ChiefsPlanet - 2024 WR Class

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Saccopoo Memorial Draft Forum (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=29)

- - 2024 WR Class (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=350534)

Remember, these draft heads had Skyy as a potential first round pick.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm sure someone has already said it but I'm hoping #15 holds another receiver workout "camp" like last year and tells Veach who he wants. PMII liked Rice last year and it turned out pretty good. Why not do it again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmax63 (Post 17388946)

If not this year, it will be next, that Veach uses one of these "Camp Mahomes" things into a smokescreen that gets folks biting on WRs they weren't looking that hard at.

Because there are some really dumb, lazy front offices in this league.

DJ, what do you think about Sanders at 31/32 if he lights up the combine like people expect?

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 17388770)

I also think Ja'Tavion Samders needs to be in the conversation. I think he will be after the combine. Him and Kelce would be ****ing insane, and help keep Kelce fresh.

This of course would have to come with a significant WR signing in free agency.

Not sure we'd need a significant WR signing in that scenario bc Sanders would be a WR here like Kelce.

I would love nothing more than to destroy defenses in 12/13 personnel the way the Patriots did with Gronk/Hernandez.

That's such a difficult offense to defend. God it would be awesome

Quote:

Originally Posted by staylor26 (Post 17389172)

DJ, what do you think about Sanders at 31/32 if he lights up the combine like people expect?

Presume you mean Ja'Tavion?

Wouldn't be opposed to it. Not sure if he'd be my BPA at the time, but in a thin TE group, he's one of 2 guys that seem to present a possible difference-maker skill-set.

And I think Andy would get a TON of production out of him during that rookie deal.

My question with Sanders is really whether or not we're a year early with him still. Do we NEED to get a guy because he's a turnkey move TE just yet? Because that's still Kelce. Can't we lean more heavily into Gray to take some load off Kelce? And ultimately would a developmental TE like Johnson or Knox be someone who could be turned into a true Kelce replacement in a season or two at the cost of a much later pick?

I'm still not whole-hog on TE and I think LaPorta, who many people cite as a reason we SHOULD'VE gone TE in the first last year, actually shows why we shouldn't. He wouldn't have been that kind of player here this season. Probably not next. But we'd have had to use that sort of capital on him anyway.

Do you get diminishing returns by going earlier than you have to?

Then again, the wall can hit hard. I thought we could afford to wait on a downfield Z like Hyatt because we had MVS for a year and could get that sort of player this season. Then MVS was hot garbage and a rookie with downfield speed might've been nice. Do I think the wall approacheth for Kelce? No, not quite. He'll continue to decline a bit but still be a top 3 TE. Does that truly need a 1st day replacement? Nah, probably not.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut (Post 17389178)

I agree, and he wouldn't be my first choice, but my thinking is that if the top WRs and DTs are off the board, and there's no LT they love, he might just be BPA.

I'd love to get my hands on Kyle Pitts here somehow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato (Post 17387674)

I'm starting to believe we've got Coleman and Franklin flipped, or at least the league does. Seems like the pros expect Coleman will go #4 and Franklin #5 or #6 WR off the board. I can't quite figure it out, but scouts and draft heads just aren't quite as high on Franklin as we are yet and despite the lack of production routinely take Coleman over Franklin, and even occasionally have him taken in the top 15. Must be his frame, athletic traits, and youth?

I heard Coleman compared to Mike Evans today and thought hmmmmm, isn't that who most of CP has been clambering for all year? You know, that guy with 10 consecutive 1k yard seasons. Turns out he had question marks around his separation coming out of college too.

Their scouting reports sound pretty similar:

Spoiler!

PFF guys seemed a just a tiny bit dismissive of Legette's performance at the Sr Bowl. I got the perception they were saying "he was fine, but he didn't stand out much either."

Franklin,
Coleman,
Thomas Jr,
Legette

Those are the only WRs I'd consider at our spot in the 1st. If Franklin's within reach, I say go up and get him because he's the best fit for what the Chiefs like to do on offense, but If not, at least one of these guys is going to drop to us at the bottom of the first. Remember that 6 is still the record for the amount of WRs taken in the 1st and there's already 3 names that are dead locks ahead of my list here.

I'd be excited about anyone of these guys!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato (Post 17389324)

I'll add to this that I've got a growing theory that the 2nd round is where the value will be at WR. Not that we'll wait to pick one there, but hear me out... I forget which draft head said this but he ranked 11 WRS in the top 50 this year, highlighting how good the WR class is. If 6 WRs is the most ever taken in a round, it seems likely that 1 of those WRs in the top 50 would fall to us in the bottom of the 2nd.

Add to the above the price of moving up in the 1st is expensive, and the value for trading down from the 1st into the 2nd (thanks KCrow) isn't there, maybe our best value at WR would be trading up from our 2nd into the middle of the 2nd round so that we can have our pick of one of the remaining 3-4 WRs ranked in the Top 50? Trading up in the 2nd seems to be a lot more equitable. I noted a few teams that moved up 9-12 spots in 2nd for a 3rd when doing some research as a reference.

Seems this has been Veach's strategy for several years, I wonder if I might be on to something here?

Sanders in round 1 or after a small trade back into round 2 wouldn’t be a bad way to approach it if you commit to the 12 set as your base.

If you run 12 as frequently as you have run 11 in the past, I’d look at it no different than committing to a WR instead.

Either way, you’re talking about a starter-level receiving target.

Sanders with the first pick/Roman Wilson with the 3rd would be an intriguing way to attack it,
iMO.

Quote:

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho (Post 17389382)

How do you guys feel about Johnny Wilson as a TE at the bottom of the 2nd or in the 3rd round? Andy could move him all over, we could put some weight on him and convert him to Travis's eventual replacement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RunKC (Post 17389176)

Glad to see support for going for a 2TE approach. Gives us a good receiver, and an eventual replacement for Kelce. Depending on who’s available maybe use our number 1 pick on a TE , UNLESS FRANKLIN IS AVAILABLE, and 2 on a WR. I agree it would probably be better value to trade up in round 2 that in round 1.

I don’t understand why there’s a feeling Laporta would not have worked out for KC. He wouldn’t have done as well as he did in Detroit in all likelihood, but would have been a much better receiver option than what we had beyond Rice and Kelce.