Cardinals Release WR DeAndre Hopkins [Titans, 2yr/$26 million]

[Dante84]

Interesting

Cardinals released DeAndre Hopkins. pic.twitter.com/c0f9UaabYA

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) May 26, 2023

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

Well that’s one way to look at it.

Or, they beat KC three times in a row then lost the last game.

Or whatever other ways there might be.


However you interpret ’3-1,’ KC is on the losing side of that. For now.


As usual, that stat alone isn’t foremost on my mind. It’s how we got there. And part of the ‘how’ is our offense repeatedly struggled vs their defense.

Doesn’t mean that CIN has the best defense. We also struggled vs. BUF as well last season.

But CIN has consistently prevented KCs offense from scoring to their average for a couple seasons now; and forced stops or turnovers to effectively close out games vs the Chiefs over multiple games and seasons.

Those are facts. There are a lot of reasons for that, many of which I’ve already posted in this thread and others, so I won’t reiterate them here again, but bottom line, CIN is not just any other team, like LAC, who also play well against us.

CIN will be in the playoffs, they’ll be vying for the 1-seed, and a SB berth.

Getting Hopkins isn’t about beAting DEN or LVR; some “good” team.

It’s about beating CIN and BUF, both of whom beat us last season in large part by stalling our offense. And could do so again, but this time maybe knock us out of the playoffs.

Or we could get a force multiplier like Hopkins and outmatch them.

Originally Posted by Megatron96

Lol, I guess “a win is a win” only counts when the Chiefs are on the right side of that aphorism, eh?

Pretty much why I never use that one myself. Same as “we have the best pass-rush in the NFL” - circa 2018 just prior to the AFCCG.

Ditto our “best 3rd down defense” of the same year.

Or any of the half dozen other silly things people say, like “we have the number one offense,” based on a single stat like total yards, while completely ignoring any stat that doesn’t conform to that one metric.

But whatever. I’ve pretty much covered all this multiple times now. Either you can read or you can’t.

Originally Posted by Megatron96

Yeah you can throw that in there with the other far too general declarations people like to use far too frequently. Good catch.

Originally Posted by tredadda

What would you need to see to judge whether an offense is #1 in the league or not?

Originally Posted by Megatron96

Meh. People get mad at me for a lot of things. I just stated a fact. One that’s more pertinent than “we’re the number one scoring offense.”


They can take it however they want.

Originally Posted by Megatron96

I would use a multifaceted metric, or I would compile multiple stats/metrics to better describe the offense. Because those metrics above just don't. I mean, I get it; they sound cool. But they lack any precision.

If they did, they'd explain what happened in the IND, BUF, CIN, TEN, LAR, DEN and HOU games. In one of the JAX games. In the first half of the SB.

You know, when they kind of sucked in those games.

The ones that are particularly concerning are obviously both the BUF and the CIN games. But let's skip that for now. In fact, we'll just put this right here:

[INSERT STANDARD EXCUSE VS. BUF/CIN HERE]

But where was this number one offense vs. TEN?

8/19 3rd downs

2-13 scoring drives. 15% efficiency.

Against a team that didn't even make the playoffs. They didn't earn a W over their last 7 games.

The Rams. Sorry, the practice squad of the Rams

5-11 on 3rd downs

2-8 scoring drives

1-6 in the RZ

Maybe that score/performance would've been acceptable if the Rams had actually been the Rams. But they were a practice squad wearing Rams colors.

And somehow "the number one scoring offense in the world" managed just two TDs against a defense that only could play 5 players of their SB defense vs. KC.

Went 1 TD in SIX TRIPS inside the RZ.

Good thing Stafford wasn't healthy. And our kicking unit was on point.

Had to go to OT vs. DEN and HOU. [Insert standard "they're a Division rival" excuse here for DEN.]

Scored just 24 vs. SEA

3rd down efficiency was ass again, 3-11

Scored just 3 TDs in 10 drives





But the most concerning thing shouldn't be the individual games themselves, but should be that some of those games were late in the season, when the offense was supposed to be gelling into playoff form. But obviously, when you take a little deeper look into the stats, past "MOST EXPLOSIVE OFFENSE EVAH," or whatever non-contextualized metric of the day is, there were problems. Chronic ones. There were even games where one could make the argument that KC won in spite of the offense, not because of it.


