Revisit: Trade Tyreek
 

I recall a thread in here or in the Lounge either during the season or last offseason about trading Tyreek but I can't seem to find it.

Anyhow, I thought at the time that the very notion was absurd but now I'm having second thoughts. Then again, maybe it's the few brain cells I still call "active" just bouncing around in the endless space they have available.

I know that KC has a need at WR already but they also have to look at the future. I think about the Vikings trading away Stefon Diggs and I thought how stupid it was until they drafted what may be a better player in Justin Jefferson with the 1st round pick they got and saved a load of money in the process.

Now, the Bills gave up a 1st, 5th, 6th, and future 4th for Diggs and a 7th.

When I think about how dynamic Hill is in terms of being a game-changer in a split second, I think he may bring a bigger return.

So, hypothetical...

Let's say a team calls you up that's in desperate need of a sure-fire playmaker because they just don't possess any. My logical thought for such a thing would be the Atlanta Falcons.

Part I

The Falcons offer you the 8th overall pick and their 3rd round pick #74.

You pretend your Bart and field the call. Do you accept the trade and save $18 million on the cap this year, thus rolling the dice by needing both a #1 and #2 receiver, or do you decline and force your hand to pay this guy at least another 90 million (and likely more) over the next 4 years?


Part II

The Falcons are gun shy and don't want to give up the #8 overall but the Eagles call offering 15 and 83 because they think Hill puts them over the top. Would you still do the deal if you'd do it for #8 or would you back out?

Part III

If you still haven't said no freakin' way, at what point do you say no?

Nope, not even.

The case can be made for this offense that it's Kelce that makes it hum, but what Tyreek is and how he affects defenses even when he doesn't get the ball just cannot being duplicated by any high pick in the first round. He is THAT unique and dangerous, particularly in this offense. Keep him and Kelce for Mahomes as long as you possibly can, especially while they're still at the tops of their games.

I’m leaning no right now but I have no idea on what his demands are going to be moving forward.

pound sand

I've definitely been of this thought. He's a unique talent for sure and speed kills.

Definitely hard to see it through no matter what. I was just trying to think through it. What gave me pause was a potential scenario like:

Sign DJ Chark
1-8 - DE David Ojabo
1-30 - WR Jahan Dotson or say, trade up to like 18 w/ NO with 2nd rounder and get a guy like Burks

Two potential studs on rookie deals can go a long way and you still have speed for days offensively (x2 actually).


lol. You're on a roll with being ridiculous today.

It was me who posed the trade Tyreek hypothetical, I could probably find the thread later.

Just to re-iterate, I love Tyreek and think he is the best WR in all of football, but my theory/question was whether Tyreek was better than say Devante Adams AND a top 10 pick, as I think probably every player apart from QB has a price.

In your 2 scenarios, I think I would take the Falcons offer, or maybe try and squeeze abit more out of that (another pick the year after as well, 2nd or 3rd round?), as long as I was confident I could actually sign a #1 replacement like Adams.

I don't think the Eagles offer is enough.

Of course, it would be a **** up of the highest magnitude to trade Tyreek and then not secure an adequate replacement, so there is some risk there and you would want a "done deal" with the WR replacing him.

A few points:

• I don't really like the "Tyreek makes the offense work" narrative. We have the best ****ing quarterback in the league, and an amazing offensive mind in Andy. Seems stupid to suggest that the offense would be bad without Hill
• Football is all about evolving, changing, adapting. It seems like the league has done more evolving to defend the Chiefs than the Chiefs Offense has done in the last year. Taking away Tyreek, and leaving defenses wondering what the Chiefs offense would look like without him, is probably a massive tactical advantage in Andy's favour

If people say they would turn down the #1 overall pick for Tyreek, or the #1 overall and the first pick of the 2nd round as well? I think that's madness, you would have to take it.

The original conversation was here:

https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/show...4#post15921214

Not unless you really think we should be starting over offensively.

The threat of Tyreek is literally what creates everything in this offense.

No thank you. I'd be more open to trading Chris Jones who underwhelms but still has some juice in the national spotlight.

Part I

The Falcons offer you the 8th overall pick and their 3rd round pick #74.

You pretend your Bart and field the call. Do you accept the trade and save $18 million on the cap this year, thus rolling the dice by needing both a #1 and #2 receiver, or do you decline and force your hand to pay this guy at least another 90 million (and likely more) over the next 4 years?

I stick with Tyreek.

Part II

The Falcons are gun shy and don't want to give up the #8 overall but the Eagles call offering 15 and 83 because they think Hill puts them over the top. Would you still do the deal if you'd do it for #8 or would you back out?

