clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

How Well Do The Chiefs Evaluate Their Own Players?

New, comments

I was listening to Chiefs GM Scott Pioli on Sirius NFL Radio the other night and he brought up a point that's often missed in free agency. The players you go out and sign are important, he says, but equally important are the ones you retain.

This falls into the self-evaluation category. How well do the Chiefs evaluate themselves?

This is a point that Michael Lombardi of the National Football Post often brings up and I think it's a good one. How many times have we seen a player doing very well and think, 'Hey that guy's pretty good. The Chiefs should have signed him.'

Then you realize the Chiefs drafted him about six years earlier and released him.

"More mistakes are made by organizations incorrectly evaluating their own teams and counting on the wrong players," Lombardi writes. "This is called a "convenient truth" that allows teams to believe something is true and failing to address the problem."

He uses the example of Alex Smith and the 49ers saying any "quality" NFL talent evaluator understands they need quarterback help but the 49ers don't realize that and it's "convenient" for them.

So how did the Chiefs do evaluating their own talent last year? Mixed results.

Good: Cutting Zach Thomas, Mike Goff and (not re-signing) Mike Brown

Bad: Keeping Larry Johnson, releasing Bernard Pollard

(Note: You could also argue keeping Mike Brown at the start of the season was one of the bad moves)

Any others you'd like to add?