Taking an Offensive Player in Round 1

[kccrow]

What would be your thoughts if the Chiefs passed on taking a defensive player in round 1?

What would be your prerequisite offseason prior to the draft to make this okay with you? Is it sign a DB? Etc.

I've been toying with the idea a bit. My thoughts were sign a CB in FA then use the 1st round pick to get an OG like Lidstrom or a WR like Campbell.

I've also had the idea bouncing in my head about the what if scenario of a good TE falling to KC in round 2, such as San Jose State's Josh Oliver. Feel free to comment on that as well.

[pugsnotdrugs19]

I’d honestly have to see the early part of the offseason unfold before saying for certain. But it’s possible that I’d be fine with it under some circumstances.

[Cosmos]

What would be your thoughts if the Chiefs passed on taking a defensive player in round 1?

What would be your prerequisite offseason prior to the draft to make this okay with you? Is it sign a DB? Etc.

I've been toying with the idea a bit. My thoughts were sign a CB in FA then use the 1st round pick to get an OG like Lidstrom or a WR like Campbell.

I've also had the idea bouncing in my head about the what if scenario of a good TE falling to KC in round 2, such as San Jose State's Josh Oliver. Feel free to comment on that as well.

Campbell WR OSU - watched every OSU game and Campbell has questionable hands, great straight line speed. Needs work on the full receiving tree. I’d take him in the second.

Don’t mind one bit investing in the OL.

We need to move on from TE Harris, so, on board with developing another TE.

[ntexascardfan]

Texas WR Lil'Jordan Humphrey declared for the draft today.

I don't think he's a first rounder, but if we want a WR he'd be there in the second or third.

He'd be special in our offense and I don't know how you cover him + Kelce being lined up on the same side of the field in the red zone.

[Halfcan]

A replacement for Fisher would be okay.

[The Franchise]

It doesn't matter who we take in the 1st round. They'd better be a fucking starter.

[bigjosh]

It doesn't matter who we take in the 1st round. They'd better be a fucking starter.



This

[Chargem]

I agree a starter is what's needed, but one is almost impossible to find on the offensive side of the ball, except center? Even a 1st round guard probably doesn't start in week 1.

If the Chiefs added 3 defensive free agents (say two secondary and one DL), I'd be okay with the 1st round pick going on offense if there was an amazing talent there.

[Hoover]

I know we didn't have a first rounder last year, but in the mock draft I would have taken James Daniels, the center out of Iowa if he had been there.

This year picking late, I'd also look at offense if there wasn't a DB there I really liked.

This year I'd look at TE (Fant or Hockenson out of Iowa), or Josh Jacobs out of Alabama.

That said, I'd prefer a DB

[CoMoChief]

They fuckin better not.

I hope they don't address offense til rd4 or later.

Team needs defense defense defense and more defense, esp in the secondary. If people expect the Chiefs to release/let walk Berry, Parker, Sorensen, Nelson, Scandrick etc etc...who do the Chiefs have left? Fuller and .....?

No more 2nd rd projects...need starters now. Chiefs can not shit their pants in the 2nd rd like they have w/ Speaks and KPass (Sorry but neither have shown any promise when given the chance).

[CoMoChief]

A replacement for Fisher would be okay.

Andy sure loves his fatties up front.

You know Reid's former #1 overall pick (and now probowl) Eric Fisher is getting a re-upped deal soon.

And although many wouldn't agree with it due to his concussion issues, I wouldn't be surprised at all if Morse doesn't get an extension.

[O.city]

I don't think they'll keep Morse. He's good but he just has injury concerns.

I wouldn't be opposed to an offensive player, but they need to get into doing what the good teams that always pick at the end of round 1 do. Start taking guys that fall for measurable reasons that are good football players.

The Pats have made hay doing it.

[DJ's left nut]

I don't think they'll keep Morse. He's good but he just has injury concerns.

I wouldn't be opposed to an offensive player, but they need to get into doing what the good teams that always pick at the end of round 1 do. Start taking guys that fall for measurable reasons that are good football players.

The Pats have made hay doing it.

The Pats made hay by having Tom Brady at 70% of his market value.

Ignoring measurables and taking 'good football players' is how you end up falling in love with someone like Paul Dawson who never amounts to anything to speak of. It's how you'd look at the Clemson linebackers in 2017 and decide you want Ben Boulware instead of Dorian O'Daniel.

Chris Jones was essentially drafted off of measurables, as was Dee Ford. When you have the coaching staff we have, I'd take the measurables guy 9 times out out of 10 and rely on my coaches to put them in a position to put those measurables to good use.

Give me a good coaching staff and guys that can run like deer. Don't give me a pile of 'Right 53' saps who know how to play football but look like they're moving in quicksand. I got no use for the Greg Schiano/Scott Pioli school of team building.

[O.city]

The Pats made hay by having Tom Brady at 70% of his market value.

Ignoring measurables and taking 'good football players' is how you end up falling in love with someone like Paul Dawson who never amounts to anything to speak of. It's how you'd look at the Clemson linebackers in 2017 and decide you want Ben Boulware instead of Dorian O'Daniel.

Chris Jones was essentially drafted off of measurables, as was Dee Ford. When you have the coaching staff we have, I'd take the measurables guy 9 times out out of 10 and rely on my coaches to put them in a position to put those measurables to good use.

Give me a good coaching staff and guys that can run like deer. Don't give me a pile of 'Right 53' saps who know how to play football but look like they're moving in quicksand. I got no use for the Greg Schiano/Scott Pioli school of team building.

Obviously not. I'm not saying throw out the measurables as they normally are about the best way to see if a guy can play or not.

