If Hamptons there vs Loveland I'd be sweating. Probably go Hampton myself. But I agree.

I'd take Luther Burden before I did that..

Does it concern you that he plays next to a guy that is expected to go in the top of the draft?

I'd be surprised if Luther makes it past 15-18. He might slide a little, but the tools are there and I think he's going to interview extremely well. He's a driven kid, has some of that WR diva stuff to him but he typically channels it extremely well into confidence rather than arrogance.

I don't think he'll be a turnkey superstar. He needs to learn the route tree a little better, needs to tighten up his route running. Needs to stop getting himself killed out there; goddamn does he take some gnarly and completely unnecessary hits.

But I think he'll be one of your more conventional "year 3 leap" sort of WRs who has a really nice progression arc.

I think a big part of that is getting hung up trying to meet "needs" in the draft. If you just look at LTs, which everybody wants, the pickings are probably slim at 32. That's why you can't approach the draft with a "must do this" attitude.

Is Hampton RB2 in this class for you?

In a vacuum he's probably RB2, yes.

I just like Henderson more for us. But I also recognize that Henderson probably can't hold up to 250 touches and Hampton probably could.

I mean it's hard to not call Jeanty RB1. The production was just SO loud. And he absolutely has the tools.

But after him, yeah -- Hampton is RB2, Henderson probably 3, Sampson 4, Johnson 5 (just not explosive enough) and Judkins 6.

After him -- hell, I might like Tuten more than anyone left. Then maybe Jordan James, Neal and....uh...Sanders out of South Carolina?

I mean there's just not a lot of separation to me after that top 5.

We have lots of needs.

And so people keep convincing themselves that every player at every need position we have will be taken.

But we don't have UNLIMITED needs. While other teams have needs at positions we don't, those guys are gonna come off the board. We don't think about them much because we aren't really looking at 'em, but other teams are.

Yea, after that group, I'm probably out. Give me a guy like Khalil Herbert instead on a cheap deal.

He's going play next to Chris Jones. The only people that should be worried are every single offense that has to deal with that for the next few years.

Nah, you watch some video on him, he jumps out. He'd be a perfect running mate for Jonesy.

You gotta let us know who else is on the board to make that determination

Well Loveland is a guy that would take a very unexpected fall, so assuming nobody else like that does, would you take him over the pocket of guys we're expecting in that range.

Ultimately, you just have to keep stacking good football players. It almost doesn't matter what position.

It matters a little bit.

Not in the sense of chasing need, but in the sense of trying to form an offensive identity. And if you're specifically looking to recapture the explosive offense than Mahomes was running back through the end of the Hill years, then yeah - the position and the skill sets do matter.

There are benefits to both approaches, but it's possible that the team has a target they're specifically striving towards in terms of style and identity. If that's the case, specific positions and tools do matter.

I'm less interested in speed in a TE. Now they cant be a lumbering stiff but Kelce has taught me understanding football nuances is more important to move the sticks.