Trade whatever possible for a LT prospect

[RunKC]

I don’t care. If there’s a LT in this draft that they feel can be a good quality LT, do it.

I don’t care if it would cost three 1st rd picks. Mahomes is not gonna be this athletic for much longer.

It needs to happen

[RealSNR]

Ersery probably won’t be ready to play year 1.

We do have Jaylon Moore this time around, but I’d hate to see us have to convert HIM to guard as well

[nychief]

I'm starting to think if there is a run on D-linemen that leaves us at 31 with options we don't love, we will go ahead and get a top RB or CB. I think the LT talk is just that... at least in round one. Look if Simmons is there, then have that conversation, but I doubt he makes it that far.

[O.city]

I don't hate drafting a CB but they also just signed one in FA.

I'd like to get some immediate contribution from the first rounder this year....

[louie aguiar]

Chad Reuter has us moving up for Ersery in his latest mock draft. Drafting him would give him an opportunity to sit and learn his rookie year- we wouldn’t have to throw a rookie into the fire in 2026 the way we did with Kingsley.

https://www.nfl.com/news/seven-round...raft-round-one

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by O.city

I don't hate drafting a CB but they also just signed one in FA.

I'd like to get some immediate contribution from the first rounder this year....

Where is a round 1 rookie guaranteed to step in and be a starter on this team? I’m not sure there’s a spot.

Maybe if you get Derrick Harmon he can force his way into the NT spot.

If you take a RB round 1, maybe. But still sharing with Pacheco this year, same as a guy you draft later.

I suppose it’s possible a LG drafted round 1 would be an immediate starter, too. Or perhaps a S.

But I don’t think we’ll see the matchup of positions and availability for KC here.

[Jerm]

Originally Posted by louie aguiar

Chad Reuter has us moving up for Ersery in his latest mock draft. Drafting him would give him an opportunity to sit and learn his rookie year- we wouldn’t have to throw a rookie into the fire in 2026 the way we did with Kingsley.

https://www.nfl.com/news/seven-round...raft-round-one

Move up for someone who’s a consensus second rounder and then he doesn’t even play in 2025…..

Yeah I’m gonna say no thank you lol.

[staylor26]

Originally Posted by louie aguiar

Chad Reuter has us moving up for Ersery in his latest mock draft. Drafting him would give him an opportunity to sit and learn his rookie year- we wouldn’t have to throw a rookie into the fire in 2026 the way we did with Kingsley.

https://www.nfl.com/news/seven-round...raft-round-one

Yuck.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by staylor26

Yuck.

Not even worth worrying about.

There is ZERO chance we trade up for Ersery.

Honestly, I think there's zero chance we stay put and take him.

That's just another lazy analyst who decided the Chiefs were taking a LT in February, ran his mock, got to the end and just looked at the top of the draft simulator he was using and plugged in the guy at the top of the OT category.

Because 90% of these guys are ****ing bums. They bring NOTHING to the table.

There are a half dozen guys (or more) on this board that bring more informed analysis to these picks than the vast majority of these draft analysts.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

Where is a round 1 rookie guaranteed to step in and be a starter on this team? I’m not sure there’s a spot.

Maybe if you get Derrick Harmon he can force his way into the NT spot.

If you take a RB round 1, maybe. But still sharing with Pacheco this year, same as a guy you draft later.

I suppose it’s possible a LG drafted round 1 would be an immediate starter, too. Or perhaps a S.

But I don’t think we’ll see the matchup of positions and availability for KC here.

This is true

I kinda wonder if safety might work out...but that's not great value me thinks.

It's a perfect time to just sit tight and take BPA, position be damned (minus RB).

[DJ's left nut]

Yeah, I just ran a couple 'full league' 1st rounds.

The worst player I can reasonably have available to me without just being silly is Kenneth Grant.

And obviously that depends somewhat on how you value guys (i.e. you value Harmon/Nolen's ceiling more than Grant's floor), but I left Sanders on the board and I left Booker on the board as well. And I didn't push anyone like Zabel up. The only thing I did that I wouldn't normally do myself was send Hampton to Washington but man, why WOULDN'T they take Hampton? He'd be a really nice fit for them. So I don't think I was being unreasonable there. I sent Starks to the Vikings -- that is a close one but they've gotten so much value out of a Harrison Smith that I could see them wanting to continue that sort of defense (and they let Cam Bynum walk this offseason. I did send Pearce to Baltimore and I just don't think that's even a little controversial. Lots of folks have him sliding to the 2nd now but he just looks like a great fit as a 3-4 OLB and pure edge rusher for them. I think they'd absolutely love to have him.

