Byron Pringle!?!?

[dennehy]

how many more targets did Gallup have? He was also the 2 at that time and got jumped by Lamb. What was Gallups catch percentage during that time, 50%? his numbers are so clearly volume related and not efficient. He‘s also hurt a ton and we’re talking about wr depth last year. And you’re bringing up his career years in the past. I don’t think Gallup is anything special. He’s fine. I don’t think Hardman is anything special either. They’re both at best 2’s. And even if you wanted to argue Gallup is better which is fine, he’s definitely not “ much, much better.” Which makes me think in your head you think Gallup is this great player or something. He’s not.

I knew that when you the numbers were obvious you would resort to moving the goalposts.

I'm confident that people who watch and understand football would take Gallup over Hardeman every time.

 

[EDPeezy]

The Bengals and Rams are just as good or better 1-3. I said KC is better 1-2, although it's very close imo. Are you able to identify numbers and differentiate them from one another? 2 doesn't equal 3.

This whole thing is about whether KC had depth in their pass catching group. Not who had the better pass catching group 1-7. And originally it wasn’t even about that. Because we had a couple guys playing debate club semantics games where they pretended Travis Kelce didn’t exist. If KC doesn’t have “depth“ then nobody does. And you’ve got me here arguing about the 3’s for KC and Dallas. I honestly think Gallup is probbaly a tiny bit better than Hardman. And I guess if that somehow makes Dallas deep and KC not then whatever.

 

[EDPeezy]

I knew that when you the numbers were obvious you would resort to moving the goalposts.

I'm confident that people who watch and understand football would take Gallup over Hardeman every time.

If I was comparing the Dallas 1-3 last year and the KC 1-3 I wouldn’t be like “well KC clearly has the better 1-2, but Gallup is so much better than Hardman it changes things. It changes nothing. You’d still rather have Hill and Kelce than Cooper and Lamb. Even if it means with Cooper and Lamb you get the slightly better 3 in Gallup. They essentially cancel each other out. Gallups not better enough than Hardman where the equation changes. If Gallup is a 7/10 Hardman is a 6.5.

 

[DaaBears]

Isn't it Hardman not Hardeman?

 

[dennehy]

I didnt move anything. Gallups numbers that year arent effecient. They’re volume related. and it’s 3 years ago. Why don’t you tell me his numbers last year when he got his spot taken by Lamb? And like I said in the post above this isn’t about who is better between Gallup and Hardman. It’s about whether KC has depth at the pass catching position.

He averaged 9.8 yards per target in 2019. That is very efficient.

I gave you the numbers for his first three years, because Hardeman has played three years.

Even in 2020 when Lamb came, he had 843 and 5, and that was with Andy Dalton.

If you don't want to discuss this anymore, feel free to not discuss it. You seem a bit triggered about what this argument is about.

 

[EDPeezy]

Isn't it Hardman not Hardeman?

he watches, but I don’t.

 

[EDPeezy]

He averaged 9.8 yards per target in 2019. That is very efficient.

I gave you the numbers for his first three years, because Hardeman has played three years.

Even in 2020 when Lamb came, he had 843 and 5, and that was with Andy Dalton.

If you don't want to discuss this anymore, feel free to not discuss it. You seem a bit triggered about what this argument is about.

you’ve created an argument that didn’t even exist. For the third time this is about whether KC has depth at the pass catching group. Not who is better between Gallup and Hardman. I personally think Gallup is a tiny bit better. But I always felt that way. For the sake of the argument we’re having (whether KC had depth or not. Not who is better than Hardman or Gallup. 4th time) about depth, separating Hardman and Gallup like they're significantly different didn’t seem like it made sense. I see you foolishly convinced yourself Gallup is this great player because you looked at a stat sheet and saw 1,000 yards. And you want to completely take those numbers out of context and ignore what he’s been since then. But to me, especially for the sake of the argument where we’re comparing depth of receiving groups I don’t put him on some other level above Hardman. He’s slightly better and I’m honestly not really sure about that.

 

[dennehy]

you’ve created an argument that didn’t even exist. For the third time this is about whether KC has depth at the pass catching group. Not who is better between Gallup and Hardman. I personally think Gallup is a tiny bit better. But I always felt that way. For the sake of the argument we’re having (whether KC had depth or not. Not who is better than Hardman or Gallup. 4th time) about depth, separating Hardman and Gallup like they're significantly different didn’t seem like it made sense. I see you foolishly convinced yourself Gallup is this great player because you looked at a stat sheet and saw 1,000 yards. And you want to completely take those numbers out of context and ignore what he’s been since then. But to me, especially for the sake of the argument where we’re comparing depth of receiving groups I don’t put him on some other level above Hardman. He’s slightly better and I’m honestly not really sure about that.

No arguments exist before they are created, obviously. I think it would be impossible for an argument to exist before it was created according to the laws of physics. I responded to part of your post. This seems like you are a bit unhinged and as I wrote if you don't want to continue, you're absolutely free to stop.

Your arguments that are based in facts have failed badly, so now you are making up strawmen about me saying Gallup is a great player and taking those numbers out of context, when I have actually given those number context and never claimed Gallup was great.

Gallup is obviously a better player than Hardman.

