Kelce cementing his HOF status

[RunKC]

Fastest TE in history to get 450 receptions and 6,000 yards. Needs 167 more to get 1,000 yards and become the first TE in history to get 1,000 receiving yards in 4 straight years.

[Gary Cooper]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

That's why I said you'd need to remove the post-season accolades to make the analogy work - Kareem has an outstanding post-season record. 6 rings and 2 (arguably 3?) Finals MVPs is more than "pretty damn good". People were trying to note that Kelce has a ring and a ton of post-season success around that Lombardi - TG has effectively NONE. I'm removing that from the calculus.

And again, while I disagree with you w/r/t Malone not being a top 10-15 player (I think his resume speaks for itself), I offered Kareem as an alternative for that very reason.

Because anyone who DOESN'T believe Abdul-Jabbar is a top 5 all time player probably needs to brush up on their history a bit. That dude was out there snatching souls in Milwaukee. And while most people remember him for his time in LA, those 5 years he spent with the Bucks were some of the most dominant years of all time as well.

So again - if you want to simply remove all discussion of the postseasons successes of TG/TK and focus on peak vs. duration, Abdul-Jabbar vs. Jordan really shouldn't be the kind of comparison that offends anyone.

Kareem detonated seemingly every meaningful counting stat there was to detonate but he didn't do it by having a sustained high peak - he did it by playing for 20 mostly healthy seasons. Jordan, OTOH, at his peak was simply better than anyone that had done it before or since.

Fair enough but Wilt had an even higher peak IMO. Kareem's peak in Milwaukee was also no worse than Jordan's.

Kelce's peak is probably higher than that of Gonzalez, but not by much. Gonzalez was also putting up numbers no other TE had previously. We have to consider the eras and the difference in QBs. Gonzalez was mugged frequently without any penalties called. Defensive holding and PI are called tighter today than 20 years ago. Also, modern tacklers can't lead with their helmet. That would make Gonzalez even more challenging to tackle. With his size and the current rules, Gonzalez has better numbers in today's league than 20 years ago, even considering his lack of speed.

I have no problem with someone saying Kelce is better, but I don't see large gap or a huge difference in their peaks. The biggest difference I see is team accomplishments. I think that skews perspectives greatly. Also, many posters can't overlook Tony's personality when comparing the two. Kelce is more beloved for a reason being a nice dude who helped us win a Super Bowl. Understandable.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

yep very true

I don't disagree necessarily.

But Travis Kelce is 9-6 in the post-season and has made several MASSIVE plays to propel the Chiefs to victory in those 15 games. Lost in the come-back against Houston was that they simply had NO answer for what he was doing to them. It was dirty. His post-season run during the 'run it back' season is one for the ages.

The Tennessee game completely flipped on its head the moment he went down. He was destroying the Titans and when he got hurt the offense just completely seized up.

What he's done in the post-season has been exceptional.

Tony Gonzalez, OTOH, has a 1-6 record w/ 286 career receiving yards on 41 targets. And 4 of those games came with Matt Ryan under center, 2 of them with Trent Green - these aren't scrubs. And TG averaged 40 receiving yards/gm.

Kelce has 3 separate playoff runs that individually surpass anything Gonzalez did in his entire post-season career. He averages 86 receiving yards/gm. His TD rate goes up over his regular season numbers. He YPG go up. His level of play exceeds his regular season level. TGs didn't. Ever.

Are championships alone dispositive in the discussion? Nah - like I said, I won't use ring counts here. But has Travis Kelce undeniably obliterated TG's post-season resume? Lord, it's not even close. I mean take the 7 WORST games of Kelce's post-season career and he smokes Gonzalez.

And given that the question is 'who was more valuable' - shouldn't the fact that one of them was a damn site harder to deal with when the lights shone brightest count for at least SOMETHING?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by JudasRising20

Fair enough but Wilt had an even higher peak IMO. Kareem's peak in Milwaukee was also no worse than Jordan's.

Kelce's peak is probably higher than that of Gonzalez, but not by much. Gonzalez was also putting up numbers no other TE had previously. We have to consider the eras and the difference in QBs. Gonzalez was mugged frequently without any penalties called. Defensive holding and PI are called tighter today than 20 years ago. Also, modern tacklers can't lead with their helmet. That would make Gonzalez even more challenging to tackle. With his size and the current rules, Gonzalez has better numbers in today's league than 20 years ago, even considering his lack of speed.

I have no problem with someone saying Kelce is better, but I don't see large gap or a huge difference in their peaks. The biggest difference I see is team accomplishments. I think that skews perspectives greatly. Also, many posters can't overlook Tony's personality when comparing the two. Kelce is more beloved for a reason being a nice dude who helped us win a Super Bowl. Understandable.