I stick with Tyreek.

Part III

If you still haven't said no freakin' way, at what point do you say no?

I'd probably take Jamarr Chase in exchange for Hill. That's about as far as I'd go, though.

I think we have to stick with Hill.

There's a lot of depth in this year's WR class, but there isn't anyone who I think is surefire elite.

If you're going to trade Hill it should be because there's a guy you want to take who you know will be elite.

I'm not trading HOF players while they're right in the middle of their prime. I don't care what the return is.

This is just stupid.

Are you in the camp of "pay him whatever he wants"?

There's a financial line in there somewhere I woudln't cross.

It would be pretty high.

If he wants to be the highest paid WR in football, it's hard for me to say he shouldn't be.

Hopkins is at $27.5 million per year (average). How far above that are you good with?

I don't have any other motives....just wondering.

I mean....30? Probably.

Agreed.

Getting "cute" with shit like that is how you mess up your team.

What about a trade with SF where they get Reek and our first, and we get Deebo and Fred Warner?

Hill is amazing.

He's 27 years old and on a hall of fame pace.

He's a freak, works his ass off at improving his craft. I don't see him slowing down anytime soon. Want to give him a 5 year contract, I'm game. Want to play some games and sign him to a 7 year deal (I know unheard of these days) go ahead, because I think he will be a very productive player well into his 30s.

You just don't find dudes like him.

An elite deep threat opens up any offense.

You don't trade those guys. They are rare animals.

Are you ****ing nuts? Seriously?

13 seconds…..

I feel like you guys are all looking at this inside a box like I did when Chargem originally posed the thought. I didn't bring everything up, hoping others would see things differently and add to the conversation more.

What if Tyreek won't get an extension done?
What if he is willing to do an extension but won't convert that roster bonus into a signing bonus to spread the hit out?
Are you going to tag for two years? Are you going to tag and trade in one of the next two years?

There are some solid options out there to mitigate the damages if you do trade Tyreek and I'm just throwing out things that could happen.

I'm 100% with you Hoover, I'd love for Tyreek to do an extension, spread that roster bonus in 2022 out, be reasonable and not expect Hopkins+ money. A lot has to happen though.

Jones doesn't have a contract you can trade. The original discussion came about because Hill was the only one with a viable contract that could be traded.

The Jets offer you 4 and 10 for him?

I'd take Chase for Hill as well I think

Megatron is a hall of famer, he stayed with one team, didn't lead to any success for them. Thinking the team as a whole CAN'T be better regardless of the return is whats "just stupid". There has to be a point where if you get enough back, its better to trade Hill. The question is just how much.

That's a weird contract, the extension was 2 years at 27.5 per but they don't kick in for another 2 years, so its hard to tell if thats the benchmark for any new deals now or not

These kinds of trades are generally stupid. Not saying you're stupid, you seem nice.

Warner is on a 100m contract, Deebo is on the last year of his rookie deal next year. You're not getting cheaper or better really by doing this. Hence stupid.

I'd say he's probably the best receiver in the league, but that doesn't mean his production can't be replaced. Sounds like you think he's worth more than Crow's Falcon's offer, but surely there must be a trade you would make? We're just discussing what he is worth

As I said above, I think his production could be replaced. Lets say he wants 29m average per year, and you could get Godwin and A Robinson for the same average in total, and you spend that number 8 overall pick on WR too. Is the offense better with Hill, or Godwin, Robinson and Burks? in 2022? in 2023? in 2024?

You can also look at it from the team perspective. the Chiefs were 3rd overall on offensive DVOA and 23rd in defensive DVOA. I think that the Chiefs offense would drop in these rankings if you traded Hill and then spent 20-30m avg per year on receivers to replace him, but how much better could the defense get with those resources from Atlanta?

To actually answer the question set by KCCrow, I would take the Falcons offer, but no less, AS LONG AS I literally had the contracts printed for premium FA WRs that I wanted to replace him and the guys sat there with the pens in their hands, waiting to sign.

My plan would probably be two receiving threats from FA - Robinson/Godwin and Ertz/Njoku/Gesicki maybe, then looking to add defense with the number 8 overall pick or possibly try trading back to the middle of the first, depending how it falls.

I'd then be looking to add another WR with my back of the first round pick, it's too early to say how its shaping up but maybe one of J Williams, Garrett Wilson, Chris Olave, Jahan Dotson

Why should he take less than Hopkins?

Why would I try to replace his production when I could just sign him and keep said production coming from him?

You’d trade him, if you wanted to, at the end of the next contract. Not now.

