Doesn't look like such a hard task to rebuild the defense now, does it.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by The Pest

I think realistically you want to come out of this offseason with the following positions:

A starting defensive end to replace Bailey.
Depth at the OLB spot.
A starting ILB opposite of Hitchens.
A starting CB opposite of Ward (who I think has starting material) and a depth CB.

The safety position is the probably the hardest to determine. I think Sorenson should be cut because his talent doesn't match his contract. Berry is the wild card because of his injury and contract. If it were up to me....I'd look for another starter and a depth piece while cutting Sorenson and Berry.

I don't see a viable path to cutting Berry if/when he fails his physical and 80% of his 2019 salary ends up guaranteed.

And I think Fuller plays enough outside in our base sets that I am comfortable considering him our CB1 with Ward as the CB2. Ideally you'd find another starting caliber CB but I don't think I want to pay what the market bears for one, especially when I'm as desperate as I am to get Jones and Hill extended. Hell, I'd sure love to lock up Fuller for the foreseeable future as well.

If you have about $25 million in cap space after tagging Ford and cutting Sorensen, you can probably just barely get those 3 guys extended (and I mean barely). Even if they have relatively paltry year 1 base salries, they're gonna still carry $6-8 million cap hits when you spread those signing bonuses over 5 years. I gotta believe you're looking at at least $20 million in year 1 cap figures to get those 3 extended (and probably upwards of $70 million in cash spending by Clark to get those bonuses paid which isn't exactly a given).

I just think the idea of going out into the market and adding any key pieces is pretty damn optimistic. And you're not getting much more active in 2020 either as Houston/Berry/Watkins dropping off will pretty much pay for the inevitable raises built into the contracts for Hill, Jones and Fuller. We'd be able to move on from Hitchens at that point but it would be painful so if he's even average we'd hold onto him.

Cutting Houston, Berry and Watkins in 2020 would free up about $40 million and that should be enough to cover the massive base salary increases that you see in year 2 of those extensions. I don't see restructuring being the answer either; the money just isn't there if we hope to hold onto the 'new core' of players in their early/mid 20s. And I know Watkins is in that age range himself but injuries and likely earning potential just makes holding onto him incredibly unlikely, IMO.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I don't see a viable path to cutting Berry if/when he fails his physical and 80% of his 2019 salary ends up guaranteed.

And I think Fuller plays enough outside in our base sets that I am comfortable considering him our CB1 with Ward as the CB2. Ideally you'd find another starting caliber CB but I don't think I want to pay what the market bears for one, especially when I'm as desperate as I am to get Jones and Hill extended. Hell, I'd sure love to lock up Fuller for the foreseeable future as well.

If you have about $25 million in cap space after tagging Ford and cutting Sorensen, you can probably just barely get those 3 guys extended (and I mean barely). Even if they have relatively paltry year 1 base salries, they're gonna still carry $6-8 million cap hits when you spread those signing bonuses over 5 years. I gotta believe you're looking at at least $20 million in year 1 cap figures to get those 3 extended (and probably upwards of $70 million in cash spending by Clark to get those bonuses paid which isn't exactly a given).

I just think the idea of going out into the market and adding any key pieces is pretty damn optimistic. And you're not getting much more active in 2020 either as Houston/Berry/Watkins dropping off will pretty much pay for the inevitable raises built into the contracts for Hill, Jones and Fuller. We'd be able to move on from Hitchens at that point but it would be painful so if he's even average we'd hold onto him.

Cutting Houston, Berry and Watkins in 2020 would free up about $40 million and that should be enough to cover the massive base salary increases that you see in year 2 of those extensions. I don't see restructuring being the answer either; the money just isn't there if we hope to hold onto the 'new core' of players in their early/mid 20s. And I know Watkins is in that age range himself but injuries and likely earning potential just makes holding onto him incredibly unlikely, IMO.

I don't know if there are any FAs that I would be looking at bringing in right now anyways.

And I'm still torn on tagging Ford or trying to give him a Watkins type deal where you can get out in year 3.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by The Pest

I don't know if there are any FAs that I would be looking at bringing in right now anyways.

And I'm still torn on tagging Ford or trying to give him a Watkins type deal where you can get out in year 3.

I'd pay the man, personally. And try to get him through year 3; escape in 4.

