I’m not 100% familiar with the whole list but several of those are closer to their desired profile just later round guys.

From Albert Breer:

https://www.si.com/betting/giants-su...n-01jq7xzbvjzy

My bet: Grant. He'd be the perfect companion for Jonesy.

They're not going to take a tackle.

If one is in range and KC finds a trade partner...I'm guessing they do. LT and to a lesser degree, CB, derailed the team last season. If you consider 15-2 being derailed...but Thuney is gone. If this new guy gets knicked...could be ruff sledding.

I think they will want Conerly. Just a feeling after more research and new info about him.

we definitely could draft another tackle. But I wouldn't want to reach for one if there is a better football player to take instead. Any position besides QB really. D-line and running back seem deep this year and I'm kind of expecting a DT in the first 2 rounds.

Conerly has pretty well had a 1st round grade since the process started on this class a year ago. I don't see why everyone would have concerns about picking him.

As for DT, the depth of the class favors going LT in the first. You know the likelihood of getting a quality one in 2 or 3 is much higher than normal. Not only that, but most DTs get taken on day 2 of the draft. It's usually rare for a DT to go in round 1. This year, there are a handful that could, and the class is just stacked through the 4th round.

Depending on how they feel about Kingsley, they could if one they like drops far enough.

I don’t think so, but that’s not absolute.

They paid Moore as a guy competing for a OT spot, NOT a foregone conclusion that he’s the starter. It’s a 2 year deal. They also drafted a super high upside project LT in Kingsley. And the back to back year investment in draft snd cap resources sure indicate you’ll end up being right….but they also have mentioned his upside at guard. They have moved on from Wanya at LT.

The Moore signing indicates to me that he will likely get first shot at the job. Can’t ignore that they also have a PERFECT scenario in the draft if we move up a few spots to get Collins and redshirt him.

Normally, while Mahomes is here…we would NEVER have the opportunity to get a kid with his skill set that fits so perfectly in what we want to do….couple that with our training staff that is the best at rehabbing players and getting Collins anywhere after 20 is a move that would be like getting a goose that lays golden eggs…but as a chick.

You know what I’d LOVE to see?

Collins in the first and Kaleb Johnson in the second. The rest can be used to move up and bolster the DL.

Boss, signing off and I’ll listen to responses off air.

What's the story on Humphries? He just disappeared and nobody has mentioned him as potential LT depth/insurance. He must really be cooked for KC not to be interested... I kind of assumed he just wasnt completely ready from his rehab.

I thought he looked like complete garbage when he started one game (not the last game vs the Broncos, I barely watched that one)

Conerly or Simmons?

Haha good catch. Simmons.

KC could have had Tunsil. OP not entirely wrong.

Tunsil is a name. His play is not worth his contract. We'd have another Taylor on our hands. Including the lining up in the backfirld and false start penalities, where he lead the lrague. Dude is also uncoachable. There's the reason why the Texans have been trying to unload this guy for two seasons now. More trouble than what he's worth.

Everybody expects them to trade up and take a tackle. It's still a month until the draft. This is all smoke and mirrors at this point. They won't do what everybody expects.

And for the record, I'm not against taking Conerly is he falls to 31. I'm not giving up extra picks to go get him. He's a solid tackle but I don't see the upside with him, he pretty much is what he is. In the end, I don't think he falls, nor does Simmons. We see guys at OT get overdrafted every year.

My guess: If Simmons should fall to us, they take him in the first... otherwise we take the D-tackle we want and look at a monster of an OT in the 3rd that could use some development

There are a couple of guys in the 3rd or later that are just beasts of human beings that could use a year of polish.

Trapilo and that dude Hollins something...

That's a nightmare scenario for me.,

Simmons is a huge, huge risk. Injury concerns, lack of playing time/proven nature.

And Johnson is a big back who isn't fast enough and doesn't pick up yardage after contact.

Drafting those two 1-2 has a high chance of leaving you 0-2.

Yeah - that's a terrible, terrible idea.

If we go LT in the first, I'll go with Conerly and by a fair bit.

I think the ceilings are awfully close and the floor for Conerly is substantially higher.

