Fix the defense (upcoming offseason version).

[Direckshun]

In the other thread, I asked that you make in-season adjustments to this current roster.

What changes are you willing to make this coming offseason to boost the defense, however?

This can include free agents, cutting our own players, letting our own free agents walk, and draft picks.

[mkp785]

Originally Posted by Chargem

He's literally the only one with a moveable contract. I don't think I would do it, but a top 10 would be pretty tempting.

What if you could get Allen Robinson for the cash freed up, bring back Gordon on a one year deal, add a draft pick?

(Allen) Robinson, Gordon, Hardman, Pringle (1 year deal), Powell, 2nd round draft pick?

Would free up two first round draft picks, including a top 10 pick, to improve the defense. Still not tempting?

No. Tyreek is the most unguardable WR in the game. He stays.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by mkp785

Well if we keep losing he might an option. Badger is gone. This kid might go top 5 though, not sure if we'll be THAT shitty.

well, if the draft were tomorrow, we'd pick #16.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Chargem

How far would you go to fix this team? If you could trade Tyreek for a top 10 pick, and free up ~18mil of cap space, would you do it?

Not a chance.

Hill's a unique fit for this team. We see in Hardman what trying to 'replace Tyreek' will generally yield.

Finding a guy with the kind of quickness, deep speed and toughness/body control that Tyreek Hill has is damn rare. And it's crucial to the passing game. Part of what makes Kelce so dangerous is Hill (and vice versa; they're extremely complementary).

Whereas if you bring someone like Robinson in as your Z, Robinson and Kelce will oftentimes occupy space.

No, you trade Hill anymore than you'd trade Kelce. Those are unicorns - you keep your unicorns.

[kccrow]

Hill is a no-touch guy in my opinion. He's too good and too important to the offense.

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

I think it's ALL about the front 4 at this point. I mean, really.

We've dumped a ton of cash into the front four, and when it produced, we won.

Now it does not, and we lose.

I would absolutely put all focus on revamping that front four.

we have two talented young LB'ers, the corner room is all 26 or under, Thornhill is still there at S.

I'm putting all emphasis on front four.

I was wishing this young man was on the Chiefs today, heck of a motor. https://www.wibw.com/2021/10/30/anud...ast-tcu-31-12/

And he is just a SOPHOMORE!

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

I think it's ALL about the front 4 at this point. I mean, really.

We've dumped a ton of cash into the front four, and when it produced, we won.

Now it does not, and we lose.

I would absolutely put all focus on revamping that front four.

we have two talented young LB'ers, the corner room is all 26 or under, Thornhill is still there at S.

I'm putting all emphasis on front four.

100% agree.

They need to do with the defensive line what they did with the offensive line last offseason. It's really that simple.

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

100% agree.

They need to do with the defensive line what they did with the offensive line last offseason. It's really that simple.

So you think Nnadi needs to go as well? I sure haven't done any numbers research but he seems to me to be giving it his all. No?

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by HemiEd

So you think Nnadi needs to go as well? I sure haven't done any numbers research but he seems to me to be giving it his all. No?

Depends on the contract offer. He was a 3rd rounder so I don't expect him to be super expensive. He's a guy you might target to keep on a 2nd contract.

[Buehler445]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Not a chance.

Hill's a unique fit for this team. We see in Hardman what trying to 'replace Tyreek' will generally yield.

Finding a guy with the kind of quickness, deep speed and toughness/body control that Tyreek Hill has is damn rare. And it's crucial to the passing game. Part of what makes Kelce so dangerous is Hill (and vice versa; they're extremely complementary).

Whereas if you bring someone like Robinson in as your Z, Robinson and Kelce will oftentimes occupy space.

No, you trade Hill anymore than you'd trade Kelce. Those are unicorns - you keep your unicorns.

Originally Posted by kccrow

Hill is a no-touch guy in my opinion. He's too good and too important to the offense.

Agree. I don’t know when you let him walk but it isn’t now.

[CoMoChief]

Trading Tyreek Hill only makes sense if you currently have someone on the roster that can replace him. The Chiefs don't, and really other than Hill their WR group is dogshit.

Passing on DK Metcalf for Hardman and/or Thornhill was another Veach related bonehead draft move.

