Predict the AFC West in 2022

[Xenos]

On 5/25/2022 at 8:37 PM, FrantikRam said:

 

What the Rams have done is clearly different and I don't think there's a comp. I really doubt that another team went five consecutive years without a first round pick and won a Super Bowl.

So the Rams aside, I agree that what the Chargers did is pretty run of the mill in terms of trying to improve their roster. You can actually point to the Bengals as an example where a bunch of FA additions paid dividends, which is pretty much what the Chargers are attempting.

Yup, we’re closer to what the Bengals did than the Rams. Funny how it flipped. They concentrated primarily on defense the past two years before moving to OL in FA this year. We focused on OL last year and went almost all defense this year.

The only Rams type move was probably the trade for Mack.

[HerbertGOAT]

27 minutes ago, Xenos said:

Yup, we’re closer to what the Bengals did than the Rams. Funny how it flipped. They concentrated primarily on defense the past two years before moving to OL in FA this year. We focused on OL last year and went almost all defense this year.

The only Rams type move was probably the trade for Mack.

Even then, we didn't give up a whole lot. A 2nd and two 7ths (in the last 10 picks of the draft, I might add) is a bargain.

[Xenos]

2 hours ago, HerbertGOAT said:

Even then, we didn't give up a whole lot. A 2nd and two 7ths (in the last 10 picks of the draft, I might add) is a bargain.

Not going to lie. I felt the 2nd was too high for someone like Mack given his age and injury history.

[JAF-N72EX]

1 hour ago, Xenos said:

Not going to lie. I felt the 2nd was too high for someone like Mack given his age and injury history.

The Mack trade was steal for them. Our dumbass GM is paying 24M of his contract to play for the Chargers this year and they only had give up a 2021 R2 and 2022 R6.  Von Miller garnered a 2021 2nd and 3rd and he's 2 years older.

[Darbsk]

On 5/24/2022 at 9:34 PM, Soggust said:

Well, at best, he's at least 1400 and 7 right? Those are #1 numbers. But obviously we don't expect that.

I don't know how many teams are getting 800ish yards out of their WR3 during healthy seasons, and we can debate him as a WR2 vs WR3 but it's really irrelevant to your point, I think. Your point is that regardless of whatever we say he is - He ain't Tyreek - and I think that's fair. 

Some Chiefs fans might point to the fact that Mahomes has a 103.1 rating and 8:1 TD/INT ratio while averaging 347.5 YPG without Hill to suggest that the loss won't be as dramatic as you and I might think, but I actually do think it's different trying to manage 5 games without a weapon vs a full season of prepared teams, obviously, so I would take it a different direction.

-------

The Chiefs just won 12 games during the worst stretch of Mahomes career (arguably his worst year). Why can't he have a better year this year? Sure, losing Tyreek hurts, but its also certainly possible Mahomes regresses towards his career mean, especially as he seemed to get through his slump in the second half of the year.

Does the Broncos adding Russell Wilson (especially considering the season he is coming off of) account for 4-5 more wins? He's certainly good for a few more, in theory, but that's a big number. I do think this number is possible, but I also think it's about as probable as Mahomes playing better this year.

Does the Raiders adding Adams make the raiders 1-2 games better? If he's the Green Bay Adams, maybe? The Raiders offense sputtered down the stretch but I would argue their passing offense was not really their primary problem last year. I think they were like top 5 in yards or something? Again, I'm not saying he won't make them better, but a WR making your team a full game (or two!) better seems optimistic, especially if he ends up diminishing returns on Renfrow/Waller.

Finally, I don't see the Chargers adding JC Jackson making a 2-3 game difference, but the argument for the Chargers of course also involves Mack and them possibly playing to their potential, so whatever. Wouldn't surprise me a bit if they ended up being great and it wouldn't surprise me a bit to see them win 8-9 games again.

-----------------

But that's just the point. We ALL have question marks. And, of course, there are more pieces added than what we mentioned and we all got rookies who will solve all of our problems yadada. 

