Saturday Morning Cup O’Chiefs
We don’t believe in doing mock drafts on this site, so don’t expect one in this next week as we head to the first round of the 2009 NFL Draft.
But we will do mock trades, because it seems that at least half of the Chiefs fans think the team should deal that third pick in the first round to pick up more draft choices.
On paper, that’s a solid idea. But as with all trades, it takes two to make a deal. Teams at the top of the round are looking for a partner to play poker. Right now all they’ve got is a game of solitaire.
As we’ve written recent history shows us that the chances of a Chiefs trade in the first round are very slim. The last time the third choice was traded was the 2000 Draft and in the last seven NFL Drafts, only one top five pick has changed hands. You know all the reasons, topped by the big-money contracts to these picks at the top of the round, good but unproven talents.
Scott Pioli made it plain this week that he wasn’t actively seeking trades, but he is willing to listen to offers for that third spot. For him to pull the trigger, another team is going to have to make it worth his while in compensation, i.e. draft picks in return.
That limits the field of potential trading partners, because teams that are past the No. 10 slot in the first round would have a hard time coming up with a draft choice package to equal the value of the No. 3 pick.
As we’ve mentioned before, NFL teams use a draft pick value chart to divine the worth of a position in rounds one through seven. Teams don’t all use the same chart, but there’s usually not a lot of difference. The most prevalent value chart says the third pick is worth 2,200 points. For the reasons why it’s so infrequent those picks are traded, maybe the top of the draft needs to be recalibrated. That’s a discussion for another time.
But those 2,200 points would seem to be the minimum in return Pioli would accept for the No. 3 position. Putting together that many points would be trouble for a lot of teams in the draft. In some cases it would eat up their entire trove of picks. Finding somebody like the New Orleans Saints, who were willing in the 2000 NFL Draft to deal away all their picks and some in 2001 for the chance to select RB Ricky Williams is a tough assignment. There are just not many Mike Ditka’s out there willing to make deals like that, especially in light of the fact that Ditka was out of job some eight months after making the deal.
Here are the prime candidates who could pull off a move up to No. 3, without decimating their draft class, and what it would cost them to equal those 2,200 points.
Now remember, it may take more than those 2,200 points to convince Pioli to move. If he plays hard to get, these packages could be bigger, or they could fade away. For our exercise, we are making decisions based on equal value.
And our proposals are based on the first-round order as of Friday evening, April 17, including the Jason Peters trade that sent the 28th pick in the round from Philadelphia to Buffalo. It doesn’t factor a team possibly stair-stepping its way up from the bottom half of the round.
Here goes:
SEATTLE: the Seahawks would need 400 points to move up from No. 4 to No. 3. They would have to give up that fourth pick and their second-round pick, No.37 that is worth 530 points. The Chiefs could even things out by dealing their fourth-round, No. 102, which is worth 92 points. KC gives up 2,292 points and gets 2,230 in return. That’s a pretty square deal.
CLEVELAND: the Browns would need 500 points to move from No. 5 to No. 3. That would take that fifth choice and either their second-round pick, No. 36 that’s worth 540 points, or their second-round pick, No. 50, plus their fourth-round, No. 104, for a total of 486 points. There’s nothing in those deals that would decimate the Browns class of ’09.
CINCINNATI: the Bengals almost never do things like this, so it’s hard to imagine them being a potential trading partner. If they wanted to go from No. 6 to No. 3, that’s a 600 point jump. They could do that for the first, their second/No. 38 (520 points) and fourth/No. 106 (82 points). It’s a doable deal, but the Bengals don’t roll this way.
OAKLAND: should we even bother? Would Pioli/Haley dance with the devil, er … Al Davis? If the Raiders wanted No. 3, they would have to give up their No. 7 pick, second/No.40 (500) and third/No. 71 (235). That would be 2,235 points coming back to the Chiefs.
JACKSONVILLE: the Jaguars are sitting at No. 8 and to move five spots, they need to give up that pick, along with their second/No. 39 (510), third/No. 72 (230) and fourth/No. 107 (80). That’s 2,220 points.
GREEN BAY: At No. 9 the Packers would need to a big package to move up to No. 3. It would take the No. 9, second/No. 41 and a pair of thirds/No. 73 and 83. That’s 2,230 points.
SAN FRANCISCO: Currently sitting at No. 10, if the Niners wanted to make the deal it would cost them that pick, a second/No. 43, a third/No. 74, a fourth/No. 111 and a fifth/No. 146. As you see, the package just climbs. That deal would be 2,195 points.
We’ll stop here in the order because as we move down, so does the point value and thus it takes more and more picks to make the jump.
But let’s add a couple of wildcards for reasons that will become obvious:
BUFFALO: the Bills now have No. 11 and No. 28, or 1,910 points. If they added a second/No. 44, the total would be 2,390 points. If they added a third/No. 75 instead, they could get to 2,155 points.
