Who is our first rd pick?

[RunKC]

It’s that time fellas! Little over 3 weeks out and it’s in our house!

I’ll put 2 options here.

1. Who do we pick if we sign a vet WR (Hopkins?) before the draft.

2 who do we pick if we don’t sign anyone else before the draft.

Who ya got?

[KobesPilot]

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato

I'd be genuinely stoked if we took either of the RBs being considered 1st rounders. It goes against all logic but I think these are the most exciting possible picks that could happen in the draft. B Robinson or J Gibbs would be phenomenal in our offense!

Wasting a 1st round pick on a RB is the stupidest thing you could do

[kccrow]

My absolute preference?

Trade up high for Broderick Jones and lock down this OLine for years.

If not that, I don't rightly care too much what it is.

I don't think the Chiefs need to lock onto any particular position, which makes it fascinating and impossible to predict.

Offensively, if Jahmyr Gibbs is there, I'm probably taking him. He has the potential to be the most electric player in the draft and fills what would be a pretty serious void the Chiefs currently have. That is, if KC brass feels he can also take snaps at WR.

If not, then I really like Rashee Rice. He gives me Stefon Diggs talent vibes.

If going defense, Isaiah Foskey. I think he's a blend of everything you want at DE.

I don't know. I have really clamped down on the "what I want" guy yet.

[Couch-Potato]

Originally Posted by Chieftain

The more I've thought about this, the more I've come to the realisation than an OT should be the pick. I would move up the board at a chance of either Broderick Jones or Darnell Wright. You solidify the O Line for years to come with this move.

I can dig it.

[Couch-Potato]

Originally Posted by KobesPilot

Wasting a 1st round pick on a RB is the stupidest thing you could do

Ok, I'll bite... why do you feel this way?

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato

Ok, I'll bite... why do you feel this way?

I don't think it's a great positional investment when Andy would really prefer not to run the ball. Plus, we've got a pretty good one already, so not many touches available.

If you were a team with a game manager type QB and needed to run the ball and play-action pass to be successful maybe you think about it.

But RB's don't last all that long, it's a brutal position. A lot of guys flame out fast.

And then there's the fact that good RBs can be found anywhere in the draft, and I just think it's not good value.

Not trying to 'talk down to anyone' or anything.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

I don't think it's a great positional investment when Andy would really prefer not to run the ball. Plus, we've got a pretty good one already, so not many touches available.

If you were a team with a game manager type QB and needed to run the ball and play-action pass to be successful maybe you think about it.

But RB's don't last all that long, it's a brutal position. A lot of guys flame out fast.

And then there's the fact that good RBs can be found anywhere in the draft, and I just think it's not good value.

Not trying to 'talk down to anyone' or anything.

Embrace arrogance. It's what I do. I figure if I'm going to convey my message around here it has to be forceful and unrelenting.

As for the RB position, I think it really has to do with the aspect of actually running the ball versus passing game impact. A guy like Gibbs is pretty rare, at least with the speed/agility/receiving ability in his frame. I'm normally with you on NEVER drafting a RB in the 1st round. I see that cat as a different breed though. I think you could also turn him into a really good WR but maybe NFL teams won't think the same way.

Now, maybe you can likely get a similar product by waiting. Keaton Mitchell is definitely intriguing on day 3 but he is 2 inches and 20 pounds smaller. He does have a really similar skill set though.

If you just want a solid receiving back and don't care as much about the juice, then Evan Hull or Xazavian Valladay makes a ton of sense.

So yeah, I get it. While I don't think Gibbs would ever be a bad pick, you might get more mileage out of taking another player there, say Rice, and adding a guy like Mitchell later on.

[Fat Elvis]

Originally Posted by Chieftain

The more I've thought about this, the more I've come to the realisation than an OT should be the pick.

via GIFER

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by Fat Elvis

via GIFER

Man, if you can guarantee me that an OT we can grab at #31 will equal Fisher, I'm all over it.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by kccrow

Embrace arrogance. It's what I do. I figure if I'm going to convey my message around here it has to be forceful and unrelenting.

As for the RB position, I think it really has to do with the aspect of actually running the ball versus passing game impact. A guy like Gibbs is pretty rare, at least with the speed/agility/receiving ability in his frame. I'm normally with you on NEVER drafting a RB in the 1st round. I see that cat as a different breed though. I think you could also turn him into a really good WR but maybe NFL teams won't think the same way.

Now, maybe you can likely get a similar product by waiting. Keaton Mitchell is definitely intriguing on day 3 but he is 2 inches and 20 pounds smaller. He does have a really similar skill set though.