Darrell Green could still run 4.3 when he retired.

Tyreek is still a 4.2 guy and probably like Darrell will do so barring injury for some time.


NO WAY !!!!!

As he sits, he's in the final year of his contract.

So, while it is true that it isn't necessarily "now," it's potentially next year if a deal doesn't get done.

He's one of the few on the roster I'd have a hard time trading but nobody sans Mahomes is untradable for the right price.

Why should he make more?

1) Hopkins' contract is ridiculously more than any other receiver contract out there (5.5m per more)
2) Hill is not the best receiver in the NFL. He's HOF caliber good and that speed is special but he's not the best right now.

There's just not a package I would take for him while the Chiefs are in this current window. Even if someone offered two firsts, I'd say no thanks.

A rookie WR is going to take time to get up to speed. FA WRs that are available don't stress defenses pre-snap and post-snap the way Hill does. Even if you're adding 2 for the price of a Hill extension, you're suffering a drop-off in explosiveness and are going to lose some of that underneath/intermediate room that is created by teams fearing Hill's ability to get deep.

And throwing the assets gained at the defense doesn't work for me. That's not protecting and reinforcing my investment at QB.

And I'll add that beyond all the on-field stuff, moving a guy like Hill rather than paying him would be an unpopular move in the locker room, too.

I mean…who’s better?

There may be a better route runner, or something similar but in terms of all that comes with it? Nah.

Then get a deal done. This is a guy that’s literally always done what’s been asked, he’s always reliable on the field and is the best play making wr in the league. He still has room to improve as well.

To me he’s a guy you pay.

You have THREE unquestionably elite talents on this team.

Mahomes, Kelce, and Hill.

Why the hell would you trade one?

Bird in the hand, man. Bird in the hand.

The 8th overall is very attractive, but I'd want more than a3rd to make that deal. I'd probably do it for a 2nd in next years draft that could move up to a 1st if Hill reached certain benchmarks.

So I guess you could say I'm looking for two ones.

This did get my attention, but probably still no.

Report is right now that Adams is going to want $30 million a season. Not to say that he's going to get it but if Adams signs before Hill (and why would Hill do that), he could end up wanting close to that.

If I were Veach and looking at future cap implications, I'd have serious reservations about paying that type of money.

I get it, you need playmakers but the question for me is to what extent?

The Patriots won a lot of football games, and SBs, with a couple of $5m per WRs and a HOF caliber TE to go with a HOF QB.

The Chiefs have the QB and TE.

Now, maybe those $5m per guys are now $10m per guys but the theory remains.

Do you drop 30m per on a single WR or do you get a couple of guys like Chark and Kirk for $10-12 per instead?

Then we have the situation where a lot of guys around here want to keep a $30m receiver and then add a $20m+ #2.

A couple people in the thread have stated that Hill doesn't really make the offense run any better. Well, we had this scenario a couple years back in 2019. Maybe some here remember the DET and then the IND games when first Hill then Watkins got hurt and didn't play.

To refresh: in the DET game, Hill was still out, and Sammy got dinged up in that game. Only Kelce was healthy enough to play of our top receivers. The offense scored just 3 TDs, none by a receiver. And while Mahomes did throw for 315 yds, he didn't connect on a single passing TD, his completion % was nearly 10 points lower than his season avg (65.9/57.1), his QBR was 10 points lower than his season avg, and his Passer Rating also took a nosedive (105.3/81.0).

In the IND game, with both Sammy and Hill not in the starting lineup and Mecole/Pringle basically taking their places, Patrick's numbers were a little worse. But at least he threw a TD.

However, the offense scored just the one TD in an embarrassing offensive disaster against a defense that would go on to give up 26 to a foundering PIT team, 38 to the inconsistent Bucs, and another 38 to the bottom-feeding Jags.


'Nuff said.

Hill's such a unique talent for this QB and this offense that I struggle to find a 'fair' trade for him. We've seen what trying to put Hardman into that role has yielded and it ain't great.

That said, perhaps the biggest issue is that in order for their to be a market for him, you'd need all the FA options to dry up. And once that happens, your path to getting a replacement is really shut off.

I guess if you got someone like Godwin signed, you could turn around and work on the Hill deal with his replacement already in hand. But even then the offense is completely different.

Hill and Kelce (plus Mahomes) are just perfect complementary players. I struggle to find a way to truly 'replace' what he brings in, especially during Kelce's remaining championship window.

It's not "enough said" because you're operating under the assumption that trading Hill equates to having a rookie and a few scrubs. That's simply not the case anyone would make in trading Hill.


