Thanks! And thoughts on the final draft grade?

[JPH83]

Just wanted to give a hat tip to a few people here for their work over the draft season.

Dante for the visits tracker and insane work on getting info on the picks up so quickly

Crow for the immense detail and knowledge provided on prospects. I always learn stuff from you each year. Much appreciated.

Staylor for the mock draft. Amazed we made it, thanks for putting in the effort to keep it on the road man

Coach for starting loads of interesting threads to ponder and general enthusiasm for all things draft. You seem like a real solid dude as well.

And then there's a load of you who know loads more than I do about scheme fits and specific skillsets etc.which includes those above, but also DJ, Duncan, Chris Meck, Run...probably loads of others.

Thanks all, I really enjoy this time of year, and I'm pretty happy with how this year's draft has gone. Reckon I'd give it an -A. What do you think?

[smithandrew051]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The player I'd have ended up losing out of this draft is Nohl Williams.

As I play around with the draft and what I'd have likely done, I just can't see a scenario where I take Williams. It's just awfully hard to know exactly, but I kinda scratch my head whenever I hear "this is such a Spags corner" when he's lived on ball skills and zone ability.

He looks pretty rough in man. And while he's generally physical, I just worry we won't be able to risk him in press because if he doesn't jam the shit out of the guy, he doesn't have the fluidity or burst to stay with him if he frees on the release. And we don't have the athleticism at safety to really cover for that.

Honestly, as I look at Williams I see a Spags safety much more than a Spags corner.

And to be completely honest, I would LOVE him at that spot. If we decided to convert him to FS, I think he and Hicks could be a dynamite long-term pairing back there. And we talk about Watson as though losing him is a foregone conclusion but guys Cook is also a pending FA and has done a HELL of a lot less to deserve a second contract here than Watson has.

I just kinda wonder if Williams won't end up at safety when it's all said and done. And he may be a real monster there if he does.

Was Kendall Fuller the corner we had who looked much better at safety when Thornhill got hurt?

[Dunerdr]

Originally Posted by smithandrew051

Was Kendall Fuller the corner we had who looked much better at safety when Thornhill got hurt?

He did move to it and had a pick in the Super Bowl. Kind of a hybrid slot and safety IIRC.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

The player I'd have ended up losing out of this draft is Nohl Williams.

As I play around with the draft and what I'd have likely done, I just can't see a scenario where I take Williams. It's just awfully hard to know exactly, but I kinda scratch my head whenever I hear "this is such a Spags corner" when he's lived on ball skills and zone ability.

He looks pretty rough in man. And while he's generally physical, I just worry we won't be able to risk him in press because if he doesn't jam the shit out of the guy, he doesn't have the fluidity or burst to stay with him if he frees on the release. And we don't have the athleticism at safety to really cover for that.

Honestly, as I look at Williams I see a Spags safety much more than a Spags corner.

And to be completely honest, I would LOVE him at that spot. If we decided to convert him to FS, I think he and Hicks could be a dynamite long-term pairing back there. And we talk about Watson as though losing him is a foregone conclusion but guys Cook is also a pending FA and has done a HELL of a lot less to deserve a second contract here than Watson has.

I just kinda wonder if Williams won't end up at safety when it's all said and done. And he may be a real monster there if he does.

They're likely going to lose both Cook and Watson, the Williams pick protects that Fulton has a tendency to miss a couple games every year and Watson just missed games last year.

I think it shows how much they do not want to end up in a spot where McDuffie has to play outside and they're stuck with Nazeeh and Josh Williams again.

[MahomesMagic]

Love the draft.

Main reason is that I think the Simmons doomers are overplaying the risk.

The Chiefs looked at his leg and felt good about it. I said if they cleared him I would be excited as the player has Pro Bowl left tackle potential.

Other than the Lott pick every other player seemed like good value and fit a need after.

Liked Royals but didn't love him. Either way I think we broke the streak with Royals of not drafting a playable WR after the 2nd round.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by smithandrew051

Was Kendall Fuller the corner we had who looked much better at safety when Thornhill got hurt?

Fuller looked great as a NCB in Washington, looked...fine...as a boundary corner here. Then he had a nice playoff run as a sort of single high specialist after Thornhill went down.

