What’s your approach to the cap and drafts?

[RunKC]

Was thinking today about Juju and Hardman being in contract years. I think both will have good years. So the question is: do you pay either of these guys? They’ll surely want at least $24 million AAV. A deal would likely be $20 million AAV.

Where would you allocate money on the team? More in offense or defense? What draft strategy do you have?

I think this is an interesting exercise in what the board thinks is best for our window with Patrick

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

This team doesn't really have a long-term #1 weapon, IMO.

It has 2 more years where it can truly rely on Kelce in all probability. And neither JJSS or MVS are going to be #1 targets. They simply don't have the requisite skill-sets.

Nor does Moore, IMO, for reasons I've gone over ad nauseum.

The skill position is going to need a TON of attention in the coming 2-3 seasons. Or yeah, PMII is gonna have a Rodgers problem on his hands.

Next Spring I think we’re going to make the DL and weapons overall the top priority

[O.city]

Give me a plethora of #2 type weapons and with Mahomes and Andy, I'll make due.

[cdcox]

1. QB
2. Pass rush1 (+ if it is interior because it gives you a leg up)

In my mind those are the only positions where I emphasize top talent over very good depth.
Basically it is an arms race between (pass rush and protection) and (targets vs coverage). Decent OL comes cheaper in FA and later in the draft, so other than having an at least average LT, I emphasize that the least of the arms race positions. I emphasize depth in targets, coverage, and pass rush. You need to be at least 2 deep in all of these, plus upcoming talent or role players that can contribute.

Does anyone think having 5 DB that are solid is too many? Two 10+ sack men is the bare minimum to have a legit pass rush. I think you have to be able to count on your #3 and #4 receivers to move the chains.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by cdcox

1. QB
2. Pass rush1 (+ if it is interior because it gives you a leg up)

In my mind those are the only positions where I emphasize top talent over very good depth.
Basically it is an arms race between (pass rush and protection) and (targets vs coverage). Decent OL comes cheaper in FA and later in the draft, so other than having an at least average LT, I emphasize that the least of the arms race positions. I emphasize depth in targets, coverage, and pass rush. You need to be at least 2 deep in all of these, plus upcoming talent or role players that can contribute.

Does anyone think having 5 DB that are solid is too many? Two 10+ sack men is the bare minimum to have a legit pass rush. I think you have to be able to count on your #3 and #4 receivers to move the chains.

I still find it fascinating that the brightest defensive mind arguably in the history of the sport has trended towards stacking his secondary and getting by with 2nd tier talents on his DL for years.

If Belichick is doing something, we might want to consider following suit.

But yeah, conventional wisdom says get your rusher.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I still find it fascinating that the brightest defensive mind arguably in the history of the sport has trended towards stacking his secondary and getting by with 2nd tier talents on his DL for years.

If Belichick is doing something, we might want to consider following suit.

But yeah, conventional wisdom says get your rusher.

I put a lot of stock in legit CB play and, especially, having a guy that can consistently lock down another team's best target. I know many here don't, or at least don't value it high in the draft because Veach has lucked out a few times.

I think letting Ward walk was an enormous mistake because he was as elite as CBs get in today's NFL. Corners as good as Ward are very hard to find and he was quickly scooped up.

I'm hoping the young kids make up for it. I do really like McDuffie, but he likely isn't stepping in and replacing what KC had on day 1.

All that said, I do value a pass rusher slightly higher. I think you have to have a guy that can disrupt the QB's clock, and if you don't then you're very much playing at a disadvantage unless you assemble a roster than can cover everyone. Easier said than done against teams like Cincinnati, for example.

[cdcox]

Originally Posted by kccrow

I put a lot of stock in legit CB play and, especially, having a guy that can consistently lock down another team's best target. I know many here don't, or at least don't value it high in the draft because Veach has lucked out a few times.

I think letting Ward walk was an enormous mistake because he was as elite as CBs get in today's NFL. Corners as good as Ward are very hard to find and he was quickly scooped up.

I'm hoping the young kids make up for it. I do really like McDuffie, but he likely isn't stepping in and replacing what KC had on day 1.

All that said, I do value a pass rusher slightly higher. I think you have to have a guy that can disrupt the QB's clock, and if you don't then you're very much playing at a disadvantage unless you assemble a roster than can cover everyone. Easier said than done against teams like Cincinnati, for example.