But whatever. I've posted this argument in much more complete detail a couple three times already. Obviously it's way more fun to throw "We're the number one offense ever" out there, than to be more analytical. I get it.

Originally Posted by Megatron96

Lol, so my takeaway from the LAR and SEA games is that we didn’t really want to score TDs in the RZ, eh? The plan was to kick FGs, because we didn’t want to give away anything?


Like I said, “a win is a win.” There’s your mentality.

Originally Posted by Megatron96

STs score FGs. That happens when the offense can't do their job and score TDs.


And I never said anything about who controlled the game. In fact, if we went back to the actual GDTs we'd find that I said repeatedly that we controlled the game, but that the offense couldn't score in the RZ.


And Andy really shouldn't have to 'empty the playbook' vs. teams as thin as last year's Rams were. The fact of the matter was, our WRs failed to execute, repeatedly. Calling vanilla offensive plays shouldn't have been that big a deal.


But like I said, people will choose their own facts for comfort's sake.


Hopefully the WRs can be more effective in 2023, because unlike some, I have serious doubts the Chiefs can continue to win at the same rate when they fail to score for multiple weeks in a row.

Originally Posted by Megatron96

First off, I've said consistently and repeatedly that we don't need DHop. But that we do need a true veteran high football IQ WR to leaven all the young/inexperienced WRs we have. Once, after a couple Scotches, I said we need DHop, maybe a month ago. That's it.


In the last half dozen posts I've stayed out of the speculation business. I literally posted facts, statistics, measurable data. I also tried to skew the data in favor of the passing offense, by omitting the first 8-9 games, because we rebuilt the entire WR room, and I didn't think it was fair to include all the early games when the WRs struggled the most. They were still learning everything, so i unilaterally gave them a pass for the first half of the season.


The data pretty strongly suggest that the WRs underperformed significantly last season. That's been my point over the last half-dozen posts, period.


The responses I've read have been mostly speculation/conjecture.

Again, I didn't speculate that the Chiefs would lose a ton of games, or that they wouldn't make the playoffs, etc. In fact, I've said 100% of the time that I think the Chiefs will probably make the playoffs, and the AFCCG.

I simply laid out the data, and poked a couple holes in the idea that the title "best scoring offense/most yards/etc." meant that the offense was rolling along perfectly in 2022.

The data clearly doesn't support that. It shows that the WRs underperformed. That Travis performed at an extremely high level to hide some of the WRs inefficiencies. That McKinnon also overperformed and hid some of that inconsistency by the WR room.

The data even shows that in the latter half of the season, the defense played a bigger part in some of the Chiefs victories in 2022 than the WRs did. But this is a thread mostly about offense, so I left that out as well.

You're a pretty smart football guy. Always read your opinions with interest. Let me ask you objectively: of the three weapons groups, RBs, TEs, and WRs, is it satisfactory for the WRs to produce less than 30% of the total offense? Knowing that for every other playoff team over the last twenty years or so the WRs almost universally account for closer to 40% of the total offense? Is it sustainable if Travis isn't playing up to his OPOY standard?

Actually, forget 'sustainable.' Does it look like 'the plan' to have the WRs account for significantly less production (nearly 400 yds/19 fewer TDs) than the TEs/RBs? Does that even sound like an Andy Reid plan?


Here's where I speculate: it looks like Andy saw that the WRs were unable to consistently produce around Week 9, and put a band-aid on it by getting McKinnon/Pacheco more involved. Idk 100% that this is true, but based on the stats/data it certainly appears that way after Mecole went down around Week 9. JM caught just 19 balls through Week 8, and 37 between Weeks 9-17. Pacheco 3/12.

It seems pretty straight forward to me. If it doesn't to you, I'd love to read your statistically-backed, data-driven (non-speculative) retort.

Originally Posted by Megatron96

You're almost never rational. And I'm not going to go back and repost 20 posts worth of data. Especially when you typically throw a fit and post something like "I'm not even going to read this because ____!!!!"

That's on you.