We kinda tried to make him a CB1 and it was just asking a little too much of him, though he was certainly credible in that role.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Thanks, OP. I'm just a big old nerd with too much time on his hands and a brain that doesn't stop until I'm asleep.

Here's my thoughts on grade:

Present: B+.
I actually really like everything the Chiefs did in this draft, aside from the amount of risk they took on in Round 1. Royals and Smith are excellent fits and should help add some explosion back to the offense. Williams and Bassa and Gillotte are all immediate nice depth pieces, and possible future starters. Anudike-Uzomah doesn't take a step? Fine. Flush him and slide in Gillotte as your cheap partner for Karlaftis on his second deal. Tranquill sucks ass again in coverage? Bassa offers an alternative. Watson gets hurt, Fulton gets hurt, Josh Williams continues to make the staff not trust him? Hello, Nohl. Norman-Lott is probably never a starter, but you can see the value of the player.

So why is it a B+ if I love that all so much? It's Josh Simmons.

I'll reference the Barney Stinson crazy-hot X-Y axis theorem. We'll call it the Duncan Idaho Draft Nerd Risk-Reward X-Y axis. Theory goes, a potential partner must be as hot as they are crazy. If they are crazier than they are hot, you should stay away. For me, Simmons' potential reward factor IS significant. Like, a 9 on a scale of 10. The problem is that I see the risk factor as a true 10/10. The risk is as bad as it can get. I will acknowledge that some might disagree and see the reward factor as higher, or the risk factor as lower (though I think you're layering on an awful lot of hope in that case). But for me, this pick by itself is a D. Maybe a D+ if I inflate my grades a bit.

Simmons - D+ (which, if the team is right, morphs into an A+)
Norman-Lott - B
Gillotte - B+
Williams - A
Royals - A+
Bassa - B+
Smith - A+

Potential: A+.
Because if Simmons is healthy, he's going to be an above-average LT.

Pretty close to Duncan here at B+, except I was higher on Gillotte than Williams.

I had us at a B- at the end of day 2. I was frustrated but wanted to wait until the end of the draft. Glad I was patient bc Day 3 was what really made this draft for me. I love the Royals and Smith picks so much. We helped our QB and got so much value.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Love the draft.

Main reason is that I think the Simmons doomers are overplaying the risk.

The Chiefs looked at his leg and felt good about it. I said if they cleared him I would be excited as the player has Pro Bowl left tackle potential.

Other than the Lott pick every other player seemed like good value and fit a need after.

Liked Royals but didn't love him. Either way I think we broke the streak with Royals of not drafting a playable WR after the 2nd round.

This has been the response by 99% of this board despite the fact that the entire population of players with this injury was compiled to show the risk. I shared it with everyone, and yet the general response remains the same. It's not people overplaying the risk, it is the risk. It's not a representative sample of some segment of players with this injury, it is the entire population. It's like, you can't really refute it. It is it.

The reality of the situation is that we have no idea if this pick is going to work out, and the Chiefs cannot say with any certainty that it will. In Burkholder's opinion, the injury looks as good as it could. That doesn't change 25 years of proof that even the best cases seldom result in a player returning to form. It's okay to be optimistic, but it's another thing to turn a blind eye to reality. Could he return 100% to pre-injury form? Yes. Could it turn out to be a good pick? Yes. We have to hope an incredibly rare thing happens.

You can be optimistic and look at about 60% of all players return to football, but then, when you look at returning to play as many games as they did pre-injury, that number drops to 29%. You look at returning to some metric of prior performance, that number drops to 24%. That's all players, and not all players have to generate power like offensive linemen. Those stats are much more grim. You start looking at 35% return to play and 6% return to play as many games, and return to prior performance. That means the risk is incredibly high. It's not zero, but if you're looking at 30/70 as your most likely best-case odds and 6/94 as reality, it's also a long way from 50/50, much less 80/20 or 90/10 like the populace here seems to think it is.

The stats are there to formulate an educated opinion. It's the reason Burkholder wasn't too keen on it at the onset. Burkholder might feel like Simmons can beat the odds. And hey, we have to hope he does, but I'd say don't tell people that they are overplaying the risk. If anything, most are downplaying the risk.

