Alex Smith Trade (1 Viewer)

[Donnybrook]

Chiefs fans have my sympathy. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. This deal is on par with the Cassel fiasco. Really hate this trade because it makes San Fran even stronger and the team to beat in the NFC.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Since we're debating pedantry (The definition of "Improved" and whether draft picks do so), you've changed the term of your original argument:

Exactly. They could do a lot of things and that's my point but until they do something you can't sit there and say KC got robbed.

What you originally said was:

Hold your horses. The only team that got any better today was KC. SF still has to make the picks.

I can buy the "We won't know who got robbed" argument until time passes and we see not only what SF does with the picks, but also how Smith performs in KC.But SF *is* an improved team with the additional pick. They have more equity, capital, whatever you want to call it, which gives them more options. Their situation is indeed improved by having another high draft pick.Unless you want to start arguing "situation has improved" isn't the same thing as "team is improved"... then I'll just

I agree that they're situation improved. In April their situation will be hinged upon one person with that pick and his success or failure will determine whether or not this trade was a good one or not. You're pretty much saying what I've been saying. The jury is out on whether or not SF robbed KC with this deal. The ones who say otherwise have a preconceived notion that this pick is a star or who they "would have picked if they were SF".... It's also helpful when quoting what I've said to include (in some way) what I was responding too. Gives a better picture.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Since we're debating pedantry (The definition of "Improved" and whether draft picks do so), you've changed the term of your original argument:

Exactly. They could do a lot of things and that's my point but until they do something you can't sit there and say KC got robbed.

What you originally said was:

Hold your horses. The only team that got any better today was KC. SF still has to make the picks.

I can buy the "We won't know who got robbed" argument until time passes and we see not only what SF does with the picks, but also how Smith performs in KC.But SF *is* an improved team with the additional pick. They have more equity, capital, whatever you want to call it, which gives them more options. Their situation is indeed improved by having another high draft pick.Unless you want to start arguing "situation has improved" isn't the same thing as "team is improved"... then I'll just

I agree that they're situation improved. In April their situation will be hinged upon one person with that pick and his success or failure will determine whether or not this trade was a good one or not. You're pretty much saying what I've been saying. The jury is out on whether or not SF robbed KC with this deal. The ones who say otherwise have a preconceived notion that this pick is a star or who they "would have picked if they were SF".... It's also helpful when quoting what I've said to include (in some way) what I was responding too. Gives a better picture.

so when they flip that pick for Revis, then what?

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Since we're debating pedantry (The definition of "Improved" and whether draft picks do so), you've changed the term of your original argument:

Exactly. They could do a lot of things and that's my point but until they do something you can't sit there and say KC got robbed.

What you originally said was:

Hold your horses. The only team that got any better today was KC. SF still has to make the picks.

I can buy the "We won't know who got robbed" argument until time passes and we see not only what SF does with the picks, but also how Smith performs in KC.But SF *is* an improved team with the additional pick. They have more equity, capital, whatever you want to call it, which gives them more options. Their situation is indeed improved by having another high draft pick.Unless you want to start arguing "situation has improved" isn't the same thing as "team is improved"... then I'll just

I agree that they're situation improved. In April their situation will be hinged upon one person with that pick and his success or failure will determine whether or not this trade was a good one or not. You're pretty much saying what I've been saying. The jury is out on whether or not SF robbed KC with this deal. The ones who say otherwise have a preconceived notion that this pick is a star or who they "would have picked if they were SF".... It's also helpful when quoting what I've said to include (in some way) what I was responding too. Gives a better picture.

so when they flip that pick for Revis, then what?

If you're following the bouncing ball then you should know the answer...

 

[MAC_32]

9ers have the ammo for some serious trade ups come April. And the Chiefs are still run by incompetence.

 

[JetMaxx]

Andy Reid will not put Smith in a situation he can't handle.

 

[Beerguzzler]

KC got hosed. Their negotiator needs to be fired.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Since we're debating pedantry (The definition of "Improved" and whether draft picks do so), you've changed the term of your original argument:

Exactly. They could do a lot of things and that's my point but until they do something you can't sit there and say KC got robbed.

What you originally said was:

Hold your horses. The only team that got any better today was KC. SF still has to make the picks.

