2011 NFL Draft Grades: All 32 1st Round Picks, Chiefs Take Jonathan Baldwin
2011 NFL Draft Grades See Chiefs Grab Jonathan Baldwin After Trade with Browns
The Kansas City Chiefs did a bit of shuffling in the 2011 NFL Draft, and we have yet to find out if they are good shufflers headed into the second round.
In the first round, the Chiefs traded their pick at No. 21 to the Cleveland Browns for their 27th pick (via a trade with Atlanta) and their third-round selection.
And because the time ran out for the Baltimore Ravens at No. 26, the Chiefs actually got the 26th overall selection.
At No. 26, the Chiefs selected Pittsburgh receiver Jonathan Baldwin, who was being compared to Arizona Cardinals sensation Larry Fitzgerald before the 2010 season.
Baldwin seemed to go the way of Jake Locker in 2010, not producing as much and thus dropping down draft boards.
The only difference is he didn't really have a quarterback to throw him the ball, and he still has the intangibles and athleticism to be a star in the NFL.
The only problem is receiver wasn't the No. 1 area of need for the Chiefs, outside linebacker was, and they likely passed up a chance to nab UCLA's Akeem Ayers by selecting Baldwin.
I was a fan of Ayers, so I'm obviously not going to like this pick, particularly when he could have been the outside pass rusher the Chiefs were looking for with veteran Mike Vrabel entering his 15th season in the league and possibly retiring.
So, although I really like Baldwin's potential, and I think at No. 27 it's a good pick, he doesn't fill a primary need with Dwayne Bowe the unquestioned No. 1 on the team.
Sure, he could develop into a star down the line and make things highly difficult for the secondary, but unless the Chiefs find an outside linebacker via free agency or trade up in the second round, they blatantly ignored their primary need, and it could end in another promising year but a quick exit from the playoffs.
For complete draft coverage, check out Bleacher Report's NFL Draft Hub.
Most recent updates:
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?