I'd take the risk at 3/37, absolutely. If he's has injured as he's been it's a bummer and a problem but not a "the roster is f**ked" "dear God it's as bad as paying Clark" type problem.

I agree we have to accept limited fixes in FA and then fill the remaining gaps in the draft. The problem we have I think is at a position like WR. I don't like FA or the draft options particularly. If I'm honest, I kinda feel that way about OT too, but appreciate others think there's some depth in the draft. I feel the opposite at DE and DT. There's some decent not great options in FA, at least situational pass rushers, and a lot in the draft.

So I'm kinda stuck. I think the area you could improve most in FA is DE and DT, but that's also the best area of depth in the draft. I suppose I'd go with your approach, the other approach I might consider is DT and RT in FA, with a middling option at DE if possible. Then it's DE R1, BPA onwards picking up OT, WR, DT, safety.
[Reply]

You're gonna have to just make some things work at LT and or DE.

Those spots are just hard to fill where we are draft wise and this years FA class, thus far. There may be guys shake lose that will help, we'll see.

But I'd guess OBJ is a Chief next year.
[Reply]

See, when I hear crap FA market for tackles that means to me when can get a great return for OBJ.

I'd bet we could get at least a decent 2nd, if not a low 1st for him. He's proven and in the right run-first offense he'd a fantastic blindside protecter. We then take that pick/s we get for him and move up and grab our own LT-who can specialize in a more pass oriented offense.
[Reply]

There really are a finite number of teams that I feel would fit the need with his skill set. Probably Chicago, Pittsburgh, and New York (Jets). I think in any of those cases, getting their higher 2nd rounder is probably a max bet.

There also are a finite number of teams that legitimately need a LT right now aside from those teams, and really it would be more about the future and not necessarily for 2023. This puts KC in a good spot to actually grab a decent player for less of a move up than maybe they otherwise would
[Reply]

With the way Brown has started the season slow and then improved as the season progressed I really doubt you'd get a 1st for him. He's not a consistent asset and he's still going to get beat by speed.
[Reply]

Well, there's a few others imo. I would add the Titans/Pats/Colts onto that list of teams that are run first and have at least a reasonable need for a LT that can do both but is better suited run blocking.

But to your point, I think that the Bears and Steelers are actually our best best. Chicago in particular would work well-if they can trade down and pick up some other picks. Our front offices are linked and it only makes sense that we do business together.
[Reply]

I don't see the Pats and Colts being fits, despite being more run-oriented, simply because they've traditionally targeted more athletic tackles but you never know, you could be right.

If Lewan ends up out of Tennessee, which seems likely, he's expressed his interest in joining the Steelers and they might just do it. Tennessee would be a quality fit in that case if they intend to continue to be a run-first type of team.
[Reply]

I think we need to come to terms with obj being the LT here for a while
[Reply]

Yeah, how about no
[Reply]

After yesterday's game, and I'm aware this may be emotional thinking, but I'm all in on building a dominant offensive line and dominant defensive line and just churning the other positions.

Keeping Mahomes upright and rushing the opposing passer are all that matter to me at this point. Everything else is a luxury.
[Reply]

Veach did a good job of fixing the secondary last year, which opens up alot of opportunities. I agree with fortifying both lines. I think it's time to really get better there for the long term.

They have a great opportunity to add quality to the DT position this year in both FA and the draft. I think if they can get a consistent rotation with Jones they can have a pretty badass defensive line.

Use the draft to address the OT positions. Get some cheap options in here that will improve the pass-blocking quality.

In the draft, I think there's a great opportunity to get a LT because the top 10 lacks teams with need.

The Bears at 1 seem unlikely to draft a tackle. They do like Braxton Jones but he really needs to work on his anchor against the bull rush to improve. I think he's okay for them right now. They'll either trade down and take a defensive player or take one at #1 IMO.

The Texans have Tunsil right now so they seem unlikely to do it. They probably go for a QB at #2.

Arizona paid their QB and Humphries could be a cap casualty so that could put them in play but I really think they'll restructure Humphries and keep him. I'd put it at 10% chance.

Seattle at 5 improved both tackle spots last year and have no need.

The Lions at 6 are good with Decker and Sewell.

The Raiders at 7 need a QB desperately and have Kolton Miller at LT. I'm sure they aren't taking a RT that high.

Atlanta at 8, you never know. They might lose McGary in FA at RT but they have much bigger needs so I have my doubts.

The Panthers are good at tackle at 9 with Moton and Ekwonu.

The Eagles might have the best set of tackles in the NFL at 10. No way.

That gets us to Tennessee. They seem set to cut Taylor Lewan, which creates an enormous hole. Could Petit-Frere slide over? Maybe. I think they are certainly in play here. I have my doubts they move on from Tannehill this year. They probably will soon, but they need to get things in order and picking at 11 might not get them a top-flight QB.

The Texans pick at 12 so that's probably safe to say no.

The Jets at 13 absolutely could use a LT. Mekhi Becton can't stay healthy. Move him to RT if he can be healthy and get a long-term RT. That said, they could move this pick in a trade for a QB so we'll see.

The Pats at 14 are in an interesting situation and probably are in play IF they don't re-sign Isaiah Wynn. Trent Brown is also in the last year of his contract. We'll see what happens but Bill has always taken an LT in round 1 when he has needed one.

The Packers probably aren't in play for a tackle at 15.

At 16, unless the Commanders want to try to upgrade over Leno, they probably aren't going to go with a tackle. I think they'll try to trade up for a QB and if that fails, they probably look more at solidifying the interior OL or secondary.

At 17, the Steelers probably take a LT if they don't sign a guy like Lewan in free agency.

The next several picks are probably no.

So we have TEN at 11, NYJ at 13 (maybe), NE at 14 and PIT at 17 as likely landing spots for a LT. That leaves some target areas at 12 and 15/16.

The Texans at 12 seem like the team to target hardest as they already pick earlier in the round.

We saw the Lions go to 12 from 32 last year, giving up 1-32, 2-34, 3-66 for 1-12, 2-46. The swap of 2nds had a value of approximately a late 3rd-round pick. Lions gave up 1410 points and Vikings gave up 1640 or according to Rich Hill model it's DET 435 for MIN 475.

It seems likely the Chiefs would have to give up 1-31, 2-63, and a 2024 2nd. It's about a 1, 2, and 4 for pick 16.
[Reply]

"It seems likely the Chiefs would have to give up 1-31, 2-63, and a 2024 2nd. It's about a 1, 2, and 4 for pick 16."

How high could we get for our 1st a 4th, & next year's 1st?
[Reply]

Looking at some mocks, which it's early, but alot of the bigger guys have 2/3 LT's goin in the first round. If that's the case, I dunno that I'm trading up for one. I'd just sit and wait and see what happens.
[Reply]

Yeah, in this draft class I’m just sure I see a guy who’s worked jumping half a round to get.
[Reply]

Yeah, I don't really either. Sadly, it's really similar to the 2021 draft where we traded for OBJ. I'd imagine they may look at it differently this year in that if you wanted to sit tight or even sit in the 2nd and one of the guys you liked developmentally (the kid from BYU for instance) is there, you could take him and play him at RT for a couple years and then eventually move him to LT if you needed to.
[Reply]