At the end of the day, we just don't know. The Chiefs could ABSOLUTELY miss the playoffs, but literally we could say that about every team in the division. So folks assuming every team in the AFCW gets better besides the Chiefs just seems presumptive at best, especially considering the Chiefs have owned this division since 2016.

But it's also a prediction thread and everyone saying the Chiefs would be boring so I get it.

This is a good post and the Chiefs should absolutely still be considered the favourite. I can only really speak of the Raiders with any confidence but that 1 to 2 game improvement won't come down to just Adams of course. Our HC was forced to resign part way through the season last year, our #1 WR actually killed someone and Waller and Jacobs were banged up for a lot of the year so I absolutely could see a 1 to 2 game improvement just based on all that crazy stuff hopefully not happening plus theoretically better coaching and red zone offence which I think McDaniels will provide.

Of course, it's absolutely plausible that they might well regress record-wise  given that Denver and Los Angeles have improved theoretically, even though they should be a better overall team. It's going to be fascinating to see but for me, and I know I am biased here, but Chiefs are the clear favourites and Raiders are a real dangerous dark horse team that I expect to battle really hard for the playoffs, Denver will improve and should be in the hunt but Los Angeles would be my favourite to disappoint. 

[Bolts223]

12 hours ago, Xenos said:

Not going to lie. I felt the 2nd was too high for someone like Mack given his age and injury history.

I feel like the injury history is being way overblown tbh. 
 

Mack historically doesn’t miss many games, last year was the exception. Whoever we would’ve taken with that 2nd round pick is very unlikely to help us win in the next 2 seasons as much as Mack projects to. 
 

Are we likely to get DPOY Mack this year? No. But he doesn’t need to be that with Bosa on the other side. He just needs to be really freaking good, which I have full confidence he will be. 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Bolts223

[Bolts223]

On 5/25/2022 at 11:37 PM, FrantikRam said:

 

What the Rams have done is clearly different and I don't think there's a comp. I really doubt that another team went five consecutive years without a first round pick and won a Super Bowl.

So the Rams aside, I agree that what the Chargers did is pretty run of the mill in terms of trying to improve their roster. You can actually point to the Bengals as an example where a bunch of FA additions paid dividends, which is pretty much what the Chargers are attempting.

Sure but the Rams are the ultimate extreme/outlier in terms of going “all in.” And part of that was going “all in” to trade for a much better QB than Goff. 

Most teams usually go “All in” once they have a QB they feel confident they can win with like the Chiefs did before the 2019 season or the Broncos/Bucs once they had Peyton Manning/Tom Brady. 
 

I think what the Chargers are doing is still going fairly all in on the next 2-3 seasons while we have Herb on a rookie deal. Once we have to pay Herb it’ll really come down to drafting/developing around him and other long term stars like Bosa/Derwin/Slater/etc. 

 

 

 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Bolts223

[FrantikRam]

2 hours ago, Bolts223 said:

I feel like the injury history is being way overblown tbh. 
 

Mack historically doesn’t miss many games, last year was the exception. Whoever we would’ve taken with that 2nd round pick is very unlikely to help us win in the next 2 seasons as much as Mack projects to. 
 

Are we likely to get DPOY Mack this year? No. But he doesn’t need to be that with Bosa on the other side. He just needs to be really freaking good, which I have full confidence he will be. 

 

 

His injuries don't concern me, he just isn't THAT good anymore IMO. With Bosa it might bring the best out in him though, we'll see.

[FrantikRam]

2 hours ago, Bolts223 said:

Sure but the Rams are the ultimate extreme/outlier in terms of going “all in.” And part of that was going “all in” to trade for a much better QB than Goff. 

Most teams usually go “All in” once they have a QB they feel confident they can win with like the Chiefs did before the 2019 season or the Broncos/Bucs once they had Peyton Manning/Tom Brady. 
 

I think what the Chargers are doing is still going fairly all in on the next 2-3 seasons while we have Herb on a rookie deal. Once we have to pay Herb it’ll really come down to drafting/developing around him and other long term stars like Bosa/Derwin/Slater/etc. 