I can buy the "We won't know who got robbed" argument until time passes and we see not only what SF does with the picks, but also how Smith performs in KC.But SF *is* an improved team with the additional pick. They have more equity, capital, whatever you want to call it, which gives them more options. Their situation is indeed improved by having another high draft pick.Unless you want to start arguing "situation has improved" isn't the same thing as "team is improved"... then I'll just

I agree that they're situation improved. In April their situation will be hinged upon one person with that pick and his success or failure will determine whether or not this trade was a good one or not. You're pretty much saying what I've been saying. The jury is out on whether or not SF robbed KC with this deal. The ones who say otherwise have a preconceived notion that this pick is a star or who they "would have picked if they were SF".... It's also helpful when quoting what I've said to include (in some way) what I was responding too. Gives a better picture.

so, like the other guy said, somebody trades a first rounder for a 5th rounder --- we have to wait 'til their careers are over to find out who got the better end of that deal.

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Since we're debating pedantry (The definition of "Improved" and whether draft picks do so), you've changed the term of your original argument:

Exactly. They could do a lot of things and that's my point but until they do something you can't sit there and say KC got robbed.

What you originally said was:

Hold your horses. The only team that got any better today was KC. SF still has to make the picks.

I can buy the "We won't know who got robbed" argument until time passes and we see not only what SF does with the picks, but also how Smith performs in KC.But SF *is* an improved team with the additional pick. They have more equity, capital, whatever you want to call it, which gives them more options. Their situation is indeed improved by having another high draft pick.Unless you want to start arguing "situation has improved" isn't the same thing as "team is improved"... then I'll just

I agree that they're situation improved. In April their situation will be hinged upon one person with that pick and his success or failure will determine whether or not this trade was a good one or not. You're pretty much saying what I've been saying. The jury is out on whether or not SF robbed KC with this deal. The ones who say otherwise have a preconceived notion that this pick is a star or who they "would have picked if they were SF".... It's also helpful when quoting what I've said to include (in some way) what I was responding too. Gives a better picture.

so, like the other guy said, somebody trades a first rounder for a 5th rounder --- we have to wait 'til their careers are over to find out who got the better end of that deal.

Why is it hard for people to stick to the subject at hand without creating some over the top scenerio in order to make themselves feel right? The next time a team trades a 1 for a 5 ill post my opinion on it. Until then, lets just use the guys we have.

 

[MAC_32]

KC got hosed. Their negotiator needs to be fired.

I think they trade down from one, add another two and add another qb with the pick. Doesn't make Alex the answer, he is not, but a plan b will be in place. Unbelievable how well run San Francisco is... It's why I wanted harbaugh so badly two years ago.

 

[Biabreakable]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

 

[The Comedian]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

So you think trading for a 28 year old starting quarterback at the expense of a 2nd round pick in an admittedly weak draft sets the team back?

 

[MAC_32]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

So you think trading for a 28 year old starting quarterback at the expense of a 2nd round pick in an admittedly weak draft sets the team back?

Depends on the commitment from the organization. Three years? Yes, it will set them back. Bring in a day two guy and put Alex on notice, may only lose this year... If they are right about the day two guy

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Since we're debating pedantry (The definition of "Improved" and whether draft picks do so), you've changed the term of your original argument:

Exactly. They could do a lot of things and that's my point but until they do something you can't sit there and say KC got robbed.

What you originally said was:

Hold your horses. The only team that got any better today was KC. SF still has to make the picks.

I can buy the "We won't know who got robbed" argument until time passes and we see not only what SF does with the picks, but also how Smith performs in KC.But SF *is* an improved team with the additional pick. They have more equity, capital, whatever you want to call it, which gives them more options. Their situation is indeed improved by having another high draft pick.Unless you want to start arguing "situation has improved" isn't the same thing as "team is improved"... then I'll just

I agree that they're situation improved. In April their situation will be hinged upon one person with that pick and his success or failure will determine whether or not this trade was a good one or not. You're pretty much saying what I've been saying. The jury is out on whether or not SF robbed KC with this deal. The ones who say otherwise have a preconceived notion that this pick is a star or who they "would have picked if they were SF".... It's also helpful when quoting what I've said to include (in some way) what I was responding too. Gives a better picture.

so, like the other guy said, somebody trades a first rounder for a 5th rounder --- we have to wait 'til their careers are over to find out who got the better end of that deal.

Why is it hard for people to stick to the subject at hand without creating some over the top scenerio in order to make themselves feel right? The next time a team trades a 1 for a 5 ill post my opinion on it. Until then, lets just use the guys we have.

you just posted your opinion on it

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.

The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.

I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

?

 

[Judge Smails]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

So you think trading for a 28 year old starting quarterback at the expense of a 2nd round pick in an admittedly weak draft sets the team back?