But look at how that's worked out for the chiefs in regards to some picks like tanoh. Sure, whichever way you go you're going to miss some.

But you just aren't likely to get blue chippers later in the first round. I'd either start taking guys that you could get in the 2nd because of maybe off field stuff whose measurables are nuts or taking good football players who maybe ran a slower 40 etc.

[O.city]

I also think i'd look more at measurables in terms of size than actually what they've done or do on the field in INDY.

It's just going to be tougher drafting late.

[DJ's left nut]

Obviously not. I'm not saying throw out the measurables as they normally are about the best way to see if a guy can play or not.

But look at how that's worked out for the chiefs in regards to some picks like tanoh. Sure, whichever way you go you're going to miss some.

But you just aren't likely to get blue chippers later in the first round. I'd either start taking guys that you could get in the 2nd because of maybe off field stuff whose measurables are nuts or taking good football players who maybe ran a slower 40 etc.

Alternatively you could look at a position that is a little undervalued right now. I'm not sure I'd be willing to do that at runningback but some position will end up a little undervalued in this draft, be it guard or safety or DE or TE. A good player with good measurables will slide because his position just isn't as coveted and that's how you get someone like Bobby Wagner.

Meanwhile, there's a good chance that the position that nobody's too worried about filling right now becomes en vogue again in a couple of years. It's just the cyclical nature of the game (and a nice place to find yourself when the one position that EVERYONE is worried about is presently occupied by the best in the world...)

So my answer to the OP is obvious - there are a lot of scenarios I can envision where I'd be fine with an offensive player in the draft. It wouldn't present the ideal scenario, but it may be the best option we have available to us. If Trayvon Mullen and/or Byron Murphy are sitting there for us at CB, I think I'd have to go that route but it may be that AJ Brown or Irv Smith or Greg Little are the best guys on our board at the time and if so, that may just be the direction we need to go.

[O.city]

I'm just hopeful one of the top ILB has a weed problem or something.

[DJ's left nut]

I'm just hopeful one of the top ILB has a weed problem or something.

Mack Wilson and Devin White, I guess? Not sure there are any other real 1st round caliber prospects in this draft at ILB. Mack Wilson may not even need to 'drop' - he could just not quite get himself up that high.

[O.city]

Mack Wilson and Devin White, I guess? Not sure there are any other real 1st round caliber prospects in this draft at ILB. Mack Wilson may not even need to 'drop' - he could just not quite get himself up that high.

The dude from LSU who’s name escapes me

[DJ's left nut]

The dude from LSU who’s name escapes me

Yeah, that's Devin White. And he's unquestionably the gold standard of ILBs in this class. KCCrow has been on him for awhile now and, IIRC, was willing to trade essentially our 1st and both 2nds to move up and get him.

I'd really like to see if Germaine Pratt slid to us in the 2nd but he may just be a slightly more polished DoD. The measureables on him are likely to be outstanding but I'm not sure he can play early down roles. And honestly, if he measures like I'd like him to, he won't be there in the late 2nd anyway.

[O.city]

Yeah, that's Devin White. And he's unquestionably the gold standard of ILBs in this class. KCCrow has been on him for awhile now and, IIRC, was willing to trade essentially our 1st and both 2nds to move up and get him.

I'd really like to see if Germaine Pratt slid to us in the 2nd but he may just be a slightly more polished DoD. The measureables on him are likely to be outstanding but I'm not sure he can play early down roles. And honestly, if he measures like I'd like him to, he won't be there in the late 2nd anyway.

After watching the Chargers do it with all safeties, I'd be fine. I think DOD needs to figure out to be more DJ and just outquick OL. That's what I'd look for. I don't want to you take on and shed blockers if you don't have to. Just run around them or beat them to the spot.

I don't see the White kid falling to us, but if he did I'd imagine they'd run up there and take him.

[Chargem]

I'm just hopeful one of the top ILB has a weed problem or something.

PFF's latest mock draft has us taking Kristian Fulton (CB, LSU) in the first, they say he may be getting as much hype as Greedy if he didn't get caught cheating on a drug test.

That's the kind of guy I want to fall out of the first round, get taken by the Chiefs and then get his shit together and play like a 1st round talent.

[Scooter LaCanforno]

I'll take OLine. I don't want our QB to be touched for the next 15-20 years. Eleven guys off the street can put up the same defensive #'s as the team we have now.

[Sassy Squatch]

If Dexter Lawrence falls because of Osterine, do you consider it?

[DJ's left nut]

PFF's latest mock draft has us taking Kristian Fulton (CB, LSU) in the first, they say he may be getting as much hype as Greedy if he didn't get caught cheating on a drug test.

That's the kind of guy I want to fall out of the first round, get taken by the Chiefs and then get his shit together and play like a 1st round talent.

NOOOOOOOOOO!

https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=13887542&postcount=15

I was on Fulton in November and really hoping he'd stay under the radar. Was of the mind we could snap him up at the back of the 2nd. I like that guy a lot. Sadly, these front offices have just gotten so thorough.

[Chargem]

NOOOOOOOOOO!

https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showpost.php?p=13887542&postcount=15

I was on Fulton in November and really hoping he'd stay under the radar. Was of the mind we could snap him up at the back of the 2nd. I like that guy a lot. Sadly, these front offices have just gotten so thorough.

It's only PFF, no one agrees with their rankings so he is probably still a 2nd round guy.

[Chargem]

If Dexter Lawrence falls because of Osterine, do you consider it?

Only if you think he can pressure well enough to play DT in a 3 man front with Nnadi and Jones. I just don't think you can draft him to play nose when you already have so many holes on D, you can't spend a 1st round pick on a "non hole" of NT.

