Off-season WR possibilities

[Reerun_KC]

Seeing a lot of teams with sub .500 records with WRs that need to get with Mahomes.

Who is available and who would you like to see us pursue to go with Rice and Watson.

[JPH83]

Originally Posted by Chief Pagan

We don't need a defense, we don't need a starting caliber LT...

Just Mahomes and three WR1.

We do need a LT, and we should get Tyron Smith or Trent Brown until we can develop one.

[JPH83]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

I would take a hard look, but I feel like he's ether aged out of possibility or he'll ask for too much.




The more time passes, the more I feel like Veach really should've over-paid for DHop though. He really feels like he was the best possible option given the circumstances. Oh well.

If he'd take, say, $10m for a year, I'd pay him. Last 4 or 5 weeks he's looked much more like the old OBJ than a too old OBJ. But yeah, DHop would've been nice.

[Azide22]

Worst part is wasting this defense and the tail end of Travis Kelce's career.
Just needed that one guy.

[kccrow]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

The defense doesn't need massive help. They got all the draft picks and money recently.

Offense needs this offseason's resources for once.

The defense still needs help dude.

We have ONE DT under contract for 2024 and that's Neil Ferrell who never sees the field.

We don't have two of our starting LBs under contract and Bolton is going into the last year of his rookie deal.

Then you have Sneed, Edwards, and Danna being FAs.

So, to act like the defense will not need resources is absurd at best.

Maybe you prioritize some of the offense, like LT and WR, but Veach isn't putting all of our eggs into the offensive basket. I'd argue he's going to spend more resources overall on the defense in one way or another.

You guys will probably get two changes at WR for all the whining and bitching and revisionist theory. IF you're really, really lucky you'll get 3 but I have my doubts.

[Chargem]

Originally Posted by MahomesMagic

The defense doesn't need massive help. They got all the draft picks and money recently.

Offense needs this offseason's resources for once.

It takes about 1 minute of research to tell how up in your feelings you are about this.

The current top 5 cap hits are 3 offense, 2 defense. If we stretch that out to the top 10, its 6 offense and 3 defense (Butker also being in the top 10).

Has the defense gotten all of the money recently? No.

draft picks in rounds 1-3 by year:

2023: 2 O 1 D
2022: 1 O 4 D
2021: 1 O 1 D
2020: 2 O 1 D

Has the defense gotten "all of the draft picks"? No.

People seem to be re-writing history on Juju. He was a veteran with his best years behind him who was coming off a year lost to injury, and was signed for peanuts. It was a classic Veach gamble in the same way Toney was a gamble I think.

Last year, the Chiefs gambled and won. This year, they gambled and lost. Veach has struck out and he has also hit homers, with 2 superbowls under his belt I would say his batting average has been fine. You can't have superstars everywhere on a roster without picking in the top 10 a few years in a row.

All of this, and I'm in complete agreement the Chiefs need some more talent on offense in the offseason, I just don't think its drastic and I don't think it was obvious before the season started that this offensive group would stumble.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by tredadda

They did figure it out after trading away Tyreek, hence the #1 offense last year as well as a SB win.

For the above receivers, looking in hindsight it's clear that things did not go according to plan, but.........

1. Moore was going into year two and there was no reason to not expect him to improve.
2. Watson is what he is. Good for a couple catches a game. He was never going to be more than WR #4.
3. Toney has all the traits to be a #1 WR. His issue was always injuries. No one could have seen the issues he is having before the season started.
4. MVS was never going to be a true #1, but even based on his previous season he has regressed a ton. There was no way to see that coming.

Now on the other hand Rice is far outperforming even the most generous of estimates, so that was an unexpected positive. But to think Veach saw all of this and did nothing about it is ridiculous and very heat of the moment. He banked on a similar level of production. He guessed wrong. No GM is perfect. If KC goes into next season with this roster of WRs then he is negligent.

The problem is 3 of those guys were evaluated every single day in practice. We knew their potential and how they fit into our scheme. They walked away from last year thinking Toney was wr1 (nevermind zero assurance he could stay healthy). They had to have seen skyys limitations. And Mvs has regressed but it’s not like he was a reliable wr even when at his prime.

