Deebo wants $25m/year. Is the WR market broken?

[Direckshun]

I read this and was talking about this with a friend yesterday.

I entered this offseason finding a way to stomach $20m/year for Tyreek. When the rumblings started to suggest $25m/year, I could barely contain myself. The strain that will put on our cap -- or any team's cap -- to pay that much for a player who can't even make his own plays without a QB getting the ball to him. That is hard to fathom.

$30m/year, though? There's no team with a competent QB in the league that will be able to pay that.

With Deebo set to ask for 25/year, that does suggest that the league could be heading to a place where elite WRs and QBs simply cannot be on the same team anymore. That your best hope is for a WR or a QB who immediately becomes elite on their rookie contract, or in the case of the stupid Bengals, one of each.

Because with Derek Carr going $40m/year, that means you're looking at $60-80m a year being tied up in two players.

How do we see this playing out over the next five years? Is there a WR bubble that's about to burst?

[Rasputin]

In 5 years Patrick is going be one of the lowest paid quarterbacks per year..

And by Raiders standards that Derek Carr is the third highest played quarterback that makes him the 3rd best quarterback.. So if Patrick is one of the lowest paid quarterbacks that must mean he sucks in 5 years.

[oldman]

Originally Posted by suzzer99

I think it may turn out to be true that when you have Mahomes a superstar WR is a luxury but not a necessity. If we learn how to win with 3-4 very good WRs, that will be much tougher for teams to stop that one star and 3 average at best WRs like we had last year.

Whereas Carr and Tua need superstar WRs that can get open and rack up YAC.

I agree. But then again, we have one Travis Kelce to go along with PMII. The point being made is 3 or 4 pretty good guys are better than 1 stud and 3 schlubs. Yeah, 75 yard bombs are fun, but winning is everything.

[Valiant]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I think this can absolutely be the case. And I think this year, with this division going absolutely insane, is a great year to stress test the theory.

Which is why I have very little interest in trading a 1st for McLaurin or going crazy to move up for a WR. I want to know if we can give Mahomes solid but unspectacular weapons, provide them in depth, and then get a similar level of production to the previous approach.

If so, man we are WAY ahead of the most of the rest of the league. With a QB who's suddenly become priced below market and no need to get into this absolutely insane WR market - we're set to run the show for a bit at that point.

It's an experiment worth trying. And if it doesn't work, next year the cap is cleaner and we can attack FA wideouts a little more.

Team has to be smart. As these guys demand so much money. The tier down guys will see less. You can load up on them or wait for some of the top tier guys to get cut and offer one year deals.

It will be interesting to see how trades work in a few years. Ohh your rookie wr wants paid. Cya. But you are only lower picks than normal as teams have to pay 150million.

If Patrick sticks to his full dea and plays welll..we should make out like bandits. The average QBs will be making 50m a year.

[UK_Chief]

I’m more concerned about our TE strategy than WR at this point. Kelce won’t be around forever and that dude takes a lot of shots

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by ThyKingdomCome15

Trade his ass. One ingrate isn't bigger than the team.

Ingrate? Deebo was SF's entire offense last season.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I think this can absolutely be the case. And I think this year, with this division going absolutely insane, is a great year to stress test the theory.

Which is why I have very little interest in trading a 1st for McLaurin or going crazy to move up for a WR. I want to know if we can give Mahomes solid but unspectacular weapons, provide them in depth, and then get a similar level of production to the previous approach.

If so, man we are WAY ahead of the most of the rest of the league. With a QB who's suddenly become priced below market and no need to get into this absolutely insane WR market - we're set to run the show for a bit at that point.

It's an experiment worth trying. And if it doesn't work, next year the cap is cleaner and we can attack FA wideouts a little more.

I've actually thought this way for a while. If/when Tyreek suddenly isn't available, that's $25 million sitting on the sideline you have to replace. If you have several competent/capable guys, one going down doesn't hurt as much.

Honestly, it's why RBs should never get paid. It sucks, but it's reality.

[Eureka]

Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla

Ingrate? Deebo was SF's entire offense last season.

What is he worth in trade value?

Get the Jets on the phone asap.

[MahomesMagic]

We don't have 3 to 4 very good wr's.

Maybe one good WR (If Juju returns to form) and another guy that is a bit better than a JAG in MVS.

[notorious]

Originally Posted by jettio

I always thought that the folks that say Deebo should have had more running plays against the Chiefs in the Super Bowl have no idea how taxing those plays are on a player.

Especially, when Deebo is involved in some serious collisions the more he gets the ball.

Tyreek Hill has incredible stamina for a player with elite speed.

It would be interesting to see the data readouts on the trackers, but my guess is that Tyreek has a lot more time at 80% effort and above during a full game than Deebo Samuel does.

He takes some major shots when he lines up at RB.

It has to be a concern.

[scho63]

I fear the NFL will become a league of 20% super paid and the other 80% subsidizing them.

I know the 80-20 rule but these are all professionals.

[Pitt Gorilla]

With rising salaries, draft picks (position AND volume) are going to be worth that much more. It's yet another reason I don't want the Chiefs spending capital to trade up.

[scho63]

Putin ****ing EVERYTHING up!

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

This is literally the stupidest thing I've ever read. Don't try for a great number 1 receiver, so that you can have a bunch of 3s with a number 2 WR.

I don't think that's the question.

The question is, let's assume you're building a 3 WR crew and you have 2 options that cost roughly the same:

A 1 and two 3s or;
Three #2s

Which would you prefer? For me I'm taking the latter every time. And I wonder if that's not what the Chiefs are looking for as well.

Because ultimately you can scheme a single WR out of the game, no matter how good he is. But VERY few teams have the personnel to handle 3 guys who can give you #2 type play because you can't overload them.

When you're looking at the former scenario, you go man 2 man vs the #3 caliber guys and more often than not, your guys win their matchup. Then you double the #1 and you're in pretty good shape.

But if you have three #2 options out there, more often than not THEY'LL win their matchup in a 1v1 scenario and you can't do anything to double all of them.

If you have the right quarterback, someone who can process quickly and attack anywhere on the field (we do), the latter scenario is a far more dangerous setup.

And I think that may just be what Veach and company are pursuing.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Valiant

Team has to be smart. As these guys demand so much money. The tier down guys will see less. You can load up on them or wait for some of the top tier guys to get cut and offer one year deals.

It will be interesting to see how trades work in a few years. Ohh your rookie wr wants paid. Cya. But you are only lower picks than normal as teams have to pay 150million.

If Patrick sticks to his full dea and plays welll..we should make out like bandits. The average QBs will be making 50m a year.

Right.

Again, for demonstration purposes lets go Hill, Pringle and Jakeem Grant is option A and it costs, what, $30 million for the 3 of those guys? $24 million, $4 million and 3 million (give or take some change here and there).

I mean, that's essentially what we had last year and it...wasn't great.

The alternative of MVS, JJSS and say Chark - also right at $30 million.

Now ultimately if someone says the former, I wouldn't just ignore them. There's an argument for it. But I'm pretty sure I prefer the latter. It's just harder to deal with.

[Monticore]

Team will be going WRBC the same way they did with RB when those guys started asking too much , a bunch of specialists and be creative.