Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
He just brought a level of consistent aggression that we simply didn't have. His approached the game with the attitude Clark was sold as having.
He went out there looking to make his opponents life difficult every single snap. Even when he was taken out of a play, he made sure to make the guy across from him work for it.
He just looked like a miserable motherfucker to be matched up against. He was like the defensive version of Trey Smith. Smith didn't win every rep, but he made you feel it even when he lost. And if he lost, it was because you beat him and not because he just jaked the play.
Now perhaps additional exposure would make it different for him, but that's such a prideful guy that I just can't see him being a player that takes plays, drives, quarters....even games off. He may run out of gas out there, but he won't pre-emptively pull the chute.
We have far too many veteran defensive players, many of whom were highly paid, who you cannot say that about.
I have this feeling that if Johnson or Karlaftis fall to the upper 20's Veach is going to send a 3rd someone's way and move up. 23 to Arizona seems like a destination spot that makes some sense. A 3rd or equivalent has gotten teams from 30 as high as 21 in the past but I'm not so certain Belichek is the one to do it without trying to fleece more. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
I have this feeling that if Johnson or Karlaftis fall to the upper 20's Veach is going to send a 3rd someone's way and move up. 23 to Arizona seems like a destination spot that makes some sense. A 3rd or equivalent has gotten teams from 30 as high as 21 in the past but I'm not so certain Belichek is the one to do it without trying to fleece more.
I'd be happy to use one of those 3rds to move up and grab the right DE.
I'd be more happy still to see the right DE fall to us at 30 and then use one of those 3rds to move up from 62 and snag the right complement to said DE taken at 30.
A 3rd rounder moves us up 12-14 spots in the 2nd. It moves us up 4-6 spots in the first.
With just a little luck in the first, we can REALLY do some damage in the 2nd and put ourselves in awfully nice shape for a guy like Bonitto or someone who has the inverse traits/productivity matrix to the guy we take in the 1st.
I'd sure like to have that 3rd in my pocket still come round 2. [Reply]
If we don’t get a WR in FA, then I think Drake London would be a guy I’d take in a heartbeat. It’s very possible he makes it to us, too. He’s expected to run an average to below average 40. He’d be a perfect compliment to Tyreek and is an elite blocker in the screen and run games. Runs the routes we utilize with precision and is as physical as they come. [Reply]
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
Here we go again.
You guys thinking taking Williams at 30 would be a mistake is hilarious.
He’s a likely top 10 pick without the injury and would help us win playoff games at a cheap rate the next 5 years. He or London would provide this offense with as much or more impact than almost anyone in this draft. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BossChief:
You guys thinking taking Williams at 30 would be a mistake is hilarious.
He’s a likely top 10 pick without the injury and would help us win playoff games at a cheap rate the next 5 years. He or London would provide this offense with as much or more impact than almost anyone in this draft.
It's about immediate return on a 1st round pick. You're getting none if you take Williams. There are also zero guarantees he's the same player when he returns. He also best fits playing flanker, which Hill already plays. It's mostly a sign you're planning for life after Hill, not in conjunction with. Many of us in the "other camp" find it could be a rather big mistake to draft him and if that comes to fruition it won't be hilarious.
London is a completely different story. He's going to be available this year and better fits the split-end position the Chiefs actually have a need at. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
It's about immediate return on a 1st round pick. You're getting none if you take Williams. There are also zero guarantees he's the same player when he returns. He also best fits playing flanker, which Hill already plays. It's mostly a sign you're planning for life after Hill, not in conjunction with. Many of us in the "other camp" find it could be a rather big mistake to draft him and if that comes to fruition it won't be hilarious.
London is a completely different story. He's going to be available this year and better fits the split-end position the Chiefs actually have a need at.
The whole discussion about J. Williams is probably moot anyway.
Reports from the combine suggest he's quite a bit ahead of schedule in his recovery. While that's good news for a team that wants immediate impact (including the Chiefs), it likely means he's gone long before we pick. [Reply]