This is the near opposite of Megatron's post in that you're looking at only trading Hill if there is a near Hill equivalent signed (top-10 or so WR in Godwin). This would also make little sense unless you think Godwin for some reason were to sign for way less than he's worth.

No.

Just, no. NO. NO ****in' way, NO.

No.

Nope.

No.

Maybe?

No.

I was thinking about some comments made about Tyreek making this offense go...

I remember 2015 when KC inked Maclin to a 5-year, $55 million deal and then he popped off with 87 for 1008 yards and 8 TDs. With only he and Kelce as significant passing weapons, KC went 11-5.

Then in 2016, when the Chiefs went 12-4, they started Maclin (who got a bit banged up and produced half as much) and Chris Conley. They had Hill as a rookie 5th round pick and Robinson as a rookie 4th round pick and Hill picked up some slack.

So, with minimal overall investment in the passing game compared to what we're talking with keeping Tyreek and adding a big-time #2, Reid brought those teams, with Alex Smith at QB no less, to a combined 23-9 record.

Is Tyreek a phenomenal weapon to have? Absolutely. That said, Tyreek Hill doesn't make this offense go. Andy Reid's brain and the overall system are what really make this offense go.

I 100% get clinging to wanting Tyreek to remain in KC as long as possible, but there are certain excuses that I can't wrap my head around.

For the record, I don't see him going anywhere and I see him being a priority re-signing but I think resources could be spent in a different way and there wouldn't be a negative outcome. That's mostly what I'm exploring here.

If we're considering this 'window' one that's based around Hill and Kelce at peak level, you do not close that window by trading away one of your three elite players in the hope that you can draft an elite player.

Bird in the hand. Bird. IN.THE.HAND.

This is a dumb idea. Really.

It would have to be a Hershel Walker level trade, and that's likely the floor. Tyreek is THAT talented and unique. He is not the route runner Devante Adams is or have the hands D-Hop does, but what Tyreek does to defenses and their looks pre-snap to as the play is unfolding just can't be duplicated, and that's not even speaking to Andy's mind and the crazy shit he thinks up for him specifically. He and Mahomes to go along with Kelce at this point in their careers are just flat untradable.

Disagree, wholeheartedly, with any presumption that you need to replace him with an elite talent simply because he's an elite talent.

Plus, that bird is getting nearly prohibitively expensive depending on how cap dynamics shake out the next couple of seasons. It's theoretically going to be much cheaper to franchise tag him twice when his contract expires than to actually pay him long-term. Of course, players don't like playing on the tag and especially not a 2nd year. You might lock him for the first one but he may sit on the 2nd forcing a contract or trade anyhow.

I wouldn't champion paying a WR 30+ million per when I already have a QB scheduled for 45+ per. The Chiefs have been kicking the can down the road with Mahomes, and they can for a little while longer, but eventually the bill will actually come due on his contract.

Obviously, the Chiefs don't have to consider trading Tyreek this year and very likely will deal with whatever decision Hill makes regarding an extension and any changes to his current cap hit. That said, the Chiefs will need to be on point with the length and value of any extension they do offer and can't just simply ignore the fact they may need to trade him and explore what teams would offer.

NO.

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).

I agree with you that they don't make players like Hill every day, or really ever. I also fully understand that the compensation may have to be significantly higher to consider it. I tried to elicit what it would take.

I'm trying to operate under two major premises:
1) You have Patrick Mahomes at QB so any offense should be good with him throwing the football.
2) If you broke up that $30m+ you expect to pay Hill, you could have at least 2 very good or 3 good receivers for that.

So with the above, I'm trying to detach from the fear of what the offense might look like without him.

I think Reid can develop a scheme that works with whoever is here. I think Hardman could step into the Z role and be effective, so long as there is a significant improvement at the X. We know Hardman cannot fill the X role. Also, Hardman is a UFA next year. I think there are other options that can operate well in that role. Kelce does Kelce things and has before Hill was here with a far shittier QB.

Do I think this team could sign DJ Chark and Michael Gallup for 30 million? Likely. Would this offense not be good with that? Add a guy like Metchie in the 2nd to replace Hardman after next year and you have a pretty good trio.

The greatest fear is fear of the unknown, so I get where Meck is coming from too with the bird-in-the-hand reference. We have Hill, why not pay him and not upset the apple cart? Draft well and you could certainly fix any issue surrounding paying Hill by offsetting the cost. As it stands you then have to get a good X and replace Hardman in the draft all while also needing to fix a defense that is void of talent.

