I would really hope Ty wouldn't come out and start hating on Reid or the organization after everything they accomplished together. I'm not sure how he can claim he wasn't utilized properly when he was clearly featured enough to become a superstar and land a massive contract with the team of his choice.

Hopefully this is all just clickbait.

Hearing what I want to hear, with out even hearing it:
Blah blah blah
Tua sucks what have I done!
Blah blah blah

Exactly my thought; go get your money. But don't try to throw out some silly ass bullshit that the Chiefs were trying to suppress your numbers to keep your cost low

https://media3.giphy.com/media/uj43M...pXN2/giphy.gif


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's not really what's triggered the conversation though.

It's more about alluding to this idea that the Chiefs were purposely sabotaging him and using him "incorrectly" to lower his contract value.

Which is total horseshit to say the least.

At the end of the day Veach chose OBJ over Hill

This is pretty much the long and short of it.

I think they chose to protect their $500MM investment, and decided WRBC would have to work

Couldn't have said it any better.

?

The clip starts off with Rosenhaus saying they reached out to the Chiefs after the season and tried negotiate a new deal, that Tyreek wanted to stay in KC. Tyreek emphasizes that he wanted to stay in KC. Then the interviewer asks "a follow up question" that directly accuses the Chiefs of misusing Hill to keep his cost down.

Maybe you know something I don't, but based on that short clip, we can't really tell what triggered Rosenhaus saying that they reached out to the Chiefs after the season.

Not quite right.

Veach chose OBJ + draft picks + the difference in money between Hill's Miami extension and whatever OBJ is going to make.

Couldn't have said it better.

No, im saying the conversation HERE.

Hill wishing to stay in KC goes w/o saying. I think everyone can assume that.

Hill hinting that maybe the Chiefs purposely sabotaged his numbers to low ball his extension is a whole other level of bullshit.

I would take Hill over all those guys we drafted with those picks

Money talks, bullshit walks.

I wonder what Hill would have been had he remained a running back. He's gone so doesn't matter, but his vision is elite

So we don't know what he actually said in response yet, right?

I feel like it was more a business decision for Veach. Last season, Hill was his usual incredible self BUT his effectiveness was lessened due to defenses playing him differently and taking some of his threat away. This left us with Mahomes, Kelce and a bunch of JAGs besides Hill. SO...Veach was probalby like "sure, we could keep him, but breaking the bank to do so leaves us in the same place we were last year. OR...we could trade him to Miami where he will rightly get paid a shitload of money, and we will get a haul that is unheard of for a player that is not a QB...Hmmmm...I wonder what I should do...".

It's the NFL, it's a business. I believe the Chiefs wanted him to have that contract, they just didn't want to be the ones to pay it. Tyreek got taken care of and so did the Chiefs.

I hope he's not gonna dump on the Chiefs. I can't believe he would. I guess we'll have to wait for the podcast...

Nobody gives a **** what you would take.

FYP

You've never even been to Kansas City and yet you get so worked up on this message board. You are pathetic.

Lies.

The Chiefs had every intention of keeping Hill AND Brown going into the offseason.

So no, they did not “choose OBJ over Hill”.

****ing morons.

That's why Hill is no longer is on the team and OBJ is about to get top tackle money. A choice was made

Of course, clickbait.

But yeah, we ‘suppressed’ his ass into a first ballot HOF’er over the last 6 years. Well, at least until he went to Miami. The grass isn’t always greener even if there’s a lot more green on the other side. He will find that out soon enough.

I love Hill and wish him the best, no hard feelings whatsoever, but if he or his agent are in any way (not saying they are at this point) suggesting the Chiefs intentionally suppressed his value in the offense in order to retain him more cheaply, then they both can go **** themselves with a rusty fork.

I mean, the Chiefs are legit trying to win Super Bowls every ****ing year for the last 4 years, and we’re gonna intentionally sabotage our most dangerous weapon to help with future contract negotiations?

GTFO with that bullshit.

Complete and utter speculation.

And even if that were the case, it would still be an oversimplification.

It’s not about OBJ vs. Hill.

It’s about what they got for Hill and the money they saved.

It’s about positional value (LT vs. WR).