DENVER: the Broncos have a pair of first rounders, No. 12 and 18, for 2,100 points. Throw in a third/No. 84 and that’s 2,270 points.
NEW ENGLAND: the Chiefs and Patriots have already made a deal this year, why not another one? New England would have to give No. 23 and all three of their second round choices and they would still be short, with a package worth 2,070 points. But the Chiefs would go from having one of the first 58 picks, to four. Highly doubtful New England would give up that much.
MIAMI: would father-in-law Bill Parcells being willing to deal to get this high? Doubtful; it would take pretty much the complete Dolphins draft class to get the third choice.
DAY ONE OF CHIEFS VETERAN, NON-MANDATORY MINI-CAMP
The Chiefs held the first two practices of the Todd Haley Era on Friday and they did it with very few people watching. Not only was the media not allowed in, but neither were club personnel. A quick drive past the practice field showed players, coaches, support staff and that was it, the entire group.
Todd Haley said he liked what he saw, especially the 60-plus players that showed up for the work. Why any player would stay away considering what the new regime has said and stressed, is hard to understand. Haley wouldn’t provide a roll call of players, but we’ll have a better idea of that on Saturday, when both sessions have time for the media to watch.
There are 67 players on the roster and reportedly at least two kickers in for a tryout. That means a very small handful of players were absent. Haley said he had heard from those not attending and was satisfied with their explanations.
“We had a bunch of guys out there that looked like they wanted to be there, and ran around; it was a fun time,” Haley said.
SIGNINGS & MOVEMENT IN THE NFL
BENGALS – restricted free agent LB Rashad Jeanty signed his tender offer; claimed RB Gary Russell (Pittsburgh) on waivers.
BRONCOS – signed OT Brandon Gorin (St. Louis).
BILLS – traded LT Jason Peters to the Eagles for the 28th pick in the first round and the fourth round/No. 121 selection of the ’09 NFL Draft and a second-day selection (third round or later) in the 2010 NFL Draft. Signed RB Dominic Rhodes (Indianapolis).
FALCONS – restricted free agent G Harvey Dahl signed his tender offer.
PACKERS - restricted free agent S Atari Bigby signed his tender offer.
SAY HAPPY BIRTHDAY …
Born on April 18, 1961 in Selma, California was TE David Little. He played in 10 games with the Chiefs in the 1984 season, catching one pass for 13 seasons. Little played 92 games over eight seasons.
Born on April 18, 1967 in Detroit was DT Tom Sims. He was drafted in the sixth-round of the 1990 NFL Draft out of Pitt. He played two seasons (1991-92) with the team, appearing in 26 games and totaling three sacks. He’s now an assistant coach on the staff of Mark Mangino at the University of Kansas.
On April 18, 1970, OT Willie Roaf
(left) was born in Pine Bluff, Arkansas. He went on to Louisiana Tech, then 13 seasons in the NFL, the last four with the Chiefs (2002-05). In KC, Roaf appeared in and started 58 games and earned four trips to the Pro Bowl.
And born on April 18, 1982 in Sumter, South Carolina was current Chiefs CB Ricardo Colclough. He joined the team last year as an injury replacement, appearing in six games with the Chiefs. He came into the NFL as a draft choice of the Pittsburgh Steelers.
I’d be surprised if we saw a trade. I think those wishing for one should forget it.
You might be right, Harold. But, it’s kinda’ fun to think about. Not much else for football junkies to do this time of year.
I think the “wild card” in the draft be Sanchez. Will Seattle take him at #4? I was reading where Denver was having him in for a workout. Do they really think he’ll still be there at #12? The 49ers have #10. I have to believe they will take him if he’s still there. But…The Jets would love to have Sanchez, too. The Redskins? Tampa Bay needs a QB, too.
I like the Denver deal. Their #12 and #18, and a third rounder for our #3? I’d do that in a heartbeat. And let’s face it, that’s their best shot at getting Sanchez.
We’ll see in a week, I guess.
Good column, Bob. First of all, it’s beyond a long shot for any divisional rival to deal with the Chiefs on draft day, and vice versa. That sort of thing just doesn’t happen.
Secondly, there really isn’t a marquee stud in this draft to stir the souls of teams down the order. No Peyton Manning, Reggie Bush or Lawrence Taylor types that I can see, so again, the possibility of a trade up to #3 overall grows even more remote.
However, one team Bob omitted does have the potential IF they include a player or two along with a pick package to move up. The J-E-T-S obviously covet a QB, so let’s give the Chiefs their first and second round picks and also send CB Revis and perhaps another player of need on to KC for their top pick.