And I don't think everyone here is wrong. I know you're usually wrong. There's a difference.

You are so completely full of shit and are a really bad liar, cuz ya know people can look up your stupid bullshit. I literally found 1 or maybe 2 posts that you posted any type of stats about the offense and not one single one was proof that the Chiefs weren't the absolute best in the NFL. I went back a long ways too. ****in tard

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

Where am I wrong dumb shit? I don't give a **** about what Albert Breer says, when has he gotten anything right about KC? I said no one knows what's going on inside the organization and everything that gets reported as what the Chiefs want doesn't even happen, so the other dipshit posts a tweet from a hack and somehow both of you tards think that proves me wrong?

Also where are those stats that prove the Chiefs offense wasn't good? You gonna post those, mouth breather?

Lol, you literally posted "Veach probably didn't even talk to DHop." Paraphrasing, because you don't really deserve my time that it would take for me to look up your exact words.

Obviously, that was wrong. Breer may not be the best prognosticator in the world, but he clearly said that Veach spoke to DHop. So your post was purely conjecture. or you're a liar. But I don't know you, or how likely it is that you would lie, so i left it at "you made a mistake." That's called precision. Something you seem to be lacking.


And you have a terrible memory, because I posted statistical context in all four DHop threads, several of which you replied to, not just this one.


Clearly you have some emotional control issues. Maybe see a therapist about that.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

I responded to someone saying he "was probably the 40th best WR," implying by omission of any qualifiers, that the poster meant 'overall.'

As such, MVS is statistically somewhat below that, but whatever; he's not a top-20 (or even 30) WR, OVERALL.


And I quite clearly stated that the stats I used were for the 2022 season only, and that they "provided an incomplete picture." But at least I provided some statistical data, as context.


If you're going to state that "DCs changed the way they called a game," with respect to MVS, without that being conjecture, you need to provide 'context' by supplying some stats or video clips, or even reference a particular game or games.

As another example:

"DHop would eat up too many targets." Speculation.

"DHop only dropped three passes last season, and also is one of the few WRs with a zero drop season (more than 100 targets), making him one of the most efficient WRs in the NFL, and not likely to absorb too many targets." Statistical context.

Again, you're missing the point, entirely.

The post you were replying to stated that MVS was probably the 30-40th best WR in the league. You responded that statistically speaking, in '22, he was the 55th. So he's a mid-WR3. To which I responded- "You don't get it." And you don't. There are no where NEAR 54 guys who can do what MVS can do.

His worth is SO MUCH MORE than the stats say, which is my point, which you're either just missing or intentionally ignoring. I'm not sure which it is, to be honest. I don't think you're stupid, and I don't think you're intentionally arguing in bad faith, so perhaps it's just a blind spot you have, in which you are SO data driven you can't see anything beyond the numbers. But there's A LOT beyond what the numbers can tell you.

Anyway.

I never stated that MVS CHANGED the way DC's called the games; I would argue that his presence kept them calling similar games to when Hill was here. Because that ONE specific elite ability-scary, startling speed-is a KILLER. MVS doesn't have the other abilities that Hill does, but he does possess that singular skill. The ABSENCE of anyone on the team with that level of speed would change the way DC's call the games, and while that's technically conjecture, it's no great stretch to see that would happen immediately if a defense didn't have to worry about someone with the ability to blow right past them.

You had to worry about Hill running by you. You still have to worry about MVS doing the same. And that reality stresses a defense and helps to dictate what you can and can't do with your coverage schemes. If you need data, you can look at how much two deep coverage we see, every year. There's a reason for that-and that two deep coverage is also part of why Kelce has such huge numbers every year. You have to pick your poison.

[Bearcat]

I wonder if Patriots fans had these exact same arguments back when they were winning all of their Super Bowls.

[mlyonsd]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

I wonder if Patriots fans had these exact same arguments back when they were winning all of their Super Bowls.

I'm glad most of the thinking now is done by vart beach.

[Red Dawg]

They have won 2 SBs after none for 50 years. The expectation from us and themselves is this team will be good and competitive for another. Thats what they have earned Dhop or not. Get him then great. Don't we still gonna be great.

