This is how we ended up with Skyy Moore instead of George Pickens just sayin

I don't recall the specifics, but if we traded down to get Moore, the trade itself was not responsible for the mistake. The mistake was made in the scouting/evaluation.

I think it was we'll take anyone between Pickens, Moore and Alec Pierce and instead of staying put and taking Pickens we got an extra 5th and Skyy Moore all so we could take Darrian Kinnard. It was the biggest fail imaginable.



also as an aside we don't need a corner in the first...unless THIS GUY falls! Would run naked through the streets if this happened


https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/...travis-hunter/






<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">There are some speedy options in the secondary this year �� <a href="https://t.co/fcFlYb5K1e">pic.twitter.com/fcFlYb5K1e</a></p>&mdash; Kansas City Chiefs (@Chiefs) <a href="https://twitter.com/Chiefs/status/1909313475035513200?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Tyreek? �� <a href="https://t.co/IGX5ONjiB2">pic.twitter.com/IGX5ONjiB2</a></p>&mdash; B/R Gridiron (@brgridiron) <a href="https://twitter.com/brgridiron/status/1909319797248336270?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I don't know why anyone pays attention to Tyreek's tweets. He loves trolling.

When the return is a 3rd day pick (or moving down too far to still control your own destiny) then yes, it is.

I wouldn't give up the 5th year option for any 1st rounder for a mere 5th round pick. Look at how much more complicated it would've made things with McDuffie and/or Karlaftis to not have that in our pocket to use if necessary.

Or how beneficial it could've been in a Chris Jones negotiation.

The option isn't any sort of given, no. But it's a card you have and that has value. That value is greater than a 5th rounder and if you're going to try to start getting 3rd or better, you're moving down a dozen spots or more.

On the trade value charts there is no distinction between moving from 32 to 33 vs. moving from 33 to 34. In fact you gain MORE value moving from 33 to 34 than you do 32 to 33. There's literally zero value placed on the 5th year option in that equation. So from that perspective, your very premise is flawed.

To move down enough to still be confident one of 'your guys' will be there means you aren't moving any lower than about 36 from 31. That nets you about the value of a 5th round pick. That's simply not worth the risk, either in terms of the player you could still get at 36 vs. 31 OR in terms of the potential value lost by moving out of the 1st round.

It's just not a good idea. Everyone falls in love with the idea every season when in reality the answer should be to move up -- just as we did to get Worthy when the board was starting to thin out. The teams that move out of the round usually don't get much for their trouble.

Oh that mock is an easy one to sniff out -- the guy's targeting position groups.

Then if Conerly falls he can say "well I had the Chiefs taking an OL but one of them fell that I had going earlier, so clearly I was still correct..."

They game the shit out of those boards all the time. They end up having no more/less validity than the CP mock where we try to game the board to goose our 'scores' when the draft is finished.

Then there are the even more overtly full of shit ones like when Kiper had us taking Hendon Hooker in the 1st round and said "I know this won't happen but I wanted to have a conversation about Hooker..." In other words, some agent slipped him some insider information to get him to put Hookers name in the 1st round and hope it creates traction for him.

It's ridiculous that this industry still holds the kind of sway they do. Or that they have the audacity to believe that they are out there influencing outcomes. No, X player isn't 'moving up the draft boards' -- you just didn't know about him a month ago. Congrats on catching up at the same rate us slapdicks on the internet are.

It's a silly and antiquated exercise at this point.

Because he decided in February that the Chiefs needed an OL and an RB then ran the table for those guys prior to the Chiefs being up in the round and just took the guy at the top of his Mockdraftable Mock.

Nate Taylor is NOTORIOUS for that shit. He'll decided beforehand what positions the Chiefs are going to take, run a simulated mock draft and then when the Chiefs are up he'll say "The Chiefs are looking OL and this is the guy at the top of the board..." and pick 'em.

That's the extent of his analysis. And that's the Chiefs beat writer. The KCSN guys aren't much better because they'll say "Well Brugler has them taking X and he's available so we'll go that route..."

The information you get on this board is orders of magnitude more useful than the shit those clowns toss out there.

You're putting too much stock in the draft chart. It's only a guideline. The differential in talent between one pick and the next is the true determinant in what will be offered in any trade. Each team will have a different assessment as to how much the pick at #31 would be worth and some will offer more than others while some wouldn't be interested at all. Furthermore, if anyone approached the Chiefs to make that trade, they'd almost certainly need to offer a premium to make the trade.

The 5th year option has value. I couldn't say exactly how much value and I doubt anyone could quantify it in a meaningful way, but I know that picks have a pretty clear value in and of themselves.

The question I answered when this part of the discussion started was what I would do if several players were available at #31 that I'd be more than happy to have and I stand by my answer. I'd field offers to trade down. I don't understand how anyone could disagree with that notion. It does not imply that I would take one of the offers, it merely says that I'd be looking to see if any were worth it. We might disagree on whether any particular offer was worth it, but entertaining offers to trade costs nothing and I think we'd be stupid not to entertain any offers.

Teams have openly admitted that they'll jump online and use one of those draft charts to finalize a trade.

Teams use different charts, but the publicly available ones are seemingly very very close to what these guys are actually using. When you see teams include a 6th round pick for a 7th round pick in the back end of a swap, do you REALLY think that wasn't done using a chart and a calculator? Of course it was -- they're closing up the math using whatever trade chart it is they tend to favor.

It's extremely rare that the return doesn't very closely match the predicted return on the 'charts'. And it seems like when it doesn't, we actually end up on the losing side of the math.

What you're saying is true, but it's also true that some trades are made that vary significantly from what the draft chart would seem to indicate. I recall that the trade the Bears made with the 49ers to move up from #3 to #2 was wildly out of line with the chart.

ETA - I looked up that Bears trade and I overstated things when I said it was wildly out of line with the chart. It was still a bad trade though given that the 49ers were extremely unlikely to take Trubisky with that pick.

49ers convinced the Bears they had an offer on the table from another team wanting to jump them for Trubisky

I love Dane but man. I just can’t get on board with this

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Dane Brugler has the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Chiefs?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Chiefs</a> selecting OT Josh Simmons in Round 1 of the 2025 NFL Draft in his latest mock with Mina Kimes. <a href="https://t.co/A9bjcW0Kt2">pic.twitter.com/A9bjcW0Kt2</a></p>&mdash; Chiefs Blitz (@ChiefsBlitz) <a href="https://twitter.com/ChiefsBlitz/status/1909246798717149265?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 7, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

There is a lot of talk about the kid from North Dakota State, Zabel, going in round one. He apparently has the versatility to play any of the 5 spots on the line, but seems to be targeted more for IOL than at Tackle. If he is still around at 31, would he be a guy Reid might be interested in taking? Reid did go with a Guard in round one while he was coaching the Eagles.

That’s a “**** no” from me.