For the most part, I don’t like signing corners to big multi year contracts after their rookie deal. They will probably be productive during the first half of the deal, and not so great in the second half.

[Couch-Potato]

Originally Posted by kccrow

I put a lot of stock in legit CB play and, especially, having a guy that can consistently lock down another team's best target. I know many here don't, or at least don't value it high in the draft because Veach has lucked out a few times.

I think letting Ward walk was an enormous mistake because he was as elite as CBs get in today's NFL. Corners as good as Ward are very hard to find and he was quickly scooped up.

I'm hoping the young kids make up for it. I do really like McDuffie, but he likely isn't stepping in and replacing what KC had on day 1.

All that said, I do value a pass rusher slightly higher. I think you have to have a guy that can disrupt the QB's clock, and if you don't then you're very much playing at a disadvantage unless you assemble a roster than can cover everyone. Easier said than done against teams like Cincinnati, for example.

Esp now that we have $14m just sitting around would have been nice to keep Ward

[Couch-Potato]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Doesn't matter what I think but my position would be this:

I'll pay four key players handsomely if deserving, one each at QB, LT, DE, and CB.
I'll pay as many mid-level contracts as I can at WR (or TE as the top guys even tend to be on par), OL, and DL.
I'm drafting for any of the rest, always, washing and repeating.
Draft focus will gravitate towards the 4 pillars if missing.
I'd never take a RB in round 1. I'd hesitate in round 1 for WR unless the cupboard is bare and I have my pillars.

I think there's an argument to be made that in the modern NFL the money spent on CB is better spent on WR. Like the NBA, it seems that NFL rules favor offense and the best WRs can score on the top CBs. Although, the lack of true shut-down CBs in the league is also a good argument for spending premium money in that position if you find a legit talent... I think it depends on what's available to you and of course who you have at QB.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by kccrow

I put a lot of stock in legit CB play and, especially, having a guy that can consistently lock down another team's best target. I know many here don't, or at least don't value it high in the draft because Veach has lucked out a few times.

I think letting Ward walk was an enormous mistake because he was as elite as CBs get in today's NFL. Corners as good as Ward are very hard to find and he was quickly scooped up.

I'm hoping the young kids make up for it. I do really like McDuffie, but he likely isn't stepping in and replacing what KC had on day 1.

All that said, I do value a pass rusher slightly higher. I think you have to have a guy that can disrupt the QB's clock, and if you don't then you're very much playing at a disadvantage unless you assemble a roster than can cover everyone. Easier said than done against teams like Cincinnati, for example.

Bah!

You're not allowed to play cover anymore. Look at what Chase did to Ward.

Draft 'em, develop, and let someone else pay 'em Rinse and repeat

The only caviat being versatile guys as far as scheme fit/inside/outside corner/safety types.

Sneed I might pay. McDuffie has the sort of varied skillset that might be more than just an outside corner.

There is no such thing as a shutdown corner anymore. Let someone else pay for the myth

Rush the passer, stuff the run. Confuse with scheme and hope for the best.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Bah!

You're not allowed to play cover anymore. Look at what Chase did to Ward.

Draft 'em, develop, and let someone else pay 'em Rinse and repeat

The only caviat being versatile guys as far as scheme fit/inside/outside corner/safety types.

Sneed I might pay. McDuffie has the sort of varied skillset that might be more than just an outside corner.

There is no such thing as a shutdown corner anymore. Let someone else pay for the myth

Rush the passer, stuff the run. Confuse with scheme and hope for the best.

I disagree, quite a bit.

Chase did get Ward on the sideline in the first matchup. Not the same deal the 2nd time around. When Ward shut Chase down in round 2 by altering how he used the sideline to his advantage, they exploited the slot matchup. That is reason and exhibit A on why you need good corners 3 deep. You don't need stars 3 deep, but you can't be as weak as the Chiefs were after Ward and Sneed. No Ward is likely going to be a problem early on this year unless Sneed steps up another notch and the rookies play well.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato

I think there's an argument to be made that in the modern NFL the money spent on CB is better spent on WR. Like the NBA, it seems that NFL rules favor offense and the best WRs can score on the top CBs. Although, the lack of true shut-down CBs in the league is also a good argument for spending premium money in that position if you find a legit talent... I think it depends on what's available to you and of course who you have at QB.

