Report: Chiefs May Move into top 5 to Draft Kalil

[Jrudi]

Sporting News is reporting that there is a lot of interest in USC's Matt Kahlil coming from Chiefs camp, and that there is talk that if the prospect falls past the Vikings, that the Chiefs are serious about moving up to #4 to draft him.

The report says the move makes sense, seeing as Albert only has 1 year left on his contract. The draft move would then cause a shift on the line, and have Albert move inside to LG.

We would then have a year to decide to re-sign Albert for the long term to man the LG position, or let him walk and still have Kahlil at a more reasonable salary.

What are the thoughts on this report?

Like it? Love it? Hate it? Not Sure?

[texaschief]

NOTHING in that article changes the fact that Albert isn't under contract after the '12 season. HOPING Albert signs an extension is sticking your head in the ground and not addressing the situation. Your argument for not taking a LT early in the first should work even stronger for not taking an OG just a few picks later. If a franchise LT isn't worth the pick at #5, a franchise OG (a much less important position and much easier to fill) isn't worth the pick at #11.

You can throw out all the stats you'd like, but until Albert signs on the dotted line, there will still be a need at LT for the future of this franchise and doing nothing but hoping for an extension next year from the incumbent is putting the team in a very bad situation heading into the 2013 season. Of course, this argument is based on not knowing what Pioli knows about the contract negotiations with Albert. Maybe he knows he can get a deal done with Albert if the cards don't fall the way he'd like and can use that as a safety net.

Either way, the future of the LT position needs to be locked up before the first snap of the 2012 season.

[Ryfo18]

Either way, the future of the LT position needs to be locked up before the first snap of the 2012 season.

Why? There are two more drafts and another free agency period before we're potentially "without" a LT. Why does it have to be addressed this year? Your solution is to trade up (which would likely cost a third, maybe a second) to draft a position which we won't know for sure whether we will even need until next year.

Dwayne Bowe will be a FA next year? Why not trade up and take Blackmon then? Especially since all of the references I've posted are saying how QBs/WRs are more important than your LTs.

The answer? Because it's foolish. There are going to be some solid players available at 11: Kuechly, DeCastro, Barron, Fletcher Cox (maybe)...And you also don't get rid of another high draft pick.

As for DeCastro, I wouldn't mind at all taking him at 11. Some teams have rated DeCastro as the 3rd best tackle in the draft (Source: http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/...avid-decastro). So either way, you get a franchise LG, and potentially a LT if Albert moves on from the Chiefs next year.

Simply put, there is no reason to panic about the Chiefs and their left tackle situation. There is a whole period of free agency and 14 more rounds of draft picks that will take place before we can officially say "Oh crap, we don't have a LT." Heck, they could even franchise tag Albert next year, then we're talking 2 more free agency periods and 3 drafts to address the tackle position.

[HaliForPresident]

There is absolutely no chance DeCastro plays LT in the NFL so if Chiefs draft him he will NOT potentially play LT. He's too good at OG and his skill set fills the requirements to be a great OG, not OT. McShay and Kiper both have said this multiple times and they don't consider him a potential OT. That's like moving Berry to CB because a shut down corner is considered more important than safety. You don't just graduate to OT if you get too good at OG, they are two completely different positions.

[Ryfo18]

There is absolutely no chance DeCastro plays LT in the NFL so if Chiefs draft him he will NOT potentially play LT. He's too good at OG and his skill set fills the requirements to be a great OG, not OT. McShay and Kiper both have said this multiple times and they don't consider him a potential OT. That's like moving Berry to CB because a shut down corner is considered more important than safety. You don't just graduate to OT if you get too good at OG, they are two completely different positions.

I'm just passing on the word...don't shoot the messenger. Obviously if some teams in the NFL think he can play LT, then he can potentially play LT. McShay and Kiper are talking faces for the biggest company in "Sports Entertainment": ESPN.

[TopekaRoy]

Here's a quote from Greg Cosell, who is widely regarded by many as one of the best film study guys in the business:

"Interestingly, that's exactly the point NFLFilms' Greg Cosell made recently. His argument is basically this: of the four "priority positions" -- quarterback, left tackle, pass rusher and shutdown cornerback -- left tackle has become less important because "The elite quarterbacks camouflage and compensate for offensive line deficiencies in many ways. … It's often the case that the quarterback takes care of the impact pass rusher with his advanced abilities both pre- and post-snap." Cosell adds: "In a passing league, it clearly makes sense defensively to do two things: rush the quarterback and cover receivers." "

This actually reinforces my point. While I don't disagree with his comments, they don't apply to the Chiefs.

