In the wake of Jeremy Maclin’s release, it’s clear that Chiefs Kingdom can be quite forgetful at times.
Over the weekend, the Kansas City Chiefs parted company with nine-year veteran wide receiver Jeremy Maclin. Since then, the narratives surrounding this transaction have been interesting to say the least. My lone takeaway from those watercooler conversations: members of Chiefs Kingdom can be a forgetful bunch.
From the discussions around the blogosphere, you’d come away thinking Maclin was an expendable part of an otherwise formidable offense. The maturation of Chris Conley and the emergence of Tyreek Hill, in an admittedly impressive rookie campaign, made Maclin a forgotten part of a budding, young offensive group. After all, the former Missouri Tiger’s production was down from the year prior. Losing him should only have a negligible effect on head coach Andy Reid and company, right? RIGHT?
Whether or not you believe the offense can survive without its most accomplished receiver depends entirely upon the premise supporting your argument. I’m okay with anyone who’s concluded that the Chiefs offense can weather the departure of Maclin. The issue, for me, are the flawed premises some have used to arrive at said conclusion. Today, if I could, I’d like to offer a counter perspective to the most popular talking points circulated around the Kingdom the past few days.
The Tyreek Hill displacement theory
Despite falling to the fifth round in the NFL Draft, rookie phenom Tyreek Hill amassed over 1,800 all-purpose yards and 12 total touchdowns in 2016. He was most productive from the wide receiver position posting 593 yards and six touchdowns as a pass catcher in Andy Reid’s West Coast offense. Given his success, it’s reasonable to expect an increased role for Hill in the 2017 season. He’s certainly capable of a larger workload and despite concerns about his stature (he’s actually the same size as Antonio Brown at 5’10 and 185 pounds), he could eventually become a No. 1 receiver in this offense.
Maclin logged starts on two of Hill’s three biggest receiving days in 2016. Is that pure coincidence or a by-product of defenses having to account for No. 19’s ability to take the top off?
The trouble with this idea is the fact that it fails to make a connection with Maclin’s contribution to Hill’s materialization in the offense. Maclin logged starts on two of Hill’s three biggest receiving days in 2016. Is that pure coincidence or a by-product of defenses having to account for No. 19’s ability to take the top off? Without him to take pressure off of Hill, he could draw the attention of multiple defenders this year.
It should also be noted that Maclin’s veteran presence, leadership and mentoring of his younger counterparts was an invaluable piece of the puzzle. Conley and Wilson are now the team’s eldest receivers at just 24 years old. With a receiver like Hill, who’s still separating himself from a sordid past, a tenured, mature receiver may prove the best way to keep him on track. The loss to the Kansas City locker room, alone, is significant and cannot be understated.
Maclin became a low offensive priority
This is perhaps the strangest talking point of all. It’s been said that Maclin simply became an afterthought to the Chiefs passing game in 2016; however, this narrative is curiously silent about the root cause of Maclin’s decline in productivity. He made just 12 starts last year due to a nagging groin injury that sidelined him for four games between the 10th and 13th weeks of the NFL season. His 44 yards-per-reception average applied to the four games he missed would’ve given Maclin 58 receptions and 708 receiving yards. That certainly isn’t anything to write home about, but it would’ve made him the most productive receiver in the offense.
Let me take that a step further.
Here are the number of targets for each of the Chiefs top four receivers in 2016:
- Travis Kelce — 117
- Tyreek Hill — 83
- Jeremy Maclin — 76
- Chris Conley — 69
It certainly looks like Maclin became the third option in Kansas City’s offense, but look closer at the numbers. Maclin played in 12 games in 2016. Hill played in 16 games last season. On average, Maclin was targeted more often than Hill (6.3 times per game compared to 5.1 times per game for the rookie). Conley’s numbers also seem to suggest he could easily supplant Maclin in this offense, but again on closer inspection, he did post a similar stat line, but it required 186 more offensive snaps. The pure numbers, sans context, don’t paint an accurate picture of Maclin’s significance to Kansas City’s offense. Consider this: A healthy Maclin in 2015 was the most targeted pass-catcher on the team (including one Travis Kelce). Coincidentally, the Chiefs were a better offensive group in Maclin’s first year with the team (finishing Top 10 in the points for category).
The remaining talent is ripening
Year over year, the growth of Chris Conley in his sophomore season may well be the most compelling reason to believe the Chiefs offense can sustain the loss of Maclin. He finished 2016 with 44 receptions and 530 receiving yards. That’s hardly comforting given what a healthy Maclin could contribute to this offense, but it is a sign that Conley’s on the path to becoming a more reliable option in the passing game. Only time can tell whether or not the third-year man out of Georgia can continue trending upward.