People say nobody could have seen it coming. And yet several pointed out we don’t have a true Wr1, that we should plan for kelce regression sooner vs later, that just because mahomes can carry talent doesn’t mean it’s a long term strategy to not surround him wr talent, that we have a bunch of role guys and no target eater (with Toney, the injury prone guy, being the only one who seemed to break that mold). We’ve got plenty of receipts on that. We also decided with this experimental wr group we’d coach them up with an assistant with virtually no experience. Veach absolutely should have seen it coming, at least enough to know we needed a bandaid. That is a serious misstep with self scouting.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Chargem

It takes about 1 minute of research to tell how up in your feelings you are about this.

The current top 5 cap hits are 3 offense, 2 defense. If we stretch that out to the top 10, its 6 offense and 3 defense (Butker also being in the top 10).

Has the defense gotten all of the money recently? No.

draft picks in rounds 1-3 by year:

2023: 2 O 1 D
2022: 1 O 4 D
2021: 1 O 1 D
2020: 2 O 1 D

Has the defense gotten "all of the draft picks"? No.

People seem to be re-writing history on Juju. He was a veteran with his best years behind him who was coming off a year lost to injury, and was signed for peanuts. It was a classic Veach gamble in the same way Toney was a gamble I think.

Last year, the Chiefs gambled and won. This year, they gambled and lost. Veach has struck out and he has also hit homers, with 2 superbowls under his belt I would say his batting average has been fine. You can't have superstars everywhere on a roster without picking in the top 10 a few years in a row.

All of this, and I'm in complete agreement the Chiefs need some more talent on offense in the offseason, I just don't think its drastic and I don't think it was obvious before the season started that this offensive group would stumble.

I disagree about the draft. Well over half of our picks have gone to defense. Even more when you consider the draft assets used to trade up in the first round. And apart from CEH all our first rounders for years have gone to defense. To the point where we drafted a few guys like FAU for next year, while we had needs on offense right away.

People say we threw a lot of picks at the WR position. The problem is that compared to the rest of the league we benchmark way to the bottom. Sure we paid Mvs $10m but the majority of teams have WAY more than that invested in the position. Sure we took a few second rounders, yet 2/3 of teams have taken a first round wr in the past 5 years. So arguably taking a wr in our spot considering the run on WRs early is like us taking 4th round prospects. It’s not that we haven’t tried, but we tried to moneyball it. Can’t blame them because it worked last year but we deprioritized offense longer than we should have. This offseason our draft needs to be dominated by offense.

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by RunKC

The best player at every level of our defense is a FA. We'll need the picks and money.

Trading a 1st and using money seems like a really bad idea

Tranquill is not our best LB.

[Chargem]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I disagree about the draft. Well over half of our picks have gone to defense. Even more when you consider the draft assets used to trade up in the first round. And apart from CEH all our first rounders for years have gone to defense. To the point where we drafted a few guys like FAU for next year, while we had needs on offense right away.

You can slice up the draft discussion a number of ways, but I cut it off at the third round because I feel like 4th and on is very much in the crapshoot range whereby you can't say they have favored the D if you are counting late round fliers on guys.

Not sure if it was that very clear in how I laid it out in the post you quoted, but in the last 4 drafts, looking at top 3 round selections the Chiefs have made 7 Offense picks and 8 Defense picks. That's pretty balanced.

Even stretching it out to all picks, I make it 62% of total picks for the Defense and 38% for the Offense the last 4 years. That's not really that far from 50/50? The actual difference is just the number of busts from the offense picks is greater than the defensive picks.

If you're only looking at first round picks, sure the last 3 have all been D. But I don't think this is that great a measure, because when you're picking at the back of the round, your choices are mortgage the future or sit and see what comes to you. I am pretty sure there was some reporting that the Chiefs tried to trade up this last draft, but could not find a partner.

I am not sure I understand your trading up point? If we factor in trades like OBJ, the Chiefs spent even more capital on offense than I originally stated.

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup

Tranquill is not our best LB.

He meant Gay, pretty sure.

[Chief Roundup]

Originally Posted by Chargem

He meant Gay, pretty sure.

He sure is not.

[RaidersOftheCellar]

Originally Posted by RunKC

The best player at every level of our defense is a FA. We'll need the picks and money.

