in.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Mar 25, 2008 6:25 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Its a risk though

I'm not a fan of getting rid of a proven player with years left to play at a high level just because you drafted a guy that at the time was a high pick.

You could get rid of Allen and Long might never play up to his level.

Why give up a sure thing for someone who "looks" like he's going to be a good player just because he's the next best guy on the board?

I think you take the player that is the best VALUE. Meaning he's the best player AND at a position you can make use of him.

So if you are getting a guy at #5 because he is the best player available, but he will have to either sit on the bench or force you to give up your best player at that position, that is NOT a good value.

That would be like the Patriots signing Matt Ryan because he is the best player available at their position (he won't be, but hypothetically). Maybe he has the potential to be a franchise QB, but the guy you have is ALREADY a franchise QB.

You're not going to trade away Tom Brady for Matt Ryan and you won't trade away Jared Allen for Chris Long.

In this case, I think you need to move on to drafting a position that will be a better value for the team rather than just collecting star players at the same position.

by DJ on Mar 25, 2008 6:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

You Never Know

If all the guys we are hoping for are gone maybe we draft someone we didn't see coming.

Mike Jenkins and Leodis McKelvin might be options for the Chiefs at that point.

Taba Hali was supposedly a reach at 20, when most teams had him going in the second round. Taking one of these CB's would probably be a proportionate "reach".

The Chiefs are going to draft who they think will give them more bang for their buck, and if its Jenkins or Mckelvin instead of Otah or Clady, then thats who they'll take.

Logically a CB wouldn't be a terrible pick, I mean who is going to start opposite of Surtain? I can't really see Brackenridge or Patterson stepping up into that role.

by kchief1990 on Mar 25, 2008 7:22 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I could see this

To me taking the best CB would make more sense than taking C. Long or Gholston (who would be sitting on the bench) or Clady (who we could get the equivellent player in the second round).

Of course theres always McFadden to consider. I wouldn't even consider him if not for the nightmare scenario we are considering here. If the Chiefs were "forced" to take him, I would expect Gailey to come up with alot of 2 back sets and of course McFadden could be used in the return game.

by DJ on Mar 25, 2008 7:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Anyhow

It's going to be a moot point. There's no way Chris Long is going to slip to us...the lowest he's going to drop is to fourth and Al Davis will snag him because he's a DE (which the Raiders need) who's the son of a famous Raider alum.

Our choices are going to be one of Jake Long, Glenn Dorsey, Sedrick Ellis, Matt Ryan, and Darren McFadden. If Ryan's available by pick 3 I think he'll end up in Atlanta because they're desperate for a QB of the future...which leaves us with Jake Long, Ellis, Dorsey, and McFadden. I think worst thing we end up with is McFadden and as DJ said if we snag him we'll probably see Gailey get very creative with the offensive sets, which will at least give us a reason to tune into the games.

Worst mistake any team makes in the draft though, is going for need over best player available. If we can't trade down, we're better off taking a player who's not a need but gives us more options, and McFadden certainly does that.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Mar 25, 2008 7:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Equivalent ?

I strongly disagre that we could get an "equivalent" talent to clady in the second round. Personally, I like Clady much more than Jake Long. Long has very stiff feet which really scares me. Nothing worse than an end making your tackle look like an idiot because he has horrible footwork (which long has). Clady is fast, strong, and his footwork is way better than jake longs. For this reason, long will never make it as an elite LT because he is way to awkward to handle true speed rushers. Long will make a great RT, but I would be more than happy to draft Clady at the 5 spot, and I think that he would fit our system much better, especially if we switch to a zone blocking scheme. If you want to talk about 2nd round talent in the top 5, then lets talk about matt ryan, but there is no way clady is even close to the second round.

by Ben S on Mar 26, 2008 12:15 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Clady

will not be the best player left on the board when we pick at #5 and I guarantee we won't reach with this pick. Here is my answer to the nightmare scenario, and yes I know it would be expensive. Why can't we draft Chris Long and move him inside? Everybody keeps bringing up the NYG - Long looks like he's built like Justin Tuck. Couldn't he be a slashing 1-gap DT?

by PVChiefsfan on Mar 26, 2008 7:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm not impressed at all with Clady

What you say about Jake Long might be true, but then again, he has played LT for two years and only given up one sack on the left side. He has played against speed rushers, like Vernon Gholston and still got the job done.

Who has Clady played against in the WAC as far as NFL caliber defensive ends?