[Chargem]

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

Trading Tyreek Hill only makes sense if you currently have someone on the roster that can replace him. The Chiefs don't, and really other than Hill their WR group is dogshit.

Passing on DK Metcalf for Hardman and/or Thornhill was another Veach related bonehead draft move.

Well, I don't think anyone can replace Tyreek, nevermind having someone already on the roster, he's probably the best receiver in the league.

The question is could you get a no.1 receiver that is not quite as good with some of the resources you free up by trading him, so that the offense gets only a little worse but the defense gets a lot better with part of the resources gained from the trade.

Patrick is heading into the more expensive years of his contract, you probably can't have the best TE and the best WR in the league on the offense with Patrick's contract going forward, unless you want the team to be ass in other areas.

I would not want to trade Tyreek, but the net result of all the other mistakes (poor drafting, poor trading, poor FA contracts) means that I think if Veach had any balls, he would consider it if the compensation was high enough. I think there's zero percent chance he actually does it.

What happens in 2023 when Tyreek wants to be the highest paid WR in all of football?

People saying he has to stay no matter what, so you wouldn't trade him for 3 first round picks? He's good, but he's a single WR, there is a price at which you have to let go of him, surely?

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by HemiEd

So you think Nnadi needs to go as well? I sure haven't done any numbers research but he seems to me to be giving it his all. No?

Nnadi is an okay player, but just okay, really.

Not much pass rush, decent run defender. Slightly above replacement level I'd say, but not a guy you couldn't replace with a cheap vet like a Pennel type.

[Chris Meck]

Originally Posted by Chargem

Well, I don't think anyone can replace Tyreek, nevermind having someone already on the roster, he's probably the best receiver in the league.

The question is could you get a no.1 receiver that is not quite as good with some of the resources you free up by trading him, so that the offense gets only a little worse but the defense gets a lot better with part of the resources gained from the trade.

Patrick is heading into the more expensive years of his contract, you probably can't have the best TE and the best WR in the league on the offense with Patrick's contract going forward, unless you want the team to be ass in other areas.

I would not want to trade Tyreek, but the net result of all the other mistakes (poor drafting, poor trading, poor FA contracts) means that I think if Veach had any balls, he would consider it if the compensation was high enough. I think there's zero percent chance he actually does it.

What happens in 2023 when Tyreek wants to be the highest paid WR in all of football?

People saying he has to stay no matter what, so you wouldn't trade him for 3 first round picks? He's good, but he's a single WR, there is a price at which you have to let go of him, surely?

I think one of the things that are really important to accomplish this offseason and next is the Hill succession plan. We need to draft and develop top flight WR talent in the next two seasons.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

Nnadi is an okay player, but just okay, really.

Not much pass rush, decent run defender. Slightly above replacement level I'd say, but not a guy you couldn't replace with a cheap vet like a Pennel type.

Yeah, I'm not sure you extend him.

I think you let him test the market and see if he wants to return.

If you can get him to re-sign using the Four-Year Qualifying veterans minimum exception, I think you go ahead and do that. The problem is you're limited to 2 players and a total of $1.125 million in 'surplus' salary. And the Chiefs have so damn many FAs that they'll probably need to split that $1.125 between two guys.

We've used it in the past on Sausage and then Robinson and when you use it on one guy you can get a free million bucks in cap space and it works out nicely. But I'm not sure splitting it between say Nnadi and DoD (guys like Pringle and Remmers wouldn't qualify) gets you enough cushion to convince either guy. Wylie would also be a solid candidate to use it on as a versatile backup OL who probably won't get a huge market elsewhere and is likely more valuable to KC than he is anyone else. I guess you could throw some of it at Winchester or a couple other guys, but it doesn't seem necessary.

If you plowed all of it into a deal for Nnadi you could effectively pay him $2 million (plus some change) and only have a cap hit of $1 million. That's probably best for all parties. But he'd want to test the market before he came back for that.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

I think one of the things that are really important to accomplish this offseason and next is the Hill succession plan. We need to draft and develop top flight WR talent in the next two seasons.

Probably aren't gonna find another Hill. He's a hall of fame type dude.

But yeah, keep adding talent there.