VEACH CANT DRAFT WRs!!!! BUT BUT BUT BUT BUT RICE DOESN'T COUNT!!!!

The CG and SB will be known as The Rashee Rice Game II and III, respectively

Do we feel good about Rice being our #1 WR next season or do whatever we can to get a #1 with Rice slotted in as our #2?

Of course one could argue that Kelce is our #1 and we at least need another #2 type talent at WR to pair with Rice.

Rice has performed as well as any WR ever has in their first year with Andy, so I'm OK with penciling him in as the #1. However, I don't think we can count on Kelce holding up at the same level moving forward, so we definitely need to be hunting for at least some help at the level of a #2.

I'm excited to what Reid does with a whole offseason to build an offense around Rice's skills.

We can probably justify drafting a receiver (WR or TE) fairly early every year.

We carry 5-6 WRs and 3 TEs. Someone will always be getting old, declining, or expensive.

We need another top guy that's around that level of Rice. Get that and this offense will be hard to stop even with Kelce declining. Hell, to be sure I reckon it's still a middling guy in FA and a 1st round WR.

Need a speedy WR that can get separation, track deep balls, and catch them.

It's crazy how hard this feels right now. We have 3 WRs (Moore, Hardman, Toney) who rolled a minus 20 in D&D for "wide receiver instincts", and another two (MVS, Watson) who know how to run routes, but don't track the ball or catch the ball very well, and never fight through contact.

We don't need a #1 - Rice can do that.

But if he's your #1, you need a pretty reliable #2 given that Kelce's likely going to show continued decline.

If you have Rice and a guy who's 90% as good as Rice as your 2nd, with 80% of this year's version of Kelce at TE - you'll be in fine shape.

It is simply criminal that the Chiefs organization has not supplied Veech with a time machine, so that he can jump out a season or two and evaluate the potential draft picks properly.

I don't like looking for a "#2" though. Go look for a potential #1 and go from there.

WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN, lol

Everyone knows but you I guess.

Oh I don't think anyone looks for a lesser player - especially if you're drafting one in the first round.

But I'm going to assume you're making a different argument - notably that you'd rather not trade ceiling for floor. You don't want to pass on a potential #1 for a more sure thing who will be a viable #2.

But...isn't that kinda what we both were eager to do with Emeka Egbuka? I don't think either of us saw him as a potential superstar yet he seemed like such a sure thing as a strong NFL contributor that we'd have been more than happy to take him even if he's less likely than say Legette or Walker to be a 1.

(And if that's NOT what you were trying to say, I have no idea what it may be - are you saying don't look for a complement to Rice but rather just the best collection of skills you can find even if some of those are redundant when paired with Rice?)