Our friend Lyle Graversen’s new piece for FanSided is up and his message may be hard to swallow for Chiefs fans. Graversen ranked all 32 of the NFL’s draft classes and found that Kansas City’s did not stack up well compared to the rest of the NFL.
Here’s what he had to say about the Kansas City Chiefs:
This was a hard team for me to slot. As a confessed KC fan, I didn’t want to be a total homer and rate them too high when they clearly ignored what most perceived as their primary needs: WR, OL, and safety. They didn’t take a true WR at all, or a safety, and they waited on offensive line until the 6th round. That having been said, I really like the players they did get. Dee Ford is a great pass rusher, Phillip Gaines has #1 CB upside, De’Anthony Thomas will help fill the void left by Dexter McCluster, Aaron Murray is a perfect developmental QB for Andy Reid, and the offensive linemen they took in the 6th round have some upside. I simply can’t ignore the fact that they overlooked their roster holes. Five years down the road people may view this draft class much more positively, but right now there are some questions.
I’ll let you hop on over to his piece to see where the Chiefs ranked, but as you can see it wasn’t very high.
One thought I had while reading Lyle’s take on the Chiefs’ draft:
It is an interesting division he and many others have about their concern for what positions the Chiefs drafted compared to the quality of talent they acquired.
There seems to be an agreement the Chiefs brought in a good deal of talent and value in the draft. Graversen does a good job of summarizing the upside potential for all six picks. Those thoughts he expresses coincide pretty well with what many other respected NFL people are saying about the individual talent the Chiefs acquired. Most seem to really like their draft in that regard.
But while there is an agreement about the talent, there seems be a frustration about that talent not being associated with an immediate need. Lyle even says in his post we may view this draft very positively five years from now. Isn’t that what we want? Doesn’t the long-term success of the class mean more than the immediate needs of the team?
It would seem the team would be worse off if they had selected a player with slightly less talent but filled an immediate need for 2014 as opposed to, what we believe, selecting the more talented player with less emphasis on what position he plays. It is an interesting juxtaposition to watch unfold.
Anyway, Graversen’s piece is really good (as always) so go check it out.