Quote:
Originally Posted by kccrow
Two things for me with regard to TE for me...
1. I would be pretty pissed if Veach ignored more pressing needs for starters in the first two rounds and went with a TE. That's a waste of draft capital at this point to me.
2. I don't know what the data is on "a lot" of 12 personnel, but my eyeballs don't recall seeing a lot. I think we've seen it more in short-yardage and goal to go situations, but as a rule not all that much. And if I'm correct, I don't forsee any major need to allocate a high-end resource over more pressing needs. I'm okay with a mid or late-round selection, but anything higher is foolish to me with Kelce likely being here a handful of years longer. I'd change that opinion if we were losing Kelce or expecting him to retire after the 2021 season.
|
They’ve run it about 1/3 of the time since Mahomes became QB and ran it more under Smith (if you count the 3 TE sets, too). I can only find data back to 2018.
I’m not selling out for that but if they don’t have a target they like at the higher value positions (DE, OT, DT, WR, I think he’s the best one in range there at 32. You could trade down and I wouldn’t complain.
My idea is that they could run that 12 personnel grouping more, run more successfully out of it, and still create matchup problems in the passing game. They flex Kelce out like a WR a lot anyway.
If they end up retaining Watkins I see less appeal there. It’s just the idea of losing that third receiving weapon I’m trying to plan around, knowing Hardman won’t just step into Watkins role and knowing a first round receiver - even one drafted round 1 - is unlikely to make much every down impact year 1 for KC.