Originally Posted by kccrow:
Coincidentally, Corey Davis is coming back after a 1-year hiatus. Kind of interested if I'm being honest.
NEWS: The #Jets have shown interest in bringing back Corey Davis however he prefers a team closer to his home in Nashville and will explore the open market, per ESPN pic.twitter.com/XRmtoZJFV2
Originally Posted by Couch-Potato:
Does CHI want to trade down from #9?
That trade probably takes 1-32, 2-64, 3-95 and a 2025 1st. We'd be blowing all of our day 2 capital to get up there.
I'd target 15 or 16. 1-32, 3-95, 2025 1st. Hope like hell one of those top 3 LTs fall there. That lets you keep your 2nd to get a WR in this class. That probably requires New Orleans to surprise the shit out of me and not go OT at 14.
If not, punt and let the draft come to you. If you love a guy that you want to get in front of Buffalo for, maybe you move your 3rd to get up to Tampa's spot but that's about it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Jerm:
I'm not moving 2 1's and a 3rd for the chance to take a LT...esp. when it's not even the top LT prospect in the draft.
Feels asinine to me, sorry.
What's more asinine is thinking you can get in range for the top tackle in the draft in any year without giving up more than 2 1's and a 3 when we pick at the bottom of the round every year.
The trade value when we moved up to 10 from 27 for Mahomes was pretty much spot on with the Rich Hill model: 216 for our 1st (27), 108 for our 2018 1st (the normal rate for a future pick is 1/2 the value of the current pick in the same round), and 44 for our 3rd (91) totaled 368 points. The 10th pick is valued at 369.
Our same picks this year would have a total value of 316 (32, 95, 2025 1st). That gets you to 15 (315 pts). If we expect to continue to be at that spot and we expect that the top tackle goes in the top 10 each year, then you're going to be giving up at least your 1st, future 1st, 2nd, and 4th. And really, that's about a 4th short if you were going from 32 to 9 this year but a 3rd would be a little heavy.
It's tough to convince a team to trade out of the top 10 to the bottom of the round. Dropping from 15/16 to 32 is a tall order on its own.
Not only all of this but the top 3 tackles this year are all really strong players. I wouldn't hesitate in this particular class to make that move. At the end of the day, you don't generally find LTs that can start day 1 outside of the top 20. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
What's more asinine is thinking you can get in range for the top tackle in the draft in any year without giving up more than 2 1's and a 3 when we pick at the bottom of the round every year.
The trade value when we moved up to 10 from 27 for Mahomes was pretty much spot on with the Rich Hill model: 216 for our 1st (27), 108 for our 2018 1st (the normal rate for a future pick is 1/2 the value of the current pick in the same round), and 44 for our 3rd (91) totaled 368 points. The 10th pick is valued at 369.
Our same picks this year would have a total value of 316 (32, 95, 2025 1st). That gets you to 15 (315 pts). If we expect to continue to be at that spot and we expect that the top tackle goes in the top 10 each year, then you're going to be giving up at least your 1st, future 1st, 2nd, and 4th. And really, that's about a 4th short if you were going from 32 to 9 this year but a 3rd would be a little heavy.
It's tough to convince a team to trade out of the top 10 to the bottom of the round. Dropping from 15/16 to 32 is a tall order on its own.
Not only all of this but the top 3 tackles this year are all really strong players. I wouldn't hesitate in this particular class to make that move. At the end of the day, you don't generally find LTs that can start day 1 outside of the top 20.
It's not asinine to me because I don't care about LT early in the draft...at all.
This team needs another playmaker in the WR room and as stacked as that position is in this draft, surely a pretty good one will fall to you at 32. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Jerm:
It's not asinine to me because I don't care about LT early in the draft...at all.
This team needs another playmaker in the WR room and as stacked as that position is in this draft, surely a pretty good one will fall to you at 32.
LTs overwhelmingly come from the 1st round. It's a total craps shoot to find one outside of the 1st and they almost never start in their first year. All the "but this guy wasn't taken in the first" shit doesn't matter when 15 other guys didn't make it. The odds are not forever in your favor, Katniss.
The only other solution is to continually kick the FA can for marginal/risky starters. We can sign Andrus Peat or Donovan Smith again for a year, sure. There will be options next year, too. You'd like to see that position locked up and not have to address it every single season.
