ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 3 of 4
< 123 4 >
Saccopoo Memorial Draft Forum>Secondary?
Direckshun 10:49 AM 01-04-2022
How badly do you guys think we need to make investments in the secondary?

Here is our secondary depth chart in 2022 right now:

CB: Sneed, Fenton
S: Thornhill, Zayne Anderson

That's it. That's who we have under contract.

Surely there will be some people we sign to futures and bring back from this roster in places, like DiCaprio Bootle, but none of them move the needle.

Mathieu, Ward, Sorensen, Hughes, Baker, and Watts are all free agents.

There's been some debate as to whether we bring back Ward, who we all really like, though I do think we agree his uppermost limitation is against Jamar Chase. I think Ward played his ass off against Chase, but just couldn't hang with him. To say nothing of the fact that Fenton was clearly outmatched on the other side, and may not be a full time starter anyway.

That being said, what kind of resources should we explore in the secondary? The Bengals are clearly not going anywhere.

Just goes to show you, you need to be a flexible defense to win it all in the NFL. Some teams like to space you out and air it out, like the Bengals. Other teams like to pound you up front.
[Reply]
Chris Meck 11:15 AM 01-06-2022
Originally Posted by CatfishBob2:
Spags has done a great job with minimal investment at CB imagine what he could do with a premium investment. We have all pros in every position group but LB and CB.....and well have one at LB soon. Throw a dart at CB for once, it couldn't hurt much
I think Sneed will be an all-pro type player very soon, don't you?

I don't know exactly what you think this 'all-pro' corner would've done differently against Jamarr Chase. Ward consistently had good position. If any defensive player so much as bumped a receiver they got flagged.

It doesn't matter anymore.

Good corners may well feast on lesser QB's, or corners playing behind excellent defensive lines may get more turnover chances, but the days of just lining up and taking away a team's best receiver are over. The NFL will not allow it.

Guys like Sneed and Mathieu are worth SO much more if this is how the game is officated now. You have no idea pre-snap what they're going to do.

We could quite easily have two former first rounders to add to Sneed and Fenton. That's a pretty good talent level.

Get someone to replace Sorensen that can actually play, and your secondary is in good shape. Draft another 4-7th rounder to groom for CB.

But draft the best edge in round one you can, and re-sign Ingram, and sign an Ogbah type for insurance.
[Reply]
wachashi 09:49 AM 01-07-2022
I like the forced incompletions stat to help judge cornerbacks. Bryce Hall is the only guy on here not making a truckload of money but that's because he's on a rookie contract. There's still value in the premier guys, but I tend to agree that we can piece together a solid defense without one, given what Spags has shown.

❌✈️❌ pic.twitter.com/i1l9DBf0ku

— PFF (@PFF) January 6, 2022

[Reply]
CatfishBob2 11:06 AM 01-07-2022
All of those guys were picked 2nd rd or better except Hall and injury concerns pushed him down the board
[Reply]
chiefforlife 01:44 PM 01-07-2022
What a great discussion. Kccrow and Chris Meck are always good reads. While both sides have merit and I think Mecks argument aligns more with what the Chiefs are thinking and likely going to do...

It made me think of what defenses do you KNOW will take away your best WR?

Patriots, Saints, Rams maybe Cowboys? The thing about those teams is they ALL have ONE guy, capable of shutting down the opponents top WR. That little fact makes me want to take a CB high in the draft.

Now maybe Sneed can be that guy, I think the Chiefs think he is and therefor will NOT take a CB in rounds 1 or 2 and probably not 3 either.

I would like to see DE, WR, LB/S as the top three picks, in whatever order Veach sees it. He has had great success not prioritizing CBs in the draft and will likely continue this approach. I think Spags agrees with this strategy also.
[Reply]
Direckshun 03:22 PM 01-07-2022
I’m personally of the opinion that you put your best CB on the other team’s #2 and erase him.

Bracket the #1.

Under that strategy, you only need one good CB, everybody else just needs to not be actively terrible.

I don’t know why more teams don’t do that.
[Reply]
Chris Meck 07:03 PM 01-07-2022
Originally Posted by chiefforlife:
What a great discussion. Kccrow and Chris Meck are always good reads. While both sides have merit and I think Mecks argument aligns more with what the Chiefs are thinking and likely going to do...

It made me think of what defenses do you KNOW will take away your best WR?

Patriots, Saints, Rams maybe Cowboys? The thing about those teams is they ALL have ONE guy, capable of shutting down the opponents top WR. That little fact makes me want to take a CB high in the draft.

Now maybe Sneed can be that guy, I think the Chiefs think he is and therefor will NOT take a CB in rounds 1 or 2 and probably not 3 either.