[kcclone]

We need to find out if we're replacing Sutton before we can really answer the question. Does this front office have the guys in place that can identify defensive players?

If not, we're better of doing what we do well, which may be to draft talented offensive guys. Use FA to get 2-3 key defensive pieces and hope to find a diamond or two in the later rounds defensively.

[Hog's Gone Fishin]

If there's a day 1 offensive starter in the 1st. get him, then 2-7 need to be defense.

We really need another top flight TE. If Kelce goes down it changes everything.

[CoMoChief]

If there's a day 1 offensive starter in the 1st. get him, then 2-7 need to be defense.

We really need another top flight TE. If Kelce goes down it changes everything.

The only position the Chiefs need on offense would be RB...and there's not a RB worth drafting w/ their first pick available in this draft, not w/ the amount of holes on D.

IMO, the good thing is that the Chiefs need D help eveywhere, so they can draft BDPA essentially w/ their first 3picks and it'd help KC immediately. But I'd preferably want the Chiefs to draft secondary first. People can trash Peters all they want to, but fact is, the secondary probably would have been better with him on the squad. At bare minimum the Chiefs would have gotten a handful of big crucial plays out of him. Team needs to move on from Eric Berry.

1.DB

2.Front 7 (wouldn't be opposed to another DB)

2.Front 7

[O.city]

Wouldn’t be opposed to an offensive player but it’s not the way I’d go.

Take a corner or a safety or an ILB.

Or trade the pick for a current corner somewhere. I’d trade it for Ramsey if it would work

[DJ's left nut]

The Mock Draft at The Athletic has Devin White falling to 20 (Steelers) and Deionte Thompson falling all the way to us at the end of the round.

If I'm sitting at the back of the first and White is still there at 19, I'm offering an extra 2nd to move up and grab him; if a 5th were needed as a kicker I'd probably go ahead and do that as well. Then if Thompson fell to 32, I'd wonder if I made a smart decision or if I should've stood pat and taken Thompson, but in real time I don't think I could justify that risk given the needs of this defense.

If White gets within 'give up a 2nd and get him' range, I think you have to do it. And frankly, if he's gone and Thompson falls that far, you may have to do the same thing.

But like I said - my druthers would be to find a way to flip both of those 2s and a little extra into another late 1 somehow. The Packers have the Saints pick and they may be willing to take a little more quantity over quality. But that would be a hard plan to stick to if I could use one of those 2nds to get White.

[DJ's left nut]

The only position the Chiefs need on offense would be RB...and there's not a RB worth drafting w/ their first pick available in this draft, not w/ the amount of holes on D.

IMO, the good thing is that the Chiefs need D help eveywhere, so they can draft BDPA essentially w/ their first 3picks and it'd help KC immediately. But I'd preferably want the Chiefs to draft secondary first. People can trash Peters all they want to, but fact is, the secondary probably would have been better with him on the squad. At bare minimum the Chiefs would have gotten a handful of big crucial plays out of him. Team needs to move on from Eric Berry.

1.DB

2.Front 7 (wouldn't be opposed to another DB)

2.Front 7

Okay, but imagine this - Irv Smith and Kelce in a 'Gronk/Hernandez' scenario. Man, if you put Hill and Watkins out wide, think of how goddamn impossible it would be to deal with this team.

How do you cover that? You can't play Cover 1 given the ability of Watkins and Hill to explode past you downfield. You damn sure can't play Cover 2 because that Smith/Kelce duo would absolutely murder you underneath and in that soft spot under the safety but behind the CB along the sidelines. A mirrored smash concept would just be unstoppable. I guess you sit in Cover 4 and give Mahomes all the time he needs to just dissect your ass.

You could just do everything from 12 personnel similarly to how the Rams lean so heavily on the 11 packages. And with Kelce's ability to play out wide (and Smith easily has the tools to do the same), you can do all kinds of shit to get Hill into the slot and have him attack those seams as well. And if Williams is your RB, with his pass-catching skills you can motion him out and put a murderous 5-wide out there.

That package would be friggen vile.

I'm not saying it's the highest and best use of the pick, but if a situation unfolded where Smith is the best guy on the board, I think you take him. Sure, we don't need another TE, but the things this offense could do with one with those physical tools is pretty much off the scale.

[RunKC]

The Mock Draft at The Athletic has Devin White falling to 20 (Steelers) and Deionte Thompson falling all the way to us at the end of the round.

If I'm sitting at the back of the first and White is still there at 19, I'm offering an extra 2nd to move up and grab him; if a 5th were needed as a kicker I'd probably go ahead and do that as well. Then if Thompson fell to 32, I'd wonder if I made a smart decision or if I should've stood pat and taken Thompson, but in real time I don't think I could justify that risk given the needs of this defense.

If White gets within 'give up a 2nd and get him' range, I think you have to do it. And frankly, if he's gone and Thompson falls that far, you may have to do the same thing.

But like I said - my druthers would be to find a way to flip both of those 2s and a little extra into another late 1 somehow. The Packers have the Saints pick and they may be willing to take a little more quantity over quality. But that would be a hard plan to stick to if I could use one of those 2nds to get White.

I’m with you DJ. I think this team desperately needs another Nnandi type DL and most importantly, an ILB.

Stopping the run has to be the priority again this offseason as the oppositions best way to beat us is run the ball and keep Mahomes off the field.

[Chargem]

Trading up for the two seconds for a first is so tempting, but there are enough holes that I don't feel great about consolidating picks unless you have some nice FA pick ups prior to the draft.

[Chris Meck]

Trading up for the two seconds for a first is so tempting, but there are enough holes that I don't feel great about consolidating picks unless you have some nice FA pick ups prior to the draft.

this. We need several upgrades. IF we can do a chunk of it via FA then maybe.