Far fetched for sure but given the draft value chart and compensation required, so are the other scenarios. I really believe the Chiefs are stuck at #3 but that’s not necessarily a bad thing because the player they take will be far more likely to achieve elite status than one taken down the board.
I would be surprised if we didnt trade. KC has brought in Curry, Orakpo, Smith for the 3rd pick.
They have brought in so many 1 or 2nd round picks. OT Britten, LB Barwin, LB Brown, DE Jarron Gilbert, LB Sintim, LB Kruger, LB Laurinaitis, LB Maualuga, LB English. None of those are good value for the #3 overall pick and almost all will be long gone by the 3 round.
I hope and bet that we trade down.
Hey Rip, I’d also be open to the idea of taking the Jets 1st and 2nd round picks this year, and 1st round pick next year to move up to #3. I don’t see how we could pass that up either.
Okay what about this? Is there a way to initiate a three way trade in this draft bob?
SO here it is. The Chiefs trade down AT MOST 7-10 spots, pick up more picks, and at the same time somehow wheel and deal their way into getting Anquan Boldin. He was quoted on NFL.com saying that he wouldn’t mind going to play for Haley in KC… I’d give up our 3rd rounder this year for Boldin but that’s a little cheap for what he actually is…unless we got a old coach discount.. If somehow we coul get boldin in that three way trade and pick up someone the likes of aaron maybin or orakpo that would be pretty sick.. anyway let me know what you all think
Arizona has already said they wanted at least a 1st and 3rd for Boldin. I don’t know of anyone that would be willing to give up a 1st and 3rd for us so we could pick up Boldin. I don’t think we have anyone on our team that we could toss in there either. Maybe if we packaged Gonzo and Pacman Johnson and a pick to be announced, but still, I don’t see how we could pull that one off, no matter how good it sounds to us.
It didn’t work for Ocho, so it doesn’t look to good for Boldin either. I think he’s stuck there in the desert.
I’d like to see Boldin here…but the price is too high. As cool as it would be to have a receiver of that caliber, we have MUCH bigger needs.
As for the draft?
If anybody can wheel and deal us a deal…it’s Pioli. Really hard to tell. He’s not gonna’ tip his hand, that’s for sure. We really could use another first day pick or two, no doubt about it.
I still think we’re sitting in THE prime spot for a team that wants Sanchez to be their “franchise”. And there seems to be several.
Should be an interesting week, and weekend.
Bob your analysus is completely wrong. Why? Teams can deal 2010 picks too. You need to redo your whole article.
Do not really understand the points system. If it is correct, the Chiefs will have to draft #3. Who is anyones guess (see above). Just hope they are more successful than Carl seemed to do.
I’d have to agree with Scott. When Seattle came out and said they would take Sanchez at #4, that forces anyone who is seriously interested in him to come dance with the devil. They really did us a favor, even if they have no real intentions of taking him there.
Oh yeah, if Pioli believes he’s getting the right compensation I think he’d trade down in a heart beat. As has been said, they’ve brought in a lot of different players so as to be ready for any scenario.
The only reason at this time to jump off a third pick is if the team did not have a lot of cap room for all placements and any other chance’s to make any move that comes by.
Not to many other teams are in this good of shape!
Fill those holes, and play a little BALL .
I’m ready for some football—-are you ready ?
Pioli explained his trading philosophy: you have to balance grade vs. need. I wouldn’t worry so much about Bob’s hypothetical point system. The factor impacting the point system is $$$$! If Pioli can trade down, even if seemingly lopsided and get his player(s), he’ll do it. He moves around to target players, not to merely play “monopoly” with “points” on a scale. He’s balancing players , needs & money.
Great column, Bob. Thanks for your thoughts.
i think we have a shot at getting to trade down i heard washingtons qb is in the same boat jay cutler was in after learning that washington expressed interest in cutler and dan snyder hates money or something cuzzz he likes 2 get rid of it so maybe after learning about seattles interest in sanchez maybe they trade up with kc and we get their 1st and a 2nd small price 2 pay for a great qb and then we draft whoever is the best d end or ot or og oh yeah and we might trade gonzo 2 atl or ny and maybe lj 2 arizona lj is a whisenhunt kinda guy
I love Curry, but gosh, if we could even got a 2/3/5 to move back, thats just crazy, could still get a top 15 player, and have 2 more picks in the top 100…wild
While I believe HUGE pick difference trades are unlikely (#3 for #20), I can easily see “baby step” swaps. If there becomes a frenzy for Curry or Sanchez, the “Chefs” (remember the old Snickers commercial?) could easily pick up a pick or two and still be in great position to draft Brown, Orakpo, Jackson, Ayers, etc.
I posted a hypothetical last week of Cleveland swapping #5 with us to get Curry and then for even more fantasy, Jacksonville swapping their #8 for the #5 to get Sanchez. We’d likely pick up a second and third rounder at minimum and still be picking at #8.