Granted I'm not an expert judging the value of a player vs a future round draft pick, but this was my thought as well. This QB class stinks. I personally don't hate the move.

 

[MAC_32]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

So you think trading for a 28 year old starting quarterback at the expense of a 2nd round pick in an admittedly weak draft sets the team back?

Granted I'm not an expert judging the value of a player vs a future round draft pick, but this was my thought as well. This QB class stinks. I personally don't hate the move.

I believe geno will make this statement and trade false. Admittedly worried about where he ends up though. Needs a strong organization. Strong leadership.

 

[TheFanatic]

So the 9ers aren't any better off because they have to use the pick and select some non bust? Otherwise they haven't actually improved? What about the $8 million they just took off their salary cap? Oh wait. Unless they sign pro bowlers with that cash then they didn't improve the team. This just in. Fantasy Football is not the NFL.

 

[Biabreakable]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.

The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.

I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

?

My bad. For some reason I was thinking the Patriots got a 1st round pick for Cassell. I guess it is about the same deal. The Pats also gave Vrabel.

 

[Biabreakable]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

So you think trading for a 28 year old starting quarterback at the expense of a 2nd round pick in an admittedly weak draft sets the team back?

I do not think it is a weak draft. I honestly do not know if it is or not. But the trade suggests to me that the Chiefs think it is a weak draft or they do not think the players available with that pick are better than Alex Smith. Or they do not think the QBs available in this draft are better than Alex Smith and wanted to commit that pick to upgrading the position. It does makes sense from that point of view I suppose but I still see the move setting the team back.I think with the new rookie pay scale trading away draft picks sets a team back. Especially a team that earned the 1st overall pick. Look at the Vikings last year most of their rookies contributed in some way. A high second round pick can bring a blue chip starter. I think that is a very valuable pick and the Chiefs should be trying to get more picks not trade picks away to support their rebuild. Trading this pick for Alex Smith will likely mean the Chiefs have a better chance to win in the short term but Smith is not going to bring KC to a championship after the rebuild, he will just keep them from having as good of draft position. So in that sense I see this setting them back also.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.

The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.

I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

?

My bad. For some reason I was thinking the Patriots got a 1st round pick for Cassell. I guess it is about the same deal. The Pats also gave Vrabel.

I'm not ripping vrabel, but that was likely more a favor to him and the pats than it was kicking in extra.this smith deal supposedly also includes a conditional pick next year.

 

[Biabreakable]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.

The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.

I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

?

My bad. For some reason I was thinking the Patriots got a 1st round pick for Cassell. I guess it is about the same deal. The Pats also gave Vrabel.

I'm not ripping vrabel, but that was likely more a favor to him and the pats than it was kicking in extra.this smith deal supposedly also includes a conditional pick next year.

Right that is what I was equating Vrabel to making it about the same deal although the Chiefs pick in 2009 was the 34th overall so it is much the same deal. The Patriots used the pick on Patrick Chung I think unless there was another trade in there.I guess the reason I remembered it as a 1st round pick is because the pick is so high in the 2nd round.

 

[Donnybrook]

This pretty much says it all: My link

 

[grateful zed]

any chance roger goodell can veto this trade?

 

[FUBAR]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.

The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.

I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

So you think trading for a 28 year old starting quarterback at the expense of a 2nd round pick in an admittedly weak draft sets the team back?

Granted I'm not an expert judging the value of a player vs a future round draft pick, but this was my thought as well. This QB class stinks. I personally don't hate the move.

I believe geno will make this statement and trade false. Admittedly worried about where he ends up though. Needs a strong organization. Strong leadership.

Geno won't be available in the 2nd.

 

[Shutout]

This was a good, fair trade for both teams. Some of the responses here are comical.Smith is a beneficiary of proximity. Proximity being he plays the QB position. This is what starting QBs cost. Not elite or even above average starting QBs. Average starting QBs. KC upgraded big time. SF walked away with a great round 2 pick and potential future pick.

The only issue I have with it is IMO, Smith is the type of player that plays well enough not to lose many games but won't ever be good enough without an elite team around him to win in the playoffs. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but this is the type of move that makes a team okay but won't ever be great. Seems that is what Hunt wants - to field a competitive product that sells tickets. So it's not a bad trade in that it gets their owner what he wants; it just has very limited rewards for their fans. A quick read through the Chiefs recent history shows us this is exactly the move we should have expected. Cassel, Green, Grbac, Gannon, Montana, DeBerg, Krieg... you have to go back 25 years to find a Chiefs QB that wasn't a retread.

