The Kansas City Chiefs shocked the NFL world on Friday when they cut star wide receiver Jeremy Maclin. The Chiefs Kingdom was caught completely off guard by the move and many were left shaking their heads in disbelief when they heard the news. I don’t know of any Chiefs fans that are happy about the move. How could you be?
On a team that has struggled on offense at times, Jeremy Maclin was far and away Kansas City’s most accomplished wide receiver. There simply is no argument to be made that the Chiefs are a better team today than they were a week ago when Maclin was on the roster. So does that mean that Chiefs fans should panic? Is the team giving up on the 2017 season before training camp even starts? Should we lose our collective faith in Andy Reid and John Dorsey? I know many are upset and reeling from this move, so let’s take some time today and talk through this.
First of all, why did they make this move?
I heard several Chiefs fans say something to the effect of “there has to be more to this” after the news of Maclin’s release broke. The thinking being that in order for K.C. to release Maclin he either need to have some injury we didn’t know about, got arrested, punched out Patrick Mahomes, or stole Andy Reid’s cheeseburger.
I don’t think any of those things are true.
Maclin’s release is due to two facts that I believe are indisputable.
#1. Jeremy Maclin had become the Chiefs number three option in the passing game.
#2. Jeremy Maclin was due to make 12.4 million dollars this season.
The Kansas City Chiefs made a business decision not to pay their number three option in the passing game 12.4 million dollars this season. That’s it. There is no secret motivation that Adam Schefter is going to tweet out next week. The Chiefs had almost no cap space (I could be wrong, but I don’t believe they even had enough space to sign all their draft picks) and they decided to cut Maclin because his price tag no longer matched his role on this team. Period.
Now, if you want to argue that the offense needs Maclin as the third option and it was worth paying him that much anyway, fine, I have no problem with that. The Chiefs could have cut or restructured someone else and you have every right to argue they would have been better off finding that cap space elsewhere.
So now we’re back to the question of if Chiefs fans should panic that Maclin is gone?
Let’s start with the case for panicking.
While I am not one of the many Chiefs fans that are freaking out about K.C. cutting Jeremy Maclin, I will admit there is a definite risk in doing so. Here is the scenario that could play out that would be an absolute disaster for the Chiefs. Please note that none of these things would be shocking developments.
1. Jeremy Maclin is highly productive for whatever team he signs with.
2. None of Kansas City’s young wide receivers step up and fill the void left by Maclin.
3. Either Tyreek Hill or Travis Kelce (or worse, both) miss significant time with an injury.
If those three things happen (or even two of the three) the Chiefs will look like absolute fools for cutting Maclin. I don’t think there is a single Chiefs fan out there that can argue otherwise. Not only will the Chiefs look like idiots for cutting Maclin, their playoff hopes will likely be DOA.
Depressed yet?
Ok, in order to be fair and reasonable, I had to get that admission of risk out of the way. That having been said, I’m still not panicking. I’m by no means happy that they released Maclin. I saw Maclin as a security blanket, not one of the key pieces of the Chiefs roster. I would rather have the security blanket than not have it, but I understand why they did it and I certainly don’t think it means their playoff chances for 2017 are going out the door along with him.
So let’s talk about why this move makes sense.
I mentioned at the start of this post that one of the key factors in Maclin’s release was that he had become the clear number three option in the passing game. Unless you didn’t watch the Chiefs at all last season, you already know that the top two options are Travis Kelce and Tyreek Hill. Those two players are not only the stars of the Chiefs passing attack but the two most important players for K.C.’s offense in general.
Travis Kelce has established himself as one of the elite tight ends in the league. He’s a playmaker that they design plays for and a guy that Alex Smith trusts and will dump off to when things break down. I simply can’t take anyone seriously if they suggest Kansas City should use Kelce less in 2017. So let’s just pencil him in for another 85 receptions again next year (that was his exact number in 2016).
Tyreek Hill was arguably the most explosive playmaker in the NFL last season. As a rookie that was transitioning from playing running back at West Alabama to playing wide receiver in Andy Reid’s complicated West Coast Offense, he totaled 61 receptions for 593 yards and six touchdowns. He added another three rushing touchdowns and three more on returns. Once again, does anyone want to argue that Hill should be less involved in the offense in his second season?
I would go so far to argue that now that he is entering his second season, he should be more comfortable both in the offense and as a wide receiver in general. I was expecting his reception totals to increase in 2017 before Jeremy Maclin was released. If he totaled 61 receptions as a rookie changing positions that didn’t start the year as someone the Chiefs were building their offense around, I don’t think it’s a stretch at all to expect 80 receptions now that he has established his importance and productivity. Over a 16 game season, that is only five receptions per game.
So now we have 165 receptions accounted for in Kelce and Hill alone.