Mahomes, kelce and hill will go down in history as one of the best trios ever like aikman, emmitt and Irvin. You don’t trade that kind of chemistry, relationship and production. You keep it at all costs! You might consider trading an aging player if you’re rebuilding but that is obviously not us.

How many receivers did Brady have in NE making over 10 million per season, much less 20 or 30?

I'm pretty certain that Moss eclipsed a cap of 10 once at 10.5 with the next closest being Welker at 9.9 in a tag year.

Even in Tampa, he never had a guy at 20. Godwin was just under 16 on a tag and Evans was under 10 (he hits 20 this year though).

Don't get me wrong here, I really like Hill on this team but I don't know that the "all costs" narrative equates to winning championships.

I'd love to see him re-signed near 20 per, even the 22 Jones got. But to start talkinga bout 27+, 30+? That seems illogical for a WR to me.

I don't disagree. There's a nut cutting point when it comes to his contract.

But with his tag figures probably being around $20 million and $24 million, the Chiefs have him for 3 more years if they elect to go that route. That's ages 28, 29 and 30.

So he's looking at a starting point of 3/63 or thereabouts? Maybe 3/$66?

Granted, that's some real cutthroat shit, but if he's gonna come looking for $27 million, he'd better get pretty reasonable pretty fast because I don't see his leverage there.

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.

I looked harder at the logistics of the two teams I chose in my example exercise (they were random stabs) in Philly and Atlanta and neither really have the cap situation to absorb Hill's current deal so it would have to be a trade and extension with the restructuring of 2022 money. Philly would be in a much better position to do that than Atlanta, which has to move some pieces to make it work. That said, they could but would need to move Deion Jones or Calvin Ridley. I don't know that teams will line up for Ridley, which makes their most logical trade piece Deion Jones. I'm not factoring Jarrett in as teams will know he's a cap casualty anyhow and won't be wanting to take on 16.5 million in salary for this year.

I can see what I can put together with such a scenario, just for giggles and shits, and post it in this thread.

Here you go Chargem, et al, my stab at a Tyreek trade offseason scenario...

Kansas City trades Atlanta WR Tyreek Hill for LB Deion Jones, 2022 1st Round Pick #8, and 2022 3rd Round Pick #74

Atlanta will renegotiate and extend Hill.
Kansas City converts the 2022 $4,567,059 roster bonus in Deion Jones' contract to a signing bonus for hits of 12,423,529 and 15,419,264 in 2022 and 2023 respectively.

The Chiefs also cut DE F. Clark, restructure QB P. Mahomes roster bonus to signing bonus, and restructure TE T. Kelce salary and bonuses to signing bonus.

This leaves the Chiefs cap space at approximately $55m

KC signs their own FAs:
LT O. Brown, Jr. (5y $115m w/ $52m guaranteed - 1st y $14.0m)
CB C. Ward (4y $62m w/ $31m guaranteed - 1st y $10.5m)
WR B. Pringle (Vet Min Cap Benefit + $1.25m)
ERFA tender TE J. Fortson, RB D. Gore, and CB D. Baker.
Vet Minimum deals: FB M. Burton, OL A. Blythe, LB B. Niemann, LB D. O'Daniel, SS A. Watts, RB J. McKinnon

KC signs the following UFAs:
WR D.J. Chark (4y $49.0m w/ $17m guaranteed - 1st y $7.0m)
WR Michael Gallup (4y $49.0m w/ $17m guaranteed - 1st y $7.0m)
OT Geron Christian (3y $12.5m w/ $4.5m guaranteed - 1st y $3.0m)
DT Maliek Collins (2y $11.0m w/ $5.0m guaranteed - 1st y $4.0m)
DE Rasheem Green (3y $23.0m w/ $9.5m guaranteed - 1st y $5.0m)
QB Trevor Siemian (1y vet min)

Draft:
1. ER David Ojabo, Michigan (6'5" 250) f/ATL
1. DT Devonte Wyatt, Georgia (6'3" 315)
2. S Jalen Pitre, Baylor (6'0" 197)
3. ER Sam Williams, Mississippi (6'3" 265) f/ATL
3. WR Alec Pierce, Cincinnati (6'2" 213)
3. CB Jalyn Armour Davis, Alabama (6'2" 192) jc-2a/Poles
4. S Bubba Bolden, Miami (6'2" 205)
7. OG Cole Strange, Tennessee-Chattanooga (6'4" 308)
7. WR Bo Melton, Rutgers (5'11" 190)
7. RB ZaQuandre White, South Carolina (6'1" 215)