Or, as unlikely as it may seem, Denver could send us #12 and #18 for #3 to snag Sanchez. They could be sorely tempted. We either use those picks or package #12 with something else and trade for Boldin and still have #18. (I hope they wouldn’t try this; as good as Boldin is we need all the defensive help we can get and after that, strengthen the OL).
Of course none of us has any idea, but this is fun stuff for the off season. And I honestly think the odds are in favor of Pioli finding a trade partner. The interest in Curry and Sanchez seems to be gaining momentum. I will be surprised if we hold #3.
After Seattle moved LB Peterson, it makes some sense (at least in my mind) that if they throw up smokescreens to increase Sanchez’s value to make somebody move to our spot to get him, they could easily take Curry afterwards.
A pathetic article Bob. Interesting insight, but stupid.
Guys, DON’T get too excited about anything Bob mentions here. Bob is using the old Jimmy Johnson value chart that he came up with in the late 80s-early 90s. NO ONE uses a chart like this now. This chart says pick 1 is worth 3000, 2 is 2600, 3 is 2200, and most picks in the 3rd round are worth between 75-200 points. Does this chart sound a little unbalanced to you? Well it is. Teams have adjusted it because of the big time money top 10 picks get and the higher value teams now place on rounds 2-4. I believe the Chiefs will trade down, but a team like….say the Jags, won’t give up their 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks to move up 5 spots. That’s insane. It would more likely be for just a 2nd rounder.
These teams won’t stick to this outdated chart like Bob does. Pioli and any potential trading partner will simply try to do what’s best for their respective teams. If that means taking less/more compensation than the chart dictates so be it. Throw out this chart Bob! It’s been out of the NFL as long as Jimmy has! The more you use it the more out of touch you look!
Since we can’t trade with Denver, what Seattle should do is arrange a secret deal with Pioli to trade Denver’s picks for our #3, then trade their #4 to Denver for #12 and #18. Seattle then turns around and trades those picks to us straight up (or maybe throw in a low-round pick) and takes Sanchez themselves. The benefit to Seattle is they make sure no one jumps ahead of them by trading with us (of course someone could trade with the Rams, but let’s assume no one is willing to pay that price). The benefit to KC is that we get a deal that we otherwise couldn’t do, with the added bonus that we are screwing Denver!
I have no clue what Pioli would/will do, but I think it would be stupid to stand on the authors #’s.
Just for an example, the authors scenario above with Jacksonville. I use this as my example because in my mind it makes the most sense for both teams and it avoids the trade within the conference.
“JACKSONVILLE: the Jaguars are sitting at No. 8 and to move five spots, they need to give up that pick, along with their second/No. 39 (510), third/No. 72 (230) and fourth/No. 107 (80). That’s 2,220 points”
These #’s are ridicules, and border line stupid, considering this years talent pool at the top end of the draft, and the uncertainty of what is going to happen with the CBA and, next year being an uncapped year.
So I can not fathom any reason why Pioli wouldn’t settle for Jacksonville’s 1st # 8, 2nd #39 (that’s a high 2nd), and then there 4th # 107 ( again that’s a fairly high 4th)
That would be a deal to good to pass on.
Then let Pioli impress us with his trademark trades up and down a few slots. He can adjust as he see’s fit to get his value guys.
Anyone that would turn that deal down should be Fired immediately!
Dan is correct. 2010 picks play heavily into any trades. I can see us losing a pick or 2 this year, but winding up with 4-5 extra picks next year. Pioli isn’t here for one year, and he likes to have alot of picks to control the draft. He can’t do it this year because Carl wasn’t planning beyond last year. But he can set us up for a Pioli type draft in 2010 and beyond.
IF we’re to trade out of #3, I expect a 2010 1st rounder and more to be part of the package. I also think the league will institute a rookie signing structure similar to the NBA in the next contract, hpefully in time for 2010, so high 1st round picks will become very valuable again in the future, and not an albatross like they are currently.
Okay……… here goes. If, if’s and buts were candy and nuts. We’d all be happy at Christmas.
Meaning, none of this trade dribble means diddly.
We have no idea what will happen, yes it would be best to have the most choices. But if it happens then we can have a party, until then it’s just if’s and buts. More is good the right ones are better.
It is all about the TEAM……….and………..
THE RIGHT (22) 53 2009
In Pioli I trust
hey devil dog
if if and buts were candy and nuts then whos nuts are slapin ur but
That’s what I’m talkin about D-dog.
And who’s to say we won’t talk to somebody about a Jason Peters type guy to go with say…a mid-1st round pick and a 3rd or 4th rounder?
I say “Bring me 2 to fill my right (22) 53 2009!”