~“PFF numbers are excellent…Last 3 seasons: 681 snaps, 4 sacks, 0 penalties. Last season’s blocking grade of 73 is higher than any Chiefs offensive lineman over the last two seasons.”
Originally Posted by TwistedChief:
Weren't there some people who comically bitched about Veach's lack of "cooking" in free agency before free agency even began?
~“PFF numbers are excellent…Last 3 seasons: 681 snaps, 4 sacks, 0 penalties. Last season’s blocking grade of 73 is higher than any Chiefs offensive lineman over the last two seasons.”
Very promising, indeed.
Excellent news, a young-ish tackle who learned from the master LT in SF. 0 penalties as well, hopefully he continues that w/ the Chiefs [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Yeah - Jackson fucked up BIGGLY.
Stanley has age and durability concerns that might've held back his value on the market. I don't think he'd have killed what he got even in this market.
Jackson would've had a stronger market than Dan Moore and potentially by a fair bit. Could've gotten another couple million a year and maybe even another year if he wanted it.
I just don't understand how anybody (Bolton included) would play their way to FA status and then not at least test the market. He had to have seen the amount of available cap out there.
He may have left $50 million on the table.
I don't know if he did fuck up per se`. You look at 57.5/3 vs 82/4 and it's just as simple as adding a 3rd year at 25m to Alaric's deal. The Rams can get out of the deal after 2 years, so that helps them. Alaric hits the market again at 28 going on 29, which means one more likely big payday, so he's also betting more on himself.
Was Alaric worth a bit more on the open market? Maybe. I think he might have got a bit more, something like 21-22m AAV on the open market. If Alaric does really well on this deal, he might be gaining a lot more than 6m on his next deal. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chieftain:
Matt Lane is the worst Chiefs 'analyst' there is. Anything he posts should be disregared.
He’s not that bad normally but is insufferable during free agency and the draft. If it’s not a guy he wanted he’s just going to slick hate for two weeks. He’s got little man syndrome but he’s not little. And it’s funny that people think he’s small purely because of his attitude. [Reply]
~“PFF numbers are excellent…Last 3 seasons: 681 snaps, 4 sacks, 0 penalties. Last season’s blocking grade of 73 is higher than any Chiefs offensive lineman over the last two seasons.”
Very promising, indeed.
good to hear. It's not a huge risk anyways with a 2 year deal.
I was actually thinking they should look at the leagues best LT's and see who their backups are because they probably didn't get many opportunities. [Reply]
Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
One of the best parts of this deal is it essentially gives the Chiefs two years to find and develop a LTOTF, if BPA calls for it.
They could go LT at any of their first picks in the next couple years, not be forced to play the kid if they need the time.
This is exactly what drew me to like the idea. You get a guy who can hold down the fort and will likely not be any worse than Cam Robinson or Dan Moore Jr, who have been, let's face it folks, relatively subpar at best and cost far more for lengthier terms.
Most of the OTs in this class are going to need some seasoning before they can play meaningful snaps. That doesn't mean you don't take one even in round 1, but it takes some pressure off and lets you develop a guy a little bit before casting him into the fire.
Even with this signing, I remain on the draft Conerly hype train in round 1. If Jaylon Moore works out at LT, you can always move Conerly to RT to take over for Taylor, it's just going to take a bit of time for him to acclimate. Conerly is going to need some development in the strength and anchor department anyhow but he's got all the other tools you want. If you can't get him, you can look at another project or wait until 2026 to get a prospect. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
This is exactly what drew me to like the idea. You get a guy who can hold down the fort and will likely not be any worse than Cam Robinson or Dan Moore Jr, who have been, let's face it folks, relatively subpar at best and cost far more for lengthier terms.
Most of the OTs in this class are going to need some seasoning before they can play meaningful snaps. That doesn't mean you don't take one even in round 1, but it takes some pressure off and lets you develop a guy a little bit before casting him into the fire.
Even with this signing, I remain on the draft Conerly hype train in round 1. If Jaylon Moore works out at LT, you can always move Conerly to RT to take over for Taylor, it's just going to take a bit of time for him to acclimate. Conerly is going to need some development in the strength and anchor department anyhow but he's got all the other tools you want. If you can't get him, you can look at another project or wait until 2026 to get a prospect.
Well, and/or for that matter, it's too early to give up on Kingsley. He's got all of the physical tools. [Reply]
Originally Posted by kccrow:
Conerly is going to need some development in the strength and anchor department anyhow but he's got all the other tools you want. If you can't get him, you can look at another project or wait until 2026 to get a prospect.
Not being able to anchor properly is a major criticism of his. I don't know if that's a teachable thing. Certainly a big red flag imo that might not be worth the risk. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
Well, and/or for that matter, it's too early to give up on Kingsley. He's got all of the physical tools.
While I agree with you on the traits, I don't know if that's a universal thought. Most draft pundits a year ago didn't see him as a LT, they thought he might work out as a RT. That sticks in my brain a bit. The Chiefs have also been pretty clear about their desire to play him at LG, from week 18 through the offseason so far. Most players that end up going to OG from OT don't end up back at OT. I don't recall an instance of it, although I'm sure it's happened in the annals of time.
Unless the Chiefs give me a reason to think otherwise, I'm of the thought that Kingsley will be our starting LG from here on out. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chieftain:
Not being able to anchor properly is a major criticism of his. I don't know if that's a teachable thing. Certainly a big red flag imo that might not be worth the risk.
It is if you have the feet for it.
People look at strength when they talk about anchor, but a lot of that is having light feet and good balance.
Conerly does seem to have both those things. He just lacks the functional strength to pull it all together.
That's the EASIEST of those three ingredients to add.
But I still don't see me wanting him over the DL in this class. [Reply]
