Why are the Chiefs not trying to get better at WR?

[mdonnelly21]

I think if they gave up enough they could pry D. Adams away from Raiders who are on the verge of being a rebuild team. 

Idc what the Chiefs have to give up either. (I know they are in the same division) 

D. Adams puts them clearly over the top as true SB contenders. 

And even if it isn't him, you can go out and get some WR talent from a bottom feeder who wants to rebuild. 

[Jakuvious]

Well, at this point, the trade deadline has passed. So that kind of overrules everything else, at this point.

But I think there's a handful of reasons that they didn't. How important each is is hard to say without being in the front office.

I do think they genuinely believe in the young guys, and their and Mahomes's ability to figure this out with time. Toney, Moore, and Rice have all had issues to varying degrees at different points in time, but none have fully been benched or thrown in the dog house. The team was really high on the young but talented corp all offseason, I don't think that opinion has changed. If the guys currently on roster do pan out, that's a much more ideal outcome.

It kind of isn't our style. We like low risk high reward late season adds, but not high investment additions. We'll grab a Terrell Suggs or Melvin Ingram late for cheap for a late push. We'll go for reclamation projects like Toney or Mike Hughes or Cam Erving, who flamed out but might do better with better coaching. But we don't really do blockbuster midseason trades despite how often they're mocked to us.

We don't really have that much for resources. Either by preference or by financial limitations, we don't really do the Philly style cap manipulation stuff. We don't like pushing expenses into future years. I don't think anyone knows if that's a Veach team building preference, or a Hunt cash flow thing, but either way, we don't do it. We're always at the bottom of lists for dead cap space. We pushed out Jones's money a little bit, because it wouldn't have been possible otherwise which is not good mid-season, but that's the only time we've really done that void year shenanigan stuff so far. Which means cap space is at a premium, and guys like Adams or Evans are expensive.

We aren't big on acquiring and paying older players. Aside from Kelce, and to a lesser extent, Thuney, we basically don't pay players under Veach who may reach their point of decline within the terms of that contract. This is probably part of the Jones negotiations issue, for what it's worth. Dorsey did a lot of this back pre-Veach, and it burned us with like half a dozen contracts. Veach is much more prone to just letting guys go get paid elsewhere, unless they're young, central pieces. So acquiring old, expensive players would conflict with that trend.

I think there's also a thought that a quick fix wouldn't actually fix the problem. We don't lack for talent at WR. No one questions (or no one should, anyway) the physical ability of our WR corp. It's the more nuanced stuff, understanding their role within the system, getting the timing down with Mahomes and being where he expects them to be and when. Little things like route depth and scramble drills and understanding how their route works within the overall play and read. All the stuff Kelce is the GOAT at, the other guys can't sort out. It's long been said that Reid's offense is a difficult one for WRs to pick up. It's part of why we only really used Toney for gadget stuff last year, as a late add. I'm not sure a late addition to a complex offense solves any of that. And sure, they could dumb down the playbook a bit for a new addition, but that's kind of one step forward two steps back.

I also think many teams would not be fond of the idea of trading with us anyway, but I don't have evidence of that, obviously.

 

Also, as uncomfortable as it feels, the offense has still been pretty much fine as far as moving the ball. We're still top 5 in yards per game, yards per drive, 3rd down %, I think top 10 in points per drive and success rate and EPA and a bunch of stuff like that. Turnovers have just spiked dramatically, especially at really really bad times to have them. We have very similar issues to the Bills, our defense just hasn't been destroyed by injuries so it hasn't hit the win/loss column as visibly.

[Nabbs4u]

Simple answer,  Andy Reid.  

You can look at the history of Andy with the Eagles/Chiefs and for the vast majority of those 30 years, he rarely has that true #1. 

He never surrounded McNabb with legit WR's. The year he did McNabb/TO we went to the SB. 

Andy believes his system makes the players along with his QB's playing like Superman! Donovan made crap WR serviceable for a decade  Vick had Desean/Maclin, Mahomes while having 4 years with Tyreek turns water into wine on a weekly basis with the rest. Especially the past 2 seasons.

Andy simply doesn't think it's a necessity.  Given the fact he just won the last SB with a #1 TE and 💩 WR's only strengthens that belief. 

[General Tso]

You're asking why the team that traded Tyreek away doesn't try to trade for Davante?