If you just want a solid receiving back and don't care as much about the juice, then Evan Hull or Xazavian Valladay makes a ton of sense.

So yeah, I get it. While I don't think Gibbs would ever be a bad pick, you might get more mileage out of taking another player there, say Rice, and adding a guy like Mitchell later on.

I'm relatively certain that Mckinnon is in the plan to return. I mean, unless he's just decided to retire or something. Which I don't see why, as he's finally healthy and producing.

So given that we have Pacheco no longer a greenhorn, and Mckinnon, I don't see many touches for a RB. Now, if you're planning on him playing WR, okay, but you've also got Skyy penciled in at the slot I would assume, right? And MVS as your deep threat, so really, we're looking for a prototypical 'X' receiver. And I don't see Gibbs as THAT under any circumstances. Now, maybe they say **** it and just take the athlete and figure out Andy'll find a way to use him and maybe that's not a bad idea. But I'm not sure about that. A guy like Rice seems like a better fit for role. Of course, you could take a Gibbs early and then nab an AT Perry or Mingo in the third maybe. Something like that.

[Couch-Potato]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

I don't think it's a great positional investment when Andy would really prefer not to run the ball. Plus, we've got a pretty good one already, so not many touches available.

If you were a team with a game manager type QB and needed to run the ball and play-action pass to be successful maybe you think about it.

But RB's don't last all that long, it's a brutal position. A lot of guys flame out fast.

And then there's the fact that good RBs can be found anywhere in the draft, and I just think it's not good value.

Not trying to 'talk down to anyone' or anything.

These are all fair points, and I mostly agree with them.

But I think if you're talking about adding a Saquon (Robinson) or Kamara (Gibbs) in their prime it's a bit of a different animal. Last time we won the SB and Andy asked Pat who he wanted to add in the draft, he asked for CEH because he was viewed as a dynamic weapon that unfortunately didn't really pan out. This could be a chance to draft what Mahomes was hoping for with CEH all along, but with greater upside in Gibbs. Remember, McKinnon was like our #3 WR last season and Andy loves his screen passes.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato

These are all fair points, and I mostly agree with them.

But I think if you're talking about adding a Saquon (Robinson) or Kamara (Gibbs) in their prime it's a bit of a different animal.

Last time we won the SB and Andy asked Pat who he wanted to add in the draft, he asked for CEH because he was viewed as a dynamic weapon that unfortunately didn't really pan out. This could be a chance to draft what Mahomes was hoping for with CEH all along, but with greater upside in Gibbs.

Well, yeah, but we didn't have needs at OT, DE, or WR when we took Clyde.

[Couch-Potato]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Well, yeah, but we didn't have needs at OT, DE, or WR when we took Clyde.

I'd be happy with an OT, but a weapon, WR or RB, would be a lot more exciting!

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by Couch-Potato

I'd be happy with an OT, but a weapon, WR or RB, would be a lot more exciting!

I'm with you on a WR.

I'm very high on Pacheco, and I'm pretty sure they'll bring Mckinnon back, so I don't see a lot of touches for a RB.

Personally, I'd prefer to move DOWN out of the first into the 40's and pick up an extra third. I really think this draft is pretty deep but not a lot of splashy first round talent.

I'd like to have as many picks in the second and third rounds as possible.

But I don't know what we'll do.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Well, yeah, but we didn't have needs at OT, DE, or WR when we took Clyde.

That was the problem with taking Clyde though. They had needs at WR long term, they ended up getting ****ed at OT so that's just bad timing.

But they should have looked ahead a little and gotten ahead of the curve.

The thing with Gibbs where I do like him is that he could be a WR/RB/split end type guy here and just do everything so you could have him on the field with Pacheco etc.

But I still ain't taking one in the first round. No chance.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by O.city

That was the problem with taking Clyde though. They had needs at WR long term, they ended up getting ****ed at OT so that's just bad timing.

But they should have looked ahead a little and gotten ahead of the curve.

The thing with Gibbs where I do like him is that he could be a WR/RB/split end type guy here and just do everything so you could have him on the field with Pacheco etc.

But I still ain't taking one in the first round. No chance.

Yeah, I don't hate the player or anything, just not sure about the fit. But if you project him as a 'joker' wild-card kind of offensive weapon I could see Andy getting excited.

I really feel like we need either a high upside burner to improve/replace MVS in '24 or a true 'X', bigger, more physical type to do the Watkins thing. If Toney's your Hill guy and Skyy's your slot guy.