I think the NFL knows this about Humphries and I don't think many teams are going to pursue him, he might just come back to the Chiefs cheap enough that it would be worth a shot with the given risks [Reply]
I think the NFL knows this about Humphries and I don't think many teams are going to pursue him, he might just come back to the Chiefs cheap enough that it would be worth a shot with the given risks
If it's for vet minimum sure. But we had to give him a contract that was essentially an 8 figure deal prorated to about 4 million. So let's not waste any more time, reps, or cap on a known broke dick that Reid wouldn't even consider after he got injured again. [Reply]
The jump from rookie year to year 2 is said to be the biggest jump for players. They aren’t preparing for the underwear Olympics, interrogation sessions and traveling for team visits like they were as draft prospects.
In Eric Fisher’s case, it took longer and I think a major reason for that was his shoulder surgery that limited him from working out and getting stronger.
I want to see what Kingsley looks like in camp at LT with a full offseason of coaching technique, which I think he will do. It’s not fair to judge a raw prospect off of a couple of games where he was clearly not ready. Again we’ve seen this before with LT’s.
Kolton Miller, Eric Fisher and Garrett Bolles are perfect examples of 1st rd LT’s that were god awful as rookies and then developed into good starters. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
The jump from rookie year to year 2 is said to be the biggest jump for players. They aren’t preparing for the underwear Olympics, interrogation sessions and traveling for team visits like they were as draft prospects.
In Eric Fisher’s case, it took longer and I think a major reason for that was his shoulder surgery that limited him from working out and getting stronger.
I want to see what Kingsley looks like in camp at LT with a full offseason of coaching technique, which I think he will do. It’s not fair to judge a raw prospect off of a couple of games where he was clearly not ready. Again we’ve seen this before with LT’s.
Kolton Miller, Eric Fisher and Garrett Bolles are perfect examples of 1st rd LT’s that were god awful as rookies and then developed into good starters.
All this preaching about patience just falls on deaf ears to me unless Reid himself shows he's willing to do it. He's already benched Suamataia. Twice. No reason to believe he's willing to just throw him out and let him sink or swim again. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
All this preaching about patience just falls on deaf ears to me unless Reid himself shows he's willing to do it. He's already benched Suamataia. Twice. No reason to believe he's willing to just throw him out and let him sink or swim again.
I would like to see Kingsley get playing time at RG next year or even RT eventually, but we need to have more guaranteed options at LT next year versus hoping Kingsley gets better with another offseason. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
i do struggle to come up with a reason not to like Will Campbell. I just don't think he's a guy that's going top 10 most years (probably nearer 18-22) and this year he probably will. Just too rich for my blood.
I do think I'd look awfully long at Zabel if he fell. He has real technique issues in pass pro given the offense he played in at NDSU. He might end up having to play guard as he doesn't seem to play as long as his height. I'll be curious to see how he measures.
But he's athletic and tough. I just don't know that he's someone I'm taking in the 1st when I'm not completely sold on him being able to stick at OT. That said, there are a LOT of similarities between him and Thuney. If he ends up taking Thuney's spot at LG over the long-term, it's not the worst use of a 1st.
Campbell's questions are about his length and whether he has the size to stick at LT. I like Zabel, too, but he seems likely to get overdrafted to me.
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
For you (and definitely you, Idaho, as I believe you were early on this train) -- if the Rams tag Alaric Jackson, what would you give up?
At this point, I honestly don't see enough difference in Smith and Jackson in terms of pure value to this team to see a noticable difference between the two.
So if the Rams tag Jackson and we tag Smith, then we can get Smith dealt for a mid 2nd and flip that mid 2nd to the Rams for Jackson while getting Jackson extended at figures that are close to what Smith would extend at -- dammit, I think I'd just do it and call it a day.
If not, I'm calling the Dolphins about Armstead.
Stanley's availability is just so spotty. Not the upshot to that is that it will likely be priced into his value on the market AND, while we seemingly have nothing we can truly count on to start, we do have some options in Morris and even Kingsley that might not be catastrophic if he misses 2-3 games here and there.
I mean I don't think you can reasonably expect more than 12 games out of Stanley at this point. The injury history is just so damn loud. And he's getting older.
I don't think the Chiefs can afford to pay Ronnie Stanley. Not from a raw cost perspective, but from a cost + availability risk perspective.
I'm not high enough on Jackson to trade for him coming off the franchise tag (and the Rams don't use the tag, so I don't think that scenario will come up). The attraction there is that you have a young player who seems to be ascending and high quality. I see some parallels to Mitchell Schwartz, I guess.
But yes, there are some concerns about how valuable he is at LT. The Rams' willingness to let him get to FA also gives pause.
Originally Posted by Couch-Potato:
How far up could we get into the 1st using next year’s 2nd? …I’m not sure next year’s picks are valued the same as picks traded in the same draft.
Maybe, Pitt’s 1st @ #21? I assume that puts us in play for at least Conerly Jr in this draft, hopefully Simmons, maybe Banks Jr falls, or Membou get’s some love at the combine and goes in that range...but I’m not certain any of the LT’s in this draft immediately solve our problem.
A pick in future drafts is generally regarded as equivalent in value to a pick from this year, but a round lower. So a future 2nd is like trading a present 3rd. So the value on including next year's 2nd is only enough to get you to about 25 on the Rich Hill trade chart.
