|
![]() |
#2 |
'Tis my eye!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Chiefsplanet
|
If they're going to trade up, they need to go get a guy that can start and have an impact right from the start.
Trading up for Johnson is one of the few trades I could stomach. |
Posts: 100,022
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
M-I-Z-Z-O-U
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Kansas City
|
I'd rather give up 29 and 50. Roughly the same value. But yeah.
|
Posts: 21,181
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Most Valuable Villain
Join Date: Dec 2006
|
Quote:
We've gone so many years without a 1st round pick, that giving up another one for Johnson doesn't hurt as much. |
|
Posts: 92,309
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
M-I-Z-Z-O-U
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Kansas City
|
Quote:
The Texans are an intriguing partner here. Here's a fun concept: Texans get: 29, 30, and 62 Chiefs get: 13, 37 That works out pretty well in value. You're giving up a 2nd, but still have 2 of them and still get 3 picks in the top 50 of this draft. I'm not sure 13 is high enough to be assured of Johnson, though. |
|
Posts: 21,181
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
'Tis my eye!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Chiefsplanet
|
Quote:
I actually like this idea. |
|
Posts: 100,022
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Most Valuable Villain
Join Date: Dec 2006
|
Quote:
|
|
Posts: 92,309
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
M-I-Z-Z-O-U
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Kansas City
|
Quote:
Not sexy. But pretty good returns. |
|
Posts: 21,181
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Most Valuable Villain
Join Date: Dec 2006
|
A trade like that would probably look more like:
Houston gets #29, #30 and #62 Kansas City gets #13 and #68 |
Posts: 92,309
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
M-I-Z-Z-O-U
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Kansas City
|
Quote:
And yeah, looking at drafttek, it looks like it need to include either 50 instead of 62 or include 62 and another pick. That runs off the Johnson chart. |
|
Posts: 21,181
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
M-I-Z-Z-O-U
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Kansas City
|
|
Posts: 21,181
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Most Valuable Villain
Join Date: Dec 2006
|
Quote:
Chiefs giving up 483. Houston giving up (with #37) 498. I was using the Johnson model for my earlier post. |
|
Posts: 92,309
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 | |
'Tis my eye!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Chiefsplanet
|
Quote:
I'll be honest - about the only thing I'm against at this point is trading up for Williams or Ojabo. It's one thing to take a guy with an injury. It's another thing altogether to trade up for that... |
|
Posts: 100,022
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 |
In Search of a Life
Join Date: Jul 2009
|
I think if you're trading up you're gonna shoot for a potential home run type dude. I don't think I'd do it for Karlaftis.
Johnson maybe. |
Posts: 81,572
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Most Valuable Villain
Join Date: Dec 2006
|
I'm trading up to the 13-15 range for Johnson, Karlaftis would probably be the 15-20 range if he's there.
Johnson can set the edge in run defense AND has pass rush skills. I think he's a 10-12 sack a season guy. |
Posts: 92,309
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
|
|