Great Article on Drafting Process (insight on Dorsey's school of thought)
 

Super long article. VERY interesting for draftniks. It will likely change the approach we take when doing mocks, as we now must factor in how prospects compare to current guys on our roster, if we haven't been doing that already.

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2014/3/6...cess-big-board

Lots of sections, but one that I found very interesting and relevant:

Read this earlier today. Great read.

hipster

HAVE YOU READ THAT PIECE IN THE TIMES

Marc Lillibridge is a cool dude.

Long but interesting read

This explains a lot about Dorsey always saying "best player available" but then drafting on need. So, the best player available this year would be the best overal guy who can beat out Avery or Lewis or Catapano.

Seems like there would be a hybrid where you create a horizontal then use that to compile your vertical. Assign a likelihood that draftees could beat out a member of your roster, then rank those based on that likelihood. If you need a safety but there is not a candidate with a high likelihood to beat out someone you already have, it's a wasted pick.

So if that is the INTENTION, what is the EXCUSE for drafting Fisher?

People always seem to point out the packers picking Rogers when they had Farve.
When smith and rodgers came out I feel some teams had rodgers higher than smith.
So if you are drafting in the 20's and your top rated qb is still there you have to take him.
To me it is less complex than people make it out to be. If you are in win now mode you would favor position over value. You would also favor a quick contributor to the guy with a higher ceiling who may take longer to develop.

Shitty draft. Simple as that.

That's what I was thinking.
I would imagine that a big vertical board could be compiled with these things already factored in, but can see why they would do this, because then they can see where other players rank in accordance with how valuable all players are to all teams to see what kind of trade down value the current available players have to other teams.

Fisher=shitty draft..... Agreed!

Uncertainty regarding the re-signing of Albert along with the percieved ranking of Fisher.

I still belive Fisher has the tools to become an elite T in this league.

Just needs to improve his overall strength, IMO.
That and a weak class.

I posted this in a draft thread, but here is my guess on some of what the Chiefs are likely to do this off-season. (Not saying this would be my choice necessarily: just a prediction of what the Chiefs might do.)

1. Sign Golden Tate as their #2 WR.
2. Keep Jenkins.
3. Drop Avery.
4. Draft a WR in the later rounds.
5. Prediction of what their draft board will look like when the 23rd pick comes up. (Assuming many, many things. Including that they don't trade down/up; or land a top flight FS in FA.)

----- a. Calvin Pryor
----- b. Kona Ealy
----- c. Louis Nix
----- d. Ryan Shazier

Why would we drop Avery

I saw that in Gothamist.

Exactly. Going back to horizontal, what WR in a late round would be an obvious bet to beat out Avery for a roster spot?

Highly doubtful.

Our WR corps is too thin to drop a proven commodity.

Avery's production does not merit his cap #. His salary for '14 is about 3X that of Jenkins and they're both similar types of receivers. (Speed) It goes up quite a bit more for 2015. Bowe's contract is uber inflated and there's only so much $ you can allocate at a specific position. Dumping Avery gives them extra money to go after a sure handed young receiver that has gotten better every year (Tate). All speculation of course, but the logic is valid.

Reread the post: Golden Tate

2 touchdowns and less than 600 yards? And almost 3X the salary as Jenkins? :hmmm:

chiefs have 6 picks. Last yr the chiefs made player for player trades with Jenkins and Sherman. They gave up 2 second round picks for Smith. Then Dorsey tried to gain a better 2014 late pick by trading a 7th and Edgar Jones for a 6th.

Chiefs had a 7 player draft class in 2013, but also had the advantage of being the first in the waiver wire (which is like having a bunch of extra late picks). Chiefs don't have that benefit this yr. They need more picks to take advantage of this deep draft class, and reduce risk.

As for Free Agency

I only expect to see the chiefs pursue CUT players. Chiefs will likely get 2015 comp picks for Albert, Schwartz, and Asamooah leaving. They might even get lucky with something for Mcluster. Signing FREE AGENTS can negate comp picks, while CUT players wont. The team might as well use that salary cap space on signing Alex Smith, Houston, and Berry long term.

So, in other words. We draft like how many of us have been saying. BPA at position of need. Nothing really new to see here.

If you need it watered down, yes. There's a lot more in there, though, outside of what I posted in the OP.

