Yeah but can he dunk?

We keep talking like this kid is borderline paraplegic. I'd take 80% Simmons over anything that's available. How else do yall expect to land a top level LT?
They are rarely available in free agency. You wanted to move up for a lesser player like Conerly who the Texans passed on, despite having a dire need at the position?
We never pick in the top 10. So, what other solution do you offer in acquiring one?

What? Dude, I've thumbed up your posts in this thread even though I dont' agree with you in the "cross" forum... Grow up.

I guess that's the glory of having my Chiefs cup run over. I just don't care.

I thought before the draft that it was a terrible idea. I still, logically, think it's pretty dumb to expect a guy to come back from something like this when history says it won't happen.

And yet I don't care. We will be back in the AFC Championship game again with or without him.

I wasn't talking about you...no worries.

I'm generally OK with it, especially if the Chiefs did their due diligence on the knee.

Sometimes you have to take risks when you constantly draft at the end of the first. If we hit on Simmons, then it extends our super bowl window for the rest of Mahomes career.

That's a risk I'm willing to take.

Bingo. This isn't a binary situation where Simmons is either perfectly healthy or irreparably injured.

Simmons at 100% is a Pro Bowl or possible All-Pro caliber prospect. If Simmons only recovers to 80-90%, that is a starting caliber LT prospect. Wouldn't we take that at 31 and have years of cost-controlled steady play there? I think so.

And you can call this BS, biased hyperbole, whatever… but Ryan Day swears that Simmons would have been the best offensive tackle in the country next year if he had returned to Ohio State.

Day also has intimate knowledge of Simmons’ injury/recovery… doesn’t sound like he thinks it will be a long term issue.

If he'd never have been injured I think he would have (or should have) been the 1st Tackle taken. My concern is with the injury and not the player.

My worry is that he'll be very much like older Roaf - he's a beast that will have to deal with flare ups and sit weeks or months throughout his career.

Three of the most intelligent, rational, logical posters this board has to offer:

I don't like the pick and here is the data showing why this is a bad idea.

ChiefsPlanet:

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/pr...dkidLNCAPM33ZD

History seems to be on a case-by-case basis, here is Correll Buckhalter running for 113 on us and 26 in the air four years after his "second" patellar tendon tear.

https://www.denverpost.com/2009/12/0...in-buckhalter/

https://www.espn.com/nfl/news/story?id=1864138

If he recovers to 90% he's out of the league before his rookie contract is over.

How do you guys continue to miss this fact?

Guys that are 90% healthy aren't 90% as good. The NFL doesn't start at zero. It STARTS at the 90th percentile. There's a decade long selection filter that ensures that guys who are 90% as good as the guys who actually make it in the league don't even get a SHOT.

This is just wrong. Absolutely and completely wrong.

90% of Aaron Donald MIGHT be an NFL football player. 90% of Trent Williams probably is.

90% of some rookie is....a UDFA.

It's just silly.

Alright.
So, what is your solution? Stay put and hope for something better next year?

The reality is there was no reasonable solution in the draft this year. Admit to that and adapt. The only option was to overpay a FA or trade for someone.

We didn't. We signed a guy who's only been a b/u we hope can become a dependable starter. We repeated the same actions of drafting a guy who's a longshot to work out once again. He only fell to us because every other NFL team felt he was too risky to take in the 1st round.

I stated this after the SB and I'll say it again - pay what it costs to get a legit LT. If that's two firsts and two thirds that's the cost. No cutting corners, no long shots, just do it. Bite the bullet, move up for a top prospect, take the highest possible odds of it working.

I don't disagree with the need to solve the LT problem - I agree. In fact I'm willing to sacrifice more to fix it. A guy who might not play at all this year does not fix the problem. A guy who might play 2 years and be done does not fix the problem.

I would not have traded for Tunsil. I would not have signed the LT we did. I would not have spent a draft pick on a LT.

I would have done ALL these things to guarantee the problem is fixed. I would have, absolutely, overcompensated because the need is that great.

Veache nailed this the more I sit back and evaluate how he went about adressing the LT situation. Immediately upgraded the position in free agency with the Moore signing, while not capstrapping the team longterm. Drafted his future replacement in what was considered the best LT prospect in the draft.

Most football experts hailed the pick as an A+. Few even brought up the medical concerns. Which are there. But, this needed to be done. You have to swing and be bold in this league. Not stay dormant and hope for the best.