If he'd take Melvin Ingram's deal with a 10% kicker, I'd do it in a heartbeat. I don't think this is a contract year special because I've heard the guy speak enough that I think he's genuine. I think he's simply a guy who's finally healthy and who's learned a TON in his time here.

The nice thing about Ingram's deal is that the Chargers can escape after year 2 or 3 relatively easily or even let all 4 years play out and be fine. If that's the structure of Ford's deal it would protect the Chiefs in the event of a back injury. And with a $10 million signing bonus as well as a tick over $12 million in year one base/roster bonuses, he got paid $21 million in actual cash when he signed that deal - that's a hell of a boost over the $16 million or so he'd get under the tag.

He'd also get $34 million in the first 2 years which is a little under what he'd make if he played under the tag twice, but would be fully guaranteed which is a fair tradeoff (give a little back to have it guaranteed vs. trying to earn a tag the 2nd year).

And if it doesn't work out you can bail after 2020 and free up the money you'll need to get Mahomes extension worked out. If he HAS played to his contract then you at least have a trade asset if needed.

Ingrams deal would be a perfect template, IMO. Provided he decides he'd take it rather than go into the market looking for a Houston or Von Miller contract that I wouldn't be willing to give him.

[ntexascardfan]

I'd love to get a guy like Taylor Rapp at the end of the first round. I'd even trade up a bit to get him.

He's one of the better graded safeties in the country last season, initiates contact with a nasty violence and he missed like 2-3 tackles all year.

[The Franchise]

Just putting this together in 30 seconds.....but something like this:

Re-sign Ford, Hill and Jones.
Cut Sorenson

Draft

1. Jerry Tillery, DE, Notre Dame
2. Trayvon Mullen, CB, Clemson
2. Taylor Rapp, S, Washington

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by The Pest

Just putting this together in 30 seconds.....but something like this:

Re-sign Ford, Hill and Jones.
Cut Sorenson

Draft

1. Jerry Tillery, DE, Notre Dame
2. Trayvon Mullen, CB, Clemson
2. Taylor Rapp, S, Washington

Would JIMP if Mullen fell that far and we could get Tillery as well.

That would be a pretty perfect draft in terms of needs/talent.

[Walt White]

We may not have the cap to do this, but is it possible we do something crazy like sign Earl Thomas or trade for Patrick Peterson?

I know we have a lot of people to pay and the draft is a much cheaper, easier option. But I hope we bring in some proven players too. A lot of vets are on the market that shouldn't cost as much.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by Walt White

We may not have the cap to do this, but is it possible we do something crazy like sign Earl Thomas or trade for Patrick Peterson?

I know we have a lot of people to pay and the draft is a much cheaper, easier option. But I hope we bring in some proven players too. A lot of vets are on the market that shouldn't cost as much.

I think one of those things is possible; both are not.

I think trading for Peterson could have happened, and of course Earl Thomas would love to play with Berry. A safety tandem of Thomas and (a healthy) Berry would negate the need for elite corners for a season or two.

[Walt White]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I think one of those things is possible; both are not.

I think trading for Peterson could have happened, and of course Earl Thomas would love to play with Berry. A safety tandem of Thomas and (a healthy) Berry would negate the need for elite corners for a season or two.

The problem is I'm not confident Berry can stay healthy. If we sign a good safety (not even necessarily Thomas), it could still be a good idea to draft another one in top 3 rounds. Same with corner.

I would even be fine with drafting straight BPA and patching any left over holes with FA's and trades. But obviously we should focus on defense.

[O.city]

Theres just so much damn money out there in free agency, it's tough to get guys on decent deals anymore.

[O.city]

I wouldn't go in the draft looking for a certain position. Just set your board and see what happens.

[tmax63]

The Chiefs need draft 2 DBs, S or CB in their first 3 picks this year and 2 of 3 on defense next year as well. If they get too many good DBs they can always trade later but until then you work on the defensive talent. Free agency will take care of itself. KC is entering the same area Denver did when they got Manning. Receivers will line up to come and play with PMII and other FAs will want to be a part of the team with a chance. And they won't have to overpay to get them, just reasonable/fair deals and the potential to win a ring.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by tmax63

The Chiefs need draft 2 DBs, S or CB in their first 3 picks this year and 2 of 3 on defense next year as well. If they get too many good DBs they can always trade later but until then you work on the defensive talent. Free agency will take care of itself. KC is entering the same area Denver did when they got Manning. Receivers will line up to come and play with PMII and other FAs will want to be a part of the team with a chance. And they won't have to overpay to get them, just reasonable/fair deals and the potential to win a ring.

