Well folks, the time has come for me to finish this series (on time I might add), and put my mid to the test just like everyone else. For those of you who didn’t see them, you can catch up on the previous versions: Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Thank you to all of commented on those, as I really did take some of the criticisms and factor it into the order of the Five. A quick recap for those who don’t want to read: I suggested that the Chiefs will attempt to grab one of the following four positions (QB, ILB, NT, or OL) with the number 11 pick, or trade down. I then chose specific people from each position who I thought would best fit into the Chiefs scenario (that would be drafted at or around #11). Those players are: Andrew Luck, Dont’a Hightower, Michael Brokers, and David DeCastro.
So, without further ado, let’s begin with #5. Some of you just didn’t get the joke. I’m guessing most of you thought I was a bit off my rocker, especially after I couldn’t get Word to copy/paste correctly into AP. My point for throwing out the name of the guy who would be taken ten spots ahead of ours was that I believe all evidence points to Pioli not taking a QB at all in the first round (or 2 or 3 or 4, but that is something else entirely). That evidence, specifically, is the signing of Brady Quinn. As we all know, Pioli likes his game tape. And while he wouldn’t watch all of it himself, he has a pretty good idea for his 1st round guys by the time free agency starts. Add in the mess created by Big Brother himself, and I can unequivocally (big word for jarhead, me need Google on internex) say that on March 13th at 4:00 p.m. EST, Scott Pioli knew exactly who he would draft at QB, and who he would not draft at QB.
Brady Quinn is going to compete for the #1 spot, which is why we signed him, which is why he came here. Ricky Stanzi is a complete unknown. He was drafted low, but he had almost no time to develop profession skill, which he needs to succeed, due to the lack of offseason. Throw in that he just bears too much resemblance to Tom Brady (and it was our GM that got Brady) and you just can’t be ready to throw him away before he even has a chance. Matt Cassel is a story that we all know. I won’t waste time, or pad my comments, by discussing him.
The glitch in grabbing a QB too early is that it forces you into a possible bad situation. What if Tannehill turns out to be worse than all three of the other guys? We can’t cut him, because that would be a waste of a 1st round pick. He would then just become a replacement for Stanzi, except we already have Stanzi on our roster. We would be letting a (possibly) better QB go, and losing out on all the other guys we could grab with our #11 pick. It is better to wait for next year, when we still have an ability to set ourselves up to grab the #1 QB or #2. Bronze just ain’t good enough for me. One last note, for those of you still wondering about the "competition at QB", and where it will come from. It will come from drafting a QB in the 5th to 7th round, or picking up another FA. We will take 4 QBs into camp, especially with the number at 90. This forces Stanzi and the new guy to battle, which in turn forces Quinn to work to avoid being overshadowed. These three guys working for 2 spots on the roster will spark Cassel’s drive for competition (which we all know he has), thereby making him better. It isn’t direct, and it won’t be that apparent to fans, but it will be there nonetheless.
#4-#1 is just tough. I look through the other guys and, honestly, it took a while for me to separate them out. Trading down, in our situation, would be best, so it passes through to the next round. Guard is a decently major need, with no major unknowns waiting in the wings, so it goes further as well. The one thing I notice as I sit and look at the final two positions (NT and ILB) is that a great NT makes a good ILB look better, while a great ILB has to cover for a good NT. However, there just isn’t a great NT in this draft, and Brockers doesn’t really fit at the position. He would still be a good pick-up for us, but there are better out there for our NT position in the lower rounds. Sitting at #3 is Dont’a Hightower. I really like him, I do, but we could get him with trading back, and really all he does is shore up our run defense, which is good already. My guess (and this is nothing more than an inkling, don’t quote me on this (unless I’m right, then go ahead, I will quote me for all the pancakes in the world)) is that I suspect Crennel will push for trying to grab Burfict in the 3-4 round range, which will once again give us 1st round talent, plus some more pass rush, at a fraction of the cost. A coach like him would be perfect for this guy.
Trade down or David DeCastro….. Trade down or David DeCastro….. Trade down or David DeCastro….. I just don’t know. This was definitely the toughest choice of all, and honestly I have switched the top 4 multiple times. On one hand, David DeCastro is young, and he would make our line even younger. Throw in that Lilja is (according to Winston) the leader of the line, and he might be harder to replace than we think. On the other hand, you have to have someone that wants to trade with you. I still think Tannehill will be the lynch pin. If he makes it past the Dolphins, and someone does want to trade up for him, they will target the two teams sitting in front of us (Bills and Panthers) who are set at the QB position. If that happens, and if (another if, I know) Trent Richardson makes it past the Browns, someone (Jets, maybe?) will need to get in front of the Seahawks because with Lynch getting beat up so much, I don’t see Richardson falling much farther. Honestly, though, that is really the only situation I could see where someone would want to trade up with us, especially with multiple reports saying all GMs from pick 3 to pick 20 want to trade down. As such, Pioli isn’t going to spend much time thinking about it, much less actively looking for one, giving the #2 spot to trading down.
Well, Mr. Upamtn, there you go. Looks like you might actually win this one. (Speaking of which, where in the hell did you get your name? I have been trying to decipher it for God knows how long and I still can’t figure it out.) My number one choice goes to David DeCastro (Stanford). I am a bit leery of this, as I have said many times, mainly for the age reason. However, he does have the ability to solidify our line for years to come. He was also known as a leader for the offense in college, which surely gives him a higher grade from the scouts. The ability to make it through a school like Stanford usually means he is capable of taking criticism, which will be imperative if he does start for us as a rookie. If he can throw in a little dose of humility, and the Chiefs can bring him along just like they like to, nice and slow. The greatest part of this pick is that, while some people will be disappointed that their favorite player wasn’t chosen, no one could be mad at this pick.
Major thanks go out to the contributors here on AP that helped me out. Upatmn, Steve_Chiefs, MNchiefsfan, and Field Yates were the big guys that directly impacted this work. Pretty much all of my info came from rotoworld.com, profootballreference.com, profootballfocus.com, footballoutsiders.com, and of course espn.com and nfl.com. I hope you didn’t get too bored with my works, as I know it came at a time when everyone was doing this. Thankfully, I didn’t do it for you, but rather for me and the practice of writing.