Simmons is a guy you take if you HAVE to find a starting OT this year. You take him because if he's healthy, he's probably capable of being an adequate starter in year 1. Conerly, OTOH, I think will get pushed around a fair bit in year 1.

But with Moore in the fold, you don't need that. So you're really looking at 2026 and I think a year of technique/strength worth for Conerly puts him on a similar tier as Simmons (and that's presuming health from Simmons).

If you take either guy expecting a redshirt 2025 then Conerly is an easy call, IMO. It's not the direction I'd go, but it's eminently defensible.

And I just have no interest in Kaleb Johnson at all.

To be fair, we all knew we needed a WR last year and a ton of folks thought Worthy was gonna be a Chief after his record 40.

They need a long term functional LT badly. Maybe that’s Moore. Maybe he’s just a bandaid.

What I do know is that if they think any of these guys is a true long term option, they should probably pull the trigger within reason. If a trade up is needed, it will have to be realistic, not giving up tons of assets. So basically small trade up.

Spot On.

Also I’m a Hawkeye fan and have no interest in Kaleb Johnson.

DJ made some great points. I wonder what the deal is with Jaylon Moore though? They’re giving him a shot to be the long term option right? But would draft his replacement before he even takes the field to prove himself?

So would Moore be a candidate to move to RT to replace Taylor in 2026 in that scenario?

Seems a bit confusing

I mentioned that a bit ago and ultimately I think you end up putting Conerly at RT if Moore appears to be a good fit long-term at LT.

Moore was awful at RT in SF. And if he's a proven, capable LT heading into 2026, why would you move him? UNLESS you just don't want to pay for him, in which case you still have Conerly serve a year-long apprenticeship at RT before moving him to LT in 2027.

I just don't see a scenario where Moore gets kicked over to RT. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

I go back and forth on whether they will take a T at 31. For the last few days, I had been convinced they will.

Now I'm back to thinking they won't. They would've signed a more true stop gap like Humphries or Wills if they wanted to take a T in the 1st, or thought it was likely they will. They went out and got a young guy that they legit think has a shot at being a starting LT.

I think it's more likely that they take a guy on day 2 the more I think about it.

Guess I have to do a new mock again really soon.

Those guys aren't even stop gaps.

I just don't love the day 2 OTs very much.

Ersery is the only one I see where I'm like "Yeah, I'd be stoked to get him" and that feels like a bit of a long-shot.

The rest look like OGs to me. There are so many guys listed as OTs in that range that all look like OGs.

I think ultimately I'd just take the board as it comes. I'm not looking to trade up given our lack of capital on Day 3. I'm not interested in trading down as the juice is never worth the squeeze and I think there is enough depth at our need positions (DE and DT, IMO) that we can probably find a contributor in the 2nd if need be.

So just take the best guy on the board regardless of the position. I don't think I'd go RB, but I'd take Burden if he's there at WR. I wouldn't go OG but if the best player is someone like maybe Zabel who might stick at RT and who has very little risk if placed at G, that would be okay.

By and large I'd just take what I have available to me and be pretty pleased.

Imagine signing one of Humphries/Wills and being pigeonholed into either taking Simmons or having to skip OT altogether in the first since Conerly went off the board already. What a disaster that would be.

Your personal feelings asides they're exactly the kind of signings a team makes when they're planning on taking a guy that position in the 1st too. Obviously with the hope that the rookie would win the job at some point.

Signing Moore is signing a starter for at least this year, and I think they clearly hope he's more than just a stop gap. It would just feel weird to draft a T unless they're thinking about RT too. I don't think Conerly is a fit at RT, and Simmons is a LT if you think he's going to be healthy.

Not "pigeonholed". That would be their target 100%, and they'd likely be agressive in doing so. That's not the same thing.

Jesus I know you get triggered by Humphries but we're talking about past hypotheticals here. Relax.

Now I can totally see a guy like Banks being somebody they never expected to fall into their lap, but they take him when he does. That makes a little more sense.

But Conerly was always going to be in their range. Simmons was always going to come with serious injury concerns in that range. When they signed Moore, it was most likely them passing on those 2.