I wouldn't pay anything close to that price for Conerly, though. If he falls to 31 it might be worth it. But I'm not burning assets for a guy who isn't Day 1 ready and has the questions he does. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
For you (and definitely you, Idaho, as I believe you were early on this train) -- if the Rams tag Alaric Jackson, what would you give up?
At this point, I honestly don't see enough difference in Smith and Jackson in terms of pure value to this team to see a noticable difference between the two.
So if the Rams tag Jackson and we tag Smith, then we can get Smith dealt for a mid 2nd and flip that mid 2nd to the Rams for Jackson while getting Jackson extended at figures that are close to what Smith would extend at -- dammit, I think I'd just do it and call it a day.
If not, I'm calling the Dolphins about Armstead.
Stanley's availability is just so spotty. Not the upshot to that is that it will likely be priced into his value on the market AND, while we seemingly have nothing we can truly count on to start, we do have some options in Morris and even Kingsley that might not be catastrophic if he misses 2-3 games here and there.
I mean I don't think you can reasonably expect more than 12 games out of Stanley at this point. The injury history is just so damn loud. And he's getting older.
Ronnie Stanley has only played 48 games the last 5 seasons. He’s missed 40% of the games.
There’s no way you could convince me that he’s worth acquiring unless it’s for a smaller contract that is incentivized heavily upon him staying healthy. Even then it’s not appealing.
I’d rather bring Humphries back at a small contract then sign Stanley. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RunKC:
Ronnie Stanley has only played 48 games the last 5 seasons. He’s missed 40% of the games.
There’s no way you could convince me that he’s worth acquiring unless it’s for a smaller contract that is incentivized heavily upon him staying healthy. Even then it’s not appealing.
I’d rather bring Humphries back at a small contract then sign Stanley.
Yeah, Stanley's not really on my radar for that same reason.
He's more name than production at this point.
That said, it's at least somewhat disengenuous to cite a 5 year window when he was A) mostly healthy prior to 20/21 and B) has been fairly healthy in 23 and 24.
I mean he's played 80% of the games over the last 3 seasons -- expanding that out to 5 is a pretty obvious example of using arbitrary endpoints to establish an argument. He played 88% of the games in the first 4 years of his career. Over the 9 seasons he's played, he's played 84% of the games in aggregate over 7 of them.
So barring the two seasons that were just lost years, he's reasonably likely to play 12-13 games. If he's capable of playing at an elite level and the injury risk is priced in, that's someone worth keeping an eye on.
But I'm not breaking the bank for him or building my offseason around him either. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
And yet in the clip that's posted above you, he isn't taking a vertical set at all.
We looked into this 'vertical set' thing from Schwartz about 8 weeks ago when he first said it and it was just goofy then and it's kinda goofy now.
Yes, he goes back deep on his sets. Because we work from the shotgun and Mahomes takes deep drops. Brown DIDN'T do that and people killed him for THAT. For 2 years we complained that OBJ wasn't getting back in his set and now that Taylor does we complain about that.
So much so that we even blame the failures of other players on it. Now that Taylor does do it, people blame Smith struggling on him. And when you go to the tap on it and Smith's just getting bullied backwards, people just ignore it and go back to "Taylor takes deep sets!".
Bottom line is that folks will NEVER be happy with the OTs here because nobody bats 1.000 and anytime Mahomes gets hit, the OTs get barbecued for it.
It's all gotten fairly repetitive at this point. And in many instances (such as 'Taylor was as bad as Thuney') just so fundamentally rooted in nonsense that it's just not worth addressing.
We could live with his pressure rate allowed. Adding on the asinine penalties makes him one of the worst RTs in the NFL. I swear to fuck he kills two drives a game all by himself and the percentage of negative plays seems to back up that notion. I championed signing this cat too when he became a free agent but I've conceded he's just not that great. His contract makes it worse because we can't even get out of it to move on to greener pastures until 2026. Hell, we could have kept Wylie who has played just as well if not better most of the time in Washington.
This year, you had the added bonuses of Smith having a bad year, Caliendo sucking shit, and Thuney playing a position he has no business playing. That just makes watching Taylor do his dumb shit worse. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
Campbell's questions are about his length and whether he has the size to stick at LT. I like Zabel, too, but he seems likely to get overdrafted to me.
I don't think the Chiefs can afford to pay Ronnie Stanley. Not from a raw cost perspective, but from a cost + availability risk perspective.
I'm not high enough on Jackson to trade for him coming off the franchise tag (and the Rams don't use the tag, so I don't think that scenario will come up). The attraction there is that you have a young player who seems to be ascending and high quality. I see some parallels to Mitchell Schwartz, I guess.
But yes, there are some concerns about how valuable he is at LT. The Rams' willingness to let him get to FA also gives pause.
A pick in future drafts is generally regarded as equivalent in value to a pick from this year, but a round lower. So a future 2nd is like trading a present 3rd. So the value on including next year's 2nd is only enough to get you to about 25 on the Rich Hill trade chart.
I wouldn't pay anything close to that price for Conerly, though. If he falls to 31 it might be worth it. But I'm not burning assets for a guy who isn't Day 1 ready and has the questions he does.
I'm absolutely not in on paying any of these guys AND giving up a premium pick. If any of them get tagged, that would be a non-starter for me. [Reply]
