Mahomes 3-3. That's average.

[tubby_mcgee 686]

I though he was supposed to be so good. 

[AxeElf 787]

Statistically, he's the best QB in the game today.

In real life, he's not very good at covering opposing receivers or stopping the run.

[Serenity Now 44]

He’s been pretty solid for my first place team. His floor is so much higher than nearly every other qb.
 

Having a set and forget it qb has also allowed me to free up a bench spot.  I had stashed Hubbard, and both Williams before the starters went down. 

[weepaws 2,452]

Remember back when KC won the super bowl with Mahomes, and I posted than that KC won’t win another with Mahomes as Qb, book it.  

Look it up ,   

[Hardcore troubadour 12,593]

It’s going to be interesting when he no longer has Kelce. He’s very good, but  Kelce is what makes him great. 

[tubby_mcgee 686]

Yeah but he's 3-3. 

 

[DEEZNUTS 18]

I completely abandoned my draft strategy, took him late in 2nd round, and so far I'm not happy. I  agree, floor is high. Wondering how many fantasy football championships are had when you spend so much draft capital on a QB early. Kyler Murray or Lamar Jackson 2 rounds later, or Justin Herbert 3/4 rounds later is much better value. 

[weepaws 2,452]

How about Stafford about 7-8 rounds later.  

No need to draft a Qb until the double digit rounds. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,593]

6 hours ago, weepaws said:

How about Stafford about 7-8 rounds later.  

No need to draft a Qb until the double digit rounds. 

Stafford wasn’t going in double digit rounds in 12 team competitive leagues. Anyone else from the actual double digit rounds you can point to? Hurts I guess, Carr for now. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,107]

There's nothing wrong with Mahomes, just that the gap between him and say, the #10 QB isn't what it used to be.  That huge year he had, in 2018, he was the #1 QB and #2 was 60 points behind him.  The #6 QB was over 100.  Since then, he's fell back to the pack and the pack also got better.  This year, right now he's #1 in my leagues, but #5 is only 10 points back.  There is a gap after that though, as Aaron Rodgers is #12 and about 45 points (7.5 fpw), behind.

Now, if you're talking about in the NFL, that's a different matter.  There's plenty of people here who pretend that paying a QB $40M+ doesn't matter, as long as the cap hit percentage is low.  That's not really the case.  Teams payout the QB and structure those deals in order to re-sign current players to lock them in.  The thing is, that doesn't improve the team, it just spreads out the money across the top.  After they bring those guys back, that "cap money savings" is gone and they're right back to where they were before the restructure of the QB, with about $20M to spend.  Of which, $7M will be for draft picks and about $5M will be saved for in-season expenses, leaving only about $8M to spend on back end roster fodder... guys who will likely be #45-50 on their roster.  In the end, they really didn't "improve" their team, they kept it status quo.  The only way they actually improve the team is via the draft and hope they hit.

The Chiefs already restructured Mahomes' deal, the year after they signed him.  Because of that, they can't restructure him again for another 5 seasons because there's nothing to restructure.  Over the next 5 seasons, his average base pay is $2.5M or less in every year but one (in 2023, it's $5.5M).  What the Chiefs did was take that savings and spent it on the offensive line.  In theory, that's a good idea, but the problem is that it came at the expense of the defense.  Looking at the rest of their schedule, I think they're going to be around 10 wins (give or a take a win).  That might get them in the playoffs.  Next year, they'll use their draft picks on defense.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,593]

I don’t think anyone who went early on Allen, Brady, Herbert, Lamar, Murray, Rodgers regret it. Idiots like me who waited and took Tanehill later do. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,107]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I don’t think anyone who went early on Allen, Brady, Herbert, Lamar, Murray, Rodgers regret it. Idiots like me who waited and took Tanehill later do. 

Yeah, that's looking like the case.  I was high on Tannehill, well, at least him being a low end QB1.  I did like Stafford more.  I got him in the 9th round in one league and got Brady in round 8 in another.  In the league I drafted Tannehill in, I was able to get Dak for Damien Harris.