 

 

 

 

 

The all in talk is nonsense anyways. I don't hear anyone saying that Denver went all in.

Which is ironic because I would not trade pick 9 in this year's draft for Jared Goff, pick 32, a third and next year's Rams first rounder.

Or in other words, half of what Denver gave up for Wilson for all of what we gave up for Stafford.

[Bolts223]

22 minutes ago, FrantikRam said:

 

 

His injuries don't concern me, he just isn't THAT good anymore IMO. With Bosa it might bring the best out in him though, we'll see.

Yeah I mean in 7 games he got 6 sacks and 6 TFL in 2021. That’s pretty damn good. 
 

He’d be a very good DE #1 on most teams, and he’s going to be our DE #2. Sign me up for that anyday. 

[Bolts223]

28 minutes ago, FrantikRam said:

 

 

The all in talk is nonsense anyways. I don't hear anyone saying that Denver went all in.

Which is ironic because I would not trade pick 9 in this year's draft for Jared Goff, pick 32, a third and next year's Rams first rounder.

Or in other words, half of what Denver gave up for Wilson for all of what we gave up for Stafford.

I mean Denver traded for a franchise QB because they continuously failed to draft and develop one since PM retired. They went all in once they signed PM back in the early-mid 2010’s hence why they were able to build such an insane defense in 2015.
 

I don’t think the Broncos are going “all in” on this season. They are most likely just a fringe playoff team given what they currently have on their roster. 
 

But having Wilson gives them an opportunity to start actually building a SB caliber team. They couldn’t do that with the likes of Trevor Siemian, Paxton Lynch, Drew Lock or Teddy Bridgewater. 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Bolts223

[FrantikRam]

1 hour ago, Bolts223 said:

Yeah I mean in 7 games he got 6 sacks and 6 TFL in 2021. That’s pretty damn good. 
 

He’d be a very good DE #1 on most teams, and he’s going to be our DE #2. Sign me up for that anyday. 

 

The seasons before he had 9 and 8.5 sacks. And it's not just about the stats - he just has a tendency to disappear for large stretches. Just a slightly above average starter at this point with name recognition.

[FrantikRam]

1 hour ago, Bolts223 said:

I mean Denver traded for a franchise QB because they continuously failed to draft and develop one since PM retired. They went all in once they signed PM back in the early-mid 2010’s hence why they were able to build such an insane defense in 2015.
 

I don’t think the Broncos are going “all in” on this season. They are most likely just a fringe playoff team given what they currently have on their roster. 
 

But having Wilson gives them an opportunity to start actually building a SB caliber team. They couldn’t do that with the likes of Trevor Siemian, Paxton Lynch, Drew Lock or Teddy Bridgewater. 

 

 

Right but this goes to my point. It's ironic that they gave up more draft capital for Wilson than we did for Stafford, and the rhetoric was that the Rams went all in and had to win the Super Bowl, while nobody says that about Denver. We had as much or more future draft capital after that trade than they currently do, yet nobody is saying that for them.

[Bolts223]

5 minutes ago, FrantikRam said:

 

The seasons before he had 9 and 8.5 sacks. And it's not just about the stats - he just has a tendency to disappear for large stretches. Just a slightly above average starter at this point with name recognition.

Yeah I think you’re not giving him near enough credit. He’s a very good player, not “above average”. He’s not GREAT like he was in 2018, but very good with Bosa as the other edge is more than sufficient. Plus our interior D-line also got upgraded from what it was last year. 

Edited June 5, 2022 by Bolts223

[FrantikRam]

1 minute ago, Bolts223 said:

Yeah I think you’re not giving him near enough credit. He’s a very good player, not “above average”. He’s not GREAT like he was in 2018, but very good with Bosa as the other edge is more than sufficient. Plus our interior D-line also got upgraded from what it was last year. 

 

 

We will have to agree to disagree. I've thought Mack was overrated his entire career and was adamant that I felt the Raiders won that trade when it happened.