Rule: You can change your answer up until next Thursday!
This might be the toughest year yet for this. I can see so many different possibilities, especially considering that I think there's a solid chance the Chiefs trade up.
Edit: It's draft day and I'm changing my pick!
Amarius Mims, OT, Georgia
There's way too much smoke about the Chiefs trading up and/or them targeting a LT. I'm going with a guy that I think could make it into our range, who also has the kind of upside that would have Veach itching to make a move to go get him. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Red Dawg:
Trade back and pick the next Sky Moore from jack shit university.
Bet if you were in charge instead of Veach we would've done something crazy like played in 6 consecutive AFC championship games and won something nuts like 3 of the last 5 Super Bowls.
What could've been, if only Clark would've seen your brilliance... [Reply]
Originally Posted by DaFace:
There are times I wish we could force user subtitles on people. "Miserable ****" is an excellent description for Red Dawg.
Sounds like Brett is prepared to be aggressive to move up and he has a history of not using smoke screens in these pre draft pressers. I’m taking it at face value that if one of the LTs slips to a spot we can move up to without a complete sellout, Veach swings big.
This OT class is so hard to gauge who goes where because there are soo many good ones with differing skill sets and I can see scenarios where Alt falls to 9 and Veach talks Poles into giving us 32nd overall value for our 2025 first and we make the same type of deal we did for Pat, to go up to get Alt, Nabers, Thomas, Harrison or one of the other guys they may have fallen in love with.
9 is worth 1350 points
32 is 590 points
95 is 120
2025 1st (590 if no depreciation for the future pick is a possibility, move that up to pick 64 if we lose a round value for next years first.
121 is worth 52
If I’m calling my shot, I’m saying KC moves up to 9 and draft Alt.
If they stay still, Kingsley is their guy…and he will be the best LT we e had for a long time. [Reply]
