Here we make some general observations and draw some modest conclusions.  The main observation is that speed in the d-backfield has changed significantly, with emphasis on football IQ.  This was definitely a need, but what about NT?  What about OT?  What about ILB?

Some will be livid that NT and ILB were not directly addressed.

How will things play out in the wake of this kind of draft?

The following lifted from  NFL.com Chiefs 'page:

I think most of us Kool-Aid drinkers are OK with the Berry pick. My only issue is how much man-to-man the #5 pick can play, which, to me, is the strongest argument to be made for taking a SS this high. If I see the Chiefs do what the early '90s Chiefs did, and play MORE aggressively against teams dumb enough to try spreadin' 'em out, instead of backing off in fear, I'll be more than satisfied.  I think that the Chiefs' formula against those early run 'n' shoot teams flowed largely from the strength of their secondary, so that Wayne Fontes' innovations were ineffective against aggressive nickel defenses fielded by teams like KC.

If spreading things out is less about exposing our defense down the field and more about exposing your QB to the KC pass rush, then this draft was a big win for KC.  And if powering-up to stop that blitz is the opposition's answer, then there are answers for THAT, as well, as the Colts have shown on numerous occasions in the last 10 or 15 years, with undersized defenses that were OK against the run, once you pulled your horns in.

Wiegmann, Lilja and now, Asamoah, signal a continued commitment to a well-conditioned and QUICK O-Line, a mobile pocket, and a ZB scheme.  And if you, like I, see Iupati as more of a hugger and less of a puncher, then Asamoah with 3b has to be seen as a real value pick, taking the best G and getting a great fit for Haley's model of offense at the same time.

I was arguing for more direct improvement to the OT position group, but nothing of the kind transpired.  That 2a pick that I thought was ideal for a great RT went for McCluster.  Once I got over my damn self, I was OK with that pick, because it gives the Chiefs a Jamaal Charles-type threat in-depth.  This could be critical to continuity of the offense.  KC can employ a scheme that doesn't need to be turned on its ear (or implode altogether) just because #25 gets a hangnail, to say nothing of slot WR, which is how most KC fans see McCluster (I'm not one of those.).

Common wisdom is that McCluster was a luxury pick, but I think the impact of Charles on the almost miraculous turnaround we saw on the OL is not to be discounted, and KC needs some Jamaal insurance, which McCluster will provide.  While the possibilities are intriguing, when one considers what Jamaal and Dexter being on the field at the same time presents, I think this pick might be more about maintaining forward progress, by ensuring that KC will always have some lightning in the bottle, and keep those homerun threats alive, even if Charles gets nicked.  In a way, the McCluster pick was an OL pick.

Rush LB was something I wanted to see.  Others argued that the sorts of 'tweeners you want for this role are just as available in the 5th as in the 1st-4th.  Apparenlty Pioli and staff concur with them, postponing any sort of pick for this purpose until picking Sheffield with 5b.

ILB and NT remain unaddressed - at least directly.  Except for Shaun Smith, no activity on NT.  I expect to see some activity, yet, on NT and ILB, thru FA, rookie or otherwise.  I think it likely that KC scouting has already found the prospects they intend to pursue in less-scouted places.  But not being thrilled with (m)any of the NT prospects in the draft, beyond Williams and Cody, and having questions about those two, I'm not so bummed as others.  I'd rather see KC pass 'em over than feel like they have to use a draft pick on a mediocre player.

I think the PON picks, so often made by King Carl, left the Chiefs with perennial weaknesses, because they were picking the BP remaining in a group where maybe NONE of the remaining players was NFL caliber.  The paradigm I seem to be seeing, here, is to get PLAYERS, but not make long-term commitments to players that are picked just because they fill a need, and are the best available from the pool of high-profile schools that everybody looks at on draft day.