This might be the longest shadow that ever hung over a team (or the longest haunting of mistakes past). Back in 1983, ever since the Chiefs passed on Jim Kelly and Dan Marino and settled on Todd Blackledge while watchinng their division rivals take John Elway, they have been absolutely paralyzed from the idea of going after that franchise QB; instead settling on all the cast-offs you mentioned. And Chiefs fans, for the majority are cranky about it. Most of them I heard on call-in shows yesterday were asking "when do we get OUR chance at drafting our own Manning, RGIII, etc?" With that being said, I think the Chiefs are making a much better move than most posting here are saying. I think its simple: There is no Cam, Luck, RG III-type franchise QB in this draft. So Reid gets a guy that knows the WCO and immediately establishes continuity for the entire team, he frees up the #1 draft spot, giving him flexibility in drafting or trading, he cuts Cassell, which will free up about the same exact amount of cap space as they take on with Smith (so they still have about $18M to work with), and then they go out next year and evaluate to see if a franchise QB is there. OR...let's not forget, this is Andy Reid, they draft a QB late and turn him into something that other teams will pay for.I think the Chiefs are making good moves. I don't thin it can be overlooked how valuable it will be to get continuity going for this team. One thing Alex smith does not do is turn the ball over so just that aspect of having a smart QB who knows the system, keeping things going smooth will make the Chiefs a much more competitive team. And in all honesty, let's be realistic. If I were a chiefs fan willing to accept the truth, I would be saying "I will give this year to get our feet under us, build a better foundation, and then whe the Broncos Qb is on his way out, we are on our way up." Given the state of the raiders and Chargers and the age of Manning, the Chiefs could own this division for a good number of years if they just get some continuity going and get going in the right direction.

 

[flranger]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 134 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTsOther than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

 

[Biabreakable]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 134 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTsOther than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

D'Qwell Jackson has been one of the better MLB in the league his whole career. He is certainly a game changer. This list looks like some pretty solid starters to me except for Thomas. To be fair you should likely be looking at a larger sample of players than eight of them especially when a quarter of those 8 players have not been in the league long enough to even judge them.I am not convinced. Considering that the Chiefs just did this 4 years ago (traded top 2nd round pick for Cassell) it does not seem like progress to me. It looks like doing the same thing again but expecting different results.

 

[RUSF18]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 134 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTsOther than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

This is such a dumb exercise to isolate one particular draft slot. I randomly queried the guys selected #44 overall...Forte, Sidney Rice, Bob Sanders in 2004, Kris Jenkins in 2001. That doesn't mean it's better to have the 44th pick than the 34th. We know that all teams have their own unique draft board and there could be massive variance between teams on any particular player. Some of those guys you listed above could have been the 12th highest rated player on their particular board, which is why they chose them at #34. All teams can do is have as many picks early on in the draft as possible, to give themselves a better chance to select as many players as possible that they have identified as being the best fit. What the Chiefs would have done with that pick and what the Niners will do with that pick are likely very different.

 

[FUBAR]

This was a good, fair trade for both teams. Some of the responses here are comical.

Smith is a beneficiary of proximity. Proximity being he plays the QB position. This is what starting QBs cost. Not elite or even above average starting QBs. Average starting QBs. KC upgraded big time. SF walked away with a great round 2 pick and potential future pick.

The only issue I have with it is IMO, Smith is the type of player that plays well enough not to lose many games but won't ever be good enough without an elite team around him to win in the playoffs. Maybe I'm completely wrong, but this is the type of move that makes a team okay but won't ever be great. Seems that is what Hunt wants - to field a competitive product that sells tickets. So it's not a bad trade in that it gets their owner what he wants; it just has very limited rewards for their fans. A quick read through the Chiefs recent history shows us this is exactly the move we should have expected. Cassel, Green, Grbac, Gannon, Montana, DeBerg, Krieg... you have to go back 25 years to find a Chiefs QB that wasn't a retread.

This might be the longest shadow that ever hung over a team (or the longest haunting of mistakes past). Back in 1983, ever since the Chiefs passed on Jim Kelly and Dan Marino and settled on Todd Blackledge while watchinng their division rivals take John Elway, they have been absolutely paralyzed from the idea of going after that franchise QB; instead settling on all the cast-offs you mentioned. And Chiefs fans, for the majority are cranky about it. Most of them I heard on call-in shows yesterday were asking "when do we get OUR chance at drafting our own Manning, RGIII, etc?" With that being said, I think the Chiefs are making a much better move than most posting here are saying. I think its simple: There is no Cam, Luck, RG III-type franchise QB in this draft. So Reid gets a guy that knows the WCO and immediately establishes continuity for the entire team, he frees up the #1 draft spot, giving him flexibility in drafting or trading, he cuts Cassell, which will free up about the same exact amount of cap space as they take on with Smith (so they still have about $18M to work with), and then they go out next year and evaluate to see if a franchise QB is there. OR...let's not forget, this is Andy Reid, they draft a QB late and turn him into something that other teams will pay for.

