Do we want DeHop?

[ROYC75]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl...9536dcd3&ei=21


Story by Andrew Gould




The Kansas City Chiefs won the Super Bowl without a star wide receiver, but they could reportedly make an elite offense even scarier by acquiring DeAndre Hopkins.

NFL insider Benjamin Albright told PHNX Cardinals that Kansas City is the "primary suitor" for Hopkins. He doesn't know the draft compensation the Cardinals would receive, but he said it's more likely they get a second-round pick than a first.

After the 2022 season, theScore's Jordan Schultz reported that the Cardinals plan to trade Hopkins this offseason.

Arizona hired a new general manager and head coach after a disappointing four-win season, and Hopkins is set to make $19.45 million (with a $30.75 million cap hit) in 2023. The Cardinals could seek a clean slate by moving the three-time All-Pro wideout, who turns 31 in June.

Hopkins began his Cardinals career by tallying 1,407 yards and six touchdowns in 2020. However, multiple lower body injuries limited him to 10 games in 2021, and he served a six-game suspension to start the 2022 season for violating the NFL's PED policy.

Yet he remains an impact player when on the field. Hopkins totaled 474 receiving yards in six full games with quarterback Kyler Murray last season.

Now imagine what he can accomplish when catching passes from Patrick Mahomes.

The Chiefs flourished without a star replacement for Tyreek Hill, but they could still benefit by solidifying the position this offseason. JuJu Smith-Schuster is a free agent after garnering 78 catches for 933 yards on a one-year deal. The depth chart features several talented question marks in Mecole Hardman, Kadarius Toney, and Marquez Valdes-Scantling.

Adding Hopkins could be great news for Kansas City, but terrible for all opposing defenses.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Do we want a high priced prima donna?

[O.city]

So you could do this (depending on the price and such) and be fine in the future, but the key is gonna be doing to the WR core what you did with the DB's last year.

You need a real talent infusion of young guys there that will be cheap. They have Toney, Moore, etc really cheap for a couple years so you can handle a Hopkins for a couple years salary if you really want to.

I think Dhop would obviously excel here, dudes a top 10 WR easily. Excel in teh vein of 1400 yards and 14 TD's. He'd be a monster.

But he's a bit older, has some injury issues and isn't gonna be had for nothing. So there's definitely risk.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by O.city

So you could do this (depending on the price and such) and be fine in the future, but the key is gonna be doing to the WR core what you did with the DB's last year.

You need a real talent infusion of young guys there that will be cheap. They have Toney, Moore, etc really cheap for a couple years so you can handle a Hopkins for a couple years salary if you really want to.

I think Dhop would obviously excel here, dudes a top 10 WR easily. Excel in teh vein of 1400 yards and 14 TD's. He'd be a monster.

But he's a bit older, has some injury issues and isn't gonna be had for nothing. So there's definitely risk.

There's risk in everything. There is risk in staying with what you have and thinking that you're going to fill it with a draft pick or two plus a cheap veteran afterwards. It worked out just fine this year and the common response is that we should trust Veach because of that....but if last year didn't work out? WR would have been at the top of the blame list.

[O.city]

Originally Posted by The Franchise

There's risk in everything. There is risk in staying with what you have and thinking that you're going to fill it with a draft pick or two plus a cheap veteran afterwards. It worked out just fine this year and the common response is that we should trust Veach because of that....but if last year didn't work out? WR would have been at the top of the blame list.

Yeah, it could have went sideways if Pat isn't a legitimate alien.

And with his salary, there's just a chance he's gonna have to do that every year and it just is what it is. But if they can make it work with a situation like this, you explore it.

Which also brings up another thing that DJ and I talked about in some thread a while back. If you are paying your QB like they're paying these guys and he's just a top 7 or 8 guy, not a legit top 2 or 3 guy/putting up all pro level seasons, you just can't win a SB without some super luck.

[Gary Cooper]

I want DeHop just for fade routes in the red zone. We NEVER do that well. It kills me when other teams do that in the red zone at will.

[O.city]

Mahomes is the slam dunk guy you have no worries about paying.

I think Burrow is in the same scenario, I'd pay him and wouldn't worry to much. He's had alot of weapons and takes sacks and such, but dude just has the mentality you want and is a pure pocket guy.

Literally any of the other guys......I'd have some reserve. Hell, take Herbert for example. He hasn't really won, which isn't necessarily on the QB, but when we're getting into this type of contract....shit if I'm having to make any kind of excuses for the guy....doesn't that bring up some hesitation?

Josh Allen's ceiling is so high you probably are ok there, but the guy tends to struggle from time to time throwing the football. For a QB, that's a problem.

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Gary Cooper

I want DeHop just for fade routes in the red zone. We NEVER do that well. It kills me when other teams do that in the red zone at will.

