DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Cont...Football guys did half the job, now it's up to numbers boys to finish the job...

If it hasn't been said in a 10 page long thread, it probably doesn't need said.

You know Mac is a pitbull.Once he latches onto something he will not let go.

As long as the “M-word” isn’t used, it’s all good.

To Device:



The article stated that hue didn't want Watson. It was widely reported that Hue liked Watson, and Watson even stated that hue text him be ready. After the fact hue said he didn't recall texting him that (which is not a surprise). But Watson was pretty clear he did.

Regardless of what actually happened there - the author is blaming that trade and pick on Hue, and not the FO at the time. Sorry, thats just made up BS and pure speculation with 0 facts to back up his claim.

The guys is saying all the "football" picks were bad, all the data picks were good.

I can play his game and make up assumptions as facts too. If we didn't go with the data guys we would have had Wentz, Myles, and Hooker on our team, but were left with Corey Coleman, Myles, Jabrill, and Njoku.

I cant twist things as well as the author too.

Right from Hue's mouthpiece, our friend, Mike Silver.

In an attempt to finally put to rest what John Dorsey did with the Chiefs while running their draft...this explains who positioned the Chiefs so they could draft Mahones.


Andy Reid: Chiefs had “a pretty good idea” how high they had to trade to draft Mahomes

Posted by Michael David Smith on January 29, 2020, 8:18 AM EST

At the time that the Chiefs traded two first-round picks and a third-round pick to move up to No. 10 overall to select Patrick Mahomes in the 2017 NFL draft, it looked like they were taking a big risk. Now that we know how great a player Mahomes is, the real risk was waiting until No. 10, rather than giving up even more and trading up even higher to get Mahomes.

But Chiefs coach Andy Reid said today that the Chiefs felt quite confident that as long as they got somewhere in the Top 10, they could get Mahomes. Reid said the Chiefs were studying every report about every other team’s plans, and 10th overall was a spot where they thought Mahomes would be there.

“Because of the media attention that gets put on the draft around that time, people talk,” Reid said. “We had a pretty good idea who was interested and who wasn’t. [John] Dorsey was in charge of the draft at that time and he maneuvered up to get him, knowing who was out there and who the threats were.”

The reality is, no team ever knows for sure what every other team thinks, and it only takes one team hiding its intentions for a player to be picked higher than anyone expects. But the Chiefs pulled off a shrewd move, and they deserve credit for landing Mahomes, making a move that a whole lot of teams now wish they had made.
link


Vers touched on this subject in another thread..that Hue was kept in the dark about the 2017 draft because he didn't agree with Sashi and Depodesta on their judgement of the QBs in the 2017 draft.

The Browns had the #1 pick and #12 pick of the 2017 draft. The word was that Hue Jackson did not want Mitch Trubiski as his QB and had been very open with Haslam that he preferred Garrett with the #1 pick and not Trubiski.

Had the Browns Analytics crew been a better judge of QB talent and recognized that Mahones was the gem of the draft, they could have made a play to move up to #10 and draft Mahones. Coming away with Myles Garrett and Patrick Mahones might have set this franchise up for a very long time.

Also, from the information in this article, the Chiefs gave up 2 first round picks and a 3rd round pick to move to #10 to draft Mahones and may have given up more to get him.

The guy in charge of the Chiefs draft was JOHN DORSEY.

Oh what could have been...

Watson on day of draft

And, this was from Silver, on the same day you posted that excerpt if you look at the time stamp.

Brett Veach is the one who was actually responsible for discovering Patrick Mahomes and selling both Reid and team owner Clark Hunt on Mahomes. Afterwards, they got Dorsey on board.

Brett Veach is the guy that replaced Dorsey as the GM in KC after Dorsey was fired.

Here's the article....

‘We got it done!’: The inside story of how Patrick Mahomes landed with the Chiefs

Guess when Silver wrote the article.....before 12/7/17. And it's not the first time Silver played revisionist history for Hue Jackson. Look up what Silver wrote about Hue's opinion on Wentz and then we he walked it back to try and save his buddy.

It's all there and this been pointed out constantly in the past.

And shorty after, Dorsey was let go. For what I can only imagine a few diff. reasons.

Hue like Malik and Watson at 12. The data guys traded down. Yes or no?

And speaking of revisionist history, as I said before:

I can play his game and make up assumptions as facts too. If we didn't go with the data guys we would have had Wentz, Myles, and Hooker on our team, but were left with Corey Coleman, Myles, Jabrill, and Njoku.

Yes, they did. That's not my point. You said there were reports Hue wanted Watson. I showed you who he wanted at 12. It was Hooker, not Watson. Texting someone "be ready, anything can happen" is nebulous at best.

The Hue mouthpiece wrote an article right after the draft saying who he preferred. The FO took neither. Then trying to help his buddy out, Silver walked it back saying who he REALLY wanted. It's all there.

Then you can take up the revisionist history piece with Mike Silver.

@MikeSilver (Twitter)

A lot of it sounds like some of the same issues Dorsey had in Cleveland. As many have said, he's a good talent evaluator and poor on the management side.

The John Dorsey Dismissal: Where It Went Wrong in K.C.

Agreed.