It’s about age/longevity (both of their current ages, and what positions age better).

But of course an inbred reerun like yourself doesn’t understand nuance.

Angry boi

Gay boi

Would you take Hill on that contract and factoring in an eventual play decline due to age and wear, whenever that begins or however sharp it may be?

Bath house Billay is clueless.

We would need DJ to break that contract. In the next few years I don't see how the offense is better though especially with an aging Kelce.

Thing is though Hill of last year was not the same Hill. He had a serious case of dropsies that led to INTs and teams started to take away his deep game by dropping safeties back and doubling him. He still did well, but that is not a good sign for someone like him who heavily relies on being the fastest guy on the field. At what he was going to cost the possibility of him living up to that contract would be slim.

Tyreek Hill’s contract is 25% more average per year than the top LT contract

He's the reason we won that Buffalo game that was incredible I'm not sure there's another player in the league that could do what he did. If Andy weren't so stubborn with the way teams played us with Hill we could line up and run the ball and get 5 yards whenever we wanted. I saw no decline or red flags regarding Hill. What I saw was a staff/QB that was unwilling at times to adapt to what defense was played against us.

Which is Trent Williams right? Who's like 34 or 35 years old.

I'm not faulting Veach for what he did. Again it was making the best out of a tough situation but it seems to be a foregone conclusion on here that we are better without Hill. Simply not the case.

I don’t disagree on parts of what you posted. I would say Kelce was just as important to the Buffalo win as Hill. He was money when it mattered most like he almost always is. Agree that we should have ran the ball more. There was no decline in Hill’s speed, but when it does go, it will go fast (no pun intended) unless he is a freak like Darrell Green. His drops were concerning and teams were starting to game plan and minimize his impact. Hard to blame Mahomes for not adapting as quickly as he should have. It can be hard to change your style of play when it has brought so much success for so long. He did eventually adjust and will continue to as he matures.

In a way we are though as KC will have to adjust how they play on offense. They can’t just play the deep game and will have to spread it around more. They did not bring in a WR equal to what was lost in Hill, but overall the depth is better than with Hill and JAGs like Robinson, Pringle, Gordon etc. Also now there might (big might) be a chance the team runs more which will make them more balanced.

Sounds like someone salty that they have to field punts from the modern Steve Bono.

I giggle just thinking about Hill having to catch passes for Tua.

ROFL

ROFL

I laughed unreasonably hard at this.

Because you lack vision.

With that line they absolutely should. Brown, Smith. Kinnard are absolute units. Creed is also damn physical.

Man, we killed that Brown trade.

People really make too big a deal of Tyreek potentially losing his speed.

I can't recall a single NFL player with legendary speed who just lost it one day in a hurry (outside of injury, of course). Guys like Darrell Green, Deion Sanders, and Randy Moss all maintained elite speed until they retired.

I mostly agree with you, but I did see some red flags with Hill last year and that was his drops. I think he was responsible for 4-5 of Mahomes INT's.

It's what people tell themselves to feel better about it. The fact that the Chiefs were willing to pay him what they reportedly where tells you that they werent sweating it.

I think it's more that Hill doesn't have a tremendous catch radius than him losing physical ability.

With the way teams were defending him, he had to turn into more of a short and intermediate receiver. On those throws, his elite tracking ability isn't as big a factor, and there is just more traffic to fight through to complete the catch.

So the fact his catch radius is limited by his physical stature led to him reaching outside his frame more than a regular-sized receiver would, which led to tipped balls and INTs.

If teams are going to sit in a cover 2 deep shell against a Mahomes-Hill combo, that means you either run his ass off on decoy deep routes all day, or try to use him in a way that is not ideal for his skill set.

With the changes KC has made at receiver, Mahomes IS going to have better, larger targets underneath with larger catch radii. If the threat of Valdes-Scantling and Hardman keeps teams in the shell, I believe we'll really see that pay off.

All comes down to whether teams continue to sit in the shell to protect against the deep ball. I think they will.

Hopefully the Chiefs are also less stubborn about running against those super light boxes, too.

I agree 100%. I always thought though we should had him run more slants because DB's give him so much cushion or we did and I didn't notice it.