Roster:
QB: P. Mahomes, T. Siemian, S. Buechele
RB: C. Edwards-Helaire, D. Gore, J. McKinnon, Z. White
FB: M. Burton
WR: M. Gallup, D. Chark, B. Pringle, M. Hardman, A. Pierce, J. Watson, B. Melton, C. Powell
TE: T. Kelce, N. Gray, J. Fortson
OT: O. Brown Jr., G. Christian, L. Niang, P. Tega-Wanogho
OG: J. Thuney, T. Smith, N. Allegretti, C. Strange
OC: C. Humphrey, A. Blythe

DE: D. Ojabo, R. Green, S. Williams, M. Danna, J. Kaindoh
DT: C. Jones, M. Collins, D. Wyatt, K. Saunders, T. Wharton
LB: W. Gay, N. Bolton, D. Jones, B. Niemann, D. O'Daniel
CB: C. Ward, L. Sneed, R. Fenton, D. Baker, J. Armour-Davis
DB: J. Pitre, J. Thornhill, B. Bolden, Z. Anderson, A. Watts

ST: H. Butker, T. Townsend, J. Winchester

Major emphasis: Rebuilt Defense.
KC revitalizes their pass rush by adding Ojabo, Green, and Williams off the edge and Wyatt on the interior.
Getting Deion Jones from Atlanta gives them a cover linebacker they haven't had here in a long time.
Pitre and Bolden replace Mathieu and Sorensen with Bolden being the likely heir to Thornhill in 2023.
I also added one of the guys I think could be sneaky good at CB coming out of this one in Armour Davis. I think he's alot better than Jobe, but he had those early-career injuries that need vesting.

Offensively, I'd go after Chark (speed) and Gallup (reliable production) with identical deals that should fit in with their market. This team retains serious speed with Chark, Pierce, Hardman, and Melton all able to take the top off.
I wanted desperately to take Brian Robinson in the 3rd but just couldn't bring myself to forgoe adding another edge rusher, so I went with White late who I think can be pretty good if he stays healthy.

That looks OK-ish.

Question:

Did you consider making Calvin Ridley the player coming back instead of Jones?

That would make sense to me and would make the deal a lot more palatable. Also leaves you with more cap space this year and probably allows aiming higher at DE/free agents.

Take the money from Gallup and Green and plop it on one DE, and I think we like the result.

Second question:

You're picking 8th and Karlaftis and Ojabo are both available. Who do you take?

Man, I just....trading a type of player like Hill doesn't traditionally work out for the team trading him away.

I didn't really consider Ridley. 1) I'm concerned about long-term availability given last year's sabbatical. 2) Deion Jones is an elite coverage player at LB that can line up against anyone and instantly transforms a defense.

The only real concern would be Atlanta being willing to let Jones go, especially with Oluokun being a free agent they can't afford.

In part 2, I'd be most inclined to go Ojabo. I guess it depends on what else I had for DEs. That said, I'm not all that concerned with run defending DEs as much as I am guys that can get to the QB in today's NFL.

On Ridley, I don't have a HUGE issue with the sabbatical. You'd have to check him out and be confident he was going to commit to playing for you, but if you feel confident in it I'm not sure there's a better replacement for WR1 available anywhere.

I'm just hesitant to splash a bunch of cash on an off-ball LB. You and I see that differently fairly consistently, so no surprise there.

I'd pick Ojabo at that spot, too. Though there's now apparently a small chance Thibodeaux slides a bit. That would be a coup.

It's a fun exercise. I'm going to take a stab at it.

So, I took a run at this, re-working the structure based loosely on crow's approach.

Trade: WR Tyreek Hill to Atlanta for WR Calvin Ridley, 2022 #8, 2022 #72.

Cut Frank Clark (pre-June 1); Restructure Mahomes and Kelce. End up with $57M in cap space from those moves.

Re-sign in Free agency:
LT O. Brown, Jr. (6y $135m w/ $52m guaranteed, 6th year is basically a void year with $6M guaranteed on a big salary - 1st y 11M)
CB Charvarious Ward (5y, $84M, 1st y 8M)
WR B. Pringle (Vet Min Cap Benefit + $1.25m)
DE Melvin Ingram (2 years, $10M)
ERFA tender TE J. Fortson, RB D. Gore, and CB D. Baker.
Vet Minimum deals: FB M. Burton, OL A. Blythe, OL Andrew Wylie, LB B. Niemann, LB D. O'Daniel, SS A. Watts, RB J. McKinnon

With this group, I'm bringing back a lot of certainty. I'm fine tacking on the extra year for Ward to spread the bonus out a bit more and increase his guarantee to make that happen.