Specifically, I like how we are not only looking at the areas that need to be upgraded, but also weighing those prospects against our current roster.

So they just suck at the draft then?

You think it's a little early to determine the overall value of last years draft, or no?

Everybody is offering the overall value of last year's draft as an excuse for drafting Fisher when he showed on the field he wasn't BPA and didn't fill a position of need.

So is it too early or not?

Got some flawed logic going on up in here.

Don't be a vagina. The book isn't written on ANY of the draft picks from last year, including Fisher.

The article talks specifically, as do several people in this thread, about Dorsey's school of thought on the draft.

The article contends that he uses a BPA scheme, weighted by position of need.

Fisher doesn't fit either of those. His play on the field bears out that he wasn't the BPA, and the fact that he couldn't even secure a starting spot full time says he didn't fill a position of need.

It was a panic pick because the draft sucked, nothing more, nothing less. Dorsey isn't infallible, and his "draft strategy" isn't revolutionary.

He is most certainly filling a position of need now. Which Dorsey may have foreseen.

No way to know who the best player in a draft was by their rookie season.

Seems people only use this common knowledge when it doesn't apply to our picks.

That's flawed logic, IMO. Fisher may well turn out to be one of the top 5 players from that class, and is filling a huge position of need for us.

It's so easy to look at guy from a small school who played injured through his rookie season, and say, Welp.

See: Dontari Poe (minus injury)

Really? Is that why the impending vacancy at left tackle is, according to the Chiefs, going to be filled by someone other than Eric Fisher?

Of course. If you don't like the Fisher pick, you're just a hater that doesn't like anything the Chiefs do. :roll eyes:

Dorsey was pure ****ing GOLD in free agency last year. A good portion of the draft was very good, too. The Eric Fisher pick just wasn't. Sorry.

If he's a right tackle, it's a terrible pick. Plain and simple.

I don't how you can ignore the fact that Dorsey may have known he wasn't going to sign Albert, or be able to afford to.
Also taking into account that he Fisher may have had a learning curve coming from a small school so may have not been able fill that void until after Albert was gone.
Seems to me like he's looking further than just the end of his nose.

ERIC FISHER ISN'T REPLACING ALBERT.

Dorsey, out of his own mouth, said Eric Fisher is a RIGHT TACKLE.

Saying that Fisher is penciled in at RT in January means nothing to me



I never implied anything like that. And saying that judging a pick after his rookie season is premature does not do that.






If he does not win the LT job in camp, I completely agree.

This.

Fish stays at RT.

And he should...if he can't find a ****ing way to master that why the hell would we want him at LT?...

No he didn't. He said that he was penciled in a RT right now. That's it.

Look, I'm not down on Dorsey. I think he's shown a lot of promise already. Obviously, he's new to the role and needs to grow.

I just think all of this talk about him somehow being "special" (there was a reference to Sabermetrics in another thread) is silly.

Can't believe people would just write fisher off as an average RT after an injury riddled rookie season after coming from Central Michigan.

He will no doubt get a shot to win the LT job in camp, and if he can't win it in his second season, after an off season in the strength program, it was a shitty pick.

I haven't written off Fisher at all.

I never wrote off Tyson Jackson. In fact, I'm one of the few here that think, given the right financial terms, we should re-sign him.

It doesn't make taking him at #3 any better of a draft pick.

After all, Fisher is just a piece of evidence. This discussion isn't about Fisher, it's about Dorsey.

I don't see how he has proven a damn thing thus far. Too early to tell.
He did well in FAs, but also made some shitty signings like Dunce-a.

Until we see what Fisher, Kelce, Nico, and Cummings actually are, we won't know anything about this past draft either.

All I'm saying is that it's impossible to tell at this juncture.

Agreed.

I think we have good reason to think positive but he get's a C+ for last year despite the huge turnaround...

That's simply not true. Some of the best pass rushers in the league are lining up all over the front, including wide against the right tackle.

Von Miller goes against the right tackle often enough that the idea of the right side being somehow less in the spotlight is just silly.

As if, having a lock-down left tackle, but giving up double digit sacks on the other side if just fine.

Can't really argue with you. I think his grade can most certainly be revised if we can get some solid play out of those 2nd year players.

Kelce, and Cummings have a real shot at making a huge difference on this team, but that cannot be counted on one iota.