I just think we're in a different cap era. The market is so insanely flush with cash that a guy like Albert Wilson can get PAID by just hitting the market.

And sure, it's possible that coming here on a 1-year, make good offer can help get a WR paid, but then you end up with roster churn at a position that is extremely difficult to pick up in this offense.

I just don't think it's a good idea washing through wideouts and I think a team with this QB should start treating developmental WRs a little bit like most teams treat developmental QBs and CBs - you could justify drafting one in the later rounds pretty much ever single draft. A 3rd-5th going after a WR with measurables and tools from a run heavy college offense could be brought in seemingly every season and after a year of coaching in this system, you see what you've got.

I get the desire to throw resources at the defense and I certainly can't argue with a tilt in that direction, but I don't think you can just start earmarking 60% of your draft capital towards DBs over the coming years. You just don't know how the board will come together and whether or not that's a good decision.

One thing I loved about Dorsey was his focus on measurables and long windows when it came to DBs. Go get the guy who's measurables compare favorably to this year's 1st day pick but who slipped because he's raw or came out of a small school or left a year early (DAMN YOU FULTON!!!! -- Man that dude was in my wheelhouse before he went back to LSU). Get him in here and give him a year of seasoning to see if you have a guy who's tools can play at this level but with a hell of a lot less organizational capital plowed into him.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I just think we're in a different cap era. The market is so insanely flush with cash that a guy like Albert Wilson can get PAID by just hitting the market.

And sure, it's possible that coming here on a 1-year, make good offer can help get a WR paid, but then you end up with roster churn at a position that is extremely difficult to pick up in this offense.

I just don't think it's a good idea washing through wideouts and I think a team with this QB should start treating developmental WRs a little bit like most teams treat developmental QBs and CBs - you could justify drafting one in the later rounds pretty much ever single draft. A 3rd-5th going after a WR with measurables and tools from a run heavy college offense could be brought in seemingly every season and after a year of coaching in this system, you see what you've got.

I get the desire to throw resources at the defense and I certainly can't argue with a tilt in that direction, but I don't think you can just start earmarking 60% of your draft capital towards DBs over the coming years. You just don't know how the board will come together and whether or not that's a good decision.

One thing I loved about Dorsey was his focus on measurables and long windows when it came to DBs. Go get the guy who's measurables compare favorably to this year's 1st day pick but who slipped because he's raw or came out of a small school or left a year early (DAMN YOU FULTON!!!! -- Man that dude was in my wheelhouse before he went back to LSU). Get him in here and give him a year of seasoning to see if you have a guy who's tools can play at this level but with a hell of a lot less organizational capital plowed into him.

Do you feel like Tremon Smith fits that mold?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by The Pest

Do you feel like Tremon Smith fits that mold?

Yes in that he's the kind of talent that I think you can/should target every draft.

No in that I think his almost total lack of awareness in his limited game action suggests that he's not one of the steals that you will occasionally stumble into.

That approach is going to yield precisely dick 4 times out of 5, in all likelihood, but it doesn't have to hit often to be hugely beneficial. And I'm not saying cut him because his physical tools say he should get at least one more shot to stick, but he's the kind of guy you are constantly layering. Add another guy just like him next season and give that guy a season or two. Rinse, repeat. Constantly have 1 or 2 guys like that in the chamber to see what they have.

Yeah, I think Smith is exactly that kind of approach, but I don't think he's likely to amount to a ton. C'est la vie - there's little organizational capital invested in him so if you move on from him, you're not really hurt.

I also think most teams wildly underutilize UDFA's. Give me 10 UDFA's over my 5th, 6th and 7th round picks and I'll be happier with the pile of 10 UDFA's that I can comb through more often than not.

I wish I knew how to do a search for UDFA productivity over the last 5 years and compare it to guys drafted at least in the 6th and 7th rounds. The 5th may be a little ambitious but I'm betting there is at least as much production culled from the undrafted ranks every year than there are from those last couple of rounds. Ward vs. Smith is a great example of it.