Open Free Agency:
WR D.J. Chark (4 years, $50M, $7M year 1 hit)
DT Maliek Collins (2 years, $11M)
vet QB (1 year/$2M)
DE Charles Harris (3 years, $21M)
S Marcus Maye (1 year, $4M, with incentives to $12M based on playing time, performance)

OK, I went a little different direction here, still adding a dynamic WR who could ascend and a solid vetern DT in Collins. Harris is a young pass rusher who finally seemed to deliver on his 1st round talent in 21. Maye is on a prove-it deal.

Draft:

1.8 - Travon Walker, DE, Georgia
1.30 - Devonte Wyatt, DT, Georgia
2.62 - Jalen Pitre, DB, Baylor
3.72 - Alec Pierce, WR, Cincinnati
3.94 - Sam Williams, DE, Ole Miss
3.103 - James Cook, RB, Georgia
4.132 - Sterling Weatherford, LB/S, Miami (OH)
7.229 - Kyle Phillips, WR, UCLA
7.238 - Nick Ford, IOL, Utah
7.239 - Danny Gray, WR, SMU
7.247 - McKinley Williams, LB, Arkansas
7.254 - Zamir White, HB, Georgia

A few comments here: I've seen Walker's stock all over the place, but his combination of size and freakish athleticism made him my best option at 8. (OK, I tossed a coin between him and Ojabo. For real). My next two picks mirror crows... a future stud at DT, and a do-everything DB who can help fill the Mathieu void.

I would love getting someone with Williams' upside in the 3rd like this, and with the depth I have added so far, he can basically play rush end and take advantage of his freakish athletic ability.

Pierce and Cook add some versatility and speed to the offense. Pierce could be a really strong long-term piece and good complement to Ridley. Cook's speed and receiving ability make him my future at RB.

Weatherford is another new name for me, but he popped up at the Senior Bowl and played well as a LB (converted S with LB size). Rest of the picks are BPA types, though I think Phillips could have pop up in a big way.

Depth Chart

QB Mahomes/vet
RB Edwards-Helaire/McKinnon or Cook
WR1 Ridley/Pringle
WR2 Chark/Pierce
WR3 Hardman/Phillips
TE Kelce/Gray

LT Brown/Prince
LG Thuney/Allegretti
C Humphrey/Blythe
RG Trey Smith/Ford
RT Wylie/Niang

RDE Harris/Sam Williams
DT Collins/Wyatt or Saunders
DT Jones/Wharton
LDE Ingram/Travon Walker

LB Gay/Niemann
LB Bolton/Niemann
LB Sterling Weatherford

OCB Ward
OCB Sneed
NCB Fenton or Pitre (Sneed actually slides to nickel in this set)
FS Thornhill/Maye
SS Pitre/Maye/Weatherford

All in all, looking at that, I don't like it as much as making things happen with keeping Hill. But I do think it is something KC could roll with. Kelce/Ridley/Chark/Hardman/Pierce give the Chiefs a wealth of receiving options.

I would hate to see Hill traded but with Ridley, Chark, Hardman, Pierce and Pringle….you’re not suffering a ton at the WR position.

Woah!

When did Jones get THAT contract? And why?

Jones was pretty much awful last year. I'd rather not have him than have him at those cap figures. That's nasty.

? Awful ? I guess we're going to have to agree to define awful in completely different contexts. Was his coverage not as good? Yeah a bit. Was he awful? I don't know if the 12 ranked player in both total and solo tackles is what I'd define as awful.

He signed it 3 years ago.

Ever ask why a coverage backer would have so many tackles?

He lost a step this year (after losing one last year as well) so many of those tackles came as a result of a guy catching a ball that would've been knocked away or not even thrown in seasons past.

He's declining quickly, IMO.

Prophetic. Too bad the return for Hill was nowhere close to this.

Close in value to the Eagles one, but not in terms of the height of the 1st rounder.

15 and 83 would have been 1225 points

29, 50, 121, and a future 4th and 6th worth about 1120.

Trying to normalize the values:
Let's say you traded 83 and 62, gets you to 45.
Vs
If the Chiefs traded 29, 62, and 121 it would be worth 17.

So that puts you at 15 and 45 vs 17 and 50.

I'm not overly disappointed in that, honestly.

I probably wouldn't have.

But since they did, I can get onboard with the logic.

This is a really nice draft to have a bunch of picks in.

Let's roll.

Clearly Bart reads our posts, Crow :)

The lounge thread is moving faster than I can read it, pretty much. Curious to hear the non crybaby thoughts.

When you say you're not dissappointed above, did you mean in the compensation for Tyreek or in how close your estimate was?

