You sign a top notch FA safety (Thomas, Collins or Amos) for multiple years and a good DT (McCoy, Richardson, Suh, etc.) for a one-year or two-year contract. You can also sign other players on offense and defense on cheap deals.
Draft
1st round: CB
2nd round: ILB and C/G
3rd round: CB
You restructure Houston. You tag Ford. You trade a 2020 2nd round pick for Patrick Peterson or a lower pick for a decent veteran player who has a year or two left on his contract. I guess you could sign instead a FA CB on a one-year deal.
You end up with:
Houston-Nnadi-Jones-Ford
O'Daniel-Hitchens-2nd round LB
Peterson-Collins-Berri-1st round CB (Fuller in the slot)
You have Speaks and Kpassagnon as backup at DE. You have your FA DT rotating with Nnadi/Jones.
With the Hithens contract, I just don't think you can afford paying big dollars to a FA LB. Plus, recent drafts have showed that you can have a good LB late 2nd round/early 3rd round (Anzalone, Carter, Warner, Cunningham, etc.) and those guys are good early.
The linebackers would be the weakest group but I think they can be decent, especially if Hitchens goes back to his Cowboys' form.
The secondary would be a strong group. Even if Berri doesn't play, you have Watts or Murray (I know he is poor) who can play there. You have Ward and a 3rd round pick as backup CBs. I guess that 3rd round pick could be a safety but I would rather get a CB. If Berri doesn't play, Veach needs to find a scrap heap safety like Dorsey did so well.
I think it would be a defense set up for the next two years where you can draft a 1st round DE in 2020 to replace Houston/Ford or something like that.
Chiefs #1 priority should be to fix the middle of the defense.
First off, they should go out and get a safety. Landon Collins would be the ideal choice since he is young and familiar with Spagnuolo’s defensive philosophy and scheme.
Secondly, they need a middle linebacker bad. Personally, I would trade up for Devin White. That guy is going to be amazing. He has everything the Chiefs inside linebackers lacked in explosiveness, great sideline to sideline speed, makes good reads, he is responsible for taking on and filling his gaps, closes angles well, a good tackler in the open field and he plays with tremendous fortitude. He fights off blocks and doesn’t give up on plays.
He is pretty complete. They traded up to get their QB, Heart of the offense, and I think they should do the same on D. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Trade up for a MLB when they just gave Hitchens a bunch of money?
No thanks. The position isn't THAT important.
What??? I disagree.
Hitchens isn't a MLB. Put him back to his original position to where he was in Dallas.
You need MLBs bro. Why take that position for granted? I don't understand?
You do realize a big reason our defense sucked was because they looked totally lost, confused and that resulted in them being disorganized and out of position many many many times. Communication, lack of understanding, organization all were issues with this defense last season.
An intelligent MLB will fix those issues; especially one that knows the defense inside and out that is willing to create the right tone and environment for the defense. You need those guys to constantly communicate and help educate the rest of your teammates and facilitate awareness within the defensive unit itself. One that could pass along knowledge about the defense, so guys could learn and become more responsible for both their assignments and where to line up and be in that right position to make plays.
Than it is just a matter of others executing around him. MLBs promote structure with a defense. To say a MLB is not important is so ****ing ignorant. No offense. A MLB makes the players around him better.
*this defense has zero leaders and no structure a big reason for that is because they don't have a field general. Tell me who is going to fix all that? Sapgnuolo and the coaches? Hitchens? Ragland? They both proved they couldn't do that last year. [Reply]
Hitchens isn't a MLB. Put him back to his original position to where he was in Dallas.
You need MLBs bro. Why take that position for granted? I don't understand?
You do realize a big reason our defense sucked was because they looked totally lost, confused and that resulted in them being disorganized and out of position many many many times. Communication, lack of understanding, organization all were issues with this defense last season.
An intelligent MLB will fix those issues; especially one that knows the defense inside and out that is willing to create the right tone and environment for the defense. You need those guys to constantly communicate and help educate the rest of your teammates and facilitate awareness within the defensive unit itself. One that could pass along knowledge about the defense, so guys could learn and become more responsible for both their assignments and where to line up and be in that right position to make plays.
Than it is just a matter of others executing around him. MLBs promote structure with a defense. To say a MLB is not important is so ****ing ignorant. No offense. A MLB makes the players around him better.
*this defense has zero leaders and no structure a big reason for that is because they don't have a field general. Tell me who is going to fix all that? Sapgnuolo and the coaches? Hitchens? Ragland? They both proved they couldn't do that last year.