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Again, you're missing the point, entirely.

The post you were replying to stated that MVS was probably the 30-40th best WR in the league. You responded that statistically speaking, in '22, he was the 55th. So he's a mid-WR3. To which I responded- "You don't get it." And you don't. There are no where NEAR 54 guys who can do what MVS can do.

His worth is SO MUCH MORE than the stats say, which is my point, which you're either just missing or intentionally ignoring. I'm not sure which it is, to be honest. I don't think you're stupid, and I don't think you're intentionally arguing in bad faith, so perhaps it's just a blind spot you have, in which you are SO data driven you can't see anything beyond the numbers. But there's A LOT beyond what the numbers can tell you.

Anyway.

I never stated that MVS CHANGED the way DC's called the games; I would argue that his presence kept them calling similar games to when Hill was here. Because that ONE specific elite ability-scary, startling speed-is a KILLER. MVS doesn't have the other abilities that Hill does, but he does possess that singular skill. The ABSENCE of anyone on the team with that level of speed would change the way DC's call the games, and while that's technically conjecture, it's no great stretch to see that would happen immediately if a defense didn't have to worry about someone with the ability to blow right past them.

You had to worry about Hill running by you. You still have to worry about MVS doing the same. And that reality stresses a defense and helps to dictate what you can and can't do with your coverage schemes. If you need data, you can look at how much two deep coverage we see, every year. There's a reason for that-and that two deep coverage is also part of why Kelce has such huge numbers every year. You have to pick your poison.

I didn't speak to what his worth was. i spoke to what his overall production was. There's a difference. But when someone else says "30th or 40th best WR," that speaks to his overall production, not his value in a particular offense/scheme.

And since about Week 13 I've consistently said that MVS' value (or worth) is greater than his actual production. I haven't been critical of MVS' role/production in the offense since then, and I've repeatedly said that within the context of his role, he's been more than fine.


But when the question is "where does he rank as an NFL WR," well, he's somewhere between the 55th and 75th WR available.


Now, among WRs that play a similar role, he might be 1st, or 5th or whatever.

But as a NFL WR, compared directly against all WRs, he's probably around 55th to 75th, statistically speaking.

And I tend to use stats more than others because I'm terrible at video editing, and effectively don't have that ability to make use of. But I avoid season stats when possible, because I know how useless they are, especially when trying to evaluate a single season. They're more useful when looking at multiple seasons, say in a career, because they tend to mitigate outlier results.

And I'm honestly puzzled why this bothers you so much. I've purposefully used stats split by the month, or by the first 8-9 weeks vs. the last 8-9 weeks. By quarters, or every four weeks, which is how most coaches look at the season.

I've broken it down by RZ and 3rd down conversion efficiency, not just for the season, but by first vs. last half of the season.

And so on, including certain players trends statistically over 2022.

And the whole time I've said that stats don't provide a complete picture, but they can show trends if properly used.

And i didn't conclude that the offense wasn't good. I said that the offensive production is off-balance, leaning more on TEs and RBs. Which the data clearly shows. Anyone with any common sense would agree that the offense should be more balanced, I would think, right?


Remember when the Chiefs WRs didn't score any TDs for an entire season? I'm going to guess that wasn't okay with you. Or any of us for that matter.



Last year they scored 13. The offense as a whole scored 59. That's 22% of all TDs scored by the offense. Isn't it safe to say that balance be closer to 33%, or 20 (19.5) TDs? Don't we want the offense to be more balanced?


So the questions are (in order) 'how did that happen?' and 'how do we fix it?'


I've been addressing the part about 'how' that happened, statistically.

DHop would address the 'how do we fix it' question, instantaneously.


But again, for the 400th time, I've only asked for "better than JuJu," not that I had to have DHop. Except the one time a month or so ago.

[FlaChief58]

Originally Posted by smithandrew051

Well, I still haven’t left Best Buy. Hopefully he gets here soon. I miss my family.

League sources tell me that he has a scheduled visit to best buy on Tuesday to buy a new washer/dryer set. Hang in there bud!

[smithandrew051]

Originally Posted by FlaChief58

League sources tell me that he has a scheduled visit to best buy on Tuesday to buy a new washer/dryer set. Hang in there bud!