“But Lyle, the Chiefs had 365 total receptions last season! That’s still 200 more receptions we need! I CAN’T BELIEVE THEY CUT MACLIN!”
It’s ok, take a deep breath, when you dig into those numbers a little more it’s not that bad. Hang with me.
So we just established that Travis Kelce and Tyreek Hill should account for 165 receptions if they stay healthy. Last season the Chiefs had a total of 365 receptions. HOWEVER, we can all agree they didn’t run the ball enough. That was the second highest total of receptions in Andy Reid’s entire head coaching career. Hopefully, with the addition of Kareem Hunt, the running game will get a little bit of a boost. In Andy Reid’s entire head coaching career his average completions per season is 332. So let’s use that as our target number.
Another staple of an Andy Reid offense is throwing the ball to the running backs. In his four years in Kansas City, Reid’s offense has averaged 75 receptions per season by running backs (including fullbacks). With Alex Smith as the quarterback (who likes to check down) and the addition of Hunt who is a great receiver out of the backfield, I don’t see that number going down. Just for argument’s sake let’s use a nice even 70 reception total for running backs in 2017. You add that number to the 165 for Kelce and Hill and you get 235. We just established that 332 was our target, to make the math easy let’s aim for 335 so now we need to come up with 100 more receptions.
Could Jeremy Maclin have been key to filling out those 100 remaining receptions? Sure, but take a look at these totals and tell me if they seem unreasonable.
- Chris Conley – 50 receptions (44 in 2016)
- Albert Wilson – 20 receptions (31 in 2016)
- Gavin Escobar – 20 receptions (Demetrius Harris had 17 in 2016)
- Demarcus Robinson – 10 receptions (zero in 2016)
That’s it. We’re out of receptions already. No third tight end catching any passes. No receptions for rookie wideout Jehu Chesson. No major jump in receptions for Conley despite Maclin’s absence. I actually decreased Albert Wilson’s production. Gavin Escobar didn’t have a noticeable jump over what Harris did last season and Demarcus Robinson barely made an impact in his second season and we STILL easily matched the desired production the Chiefs need simply by bumping Tyreek Hill’s receptions up to five catches per game and getting back to running the ball a little more.
Can anyone sit there and honestly argue that you see a giant gaping hole left by the loss of Jeremy Maclin in those numbers? Can you understand why the Chiefs may have looked at these numbers and gone “Wait a minute, if we’re going to get Tyreek more involved and get back to running the ball more effectively, we don’t really need to pay someone 12.4 million dollars to be a limited contributor.”
I also think that the long-term picture with Patrick Mahomes could have been part of the equation as well. Jeremy Maclin was likely not going to be a key part of this team once Mahomes takes over as the quarterback in a year or two. However, other guys that may get more reps now that he is gone like Hill, Conley, Robinson, and Chesson could be. If the Chiefs believe in those players this move now frees up more chances for them to develop their game before Mahomes takes over.
Let’s wrap this up.
I believe that if things go as the Chiefs are hoping they will that they won’t miss Jeremy Maclin next season. I think they believe they have two elite weapons in Travis Kelce and Tyreek Hill. I think with them as the focus of the passing game and even just a small bump in the running game there simply isn’t a lot of room for Jeremy Maclin to be a big contributor on this team. You’ll notice my predictions didn’t even call for a breakout by Chris Conley or any of the other young receivers.
The cutting of Maclin right after their first few OTA practices could imply that they saw something in one or more of their young receivers that make them think they are ready to step up and produce even more. If they think someone like Conley, Robinson, or even the rookie Chesson is ready to play a more signifiant role it really makes finding targets for Jeremy Maclin difficult. Imagine adding 20 more receptions to the totals I had for one of those young players AND trying to find receptions for Maclin. The numbers just don’t add up.
That all having been said, there is risk involved. Like I stated earlier, the Chiefs security blanket is now gone. If the young guys don’t step up or Kelce/Hill get hurt this could be a disaster. Even if Hill and Kelce stay healthy, if none of the other young wideouts step up, it will mean defenses can double up on coverage on their star players. This is definitely a move that has a chance to go poorly.
That said, it could also be a move that we are praising John Dorsey for a year from now. If Maclin goes elsewhere and proves to just be a role player at this stage of his career and K.C.’s young guys step up this will have 100% been the right call. The bottom line is that Chiefs fans should not be panicking yet. Let things play out. Give the young guys a chance to prove their worth. I still believe the Chiefs may have the receiver talent on the roster to thrive, but only time will tell.
So what do you think Chiefs fans? Are you still freaking out about the loss of Maclin or do you understand why the Chiefs made the move? Do you agree that if the Chiefs offense goes according to plan in 2017 there simply may not have been room for Maclin to contribute much? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments below.
As always, thanks for reading and GO CHIEFS!!!!