I am not a big believer in Jaylon Moore but he is more athletic than I thought with solid footwork and seems to have a good idea on how to use his hands and handle bull rushes.

It feels like they needed something now and pulled that trigger bc you never know what will happen in the draft.

I will say that Conerly and Simmons (if he’s cleared medically) are better options than what we’ve seen recently from tackles in the late first rd minus Anton Harrison.

Last year the insane run of QB’s, Bowers and tackles pushed studs like Jared Verse, Dallas Turner and Laiata Latu down the board. It feels like the inverse could happen with a ton of DL, a couple of TE’s, some corners and QB’s. Mocks have shown around 9 DL picked before 31 and so did the CP mock.

One last thing to keep in mind: who needs a LT after the Bears? Maybe the Packers? The Texans if they choose to address it and redshirt a prospect? Anyone else that hasn’t put a big asset recently into that position or already have their guy?

Feels like a damn near lock that one of Simmons or Conerly will be there for us.

No they aren't. They're in the Donovan Smith tier. Guys that get signed after free agency and the draft, potentially even mid season, when a team has already pivoted multiple times. They absolutely are not plan A, B, or C for any team that has a modicum of sense.

I think so too, and I think the Chiefs probably knew this when they signed Moore.

I haven't believed for a second that they would take a RB, but what other position have the Chiefs done less to address?

OL? Added Moore. Moving Kingsley over to LG. Tagged and possibly re-signing Smith.

DL? Re-signed Omenihu. Added Tillery who is a minor drop from Wharton at worst.

WR? Brought Hollywood back.

Elijah Mitchell isn't comparable to any of those guys/moves.

I'm not saying the Chiefs are going to take a RB in the 1st , but it's just as likely as OT IMO. Maybe slightly less only due to position value.

I think DL is still most likely.

Veach would need thrown out of the organization if he signed either one of Humphries or Wills with the intention of targeting Simmons in the draft. That's just inconceivably awful as a hypothetical.

You sure about that? They signed absolutely nobody last year and didn't even take a T until the 2nd round.

Hell they could've signed both, or Donovan Smith, point is if they thought they had their future starting LT in the 1st round of the draft they aren't signing Moore on top of it.

You are so caught up in something and missing the point entirely.

I agree on the tackles.

And while there's things about Johnson not to like, yardage after contact isn't one of them. He was 7th in the NCAa in yards after contact.

It's all about his speed. If he runs faster than the 4.6 people think he will run, he's going to move up boards.

I think his YAC in college will not translate to the NFL. It's not as much about contact balance and elusiveness as it is about size and running over dudes.

If the idea is to get a physical back in this draft, there are better options. And he certainly is not a guy you should take in round 2.

Gun to my head, I think it’s LT for us at 31/first round right now.

Moore is already an unknown, and even if he was good, you’re an injury away from Wanya Morris at LT again.

I just can’t see Andy signing on for that. Think it’ll take a unique BPA situation for it not to be Simmons or Conerly, etc.

Roster right now in my opinion is Super Bowl ready as long as you have LT solidified and maintain better health than you did last year. So hedging at LT makes too much sense.

Can’t let LIX happen again. Between rounds 2-7, they can add the extra juice they need to really icing the cake at other spots.

I want Simmons! And then draft two dts we need to shift our allocated resources to defensive end and left tackle once jones retires

I believe you are spot on in their line of thinking. They absolutely see Moore as a viable, short term starting LT, but if Conerly or Simmons is available they are going to jump all over them. You simply don't get that value at OT without the question marks they have, and this gives you the opportunity to move on from Jawaan Taylor in 2027. If Moore looks good, you can play the rookie at RT after his redshirt year, then have him take over at LT in year 3 of his rookie deal. Pretty ideal situation.

If Omarion Hampton happens to fall, I'm not sure I could pass on him for a tackle prospect, but if there is nobody on their board who moves the needle, then this is definitely an option.

They need to solve the LT issue long term, but I don't think any of the guys there at 31 will be that.

Wouldn't shock me if they go DE/DT.

Simmons has the injury stuff and Conerly doesn't have the exact physical traits Andy desires in his tackles.