I think the Chiefs are making good moves. I don't thin it can be overlooked how valuable it will be to get continuity going for this team. One thing Alex smith does not do is turn the ball over so just that aspect of having a smart QB who knows the system, keeping things going smooth will make the Chiefs a much more competitive team. And in all honesty, let's be realistic. If I were a chiefs fan willing to accept the truth, I would be saying "I will give this year to get our feet under us, build a better foundation, and then whe the Broncos Qb is on his way out, we are on our way up." Given the state of the raiders and Chargers and the age of Manning, the Chiefs could own this division for a good number of years if they just get some continuity going and get going in the right direction.

or keep him as their QB of the future.Is there any chance Reid develops Stanzi?

 

[FUBAR]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 134 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTsOther than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

This is such a dumb exercise to isolate one particular draft slot. I randomly queried the guys selected #44 overall...Forte, Sidney Rice, Bob Sanders in 2004, Kris Jenkins in 2001. That doesn't mean it's better to have the 44th pick than the 34th. We know that all teams have their own unique draft board and there could be massive variance between teams on any particular player. Some of those guys you listed above could have been the 12th highest rated player on their particular board, which is why they chose them at #34. All teams can do is have as many picks early on in the draft as possible, to give themselves a better chance to select as many players as possible that they have identified as being the best fit. What the Chiefs would have done with that pick and what the Niners will do with that pick are likely very different.

good point. So let's look at what the Chiefs do with late 1sts and early 2nds...2012 #44 Jeff Allen2011 #26 Jon Baldwin2010 #36 McCluster, #50 Javier Arenas2009 - nada2008 #35 Brandon Flowers (this might be the Chiefs best draft in quite some time)Overall not exactly a cornucopia of game changers.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 134 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTsOther than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

You're the second person that has done this. You can't just look at the player picked at that exact spot. Weren't there players that could have been picked instead at spot 34 in those drafts? Not to mention that there are some good players in your list.ETA: Also as I said before those second round picks are more valuable than they used to be as teams have a full day to evaluate their draft boards and determine whether its worth moving up to get their guy. The fist couple of picks in Round 2 have much more (trade) value than they did in the past.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Let's check back in a year or two to get a better idea of how things worked out.

 

[tdmills]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 134 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTsOther than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

You're the second person that has done this. You can't just look at the player picked at that exact spot. Weren't there players that could have been picked instead at spot 34 in those drafts? Not to mention that there are some good players in your list.ETA: Also as I said before those second round picks are more valuable than they used to be as teams have a full day to evaluate their draft boards and determine whether its worth moving up to get their guy. The fist couple of picks in Round 2 have much more (trade) value than they did in the past.

I posted the 33rd picks from the past many years. The point is no pick is proven, it's only potential. #34 pick looks nice on paper, it may end up being the golden ticket into Willie Wonka's Chocolate Factory or it could just be a piece of paper.In the end, KC weighed it's options at QB and didn't like the 2013 draft. They traded away potential, for an upgrade at QB.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):

34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 1

34 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years

34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years

34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years

34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years

34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years

34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years

34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years

1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTs

Other than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

You're the second person that has done this. You can't just look at the player picked at that exact spot. Weren't there players that could have been picked instead at spot 34 in those drafts? Not to mention that there are some good players in your list.ETA: Also as I said before those second round picks are more valuable than they used to be as teams have a full day to evaluate their draft boards and determine whether its worth moving up to get their guy. The fist couple of picks in Round 2 have much more (trade) value than they did in the past.

I posted the 33rd picks from the past many years. The point is no pick is proven, it's only potential. #34 pick looks nice on paper, it may end up being the golden ticket into Willie Wonka's Chocolate Factory or it could just be a piece of paper.In the end, KC weighed it's options at QB and didn't like the 2013 draft. They traded away potential, for an upgrade at QB.

I think everyone understands that.I'll back off my "terrible trade" stance of earlier in this thread after thinking it over a bit. I still don't think it was the right move for the franchise but I guess if it gets them a few postseason games (and in that division it's certainly possible) that does have some value.

