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 DJ's left nut:
I don't think that's entirely fair.
Much of that confidence comes from a belief that Toney and Moore can/will be more than JAGs.
Misplaced confidence? Perhaps. But I think those that are more passive w/r/t our WR needs are simply very confident in further development from those guys.
Toney isn't a Jag, he's just made of glass which is more scary because he can't be counted on. [Reply]
No one here has said that we HAVE to get Hopkins. At least no one who has ever made any sense with their posts.
But for all the talk about Hopkins improving this team...you're on the other side just shrugging your shoulders and thinking that MVS, Toney and Moore plus a mid round WR will be just fine. [Reply]
Originally Posted by raybec 4:
JUSTYN ROSS!! I keep seeing this, but I swear I will be totally shocked if that kid sees even 1 game on the active roster in 2023.
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Here's the thing - when you listed our WR corps, you said "minus Juju".
Where are you getting almost 80 receptions and 900 yards to replace him?
Just lay it out for us.
What's your "ideal" plan for the WR group?
Is that not a similar argument made by the "Hill is gone, the Chiefs are dooooooomed" crowd?
I mean if you see 50 targets between Toney and More turning into 100 targets between the two of them, you need to backfill 50 more targets. Is that ideal given the bottom of our present WR room? No. But is it untenable? Nah - there are still some available options and the draft.
Say you trade for Hopkins. Does that stop you from drafting a WR this year? No. Does it stop Justyn Ross from having this miraculous breakout? No. Does it stop Moore from having a great sophomore season? No. What about Toney showing that he can put together 17 games? Nope. All it does is keep stacking the WR room and giving Mahomes as many weapons as he needs, while having a contingency plan if none of those things happen. [Reply]
Originally Posted by The Franchise:
Say you trade for Hopkins. Does that stop you from drafting a WR this year? No. Does it stop Justyn Ross from having this miraculous breakout? No. Does it stop Moore from having a great sophomore season? No. What about Toney showing that he can put together 17 games? Nope. All it does is keep stacking the WR room and giving Mahomes as many weapons as he needs, while having a contingency plan if none of those things happen.
The biggest thing it does is not put so much weight on Kelce and maybe you can extent his elite play by a year. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
Toney isn't a Jag, he's just made of glass which is more scary because he can't be counted on.
But let's say you get 10 games and 7 targets/gm out of him. That's not unreasonably optimistic and it's 55 more targets than he got here last year. It's half of what was lost via letting JJSS walk.
I just think we're overestimating the impact of losing Smith-Schuster. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Is that not a similar argument made by the "Hill is gone, the Chiefs are dooooooomed" crowd?
I mean if you see 50 targets between Toney and More turning into 100 targets between the two of them, you need to backfill 50 more targets. Is that ideal given the bottom of our present WR room? No. But is it untenable? Nah - there are still some available options and the draft.
It isn't Hopkins/OBJ or bust here.
Exactly right. But that's just the thing - you're suggesting the Chiefs have options. Lots of options, actually because there are potential players out there that will move without us even knowing they're available.
The main reason replacing Hill worked was because Juju was able to get decent production all by himself. He didn't replace Hill but he replaced enough of his production to still win.
If we're now talking about replacing Juju with a player who will replace less of Juju's snaps and we're a full step further away from having Hill.
There comes a point where getting cheaper and cheaper at a position has diminishing returns. We are at that point with WR's now. In fact, I bet they built this WR room knowing they can get someone, whether it be Hopkins or OBJ or whoever.
There's NO WAY that we go into this next season with this WR corps plus a guy from the draft. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
But let's say you get 10 games and 7 targets/gm out of him. That's not unreasonably optimistic and it's 55 more targets than he got here last year. It's half of what was lost via letting JJSS walk.
I just think we're overestimating the impact of losing Smith-Schuster.
Absolutely.
Like we said all offseason, JJSS is fungible. But that doesn't mean you just give away what he brings and don't try to replace it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
But let's say you get 10 games and 7 targets/gm out of him. That's not unreasonably optimistic and it's 55 more targets than he got here last year. It's half of what was lost via letting JJSS walk.
I just think we're overestimating the impact of losing Smith-Schuster.
That's over 1,100 yards from 3 relatively unsung heroes.
THEY were the difference in production, not JJSS. They made up where JJSS couldn't.
We had two relative unknowns come in and produce for us a little bit to help offset the loss. I don't recall anyone saying that they expect over 500 receiving yards from Jerrick McKinnon. He saved our asses in a lot of ways.
Well, he ain't here either.
The idea is to gain another reliable target to take pressure off of Kelce and to give the Chiefs another option, in big-game clutch moments.
But you can add one of those guys and still do your "production by committee" approach. But why not upgrade the committee? [Reply]