I would like to see DE, WR, LB/S as the top three picks, in whatever order Veach sees it. He has had great success not prioritizing CBs in the draft and will likely continue this approach. I think Spags agrees with this strategy also.
agree it's a good discussion.

I don't really agree that anyone has a CB that can just shut down a premiere WR #1. Not without a killer pass rush. To me, that makes the pass rush the priority. As we've seen here in KC, when our pass rushers are having a good game, we tend to look great. When they don't, we look like shit.

At any rate, the SPECIAL corners tend to go higher in the first than we'd pick anyway. As for late first round corners, well, we've got TWO right now on the roster. I'm totally for bringing both back along with Sneed, Fenton, and Bootle.

I just think that Sneed's versatility is like Mathieu's-he can do so many things well besides just cover and that allows you to threaten so many different looks. That's the key in the secondary under these rules.
[Reply]
CatfishBob2 09:03 PM 01-07-2022
We have two FORMER first round picks that we invested a SIXTH rd pick and picked up off the street. And neither one of them had seized a starting position. It's great that the coaching staff has done such a great job with so little, but that's what they get paid to do. I'm not looking for a shutdown corner. I just want a surefire starter with some upside opposite Ward, if we keep him
[Reply]
kccrow 09:28 PM 01-07-2022
If my list below is roughly the top 25 CBs in the NFL (argue a few if you want), then the overwhelming consensus would be you likely need to take them in the 1st round. 16 of 25 were taken at pick 38 or higher. That said, only 7 of 25 were taken above pick 18, which means you can get them in the second half of the 1st. That number creeps up to 10 of 25 when you talk about those taken above pick 24. Meanwhile, only 6 of 25 were taken beyond the 2nd round and only 3 past the 3rd (2 UDFAs).

What this shows is that if you take the stance to argue for a top-tier CB, you argue for the Chiefs to take one early. It's similar to what I showed with LTs last year where you have to get them by pick 18, generally. In this case, 18-32 isn't a bad range if you want a CB.

I fully respect Meck's position that this team doesn't need a top-tier CB and I think he's right. Would it be nice? I think yes. Having a true playmaker on the perimeter would help. I do also agree that you have to figure out the pass rush plan first though. If you keep Clark or get a guy in FA and you're comfortable with the 2nd and 3rd round projections, I wouldn't hesitate to add a guy that could make teams pay.


The List

Bryce Hall 5-158
Jalen Ramsey 1-5
James Bradberry 2-62
Marshon Lattimore 1-11
Jaire Alexander 1-18
Xavien Howard 2-38
Tre'Davious White 1-27
Denzel Ward 1-4
William Jackson III 1-24
Trevon Diggs 2-51
JC Jackson UDFA
Marcus Peters 1-18
Byron Jones 1-27
AJ Terrell 1-16
Stephon Gilmore 1-10
Adoree Jackson 1-18
Steven Nelson 3-98
Carlton Davis 2-63
Joe Haden 1-7
Jamel Dean 3-94
Kyle Fuller 1-14
Darius Slay 2-36
Shaquill Griffin 3-90
Malcolm Butler UDFA
[Reply]
Chris Meck 08:29 AM 01-08-2022
Originally Posted by CatfishBob2:
We have two FORMER first round picks that we invested a SIXTH rd pick and picked up off the street. And neither one of them had seized a starting position. It's great that the coaching staff has done such a great job with so little, but that's what they get paid to do. I'm not looking for a shutdown corner. I just want a surefire starter with some upside opposite Ward, if we keep him
Actually I quite like Baker. I thought he looked excellent in the last game last year before he snapped his leg, and I think he's been pretty good in spot duty this year. I just think he's got guys in front him that have also played well.

I think more reps and he'd be fine.
[Reply]
Chris Meck 08:40 AM 01-08-2022
By the way, kudos to all involved in this discussion; this is what the planet used to be like, way back when. We actually used to talk football.

What we have here is a difference in philosophy. Neither side is stupid; neither side is necessarily wrong, and only time will tell us if 1)The Chiefs agree with either and 2) whether that ends up being successful.

Once upon a time, Reid said to give him two edge rushers and two corners and he'd figure out the rest, and I think that was the way to build a defense...until they changed the rule emphasis.

A couple of years ago, when asked what he thought the future of NFL defense was, and Reid said-Inside pass rushers. Like Donald. Like Jones. Can get to the QB quicker than the edge.

corners aren't allowed to so much as touch receivers beyond 5 yards anymore. It can be a flag at any time. To me, that just means that Spags is right in his theory of confusing the pre-snap reads. Trick the QB. That's all of the tools you have left in your bag, really. Fool them into mistakes.