Furthermore, there's a good possibility neither of them are starters day 1, meaning you just spent a first round pick to NOT solve the problem you're looking to solve.

I don't think the probability is as high as everybody thinks.

Exactly.

Simmons is if they have confidence in his medicals.

If. I hate that word.

Why? It's totally up to how they view his medicals. Chiefs wouldn't take him unless they're confident in that knee going forward.

Simmons, a fast rb who can catch 2 defensive tackles and a corner / tight end

That’s the draft to me

Simons is likely still recovering from injury week one regardless who drafts him. Which might allow us to get a top 10 player at our pick. We don’t need him we just signed a left tackle. It works perfect. He’ll be ready by week 6 - 10.

Conerly has the traits. He’s super athletic and has the footwork. His foot speed is way better than Kingsley’s which is why I think Kingsley will be a fine G

Jaylon Moore is a damn near perfect hedge for drafting Simmons.

I don't think the problem you're looking to solve is OT in 2025, though.

I think they feel like they've solved that as well as they could've reasonably been expected to.

The problem they're looking to solve is the revolving door at the bookends. And Conerly could do that (Simmons could as well) in that you theoretically have Moore as a possible throughput alongside the rookie for the next 5 years or so before you have to start looking at replacing Moore. Or maybe the rookie is the first step of the long-term plan in that he eventually becomes your LT at RT is an easier fix.

I think you address some longer term issues with OT in the 1st, even if it's not exactly what I'd be focusing on.

I think that 4-man pass rush HAS to improve. That's why I'm looking DL.

To a previous point - there is no 'hedge' for Simmons. His floor is literally that the knee prevents him from ever being the player he was.

And as was noted, if the medicals come out sterling, he's probably a top 20 guy. If they don't...why would you want him?

There's no 'hedge' to taking a guy who's had a knee injury as severe as Simmons in the 1st round. Either that knee comes back right as rain (in which case a 'hedge' isn't necessary and you probably don't get him anyway) or you take him off your board.

Teams will analyze the medicals differently, and some won't take him regardless of how they look

Kingsley's traits are fine - his brain just gets in the way.

His kick slide and footwork are more than adequate at OT when he's decisive in his movements. It's not his feet that kills him -- its his head.

I don't think Conerly's physical traits are on par with Kingsleys - the latter is just more physically impressive to me. But he's more comfortable from what I can see. He uses his angles well to address his weaknesses in strength and length.

Which means they aren't clean.

It's like marriage -- if you have to ask, the answer is probably no.

If there's room for significant disagreement with the medicals, he's not a 1st rounder, IMO.

Because I will again reiterate that I don't think he was THAT great a prospect before the injury. He was good -- probably top 15. Not ahead of Campbell, IMO. Maybe not ahead of Membou.

I'm not taking a massive medical risk on an injury of that significance for a 15 spot discount. This isn't a Jeffrey Simmons situation where I thought that guy was a damn monster before the injury.

I thought Josh Simmons was...fine. A good prospect. But not someone we don't see in a lot of years and someone that goes in that 12-18 range. With that kind of injury risk and "medicals being evaluated differently" that's a guy I put in the back of the 2nd into the middle of the 3rd.

Don't want him personally. Right now my preference is to double down on DL with 31 and 63 or 66. But it wouldn't shock me at all if they went that route.

Matt Miller said he’s heard around the league that the Packers want a tackle early. That might hurt be our competition for a guy we want.

Also I think Ersery has the potential to be a solid RT replacement for Jawaan. Would take him at 63 or via a trade up after taking a DL in rd 1. He’s not a LT to me but has RT potential.

Anyone heard if Veach was in on the Tunsil trade at all? I know many think he isn't good at run blocking but he is still an elite pass protector.

I'm a huge believer in not taking guys with medical concerns that early. If he checks out, sure take him. But going into the process starting with an "if" just isn't a good thing to me.

If he's not the starter week 1, why draft him? The whole reason people want a LT is to solve the problem, not to acquire another throw of the dart.

Doesn't have ideal size or arm length. Not saying that's bad, it's just not ideal.

Hey man, don't look at me. I have no illusions they're trying to solve the immediate need. But just take a look at this thread - the majority here think taking a 1st round tackle solves the immediate problem and that's why they want one so bad.

