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.
[Reply]

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.
[Reply]

Yeah the issue of doing a trade up is you likely have to trade 63 or 66 and probably your 4th to move up that high. Simmons is the only guy in the draft that I’d trade up for and I think he’s going in the top 20 unfortunately.

They need to play Kingsley next year whether it’s at LT or RG. He’s too high of an investment and he’s got the traits you can’t teach. He was talked about as a late 1st rd pick.

He may have struggled but OL rarely have elite size and elite athleticism, especially guys that don’t go I the top 20 picks. Kingsley is very similar in size and athleticism to Tristan Wirfs. Both have the size and athleticism, albeit Kingsley is stronger. Wirfs developed at Iowa which is known for their work with OL while Kingsley went to BYU and their high RPO get rid to the ball quickly offense that didn’t develop him near as well.

Kingsley is gonna be like Fisher. It’s gonna take time if he plays LT. People forget that Fisher wasn’t good until year 4. Donald Stephenson started games at LT in year 3 and people hated it.

I’m not sure people are gonna be patient with Kingsley, but he is still only 22 this coming season. He’s really young. If he hits by the time he’s 23 or 24, that’s a solution for maybe the rest of Mahomes career here.
[Reply]

I said this about 6 weeks ago -- Kingsley was Alaric Jackson before Jackson.

If we want a young LT who didn't cost a small fortune to acquire, we just have to be patient with them.

Kingsley has every bit of physical ability you could want from a LT. He's just raw as hell.

So was Jackson. He barely played as a rookie, was little more than a functional reserve in his 2nd year. Went through some growing pains while being mostly adequate in his 3rd year and didn't truly break through until this season. That's what people USED to expect from guys like that.

I don't see any reason in the world to think Kingsley couldn't do the same thing.

The reason I'd be willing to pony up for Jackson if he's available is that nothing would prevent Kingsley from playing very well at RT if he develops. And at that point, he'd probably be ready to play around the time Taylor's deal becomes something we can move on from.
[Reply]

I've kinda been anti-Jackson because I think McVay asked very little of him relative to what most LTs, especially Andy's, are asked to do. There just isn't much tape or proof out there to give a high degree of confidence he can execute the job description of a KC left tackle. I guess that's also why I do favor Stanley a little - I know he's a Andy Reid prototype in a lot of ways. Armstead too, but his injury history is no better; it may be worse.

I'll reiterate too though that Andy shouldn't be asking so damn much of these guys anymore, OL are already behind the curve so much in this era that you're really setting them up to fail with as little help as he gives them. I'm not even saying just chip help, it goes beyond that.
[Reply]

I still think when it's all said and done, Kingsley ends up the LT.
[Reply]

Just hope it's not because we pay one of these brokedick bandaids and he's forced in again.
[Reply]

Me too. There's no need to rush the kid.
[Reply]

This is the best case for all. CP just wants a right now move to make them feel better. People want Jaylon Moore (who I think I like best of all so far), Alaric Jackson and Cam Robinson because it feels guaranteed. In reality they all have serious warts. And the most popular one has expensive warts. Bring back Humphries and let Kingsley develop.
[Reply]

Believe htismaqe is an Iowa fan so he could tell you this as well as anybody. Kirk Ferentz runs a pro style offense there. If you’re an offensive player in that program that doesn’t play QB, your ass better know how to block or damn well learn it. It’s demanded there. That’s why their players have good technique entering the league.

And you see it with their players. Alaric Jackson, Tristan Wirfs, Brandon Scherff, etc. Even the TE’s like LaPorta and Kittle are solid at worst blockers.

Kingsley played in an RPO spread offense that was composed of getting rid of the ball quickly and not actually learning technique. You’re not gonna learn countermoves or hand usage that way.

This is exactly why I’m not interested in Josh Conerly. Same system but a lesser sized and lesser strength player that is also a project in my eyes and looked good due to system more so than talent.

Kingsley is a raw block of stone and I’m really disappointed Andy just threw him in there so quickly without realizing his flaws in camp. It was unfair to the kid. I think they have to get this guy on the field though. He was a high investment. I hope that he is the future at LT but honestly he needs to fix a problem somewhere. If that’s RG and he provides adequate play there, then it’s not a failure. But the upside of being a long term LT cannot be ignored with this kid.
[Reply]

Next year?

They’re about to overpay for a FA tackle
[Reply]

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.
[Reply]

Never said next year. Probably won't happen that fast.
[Reply]

"Bring back Humphries and let Kingsley develop."

Sure, until Humphries tears one of those paper mache ligaments in his knees or strains his back shitting and we're right back to square one.
[Reply]

I’d bring Humphries back too, let’s create as much competition on the OL as possible to find our guys. We could always try trading away one of our recently picked guys if they don’t have a place here.
[Reply]