And frankly, I forced Harmon to Buffalo just to take him off the board. That's not a perfect fit -- I just did it to do it and make the board leaner. Honestly, they'd probably prefer Grant.

So that left Grant, Tyleik Williams, Trey Amos and Booker still sitting there as possibilities as well as JT Tuimoloau. Harmon, Nolen, Conerly and Simmons are all gone in this scenario.

That's a couple guys that I think would be nice gets (Grant and Williams) in that spot as well as a few more than I'd be just fine taking -- I'd take them OVER Ersery and damn sure wouldn't give up a 3rd to get there.

I mean the Chiefs gave up the pick that Baltimore used on Darien Porter, who tested out of this world and who has premier ball skills to go with lengh and enough physicality. If the Chiefs gave up a 3rd to move up for Ersery that would be akin to trading Kenneth Grant and Darien Porter for an OT who's not an appreciably better prospect than Kingsley was last year.

And the justification for the move is "Well he wouldn't have to play..." so you already set at least 20% of his draft pick value on fire but just resigning yourself to redshirting him.

It's dumb. And Brett Veach isn't dumb.

It's not gonna happen.

[kccrow]

I think it boils down to this for me, personally...

If I can't go get Banks or Conerly either at all or for a reasonable price, I'm sitting at 31 and sprinting to the podium with my pick of JT Tuimoloau. Yeah, he might be a slight "reach" by many analysts boards, but I don't see a better fit at DE for this particular team than him. I think he has a similar floor to Karlafits but a higher ceiling. I just think having two guys like George on this defensive line is huge.

So much is made about how Omenihu takes pressure off George and Jones, and I just think to myself that Omenihu isn't even that great. He's solid, but another guy as good as George or even better is an enormous improvement over anything Omenihu offers. This DT class is deep enough that you're going to get value in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. I'm happy waiting on that.

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by louie aguiar

Chad Reuter has us moving up for Ersery in his latest mock draft. Drafting him would give him an opportunity to sit and learn his rookie year- we wouldn’t have to throw a rookie into the fire in 2026 the way we did with Kingsley.

https://www.nfl.com/news/seven-round...raft-round-one

Just absolutely stupid.

Not even worth those 3 words. Crazy that they would trade UP to take that guy, especially in a mock where a superior prospect for their "needs" ends up going #38.

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Yeah, I just ran a couple 'full league' 1st rounds.

The worst player I can reasonably have available to me without just being silly is Kenneth Grant.

And obviously that depends somewhat on how you value guys (i.e. you value Harmon/Nolen's ceiling more than Grant's floor), but I left Sanders on the board and I left Booker on the board as well. And I didn't push anyone like Zabel up. The only thing I did that I wouldn't normally do myself was send Hampton to Washington but man, why WOULDN'T they take Hampton? He'd be a really nice fit for them. So I don't think I was being unreasonable there. I sent Starks to the Vikings -- that is a close one but they've gotten so much value out of a Harrison Smith that I could see them wanting to continue that sort of defense (and they let Cam Bynum walk this offseason. I did send Pearce to Baltimore and I just don't think that's even a little controversial. Lots of folks have him sliding to the 2nd now but he just looks like a great fit as a 3-4 OLB and pure edge rusher for them. I think they'd absolutely love to have him.

And frankly, I forced Harmon to Buffalo just to take him off the board. That's not a perfect fit -- I just did it to do it and make the board leaner. Honestly, they'd probably prefer Grant.

So that left Grant, Tyleik Williams, Trey Amos and Booker still sitting there as possibilities as well as JT Tuimoloau. Harmon, Nolen, Conerly and Simmons are all gone in this scenario.

That's a couple guys that I think would be nice gets (Grant and Williams) in that spot as well as a few more than I'd be just fine taking -- I'd take them OVER Ersery and damn sure wouldn't give up a 3rd to get there.

I mean the Chiefs gave up the pick that Baltimore used on Darien Porter, who tested out of this world and who has premier ball skills to go with lengh and enough physicality. If the Chiefs gave up a 3rd to move up for Ersery that would be akin to trading Kenneth Grant and Darien Porter for an OT who's not an appreciably better prospect than Kingsley was last year.

And the justification for the move is "Well he wouldn't have to play..." so you already set at least 20% of his draft pick value on fire but just resigning yourself to redshirting him.