Which was why I attempted to discuss Witten as a reasonable proxy. And he really is - it's startling how similar their careers were and during a period that largely overlaps...

Yet NOBODY on this board would ever say that Kelce and Witten are in the same league. And the difference in that reaction is not because TG was about 10% better than Witten over a 270 game sample size.

Tony was the face of the franchise for a decade. And at that TIME he was universally beloved. So while you say that people are giving Kelce too much credit due to team accomplishments - I think there's an argument to make that putting TG in the same tier in terms of Kelce when discussing their respective peaks is given TG too much credit without acknowledging his faults. If he were that much more dangerous than his contemporaries, you'd think he'd have smoked Witten's career numbers, no?

Yet here we are. 8 yards/gm over Witten. 1/2 a catch/gm. 2 TDs/yr. Added value, sure - but enough to really let him hang with Kelce? I just don't see it.

[Megatron96]

This is great stuff!

[Gary Cooper]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I don't disagree necessarily.

But Travis Kelce is 9-6 in the post-season and has made several MASSIVE plays to propel the Chiefs to victory in those 15 games. Lost in the come-back against Houston was that they simply had NO answer for what he was doing to them. It was dirty. His post-season run during the 'run it back' season is one for the ages.

The Tennessee game completely flipped on its head the moment he went down. He was destroying the Titans and when he got hurt the offense just completely seized up.

What he's done in the post-season has been exceptional.

Tony Gonzalez, OTOH, has a 1-6 record w/ 286 career receiving yards on 41 targets. And 4 of those games came with Matt Ryan under center, 2 of them with Trent Green - these aren't scrubs. And TG averaged 40 receiving yards/gm.

Kelce has 3 separate playoff runs that individually surpass anything Gonzalez did in his entire post-season career. He averages 86 receiving yards/gm. His TD rate goes up over his regular season numbers. He YPG go up. His level of play exceeds his regular season level. TGs didn't. Ever.

Are championships alone dispositive in the discussion? Nah - like I said, I won't use ring counts here. But has Travis Kelce undeniably obliterated TG's post-season resume? Lord, it's not even close. I mean take the 7 WORST games of Kelce's post-season career and he smokes Gonzalez.

And given that the question is 'who was more valuable' - shouldn't the fact that one of them was a damn site harder to deal with when the lights shone brightest count for at least SOMETHING?

Gonzalez only played a few postseason games in KC. He was 21 in 1997. He was green as hell. Caught a TD and had a controversial one called back. I believe he scored the Chiefs only TD in that game.

His next playoff game was 6 years later! Think about that. The infamous "No Punt Game". He did fine in that game. Certainly wasn't his fault the defense couldn't stop Peyton Manning. Does Kelce stop Peyton in that game? Probably not.

His next playoff game was 4 years later! Do you see the pattern here? The infamous Herman Edwards "Run, Run, Pass, Punt" game. He had the team's only TD in garbage time. Sure, he could have played better but the gameplan was vanilla trash that day.

I didn't follow his Atlanta career much. I know he made some Pro Bowls in his later years but his playoff career in KC is not his fault as outlined above.

[DJ's left nut]

But at a point the resume is the resume.

Excuse it away if you want but the league is littered with but/for cases.

You can't NOT give Kelce credit in this conversation because of justifications for where Gonzalez simply doesn't compare.

Do or do not. Kelce did. Often.

Gonzalez did not. That means something.

[ThaVirus]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

Kelce was a beast without mahomes and with him. Even with Alex smith we’d be having the same damn conversation.

Sorry, but I 100% disagree on intangibles. Leadership is the difference between mahomes pumping his team up and grinding out tough wins vs Lamar sulking when adversity hits. It absolutely is what separates him from Gonzalez who was a more gifted player than kelce on a number of levels. I don’t know that there has ever in chiefs history been a better example of a player who plays every damn snap the right way than kelce. He does it with ability, intelligence and max effort. And I don’t know that there’s ever been a player who wants to win more then kelce, and that’s putting him up against mahomes who is insanely competitive.

In the end, that’s why kelce - a guy who isn’t as physically gifted as some of the all time great TEs including in his own teams history - still belongs in the conversation of all time greatest.

This was the post that started it all.. lol

I honestly don't understand how you can look at this post and argue against it:

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

OK, so apparently I do need to show the stats before and after Mahomes lol..

Kelce in the four seasons prior to Mahomes:

Four games total. 294 yards and 1 TD. 1-3 record. One Wild Card Round win. Never made it past the Divisional Round.

Kelce in four seasons with Mahomes:

Eleven games total. 997 yards and 11 TDs. 8-3 record. One Super Bowl win. Never failed to advance to at least the AFC Championship game.

This isn't about some bullshit like leadership. It's about opportunity.