The combine measurements were supposedly bullshit this year. That's why so many guys measured short. Pro days have been more accurate and he measured in at 34" arms. He just makes the cut.

This.

Cowherd says an NFL exec told him the Steelers like Milroe and will take him in the 1st round LMAO

https://x.com/steelersdepot/status/1...907669017?s=46

Please be true. The more QBs the better.

They were turning down offers to trade him. Apparently Veach asked last year.

They look like bullshit when you have a bunch of 6'6" to 6'8" guys measuring at 33". It just doesn't seem right, especially en masse. When I watched the footage, it didn't look like they were taking measurements in the normal fashion. Very odd. Some of these guys, you look at them on tape and you can tell they have long arms and are keeping guys out of their chest and then they measure in at 33" and you're like WTF? I think you're totally onto something.

Yeah, I wasn't talking about combine measurements. I just knew that Conerly's arms were on the shorter side. He's a good player with a solid floor. I just wouldn't trade up for him. I don't think he's worth that much and I don't think he's guaranteed to start right away. He would essentially be another arrow in the proverbial quiver. If they're going to throw numbers at it anyway, I'd rather have more speed at 31.

Well, see, Veach placed a Chiefs scout on the arm measurement team with an incorrectly marked tape measure.

No one gives a damn what I think, but there is a -0% chance we go LT at #1

We already have 3 different inexpensive, in house LT options ready to battle it out in camp... the best D lineman on the board is the only sane choice

Then gimme a 4.4 or better back with hands at #2, none of this 220 dudes running a 4.5 at best who can't get outside vs NFL defenses... we need triples and homeruns, consistent 30-60 yarders

We need greasy fast speed at RB, its time to spend big on a Henderson type

Are the "physical traits" something we're just conjuring up in our heads or hearing from talking heads? What is it? Because all of you guys that keep regurgitating this as truth can look at them right here and tell me how one is so much better than the other...

Suamataia
6'4-5/8", 34-1/4" arms, 326 lbs, 10-5/8" hands, 5.04 40, 1.74 10 split, 28" vertical, 9'2" broad, 31 reps

vs

Conerly
6'4-5/8", 33-1/2" arms, 311 lbs, 10-3/8" hands, 5.05 40, 1.71 10 split, 34.5" vertical, 8'7" broad (arm length is debatable; pro day is 34" and probably more accurate than combine)

The guy who played better, looked smoother on tape, and did it against better competition happens to be Conerly, too.

I hated Kenny Pickett as a prospect, but I respected the Squealers for at least trying.

For this one? No. They do not deserve an A for effort.

Potato salad.

If you want Speed Score hero then it's Bhayshul Tuten. He's right there with Pacheco in that area.

For what it's worth, Mike Tice thinks Conerly is the best OL in the class.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Episode is out now! And it did not disappoint.<br><br>We talked about 11 OL prospects, including a surprising choice from my dad for his OL1 in this class (that I endorse!) <a href="https://t.co/8yREk9O9Uk">https://t.co/8yREk9O9Uk</a> <a href="https://t.co/NivI5obiM4">pic.twitter.com/NivI5obiM4</a></p>&mdash; Nate Tice (@Nate_Tice) <a href="https://twitter.com/Nate_Tice/status/1905441624572002811?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 28, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

For the record, my opinion on Conerly was lodged prior to the combine. I watch a ton of B1G football and I watched him all year. I've said it several times - he kind of reminds me of a poor man's Rashawn Slater. He's obviously a little smaller, you can see it on tape. But he's smart and has good technique.

I'm not against taking Conerly at 31. I'm absolutely against trading up for him.

It would be aggressive to the point of reckless but IF they traded down with KC and took Dart with that 1st (you don't want to come out of the 1st and lose the 5th year on him) it might make some sense for them.

Or if they trade down with anyone else in the late 1st.

I'm not seeing Milroe but I could see him being used as a smokescreen to get their hands on Dart.

I don't think it's a wise pick but man, if you need a QB (and they do) you've gotta take some swings. Dart has some NFL skills -- the rest is just how well he develops.

It's a defensible decision.