[Calamity_Cometh]

You underestimate how much the Chiefs, Raiders and Broncos all despise each other. Such a trade would never happen unless Mahomes is coming back in the deal. So never.

[FrantikRam]

Tyreek has a real claim to the title of best WR in the league.

With him the Chiefs won one Super Bowl.

Without him they won one Super Bowl.

 

Not that they shouldn't find a sweet spot and improve, but Mahomes doesn't need it, and as crazy as this sounds, it can be a diminishing returns thing to invest heavily in a WR group when you have possibly the greatest QB ever to play.

[BetterCallSaul]

$$$$. They expect Mahomes to be the passing game. It makes sense, but they need a burner in the draft. 

[notthatbluestuff]

If Mahomes is so great, how come he doesn’t elevate his receivers?

/s

[stl4life07]

9 minutes ago, notthatbluestuff said:

If Mahomes is so great, how come he doesn’t elevate his receivers?

/s

Thats what Ive been saying but apparently its irrelevant. 

 

 

[notthatbluestuff]

2 minutes ago, stl4life07 said:

Thats what Ive been saying but apparently its irrelevant. 

 

 

I was being sarcastic dude, he won NFL MVP and the Super Bowl without an elite WR, that’s why it doesn’t matter.

[stl4life07]

8 hours ago, mdonnelly21 said:

I think if they gave up enough they could pry D. Adams away from Raiders who are on the verge of being a rebuild team. 

Idc what the Chiefs have to give up either. (I know they are in the same division) 

D. Adams puts them clearly over the top as true SB contenders. 

And even if it isn't him, you can go out and get some WR talent from a bottom feeder who wants to rebuild. 

Im guessing the Chiefs thought that Mahomes greatness could turn a receiver that has talent or untapped potential into being great. That hasnt happened. So the Chiefs now have to re-evaluate and go get a legit receiver. I wouldve never let Hill go. I understand he wanted a big payday and sacrifices have to be made. You dont let greatness out of the building. You dont let a scary offense with Mahomes, Hill, and Kelce go. The only way those guys shouldve split is when Kelce retired. 

[stl4life07]

Just now, notthatbluestuff said:

I was being sarcastic dude, he won NFL MVP and the Super Bowl without an elite WR, that’s why it doesn’t matter.

Well Im dead serious. If the Chiefs offense continue to look like this will we all look back and say that one season was an aberration? As in how in the world did they pull that off after losing Hill? Unless you think losing Juju was the reason the Chiefs offense has taken a step back? Which we know is not the case bc Juju isnt that big of a difference maker to lose and all of a sudden the receivers are this poor. My guess is eventually the Chiefs will have to look at getting a legit receiver. The draft has some nice players in it at receivers in it. I dont know who will be available via FA or trade but yeah the Chiefs cant stand pat and expect what happened last season to happen again. It COULD bc I dont put nothing past Mahomes/Reid and I really like the Chiefs defense. Not to mention the NFL as a whole can be up and down week to week. But I wouldnt have it in the bank that the Chiefs are just fine the way they are at receiver. The Chiefs dont want to be in the Superbowl or the AFCCG with the receivers letting them down constantly and that be the reason they dont win.

 

[Soggust]

3 minutes ago, stl4life07 said:

Well Im dead serious. If the Chiefs offense continue to look like this will we all look back and say that one season was an aberration?

Nope

[RedGold]

The struggling passing game is also not just on the WR’s.   Sure there are no stars,  but there are plenty of examples of guys being wide open and Mahomes not going through progressions / trusting.    
Reid has made a living on getting guys open in space,  I don’t think that has changed.     I may have too much faith in them,  but if the area of concern with KC is the passing game.  I’m pretty confident Reid will throw out the stuff that isn’t working come post season. 

[Chiefer]

9 hours ago, mdonnelly21 said:

I think if they gave up enough they could pry D. Adams away from Raiders who are on the verge of being a rebuild team. 

Idc what the Chiefs have to give up either. (I know they are in the same division) 

D. Adams puts them clearly over the top as true SB contenders. 

And even if it isn't him, you can go out and get some WR talent from a bottom feeder who wants to rebuild. 

Lol you think the Raiders would trade the best WR to the Chiefs? You’re delusional 

we’re also broke cap-wise, and that’s after restructuring contracts already. 

My hope is we grab one in the first next year, but we’re likely to draft an offensive tackle instead and a WR in the 2nd again

this WR corp stinks, but if we can eliminate turnovers and penalties this offense will look a lot better.