First of all, I never said MLB wasn't important. I said it isn't important enough that you give up a bunch of draft picks to move up from 29 to the middle of the 1st round.
By the way, Hitchens original position is WLB. He's also played a ton of MLB. Put him at WLB and DOD goes to the bench. He's not a SLB, playing him there would be a mistake.
And if you think a rookie MLB is going to come in here and elevate the entire defense, I don't know what to tell you. We're not getting DJ or Kuechly in this draft and those are the guys that actually make a difference at MLB. [Reply]
Earl Thomas isn’t even 30 yet. With that broken leg and another year gone, his price tag might drop enough that he’d be willing to play for a contender on an incentive-laden contract. [Reply]
Hitchens isn't a MLB. Put him back to his original position to where he was in Dallas.
In Dallas he played MLB in 2014, 2015, 2016 and in 2017 when he beat out Jaylon Smith until another injury to Sean Lee when they moved him to the WLB.
So in short his original position was MLB with the Cowboys. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chief Roundup:
In Dallas he played MLB in 2014, 2015, 2016 and in 2017 when he beat out Jaylon Smith until another injury to Sean Lee when they moved him to the WLB.
So in short his original position was MLB with the Cowboys.
No it wasn't. Cowboys traded for Rolando McClain and that was originally their plan at MLB. Hitchens was originally not slotted to play there to begin with.
Cowboys wanted him to learn all three different linebacker positions and make him versatile. That's because guys were either getting injured or suspended. Hitchens was used laterally by the Cowboys to help solidify their depth at linebacker.
He has experience at MLB but that was never his original position. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
First of all, I never said MLB wasn't important. I said it isn't important enough that you give up a bunch of draft picks to move up from 29 to the middle of the 1st round.
By the way, Hitchens original position is WLB. He's also played a ton of MLB. Put him at WLB and DOD goes to the bench. He's not a SLB, playing him there would be a mistake.
And if you think a rookie MLB is going to come in here and elevate the entire defense, I don't know what to tell you. We're not getting DJ or Kuechly in this draft and those are the guys that actually make a difference at MLB.
:-) dude, you implied it wasn't important and acted like they should just play Hitchens just because he got his payday. [Reply]
I'd personally play Hitchens at the "will" in man to man and in zone place him in the flats...I think he would fit best there under those scenarios. [Reply]
Originally Posted by bricks: :-) dude, you implied it wasn't important and acted like they should just play Hitchens just because he got his payday.
You're wrong. I said explicitly that MLB wasn't THAT important, referring to your statement that we should try to trade up to get one, especially when they already have Hitchens on a big contract.
I never said that it wasn't important at all. Didn't even imply it.
This team has a ton of needs and trading away multiple draft picks to get a MLB would be foolish, especially considering there aren't any blue chippers in this draft class anyway.
It's pretty simple English if you'd just bother to read. [Reply]
Originally Posted by bricks:
He has experience at MLB but that was never his original position.
Absolutely 100% correct. Hitchens' natural position is WLB.
The only reason people are talking about him as a MLB is because he has played there some and because they're looking for ways to get DOD on the field.
If Hitchens is your starter at WLB, then you need both a Mike AND a Sam. That's a lot of ground to make up considering the needs in the secondary. They only have so many draft picks. [Reply]
By the way, even if you do consider Devin White to be a Kuechly/DJ type of prospect, he's going to like go somewhere between 8 and 12 unless he absolutely bombs at the combine or something.
The Chiefs would have to trade their ENTIRE draft to get to #10. Just to get to #12 would cost them their first rounder and BOTH seconds.
That is why I said the position is not THAT important. You'd essentially be giving away 3 potential starters for 1, all for a team that has dire needs at CB and S. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
You're wrong. I said explicitly that MLB wasn't THAT important, referring to your statement that we should try to trade up to get one, especially when they already have Hitchens on a big contract.
I never said that it wasn't important at all. Didn't even imply it.
This team has a ton of needs and trading away multiple draft picks to get a MLB would be foolish, especially considering there aren't any blue chippers in this draft class anyway.
It's pretty simple English if you'd just bother to read.
I did read your post.
Ok. You have your interpretation and I have mine. When someone says “its not that important what does that mean?” The way I look at is, its not something taken seriously thus deflating its value or worth within the figment of their own imagination. Isn’t that the same thing as “not important?” But whatever, this argument is NOT important!! Its only going to go in circles and therefore to me is NOT important:-)
We traded away multiple picks to get Mahomes. How did that turn out? You never know? If a guy is really really good then he may be worth trading those picks to get him? But you have your opinions about that and don’t think its worth it and I respect that. [Reply]