[O.city]

I dunno, it's awesome to have the fifth year option, but damn having 2 more picks is nice.

[DJ's left nut]

this. We need several upgrades. IF we can do a chunk of it via FA then maybe.

There aren't as many holes as people insist there are, especially if we end up tagging Ford.

They could use a DL, safety, ILB and CB (and they may just be able to convert K-Pass or Speaks for the DL). Some depth on the OL and WR depth.

In terms of relative needs, that list is shorter than just about every team out there. The Chiefs will likely need to pull 2 starters from this draft and those odds are significantly improved by moving up higher in the draft, especially into the 1st.

They don't need raw numbers as much as they need definite contributors. If I can turn 2 valuable picks (and a throwaway late rounder) into a much MORE valuable pick and improve my odds, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Now flipping a 2nd for a higher 1st is more iffy because the risk/reward may not be there. That said, if it's to get a specific player that I'm damn certain will be a starter (White or Thompson), then I'd do it anyway.

It's more important that our highest picks hit than it is that we have additional higher picks, IMO. And I get the numbers game; that more picks yields more chances to hit, but this is the dart game that O.City spoke of awhile back. Would I rather have an extra dart to toss from 8 feet or would I rather throw 2 instead of 3 from 6 feet? I'm going with the latter.

[O.city]

There aren't as many holes as people insist there are, especially if we end up tagging Ford.

They could use a DL, safety, ILB and CB (and they may just be able to convert K-Pass or Speaks for the DL). Some depth on the OL and WR depth.

In terms of relative needs, that list is shorter than just about every team out there. The Chiefs will likely need to pull 2 starters from this draft and those odds are significantly improved by moving up higher in the draft, especially into the 1st.

They don't need raw numbers as much as they need definite contributors. If I can turn 2 valuable picks (and a throwaway late rounder) into a much MORE valuable pick and improve my odds, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Now flipping a 2nd for a higher 1st is more iffy because the risk/reward may not be there. That said, if it's to get a specific player that I'm damn certain will be a starter (White or Thompson), then I'd do it anyway.

It's more important that our highest picks hit than it is that we have additional higher picks, IMO. And I get the numbers game; that more picks yields more chances to hit, but this is the dart game that O.City spoke of awhile back. Would I rather have an extra dart to toss from 8 feet or would I rather throw 2 instead of 3 from 6 feet? I'm going with the latter.

The other thing though we need to start looking at, is that while yeah theoretically they don't have a hole here or there, we need to start becoming a bit more thoughtful of maybe saving a buck here or there.

If you could get a couple guys that hit in the 2nd round at say corner or DL or WR that would allow you to maybe move away from a mid to big money guy.

[O.city]

But when you look around at the most successful teams long term, you've just got to start stacking depth.

So while they may make a pick in the 2nd round or something that isn't an immediate starter, if it's say, a DL in the mold of Christ jones or in that type of development curve, that could be huge.

[DJ's left nut]

But when you look around at the most successful teams long term, you've just got to start stacking depth.

So while they may make a pick in the 2nd round or something that isn't an immediate starter, if it's say, a DL in the mold of Christ jones or in that type of development curve, that could be huge.

The only team that's done that with any regularity is the Patriots and that's still just nothing more than having Tom Brady. As a rule, those trade-downs of theirs haven't worked worth a shit. The Seahawks tried doing that as well and got next to nothing for their efforts.

And that's not at all what the Rams have done. Frankly it's not really what the Saints have done either - they stood pat and took Lattimore when we sniped Mahomes. Thomas, Rankins, Peat, Ramzczyk - those guys are just good players they took high. Kamara was a 3rd rounder but that's just making a good pick in a good system.

Teams aren't killing it with these trade downs. Meanwhile the Chiefs are the absolute best example in the entire NFL of the value of spotting your guy, damning the torpedoes and going after him. Getting Mahomes changed this entire franchise. And the Chiefs would've been better served NOT trading back with Jones and having his 5th year option. Ford's 5th year option is the only reason he's on the team this year.

I just completely disagree that teams are showing any kind of obvious tactical advantage by trading back. That demonstrates to me that the play is still to sit there, wait for your target to start dropping and go get his ass. Playing back on your heels is how you end up with some bum like Breeland Speaks instead of giving up more to move up 10 more spots and getting Darius Leonard. Let's say that instead of giving up 54 and 78 to get up to 46 and get the 100 with it, they just give up that 54 and 78 to move up to 34, piss on the 3rd rounder they got as well and take Leonard with the higher 2nd.

I think I'd be okay giving up Speaks and O'Daniel for Darius Leonard....wouldn't you?

Give me the higher end player over another wild-card every single time.

[carcosa]

I'll take OLine. I don't want our QB to be touched for the next 15-20 years.

Yas, this.

If there's not a start-quality OL at the 32nd pick, though, go with defense. It almost doesn't even matter what position.

[O.city]

The only team that's done that with any regularity is the Patriots and that's still just nothing more than having Tom Brady. As a rule, those trade-downs of theirs haven't worked worth a shit. The Seahawks tried doing that as well and got next to nothing for their efforts.

And that's not at all what the Rams have done. Frankly it's not really what the Saints have done either - they stood pat and took Lattimore when we sniped Mahomes. Thomas, Rankins, Peat, Ramzczyk - those guys are just good players they took high. Kamara was a 3rd rounder but that's just making a good pick in a good system.

Teams aren't killing it with these trade downs. Meanwhile the Chiefs are the absolute best example in the entire NFL of the value of spotting your guy, damning the torpedoes and going after him. Getting Mahomes changed this entire franchise. And the Chiefs would've been better served NOT trading back with Jones and having his 5th year option. Ford's 5th year option is the only reason he's on the team this year.

