Alphadawg7

Not gonna lie...Milano injury hurts. With so many changes on the defense, his absence sucks. I am much more optimistic about our offense than our defense this season, and that was before the Milano injury. My biggest concern on defense was the injury risk having 2 undersized LB's and not having the depth at certain positions we have had in the past to where additional injuries can be a big problem. Claypool changes nothing IMHO...he was already trending to not making the roster having missed so much time. He was a low risk and high reward kind of pickup, he was never someone they needed to step up. That being said, I do think this team is still a playoff team and can still compete for the divisional title and even a Super Bowl if we can avoid too many significant injuries to key players. Maybe more so than in even past years, how healthy we can stay is going to play a bigger role as we aren't as deep with all the transitions we had to make this year for cap and age reasons.

Wait are you actually saying that the group of Rice, Skyy, Toney, MVS is a better and more talented group than Shakir, Keon, Samuel, and Hollins? Let's do this...rather than be vague...so there is no confusion on what you are implying, just answer the question: Which WR room do you think is better and would take for your top 4? A - The 2023 Chiefs top 4 of Rice, Skyy, Toney, and MVS B - The 2024 Bills top 4 of Shakir, Keon, Samuel, and Hollins Who you taking...A or B?

As far as the double teams go...this is way over exaggerated around here. How much All-22 footage have the people saying this watched to confirm his double team rate? For example, KC Chiefs safety literally stated they didn't double Diggs in our Week 14 win over KC last year. But...besides the point of how much he was really doubled, the idea that double coverage on one players turns lesser palyers into good players is just a false assumption. Yes, it helps when you have someone drawing the best coverage, but the way it is applied here is just over stated. Most teams don't take their DB and shadow a WR all over the field like so many assume. Second, Shakir plays a lot out of the slot, teams are not taking their best outside CB and moving them inside to where the NCB would be normally be playing to just shadow Shakir either. Next, this idea that no one is going to command extra attention with Diggs gone is also an inaccurate assumption. Teams still need to account for Josh as a runner, teams still need to try and counter the size and catch radius of Keon if him and Allen start to have the chemistry they are showing in camp during the season. Teams still need to account for Kincaid and Shakir if they keep ascending this season. There may not be one single guy getting doubled more often, but there will be plenty of plays where the defense will cheat extra attention to someone on this offense still. And the point of the offense is that when that happens, someone else will take advantage and get open and Josh will go there with the ball. That is really the point to the "everyone eats" philosophy they are focused on this year. If he does that, he puts himself in legit WR1 conversation the way St. Brown did in his second season after his late season breakout as a rookie. I think its highly plausible that Kincaid, Shakir, Samuel, and Keon will total similar numbers to the 3500 and 22 TD's marks you just posted. That isn't that hard to do IMHO and no one needs to break a 1000 yards either. If Shakir and Kincaid can get 1900 of that between the two, that means Samuel and Keon only need to put up 1,600 yards combined. That feels very realistic and doable and if either Shakir or Kincaid (or both) break 1,000 yards, then Samuel and Keon need even less yards to hit that target.

Counterpoint: KC's overall WR room was light years worse than our WR room is this year. There was literally no one who should be listed anywhere higher than WR5 on that roster outside of Rice. And it is why they replaced everyone on that roster in the WR room not named Rice. Skyy, Toney, and MVS literally lost multiple football games for the Chiefs last year by being so bad at their jobs. Skyy and Toney wouldn't even make our roster this year...and MVS is doing his best to not make the roster too dropping all kinds of passes in camp, practice, and preseason games.

I get why they did the Diggs extension...but I also think there is some truth to that being a mistake. I think because the market went so WR crazy contract wise that year, they tried to use a contract extension a year early to keep Diggs content, but the real issue wasn't as much the money as it was his frustration not getting over the hump and waning confidence this team could do it before the cap would force changes that were looming between age and the cap. There are players that would have worked well with...but Diggs isn't wired that way IMHO. This last statement is the disconnect between you and the majority of the people who have maybe more optimistic expectations from the changes. You just said this sentence as if it is definitively true were are actually worse. The truth is you don't know that...you know on paper before games played there is less proven production...sure. But you don't actually know if our offense will be better or worse this season with this group compared to last year. There is a lot to say about addition by subtraction...Diggs and Davis were wildly inefficient compared to what this group has the potential to be. Shakir and Kincaid are ascending players, how do you know Shakir won't make a St. Brown like leap this year after St. Brown had a breakout the back half of his rookie year? People still doubted him like they do Shakir going into that 2nd season in terms of the likelihood he would elevate to a top tier WR and for a lot of the same reasons as Shakir too. We know Keon is not who you would have taken and you have your doubts about him, but he has been a star at camp and has legit WR1 potential despite your personal concerns about him. So you don't know what he may end up being by seasons end. Look at what Rashee Rice did last year. If Rashee Rice was in this years draft he would not have gone before Coleman and probably would have gone a round or two later. Yet he emerged as a bonafide WR1 for Mahomes and played a big role in their postseason run to a SB. Point is...no one knows what this group is. To say its worse on paper before the games are played is as meaningless as grading the draft the day after the draft. Nothing means anything until the games are played...and some of us have left room for possibility that this group may prove to be a more effective group overall for Josh and the offense while others want to commit to that not being the case before we know any answers.