You guys are going to be begging for Dorsey back before the end of the 2020 season, **** i'd maybe even say before the end of 2020 NFL Draft

Just wait to see what this Mr Assistant 1-31 twit in Berry thinks is a good player LOL

We are so screwed.

The entire point of this discussion is talking about the article that stated hue DIDNT want Watson. That's not true. He preferred Hooker, but like Watson as well. The article I stating it was Hue that wanted to trade down, but that was not correct. Hue would have easily took Hooker or Watson at 12 - I believe is safe to say.

Silver, has given two reports - one that he wanted Watson, one that he wanted Hooker - agree?

I will go ahead and say you do. No where, ever - other than this report - said Hue or the football guys - wanted to trade down.



You replied:



It is the point, because this entire discussion I have been having is on the crap article that was posted saying different. So we agree, the article is baseless and nothing but crap.

You realize that a lot of times, the data and football guys both agree on players right? Lol.

Your saying the pick is going to be bad because the data guys are making it - not even knowing what the pick is yet - or who. Agenda?

No. I believe he wrote one report saying Hue wanted Hooker. A tweet saying he, all of a sudden, wanted something different roughly 6 months later trying to save his boy's face. I'm guessing that tweet also came after the McCarron debacle that was Hue Jackson as well.



And I'll go back and re-read the article but, at first, I don't recall it stating that Hue wanted to trade down. I thought the author referenced in general trading down because when it came to a QB Hue didn't want, trading down was now an option, so they did to acquire draft capital. My first reaction to that point in the article was also Wentz. Trading down because Hue didn't want him at 2, which Silver also tweeted out. Ironically enough, he went the revisionist route on that too.

As far as the Hue stuff goes, it's spot on. I've been following this saga since it's inception. Hue didn't want Wentz @2, Hue wanted Garrett @1, Hue wanted Hooker @12. Hue started Kizer against the recommendation of the front office. All true.

Silver was so good you quoted him to try and make your point. As soon as he was no longer a useful pawn in your chess match, he's a piece of crap again.



Helps me = Solid source

Doesn't help me = POS

You clearly are not following.

Depo is the guy that said Wentz was not going to be a NFL quality QB. See the Depo QUOTE below.



and from I remember, the data guys wanted Trubisky.

He did, that doesn't mean he didn't like Watson or wanted to trade down.

Who else was there to start again? Your acting like this was a bad decision, it wasn't. Kizer stunk, but at the time - sadly, he was the best QB we had on the roster talent wise.

No, no its not.

Is Myles Garrett or Mitch Trubisky on our roster? Did I miss something? The "data guys" were in charge and took Garrett. Or was Hue in charge and he took Garrett? And if Hue was in charge were the other picks his too?

I'm confused.

You aren't confused. Other people are.

From your reply, you still didn't debunk anything I said about Hue.

Hue still didn't want Wentz @2, but Depodesta said he wasn't a top 20 QB.
Hue wanted Garrett, "data guys" wanted Trubisky.
Hue wanted Hooker over Watson. Hue has also said you don't pass on a franchise quarterback. Hue didn't want to trade down from what I understand, but the point of contention was Hue wanted to draft Watson @12, which is false.
Who else was here to play QB? We had McCown, Osweiler, and Kessler all with experience as a starter. Hue chose Kizer. I will still contend that we would not have gone winless had any of those other 3 been named the starter.

Your wrong.

We had Kizer, Kessler, and Hogan going into 17. that's what hue had to chose from. McCown and Osweiler were in 16 before Kizer was drafted. All 3 started, and all 3 lost.

hahahahahahhahaa

again, this is all about the article - you just proved my point!!!! The article says that the players that busted were the football guys picks, but as you said who made the picks - hue or the FO? Sooooooo THE ARTICLE IS CRAP. The article wants to give the data gusy credit for the good picks and blames the bad picks on Hue.

this all started because I pointed out that the data guys did the draft, they get to own the bad picks.

Are we talking about the SI/Maven article? If so:

RG3, McCown, Kessler were 2016.

We still had McCown under contract when Hue asked him to be a coach. McCown still wanted to play. We released him.

We traded for Osweiler March of 2017 and we started him in the preseason. Joe Thomas even thought we were grooming him to be the starter.

Then Hue started Kizer the one preseason game and named him the starter against the front office's recommendations.

Hue had a say on the quarterbacks. That was the point and the point made in the article.

Hue isn't a 'data' guy, and I'm pretty sure at this point that he definitely isn't a 'football' guy, so why is everyone still talking about him?

Dude couldn't lead his way out of a wet paper bag. Period.

But he sure can jump in a lake in June with the best of them!

Yes, but how is his swimming technique?

no no no, all just told me the data guys were in charge. You cant have it both ways lol. I know you want to pic and chose, either they were in charge drafting or they were not.
And what I have been trying to POINT OUT is that even AFTER you stated the FO of the data guys were in charge, the ARTICLE yet still blames the football guys for scooby wright shon coleman drango.

The entire article basically trieds to paint any bad player as a "football guy pick" and the good/decent players as "data guy" picks.

Sheesh - its literally in the other thread the article - from yesterday and yall are trying to change what it says and revise it already lol.

I thought that said "Hue sat on the quarterbacks" and I was like, well, things are finally making sense!