Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
Not really.
I'm saying that there IS no real near-equivalent of Hill. They just don't make guys like him. And that if you trade him, you have to essentially resign yourself to a much different type of offense. Probably one where Kelce is even less effective because you lack the field stretcher that Hill provides who can also work the middle of the field (giving Kelce the ability to work the middle OR run the seam, as the patterns and coverages dictate).
If you trade Hill you almost have to commit to essentially a ground-up rebuild of the offense. A completely different animal. For a week or even several weeks, you can get by without someone like Hill because teams won't completely adjust to Hills absence - there's just not enough tape out there to know what that looks like and respond in kind.
But if you TRADE him, teams are gonna get a really long look at what your offense is without Hill and I'm pretty confident this version of it simply does not work without him over any prolonged period.
Now that's not to say this team can't have SOME form of offense that is very dynamic and effective. But as I noted, traded Hill requires a commitment to that re-set.
And for me, while we still have Kelce and Hill out there doing HoF caliber shit, I'm disinclined to do it. And I can't see a scenario where we get adequate value to convince me of it (including the scenarios outlined).
|
The offense would change without Hill, but I don't think it would be anything close to a ground up rebuild. I agree with you, defenses would stop being totally petrified of Hill over the top and not be in prevent-deep-shots-at-all-costs mode, but that probably means the Chiefs would have MORE successful deep passes per year without Hill than with him, bizarrely.
The narrative that Hill is irreplaceable in terms of his specific skill set is true, but that his production in the Chiefs offense is irreplaceable is pretty much saying you think the Chiefs are a gimmick offense like the Ravens with Lamar, they need some specific chess piece to be successful.
I think we all agree Mahomes is an amazing quarterback, and the Andy is an offensive genius. Amazing QB + Good coach + getting time to throw + receivers who can separate = a very productive offense. It doesn't matter on the specific skillset of the receivers, you just need 2-3 that can get open.
On the tag thing, that's true as long as he is willing to play on the tag for 2 years - I'm not sure he would?
Hill has a LOT of value, and he is probably worth more than the Atlanta offer, but I think the Atlanta offer is about the base level at which the team gets better for having traded him.
KCCrow, please feel free to turn down this request, but how about a mock that includes a Hill trade to Atlanta? It would be great to actually see what could be done to the roster with the extra resources. I understand if you don't wanna put the time and energy into it, people will probably hate it.