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.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
It is when you argue that a WR1 would make mahomes get tunnel vision. That they're ballhogs. That it takes away from the offenses efficiency. There are plenty who believe a WR1 is regressive. So even if an elite WR1 was handed to us on a silver platter we wouldn't want it.
There's plenty of evidence it did exactly that at times in Hill's last season here, particularly the AFCCG. Coupled with the fact that snaps and targets get eaten up as well as a big chunk of the cap, yeah, it's not the way to go now that Mahomes is off his rookie deal.
Now, if Rice, Toney, or Skyy become serious weapons, then it's a good problem to have. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
Let me ask this... If Tyreek or Evans came to this offense for $20m would you take it?
No.
We literally don't have the cap space for that right now.
And looking at '24 and '25,it means that guys we'd like to keep we'll have to let go, AND, we have 3 young WRs that need to play to see if they can be great in their own right.
So, no. I think what they're doing is the best thing for the team. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
There's plenty of evidence it did exactly that at times in Hill's last season here, particularly the AFCCG. Coupled with the fact that snaps and targets get eaten up as well as a big chunk of the cap, yeah, it's not the way to go now that Mahomes is off his rookie deal.
Now, if Rice, Toney, or Skyy become serious weapons, then it's a good problem to have.
The offense was dominant the year we had Tyreek too. We had one of our best playoff games in history vs the bills then a 24 point half. our entire opinion of the Tyreek season is rooted one awful half of football. Beneath the numbers we had issues this year too. The big difference between this year and last is thar we dominated Cincy on defense.
Even still, mahomes is a different and better QB. Reid has a better understanding of how to beat these looks. And we have actual guys who can play off a wr1 whereas our offense always looked way worse without Sammy Watkins. What the right cost is and if we can afford it is plenty debatable. But the idea that a WR1 or even Tyreek for that matter hurts us (dollar value aside) is a bit of Hocus pocus. Veaxhs plan was to keep Tyreek and have juju play off of him and it's hard to imagine that wouldn't have also been great. Mahomes is way too good of a QB to believe his ceiling is to be an efficient catch and run QB. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
The offense was dominant the year we had Tyreek too. We had one of our best playoff games in history vs the bills then a 24 point half. our entire opinion of the Tyreek season is rooted one awful half of football. Beneath the numbers we had issues this year too. The big difference between this year and last is thar we dominated Cincy on defense.
Even still, mahomes is a different and better QB. Reid has a better understanding of how to beat these looks. And we have actual guys who can play off a wr1 whereas our offense always looked way worse without Sammy Watkins. What the right cost is and if we can afford it is plenty debatable. But the idea that a WR1 or even Tyreek for that matter hurts us (dollar value aside) is a bit of Hocus pocus. Veaxhs plan was to keep Tyreek and have juju play off of him and it's hard to imagine that wouldn't have also been great. Mahomes is way too good of a QB to believe his ceiling is to be an efficient catch and run QB.
But you CAN'T set aside the dollar value. It's crucial to how you build your team. Everything else may well be arguable, but you can't set the cap dollars aside, and that is my point.
We were more efficient, scored more points, and had more 'explosive' plays last year than in '21 with Hill. These are facts. So the difference is not worth the cap dollar investment when it means you have to do without good players at other spots on the team.
I'd LOVE for Toney, Rice, and Skyy Moore to all reach their potential and have a great trio of WR's. I'm hopeful one of them becomes a bonafide stud. Man, if all three hit, we're probably going to threepeat.
But part of the reason that would happen is the equally serious investment in the defense.
The issue isn't really the amount of money. Its the return on investment.
With Pat making what he makes, it does get tougher. But you still have money to play with. You can sign big money dudes like Tyreek or whoever. The issue is you have to have said player play to that level to get the return to equal the investment. With Pat and Andy here, they figure they can get more production per unit money spent cheaper on the offensive skill spots and spend resources elsewhere, with what was and has been available and or attainable.
That calculus may change if a guy like...say Jaylen Waddle or Justin Jefferson came available as Kelce ages out or something.
It's not one way or another. It's not "dont' pay WR's" it's more don't pay any that aren't worth it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by O.city:
The issue isn't really the amount of money. Its the return on investment.