I just completely disagree that teams are showing any kind of obvious tactical advantage by trading back. That demonstrates to me that the play is still to sit there, wait for your target to start dropping and go get his ass. Playing back on your heels is how you end up with some bum like Breeland Speaks instead of giving up more to move up 10 more spots and getting Darius Leonard. Let's say that instead of giving up 54 and 78 to get up to 46 and get the 100 with it, they just give up that 54 and 78 to move up to 34, piss on the 3rd rounder they got as well and take Leonard with the higher 2nd.

I think I'd be okay giving up Speaks and O'Daniel for Darius Leonard....wouldn't you?

Give me the higher end player over another wild-card every single time.

Yeah, that's true.

I get it for sure and I agree that i'll always go for the higher end guy.

But in an ideal setting the Chiefs can hit on both those 2nds this year. That's my whole argument is just for this year with the 2 of them. Normally, I'd never ever trade down, but up.

It is definitely so much easier to get better guys higher. Duh. But the Chiefs need to hit on some of these 2nds and maybe that's clouded my vision as of late.

[O.city]

The only team that's done that with any regularity is the Patriots and that's still just nothing more than having Tom Brady. As a rule, those trade-downs of theirs haven't worked worth a shit. The Seahawks tried doing that as well and got next to nothing for their efforts.

And that's not at all what the Rams have done. Frankly it's not really what the Saints have done either - they stood pat and took Lattimore when we sniped Mahomes. Thomas, Rankins, Peat, Ramzczyk - those guys are just good players they took high. Kamara was a 3rd rounder but that's just making a good pick in a good system.

Teams aren't killing it with these trade downs. Meanwhile the Chiefs are the absolute best example in the entire NFL of the value of spotting your guy, damning the torpedoes and going after him. Getting Mahomes changed this entire franchise. And the Chiefs would've been better served NOT trading back with Jones and having his 5th year option. Ford's 5th year option is the only reason he's on the team this year.

I just completely disagree that teams are showing any kind of obvious tactical advantage by trading back. That demonstrates to me that the play is still to sit there, wait for your target to start dropping and go get his ass. Playing back on your heels is how you end up with some bum like Breeland Speaks instead of giving up more to move up 10 more spots and getting Darius Leonard. Let's say that instead of giving up 54 and 78 to get up to 46 and get the 100 with it, they just give up that 54 and 78 to move up to 34, piss on the 3rd rounder they got as well and take Leonard with the higher 2nd.

I think I'd be okay giving up Speaks and O'Daniel for Darius Leonard....wouldn't you?

Give me the higher end player over another wild-card every single time.

The only time i'd be okay with trading down is in a situation where you can trade down and still get your guy in the same round. Like if you can go from 22 to 27, add a 2nd and still get your guy.

[O.city]

I also think one of those extra seconds could be better served trading for a current player on another roster.

With your thoughts on this DJ being what they are, what do you think about moving some picks for a current player that may need resigned? For instance, Patrick Peterson for our 1st or both 2nds?

[DJ's left nut]

I also think one of those extra seconds could be better served trading for a current player on another roster.

With your thoughts on this DJ being what they are, what do you think about moving some picks for a current player that may need resigned? For instance, Patrick Peterson for our 1st or both 2nds?

I would give up a 2nd but not both and not a 1st. Am not moving that 1st with the cap issues we're going to face in the coming years. That's too valuable and this team has demonstrated an excellent track record on 1st round picks.

This season has proven more than anyone could have expected that we simply don't need to build this squad like it's the Alex Smith era Chiefs were there can't be any holes anywhere. This is a team that can 'make due' at a position or two and use talent elsewhere to patch those holes.

It doesn't NEED to make short-term decisions. They can look at immediate short-term issues and address them with long-term solutions.

Every decision should be made over a 5-year return because with Mahomes we can ALWAYS win. If we had Smith and needed a perfect defense and had an aging QB who we needed to win with before he aged out of viability, I'd be more inclined to do so. But with Mahomes, I'm simply not going to go crazy trying address the 'now'.

[O.city]

I would give up a 2nd but not both and not a 1st. Am not moving that 1st with the cap issues we're going to face in the coming years. That's too valuable and this team has demonstrated an excellent track record on 1st round picks.

This season has proven more than anyone could have expected that we simply don't need to build this squad like it's the Alex Smith era Chiefs were there can't be any holes anywhere. This is a team that can 'make due' at a position or two and use talent elsewhere to patch those holes.

It doesn't NEED to make short-term decisions. They can look at immediate short-term issues and address them with long-term solutions.

Every decision should be made over a 5-year return because with Mahomes we can ALWAYS win. If we had Smith and needed a perfect defense and had an aging QB who we needed to win with before he aged out of viability, I'd be more inclined to do so. But with Mahomes, I'm simply not going to go crazy trying address the 'now'.

That's a little bit to where I've shifted, especially lately.

I was looking around at free agency and such and while i'm guessing they're enamored with Earl Thomas, there are a couple other guys i'd be more interested in.

I think you may have to sign Ford first off, likely tag him atleast. I kind of like Brandon graham but he may be a little redundant.

[O.city]

That's also why I'm not sure I'd scoff at the idea of a high end offensive player in the first round.

Hell, I'm talking myself into a RB in the late 30's.

[The Franchise]

That's a little bit to where I've shifted, especially lately.

I was looking around at free agency and such and while i'm guessing they're enamored with Earl Thomas, there are a couple other guys i'd be more interested in.

I think you may have to sign Ford first off, likely tag him atleast. I kind of like Brandon graham but he may be a little redundant.