[weepaws 2,452]

31 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I don’t think anyone who went early on Allen, Brady, Herbert, Lamar, Murray, Rodgers regret it. Idiots like me who waited and took Tanehill later do. 

If their teams aren’t winning they do, that’s often times the case when over ranking  when to draft a Qb.  

[weepaws 2,452]

2 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Stafford wasn’t going in double digit rounds in 12 team competitive leagues. Anyone else from the actual double digit rounds you can point to? Hurts I guess, Carr for now. 

Oh sure he was, right on this board many drafted him in the tenth round , depends also when ones drafted.  Also Cousins would be on that list.  No need to chase a Qb before double digit rounds.  

[weepaws 2,452]

I know Tannehill was a big topic during the offseason, of one finds my post about him , I said he wouldn’t avg 25 or so points per game like he did in 2020.  His avg of 20 points per is on par for him  

Live and learn.  

[DrG 94]

The gap between Mahomes and everyone else is narrowed by the running QBS like Allen and Murray plus some teams are trying to play faster.

Add the loss of Watkins and that CEH has been a little underwhelming and this offense hasn’t really hit stride. No other wr has stepped up after Kelce and Hill

[Skinny_Bastard 154]

I got Allen in the 3rd round after Mahommes went.  Everyone was laughing screaming "QBs are DEEEEEPPPPP".

No one laughing now with Allen dropping 40+ 3 out of past 4 weeks.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,593]

The only fantasy relevant players during Mahomes 4 years have been Hill and Kelce and Kareem Hunt the one year. 

[weepaws 2,452]

Stafford is avg only five points less per game, and Cousins is avg 6, and neither one of them are running qbs.  

[Serenity Now 44]

The correct answer to what position should have been waited on is WR.

[weepaws 2,452]

No, qbs and tes and kicker and def.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,593]

23 minutes ago, Serenity Now said:

The correct answer to what position should have been waited on is WR.

Correct.  If you didn’t go D Adams then you should have waited. Signed - AJ Brown and DK drafter.  

[Serenity Now 44]

15 minutes ago, weepaws said:

No, qbs and tes and kicker and def.  

Not based on the stats and facts. Mid round wrs are not only a better value, but many are out producing early round wrs. You could have positional point advantages at RB, QB, & WR if you waited on WR.

[polecatt 399]

1 hour ago, Serenity Now said:

The correct answer to what position should have been waited on is WR.

Yep, what rounds did Cooper Kupp and Mike Williams go in?

[weepaws 2,452]

Kupp didn’t go double digit round.  Now that’s true value where you land qbs and tes.  

 

[Serenity Now 44]

Pretty easy to out score the qb streamer crowd this year. With a stud qb and any number of Kupp, Chase, Williams, A. Brown, M. brown, Samuel, Patterson, Sanders and others. Draft the right rbs in the first two or three rounds and your opponent is chasing points at too many positions consistently to keep up.

[weepaws 2,452]

Better yet, you draft those WRs and Rbs, while the non Qb streamers chase qbs, and those early tes.  

[DEEZNUTS 18]

Because the gap has closed between Mahomes and other QBs he's far more difficult to trade for assets like a front line RB. So drafting Mahomes as early as late 2nd round in a 12 team league a bad move. Which is what I did. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,593]

1 hour ago, DEEZNUTS said:

Because the gap has closed between Mahomes and other QBs he's far more difficult to trade for assets like a front line RB. So drafting Mahomes as early as late 2nd round in a 12 team league a bad move. Which is what I did. 

Who was available? 

[cmh6476 748]

On 10/18/2021 at 6:35 PM, weepaws said:

Remember back when KC won the super bowl with Mahomes, and I posted than that KC won’t win another with Mahomes as Qb, book it.  

Look it up ,   

[cmh6476 748]

On 10/18/2021 at 6:55 PM, Hardcore troubadour said:

It’s going to be interesting when he no longer has Kelce. He’s very good, but  Kelce is what makes him great. 