Going to be interesting watching him in Miami with Tua because he will be running alot of slants and short routes as well I imagine. Will teams play 2 high against the Fins you think? I am not sure Tua has the arm to scare opposing defenses.

I really hope this is not going to be like the Bronco's Megathread that never leaves the front page of the lounge. :harumph:

well said.

I'll miss the balls bouncing off his facemask or being batted straight in the air in a spastic attempt to move before getting clobbered.

If the Chiefs had a really good LT under a rookie deal for 2-3 more years, you don't think it would have had any impact on their decision to trade Hill?

It absolutely would have. Not saying he doesn't still get traded, but it certainly would have weighed in to the conversation.

What exactly is the point of this hypothetical? You’re basically asking, “if the Chiefs had more cap space, would they have re-signed Tyreek Hill?”

Possibly, but when you listen to Veach talk about the Tyreek trade, it’s pretty obvious that they did it so they could acquire more draft picks and have the cap space to be players in free agency over the next couple of years. He specifically mentioned the defense.

To say they chose OBJ over Tyreek is the epitome of an oversimplification.

If KK makes a comeback, is the only real downside. Top Os with losey Ds only get so far

Obviously it's not as simple as "choosing" him over Hill, I'm just saying they went into the offseason thinking Hill was going to cost a certain amount, and when that number exploded it became clear they couldn't have a QB, LT and WR all making obscene money and still build a team. If Orlando Brown wasn't in the equation, they may have approached the situation much differently.

I actually agree with your overall assessment, I do think they were planning on keeping both. The cost/benefit analysis between keeping Hill at the price he ended up demanding or trading him was clearly the determining factor, and I'm pretty happy with how the whole thing turned out.

I do not think anyone is arguing that Veach and company looked at the next 2-3 years and knew they faced a decision at LT and needed to spend significant resources on the defensive side when deciding to trade Hill.

I wouldn't say it's baseless, though.

At the time the Hill trade was made, it wasn't as though a Brown trade was impossible. Brown wouldn't have yielded the kind of return package that Hill did though.

The nice thing about the Hill deal is that the packaging of picks made it pretty easy to just say that we got McDuffie and Moore for Hill. It's a little bit of an oversimplification because we gave up an extra third in there, but if you wash out the 4th we'll get next year and the 5th we got in the trade down, etc... then it's close enough to act as a reasonable proxy.

Ultimately it's the reality of paying a top tier QB - every deal has to be viewed through the lens of potential surplus value. A straight up Hill for OBJ deal is probably something of a wash long-term. Neither guy is likely to present a ton of surplus value - they'll play at/near their respective deals in relation to the market. I think Hill is more likely to play to the level of his compensation for the first 2 years before dropping off, I think OBJ will simply play a little below what we'll be paying him for most of the deal by virtue of being a young LT that can demand a big payday.

But in the end, how you get there will be largely moot- they'll end up in roughly the same spot in relation to their deals, IMO.

Where you make ground is that McDuffie and Moore are likely to produce beyond their paychecks in a way that a hypothetical return for Brown wouldn't. Because we saw what a cheap year of Brown plus the tag season would get you on the market - nothing near what we got for Hill. And now there's a year less on the deal. You're probably looking at getting maybe a 3rd for him.

So lets say Door #1 is trading Hill, saving the cap to allocate to OBJ and ending up with what amounts to: McDuffie, Moore and OBJ. Door #2 then would likely be dealing OBJ, putting his cap allocation to Hill and then let's say we draft Nicolas Petit-Frere with the return we'd get for him - seem fair?

McDuffie
Moore
OBJ

or

Hill
NPF

I still think your surplus value is clearly higher w/ option A. And I think your floor is substantially higher as well. You trade Brown away and don't have an immediate obvious answer at LT, it could be a real disaster in a hurry. And there are no assurances that NPF would be the answer (or anyone else in this draft, for that matter).

Is the ceiling potentially higher for the next year or 2 with option B? Yeah, I could see that argument. But it's not worth the risk, IMO.

Great stuff, DJLN.