[Why Not?]

I spend way too much time thinking about football during the fall as is, so I don't do even the shallowest of dives into the draft. I do enjoy reading y'all's stuff though so, thanks. I think this is an A draft, personally.

[poolboy]

im sure J. Paul Schroeppel, MD, the main ortho surgeon that is on the sidelines and the field EVERY Chiefs game signed off on the surgery being ok...the rehab is a different story Im afraid...thats where Burkholder comes in

[MahomesMagic]

Originally Posted by kccrow

This has been the response by 99% of this board despite the fact that the entire population of players with this injury was compiled to show the risk. I shared it with everyone, and yet the general response remains the same. It's not people overplaying the risk, it is the risk. It's not a representative sample of some segment of players with this injury, it is the entire population. It's like, you can't really refute it. It is it.

The reality of the situation is that we have no idea if this pick is going to work out, and the Chiefs cannot say with any certainty that it will. In Burkholder's opinion, the injury looks as good as it could. That doesn't change 25 years of proof that even the best cases seldom result in a player returning to form. It's okay to be optimistic, but it's another thing to turn a blind eye to reality. Could he return 100% to pre-injury form? Yes. Could it turn out to be a good pick? Yes. We have to hope an incredibly rare thing happens.

You can be optimistic and look at about 60% of all players return to football, but then, when you look at returning to play as many games as they did pre-injury, that number drops to 29%. You look at returning to some metric of prior performance, that number drops to 24%. That's all players, and not all players have to generate power like offensive linemen. Those stats are much more grim. You start looking at 35% return to play and 6% return to play as many games, and return to prior performance. That means the risk is incredibly high. It's not zero, but if you're looking at 30/70 as your most likely best-case odds and 6/94 as reality, it's also a long way from 50/50, much less 80/20 or 90/10 like the populace here seems to think it is.

The stats are there to formulate an educated opinion. It's the reason Burkholder wasn't too keen on it at the onset. Burkholder might feel like Simmons can beat the odds. And hey, we have to hope he does, but I'd say don't tell people that they are overplaying the risk. If anything, most are downplaying the risk.

Problem is you are adding in everyone with similar injury.

In this case we aren't getting a random player with the injury but with someone we got to peek into the box with.

I am not saying there is no risk but that the 75% are never the same is Doomer projections.

I don't think the Chiefs draft him if they thought his chance was less than 50% there.

How much higher is it?

Unknown.

[kccrow]

Keep downvoting my ****ing posts. ****ing christ.

[O.city]

The issue is that...you can't know. Like has been said ad nauseum, with stuff like this it's not about the surgery or how it looks now.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by poolboy

im sure J. Paul Schroeppel, MD, the main ortho surgeon that is on the sidelines and the field EVERY Chiefs game signed off on the surgery being ok...the rehab is a different story Im afraid...thats where Burkholder comes in

Sure, they can comment on how it looks and if the grafts were good and if the joint looks sound now.

That's great.

The problem with this injury is that ... well, that's not all there is to it. Until you're completely cleared and trying to max out his use of that leg/joint, you don't know if the knee is as good as it was before.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

Problem is you are adding in everyone with similar injury.

In this case we aren't getting a random player with the injury but with someone we got to peek into the box with.

I am not saying there is no risk but that the 75% are never the same is Doomer projections.

I don't think the Chiefs draft him if they thought his chance was less than 50% there.

How much higher is it?

Unknown.

No, dude. We are not adding in "everyone with a similar injury." The orthopaedic research doctors who did the study on this that was accepted through peer review and published to PubMed is what is referenced, and it separates patellar tendon injuries from quad injuries.

It is not Doomer projection to look at the NFL and NBA guys who have had this injury over the past 25 years and say 75 percent were never the same.

It is basic math.

The risks here are about as risky as risks can get. If he comes back and his knee is 100 percent the same and his abilities and level of play is exactly the same, he will be one of 1-3 EXTREME outliers.

[poolboy]

all I was saying was that the Chiefs ortho doctors signed off on the surgery looking ok..thats about all they can do at this point.
I agree that the next part doesnt look great at all