[cmh6476 748]

On 10/19/2021 at 9:18 AM, TBayXXXVII said:

There's nothing wrong with Mahomes, just that the gap between him and say, the #10 QB isn't what it used to be.  That huge year he had, in 2018, he was the #1 QB and #2 was 60 points behind him.  The #6 QB was over 100.  Since then, he's fell back to the pack and the pack also got better.  This year, right now he's #1 in my leagues, but #5 is only 10 points back.  There is a gap after that though, as Aaron Rodgers is #12 and about 45 points (7.5 fpw), behind.

Now, if you're talking about in the NFL, that's a different matter.  There's plenty of people here who pretend that paying a QB $40M+ doesn't matter, as long as the cap hit percentage is low.  That's not really the case.  Teams payout the QB and structure those deals in order to re-sign current players to lock them in.  The thing is, that doesn't improve the team, it just spreads out the money across the top.  After they bring those guys back, that "cap money savings" is gone and they're right back to where they were before the restructure of the QB, with about $20M to spend.  Of which, $7M will be for draft picks and about $5M will be saved for in-season expenses, leaving only about $8M to spend on back end roster fodder... guys who will likely be #45-50 on their roster.  In the end, they really didn't "improve" their team, they kept it status quo.  The only way they actually improve the team is via the draft and hope they hit.

The Chiefs already restructured Mahomes' deal, the year after they signed him.  Because of that, they can't restructure him again for another 5 seasons because there's nothing to restructure.  Over the next 5 seasons, his average base pay is $2.5M or less in every year but one (in 2023, it's $5.5M).  What the Chiefs did was take that savings and spent it on the offensive line.  In theory, that's a good idea, but the problem is that it came at the expense of the defense.  Looking at the rest of their schedule, I think they're going to be around 10 wins (give or a take a win).  That might get them in the playoffs.  Next year, they'll use their draft picks on defense.

@ Tenn - L

NYG - W

GB - L

@ LV - W

Dal - W

Den - W

LV - W

@ LAC - W

Pit - W

@ Cin - W

@ Den - W

give or take a couple of the Ws they may lose, and a L they may win.  We're talking about a 12-5 team.  Chiefs have had the most difficult schedule to start the season of any team by far, and it shows.  Get Frank Clark and Chris Jones and Willie Gay healthy, they've replaced Sorensen with Thornhill already and get Ben Niemann out of the lineup and this team may still end up being the top seed in the AFC when all is said and done.

[cmh6476 748]

Baltimore has the 4th toughest schedule remaining, while Buffalo has the easiest.  And the Ravens just lost their Pro Bowl LT for the season.  I still think the AFC bye comes down to the Chiefs and Bills, and that home loss on Sunday night could really end up being huge.

[weepaws 2,452]

14 minutes ago, cmh6476 said:

Hasn’t happen yet

[TBayXXXVII 2,107]

35 minutes ago, cmh6476 said:

@ Tenn - L

NYG - W

GB - L

@ LV - W

Dal - W

Den - W

LV - W

@ LAC - W

Pit - W

@ Cin - W

@ Den - W

give or take a couple of the Ws they may lose, and a L they may win.  We're talking about a 12-5 team.  Chiefs have had the most difficult schedule to start the season of any team by far, and it shows.  Get Frank Clark and Chris Jones and Willie Gay healthy, they've replaced Sorensen with Thornhill already and get Ben Niemann out of the lineup and this team may still end up being the top seed in the AFC when all is said and done.

This is absolutely possible.  I have them beating Tennessee, but losing 1 game to the Raiders as well as the Cowboys, and either Denver or Cincinnati at the end.  Why?  The Raiders, Bengals, and Cowboys all have offenses that can put up enough points to beat the Chiefs.  Two of the three are on the road.  I figure that Denver could split or at the end, they lose to the Bengals.  The Broncos have a defense that can slow down the Chiefs enough to where they could beat them.  It's possible that they beat Denver both times, I just think that if they do, they'll have lost to the Bengals on the road the week before.  I don't think the Bengals are the pushover they've been in the past.  I think they get better and better as the season goes on.  That's why I see a possible 10-7 season.  I can see them losing another game, like at the Chargers, which I'm also giving them a win even though it's a road game. 

