What we know about this team is that it typically likes to fill its roster out as much as possible in free agency and then spend its highest picks on potential replacements for job openings a year down the road, and that includes Veach.
I doubt I even need to run down the list but:
2020: CEH --> Williams
2019: Hardman --> Hill/Watkins
2018: Speaks --> Ford/Houston
2017: Mahomes --> Smith
Fisher will be on the last year of his contract, and most of us suspect Schwartz retiring.
The Chiefs obviously like Niang but going OT 1st gives them the options:
Niang vs. the rookie for starting RT
if the rookie wins, Niang can slide into guard or hold the swing tackle position
if Niang wins, the rookie can slide into guard or hold the swing tackle position
the Chiefs love Fisher but if both Niang and the rookie excel, maybe they cut bait
if only one of them excel, the Chiefs can extend Fisher
It just seems like the kind of move that gives them the flexibility in future decisions that they like to have.
I'd rather they go DE, even if it means trading up for one. But based on what we know, OT could ostensibly solve up to two different OL spots in 2021 and gives them all kinds of options in 2022 based on how 2021 goes. [Reply]
If you don't think you can catch up with the talent on a SB winning team, don't you lean toward getting a lot of change in personnel and at the same time dump a bunch of players into Free Agency.
That invites a bear bias in salary cap. You are looking to erode the distance in play between haves and have nots in known talent. I don't know how each team at the top and bottom of play looks in their cap and obligations but there are 24 teams that didn't make the playoffs and may be looking for reshuffle of each teams players. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
You may only need those tackles for one year though.
This team just can't afford a new center and two new tackles with all the other needs they have.
It would be a crying shame to have a top 10 offensive line in 3-4 years and have nothing at WR or TE because we stopped acquiring them.
Does anybody REALLY want to be the fucking Colts?
I don't think we have to worry about that. Aside from last year, the Chiefs have drafted at least one pass catcher in every draft since 2004. They have 5 mid-round draft picks to acquire one this year in a draft heavy with mid-round talent at the position. I fret not. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I don't think we have to worry about that. Aside from last year, the Chiefs have drafted at least one pass catcher in every draft since 2004. They have 5 mid-round draft picks to acquire one this year in a draft heavy with mid-round talent at the position. I fret not.
This draft is deep at OL too. You can't just zero in on OT or you'll end up with someone that can't actually step in and play. That would be the worst possible scenario - draft a 1st round tackle and have to sign two stop gaps anyway. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
You may only need those tackles for one year though.
This team just can't afford a new center and two new tackles with all the other needs they have.
It would be a crying shame to have a top 10 offensive line in 3-4 years and have nothing at WR or TE because we stopped acquiring them.
Does anybody REALLY want to be the ****ing Colts?
WHA?
Respectfully, we would never be The Colts.
Also, we're loaded with weapons, and the likelihood that we'll just stop looking at offensive weapons is nil.
Worrying about 3 to 4 years down the road when you have glaring deficiencies makes no sense.
It would seem, based on the mocks I'm seeing and draft grades that this class of OT's is talented and deep; and it's possible to get a day one starter perhaps as late the end of the second/top of the third.
It seems to be a very deep WR class too; and honestly, I see not all that much space between the first rounders and the third and fourth rounders. At any rate, zero chance any drafted WR starts in year one in this offense. ZERO. It ain't happening. He'd have some play packages, just like Reid does with all of his new toys until they have digested enough to play the whole offense. That doesn't generally happen until year 2 at the earliest. I also don't expect there to be a huge problem bringing either Robinson or Pringle back, it's not like they're going to get huge offers. And they should bring one back, and they should still draft at least a middle round talent to groom.
DE is also a need, and is an area where I DO see some drop-off once you get into the middle rounds. Still, some guys may fall, but I feel like you won't get a 'difference maker' type beyond round two. You can get some solid players later, though. [Reply]
Also, we're loaded with weapons, and the likelihood that we'll just stop looking at offensive weapons is nil.
Worrying about 3 to 4 years down the road when you have glaring deficiencies makes no sense.
It would seem, based on the mocks I'm seeing and draft grades that this class of OT's is talented and deep; and it's possible to get a day one starter perhaps as late the end of the second/top of the third.
It seems to be a very deep WR class too; and honestly, I see not all that much space between the first rounders and the third and fourth rounders. At any rate, zero chance any drafted WR starts in year one in this offense. ZERO. It ain't happening. He'd have some play packages, just like Reid does with all of his new toys until they have digested enough to play the whole offense. That doesn't generally happen until year 2 at the earliest. I also don't expect there to be a huge problem bringing either Robinson or Pringle back, it's not like they're going to get huge offers. And they should bring one back, and they should still draft at least a middle round talent to groom.
DE is also a need, and is an area where I DO see some drop-off once you get into the middle rounds. Still, some guys may fall, but I feel like you won't get a 'difference maker' type beyond round two. You can get some solid players later, though.
Um, yeah? That's what I said in my last post. :-) [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
And while I don't completely agree (there are WR's that could contribute day 1 if both Sammy and DRob are let go) on the WR, my point was this:
If you take an OT at #32, he HAS to start day 1. If he doesn't, you've just thrown away a ton of value.
We can afford to have a WR slow ramp into the offense. We can't afford to take an OL and have them not be a starter.
If you're going to draft for need, you have to be damn sure you fill the need.
Originally Posted by O.city:
You want skill guys, but at some point you can only have so many on the field at one time. You need two good tackles.
Excellent point.
Kelce got 145 targets, Hill 135, Hardman 62...
Some here bitch and moan about Hardman noting being used more, and we all agree that CEH will be more involved in the passing game moving forward, but yet some want to spend a first round pick on a WR. I just don't get it. Yeah we need to replenish the position, but I don't think it requires high draft picks. I mean we have the best QB on the planet. I'm pretty sure he can create stars. [Reply]
Some here bitch and moan about Hardman noting being used more, and we all agree that CEH will be more involved in the passing game moving forward, but yet some want to spend a first round pick on a WR. I just don't get it. Yeah we need to replenish the position, but I don't think it requires high draft picks. I mean we have the best QB on the planet. I'm pretty sure he can create stars.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
You may only need those tackles for one year though.
This team just can't afford a new center and two new tackles with all the other needs they have.
It would be a crying shame to have a top 10 offensive line in 3-4 years and have nothing at WR or TE because we stopped acquiring them.
Does anybody REALLY want to be the fucking Colts?
:-) Good grief, this is way over the top melodramatic. Just because we're most likely going to spend a single Offseason building our OL back up after both our bookends suffered at best significantly career altering injuries doesn't mean we're never going to be able to find more offensive skill position players. [Reply]
I just don't get all of the panic about the offensive line.
The past few nights, the NFL Network has replayed the 2018 regular season game against the Patriots as well as the AFC Championship game, and regardless of who has started, the line performed fine, whether it was Wylie or LDT or Cam Erving at LG or any iteration.
I think there's a better than good chance that the Chiefs starting offensive line will be either Fisher or a fill-in at LT, Allegretti, Reiter, LDT and Wylie, if Schwartz is actually retires.
I think it would be great if the Chiefs can re-sign Remmers and Wiz as backups, leaving Niang and a draftee to battle out at LT. I could see them snagging another IOL from the 5th-7th, watch the guy sit for a year, then move into the RG or Center position. But I just cannot envision a scenario in which they draft a pair of tackles and a center while forcing them to start the 2021 season.
That just doesn't jibe with Veach and Reid's philosophy. [Reply]
