![]() |
Something I've been bouncing around in my head last 24 or so hrs,
in this cap era, seems like every team has a weakness, every year. Ya can't put together a perfect team. You obviously wanna prevent them as much as possible especially at critical mass positions (see LT last year)... but there's always going to be something that threatens your team from reaching the goal. But, is there ever a good reason not to take the BPA on your board in the draft? Assuming it's clear cut who the top guy is. For example, let's say KC enters the draft with only Tranquill and Leo at LB. In theory the position is relatively weak short and long term. You feel like you should take one early. But it lines up where your BPA by far are guys at RB, DT, CB in some order early on. You never really have a LB on the board you love or think is a long term answer. Is it not better to just say, well, damn LB might be a weak link we gotta work around for a year, but we're going to turn (insert position) into a mega strength? You need a bunch of good to great players to win Super Bowls and be a dynasty (see draft classes 2021-22). Does it matter what positions they play, or is it just a race to have 20+ good to great players every year and you figure out how to leverage those strengths best from year to year? |
The issue with drafting for “needs” is you don’t really know what needs are yet and you miss out on things.
If we’d have taken BPA we’d probably have Porter Jr and mcduffie at cb |
Quote:
Mike Hughes, Daniel Sorenson, Ben Neumann, Anthony Hitchens, Alex Okafor and then older declining vets in Frank Clark and Tyrann Matheiu. Feels like that’s where we are on offense now. Granted they’ve gotten a good start with Rice/Worthy but man they need to inject real talent and youth into some of these positions on offense. To your point, DL looks incredible this year. I would think getting one of those beasts would be a priority as BPA in rd 1. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
The only way paying Trey makes any sense at all is if you're done with Thuney and honestly Trey isn't a perfect fit in the Chiefs scheme. |
Paying Trey Smith would be incredibly annoying. On any given Sunday this season he'd be the second worst OL on the field for the Chiefs and there were a couple games he was worse than the rotating door of sadness at LT.
|
Quote:
Like I think Trey Smith would look like a dominant monster if he played for Detroit but he's in an offense that is nothing like that. |
Quote:
One would think Kingsley will be a better pass blocker than run blocker as a guard. That might help us to better handle Taylor's spacing. |
4/60 would be way too rich IMO but I've come to accept these things over the years.
|
Quote:
|
If Bolton and his agent are being honest about his value he'll look at Patrick Queens contract and look to marginally top that. So somewhere around an AAV of 14.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I think they are going to keep him though bc Trey is way overpriced and running Spags defense requires football IQ that Bolton and Reid provided on the back end. I don’t think Spags wants to lose both guys. I think he’s been hammering to Veach that they must keep Bolton |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.