I just think they could have been better served signing a cheap free agent like Matt Moore (who I think is on par withe Smith) and use that second on either BPA or a QB that they liked - next year should also be a good one for QBs. I do think Reid is a good football coach though and will defer to his judgment.

 

[roadkill1292]

Let's check back in a year or two to get a better idea of how things worked out.

I dunno, some of these guys are awfully sure of themselves. I always find that convincing.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Let's check back in a year or two to get a better idea of how things worked out.

I dunno, some of these guys are awfully sure of themselves. I always find that convincing.

It's like they can see the future or something.

 

[TheFanatic]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):

34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 1

34 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years

34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years

34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years

34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years

34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years

34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years

34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years

1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTs

Other than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

You're the second person that has done this. You can't just look at the player picked at that exact spot. Weren't there players that could have been picked instead at spot 34 in those drafts? Not to mention that there are some good players in your list.ETA: Also as I said before those second round picks are more valuable than they used to be as teams have a full day to evaluate their draft boards and determine whether its worth moving up to get their guy. The fist couple of picks in Round 2 have much more (trade) value than they did in the past.

I posted the 33rd picks from the past many years. The point is no pick is proven, it's only potential. #34 pick looks nice on paper, it may end up being the golden ticket into Willie Wonka's Chocolate Factory or it could just be a piece of paper.In the end, KC weighed it's options at QB and didn't like the 2013 draft. They traded away potential, for an upgrade at QB.

I think everyone understands that.I'll back off my "terrible trade" stance of earlier in this thread after thinking it over a bit. I still don't think it was the right move for the franchise but I guess if it gets them a few postseason games (and in that division it's certainly possible) that does have some value.

I just think they could have been better served signing a cheap free agent like Matt Moore (who I think is on par withe Smith) and use that second on either BPA or a QB that they liked - next year should also be a good one for QBs. I do think Reid is a good football coach though and will defer to his judgment.

I don't think that Moore has ever played in the WCO? It would take the guy a couple years to learn the system. In terms of physical attributes, they are probably similar, but in terms of experience in the offense Reid runs, Smith is way ahead...

 

[Jason Wood]

I'm with Bloom, this move makes a ton of sense. The more I see people decrying it the more comfortable KC fans should be that it was the right move. People forget that Smith is still YOUNG. And say what you will about Andy (I've lived with him as coach for 14 years), he's a GREAT quarterback scout and teacher. He's gotten the best production out of every QB that's ever played for him, and even made mediocre talents like Kolb and A.J. Feeley look productive enough to warrant 2nd round picks from other teams -- who thought they were getting a starter. I think this move signifies a belief that Andy thinks Alex Smith can be a productive passer in his offense, and win games immediately.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 134 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTsOther than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

what happened to the shark pool?I don't mean to discourage anybody's trolling, but I wanted to post a list of 2nd rounders that could've been had with that pick:Andy DaltonColin KaepernickAkeem AyersBrooks ReedKyle RudolphChris CookT. J. WardRob GronkowskiZane BeadlesDaryl WashingtonCarlos DunlapSean LeeBen TateJames LaurinaitisJairus ByrdMax UngerConnor BarwinLeSean McCoyWilliam MooreSebastian VollmerWilliam BeattySean Smiththat's skimming the last few years.if I find a tom brady drafted at 199 does that mean you'd be trying to trade for 199 every year?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):

34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 1

34 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years

34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years

34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years

34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years

34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years

34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years

34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years

1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTs

Other than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

You're the second person that has done this. You can't just look at the player picked at that exact spot. Weren't there players that could have been picked instead at spot 34 in those drafts? Not to mention that there are some good players in your list.ETA: Also as I said before those second round picks are more valuable than they used to be as teams have a full day to evaluate their draft boards and determine whether its worth moving up to get their guy. The fist couple of picks in Round 2 have much more (trade) value than they did in the past.

I posted the 33rd picks from the past many years. The point is no pick is proven, it's only potential. #34 pick looks nice on paper, it may end up being the golden ticket into Willie Wonka's Chocolate Factory or it could just be a piece of paper.In the end, KC weighed it's options at QB and didn't like the 2013 draft. They traded away potential, for an upgrade at QB.

I think everyone understands that.I'll back off my "terrible trade" stance of earlier in this thread after thinking it over a bit. I still don't think it was the right move for the franchise but I guess if it gets them a few postseason games (and in that division it's certainly possible) that does have some value.