All that said, I can see them getting things fixed and finishing 13-4 or even run the table.  They have the talent.  But, the way the Chiefs have been playing these first 6 weeks, they're not the lock they'd otherwise have been in recent years, against some of these teams.

[kcBlitzkrieg 17]

On 10/18/2021 at 7:35 PM, weepaws said:

Remember back when KC won the super bowl with Mahomes, and I posted than that KC won’t win another with Mahomes as Qb, book it.  

Look it up ,   

Well he just turned 26 years old so you might want to hold onto that book mark a few more years.... 

[weepaws 2,452]

Wilson was a young Qb back when he lead the Seahawks to a super bowl victory, plus he had a def , like I posted after Mahomes first super bowl, it will remind me of Wilson and the Seahawks, one and done. 

But let’s check back in a few years than. 

[weepaws 2,452]

On 10/18/2021 at 4:35 PM, weepaws said:

Remember back when KC won the super bowl with Mahomes, and I posted than that KC won’t win another with Mahomes as Qb, book it.  

Look it up ,   

 

On 10/20/2021 at 12:28 PM, kcBlitzkrieg said:

Well he just turned 26 years old so you might want to hold onto that book mark a few more years.... 

 

On 10/20/2021 at 11:32 AM, cmh6476 said:

I’ll stand behind my statement. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,107]

On 10/20/2021 at 2:46 PM, cmh6476 said:

Baltimore has the 4th toughest schedule remaining, while Buffalo has the easiest.  And the Ravens just lost their Pro Bowl LT for the season.  I still think the AFC bye comes down to the Chiefs and Bills, and that home loss on Sunday night could really end up being huge.

 

On 10/20/2021 at 3:22 PM, TBayXXXVII said:

This is absolutely possible.  I have them beating Tennessee, but losing 1 game to the Raiders as well as the Cowboys, and either Denver or Cincinnati at the end.  Why?  The Raiders, Bengals, and Cowboys all have offenses that can put up enough points to beat the Chiefs.  Two of the three are on the road.  I figure that Denver could split or at the end, they lose to the Bengals.  The Broncos have a defense that can slow down the Chiefs enough to where they could beat them.  It's possible that they beat Denver both times, I just think that if they do, they'll have lost to the Bengals on the road the week before.  I don't think the Bengals are the pushover they've been in the past.  I think they get better and better as the season goes on.  That's why I see a possible 10-7 season.  I can see them losing another game, like at the Chargers, which I'm also giving them a win even though it's a road game. 

All that said, I can see them getting things fixed and finishing 13-4 or even run the table.  They have the talent.  But, the way the Chiefs have been playing these first 6 weeks, they're not the lock they'd otherwise have been in recent years, against some of these teams.

After yesterday, any thoughts I had of the Chiefs finishing above .500, are gone.

[cmh6476 748]

On 10/20/2021 at 1:39 PM, cmh6476 said:

@ Tenn - L

NYG - W

GB - L

@ LV - W

Dal - W

Den - W

LV - W

@ LAC - W

Pit - W

@ Cin - W

@ Den - W

give or take a couple of the Ws they may lose, and a L they may win.  We're talking about a 12-5 team.  Chiefs have had the most difficult schedule to start the season of any team by far, and it shows.  Get Frank Clark and Chris Jones and Willie Gay healthy, they've replaced Sorensen with Thornhill already and get Ben Niemann out of the lineup and this team may still end up being the top seed in the AFC when all is said and done.

Granted if Rodgers was playing he would have completely picked apart this defense and probably won the game.  But as it sits, I'm +1 on my ROS projection.