Completely agree. The caveat to my post is that if Veach is cool with it, I am.


Veach hates Free Agents over the age of 28 more than Pioli hated Chiefs staff over the age of 50.

I think he ends up playing rt at the next level is what I meant. I’m just not a big fan of his. Like the ou kid a lot better

There are going to be some OUTSTANDING WRs and TEs available after the first. I'm not suggesting a trade down, but I also don't see the need to, necessarily, move up.

OR just draft somebody. FFS, there will be some outstanding WRs at our pick.

I really don't think Veach will extend Chris Jones. He typically cuts players loose once they approach 30. HB was the perfect example of that. Now would be a perfect time to trade him and get significant value back. It's the first thing I thought of after the SB.
You can get a DE plus a DT with those picks. Re-sign OBJr, draft another OT in the second, a safety in the 3rd and then take a swing at WR and RB in the later rounds.

I'm all about drafting and developing guys.

But everytime you make a move like this, you spin the wheel or risk. We hit last year, but trading away the best defensive player in the history of your franchise right in the middle of his prime (and the lynchpin of your defense) is a pretty big wheel spin.

Don't see who will be there at 31 that steps in and has an immediate impact in Reids offense

Trading him just isn't about replacing him, not that you're saying that but it relates to this comment on "spinning the wheel of risk" and I want to elaborate.

I say this because I've seen the opinion frequently that if we trade Jones we won't be able to replace that impact. And to that I say, most likely not. At least not on the defensive line and at the defensive tackle spot specifically. It's akin to saying you can replace JJ Watt or you can replace Aaron Donald and so forth. You can't replace a guy that's probably going to wear a gold jacket.

John Randle was probably the greatest pass-rushing defensive tackle of the modern era. Only Alan Page has more sacks as a DT. Did the Vikings never have a good defensive tackle again? Well, Chris Hovan wasn't terrible, then a few years later they got some Kevin Williams guy and he was pretty okay I guess, considering he's right on the edge of being considered a HOF guy himself. Overall, they are one of the few teams in this league that repeatedly fields a strong defensive front.

There is life after HOFers. And trading a guy like Chris Jones could set this team up for better players at more positions. There will never be another Chris Jones, in all likelihood. But the Chiefs might get AP guys at couple of other positions and still get a really good DT.

Let's say the Lions did call and offer 6 and 18 for Jones. I think it's an overzealous assumption, but this is for the sake of pretend. Let's say you got DE Tyree Wilson at #6, OT Broderick Jones at #18, and umm DL Tuli Tuipulotu at #31 in those spots. Maybe not perfect science there but it's all pretends. You've got your LT of the future that can play RT this year, you have a stud DE prospect, and you've got a stud UT prospect. Maybe you end up with a different set of guys like Paris Johnson, Brian Bresee, and Derick Hall or something like that, but the point is the same.

That trade could have profound dividends on the overall roster and on the cap situation going forward. Something like that lets you spend money and keep other guys. Do you like the idea of keeping Thuney beyond this year? Do you like the idea of re-signing guys like Creed, Smith, and Bolton in the near future? This type of deal can set you up to do all of that and still field a really good football team.

Of course, it would take THAT type of deal to make the wheels go around so it's highly unlikely but if it's presented you almost have to strongly consider it.

Whatever. The bottom line is this team is going to have to do some kind of magic to accomplish what the OP is stating. You can't have it all! Some are going to have to go or restructure in order to move up or stay put to see where we stand come draft day. Please!

It's understandable. But we also have to look at guys like smith, Bolton, Thuney etc. Would I rather have Jones in his prime for a few more years or lose a G, a G and a run stopping MLB?

I mean, from a draft perspective, what's easier to replace here? Cost wise as well.

In a vacuum yeah, if they offered that you'd consider it. I don't think it's as cut and dry as "yeah do it".

We use the Hill example so much around here. It worked out great, saved money, got picks etc.

But you could argue it worked out so well because they have the greatest QB to ever play currently and he just papered over the holes in the drywall.

You just can't keep moving off of HOF level players and expect to just keep moving along. Sometimes it's just the moves you have to make, but unless Jones wants like Aaron Donald plus 10% money, I just don't see how you are better in the next 2/3 years without Chris Jones than you are with.

There's a big difference between Mathieu and Jones. Mathieu was obviously on the decline and it was a steep drop off. Jones just had a season of 15.5 sacks and hasn't shown an inkling of being on the decline. Sure, it could happen next year but I wouldn't bet on it.

WR and corners usually drop off at at 30. DT’s are not the same. CJ is 28 and should be still have top end production (or slight drop off) until at least 32. He’s too important to our defense production wise and in the locker room. He wants to be here.. you keep that guy

I think Veach will use those late picks to move around in the third and fourth. I bet we sit tight in rounds one and two. Just my opinion.