You have to have balance. Sure, the league favors offense but that's not to say you shouldn't worry about your defense. I posted an exhibit in the Lounge a few weeks back that basically proves that you aren't going to win the SB very often unless you're top 10 in both points scored and points given up. If you have a bad secondary, teams are going to carve you up in every way possible, and it won't matter how good of a pass rush you have.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I still find it fascinating that the brightest defensive mind arguably in the history of the sport has trended towards stacking his secondary and getting by with 2nd tier talents on his DL for years.

If Belichick is doing something, we might want to consider following suit.

But yeah, conventional wisdom says get your rusher.

Bc you can have several variations of blitz packages if you have a strong secondary. You can’t do that the other way as seen by the 2018 Chiefs.

Look at what the Patriots did to us in 2018 with below average rushers? Look at what we did to Josh Allen in the 2020 championship game to confuse him?

That’s why I think coverage is more important if you had to choose.it’s rare to have both

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by kccrow

I put a lot of stock in legit CB play and, especially, having a guy that can consistently lock down another team's best target. I know many here don't, or at least don't value it high in the draft because Veach has lucked out a few times.

I think letting Ward walk was an enormous mistake because he was as elite as CBs get in today's NFL. Corners as good as Ward are very hard to find and he was quickly scooped up.

I'm hoping the young kids make up for it. I do really like McDuffie, but he likely isn't stepping in and replacing what KC had on day 1.

All that said, I do value a pass rusher slightly higher. I think you have to have a guy that can disrupt the QB's clock, and if you don't then you're very much playing at a disadvantage unless you assemble a roster than can cover everyone. Easier said than done against teams like Cincinnati, for example.

I think you get diminishing marginal returns at the very top of the CB scale. I don't worry much about having a 'true shut down #1 CB' that much because honestly, even they get beat in this era.

But give me 3 viable above average CBs at the price of a #1, 2 and fill-in 3, and I'm gonna be a happy camper.

Secondary depth is more important than it's top end to me. But like you, I think Ward at his price was someone we should've brought back because that's exactly the sort of solid value #2 sort you can add/extend another guy just like him to and then draft your 3 and 4 to get your full DB set for around $28 million or so? Yeah - I'm down with that.

Not having a hole in your secondary {coughcough}Mike Hughes{/cough} is more important than having Jalen Ramsey out there.

And the Bengals regular season loss vs. the Bills playoff win provides both sides of that coin. No DB in the world shuts down Chase that day. Ward was constantly in his pocket and it just didn't matter. Chase was locked in and when that happens your DB loses.

But against the Bills, Allen just kept dropping back, finding Hughes and attacking the inevitable misstep. And made it look EASY. Whereas Chase was making miracles happen out there.

Just keep the easy shit from happening and I'll live with the occasional miracle.

[O.city]

Teams are too good at finding any potential weakness in today's league, paired wiht the inability for a star in the secondary to make huge differences due to the rules.

You need a secondary full of B players atleast. You can't have an A+ guy at corner with a ton of C- players or worse elsewhere. Over the season, you guys run into to many teams that can take advantage of it.

Defense in today's league is about having as many good players as you can or more less, having fewer average or worse guys.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

Teams are too good at finding any potential weakness in today's league, paired wiht the inability for a star in the secondary to make huge differences due to the rules.

You need a secondary full of B players atleast. You can't have an A+ guy at corner with a ton of C- players or worse elsewhere. Over the season, you guys run into to many teams that can take advantage of it.

Defense in today's league is about having as many good players as you can or more less, having fewer average or worse guys.

Two words: Gabriel Davis.

Davis is a fine player, don't get me wrong. Very fast at least. But on a team with Diggs, Beasley and Sanders, we got eviscerated by Gabrial Davis. And if we'd have had Deion Sanders and Ed Reed on the other side of him, it wouldn't have made a difference.

Because Hughes just couldn't get out of his own goddamn way. My memory is that he was pretty much singularly responsible for 3 TDs that day.

You just can't have that. I'm not even sure I agree completely that you need to avoid average players - average players are fine if they're playing average football.

But you can't have guys out there tripping over their feet on every drive like the Chiefs had that day. That was a total debacle.