Mock Draft: Version 3.0

[...] Unlike Paddy, I will not be forecasting any potential trades. Feel free to compare 4.0 to Paddy’s 3.0 and my own 2.0 to examine how things have shifted. [...]

Not so good, Clausen has NO chance of going number 1

This is the worst mock draft I have ever read in my life. I read one that was really bad in 1992 but this one is much worst that that garbage. DPG said you did your homework he must be talking about elementary school because it seems like a 2nd grader compiled this mock. Stick to what you know recess, long division, spelling and spitballs.I didn't know this was a kiddie sports site. Ask your parents the next time you want to create a sports site.

The Browns took two WRs in the 2nd last year and taking Bryant would make a young group even younger. I'm not saying they won't, just hoping they go in another direction. Nice work on the mock, though. You did your homework.

If suh mccoy and berry are all off The board. By our pick i still say we take. haden. Carr showed last year that he gets beat more than a corner should l. Draft haden and pair him with flowers and move carr to. safety. Carr Is still young and the transition can be made. That gives us 2 shutdown corners aswell as a goodtlyoumgsafety. Now if we do that and go get a playmaker like peppers our d could b top ten next year!!!

if da chiefs be tradin fomo pics, den dey need to be able to do the time if gonna do the time. crazy son! weiss likes little baby WR's like Tate he is like wayne chrebets athletic adopted brotha! Pety Wheatstraw out of Tulsa would be my fav second round pick. he a longsnappa. rememba that one that got away from Colquitt. Think bout it?

I would love to see the Chiefs trade back and if one or both of the top 2 QB's are still available at number five they should see some offers. But taking TATE at number 12? NO FRIGGIN WAY is he worth a top 15 pick... I don't think he is even worth ANY first round pick. IF we can trade down a couple of times to #12 as suggested, we should take the best OT available, unless someone like McClain should fall that far (which I doubt). But Tate? I wouldn't even take Bryant at #12. Too much bust potential for a WR.

Tulsa's right. Eric Wright's very solid as one corner, but the other starting corner is Ben MacDonald, and he's a backup at best. I hate drafting WRs in the top ten, and Bryant comes with baggage and isn't known for great route running. Last time we drafted a WR like that, we regretted it. We spent two second round picks on WRs last year, and both are coming along nicely--especially MoMass. Haden would do far more for the Browns than Dez Bryant.

the browns have exactly one cornerback. the others were so bad we started a back up safety at cb. then moved our slot wr to starting safety. Thats fact! need wr but need major help in d backfield

Dunlap is too low, & no Pierre-Paul rd 1?!? These guys are going to fly up boards after they wow at the Combine. Top 10.
I don't think that there is any way the Rams take one of these QBs first. They are OK prospects but not franchise quarterbacks.

LOL Fighton.

My mistake. We run the mock out of a template and I forgot to delete UCLA from that box when I added in Griffen.

Thanks for the catch.

maybe denver likes bradford enough to trade up to 5 with their 1 and the 100 catch a year receiver. highly unlikey, but bradford may be worth it as he looks like p manning running the shotgun/no huddle that is becoming so popular.

Dude... Everson Griffen from UCLA? As a Trojan, I'm deeply insulted by your mistake. Do some QA for the love of Pete (Carroll)!

If we want tate we take him no way he makes it to our 2a. Rams lions bucs redskins all. Need Wr help we either trade down in the first or make a trade to. get another very late 1 to get him.

I don't know if I would want to take a G in the first round. I could live with Kindle though.

Yeah, I would probably want to snatch up Kindle, Bulaga or Iuputi before I even thought about Tate.

Merlin:

According to Draf Tek, which you write for I might add, Tate at 12 is only a 5 slot reach.

Pat:

I like Tate, but #12 is very high for him and I see larger needs on this team. This mock is certainly out of the box!

If the Chiefs were able to be fortunate enough to trade down to #12, why would we take a late 1st, high 2nd pick like Tate when Thomas, Spiller, Kindle, Graham are all seemingly better talents? I truly think there will be good trade down offers if one or both of the QBs are available, but I have a hard time believing they would reach on a non-Bryant WR with such a high pick. Heck, I would be happier with Iuputi there.

http://www.prodraftparty.com/2009/wr-golden-tate-scouting-report/

Check out the video of his catch at around the 50 second mark.

Why in God's name would we want a guy that can catch like that?

I use the Draft Tek Big Board and they have Tate ranked as #17.

Also what the hell is wrong with Tate? He can break it from just about anywhere on the field and he can return kicks. The Chiefs need someone who can add some more punch to their offense and he will be playing under Weiss who can help shorten his NFL learning curve.

damn boys this is fun. i should of found the internet years ago. i am glad i stumbled here to aa and i do not even drink. as far as this draft, i think rolly mccain or dez bryant or joe haden are talented enough to make the hof, certainly several pro bowls. if we have a chance to pick em we do and stuff the trades. otherwise trade if we can but there are very,very few trades at this high a pick.

It is different, a little!! Same idea, we need a CB, ILB, C and OLB. they are our biggest needs. I think we need two stud corners to deal with these passing teams.

You posted that elsewhere, too, 102win.

There are some minor disagreements I've had with it, but one really big disagreement: Andre Roberts will simply not fall that far. He's gone by the 3rd, if not sooner.

