Quote:
Originally Posted by OKchiefs
You also shouldn’t just draft for immediate need. Kelce will be 33 this year. I’m guessing he has 2, MAYBE 3 years tops of being an elite TE. Do we want to gamble on Kelce staying elite? Receiver is also a position that takes a while to learn the offense, so ideally you take someone a year early before you really need one.
I’m a fan of the Pittsburgh method of taking a receiver nearly every year. Big Ben sucks at this point but their receiver group is collectively top notch despite not really having a single true %1 receiver.
KC has invested almost nothing at WR in the draft under Veach, I’m not sure how much longer that can continue.I’m not suggesting WR is a top priority in rd 1 unless a can’t miss talent drops, but IMO it should be addressed hopefully by rd 3 at the latest along with an affordable FA addition like Juju. By all means spend the remaining draft capital and FA money on defense.
|
Kelce's time as a top end TE being limited is exactly why the Chiefs should be drafting with need in mind.
This isn't Zach Ertz we're talking about. You don't replace Travis Kelce. Or Tyreek Hill for that matter.
Capitalize on this window while you have it open. If that means putting more 'need' into your early round picks, so be it.
As a general rule I absolutely agree with you - FA for need and draft for long-term talent acquisition. But we have some BIG contracts on this cap so FA can't be our exlcusive method of dealing with need issues. And long-term we won't have Kelce/Hill anymore.
It's important to consider need with these early picks, IMO.