I just think they could have been better served signing a cheap free agent like Matt Moore (who I think is on par withe Smith) and use that second on either BPA or a QB that they liked - next year should also be a good one for QBs. I do think Reid is a good football coach though and will defer to his judgment.

I don't think that Moore has ever played in the WCO? It would take the guy a couple years to learn the system. In terms of physical attributes, they are probably similar, but in terms of experience in the offense Reid runs, Smith is way ahead...

While he wasn't a starter last season he was with Miami with Joe Philibin who runs a WCO - although there are now so many different variations of the WCO I don't know how similiar they are.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I'm with Bloom, this move makes a ton of sense. The more I see people decrying it the more comfortable KC fans should be that it was the right move. People forget that Smith is still YOUNG. And say what you will about Andy (I've lived with him as coach for 14 years), he's a GREAT quarterback scout and teacher. He's gotten the best production out of every QB that's ever played for him, and even made mediocre talents like Kolb and A.J. Feeley look productive enough to warrant 2nd round picks from other teams -- who thought they were getting a starter. I think this move signifies a belief that Andy thinks Alex Smith can be a productive passer in his offense, and win games immediately.

Why wouldn't he just sign a cheap FA or keep Brady Quinn/Matt Cassell, since he could just make mediocre talents look productive?

 

[Jason Wood]

I'm with Bloom, this move makes a ton of sense. The more I see people decrying it the more comfortable KC fans should be that it was the right move. People forget that Smith is still YOUNG. And say what you will about Andy (I've lived with him as coach for 14 years), he's a GREAT quarterback scout and teacher. He's gotten the best production out of every QB that's ever played for him, and even made mediocre talents like Kolb and A.J. Feeley look productive enough to warrant 2nd round picks from other teams -- who thought they were getting a starter. I think this move signifies a belief that Andy thinks Alex Smith can be a productive passer in his offense, and win games immediately.

Why wouldn't he just sign a cheap FA or keep Brady Quinn/Matt Cassell, since he could just make mediocre talents look productive?

Because he thinks Smith is significantly better than "mediocre."

 

[Slapdash]

Bad move, but typical.

 

[cstu]

What this move tells me is that Reid is not planning on being the coach in KC long. If he was planning on being the HC there for awhile I do not see the reason for this move. Build from the draft that is the main advantage that having a losing season gives a team is high draft position. This trade sets the Chiefs back in the long term for short term stability at the QB position.

The other thing this tells me is that this years draft may be viewed by the KC front office (as well as perhaps around the league)as a weak one.

I do not think this was a good deal for KC but at least it is not as much as they paid for Cassell when they traded for him.

?

My bad. For some reason I was thinking the Patriots got a 1st round pick for Cassell. I guess it is about the same deal. The Pats also gave Vrabel.

The Chiefs giving up their pick wasn't a big deal then either. The problem with Cassel is that they immediately gave him a contract that paid him an average of $14M over the first 3 seasons (the first two seasons were guaranteed). Smith is getting $8.5M and $9M for the next two years.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

They traded pick 34 to draft one of these guys as an example (last eight years of pick 34):

34 Indianapolis Colts Coby Fleener TE Stanford 26 catches year 1

34 Buffalo Bills Aaron Williams CB Texas 1 int in two years

34 Minnesota Vikings Chris Cook CB Virginia 1 sack/no int in three years

34 New England Patriots Patrick Chung S Oregon 163 tackles/seven int/3 sacks in four years

34 Washington Redskins Devin Thomas WR Michigan State 43 career catches in five years

34 Buffalo Bills Paul Posluszny LB Penn State 470 career tackles/seven sacks/nine int in six years

34 Cleveland Browns D'Qwell Jackson LB Maryland 455 career tackles/10 sacks /7 int in seven years

34 Cleveland Browns Brodney Pool S Oklahoma 293 career tackles/5.5 sacks/10 int in eight years

1 SF 49ers Alex Smith QB Utah 14280 yards/81 TDs/63 INTs

Other than maybe Posluszny, who has battled injury or his numbers would have been higher I don't see a real game changer in that list. Now compare that to a legitimate starting NFL QB, not elite but at a minimum a legitimate starter given the mess they had last year I don't think this is a bad move. Everyone throws out that a second round pick is like a piece of gold. The above list is 8 years worth of "gold", and I don't see but maybe one player that I'd rather have than Alex Smith right now, especially given the amount of talent on the rest of the KC roster to surround him.