I would like this to fly, but we need defensive help. So trade back with Buafflo and gain their #41. New England jumps to #9 to get McClain, we also give up #138, we get their #22,#42 and #53. We draft:

R1 #22 CB Patrick Robinson-FSU
R2 #36 LB Brandon Spikes-Florida
R2 #41 C Maukrice Pouncey-Florida
R2 #42 SS Chad Jones-LSU
R2 #51 LB Jerry Hughes-TCU
R2 #53 G Mike Johnson-Alabama
R3 #68 RB Toby Gerhart-Stanford
R4 #99 WR Danario Axlender-Missouri
R5 #132 WR Andre Roberts-Citadel
R5 #144 DE Corey Peters-Kentucky
R6 #163 RB Chris Brown-Oklahoma

Really? You really want us to take a 2nd round receiver in the #12 spot? That is just plain crazy! Earl Thomas, Sergio Kindle just to name a few that would be much better picks, especially at the #12 spot. If the Chiefs take a player like Golden Tate in the top 15 I might never cheer for them again. I agree with a "sexy" pick and not picking up another buffet buster but come on! Hell, I'd even take Jason Pierre-Paul over Tate at the #12 spot

I would absolutely shoot myself if we traded down and took Golden Tate instead of CJ Spiller, Taylor Mays, and virtually anybody else with the #12 overall.

I've got to give you tons of credit for thinking outside of the box, though. But this was thinking outside of the credible universe.

Im not completly sold we need a inside lb with our 1st pick as all kno in The 3-4 the lineman are used to free up backers and to generate pressure. Our d line did none of this williams led the team in tackles even after fighting off blocks that the d line should have taken care of and our other inside backer is dj. I think more than anything we need a dominate dt. I say we trade up if we have to and get mccoy. If not trade down or take haden. We need a outside lb. There are rumors bout us goin after peppers and i think with him and a dominate. Dt we stop the run and generate a passrush.

I am with DD. I hate the second trade down. Pat, what are we getting for those trades?

Patrick:

Nice work. Good analysis. I disagree on a few picks but nothing to rant about. I don't think Tuna is going to trade up to get Haden. I also think that picking Tate here is too early. If we really want him, we can get him later (at least as most Big Boards look now).

Chiefsfan567:

If it went Suh, Okung, McCoy, Berry we could have something very nice occurring when we trade back. The reason is that we are now the first pick before a string of teams possibly looking for a QB and both Clausen and Bradford are sitting there.

We trade back getting the most out of the highest pick possible for 1 QB, then we trade back again getting the most we can for the 2nd. In the end we probably gain 2 picks in the 2nd or 3rd round.

As to who we go for then, depending on where we end up we can go: Rolando McClain, Dan Williams, Earl Thomas, etc...

I agree but who do we go after?? I like the idea of haden the cb and movin carr to safety. Improves the whole secondary and gives us 2 shutdown corners and a good safety carr is still young enough To make the switch

756:

If it foes like that then we will definitely be trading back. If Clausen is still there at 5, teams will be falling all over themselves to trade up.

Pat wtf do we do if it goes suh, okung, mccoy, berry

The thing I love the most about mock drafts - in the end none of it matters. I too would love to see the Chiefs trade out of the 5 spot and I wonder if the weak free agency and the long period between the 1 and 2-3 rounds will make for more trades. The good news is we shall find out -come on April!

On another note - I wonder if the Chiefs will do a draft party this year - I've been going for years (I miss the small crowds and it being held in the Arrowhead Club) but I don't know how well I can make it to a Thursday night event as I live almost 2 hours away.

Sldo I hsve been hearing that there is a good chance the Lions will take Okung with the 2nd pick.

Now that throws things out of whack as well. You know I think the Chiefs would be stupid to take a tackle and they would be really stupid to take Davis at 5.

If the Lions take Okung it could go:

1. Suh
2. Okung
3. McCoy
4. Clausen

Chiefs: Berry.

I could live with that.

You are probably right Jeremy.

One of the reasons I has Suh go at 2 is because who wants to see the same damn mock draft every time. I am trying to play with possibilities to see what COULD happen. I don't think anyone thought the Chiefs were going to take Tyson Jackson last February.

It gets tiring seeing Suh go first in every mock. He probably will but you never know what possibilities would be uncovered if he went 2.

Love the effort. The commentary is funny too.

However, St Louis will most assuredly take Suh, because of a thing called peer pressure. No one likes to be second guessed and at this point everyone is saying, absolutely everyone, that Suh is the best player in the draft and a can't miss player. As a GM you don't want to screw that up. If they take claussen and he flames out, and Suh is just respectable, that GM will be always known as an idiot. Hope that makes sense.

I would love any scenario where we trade down.

Double D:

Good point about being in the 9 slot with McClain still being on the board. However, there are some interesting LB prospects in this draft. James Laurenitis proved that good LBers can be found later. If the Chiefs have the chance to pick up more picks I think they will do it.

They have more holes than McClain can fill.

Also this idea that Bradford won't go in the first round is baffling to me. He very well may be the best QB in this draft and many draft boards have him rated higher than Clausen.

Teams place a HUGE premium on the QB position and there are a lot of teams that need QB's. I don't think it is crazy as all to say that the Bills or someone else for that matter, might want to trade up to take him, especially if Clausen is off the board.

There is no telling what Holmgren might do. He might say the hell with Anderson and Quinn and draft Bradord himself.

Also, if I'm sitting at #9 and McClain is still on the board, I'm probably not going to trade down unless I'm getting A LOT out of the deal.

The Browns traded back a gazillion times last year. It can happen.

I don't think this would ever happen, Pat. I don't agree with most of the picks in the first place, but it was interesting at least. One first round trade is hard enough let alone two...

I would love to see something like this happen but I have to believe that Chan Gailey might have a thing or two to say against trading up to the #5 pick so that it can be used on an inexperienced, potentially injury-prone, QB. That's what you call taking a huge and unnecessary risk. Besides, even if he really wanted Bradford, my bet says Bradford will still be there at #9. In fact, I won't be at all surprised if Bradford doesn't get taken until the 2nd round . . . perhaps even by the Chiefs???