Chiefs Talking Heads: Q&A With David and Laddie

Chiefs Talking Heads: Q&A With David and Laddie– Here’s a conversation David Bell and Laddie Morse had which hopefully will answer some relevant questions on some fan’s minds.

.

David’s Q: If the Chiefs trade back, looking at the basic positions Veach said the focus would be on [OL, DL, LB], should the Chiefs draft an OT as the 31st pick?

Laddie’s A: The Chiefs should only draft an OT with the first pick if:

• they have not signed one in FA, and
• they can’t draft a top DT, and
• they can’t locate a top player who rates definitely higher on their board at that point (whatever point they end up drafting at).

.

Laddie’s Q: Will the level of need, at certain positions change the way KC values specific Free Agents and/or Draft Prospects? If so, will Veach do much trading up or down the board in the draft, to get his man?

David’s A: Veach and Co build position by position draft charts and use that. They stick with it as far as I can tell. If their #1 for OT is equal to a #1 WR, and if the players are equal in rating, then they would select the OT. If they were not the same level ranking? That’s where my question really comes in. They would choose the higher ranked player if the rankings were disparate.

They focus on positions of need in deliberating free agents. They must do so. I wonder about how important the individual position was at OG, selecting Thuney, but it made perfect sense and fit what they could afford (even though it was a first wave signing).

I think Veach will definitely consider moving up to obtain a player that fills a specific need who is higher ranked than players below. Take Mahomes as the only real matching comparison to that. Will they do this for an OT? I think Veach and Co — with Reid and coaches in consultation — would trade up, if they could make it happen and the player they want is so coveted enough as to require the trade up. That could be OT this year as a consideration.

We do not see much trading down specifically, but where it fits to get extra picks, say in the 1st 120 players? He would do that as you and I have discussed (somewhat endlessly). It makes sense to us? Veach has got to see it too as you noted.

.

David’s Q: Do you agree that the Chiefs should never draft a bridge player in the draft – only the BPA as determined by the top players available in the position group regardless of need?

Laddie’s A: I agree that K.C. should only sign a bridge player… but they should draft for the future. 

.

Laddie’s Q: Now that [OG] Joe Thuney is signed for big money, what do you think are the odds that Veach will still go after an Offensive Tackle in Free Agency?

David’s A: They will sign a F/A OT. He may not be a top level signing, but I hope he is ranked up there because we have Niang opposite. I now am back to believing that Niang will be ROT again, draft a guy for the position and sign a F/A that can start if we have to do so. Best if we can get a player who is in that intermediate range, but qualified for long term starter on the left. Worth it to protect Patrick and ensure he has time to pass (which was missing a bunch in 2020).

.

.

David’s Q: If there is a LOT out there that will cost us something like Joe Thuney’s range, would you use that to get the LOT aboard (with a future of something like 5 years)?

Laddie’s A: Kyle Long who is scheduled to meet with the Chiefs. At 32, he would not be a long term anser on the OL… which… I think likely reflects Veach and Reid’s mindset as well. –> Get a bridge player in the meantime, then develop a drafted player to take over once Long is long gone.

.

Laddie’s Q: Is this at all what Andy Reid had in mind when he said: “The OL is not bleak like everyone thinks”?

David’s A: I have to believe Andy and Brett are at least hooked at the hip. They knew what was faced with Fish and Mitch. They also knew that Austin Reiter was not a solution…. time to move on from all three. Why they spent coach speak on anticipating the return of both players is a question. I think Veach made a decision based on logic and coaches input of course. All 3 departed, but at the same time they had to be putting their heads over a bottle of beer or 2 and knew the possible avenues that would open up. Thuney was the right choice. If they put Niang at ROT and try to start a [drafted] LOT, we will have learning curve issues with it. If they go for a big gun [Free Agent] , it solves the problem as long as that can be a 3-5 year projection. If they go the intermediate route, it is a “Bridge player.” Can Kyle Long handle LOT? I haven’t looked into his playing time yet. I suppose if it is, he could be a bridge to 2023. Or even 2022. If he can play longer and do well? Then I can see Niang moving inside, for example. However, that depends on what he can really do inside. Plus, he wants to be the next ROT, at least from what he’s said in recent past.

.

Closing Remarks

David

I think Veach overruled Andy on this one. He obtained one piece of the puzzle with Niang and another with Thuney. I am not totally sold on LDT returning either but for the sake of stating where things stand right now, my illustration I sent earlier suffices.

LOT? ROT – Niang, SW/T = Remmers hired back? The depth at OG is Durant and Rankin. If they cut LDT, then competition at ROG is between Rankin and Durant. That’s not a bad thing. Of course, we still have desperate need for a starting LOT and I prefer that not be a rookie unless they know which player they want, who has better feet than Fish, which eases his break-in time. Hence the LOT F/A doesn’t need to be top notch or top commitment. If Long fits that picture, then great. If the newcomer can win the spot outright? I am good with that too. We need to see some more pieces added to the puzzle to really anticipate what the draft will look like. Hence my original question about drafting an LOT (or ROT if Niang can move left side). I don’t think they can count their chickens until the decision is made. Best choice? Find a top player and spend the money on that F/A. Niang on the right and the other players fall in place.

You’re not going to like this, but now that Kyle Long has been signed, Reid might go with him ay RG, move Niang to LT then have Rankin in at RT. That also means, it may be time to cut ties with LDT and get a fresh start across the board on the OL.

Laddie

No question at this point that Veach is faced with signing a Free Agent Tackle. Whether that player is a Right OT or a Left OT doesn’t matter because Lucas Niang can flip to the side untaken. While I prefer to see him settle in on the Right side and stay there for the next ten years, Veach may be faced with signing a guy who can only play the Right side so…. The freeing up of Travis Kelce’s dollars makes me think another move is forthcoming and after the Tackle situation is resolved, I’m hoping WR or DL or LB is next. These positional resolutions may not happen this week, but some time prior to the draft, is a must.

With Kyle Long under contract, Veach may be touting him at an OT, so he’s not perceived as needing a Tackles, then turn around and draft a Tackle early in the draft. From Michael David Smith:

.

“The Chiefs, who might have won the Super Bowl with a better offensive line, have now added two veteran guards in Long and Joe Thuney. The identity of their starting tackles remains to be seen.”

.

For a closer look at the Joe Thuney signing, and Seth Keysor’s take, here’s his first visit to RGR Football with Ryan Tracy.

.

.

David Bell Laddie Morse — ArrowheadOne

.

If you are viewing this in Apple News and would like to join the Discussion, [GO HERE.](http://arrowheadone.com/chiefs-talking-heads-qa-with-david-and-laddie/#disqus_thread)

.