The Kansas City Chiefs won the Super Bowl without a star wide receiver, but they could reportedly make an elite offense even scarier by acquiring DeAndre Hopkins.
NFL insider Benjamin Albright told PHNX Cardinals that Kansas City is the "primary suitor" for Hopkins. He doesn't know the draft compensation the Cardinals would receive, but he said it's more likely they get a second-round pick than a first.
After the 2022 season, theScore's Jordan Schultz reported that the Cardinals plan to trade Hopkins this offseason.
Arizona hired a new general manager and head coach after a disappointing four-win season, and Hopkins is set to make $19.45 million (with a $30.75 million cap hit) in 2023. The Cardinals could seek a clean slate by moving the three-time All-Pro wideout, who turns 31 in June.
Hopkins began his Cardinals career by tallying 1,407 yards and six touchdowns in 2020. However, multiple lower body injuries limited him to 10 games in 2021, and he served a six-game suspension to start the 2022 season for violating the NFL's PED policy.
Yet he remains an impact player when on the field. Hopkins totaled 474 receiving yards in six full games with quarterback Kyler Murray last season.
Now imagine what he can accomplish when catching passes from Patrick Mahomes.
The Chiefs flourished without a star replacement for Tyreek Hill, but they could still benefit by solidifying the position this offseason. JuJu Smith-Schuster is a free agent after garnering 78 catches for 933 yards on a one-year deal. The depth chart features several talented question marks in Mecole Hardman, Kadarius Toney, and Marquez Valdes-Scantling.
Adding Hopkins could be great news for Kansas City, but terrible for all opposing defenses.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In no way shape or form is it a good idea to do what Green Bay does. It worked for us this year but it's not a great strategy because honestly your margin for error becomes razor thin. The end of the Bengals game when Marcus Kemp is out there speaks to that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
In no way shape or form is it a good idea to do what Green Bay does. It worked for us this year but it's not a great strategy because honestly your margin for error becomes razor thin. The end of the Bengals game when Marcus Kemp is out there speaks to that.
Right.
All this season proved was that Mahomes CAN win with a bunch of middling guys.
That doesn't mean this season proved it was a good idea going forward.
This team should always be looking to improve, no matter what. Thankfully, that's Brett Veach's MO so we're all good. [Reply]
All this season proved was that Mahomes CAN win with a bunch of middling guys.
That doesn't mean this season proved it was a good idea going forward.
This team should always be looking to improve, no matter what. Thankfully, that's Brett Veach's MO so we're all good.
My exact thought process...
Like guys he would be the BEST WR he has ever had. Why the fuck not, yes will we lose some guys? Sure but we have already LOST guys because of contracts.
What I think Hopkins can potentially provide is 2-3 year window of TRUE dominance on the offensive front.
We HAVE to capitilize on not just Mahomes window (Bigger) but Kelces window. We have 3-5 year left of top tier TE play.
Does ADDING HOPKINS allow Kelce to dominate a little longer? [Reply]
It really is about maximizing Kelce's window...... And if adding a future HOF X-WR to take double off of him helps add to his longevity I want it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
In no way shape or form is it a good idea to do what Green Bay does. It worked for us this year but it's not a great strategy because honestly your margin for error becomes razor thin. The end of the Bengals game when Marcus Kemp is out there speaks to that.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Right.
All this season proved was that Mahomes CAN win with a bunch of middling guys.
That doesn't mean this season proved it was a good idea going forward.
This team should always be looking to improve, no matter what. Thankfully, that's Brett Veach's MO so we're all good.
I've been thinking about this lately, wasn't sure how to really quantify or express it, but you guys did a good job here.
Ideally, yeah, you keep drafting and having great drafts. It's just that it isn't feasible to continue to constantly hit like we did. If you get 2 or 3 starters out of a draft, that's a hell of a hit.
We also can't just keep asking Mahomes to be all time great kinda player every season. He's gonna likely do it, but at some point, you just have to keep weapons around him. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
I've been thinking about this lately, wasn't sure how to really quantify or express it, but you guys did a good job here.
Ideally, yeah, you keep drafting and having great drafts. It's just that it isn't feasible to continue to constantly hit like we did. If you get 2 or 3 starters out of a draft, that's a hell of a hit.
We also can't just keep asking Mahomes to be all time great kinda player every season. He's gonna likely do it, but at some point, you just have to keep weapons around him.
You'd also like that if he plays at an all time level the players around him make that a historic season like 5800 yards and 60 TD's. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BleedingRed:
I also like having a vet WR in the WR room. Hopkins has never had beef with players to my knowledge.
Mentoring guys like Toney/Sky is something we need. MVS/JuJu don't have the same ability to pull those young guys in like Hopkins will.
j
Shit, we all want Toney to eventually be the WR1? No better mentor than a true WR1 like DHop, who just happens to have many of the exact same attributes/skillsets.
But nah, let’s not have Toney/Skyy learn from one of the best to ever do it, let’s just squander these formative years learning from MVS and the like. Makes sense. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Megatron96:
Shit, we all want Toney to eventually be the WR1? No better mentor than a true WR1 like DHop, who just happens to have many of the exact same attributes/skillsets.
Until Toney shows he can play a full season you can't just mark him down as reliable. [Reply]
