Quote:
Originally Posted by htismaqe
1. I was talking more specifically about OT and the idea that we have to draft one in the first round. If they draft an OT in the first round because of NEED, he better damn well start from day 1 or they failed to address the need. That's just the definition of need.
2. I agree which is why I said it. If they draft a tackle, he better play. It better not be someone like Rankin filling in for Fisher.
3. I agree. I absolutely hate the idea that a certain pick in a certain round HAS to be a certain position. That's how you end up drafting poorly and surrounding Mahomes with shit.
|
Yeah, this is an uncommonly deep draft for OT's; and since it IS an area of need (though we may disagree on HOW much we need one) I feel like we oughta take one, but not necessarily in the first. I think there's a bigger drop-off after, say, a Jaelen Phillips to like a Weaver or Basham Jr. than there is from Darrisaw to say the Mayfield/Eichenberg/Radunz tier. And Little may end up better than all of them, but hasn't played football in a year and a half. He IS a Stanford guy though, and dummies don't go to Stanford, so that's a + in his column.
All of which I would like to try to hedge with some of these vets that are coming off of injuries and trying to re-establish their careers. Cheap stop-gaps while you figure out what you have with the young ones. I just think it's smart if you can't throw money at it to throw numbers at it. Double your chances of success, and if you somehow end up with too much talent to play, well that's a good problem to have.
If we DO sign a significant FA cap-wise, I'd bet it's a WR to take Sammy's spot.
but-and these are just guys that makes sense to me at the moment but it could be others-Peters and Britt would be super cheap stop-gap guys that would be upgrades over what we currently have if they're healthy.
I don't want to waste another year of prime Mahomes on an offensive line performance like that when it's avoidable. I mean it WASN'T avoidable really, but it is now.