I agree on everything except assuming that the 4th and 5th rounders next year are a wash. Tyreek Hill was a fifth rounder. Those picks matter. I think day 3 picks are often dismissed as special teams guys who won't make the squad, but the last three drafts have landed us a starter on day 3.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think trading Hill didn't clear cap space for OBJ. Wasn't he tagged two weeks before Hill was traded? And signing Brown long term would make that number go down this year. I think (hope) the cap space for Tyreek is going to clear the way for another pass rusher, either this year or next with the rollover.

They would wash out the 3rd that we gave up that we got for Poles - that 3rd had nothing to do with the Hill trade so you have to account for that additional capital expenditure somehow.

The extra 4th and 5th seemed like a fair trade-off.

As for the cap question - you're technically correct but practically it's just not how the front office wanted to do it. It seemed they clearly wanted to maintain that additional salary cap flexibility going forward and that was impossible with both a top of the market LT and WR. So they seemed to conclude that they could have one or the other over a meaningful timeline.

They elected the former.

I think it's pretty fair to say that if OBJ were under team control at $3 million/yr for the next 2-3 years, Hill would still be here. He isn't. So a decision had to be made. Was it directly Hill or OBJ? Nah. But practically speaking was it? Yeah, I'd say it was.

Ah, gotcha.

And, as time has gone on, I've had to begrudgingly admit that replacing Brown just seems pretty impossible with the league landscape and where we are consistently drafting.

If we intended to do so, we'd have needed to do it this year.

If the Chiefs weren't sold on Brown, I think NPF at the end of the 2nd would've been an obvious solution. Not that you'd have him starting this year, but that you'd have Brown play on the tag this year and get a year of watching NPF to see if he's a long-term answer or if you'll need a band-aid in free agency.

I don't think it's impossible to find a LT, but it's damn hard to find one that can immediately contribute. If you're willing to 'redshirt' a guy, you can find one on the 2nd day, IMO. But we clearly didn't have that in mind. As much as I like Kinnard, I have a hard time seeing a scenario where he's a viable LT. We know Wylie isn't and I'd say that Niang is dead to this organization unless/until he establishes otherwise.

That’s silly, man.

It’s ignoring everything pointing to KC wanting to keep both of them.

Wanting and being able 2 are 2 entirely different things

It's the same people making the same points time after time after time. I guess they think the more they say it the more legit it becomes.

Jesus. Reid destroyed Todd Leabo in the presser today when he asked about Tyreek’s vid.

“You’re pretty good at asking those. Shock-Jock. That’s a dumb question. Especially since you know I haven’t seen that. Whatever.”

I think my favorite Tyreek moments were during that Superbowl win run. Whenever someone like Damien Williams was breaking one for a TD. There was Tyreek trying to catch up and out run him to the end zone and succeeding every time. That shit was awesome to see.

I'll miss the best play maker in the NFL. I remember your dumb ass from the issue with his son and baby momma a few years back. Makes perfect sense why you would have such a moronic take.

It was the eye roll when I knew he was a little pissed hearing that

I heard that. The reporter bent over backwards to ask with respect and tact, and Reid just went overboard. Amazing to me how sensitive millionaire football guys can be.

Love andy reid, but this was not his best day

Edit: duplicate posts happening all over this mother****er today

LOL, because he was blunt and honest with the guy. It was a garbage podcast starement and a garbage podcast from the reporter.

I wonder if Reid has disdain for 810 in general because of KK, and Petro’s occasional dipshit questions. Maybe it just boiled over onto Leabo.

It was a stupid ****ing question. The reporter deserved it.

What, pray tell, was the question?

I no longer care about Tyreek Hill.

BS, it was 100% a legit question to ask. Hill released a sound byte leading to the idea KC purposely underutilized him to lower his contract value.

The only stupidity here is Hill's PR team.

While it seemed cool at the tume looking back on it this was him trying to make everything about him.

All of Hills actions since end of the season have shown he cares about himself and his contract value.

I’m sure that bs is what Tyreek was told by Miami in pre trade contract talks snd now that he’s catching punts from Tua, he’s holding onto anything he can to believe he made the right choice.

Gonna be tough for him to watch KC win playoff games from his home in Miami.

horseshit

Me either. He will become irrelevant soon. Just another good player on a shit team.