WRs are a dime a dozen. LTs aren't. There will be plenty of quality WR options available in round 2 this year. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Jerm:
It's not asinine to me because I don't care about LT early in the draft...at all.
This team needs another playmaker in the WR room and as stacked as that position is in this draft, surely a pretty good one will fall to you at 32.
As kccrow just said, the data on this is pretty clear - starters at left tackle come from 1st round picks at a much higher rate (51%) than any other position except QB’s. Starting NFL WR’s come from 1st round picks only 24% of the time.
Couple all this with the facts that 1) we don’t have a left tackle 2) we have the most valuable asset in all of professional sports 3) left tackles are the second most expensive position in the NFL, it would make sense then to fill our LT hole, protect Mahomes, and do so cheaply for many years. This makes even more sense considering we could probably get a starting caliber WR at #64. If we solve LT this year, future drafts become much easier to manage as other positions are far easier to draft. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Semichief:
As kccrow just said, the data on this is pretty clear - starters at left tackle come from 1st round picks at a much higher rate (51%) than any other position except QB’s. Starting NFL WR’s come from 1st round picks only 24% of the time.
Couple all this with the facts that 1) we don’t have a left tackle 2) we have the most valuable asset in all of professional sports 3) left tackles are the second most expensive position in the NFL, it would make sense then to fill our LT hole, protect Mahomes, and do so cheaply for many years. This makes even more sense considering we could probably get a starting caliber WR at #64. If we solve LT this year, future drafts become much easier to manage as other positions are far easier to draft.
Yup.
This really has crystalized for me the last couple of weeks. And we'll have Morgan or Suamataia to choose from there and both of them have some real strengths that could make them very valuable players for us going forward.
Kingsley took a bit of a step back this year from what I can tell but by and large that seemed to be in the running game. He's been very strong in pass pro for a couple of seasons now and you really like to see that sort of stable performance from a high draft pick. Especially when the pass pro performance stayed strong even as he transitioned from RT in 2022 to LT in 2023.
Either guy presents a real nice option for us in the 1st round, IMO. [Reply]
Now that we have brown, I think our first priority should be left tackle. And we can maybe get one that will satisfy our needs long-term if we stay at 32. But it will be much more likely if we can trade down. We should use our number one for next year, preferably or possibly Sneed – but I would rather keep him. if we can get within the top 10 packs, I’d be OK with using both.
But I don’t think we should also throw in our and over to pick this year. We should use that for a TE OR A WR, BEING WILLING TO TRADE DOWN A BIT IN EITHER CASE IF NECESSARY. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
LTs overwhelmingly come from the 1st round. It's a total craps shoot to find one outside of the 1st and they almost never start in their first year. All the "but this guy wasn't taken in the first" shit doesn't matter when 15 other guys didn't make it. The odds are not forever in your favor, Katniss.
The only other solution is to continually kick the FA can for marginal/risky starters. We can sign Andrus Peat or Donovan Smith again for a year, sure. There will be options next year, too. You'd like to see that position locked up and not have to address it every single season.
WRs are a dime a dozen. LTs aren't. There will be plenty of quality WR options available in round 2 this year.
Yup. You can get good WR’s with less value, especially with Mahomes. Rice, Juju and Hollywood prove this.
It’s hard to find a quality LT bc there just aren’t many available often.
If Veach traded into the top 10 and it wasn’t for one of the LT’s I’d be furious bc they wouldn’t be able trade high enough to get one of the big 3 WR’s and the tackles available from 7-10 are good LT prospects [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Yup. You can get good WR’s with less value, especially with Mahomes. Rice, Juju and Hollywood prove this.
It’s hard to find a quality LT bc there just aren’t many available often.
If Veach traded into the top 10 and it wasn’t for one of the LT’s I’d be furious bc they wouldn’t be able trade high enough to get one of the big 3 WR’s and the tackles available from 7-10 are good LT prospects
KC also just won 2 SB's with Donovan Smith and Orlando Brown Jr at tackle.
Those were good enough and were not hard to find.
What you should say is that plug and play LT's are hard to find in the draft, so what?
With this loaded tackle class and so many great players that can project at LT who can be grabbed in the 2nd round I would prefer the elite playmaker and the guy who can be a star LT in the 2nd but needs some polish with the signing of a vet LT to man the post until they are ready. [Reply]