The difference between the 2003 Chiefs squad and the 2019 squad winning/not winning the Super Bowl did not come down to the difference in TG and TK's leadership style.

A great deal of this sport is about opportunity. There's just no way around it.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Which was why I attempted to discuss Witten as a reasonable proxy. And he really is - it's startling how similar their careers were and during a period that largely overlaps...

Yet NOBODY on this board would ever say that Kelce and Witten are in the same league. And the difference in that reaction is not because TG was about 10% better than Witten over a 270 game sample size.

Tony was the face of the franchise for a decade. And at that TIME he was universally beloved. So while you say that people are giving Kelce too much credit due to team accomplishments - I think there's an argument to make that putting TG in the same tier in terms of Kelce when discussing their respective peaks is given TG too much credit without acknowledging his faults. If he were that much more dangerous than his contemporaries, you'd think he'd have smoked Witten's career numbers, no?

Yet here we are. 8 yards/gm over Witten. 1/2 a catch/gm. 2 TDs/yr. Added value, sure - but enough to really let him hang with Kelce? I just don't see it.

I don’t think in the end gonzalez is nearly on the same tier when it comes to GOAT. Again, I believe he was exceptionally gifted as an athlete and way more than you give him credit for. But in the end I believe it’s kelce and gronk. Gonzo in the next tier with witten with maybe Antonio gates hanging in there, If you only focus on his prime. And while i like my guy way more I think aside from durability anyone lobbying for gronk has a solid enough case.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

This was the post that started it all.. lol

I honestly don't understand how you can look at this post and argue against it:



The difference between the 2003 Chiefs squad and the 2019 squad winning/not winning the Super Bowl did not come down to the difference in TG and TK's leadership style.

A great deal of this sport is about opportunity. There's just no way around it.

Leadership is a soft factor. It is not the only factor. It is also about knowing when to use your skills for what purpose. I still stand behind kelces comparison to jerry rice. There are so many things he did that transcended pure athleticism. A ton of his production was late in games because his workout endurance was off the charts. He had elite athleticism to change direction but that is all set up by an insane understanding of selling his routes and going exactly where he needed to be. He had tremendous burst off the line but also an impeccable snap timing. And then theres the ability to catch almost literally every ball remotely in his area. Much of this is driven by intangibles and feel for the game that add a TON of juice to natural god given athleticism.

I think TG would have excelled under mahomes. But I also don’t know that he brings the same intangibles to the table. Kelce has an uncanny understanding of where to be and the best way to get there. Which is tremendous for a team that so often goes off script. How many times have we seen the two on a page where you’re like… how the **** did they both know to do that? He also gets abused like no other player in the league in terms of defenses hacking the shit out of him but he keeps grinding at it. His attitude is off the charts. That’s on top of being a tremendous teammate. So yeah when comparing two guys who are both exceptional athletes, I’ll take the guy who has a way better feel for the position any day of the week.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

This was the post that started it all.. lol

I honestly don't understand how you can look at this post and argue against it:

But by trying to argue that we can't talk about what Tony Gonzalez didn't do in the post-season you're tacitcly arguing that we also can't talk about what Travis Kelce has done in the postseason.

And if you want to play the 'what if' games (which again, I don't care for doing; just too speculative), 'what if' Travis Kelce doesn't get pulled for the concussion protocol that didn't exist in TG's era? The Titans had no answers for him and the key play in that game was Orson Charles dropping a 1st down that would've iced the game that hit him right between the numbers.

Suddenly Kelce is 2-2 w/ 350ish yards in 4 games - right in line with his career post-season averages.

Again - Travis Kelce has historically raised his level of performance in the post-season whereas Gonzalez has seen his post-season performance decline from his regular season standards.

Of course opportunity matters, but Kelce's been a person who has consistently risen to the level of the challenge in the post-season. Tony Gonzalez, relative to his OWN standards, simply hasn't. That's gotta be relevant.

To try to say "Well Kelce has Mahomes..." is almost as insulting as saying "Well Mahomes had Hill..."

Kelce, prior to Mahomes, had 1 game where he wasn't outstanding and it has another 'what if' element to it - 'what if' Maclin hadn't mangled his knee and Bill Belichick wasn't content triple-teaming Kelce and letting Albert Wilson and Jason Avant beat him. I mean Gonzalez at least had Rison (in his odd comeback season) and Eddie Kennison (criminally underrated) keeping defenses a bit more honest in those playoff games.

In the end, you've gotta give credit for what was actually done. And what Kelce has done in the post-season has been nothing short of spectacular.

[Chris Meck]

They're totally different.

Gonzales was a 'post up' kind of TE. Kelce is like a huge WR, and a YAC machine.