I'm not saying that there is no difference between Clady and a guy you will pick up early in the second round, but from what I've seen, that difference will be fairly small and not enough to reach for Clady over taking an elite talent.

by DJ on Mar 26, 2008 7:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree

giving up one sack to Gholston, who may end up being a top 10 pick, is quite different from Clady looking awesome against the stellar right DE's from Utah and Wyoming.

by PVChiefsfan on Mar 26, 2008 8:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

If Jake Long Is A RT...

...then that's fine because we need a RT too. And he's not going to be as bad as Terry, McIntosh or Turley if we stick him on the left.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Mar 26, 2008 8:27 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Great Thing About Having A Team With So Many Holes

We aren't generally going to make ourselves worse by selecting the best available player because most of them will either fill a need or create a strength somewhere.

Supporting the lesser of two evils is still supporting something evil.

by UCrawford on Mar 26, 2008 8:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

This is actually an advantage

Thats one thing I keep trying to remind people about the Chiefs not being active in free agency. They may have other motives for what they're doing (or not doing), I don't know. But an advantage of not filling holes with expensive free agents is that we are open to almost anything when draft time comes.

In alot of situations, whoever the BPA is will probably be a position we could use help with. Signing the best players available who are able to play right away without sitting on the bench (DE is a position I think we're good at for now) will make your team a better team in the long run.

by DJ on Mar 26, 2008 6:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fair enough

I'm not saying jake long isn't proven, and I would be completetly fine if the chiefs drafted him, but I definetly would like if we picked up clady with the 5th pick. As for only giving up a sack to vernon gholston, yeah thats an impressive feat for any player, but we must remember that this is still college. You can look at it from the standpoint that the only guy (im not going to count his freshman year) he allowed a sack to is to actualy nfl talent. Yes, the same and more can be said about clady, but what I am trying to say is that you have to take a stat like that with a grain of salt because in reality, whatever you did in college doesn't matter when you make the transition to the nfl. The only time I would really take that stat into mind is if the player played in the SEC because thats as close as you are going to get to NFL defenses, in terms of speed atleast.

by Ben S on Mar 26, 2008 1:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

And the WAC

is as far as you are going to get from NFL defenses - that's what worries me.

by PVChiefsfan on Mar 26, 2008 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haha

actually I would have to say the Pac 10 is about as far away as it goes.

by Ben S on Mar 26, 2008 2:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

clady

physically yes jake Long is a specimen but there are some major issues to his game. His first two years after being highly recruited were pretty bad and alot of people were writing him off as a jr and sr he played alot better,to me that says he may have a longer learning curve in the transition to the NFL and its speed. While he has long arms his playing style is not that of a left tackle for one. He locks on to defenders and doesnt use the punch move that stud LT's do, namely guys like Orlando Pace (best punch in game), Ogden. Which in turn makes him very succeptible to speed rushers. His game against Gholston when Gholston was a sophomore and even more raw he was dominated and i advise you go back and watch some film. He may only gave up one sack but Gholston put pressure on henne all day and he was a sophomore. Namely that game showed his biggest weaknesses. Long has trouble with speed rushers and in pass protection. Plain and simple the only game i was impressed with him was against the gators where he had a great day against Derrick Harvey. For a LT i want a guy who can handle speed rushers day in and day out especially in todays NFL with the 34 and OLB's like Merrimen playing you two times a year pass rushing every play, i want a LT with the feet and hand punch to stop such a player and Long isnt that guy at LT. He stands high at times in pass protection making him very vulnerable to inside moves, which guys like Merriman, Gholston, Freeney and alot of other pass rushers make their career off of. But the Chiefs are one of the only teams that can make him suceed there with there style of play with motion by TE's to pop 34 OLBs before they get to the line. But he is clearly more of a RT and because of great physical combine numbers i think people are making him to be a more natural athlete then what he is. Not trying to bash the guy but there arent many situations where id want him as my blind side protector.
And the stat for sacks is a stat i wouldnt base to much of a decision on. guys like Jared Gaither went all through College without letting up a sack and he is not a guy i would call a Pass protector specialist.
When you look at a guy like Clady he is a more risky pick as he is a raw talent but his upside is enormous. He has natural LT feet, has extremely long arms, is a natural knee bender (cant even say Jake Long is close there) and has the quickness to stop any pass rusher out of any formation. He would allow for TE's,RB's and FB's to help the right side in pass protection as he is the type of linemen that you can put on an island against a pass rusher, he has the lateral mobility to stop inside moves and the quickness to stop speed rushers. he had a great pro day and you can throw out his poor combine numbers if that shys you away from him as a prospect. There are only a few pure LTs in this draft and i would say they are Clady, Chris Williams and Anthony Collins.

by brobrothemofo on Mar 26, 2008 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs