Because Spags does as well.

Safety

The running back of the defense?

We've used a 2nd round pick and one halfway decent contract on the position since he's been here.

Spags uses them - but he also throws the Dan Sorensen's of the world at the spot.

I think Spags finds them to be important, yes. I also think he feels they can be built rather than bought. I don't think he sees a 'big ticket' need there.

2-down linebacker is probably the RB of the defense.

I'd say safety is probably the TE of the defense. If you have a GREAT one, you're in fantastic shape. But the vast majority of them just have to not suck.

And you're no more likely to find a great one at the top of the draft than the middle of it.

As DJ said, a 2-down LB is the RB of the defense. Safeties are much more valuable. More like the center of your defense or in some cases, QB.

I can agree with this.

I don't think you're paying attention to how the Chiefs use them, though. In a conventional defense, you may well be right. Simple, straightforward skillset usage.

That's not what Spagnuolo does. Our Safeties have to be part linebacker, part traditional strong safety, part free safety, part slot corner. And they need to do any of those things while showing something else on any snap. It's a big part of the defense.

Sam Williams is going to be our “Justin Houston” or “Trey Smith” this year. A guy we get a couple rounds (or more) higher than his talent suggests he goes.

His issue in college is going to have him off many teams boards completely and with this being such a deep class, he’s going to fall quite a bit. I’d love him anywhere after pick 50 and we might be able to get him with 94 or later.

Pickens, to me, has #1 upside if he can just manage to be healthy. Austin on the other hand, he's a guy I can't ever see becoming more than a functional slot on par with Mecole Hardman. I'd be okay with it but I'd rather make that stab for a guy that I think could replace JuJu next year rather than worrying so much about replacing Mecole.

Now, going with Sam Williams at 62 is something I'd definitely consider but that really does force a worse WR pick at 103. It's almost a pick your poison situation. If I'm going for Johnson high, then I'm not as high on going with Williams later because I see both more as WDEs. I'd probably look harder at Cam Thomas if he's there in that situation or a guy like Paschal in the 3rd or Thomas or Clemons in the 4th.

Going with your scenario also changes the approach at CB. I think this team needs to get a CB and I'd like one that could potentially play significant snaps early on. I think that means finding one before the end of day 2. If it's not a CB, I'd like to think it's a FS type that can play the slot. That's one reason I mocked Pitre in my full round 1 option.

I think a Williams/Johnson duo gives you two largely interchangeable guys where you're not really playing a 'shade' w/ an SDE or WDE type DE, but rather two guys that are playing straight 7/9 techniques. And both of those dudes can be that kind of player and provide complementary bookends.

And again - we used Dan Sorensen in that role.

EFFECTIVELY, I will add, until last season.

It's a tweener position. Spags uses guys that aren't fast enough to be a dedicated FS, not big enough to be a LB, not agile enough to be a NCB. He finds an undervalued hybrid player (not unlike Deon Bush) and gets good results out of them.

You don't need a 1st round caliber talent there. And the Chiefs seem to agree as they haven't been nearly as aggressive with that position as many have predicted they would be since Spags got here.

To me we have a 'market inefficiency' at both S3 and at CB. We are able to get really good productivity out of those positions without expending substantial cap/draft capital on them. So why alter course there?

Especially when we HAVEN'T had nearly that kind of success on the DL. So we need to be hunting blue-chippers or at least safer bets there.

I think we get RAPIDLY diminishing marginal returns on our draft capital when it comes to S3. We can put a guy who fell through the cracks that we picked up in the 4th round or even as a UDFA there and get 80% of the productivity we'll get from a 1st rounder. Someone like Hill is just enormous overkill, IMO.

It really depends on how the board shapes up, though. Hill may be overkill but it's still possible he's BPA when we pick.

I'm just not ruling it out. Of course, they'll probably trade up then and it's all moot anyway.

I just don't think 'BPA' is a vacuum analysis. I think raw talent is the most critical component, yes. But scheme fit and yes - need - is also a part of it.

And when I think we can get a guy on the 3rd day or cheap on the FA market to play the S3 role for us, I simply cannot see any scenario where, once that's taken into account, Hill is the 'BPA' for the purposes of this exercise.

Might he have the most raw talent of the available players? Maybe. There's a non-zero chance there. But you DO have to consider what it is your organization does well and what it is your organization needs when determining who the 'best' player for your organization is.

And I just can't see that math spitting out Dax Hill.

What if there's a run on DE and WR before we pick and we don't trade up? Do you do whatever it takes to trade down at that point? Or do you take a TE or something else that would be similar in value to S at this point?

Is Devontae Wyatt there? If he is...I'd take him.