Cole Bishop is not only who I thought we would take in the 2nd, but also who I felt was someone we should take. Safety is a big need and concern, you gotta start bringing some young talent in when you jettison your 2 long time anchors back there. Couldn't put that off another year IMHO and there isn't a clear cut WR to take there over Bishop who IMHO was amongst the BPA at our pick. Now, whether or not we should have used one of our other picks on a WR, well that is a fair question. Personally, there was no WR on the board I would have taken over Ray Davis or SVPG when we drafted them. But where the real question will come from IMHO is if we should have taken a WR in the 3rd over Carter as there were guys there that would have made sense at that time. But we also do have needs on the DL as well, so don't fault them for addressing the trenches in the 3rd as its proven time in and time again that the most important areas of the field are winning in the trenches. The Carter pick is the one pick for me that is up for debate (outside the obvious debate if Keon or a different WR should have been our first pick).

Thats just it, I don't think Beane sees it as throwing away a prime year for Josh, nor do I. I think Beane saw an opportunity to clear out stuff that wasn't working (a high target and demanding WR) in a year he was already forced to jettison aging high priced tenured vets and try another direction with a different approach this year. Best case it proves to be the right direction, worst case, he sets the team up to make a major move at the position next year with cap space and draft capital to do it.

You know there is an additional $31M committed to WR than is on the field this year right? Beane does have a plan...it wasn't your plan, but he has a clear plan. He is rebuilding the room/team and philosophy right now while clearing out cap, aging players, and bad energy. He has this team stacked for next offseason in both cap space and draft capital to be aggressive. This world of immediate gratification makes people lose sight about the fact that its not all about one year.

I have followed what you said, and you were wrong about the narrative as literally no one has claimed they were the top 2 guys, and even the guy you were talking to had to spell that out for you. Oh come on...you can't be seriously bringing up Rashee Rice now who was LITERALLY the #1 WR for the Chiefs last year and was 2nd to only Kelce in targets. He had 102 targets to Shakirs 45, that is more than DOUBLE. Yet Shakir had a better catch %, more YPT, more YPC as the FIFTH option...on the same amount of targets Shakir would have projected out to over 1200 yards compared to Rashees 938. LMAO I am not taking anything out of context, you falsified a narrative, made incorrect statements about projections off it and now you want to keep trying to sell it...and all for the purpose of diminishing what they did so you can sell your bias further.

Its not what he said. First he claimed that the "narrative" is that Shakir and Kincaid were the "top 2" options last year with Brady. Literally no one has said that. No one thinks they were the focal point of the final 10 games last year. So that was the first thing that was wrong. Second, he said they were not really that good as the "top 2" options (which they were NOT the top 2 options) and projected their stats out over 17 games saying that what they did LAST year as the TOP TWO options over a 17 game season is NOT good enough. That is a totally false narrative and false projection. The reality is that they were the 5th and 3rd options...and in THOSE roles, Shakir led the team in receiving yards the final 10 games despite getting less than half the targets the actual top option got, led all WR's in the NFL in catch %, and had an incredible YPT while Kincaid put up the 4th most receptions and 10th most yards for a rookie TE in NFL history. The facts are, for the 5th and 3rd options...one being a 2nd year player just finally getting on the field after the idiot OC was fired and the other being a rookie...did QUITE WELL in their REAL roles last year. To manipulate the data to pretend they were the top 2 options to devalue their production last year is disengenuous and all about pushing a bias. The numbers will increase because their roles will increase this year as they will likely be 2 of the primary targets this season and good chance to finish as the 2 most targeted players. And definitely efficiency has a strong chance to decrease some as volume increases, but that is true for every player in the NFL. If Shakir and Kincaid as PRIMARY options this year have around the same production as they had last year when they were NOT the focal points of the offense...then obviously everyone knows that isn't good enough. But that isn't what he said, he incorrectly claimed they already underwhelmed last year as lead options when they were never the lead options.