Trading a 1st and using money seems like a really bad idea

You’re saying Gay is the best LB? Hell, he might be the weakest of the regulars. The only major contributor I see them losing is Jones. I’ll bet they re-sign Sneed. Even if they don’t, this could easily remain a great defense with continued development of the young talent and a few additions.

[Boxer_Chief]

Higgins is a FA, not a trade candidate. I’ll continue to beat the drum for him and do whatever it takes to get him. Even if there’s a couple cap casualties.

[RunKC]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I disagree about the draft. Well over half of our picks have gone to defense. Even more when you consider the draft assets used to trade up in the first round. And apart from CEH all our first rounders for years have gone to defense. To the point where we drafted a few guys like FAU for next year, while we had needs on offense right away.

People say we threw a lot of picks at the WR position. The problem is that compared to the rest of the league we benchmark way to the bottom. Sure we paid Mvs $10m but the majority of teams have WAY more than that invested in the position. Sure we took a few second rounders, yet 2/3 of teams have taken a first round wr in the past 5 years. So arguably taking a wr in our spot considering the run on WRs early is like us taking 4th round prospects. It’s not that we haven’t tried, but we tried to moneyball it. Can’t blame them because it worked last year but we deprioritized offense longer than we should have. This offseason our draft needs to be dominated by offense.

The people that piss on Veach for drafting FAU make no damn sense to me. What was he supposed to do there?

He tried trading up, presumedly for a WR. That's been reported. Teams ultimately turned him down. How is that his fault??

FAU was the best possible pick they could make for the future in scenario knowing Chris Jones was probably gone. There was only 1 WR picked from pick 23 until pick 50. That's how thin WR was. And they got Rice who has performed as well as any WR pick relative to their draft position. Dude was an absolute steal for pick 55.

Last year was a really bad year to need a WR unfortunately. People keep claiming Hopkins but he was really the only guy I think would change things here.

Oh well. They got it wrong this year but Rice looks great for the future. Build the offense this Spring and go for it again next year.

[JPH83]

Originally Posted by kccrow

The defense still needs help dude.

We have ONE DT under contract for 2024 and that's Neil Ferrell who never sees the field.

We don't have two of our starting LBs under contract and Bolton is going into the last year of his rookie deal.

Then you have Sneed, Edwards, and Danna being FAs.

So, to act like the defense will not need resources is absurd at best.

Maybe you prioritize some of the offense, like LT and WR, but Veach isn't putting all of our eggs into the offensive basket. I'd argue he's going to spend more resources overall on the defense in one way or another.

You guys will probably get two changes at WR for all the whining and bitching and revisionist theory. IF you're really, really lucky you'll get 3 but I have my doubts.

It'll need help but I think it can get cheaper without losing too much We could absolutely get 2-3 DTs that cost a decent amount less and offer as much as the aggregate of Jones and Nnadi. They'll lose Danna but surely will slot in FAU, they have to see what they've got there. You could lose Reid and probably get a guy like Geno Stone for less. Sneed may be the tricky one, one way or another if we pay him it's a lot more.

Actually, I'm probably just agreeing with you here. I think they'll get either 2 WRs or 1 and a LT before the draft.

Either way I can't see anyway offense doesn't have a big uptick in cap space and draft allocation compared to the defense. We're almost certainly going to have some gaps and depth issues on D next year.

[JPH83]

Originally Posted by RunKC

The people that piss on Veach for drafting FAU make no damn sense to me. What was he supposed to do there?

He tried trading up, presumedly for a WR. That's been reported. Teams ultimately turned him down. How is that his fault??

FAU was the best possible pick they could make for the future in scenario knowing Chris Jones was probably gone. There was only 1 WR picked from pick 23 until pick 50. That's how thin WR was. And they got Rice who has performed as well as any WR pick relative to their draft position. Dude was an absolute steal for pick 55.

Last year was a really bad year to need a WR unfortunately. People keep claiming Hopkins but he was really the only guy I think would change things here.

Oh well. They got it wrong this year but Rice looks great for the future. Build the offense this Spring and go for it again next year.

I think it's kinda futile second guessing what actions were or weren't taken behind the scenes, what the strategy was etc. Whether that's to defend or criticise Veach, we just don't know the variables. Far easier and fairer to judge the results in isolation. Probably the exception is draft busts/whiff that have really failed, like Moore.