Beyond Hill and Conley, the Chiefs’ receiving corps is largely an unproven commodity. Albert Wilson is the only other receiver who’s logged an NFL start in that group. Jehu Chesson and Demarcus Robinson do have potential and athletic skill sets, but will be asked to contribute in a system that has high demands on young wideouts. The cupboard is much thinner without Maclin in the fold. Despite the possibilities, that doesn’t bode well for an offense that finished 13th in the league in scoring last season.
There are only so many balls to go around
If Hill’s a rising star and Kelce needs to maintain his position as the offense’s most prolific pass-catching option, is there really room for Maclin at this stage? Answer: Of course there is. I’ll prove that here in a moment, but let’s analyze a few numbers and establish a baseline first.
Since coming to Kansas City, Reid’s offense has averaged 332 completions per season. Kelce has averaged 81 receptions per season over the part of that stretch where he wasn’t injured. Running backs have averaged nearly 75 receptions per season going back to 2013. Although, that average is skewed by a 2013 season with abysmal production from the receiving corps. Dwayne Bowe led that group with just 673 receiving yards.
Are you more comfortable with the ball in the hands of Wilson, Thomas and Conley than a proven veteran like Maclin?
Hill’s been in Kansas City just one season, but if you account for his 61 receptions, there are still approximately 115 catches to split between Jeremy Maclin, Albert Wilson (27 reception-per-season average), Demetrius Harris (9 reception-per-season average), De’Anthony Thomas (31 reception-per-season average), and Chris Conley (30 reception-per-season average). By my count, Wilson/Harris/Thomas/Conley account for an average of about 97 receptions per season. That leaves just 18 balls for Maclin on the average year.
Ask yourself the following question though, are you more comfortable with the ball in the hands of Wilson, Thomas and Conley than a proven veteran like Maclin? Couldn’t a case be made that he would make more of those offensive opportunities than that assortment of skill players?
Take a gander at the following chart and you be the judge:
Yards-Per-Reception since 2013
- Maclin — 13.5 average (two seasons)
- Conley — 12.0 average (two seasons)
- Harris — 8.0 average (three seasons)
- Thomas — 7.0 average (three seasons)
Maclin showed signs of hitting the proverbial wall last year
Some have surmised that the Chiefs decision to cut Jeremy Maclin was warranted on the strength of his regression in 2016. His detractors have also suggested that he was never a true No. 1 receiver neither here nor in his draft city of Philadelphia. They go on to argue that such being the reality, he wasn’t worth the $12.4 million dollars that would’ve counted against Kansas City’s cap in the forthcoming season. That’s actually a fair point. Even a more productive 2016 campaign would’ve made that a prohibitive cap number in the third year of his deal. Though if we’re being honest, that’s more of an indictment of the general manager John Dorsey, and the structure of the deal, than it is of Jeremy Maclin.
How quickly we forget that it was Maclin who ended Kansas City’s miserable stretch of 21 games without a touchdown reception by a wide receiver.
In his first season with Kansas City, he broke the franchise record for catches in a single season (with 87 on the year, a career best). In that same season, he went over 1,000 receiving yards for the second-consecutive year (1,088) and was credited with only a single dropped pass. How quickly we forget that it was Maclin who ended Kansas City’s miserable stretch of 21 games without a touchdown reception by a wide receiver. In 2015, he was one of the driving forces behind the Chiefs’ 9th-ranked scoring offense in the NFL.
The sky isn’t falling. Jeremy Maclin isn’t an elite receiver by league standards, but he was by far and away this team’s most decorated wideout. There are a number of reasons to think this could backfire on Kansas City. After all, the man at the helm of the team’s offense may require a strong supporting cast more than any other leading man in the National Football League. He’s not the kind of quarterback that can overcome a dearth of pass-catching talent.
The Chiefs do have a talented group of young receivers with loads of potential, but you’d be hard pressed to make the claim that cutting Maclin makes this a better offensive group in the short term, especially, not in an offense that has such a steep learning curve for receivers being freshly introduced to it. It’s also delicately balanced on a foregone conclusion that Kansas City’s best offensive weapons will stay healthy throughout the new season. A significant injury to Hill, Conley or Kelce could put this football team in an impossible position and severely limit the possibilities for Reid’s offense.
Following a Divisional Round loss to a Pittsburgh Steelers team that didn’t score an offensive touchdown, it’s tough to argue that subtracting otherwise serviceable and productive weapons was a step toward righting the ship. If anything, the Chiefs should be striving for more a more potent passing attack and not blind reliance upon a group of young hopefuls who’ve never played a meaningful offensive snap in the NFL. Time will tell if this transaction was worth the risk. For my money, in this moment, it was clearly the wrong choice.
How’d you take the news of Maclin’s release over the weekend? Is he truly past his prime or was last season the exception and not the rule? Where do you expect Maclin to land? Could he upstage the successors he left behind in Kansas City? Use the comment section below to weigh in on the discussion. As always, we appreciate your readership and support.
Until next time, Addicts!