Originally Posted by staylor26:
You actually bring up a great point that proves this to be true.
We all saw the impact that Osemele had. Now imagine adding a guy like that in their prime.
My rule for OL is you want 3 very good to elite players.
Once you have 3 you can operate very well because the other two can be just mediocre. Of course KC would prefer two of the top guys be tackles but you still need one more... [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
My rule for OL is you want 3 very good to elite players.
Once you have 3 you can operate very well because the other two can be just mediocre. Of course KC would prefer two of the top guys be tackles but you still need one more...
How many teams have 3 very good to elite players on the offensive line currently? [Reply]
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
My rule for OL is you want 3 very good to elite players.
Once you have 3 you can operate very well because the other two can be just mediocre. Of course KC would prefer two of the top guys be tackles but you still need one more...
You're talking about very few teams in the NFL and almost all of them are non-contenders.
The Chiefs offensive line last year won a Super Bowl and despite having 8 or 9 different starting lineups this year, made it back to the Super Bowl.
The Chiefs need a center but the other positions are fine. They need some developmental prospects but by no means do they need to go hog wild on the line. It's a waste of resources. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Using a first round pick on an interior linemen would be foolish. Sorry.
That’s another conversation, because he has serious injury concerns, so I wouldn’t draft him either.
But this “using a 1st round pick on __ would be dumb” sounds a lot like the argument against a RB last year.
When I’m picking at 31, I don’t care about position value like I would picking in the top 5 to top 20. When you’re picking at the bottom of the round, you don’t pass up overall value because of positional value.
Once you get to the end of the 1st round, you’re essentially picking 2nd round talent. Typically, there aren’t 32 1st round players in a draft.
If a top 15 talent falls to 31, I don’t care if he’s a C. That’s value and BPA.
Are you saying you wouldn’t take a Quenton Nelson type of player at 31 because of positional value? Now that’s foolish. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
That’s another conversation, because he has serious injury concerns, so I wouldn’t draft him either.
But this “using a 1st round pick on __ would be dumb” sounds a lot like the argument against a RB last year.
When I’m picking at 31, I don’t care about position value like I would picking in the top 5 to top 20. When you’re picking at the bottom of the round, you don’t pass up overall value because of positional value.
Once you get to the end of the 1st round, you’re essentially picking 2nd round talent. Typically, there aren’t 32 1st round players in a draft.
If a top 15 talent falls to 31, I don’t care if he’s a C. That’s value and BPA.
Are you saying you wouldn’t take a Quenton Nelson type of player at 31 because of positional value? Now that’s foolish.
I don't think the RB we took #1 was worth that pick last year. I like him but I would have liked him better in the second. But with that said all this "positional value" is overstated. To me the first pick should be the player you feel will have the most immediate or most potential impact on the team. It's that simple [Reply]
We're pretty much drafting the same players lol. I just got done with one
31.
Creed Humphrey
IOL,
63.
Joe Tryon
EDGE,
94.
Spencer Brown
OT,
136.
Tamorrion Terry
WR, - Realistically, unless he's a headcase, I think he'll be long gone before this spot...he looks too explosive to be a late round pick......I would love to trade back from #31 and steal him in the second
Originally Posted by CatfishBob2:
I don't think the RB we took #1 was worth that pick last year. I like him but I would have liked him better in the second. But with that said all this "positional value" is overstated. To me the first pick should be the player you feel will have the most immediate or most potential impact on the team. It's that simple
Yeah, tough one for me.
I LOVED CEH as a player but I have a hard time drafting RB's high.
If it was me I probably would have drafted the DE Yetur Gross-Mattos.
I also liked Michael Pittman with a slight trade back.
In the end, I think CEH will only look better once we actually use him a passing weapon and beef up the OL. [Reply]
Had to do one right away because of the Fisher/Schwartz news for fun. Had to go OL first 2 not knowing what's going on in Free Agency. Added that support TE for Kelce that is sorely needed. Red Zone/Slot replacement for Sammy. Filled positions of need based off site.
Originally Posted by staylor26:
That’s another conversation, because he has serious injury concerns, so I wouldn’t draft him either.
But this “using a 1st round pick on __ would be dumb” sounds a lot like the argument against a RB last year.
When I’m picking at 31, I don’t care about position value like I would picking in the top 5 to top 20. When you’re picking at the bottom of the round, you don’t pass up overall value because of positional value.
Once you get to the end of the 1st round, you’re essentially picking 2nd round talent. Typically, there aren’t 32 1st round players in a draft.
If a top 15 talent falls to 31, I don’t care if he’s a C. That’s value and BPA.
Are you saying you wouldn’t take a Quenton Nelson type of player at 31 because of positional value? Now that’s foolish.
A guy like Quentin Nelson doesn't fall to 31. Anyone that has THAT kind of talent falls that far because he has an injury history.
Which is a non-starter for me, with any position. [Reply]
Originally Posted by CatfishBob2:
I don't think the RB we took #1 was worth that pick last year. I like him but I would have liked him better in the second. But with that said all this "positional value" is overstated. To me the first pick should be the player you feel will have the most immediate or most potential impact on the team. It's that simple
Um, positional value IS about the most immediate or potential impact on the team.
That' why certain positions, like RB, have lower positional value - because they don't have a huge impact in terms of winning games anymore. [Reply]