It's dumb. And Brett Veach isn't dumb.

It's not gonna happen.

Agree that Veach and company are not dumb. They are not going to make a dumb, desperate move, and that's what some of these "forced" fits are.

Even folks I respect that try to cover the whole draft - like Sam Monson and Steve Whazziname - do stupid stuff. They released a 3-round mock that I listened to WAY too much of today, in which the Chiefs took Donovan Jackson in Round 1 because "he can play Tackle OR Guard!" - again, with Conerly available, with Matthew Golden available.

I sighed in disgust and scrubbed forward from there to see what they did for KC in round 2 - and they still had Mason Taylor on the board and sent him to KC. Which, yeah, sure, KC would PROBABLY run to the podium to turn in a card with his name on it at 63. But that's not happening.

I should have stopped at that point, but jumped ahead two picks to their pick at 66... where they sent Kevin Winston to KC (with several of the tier 2 DL and DE still available). That finally got me to stop and turn it off.

I still think the only outcome where the Chiefs trade up is for Harmon or Nolen, if they make it into the mid-20s (unlikely). And that all this smoke about a T is cover for their true goals there.

More and more, I think they sit and see how the board falls to them.

To me, Plan A is PROBABLY to try and go get Harmon if he gets into a zone they're comfortable with. With Plan B being to sit at 31 and hope they can get one of the Saints or Giants to trade up a few spots to come get a QB.

Jaxson Dart falling to 31 would probably be best-case scenario for KC in that outcome. Then you can run two teams that "love" him against each other and get an above-market return for the pick.

[DJ's left nut]

Man do I ever love the guys who's first line on their scouting report is "Versatile..."

If that's your first line, it means you're not great at anything. It means you're just passable at a lot of things. If you were great at anything, THAT would be why we should take you in the first round.

It's like nobody ever learned a thing from Cam Erving.

As for Taylor -- I have a buddy who's convinced himself that we should take him in the 1st. Chiefs fans and their OL and TEs, man... I don't see it. If you're saying the Chiefs wouldn't take him at the back of 2 - I don't think I agree with you. If you're saying he just flat won't last to the back of 2, that I kinda understand (though I still think he's a late riser and that's usually bullshit).

Honestly, if the Chiefs took Winston at 66, I wouldn't be floored. There's some Reid to his game. Physical, more athletic than his style of play (Reid was just never the ball-hawk that his athleticism and intelligence said he should be) and seems to be pretty smart.

This is a team that took Bryan Cook for....reasons. I could absolutely see them saying that they're worried Winston wouldn't get to the back of 3 so they need to take him at the top of 3. I'd hate it, but it's not THAT far out there.

[DJ's left nut]

So over lunch today my buddy that wants Taylor in the 1st says "Well if you don't like Taylor, you've already told me you don't like Jeremiah Simpson, so who do you want?"

"You mean Josh Simmons?"

"Yeah, him..."

"I don't really think that conversation is worthwhile at this point...."

I mean c'mon, you're gonna ask me to defend my pick when you don't even have the name of the one guy that EVERYONE has in some way linked to the Chiefs right? Nah, I don't think I will...

[duncan_idaho]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Man do I ever love the guys who's first line on their scouting report is "Versatile..."

If that's your first line, it means you're not great at anything. It means you're just passable at a lot of things. If you were great at anything, THAT would be why we should take you in the first round.

It's like nobody ever learned a thing from Cam Erving.

As for Taylor -- I have a buddy who's convinced himself that we should take him in the 1st. Chiefs fans and their OL and TEs, man... I don't see it. If you're saying the Chiefs wouldn't take him at the back of 2 - I don't think I agree with you. If you're saying he just flat won't last to the back of 2, that I kinda understand (though I still think he's a late riser and that's usually bullshit).

Honestly, if the Chiefs took Winston at 66, I wouldn't be floored. There's some Reid to his game. Physical, more athletic than his style of play (Reid was just never the ball-hawk that his athleticism and intelligence said he should be) and seems to be pretty smart.

This is a team that took Bryan Cook for....reasons. I could absolutely see them saying that they're worried Winston wouldn't get to the back of 3 so they need to take him at the top of 3. I'd hate it, but it's not THAT far out there.

I was saying there's no way I see Taylor lasting to 63. Not when they're talking about Warren and Loveland both going top 15.

I wouldn't hate taking Winston at 66, depending on they did with the first two picks. But if the first two picks are an OG and a TE, I would not like it. At that point, you're completely missing on the DL talent in this class.