That does NOT say they were the "top options" like you keep falsely saying. It says they were playing better than the others. Playing better than the other guys does NOT mean they were the focal point of Brady’s offense. AGAIN...they were NOT the top options last year. Again, not our top options last year. What they were last year was the 5th and 3rd options and in THOSE ROLES they put up stats and efficiency that was good to great for their ACTUAL roles. So stop trying to negate that by pretending they were our "top options" last year, because you know they were not...everyone knows that.

Except, that isn't the narrative...where are you coming up with that? You know being the teams top primary receiver is not the same thing as stating someone led the team in receiving during that stretch right? So for example, someone stating Shakir was our leading WR those 10 games does not mean they are saying he was our TOP receiver those 10 games, everyone and their mom knows that was Diggs.

First, I never said anything about salaries. I said 1400 yard receivers which has nothing to do with salaries. Another poster mentioned salaries and I simply corrected your notion about QB's because you only looked at QB's still playing today which eliminates the majority of the SB winners the past 20 years. And just like QB's your anlaysis is wrong...again. You can't look at a list of the top 10 paid TODAY to see how many won the SB the past 20 years as most were not playing yet. The fact I have to tell you that is troubling. The top 10 paid at each position are usually the younger top end players as they reset the market when they get their contracts, meaning they haven't been playing very long. So before you start calling someones argument "bad"...maybe make sure yours even makes sense first

Too bad in 3 of his 4 postseasons here it was the Chiefs who sent us home.

How did anything I say state that it directly did? I said coming into the season having two undersized LBs was an injury concern. One was hurt in his only season starting, the other (Milano) has had on and off injuries again. And doesn’t take a steep jump in logic to understand undersized players playing a violent game at a violent position have a higher injury risk. So really not sure what your objection to my concern is here or how you can even dismiss that it could have been a factor after years of punishment that his smaller frame is having a harder time holding up with the physicality of the game.

I guess you missed that part where Brady retired who had 7.

They were still in the top 20 paid, so that’s a moot point. And neither won any Super Bowls with any high priced WRs.

No it means that teams win Super Bowls, not individuals.

This was a big concern for me coming into the season. Both our key LBs are undersized, so injury risk was something that had me worried because not having both last year was a major reason we lost the KC game. Entering the year already down Milano is no bueno.

They weren’t the top 2 receivers, that assessment is wrong. So your whole premise here is based on their performance when they were NOT the top 2 guys. So it’s a completely irrelevant statement. And wrong. The objective is to reach and win a Super Bowl. Something those other teams didn’t do. When was the last time a team won a SB and had a 1400 receiver that season? And how many SB winning teams had a 1400 yard receiver that year the past 20 years? Hint…it’s not the number you seem to think it is not is it a prerequisite like many of you think around here.

LOL...come on, do I even have to point out why this is such a silly comment? You just took that part of their season last year when they had LESSER roles and targets than they are expected to have this year and said that "ain't gonna cut it" in a 17 game season (implying this year as primary targets). Obviously that isn't going to cut it...they were the 5th and 3rd targets last year and now are likely 1 and 2 this year. Sure...in a 17 game season putting up the same numbers they had as lesser targets "is not gonna cut it". For their ACTUAL roles LAST year, those stats are quite good. Shakir was the FIFTH target last year and over the final 10 games, he had LESS than HALF the targets Diggs and yet still led the team in receiving the final 10 games...and on the season, Shakir had an insane 13.58 YPT while also leading ALL NFL WR's in catch % (which probably still kills you after you spent all last offseason and even during the season arguing "Shakir can't catch" because of one play you saw against Miami in the postseason). Kincaid was the 3rd target on this team and as a rookie he went out and put up the 4th most receptions and 10th most yards for any rookie TE in NFL history despite playing on a team with a target vacuum like Diggs.

Geezus...all the misguided panic in this thread. No this isn't "where we are"...we had a guy at the END of the bench at best that just got sent to IR...a guy who was already trending to not make the roster. So they are looking for another camp body guy to come in who maybe can compete for the end of the bench or just get cut in a few weeks. You people act like the Claypool injury changed anything. He was already a long shot to make the roster after all the missed time as it was.

This is what so many people miss about what they are doing. Diggs was a failure in the post season his entire time here where his stats are no where near his regular season. THANK GOD we won't have to watch another OC call a fade from the 3 yard line to a short Diggs that never works.

I mean he may make the team, but he doesn’t get a free pass of dropping as many passes as he wants. It’s not been a couple, if he keeps dropping them I can’t see how they keep him. He had a terrible preseason game too. Claypool being done helps, but I don’t think he has a guaranteed spot yet. His preseason game All-22 was terrible

He was already likely not gonna make the roster falling behind missing so much time. This doesn’t change much of anything IMHO outside giving Burrito Hands MVS a slightly easier path to make end of the roster so he can drop passes in live games.