Are we going to have the cap space though? You figure that we're either going to tag Ford or give him a new deal. Hill is going to need a new deal, as well as Jones (yes, you don't need to do them right now).

As it stands right now, we'll have roughly $37 million in cap space. Tag Ford and now you're down to $22 million.

[DJ's left nut]

That's a little bit to where I've shifted, especially lately.

I was looking around at free agency and such and while i'm guessing they're enamored with Earl Thomas, there are a couple other guys i'd be more interested in.

I think you may have to sign Ford first off, likely tag him atleast. I kind of like Brandon graham but he may be a little redundant.

I've said for most of this season that if I could get Ford signed with a $16 million/season AAV and a bail at 3 years, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

That horse has left the barn though. I still say discuss a LTC but if you can't get it done this year, you cannot get it done at all. Do NOT tag the man and then make a deal the following season. For the love of all things holy, please FINALLY learn something from Houston and Berry.

[DJ's left nut]

That's also why I'm not sure I'd scoff at the idea of a high end offensive player in the first round.

Hell, I'm talking myself into a RB in the late 30's.

Well that's just stupid.

[O.city]

I've said for most of this season that if I could get Ford signed with a $16 million/season AAV and a bail at 3 years, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

That horse has left the barn though. I still say discuss a LTC but if you can't get it done this year, you cannot get it done at all. Do NOT tag the man and then make a deal the following season. For the love of all things holy, please FINALLY learn something from Houston and Berry.

Yeah, I'd tag him for a year and look to draft a replacement. Ideally you've got Speaks and Tanoh but i'm not overly excited there.

I'm also talking myself into signing Sheldon Richardson. Is that bad.

[O.city]

Preston Smith is interesting at OLB and Z'Darius Smith.

[The Franchise]

No fucking RBs until Round 4 or later.

[O.city]

Well that's just stupid.

Not a 30 year old RB.

But a late first round pick on a RB? I dunno. No?

Maybe a 2nd?

[DJ's left nut]

Yeah, I'd tag him for a year and look to draft a replacement. Ideally you've got Speaks and Tanoh but i'm not overly excited there.

I'm also talking myself into signing Sheldon Richardson. Is that bad.

They suck.

You have talked yourself into drafting, trading for or signing Sheldon Richardson every year for the last 6 years. How is this any different? You have yourself a hard-on for a guy who you'd never remember but/for the recruiting saga we went through at Mizzou. I'm not convinced he has EVER been worth the headaches that he's brought along with him everywhere he's gone.

In 2014 he was probably everything you've built him up in your mind to be, but apart from that he has never been what he was advertised as in college or the NFL. Just let him go, man.

[O.city]

They suck.

You have talked yourself into drafting, trading for or signing Sheldon Richardson every year for the last 6 years. How is this any different? You have yourself a hard-on for a guy who you'd never remember but/for the recruiting saga we went through at Mizzou. I'm not convinced he has EVER been worth the headaches that he's brought along with him everywhere he's gone.

In 2014 he was probably everything you've built him up in your mind to be, but apart from that he has never been what he was advertised as in college or the NFL. Just let him go, man.

First off, I'm no MU fan. I vaguely remember the recruiting stuff. But you're probably right.

I just have visions of him at the 3 tech next to Ford and Jones.

[DJ's left nut]

Not a 30 year old RB.

But a late first round pick on a RB? I dunno. No?

Maybe a 2nd?

No. Damien Williams is just further proof of what a monumental waste of resources a 1st round RB would be with this staff and this roster.

There are positions we struggle to make work well even WITH fantastic talent. RB ain't one of 'em. We can turn 3rd rounders and/or UDFA's into viable starters. Why the hell would we ever throw a 1st rounder at one when even a reliable veteran back costs dick on the open market and a guy like CJ Anderson - who was literally unemployed 6 weeks ago - can dominate a post-season game.

Quit it, dammit. You're just wrong here.

[The Franchise]

If we can pull it off.....I'm taking Jerry Tillery at the bottom of the 1st.

Tillery - Nnadi - Jones

[DJ's left nut]

If we can pull it off.....I'm taking Jerry Tillery at the bottom of the 1st.

Tillery - Nnadi - Jones

I'd be on board with that as a fallback position if I don't think White or Thompson are viable trade-up targets. And I might actually prefer that to Thompson (who I think is good, but maybe just a product of being my favorite target at a position that has murdered us this season more than being a truly elite prospect).

I still just keep drooling over what this offense could be with a guy like Irv Smith running alongside Kelce. That's a serious failure to keep my eye on the ball; I get it. It's some Mike Martz shit. But this offense could be absolutely unstoppable with Smith out there with Kelce, Hill and Watson. And while nobody likes to think of what life without Kelce may look like, I still remember our offense dying when he got hurt against TN. A viable backup and potential replacement if a contract can't be reached would be nice.

And when a defensive guru like Belichick still exists and specializes in taking away the thing you most want to have - good luck with that one, BB. You go ahead and try to figure out how to neutralize Kelce when you have another specimen like Smith roaming the field and Hill looking to take the top off.

:drool::drool:

[The Franchise]

I'd be on board with that as a fallback position if I don't think White or Thompson are viable trade-up targets. And I might actually prefer that to Thompson (who I think is good, but maybe just a product of being my favorite target at a position that has murdered us this season more than being a truly elite prospect).

I still just keep drooling over what this offense could be with a guy like Irv Smith running alongside Kelce. That's a serious failure to keep my eye on the ball; I get it. It's some Mike Martz shit. But this offense could be absolutely unstoppable with Smith out there with Kelce, Hill and Watson. And while nobody likes to think of what life without Kelce may look like, I still remember our offense dying when he got hurt against TN. A viable backup and potential replacement if a contract can't be reached would be nice.