I was going to make this point, but not everyone is ready to accept RT being even close to as important, even though Pass rushing from all angles is the only way to win a championship in this day and age without an elite QB.

People view pass rushers as the 2nd most valuable position in the league, but don't seem to value the guys who can negate them in the same light.

You can get right tackles ANYWHERE. Literally, you can pick them up as undrafted free agents and not give up "double digit sacks".

Spending the first overall pick on a right tackle isn't even poor value. It's throwing value down the toilet.

The best right tackles in the league weren't, by and large, 1st round picks, let alone the first pick overall...

RTs block the Von Millers and Justin Houstons of the league but still get treated like second class citizens.
Reid, and Dorsey have made it clear that they do not think that way. They might want to keep Fisher at RT for that reason, being that he has more experience there now, and even if Fisher becomes an all-pro there, and stone walls Von Miller twice a year, some will still see it as a wasted pick.

But 3 went in the top 4 picks in that draft.(if they don't convert)

So in 3 years, some of the top RTs in the league, may be top 5 picks.

You're looking at this completely backwards.

It's not about the value of right tackles. It's about the value of the 1st overall pick.

You can get right tackles, competent right tackles - hell, ALL PRO right tackles - anywhere.

Those other teams are as bad as the Chiefs then...

This.

Dorsey invested huge in the future.

I'm not against that. I think it's the way to go, to be honest.

I really like the play of guys like Abdullah and Cooper. But his draft picks went down last year before round 1 and they damned well better show up this time around...

They're building this team around a QB that I like but he's a QB that requires playmakers around him. They better start drafting some.

And yet he played one of the best games of his life while missing some playmakers in the playoffs.
Posted via Mobile Device

Bump for interesting read.

BPA is a bullshit myth. If you have a stud at a certain position a team will not draft that same position in the first round even the best player in the entire draft was available.

For every position except QB or K/P (who you're not taking in the first anyway). Justin Tuck and Kiwanuka were taken even when they had Strahan and Umanyiora. Will Smith was drafted when the Saints had 2 exceptional pass rushers. On OL, you can often let two guys compete for a job, and let the loser shift somewhere else on the OL.

I would rather have a playmaker at a position you don't need than a solid but unspectacular player at a position of need. Just my opinion.

How do you explain the Dee Ford pick?

Or Phillip Gaines when there was still a ****ton of WR talent available, which was the Chiefs' most urgent position of need that entire offseason?

No team that claims to go with a BPA draft strategy will follow it verbatim, otherwise you'd see a draft one of these years where 4 or 5 players of the same position get drafted (even though last year came close with the Packers and Jaguars both picking 3 WRs each).

But there are quite a number of teams that definitely embrace the spirit of the BPA philosophy. If the 2014 (and 2013 draft to some extent) are any indications, then we can expect John Dorsey's Chiefs to fall in that category.

How far will that philosophy extend this year? Would the Chiefs pick Alvin Dupree if he fell to 18? My guess is they'd probably try to weasel a trade down, but we all know how much Dorsey sucks at negotiating those kinds of things. If nothing was available in the way of a trade down, and the options basically come down to Cam Erving or Alvin Dupree, I'm guessing that Dorsey would take Alvin Dupree.

Dbs were much more critical a need than wrs last offseason. Let's not forget the panic we all had going into the season with the secondary we had.

Only fools were worried about the secondary. I was not, and it wasn't because I thought Phillip Gaines was going to play meaningful snaps and do somewhat well. I was fairly confident that we would have an improved secondary from 2013, and I was definitely right. Considering we had Berry's bad ankle and his lymphoma diagnosis as well as the spotty health of our newly acquired dimeback, my assertion was more true than I even thought.

Not hating on Gaines at all. I think he's a good player, and I'm glad we made that selection, but if you're going to be like Tuckdaddy and claim that BPA is bullshit, then the Phillip Gaines pick CLEARLY muddies up that assertion. WR was such a glaring need this offseason and the draft was so deep and stocked with WR talent that it would totally have been acceptable and understandable for Dorsey to break with his BPA strategy and take maybe the 2nd or 3rd player on his board as long as it was a WR.

But Dorsey stuck to his BPA guns. And I personally think it paid off even at the expense of our putrid play from all WRs not named Bowe last year.