Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
Wut. I pounded the table for Slater that entire off-season and wanted to give up multiple 1sts to do it. A very stiff price to pay but the dude was All Pro out the gate
You do understand that wanting to trade up to 12 or earlier from 31 is one thing, but actually being able to do it is another, right?
You have no idea who was willing to trade, if anybody, what the cost would've been, etc.
When you're talking about a move that big, it's impossible to know what was possible. Stop being obtuse, and at least acknowledge that with your answer, then maybe we can take it seriously. [Reply]
Originally Posted by SHOWTIME:
you have to trade up if necessary. Veech has shown that he's willing to do that as did Dorsey before him.
It would have meant losing one each of Humphrey/Bolton and McDuffie/Karlaftis, at least. That's fucking brutal but the offset is solving the issue for most of Mahomes career with a top end talent. [Reply]
Originally Posted by GordonGekko:
I think most LT's struggle in their first year, even Fisher did. It was just one scenario I could think of, perhaps with Chiefs coaching and knowing you are protecting Mahomes maybe he plays better? Veach gets paid $ millions to think about these decisions all day along with having access to the best analysts/coaches for their input the Chiefs employ. 2x Superbowls now where our OL got stomped and we were blown out.
He does get paid millions. So maybe the reason they didn’t take Guyton was because … the grade on him wasn’t much different than the grade on guys like Suamataia.
They just tried to get through a season taking lumps with young guys who needed to develop based on their traits, and people are complaining that wasn’t good enough.
Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
If you're wondering why folks aren't debating in good faith anymore, this is it. Demanding names and then immediately dismissing it outright when you get one folks will just shut it down and quit playing.
Well, saying they should have traded to 13 to get Rashawn Slater is really out of touch with reality and possibilities.
If you want to talk about that draft, Christian Darrisaw is the guy to discuss. In hindsight, I’d imagine they would try harder to get into 21 or 22.
That’s really the only realistic alternative since Fisher popped his Achilles’ … but even Darrisaw had grades on him similar to a lot of guys who have ended up playing G. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
It would have meant losing one each of Humphrey/Bolton and McDuffie/Karlaftis, at least. That's fucking brutal but the offset is solving the issue for most of Mahomes career with a top end talent.
Aaaand you still don't know whether it was even a possiblity in the first place. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
All I know is some of you need to open your eyes, start breathing again, and stop stomping your feet.
I KNOW you WANTS the new Left Tackle NOWS … but throwing fits about isn’t going to manifest it.
It’s easy to say “spend the money.” You can’t control who is available to spend the money on.
Maybe Robinson hits the market. Maybe Alaric Jackson does (the Rams don’t use the franchise tag, so it’s possible he’s out there). Maybe each of them is locked up before the window opens. I wouldn’t blink one bit if they made Jackson the new highest paid player at LT, because they can create the cap space, it’s worth doing, he’s young and good, and it’s better than helping a G reset the market when he’s good in pass protection but not dominant.
They will do … something.
I don’t love the idea of signing a veteran in the JAG tier to stop-gap it while they keep trying to develop a T based on traits. But that may end up being the best option available to them. And in that scenario, Humphries in his second year removed from his ACL tear might be a pretty good option.
I do believe they’re going to consider both upside and floor with whatever decision they make.
That probably means they aren’t going to blow through a bunch of draft capital to get a T in a pretty weak T draft … unless they’re lock-stock sold on that player.
And unless they see something no one else does, I have a hard time believing that T is in this draft, unless there’s a guy the Chiefs see something with… that most don’t.
Duncan, I agree with all this and posted something similar, maybe on another thread. I think it's highly unlikely that it's possible, but I'd like us to at least try for Stanley.
After that, as you say, maybe DJ back is the best option short-term. I just don't see the draft offering a reasonable way out.
It's not an easy problem to fix and we may have to accept it won't be next year, maybe not for a few years if the drafts and FA aren't favourable.
Will it dent our SB hopes the next couple of years? Quite possibly, but we also won a SB with Donovan Smith. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
He does get paid millions. So maybe the reason they didn’t take Guyton was because … the grade on him wasn’t much different than the grade on guys like Suamataia.
They just tried to get through a season taking lumps with young guys who needed to develop based on their traits, and people are complaining that wasn’t good enough.
Well, saying they should have traded to 13 to get Rashawn Slater is really out of touch with reality and possibilities.
If you want to talk about that draft, Christian Darrisaw is the guy to discuss. In hindsight, I’d imagine they would try harder to get into 21 or 22.
That’s really the only realistic alternative since Fisher popped his Achilles’ … but even Darrisaw had grades on him similar to a lot of guys who have ended up playing G.
Darrisaw actually would be operating in hindsight. And he's kind of a brokedick. Slater is too TBF but from the outside looking in that seems like the Chargers doing Charger things and completely mismanaging injuries leading to exacerbation rather than mitigation. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
If you're wondering why folks aren't debating in good faith anymore, this is it. Demanding names and then immediately dismissing it outright when you get one folks will just shut it down and quit playing.
Slater went, what, #13? In what world could we get to #13?
That's not a good faith debate, it's fantasy.
and yeah, I'll dismiss fantasy as exactly that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
It would have meant losing one each of Humphrey/Bolton and McDuffie/Karlaftis, at least. That's fucking brutal but the offset is solving the issue for most of Mahomes career with a top end talent.
I love Bolton as a player and leader but he is too slow to cover the RB/TE out of the backfield and gets exposed. He is an old school LB in a modern speed game.
We will miss him but we need a 2025 LB with some speed. Should be able to get a great one with one of those 2nd rounders.
We change out that possible long term $15 million deal for a rookie deal. Could use that $15 million to get us a WR, help pay a LT etc. [Reply]
What they ended up doing was better anyway. OBJ was very very good in 2021. Unfortunately his play slid significantly and his agent was a complete fucking moron irregardless. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
It would have meant losing one each of Humphrey/Bolton and McDuffie/Karlaftis, at least. That's ****ing brutal but the offset is solving the issue for most of Mahomes career with a top end talent.
I can't think of a single time when Belichick left Brady's blindside to a scrub... [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
Slater went, what, #13? In what world could we get to #13?
That's not a good faith debate, it's fantasy.
and yeah, I'll dismiss fantasy as exactly that.
Cowboys took Parsons at 12, and Bears took Fields at 11. Zero reason to think either of those teams had any desire to pass on those guys and go all the way back to 31. [Reply]
I don't see Staley leaving Baltimore. He's been there his entire career, and they're a perennial contender.
Jackson, on the other hand, is 26, entering his prime, and Stafford is nearing the end. He could take the bag and come to KC and protect Mahomes for the rest of his career if it works out. So I see that as a greater possibility.
Originally Posted by Sassy Squatch:
Said the same thing back then. Hit the bid button until a team says yes. Foolhardy, sure, but that's what I wanted them to do.
And it was as out of touch with reality then as it is now.
The Chargers aren’t going to trade with you. You’d have to get to 11 or 12 to get in front of them for Slater, who they were connected with pretty heavily, and the price there is going to be higher than the one to get Mahomes.
Asking them to do that for a guy many were concerned would end up at G is pretty out of touch.
Especially when their alternative was trading a lot less for a guy who was good enough to get them back to an afc championship and win a Super Bowl, who they made a very fair offer to keep long-term. [Reply]