And when a defensive guru like Belichick still exists and specializes in taking away the thing you most want to have - good luck with that one, BB. You go ahead and try to figure out how to neutralize Kelce when you have another specimen like Smith roaming the field and Hill looking to take the top off.

:drool::drool:

It would be nice to have another TE just for the simple fact that Kelce isn't going to play forever. And then for all the reasons you stated above.

[DJ's left nut]

PFF's latest mock draft has us taking Kristian Fulton (CB, LSU) in the first, they say he may be getting as much hype as Greedy if he didn't get caught cheating on a drug test.

That's the kind of guy I want to fall out of the first round, get taken by the Chiefs and then get his shit together and play like a 1st round talent.

Fulton stayed at LSU. Kinda screwed that plan up a bit.

Probably a smart decision though; a healthy year puts him in the top 15, IMO. That kid has incredible talent.

[O.city]

I'd be on board with that as a fallback position if I don't think White or Thompson are viable trade-up targets. And I might actually prefer that to Thompson (who I think is good, but maybe just a product of being my favorite target at a position that has murdered us this season more than being a truly elite prospect).

I still just keep drooling over what this offense could be with a guy like Irv Smith running alongside Kelce. That's a serious failure to keep my eye on the ball; I get it. It's some Mike Martz shit. But this offense could be absolutely unstoppable with Smith out there with Kelce, Hill and Watson. And while nobody likes to think of what life without Kelce may look like, I still remember our offense dying when he got hurt against TN. A viable backup and potential replacement if a contract can't be reached would be nice.

And when a defensive guru like Belichick still exists and specializes in taking away the thing you most want to have - good luck with that one, BB. You go ahead and try to figure out how to neutralize Kelce when you have another specimen like Smith roaming the field and Hill looking to take the top off.

:drool::drool:

Tight end would be a place to look for sure. Irv Smith is just a monster, I doubt he's there when we pick though. I wouldn't be opposed.

I know the whole RB issue. I personally wouldn't take one there or anywhere close to that and i'm pretty sure Andy shares a similar thought process.

Ideally, I'd really like to have a 3 down badass at MLB. Is there any way there is one of those there?

[DJ's left nut]

Tight end would be a place to look for sure. Irv Smith is just a monster, I doubt he's there when we pick though. I wouldn't be opposed.

I know the whole RB issue. I personally wouldn't take one there or anywhere close to that and i'm pretty sure Andy shares a similar thought process.

Ideally, I'd really like to have a 3 down badass at MLB. Is there any way there is one of those there?

Probably not. White's the only one in the draft with pedigree, production and measurables (lots of guys with 2 of the 3 that may pan out). It would be a minor miracle of he made it into the late teens and if he does I think you need to go get him.

[RunKC]

Not sure if it will be the 1st rd, but I can see Andy wanting another weapon due to Sammy Watkins inconsistency.

I like Robinson, but he isn’t a big difference maker. A big target receiver with more lateral athleticism to get open quickly would be a great value. It would also allow us to trade Watkins in the last year of his deal if necessary.

I think Veach wants someone like JuJu. Very similar to Sammy but cheap for 5 years.

[DJ's left nut]

Not sure if it will be the 1st rd, but I can see Andy wanting another weapon due to Sammy Watkins inconsistency.

I like Robinson, but he isn’t a big difference maker. A big target receiver with more lateral athleticism to get open quickly would be a great value. It would also allow us to trade Watkins in the last year of his deal if necessary.

I think Veach wants someone like JuJu. Very similar to Sammy but cheap for 5 years.

I mentioned AJ Brown earlier in this thread and I think that may be the guy there. He's not the same kind of WR as JuJu because he's not that quick, but he's a big, physical target with good hands. More of a Demaryius Thomas type.

Not sure that's what Veach or Reid look for in their WRs, but he'll probably be the best WR that may be available late in the 1st.

[O.city]

I'm sure he wants to play QB but if Kyler Murray was there where the Chiefs are picking and was open to playing RB/WR/ QB would you do it?

[DJ's left nut]

I'm sure he wants to play QB but if Kyler Murray was there where the Chiefs are picking and was open to playing RB/WR/ QB would you do it?

Fuck no.

[O.city]

You're no fun.

I wouldn't want that headache though.

What DL or S is gonna be the best bet to be there when we pick?

[carcosa]

Not a 30 year old RB.

But a late first round pick on a RB? I dunno. No?

Maybe a 2nd?

Only way I do that is if a Gurley or Barkley level talent fell to 32... but there are still too many teams stupid enough to take RBs early in the 1st for that to ever happen. And even if it did happen, I'd only take the RB if there weren't a clear starter in a more valuable position.

[The Franchise]

I'm sure he wants to play QB but if Kyler Murray was there where the Chiefs are picking and was open to playing RB/WR/ QB would you do it?

Fuck you.

[Chargem]

There aren't as many holes as people insist there are, especially if we end up tagging Ford.

They could use a DL, safety, ILB and CB (and they may just be able to convert K-Pass or Speaks for the DL). Some depth on the OL and WR depth.

In terms of relative needs, that list is shorter than just about every team out there. The Chiefs will likely need to pull 2 starters from this draft and those odds are significantly improved by moving up higher in the draft, especially into the 1st.


I go back and forwards on what holes the Chiefs have. The week after Hunt was released, you could look at it and say the Chiefs needed: RB, 2nd TE, WR depth, Center, DL, OLB, ILB, Safety (maybe two depending on Berry health), CB x 2.

That's a lot of holes anyway you look at it. But since then, Damien Williams performance, the Reiter signing, Lucas and Wards play all cuts that list down quite a bit and maybe there aren't nearly as many holes as people first thought.

I can see the argument for shipping the two 2nd's for a 1st, but I think you can realistically expect a solid contribution from a 2nd round pick in their first year (See Leonard, Jessie Bates) if you pick the right guy. Speaks was always going to be a project, as was Kpass.

The key thing for me now is that whether or not you trade up those seconds, you absolutely have to get a contributor that you are expecting 3 and a half years of solid starter play from at least.

[DJ's left nut]

I go back and forwards on what holes the Chiefs have. The week after Hunt was released, you could look at it and say the Chiefs needed: RB, 2nd TE, WR depth, Center, DL, OLB, ILB, Safety (maybe two depending on Berry health), CB x 2.

That's a lot of holes anyway you look at it. But since then, Damien Williams performance, the Reiter signing, Lucas and Wards play all cuts that list down quite a bit and maybe there aren't nearly as many holes as people first thought.

I can see the argument for shipping the two 2nd's for a 1st, but I think you can realistically expect a solid contribution from a 2nd round pick in their first year (See Leonard, Jessie Bates) if you pick the right guy. Speaks was always going to be a project, as was Kpass.

The key thing for me now is that whether or not you trade up those seconds, you absolutely have to get a contributor that you are expecting 3 and a half years of solid starter play from at least.

Absolutely.

The bottom line, though, is that if you use the 2s you're probably hoping for someone that gives you 3(ish) years and the odds are that one of them gives you natch.

Whereas if you fold them into a 1st, you can realistically plan for 4 years and a shot at 5.

Honestly, if we still had Dorsey I might be more inclined towards keeping the 2s because I think he's a brilliant scout. Veach, OTOH, I just don't have as much confidence in. And it's not that I think he's bad in that regard, it's more that I think he's closer to average. And those average GMs are looking at a 40-50% bust rate on 2nd rounders. Additionally, I think we're looking for some pieces that are just damn hard to scout (DB and DL are notoriously difficult to project). In that case, I think I'd rather lower the degree of difficulty.

Again, it all comes down to the board. If there's nobody sitting there at the back of 1 that Veach and crew feel strongly about, then I'll defer to them. But if there's a potential Leonard or Bobby Wagner sitting there at the back of the 1st, I'd sure like to see them get aggressive and move up for the ceiling rather than lay back and hope to win via numbers.

[O.city]

Absolutely.

The bottom line, though, is that if you use the 2s you're probably hoping for someone that gives you 3(ish) years and the odds are that one of them gives you natch.

Whereas if you fold them into a 1st, you can realistically plan for 4 years and a shot at 5.

Honestly, if we still had Dorsey I might be more inclined towards keeping the 2s because I think he's a brilliant scout. Veach, OTOH, I just don't have as much confidence in. And it's not that I think he's bad in that regard, it's more that I think he's closer to average. And those average GMs are looking at a 40-50% bust rate on 2nd rounders. Additionally, I think we're looking for some pieces that are just damn hard to scout (DB and DL are notoriously difficult to project). In that case, I think I'd rather lower the degree of difficulty.

Again, it all comes down to the board. If there's nobody sitting there at the back of 1 that Veach and crew feel strongly about, then I'll defer to them. But if there's a potential Leonard or Bobby Wagner sitting there at the back of the 1st, I'd sure like to see them get aggressive and move up for the ceiling rather than lay back and hope to win via numbers.

The issue with the 2nds is that they're going to be at the absolute back ass end of the 2nd. It's not as if they have one of them at the top of the round, which would be nice.

I wonder if one of those 2nds could be turned into the next Mitch Morse, if they've decided to move on from him. That's usually a nice sweet spot to find some nice OL.

They need an ILB with Ragland being a free agent, if he would stay for reasonable price I'd keep him. He's not great but I can't think they were as bad as they showed thru this season right?

[O.city]

One area I think the Chiefs need to dip their toe is the pick swap for a player. Seems to be some market inefficiency there

[Chargem]

The issue with the 2nds is that they're going to be at the absolute back ass end of the 2nd. It's not as if they have one of them at the top of the round, which would be nice.

I wonder if one of those 2nds could be turned into the next Mitch Morse, if they've decided to move on from him. That's usually a nice sweet spot to find some nice OL.

They need an ILB with Ragland being a free agent, if he would stay for reasonable price I'd keep him. He's not great but I can't think they were as bad as they showed thru this season right?

I wouldn't mind a center in the 2nd if it falls that way, especially if the 1st goes on defense.

Also, Reggie is not a free agent. He's locked in next year for $1.2m cap hit.

One area I think the Chiefs need to dip their toe is the pick swap for a player. Seems to be some market inefficiency there

I'm not sure about that. I think there are some good deals to be had on swapping picks for players but it normally leads to landing guys with higher cap hits, I'm not sure the Chiefs can play that game with their cap situation.

[O.city]

I wouldn't mind a center in the 2nd if it falls that way, especially if the 1st goes on defense.

Also, Reggie is not a free agent. He's locked in next year for $1.2m cap hit.



I'm not sure about that. I think there are some good deals to be had on swapping picks for players but it normally leads to landing guys with higher cap hits, I'm not sure the Chiefs can play that game with their cap situation.

Not necessarily for high profile players.

Look at what the Pats did to get their current LT. Drop a few spots in say the 5th round.

That's something the Chiefs could look at on draft day.

[Bump]

depends on whats available. If there is some stud WR or lineman and all of the defensive backs would be considered reaches, go for the stud. I'd rather not reach in the first couple of rounds TBH.