For me, its a tiny bit dissappointing to not get that real high 1 like I hoped for, but its a pretty good haul of picks to work with, I never would have thought 6 picks was possible.

My thought process on a trade like this was always that Hill's production was reproducable, but I think you need to add a veteran free agent WR - I wish this was done sooner so there were more options. You probably want 4 above average weapons to work with, and you have 2 currently (I am calling Juju above average). One in the draft, one signed to a multi year deal now to make 4 and I am pretty happy with the offenses potential still.

Who would you add, of the WRs available?

I'm not disappointed in what the Chiefs received as compensation. I think it's a fairly reasonable deal.

Good on you, by the way, to have brought this up. I can't say I would have fathomed the possibility if not recalling what you wrote up and thinking about it with the pending contract and value of WRs getting so high.

I think KC has to add another vet in free agency. I don't know if that guy needs to be starter material but I'd highly prefer it. That said, there are not many options out there screaming at me. If I had a preference, it'd be Will Fuller. I remember him calling out the Chiefs to draft him. I think he'd be a nice piece that could man the Z and keep Mecole in the slot. I wouldn't mind Odell on a 1-year deal either.

I still like some other guys out there but I see them more as depth plays. Tre'Quan Smith is one.

I don't know if I'd give much up in a trade for anyone out there. A future 5th for Laviska Shenault? Sure. Maybe our late 4th, certainly not 121.

As for the draft, I'd probably look hard at the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round guys and take 2. Not sure I'd look at anyone in the 1st unless Olave fell within a decent striking range. If KC moves up though, I'd rather it be for an edge guy.

Might put a mock together later just for fun.

Reading back through this is pretty amazing. Well done, kccrow. You had a good idea of what veach might be thinking. I would have preferred to wait one more to trade hill but I get it. Really impressive analysis on our system and how it fits with PM and wrs and how hill could be traded. Let’s hope we nail the draft and build up the roster.

Not to beat the drum any harder than I already am for J Williams, but tell me that he isn't the only WR that pops out at you that could fit this scenario with Tyreek?

The only thing that pops out at me is his ACL.

I'll be here all week! :D

You know what pops to me?

How fascinated everyone was with fast Alabama WRs (Ruggs and Jeudy) and didn't want to consider how really good some other WRs were.

How good that class was overall and that two guys went at the top of the 2nd that are 1k receivers, one of them as a #2.

And let's look at that guy, Tee Higgins. Was supposed to be a mid-to-late 1st round guy, fell just out of the 1st to 33. Bigger receiver at 6'3" 216 and ran a 4.59. Sound like a guy we are seeing in this draft? Compare statistics and measurables between Treylon Burks and Tee Higgins.

If Burks is there, I'm jumping all over that.

Talk more on this later too, gotta run for now

I like Burks but still don't like Tee Higgins. Yes, he's productive but it's a perfect match with Burrow's ball placement and his skill set.

I like burks a lot. I’m just not sure he’s there. He’s likely gone by the time we pick. And some of y’all don’t want to trade up for legit #1 wr that has produced in the sec but want jalen Tolbert in the 2nd, who gets blanketed by Georgia southern.ROFL

Blanketed by Georgia Southern? The same Georgia Southern he roasted for 11 receptions, 174 yards, and a TD? That Georgia Southern?

How about when he obliterated your beloved SEC, when he visited Tennessee, to the tune of 7 receptions, 143 yards, and a TD?

Or do you have to dig back an extra year to get that dirt on him? Should we gather dirt on how productive Williams was in 2020?

Should we talk about how piss poor of a route runner Williams was at OSU and that's the reason he couldn't get time on the field? He's still not that good of a route runner, but he has speed and speed wins in college. Chris Olave would break Williams' if he tried to keep up with lateral cuts and route sophistication. It's not even in the same stratosphere.

I like Williams, don't get me wrong, but I'm not about to concede that he's anywhere near the type of finished product you go balls deep to get in a draft loaded with as talented WRs while also having a torn ACL.

Could he end up being productive right away like Jaylen Waddle? Sure he could. He could also end up being Henry Ruggs... before Ruggs was an idiot. With his lack of route running, I'd err closer to Ruggs than Waddle.

I'd take a shot on him at 29, sure. Move up for him? No. If I'm moving up for a WR it's Olave if he makes it past Philly and it's not even close. That said, I'm not championing that move either. I'd take my chances on what might fall to 29 and if one doesn't I'm looking at what's there at 50 and possibly 62. I wouldn't mind Tolbert and Pierce both in 2 if you get DL in 1.

:wayne: