WR Fan Poll On KCChiefs.com Selects Brandin Cooks

[SeeingRed]

41% of 258 voters thus far select Brandin Cooks as the top WR prospect over Beckham Jr. and Lee.

Check it out...cool little piece on Cooks. I think hoping he falls to #23 is a bit of wishful thinking to be honest, but i wouldnt upset with this pick if he fell to us.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/article...0-54ce01053c6e

Thoughts on Cooks?

[Ragged Robin]

I'm not sold on Beckham, Lee, or Cooks being true #1s at all. I hope they trade down to pick up a 2nd rounder and maybe a 3rd or 4th (whatever that equates to) and then pick up two receivers like Jordan Matthews and Kevin Norwood or if Davante Adams or Moncrief are still there.

[planetdoc]

Originally Posted by Ragged Robin

I'm not sold on Beckham, Lee, or Cooks being a true #1s at all. I hope they trade down to pick up a 2nd rounder and maybe a 3rd or 4th (whatever that equates to) and then pick up two receivers like Jordan Matthews and Kevin Norwood or if Davante Adams or Moncrief are still there.

agree

[OldSchool]

Give me Matthews, Robinson, Adams, Latimer, or Moncrief in the 2nd after a trade back.

[SeeingRed]

Originally Posted by Ragged Robin

I'm not sold on Beckham, Lee, or Cooks being true #1s at all. I hope they trade down to pick up a 2nd rounder and maybe a 3rd or 4th (whatever that equates to) and then pick up two receivers like Jordan Matthews and Kevin Norwood or if Davante Adams or Moncrief are still there.

According to what Rich Cimini writer from ESPN New York is saying none of those top WRs will be there anyway at #23 so trading down for an extra pick might make alot of sense.

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/9403/odell-beckham

[Dayze]

this isn't directed at anyone, but when the phrase 'trade down' is used, I always wonder why that is considered such an easy deal. I guess my point is, it's probably harder to just trade down with anyone all willy nilly.

...if that makes any damned sense.

[BigBeauford]

Originally Posted by Dayze

this isn't directed at anyone, but when the phrase 'trade down' is used, I always wonder why that is considered such an easy deal. I guess my point is, it's probably harder to just trade down with anyone all willy nilly.

...if that makes any damned sense.

[Dayze]

"dude....'willy nillly' is so hard to say right now."


I'm just saying the phrase trade down is used quite often, but that assumes there's someone that is interested in trading up. Lots of variables in that IMO.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by BigBeauford

That is seriously how I picture Dayze

[planetdoc]

Originally Posted by Dayze

this isn't directed at anyone, but when the phrase 'trade down' is used, I always wonder why that is considered such an easy deal. I guess my point is, it's probably harder to just trade down with anyone all willy nilly.

...if that makes any damned sense.

because trades in the area that the chiefs pick (23) have historically happened.
trades:
2013: picks 3, 8, 12, 13, 16, 18, 22, 25, 29, 30, 31
2012: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,12, 14, 15, 17, 21, 22, 25, 27, 29 31
2011: 6, 10, 16, 17, 21, 26, 27, 28
2010: 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by Dayze

this isn't directed at anyone, but when the phrase 'trade down' is used, I always wonder why that is considered such an easy deal. I guess my point is, it's probably harder to just trade down with anyone all willy nilly.

...if that makes any damned sense.

I agree. Every year it's "trade down, trade down trade down". Everyone would prefer the Chiefs to trade down. I'm sure the Chiefs would prefer to trade down too. Hell, half the league would probably prefer to trade down. But who's to say that option is even on the table? A team has to want to trade UP in order for the Chiefs to trade down.

I'd prefer to entertain the idea of who will be available @23, rather than worry about any sort of trade down scenario.

[Chiefs=Champions]

Originally Posted by Ragged Robin

I'm not sold on Beckham, Lee, or Cooks being true #1s at all. I hope they trade down to pick up a 2nd rounder and maybe a 3rd or 4th (whatever that equates to) and then pick up two receivers like Jordan Matthews and Kevin Norwood or if Davante Adams or Moncrief are still there.

Why? Because they are small? I don't buy that argument at all and neither does history.

[ToxSocks]

Originally Posted by Chiefs=Good

Why? Because they are small? I don't buy that argument at all and neither does history.

I agree.

Cooks is small, but he is so much more fluid then those others he listed. Cooks is a natural receiver. He has play maker written all over him. Moncrief might be big, but he doesn't look like a natural pass catcher, he catches with his body.

Big WR's don't = Good Wr's.

Small WR's don't = Bad WR's.

[TEX]

Cooks' stock is rising. Other teams know this. I doubt he's there when the Chiefs pick. I wouldn't be surprised if he goes just before the Chiefs pick.

[Kiimo]

If Cooks is available he if far and away the best pick and I'd be ecstatic if we could get him. People are afraid of him being Dexter McCluster but I see more Percy Harvin than Dex.

He's a home-run hitter and we need that. He runs excellent routes and he's dangerous in space. He's perfect for this offense.