This is my thought process.....

Adding the Fade Route would really open even more route in the Red Zone.

Pat see's a WR singled he can just throw the fade, if not then run the play.

I just want to see Pat have the option of the FADE.

[Redbled]

Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501

I’m not saying we need to just chuck the ball up. But what mahomes doesn’t have is a WR with a catch radius. Whether you’re back shouldering it, high point, fades or even just wrestling for position… so mahomes’ option 9 times out of 10 is to throw a perfect ball to a WR who’s wide open. The most glaring example is Mvs who has been really bad at adjusting to the ball.

Part of efficiency is being able to get rid of the ball quickly. that also goes a long way to keeping mahomes on his feet and helping the OL out. Other teams can throw quick sideline routes knowing their WR will find a way to make the play. We don’t have that. And that’s a big miss. Just because mahomes is capable of doing magic tricks in the pocket doesn’t mean it’s ideal. And it’s not something you want to sustain into his 30s. At some point you have to give him some WRs who can help him out before the pass is thrown.

Again, you can talk statistical production til we’re blue in the face. We are better in a lot of ways but we still have gaps. Now, does that mean Hopkins is the answer? I have no idea. Depends on health and compensation. But the idea that the right fit, right comp $20m option isn’t a huge help to our offense is nonsense.

I think Toney is that if he’s healthy. But I still want Dhop if possible.

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by Redbled

I think Toney is that if he’s healthy. But I still want Dhop if possible.

I think Toney has a shot at being that, but Hopkins catch radius is like Larry Fitz used to be...

Having WR's on the outside who can come down with contest catches keeps the chains moving.

We do need to keep talent stacked around Mahomes....

[Redbled]

Originally Posted by Gary Cooper

I want DeHop just for fade routes in the red zone. We NEVER do that well. It kills me when other teams do that in the red zone at will.

Like the jump ball Hurts threw in the SB. Everyone praised him for that but it was all Brown. Pat can’t do that.

[Redbled]

Originally Posted by O.city

Mahomes is the slam dunk guy you have no worries about paying.

I think Burrow is in the same scenario, I'd pay him and wouldn't worry to much. He's had alot of weapons and takes sacks and such, but dude just has the mentality you want and is a pure pocket guy.

Literally any of the other guys......I'd have some reserve. Hell, take Herbert for example. He hasn't really won, which isn't necessarily on the QB, but when we're getting into this type of contract....shit if I'm having to make any kind of excuses for the guy....doesn't that bring up some hesitation?

Josh Allen's ceiling is so high you probably are ok there, but the guy tends to struggle from time to time throwing the football. For a QB, that's a problem.

Allen is still the clear 3rd option to me.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

This is my thought process.....

Adding the Fade Route would really open even more route in the Red Zone.

Pat see's a WR singled he can just throw the fade, if not then run the play.

I just want to see Pat have the option of the FADE.

Fades are the worst plays in football.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by O.city

The Chiefs don't throw those balls though, they're more about separation.

So if you wanna trade for a WR and pay one, it should probably be more along the lines of a Brandon Aiyuk or a younger guy like that.

Yeah, I’m not saying Hopkins is the answer. Or that jumpballs are the only way to go. But you do need some guys who are capable of snagging quick aggressive passes. A simple sideline route can be quick by either a WR who can consistently win 50-50 balls or gets immediate separation. At the very least have a WR who can adjust to the ball instead of waiting for the ball to hit his hands. Main point is it’s not like the past where we were trying to light up the scoreboard with long developing jump balls. Here we are talking about new ways for guys to get open quicker. And that is a huge help as well in the red zone and short yardage where we weren’t very good last year.

Toney has played a small % of snaps but you can see mahomes threw a lot of aggressive “go up and get it” passes that we haven’t seen before. If you give him the option, mahomes will use it.

Certainly not opposed to someone like aiyuk.

[BleedingRed]

Originally Posted by -King-

Fades are the worst plays in football.

Not even close.... And considering you have watched EB get CUTE with plays for 3 years+ you should know better.

[chiefzilla1501]

Originally Posted by Chris Meck

We don't really do that, never have.

Because we don’t have the receivers who can

[-King-]

Originally Posted by BleedingRed

Not even close.... And considering you have watched EB get CUTE with plays for 3 years+ you should know better.

It doesn't get much cuter than fades which are incomplete the vast majority of the time. Unless you have prime Calvin Johnson, fades are a waste of a down.

Part of the reason lies in the remarkable inefficiency of the play. Just 13.5% of those 37 fades were caught for touchdowns in 2019, compared with 57% of flat routes, 42% of slants and 42.5% of out routes. Although last season was historically awful, the play has always been a dubious option. Over the previous two seasons, quarterbacks connected on 30% of fades thrown close to the goal line compared with 48% of all other routes.