Kelce gets knocked for not blocking, but he's fine at that when asked, he's just not asked all that often.

It's just totally different.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

They're totally different.

Gonzales was a 'post up' kind of TE. Kelce is like a huge WR, and a YAC machine.

Kelce gets knocked for not blocking, but he's fine at that when asked, he's just not asked all that often.

It's just totally different.

I think Kelce could be who Gonzalez was. He has the frame and the fearlessness to do it.

I don't think TG can be who Travis Kelce is.

To me that's the major point of distinction. Kelce is capable of more (because again: Better athlete, which is how we got here in the first place) and as such that versatility makes him a harder post-season matchup and more critical 'gotta have it' player.

Yeah - they're different. But that doesn't stop me from saying I'd take one over the other without hesitation. I'd simply take Kelce 100 times out of 100.

[ThaVirus]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

But by trying to argue that we can't talk about what Tony Gonzalez didn't do in the post-season you're tacitcly arguing that we also can't talk about what Travis Kelce has done in the postseason.

And if you want to play the 'what if' games (which again, I don't care for doing; just too speculative), 'what if' Travis Kelce doesn't get pulled for the concussion protocol that didn't exist in TG's era? The Titans had no answers for him and the key play in that game was Orson Charles dropping a 1st down that would've iced the game that hit him right between the numbers.

Suddenly Kelce is 2-2 w/ 350ish yards in 4 games - right in line with his career post-season averages.

Again - Travis Kelce has historically raised his level of performance in the post-season whereas Gonzalez has seen his post-season performance decline from his regular season standards.

Of course opportunity matters, but Kelce's been a person who has consistently risen to the level of the challenge in the post-season. Tony Gonzalez, relative to his OWN standards, simply hasn't. That's gotta be relevant.

To try to say "Well Kelce has Mahomes..." is almost as insulting as saying "Well Mahomes had Hill..."

Kelce, prior to Mahomes, had 1 game where he wasn't outstanding and it has another 'what if' element to it - 'what if' Maclin hadn't mangled his knee and Bill Belichick wasn't content triple-teaming Kelce and letting Albert Wilson and Jason Avant beat him. I mean Gonzalez at least had Rison (in his odd comeback season) and Eddie Kennison (criminally underrated) keeping defenses a bit more honest in those playoff games.

In the end, you've gotta give credit for what was actually done. And what Kelce has done in the post-season has been nothing short of spectacular.

Kelce has been incredible in the postseason. He only needs 152 yards to pass Julian Edelman and slide into #2 all-time behind Jerry Rice.

I'm all for giving Kelce praise for what he's accomplished; I am just not OK with putting Gonzalez down for not enjoying the same success. You can argue that he didn't elevate his play in the postseason but the stats show that Kelce really didn't either before Mahomes came to town.

Kelce in the four seasons prior to Mahomes:

Averaged 73 yards and 0.25 TDs per game.

Kelce in four seasons with Mahomes:

Averages 90 yards and 1 TD per game.

I mean, that is a significant difference. If Kelce isn't lucky enough to be on the team that drafts Patrick Mahomes, it's possible that we're all in this thread saying "Yeah, he's definitely a Hall of Fame talent but just never put up the numbers in the postseason to put him above Gronk, Gonzalez, etc."

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by ThaVirus

Kelce has been incredible in the postseason. He only needs 152 yards to pass Julian Edelman and slide into #2 all-time behind Jerry Rice.

I'm all for giving Kelce praise for what he's accomplished; I am just not OK with putting Gonzalez down for not enjoying the same success. You can argue that he didn't elevate his play in the postseason but the stats show that Kelce really didn't either before Mahomes came to town.

Kelce in the four seasons prior to Mahomes:

Averaged 73 yards and 0.25 TDs per game.

Kelce in four seasons with Mahomes:

Averages 90 yards and 1 TD per game.

I mean, that is a significant difference. If Kelce isn't lucky enough to be on the team that drafts Patrick Mahomes, it's possible that we're all in this thread saying "Yeah, he's definitely a Hall of Fame talent but just never put up the numbers in the postseason to put him above Gronk, Gonzalez, etc."

But again - just give Kelce the same pace he had in the first half before his concussion. Or just pro-rate the 'per game' stats for the lost half of football (that's hugely relevant when we're talking a 4-game sample size).

Then suddenly he's at 88 yards/gm. It's close enough to the 90 yards/gm he's put up with Mahomes to say that there's not an appreciable difference, especially when you account for simple development that comes with a young player getting better and more experienced.

Travis Kelce was DAMN good in the post-season even before Mahomes hit the scene. I just don't see anything to suggest otherwise.

[chiefzilla1501]

Interestingly i think gonzo is a better fit for Alex smith and kelce is a better fit for mahomes