You're the second person that has done this. You can't just look at the player picked at that exact spot. Weren't there players that could have been picked instead at spot 34 in those drafts? Not to mention that there are some good players in your list.ETA: Also as I said before those second round picks are more valuable than they used to be as teams have a full day to evaluate their draft boards and determine whether its worth moving up to get their guy. The fist couple of picks in Round 2 have much more (trade) value than they did in the past.

I posted the 33rd picks from the past many years. The point is no pick is proven, it's only potential. #34 pick looks nice on paper, it may end up being the golden ticket into Willie Wonka's Chocolate Factory or it could just be a piece of paper.In the end, KC weighed it's options at QB and didn't like the 2013 draft. They traded away potential, for an upgrade at QB.

I think everyone understands that.I'll back off my "terrible trade" stance of earlier in this thread after thinking it over a bit. I still don't think it was the right move for the franchise but I guess if it gets them a few postseason games (and in that division it's certainly possible) that does have some value.

I just think they could have been better served signing a cheap free agent like Matt Moore (who I think is on par withe Smith) and use that second on either BPA or a QB that they liked - next year should also be a good one for QBs. I do think Reid is a good football coach though and will defer to his judgment.

I don't think that Moore has ever played in the WCO? It would take the guy a couple years to learn the system. In terms of physical attributes, they are probably similar, but in terms of experience in the offense Reid runs, Smith is way ahead...

While he wasn't a starter last season he was with Miami with Joe Philibin who runs a WCO - although there are now so many different variations of the WCO I don't know how similiar they are.

I dont think Alex Smith has been in a WCO.Norv turner/Mike Martz harbaugh, none of them ran WCO, im not sure what you call harbaughs offense, but turner & Martz both run variations of the air coryell system, not a WCO

 

[Bigboy10182000]

Given Reid will have him throw 35-40 times a game, does he have any upside? Would have liked Foles or Geno better, but I still think it's a system that will produce stats.

I dunno. Harbaugh had him averaging 27 throws a game until he got hurt this year. Smith was QB19 after 7 weeks. Can't see Smith suddenly becoming a fantasy factor. I think he probably hurts Bowe as well if Bowe stays. (not necessarily from Bowe's 2012 numbers, but his career averages).

I'm not sure I agree with that yet. Reid will surely keep him throwing no matter what the situation is so that's a plus. The KC D will surely keep them in garbage time a lot as well. Assuming they keep Bowe I could see Smith finishing as a top 12 guy.

 

[TheFanatic]

Given Reid will have him throw 35-40 times a game, does he have any upside? Would have liked Foles or Geno better, but I still think it's a system that will produce stats.

I dunno. Harbaugh had him averaging 27 throws a game until he got hurt this year. Smith was QB19 after 7 weeks. Can't see Smith suddenly becoming a fantasy factor. I think he probably hurts Bowe as well if Bowe stays. (not necessarily from Bowe's 2012 numbers, but his career averages).

I'm not sure I agree with that yet. Reid will surely keep him throwing no matter what the situation is so that's a plus. The KC D will surely keep them in garbage time a lot as well. Assuming they keep Bowe I could see Smith finishing as a top 12 guy.

I don't know about top 12, but definitely in the top 20, so he could easily be a QB2 to fill in when Brees/Rodgers/Mannings/Brady/Big Ben/RGIII/Luck/etc are on bye. He might even be a top 15 or so guy who could be paired with another middle of the pack guy to play the matchups. If you have this guy in a 2QB league, he just became gold! He was doing well before the injury and I expect Reid to make the guy even better.

 

[Donnybrook]

I'm with Bloom, this move makes a ton of sense. The more I see people decrying it the more comfortable KC fans should be that it was the right move. People forget that Smith is still YOUNG. And say what you will about Andy (I've lived with him as coach for 14 years), he's a GREAT quarterback scout and teacher. He's gotten the best production out of every QB that's ever played for him, and even made mediocre talents like Kolb and A.J. Feeley look productive enough to warrant 2nd round picks from other teams -- who thought they were getting a starter. I think this move signifies a belief that Andy thinks Alex Smith can be a productive passer in his offense, and win games immediately.

Lets not get carried away. Andy got good value for the players he traded but he also spent a 2nd on Kolb and a 4th on Kafka. He is no Bill Walsh.

 

[rascal]

Matt Cassel - 58.9 completion %, 13,495 yards, 82 TD, 57 INT, 24 Fumbles, 80.4 Passer RatingAlex Smith - 59.3 completion %, 14,280 yards, 81 TD, 63 INT, 36 Fumbles, 79.1 Passer Rating