A boundary corner...well, there's not much he can do to fool you. He's either in zone, or he's in man pretty much. And at least at the snap, you know immediately. It's kind of a line up and beat me kind of position.

but the rules are so stacked against them...I don't know. I think the functional difference between a DECENT player and a VERY GOOD player is negligible. At any rate, can be totally erased by forcing the QB to get rid of the ball very quickly due to pressure.

Give me stud pass rushers, and chess pieces for the back 7 and I'll show you a top 10 defense.
[Reply]
Buehler445 09:17 AM 01-08-2022
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
By the way, kudos to all involved in this discussion; this is what the planet used to be like, way back when. We actually used to talk football.

What we have here is a difference in philosophy. Neither side is stupid; neither side is necessarily wrong, and only time will tell us if 1)The Chiefs agree with either and 2) whether that ends up being successful.

Once upon a time, Reid said to give him two edge rushers and two corners and he'd figure out the rest, and I think that was the way to build a defense...until they changed the rule emphasis.

A couple of years ago, when asked what he thought the future of NFL defense was, and Reid said-Inside pass rushers. Like Donald. Like Jones. Can get to the QB quicker than the edge.

corners aren't allowed to so much as touch receivers beyond 5 yards anymore. It can be a flag at any time. To me, that just means that Spags is right in his theory of confusing the pre-snap reads. Trick the QB. That's all of the tools you have left in your bag, really. Fool them into mistakes.

A boundary corner...well, there's not much he can do to fool you. He's either in zone, or he's in man pretty much. And at least at the snap, you know immediately. It's kind of a line up and beat me kind of position.

but the rules are so stacked against them...I don't know. I think the functional difference between a DECENT player and a VERY GOOD player is negligible. At any rate, can be totally erased by forcing the QB to get rid of the ball very quickly due to pressure.

Give me stud pass rushers, and chess pieces for the back 7 and I'll show you a top 10 defense.
Good post. I agree about the discussion here. I've enjoyed it even though I'm not qualified to engage largely.
[Reply]
kccrow 05:03 PM 01-08-2022
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
Good post. I agree about the discussion here. I've enjoyed it even though I'm not qualified to engage largely.
You're absolutely qualified. I'm longwinded and can't learn to exercise brevity, so sometimes it looks like I'm trying to take over the conversation and I absolutely do not have that intent.

You and Direkshun brought up a great idea about not locking your best CB on the best WR one-on-one, especially if he's going off. I think it's a really good idea to completely lock down the #2 and bracket the #1 but not as a full-time deployment since it's too predictable.
[Reply]
Nightfyre 09:26 PM 01-16-2022
After Hughes let's his dude get four steps on him in the end zone, we need to bring back ward and find a Hughes replacement.
[Reply]
Chris Meck 08:38 AM 01-17-2022
Originally Posted by Nightfyre:
After Hughes let's his dude get four steps on him in the end zone, we need to bring back ward and find a Hughes replacement.
Dude, it happens. It wasn't four steps anyway, he's just much, much shorter than Claypool so even having decent position, you don't have good enough position.

I would agree that we should be looking to draft more length at the position, but I don't agree that we should be paying a premium price for it.

I'd rather have two stud DE's to pair with Jones and have opposing QB's getting rid of the ball in 2 seconds or get sacked.
[Reply]
Chris Meck 08:44 AM 01-17-2022
Originally Posted by kccrow:
You're absolutely qualified. I'm longwinded and can't learn to exercise brevity, so sometimes it looks like I'm trying to take over the conversation and I absolutely do not have that intent.

You and Direkshun brought up a great idea about not locking your best CB on the best WR one-on-one, especially if he's going off. I think it's a really good idea to completely lock down the #2 and bracket the #1 but not as a full-time deployment since it's too predictable.
I think you're touching on an important point here, and one that happens to be what makes a Spags defense successful when it is-

Unpredictability.

It's just not a reasonable strategy anymore to line up in ONE defense and shut down the opponent. They've made it impossible to do so with the DPI rules, and the roughing the passer rules.

So, you know, the 'shutdown corner'-that's a thing of the past, and not a relevant pursuit in this day and age. Belichick's bracket the #1 and put your best corner on their #2 and force them to beat you with their #3 thing- that's a good plan, but against the top flight QB's in this era, that'll still get you walloped.

You've got to do SOME of that, and some zone looks, and blitzing, and some disguising, and by all means to have any sustained success, you've got to be able to get there with 4 rushers consistently.
[Reply]
Page 3 of 4
< 123 4 >
Up