#1) Cassel is not an elite quarterback. He can do very well with a good o-line, but he needs more time to throw the ball in order to be effective.

#2) the Chiefs are one of only a few NFL teams that rely heavily on running the ball (to eat up clock, rest the defense, reduce the chances of turnovers and soften opponents defenses against the pass).

I'm still not convinced that moving up to get Kalil will be worth the cost, but having a very good LT is important to this team. We can get by without one only if we can get an elite QB and change our entire offensive scheme. And we aren't going to do that this year.

[figcrostic]

There is absolutely no chance DeCastro plays LT in the NFL so if Chiefs draft him he will NOT potentially play LT. He's too good at OG and his skill set fills the requirements to be a great OG, not OT. McShay and Kiper both have said this multiple times and they don't consider him a potential OT. That's like moving Berry to CB because a shut down corner is considered more important than safety. You don't just graduate to OT if you get too good at OG, they are two completely different positions.

Isn't that how our current LT got the job?

[TopekaRoy]

Isn't that how our current LT got the job?

There are some guys who can play both positions, but there are physical differences for the two positions. You want a guard to be big, heavy and hard to move. Tackles tend to be taller and leaner with longer arms and lots of upper body strength. Tackles are also usually more athletic than guards.

A good center can usually play guard, but not necessarily vice-versa. It's usually easier for a tackle to move to guard than the other way around, but it depends on the player.

[chiefsflow]

Moving up to 5 will cost so much! He seems a good player but not worth what it would cost us.

[chief31]

Why? There are two more drafts and another free agency period before we're potentially "without" a LT. Why does it have to be addressed this year? Your solution is to trade up (which would likely cost a third, maybe a second) to draft a position which we won't know for sure whether we will even need until next year.

Dwayne Bowe will be a FA next year? Why not trade up and take Blackmon then? Especially since all of the references I've posted are saying how QBs/WRs are more important than your LTs.

The answer? Because it's foolish. There are going to be some solid players available at 11: Kuechly, DeCastro, Barron, Fletcher Cox (maybe)...And you also don't get rid of another high draft pick.

As for DeCastro, I wouldn't mind at all taking him at 11. Some teams have rated DeCastro as the 3rd best tackle in the draft (Source: http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/...avid-decastro). So either way, you get a franchise LG, and potentially a LT if Albert moves on from the Chiefs next year.

Simply put, there is no reason to panic about the Chiefs and their left tackle situation. There is a whole period of free agency and 14 more rounds of draft picks that will take place before we can officially say "Oh crap, we don't have a LT." Heck, they could even franchise tag Albert next year, then we're talking 2 more free agency periods and 3 drafts to address the tackle position.

That is an interesting situation where you call one a fool for drafting for a position where the current starter only has one year left on his contract, especially since you chose to take that comparison to WR......Johnathan Baldwin.

[texaschief]

Why? There are two more drafts and another free agency period before we're potentially "without" a LT. Why does it have to be addressed this year? Your solution is to trade up (which would likely cost a third, maybe a second) to draft a position which we won't know for sure whether we will even need until next year.

Dwayne Bowe will be a FA next year? Why not trade up and take Blackmon then? Especially since all of the references I've posted are saying how QBs/WRs are more important than your LTs.

The answer? Because it's foolish. There are going to be some solid players available at 11: Kuechly, DeCastro, Barron, Fletcher Cox (maybe)...And you also don't get rid of another high draft pick.

As for DeCastro, I wouldn't mind at all taking him at 11. Some teams have rated DeCastro as the 3rd best tackle in the draft (Source: http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/...avid-decastro). So either way, you get a franchise LG, and potentially a LT if Albert moves on from the Chiefs next year.

Simply put, there is no reason to panic about the Chiefs and their left tackle situation. There is a whole period of free agency and 14 more rounds of draft picks that will take place before we can officially say "Oh crap, we don't have a LT." Heck, they could even franchise tag Albert next year, then we're talking 2 more free agency periods and 3 drafts to address the tackle position.

Well, if we don't address the position in this year's draft, that means one draft is out of your equation. Elite LTs don't hit the open market, so there goes that option. As for next year's draft, we'll probably be picking in the mid-late 20s which means we're not getting an elite LT at that spot either without giving up MUCH more than what we would this year by moving up only 6 spots.

We're not trading up for Blackmon because we already got our guy in Baldwin last season... (see the correlation?)

Just because you don't have foresight doesn't mean the LT position doesn't need to be addressed one way or the other.