My wife left me and took the kids. I’m in no rush to leave now.

As long as it takes.

[JohnnyHammersticks]

The good news is DHop is monitoring this thread and was ready to lower his contract demands drastically for only the Chiefs once we hit 2500 posts.

The bad news is he’s been reading the posts for the last few days and he now thinks our fans are too batshit crazy to risk playing in front of.

Don’t kill the messenger, I’m just passing along what DJBILL’s neighbor’s cleaning lady told me.

[MarkDavis'Haircut]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

I wonder if Patriots fans had these exact same arguments back when they were winning all of their Super Bowls.

Yes, they did.

I checked once or twice. They were always arguing about something. Message boards tend to be like that.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by MarkDavis'Haircut

Yes, they did.

I checked once or twice. They were always arguing about something. Message boards tend to be like that.

Ironically, there's probably a Randy Moss thread just like this one, and signing him is about when they started their SB drought.

[Megatron96]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Ironically, there's probably a Randy Moss thread just like this one, and signing him is about when they started their SB drought.

More recently, I checked on PP around the time they drafted N'Keal Harry (sp?), and they were bemoaning the lack of WR talent, and that the offense was relegated to rushing and throwing to Edelman and the RBs. Gronk was very limited in terms of availability at the time, iirc, and that also was a source of a lot of contention.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by Megatron96

I didn't speak to what his worth was. i spoke to what his overall production was. There's a difference. But when someone else says "30th or 40th best WR," that speaks to his overall production, not his value in a particular offense/scheme.

And since about Week 13 I've consistently said that MVS' value (or worth) is greater than his actual production. I haven't been critical of MVS' role/production in the offense since then, and I've repeatedly said that within the context of his role, he's been more than fine.


But when the question is "where does he rank as an NFL WR," well, he's somewhere between the 55th and 75th WR available.


Now, among WRs that play a similar role, he might be 1st, or 5th or whatever.

But as a NFL WR, compared directly against all WRs, he's probably around 55th to 75th, statistically speaking.

And I tend to use stats more than others because I'm terrible at video editing, and effectively don't have that ability to make use of. But I avoid season stats when possible, because I know how useless they are, especially when trying to evaluate a single season. They're more useful when looking at multiple seasons, say in a career, because they tend to mitigate outlier results.

And I'm honestly puzzled why this bothers you so much. I've purposefully used stats split by the month, or by the first 8-9 weeks vs. the last 8-9 weeks. By quarters, or every four weeks, which is how most coaches look at the season.

I've broken it down by RZ and 3rd down conversion efficiency, not just for the season, but by first vs. last half of the season.

And so on, including certain players trends statistically over 2022.

And the whole time I've said that stats don't provide a complete picture, but they can show trends if properly used.

And i didn't conclude that the offense wasn't good. I said that the offensive production is off-balance, leaning more on TEs and RBs. Which the data clearly shows. Anyone with any common sense would agree that the offense should be more balanced, I would think, right?


Remember when the Chiefs WRs didn't score any TDs for an entire season? I'm going to guess that wasn't okay with you. Or any of us for that matter.



Last year they scored 13. The offense as a whole scored 59. That's 22% of all TDs scored by the offense. Isn't it safe to say that balance be closer to 33%, or 20 (19.5) TDs? Don't we want the offense to be more balanced?


So the questions are (in order) 'how did that happen?' and 'how do we fix it?'


I've been addressing the part about 'how' that happened, statistically.

DHop would address the 'how do we fix it' question, instantaneously.


But again, for the 400th time, I've only asked for "better than JuJu," not that I had to have DHop. Except the one time a month or so ago.

Well, I think better than Juju is certainly an expectation, DHop or no. There's a reason you draft two high picks and sign a first rounder. You're expecting more.

The Chiefs are, or they would have brought Juju back. Clearly they think they can do better with Skyy, Toney, and Rice.

Will the WR room score a lot more? Dunno. I don't really care. See, coverages dictate where the ball goes as much as anything. If what's there is a back in the flat, I think that's just fine.

[Simply Red]

do we even have twitter tards anymore?