Drafted by us. Only 2 in the last 34 years despite being a factory.

I think with this guy available when he was, this was a no-brainer. Was it a risk, sure…but every draft pick is—-you win some and you lose some. Our boys have done a good job generally speaking.

I’m astonished by all the keyboard warrior dumbasses who think they know more about picking players than the guys we pay to do it. Drafting is not an exact science, but doubting Veatch and the organization on this is pure dumbassery my mind. Sheesh.:rolleyes:

If Simmons is never fully recovered, and a bust, he will be exactly like CEH and FAU and Skyy Moore. A wasted pick that a Super Bowl team with Mahomes at QB can withstand.

If he recovers, and gets back to 100%, this is a FN steal. I personally think there were 2 first round tackles, and we weren't getting up in the top 10, so getting Simmons at 32, a LT with Franchise Pillar upside, could be incredible.

But, again, if he is a bust, so what. We have wasted 1st and 2nd round picks quite a bit recently, and we have been in 5 of the last 6 Super Bowls.

Uhh, obviously. It’s always subjective. But you’re just assuming ex ante he’s the average case. And as more information becomes available, that’s no longer the most informed judgment.

But yes, it’s always going to be subjective. Your analysis is largely based off PFF grades pre- and post-injury. Is that not subjective as well? Does that invalidate the entire study as a result? Of course not.

I said in the draft forum a week ago or so that this pick only makes sense in that you're throwing data aside and saying "So, you're telling me there's a chance?" It's akin to what your saying here. My opinion was, you take that type of shot in round 3, though, not round 1.

It's not a stability issue, it's a power conversion issue with this injury.

Love me some Dante84 draft threads!

Yep. I wasn't a master debater in high school. Guess that a law degree and trial advocacy training don't matter.

Of course, logical fallacies are pretty much meaningless when it comes to real world persuasion (see LW argument that the abortion question turns on "control of her body," while a VERY compelling argument that has moved MILLIONS of people for more than 50 years, it's built on a logical fallacy. The abortion argument CAN'T turn on this question. Instead, it's an obvious case of "begging the question." Logically unsound, but undeniably effective advocacy).

It's not about using subjective PFF grades. The data on ever playing in or starting as many games as prior to the injury is objective and actually less favorable to him than the data using the PFF grade on "return to prior performance." Using that PFF-based metric in the argument for/against drafting him in round 1 increased his odds from 6.5% to 13%, so I used that as a "best case" type of situation. Arguing on purely objective data makes the pick look far worse, not better. Now we're talking 1 case in 25 years and roughly 20-22 players (if we add the guys that have had it since '23) where it truly "worked out."

He really does have to be a "unicorn" as duncan pointed out.

A couple of comments about those injury stats.

First, statistics on "returned to play" are not definitive. Different internet sites show different numbers, but in general roster retention from year to year is about 70 percent or less. I'm being conservative here since most sites show it lower. So if 70 percent of players come back that means that ANY group of 17 players will have 5 who don't return to play the following year. So that means your baseline is that 12 of the 17 return to play. If the post-injury guys come back at a 6 of 17 rate, that's a 50 percent return from injury. Not ideal, of course, but a lot better than 20 or 30 percent.

Second, the 20 to 30 percent figures are from the instant of injury. So when a guy is down on the ground, you can point at him and say, "He's got a 20 percent chance of coming back." From that point on, your knowledge gets better. Two years later, you can point at the same guy and confidently say with 100 percent certainty that he came back or he didn't. So during that two year period, your likelihood of guessing correctly gets constantly better, because you're moving down a timeline from being unsure to being sure. Since Mr. Simmons is X months down the timeline from injury, the odds of guessing his likelihood of returning are a lot better than 20 percent.

Put another way, let's say that we're firing ten simultaneous arrows at a target 100 yards away, and we have a 20 percent chance of hitting the bullseye when we fire each one. Two of them will hit and eight of them will miss.

Now imagine that we can freeze time when those arrows are 25 yards from our bow. We can look at the ten arrows and pretty confidently pick some that are clearly off target, and weed them out. Now we let them move another 25 yards and we do it again. We weed out more arrows that are off target and keep watching the ones that look close. We do it again 25 yards later and we can pretty confidently pick the two arrows that are going to hit the bullseye.

We're not evaluating Mr. Simmons at the moment that his arrow was fired. We're evaluating him well down range, which means we're better able to predict if he's on target or off.

This is going to be a big win for us. The Chiefs organization is competent and well run. I don't care if teams like the Chargers or Bears make a different decision, because they're usually going to be wrong.

This may turn out to be the best chiefs pick since McDuffie - what a steal

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The Chiefs got one of my favorite players in the class to study on film in Josh Simmons. Perfect spot at pick 32. <a href="https://t.co/cStRawdBsR">https://t.co/cStRawdBsR</a> <a href="https://t.co/QG9Z8y71nw">pic.twitter.com/QG9Z8y71nw</a></p>&mdash; Brandon Thorn (@BrandonThornNFL) <a href="https://twitter.com/BrandonThornNFL/status/1915613741665694067?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 25, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I’d have more confidence in a medical evaluation here if they were able to test strength and explosion in the leg.

If him squatting 225 pounds is being touted by his PR team yesterday as positive sign of recovery, I have hard time believing they ran him through tests that would show if the tendon functions as well as it did before the injury. Im not a doctor or PT, but the PhD PT I know told me that’s the true test of the repair - not just is the tendon whole/did it work/is the joint clean, but can the tendon do as much as before - and that the answer has always been that it is less than it was.

I did knock out some 225-lb one-leg squats at the gym today, though, in Simmons honor.

He will be fine. People are always overly afraid of injuries for young players.

A guy like that isn't going to be there in round 3.

You may end up being 100% right about this. I'm a draft nerd, but you pass me by many orders of magnitude and you're one of the people I enjoy reading most in the runup to the draft.

If Simmons flames out - which is possible - you won't see me ever blaming Veach for drafting him. If you're the KC Chiefs you take this chance because it may never come again without burning a bunch of valuable draft capital, which you simply cannot do when you have a franchise QB like Patrick.

I think we look back 3 years from now in amazement that we got an All-Pro LT with the last pick in the 1st round.

Hell, I'm not expecting All-Pro by any means. Give me a solid guy that can stay healthy. Dion Dawkins has been healthy for 99% of Josh Allen's games the last 7 years. Insane luck for Buffalo at the LT spot. Dawkins is not an All-Pro guy, but he's very solid. I'm ready for Buffalo & Allen to jump on the "instability" train at Left Tackle, which Mahomes has been riding ever since Fisher went down in January 2021.