With Pat making what he makes, it does get tougher. But you still have money to play with. You can sign big money dudes like Tyreek or whoever. The issue is you have to have said player play to that level to get the return to equal the investment. With Pat and Andy here, they figure they can get more production per unit money spent cheaper on the offensive skill spots and spend resources elsewhere, with what was and has been available and or attainable.
That calculus may change if a guy like...say Jaylen Waddle or Justin Jefferson came available as Kelce ages out or something.
It's not one way or another. It's not "dont' pay WR's" it's more don't pay any that aren't worth it.
Well, yeah, when Kelce ages out, then the calculus likely changes. But I think that's part of why they've invested heavily into the WR position in the last year plus. If one or more of these guys grows into a star, then you have time to address keeping them in two or three years depending on who it is.
But I agree, it's a return on investment/cap percentage calculus. And I'm not certain that better OL play doesn't somewhat negate the difference between a 'good' WR and a 'great' one somewhat. It's not going to help a shitty WR or a JAG, mind you-I'm not saying that.
But I don't think the Chiefs think Rice, Toney, or Skyy are JAGS or they wouldn't have spent the resources to get them.
I don't either, but that's just me. We'll see. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Rainbarrel:
DBs got too expensive, they found away around it. Now it's a overpriced WRs market, thanks Jags. Need to try another angle for now
It wasn't intentional though...they wanted to keep Tyreek, made a move to try to get AJ Brown, that says they aren't going with the idea of "eh we don't pay WRs" [Reply]
Originally Posted by RINGLEADER:
I get the argument that we don’t have a proven number one but there is a lot of talent and a bunch of players could take the step up. Even if many of the receivers from last season don’t take huge steps you’re still left with:
You’ve got 3600 yards before you get to any improvements Toney, Rice, or Moore make. If just one of the three can manage 1,000 yards you’re right back to 5,000+ and a top 3 offense at the worst.
The argument that you need Juju or Dhop or another true number one to make this offense fly gets undercut by Kelce who we all know is the real engine that makes it all work.
That is a pretty hefty “if”…
Maybe the expectations are more like an average of 400-500 yards between the 3 youngins’ to attain the ~5,000 total team receiving yards, yes? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Toad:
That is a pretty hefty “if”…
Maybe the expectations are more like an average of 400-500 yards between the 3 youngins’ to attain the ~5,000 total team receiving yards, yes?
This.
Reid's offense rarely gives out big numbers to WR's unless you are Terrell Owens or Tyreek Hill. [Reply]
Originally Posted by RINGLEADER:
I get the argument that we don’t have a proven number one but there is a lot of talent and a bunch of players could take the step up. Even if many of the receivers from last season don’t take huge steps you’re still left with:
You’ve got 3600 yards before you get to any improvements Toney, Rice, or Moore make. If just one of the three can manage 1,000 yards you’re right back to 5,000+ and a top 3 offense at the worst.
The argument that you need Juju or Dhop or another true number one to make this offense fly gets undercut by Kelce who we all know is the real engine that makes it all work.
Kelce is more likely to have 2k yards and 30 TDs than one of those three getting 1k.
If the Tony and Moore top 700 and Rice tops 400 it will be above expectations for all three. [Reply]
As some have said, do we really want Kelce having such a huge usage and get his 34 year old brains mashed in? Id like to give him some breathers against in easier games and a real #1 WR will do that. Mahomes arguably has never not had a #1 WR before. Tyreek and then Juju. Now.....MVS? Its a stretch to assume the offense will be AS dominant as it always has. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BWillie:
As some have said, do we really want Kelce having such a huge usage and get his 34 year old brains mashed in? Id like to give him some breathers against in easier games and a real #1 WR will do that. Mahomes arguably has never not had a #1 WR before. Tyreek and then Juju. Now.....MVS? Its a stretch to assume the offense will be AS dominant as it always has.
JuJu was is not a #1. He is a quality #2. KC had no true #1 last season. Closest would be Kelce. [Reply]
Makes sense from his POV. BUF would probably use DH in a more traditional boundary type role, basically take over Gabe's role opposite Diggs. He would also get a lot of 1v1 situations, because of the respect DCs would have to give Diggs, so for the first time in his career he wouldn't be facing doubles all of the time. [Reply]