 

[remydat]

You see, they’ve got two of the best pass catchers in the league. Arguably the best at the two at their position. But that’s only two. See, that’s not “loaded.” In order to be loaded you need 3 all pros catching passes.

What the hell are you talking about?

The topic was about why Pringle did not get more starter reps and the comment was made because the Chiefs WR core was loaded.

Kelce does not impact whether Pringle plays at WR so he is irrelevant to the convo as to why guys like Hardman and Robinson took reps away from Pringle.

 

[ZenBear34]

The topic was about why Pringle did not get more starter reps and the comment was made because the Chiefs WR core was loaded.

Kelce does not impact whether Pringle plays at WR so he is irrelevant to the convo as to why guys like Hardman and Robinson took reps away from Pringle.

This is a stupid argument but Kelce definitely factors in because he lines up as a receiver a lot and gets targeted like a receiver. But, whatever. This whole argument is specious and pointless.

 

[remydat]

This is a stupid argument but Kelce definitely factors in because he lines up as a receiver a lot and gets targeted like a receiver. But, whatever. This whole argument is specious and pointless.

Kelce lining up out wide does not change the fact you still need 2-3 WRs on the field on most downs. The Chiefs were in 11 personnel ie 3 WRs 67% of the time overall and 78% of the time when they passed. Kelce lining up at WR doesn't really explain why Pringle only played about 50% of snaps over all and 57% of passing snaps. He was losing snaps to KC's mediocre WRs not to Kelce.

Again the comment was their WR core being loaded stole snaps from Pringle. That has nothing to do with Kelce and the reality still is Hardman and Robinson do not constitute a loaded WR core.

And to be clear, I think the decision not to play Pringle more was foolish. As someone that lived in KC for years and still have a ton of KC friends, there was always complaints about how Reid was committed to Hardman when he didn't really warrant that level of commitment. My point simply was we don't have to make up a false narrative (ie their WR core is loaded) to still think Pringle was a good signing.

Pringle was underutilized in KC not because their WR core was loaded but because their WR core was mismanaged by Reid. They gave way too many chances to an overrated Hardman and to Robinson who really offered very little.

 

[Chicagosports89]

The topic was about why Pringle did not get more starter reps and the comment was made because the Chiefs WR core was loaded.

Kelce does not impact whether Pringle plays at WR so he is irrelevant to the convo as to why guys like Hardman and Robinson took reps away from Pringle.

Sorry, but @sleezypeezy is busy blessing us with his football intellect per usual. What he says must be accepted as fact

 

[90sBullsFan]

Can I chime in here as a Chiefs fan? It seems a few here are arguing about the Chiefs receiver corps being loaded or not or whether this player is better than that player. As someone who watches every minute of every Sunday, neither of those arguments have anything to do with why Pringle didn't get more work.

The Chiefs have had the Hill/Kelce combo for a few years now. Mahomes prided himself on making the "big" play a lot of the time, and those are his two biggest playmakers. That left very little in the way of reps/catches for guys like Hardman, Robinson, and Pringle. Early this past season, teams had "figured out" the Chiefs (take away the big play, make Mahomes and the offense struggle).

The Chiefs finally did a good job of adjusting to that defensive strategy about the 8th or 9th game of the year. They decided to take what the defense gives them and work their way down the field instead (with occasional deep strikes instead), which as we saw, ended up being wildly successful (they went on a tear over the last 10 games of the year and ended up winning the AFC West after starting 3-4).

Pringle's increased production the 2nd half of the year is directly tied to that change in strategy. Suddenly he was seeing many more targets, and he made the most of them. In the regular season Pittsburgh game at Arrowhead in particular, he was outstanding (no Hill). He turned that change in strategy into a nice free agent contract with the Bears. I didn't want to lose him but I'm happy for him that he made the most of his opportunity. He won't be a game breaker for you guys, but he showed that he's obviously got something when he was given the chance after they switched gears mid-year last year.

 

[remydat]

Can I chime in here as a Chiefs fan? It seems a few here are arguing about the Chiefs receiver corps being loaded or not or whether this player is better than that player. As someone who watches every minute of every Sunday, neither of those arguments have anything to do with why Pringle didn't get more work.

The Chiefs have had the Hill/Kelce combo for a few years now. Mahomes prided himself on making the "big" play a lot of the time, and those are his two biggest playmakers. That left very little in the way of reps/catches for guys like Hardman, Robinson, and Pringle. Early this past season, teams had "figured out" the Chiefs (take away the big play, make Mahomes and the offense struggle).

The Chiefs finally did a good job of adjusting to that defensive strategy about the 8th or 9th game of the year. They decided to take what the defense gives them and work their way down the field instead (with occasional deep strikes instead), which as we saw, ended up being wildly successful (they went on a tear over the last 10 games of the year and ended up winning the AFC West after starting 3-4).

Pringle's increased production the 2nd half of the year is directly tied to that change in strategy. Suddenly he was seeing many more targets, and he made the most of them. In the regular season Pittsburgh game at Arrowhead in particular, he was outstanding (no Hill). He turned that change in strategy into a nice free agent contract with the Bears. I didn't want to lose him but I'm happy for him that he made the most of his opportunity. He won't be a game breaker for you guys, but he showed that he's obviously got something when he was given the chance after they switched gears mid-year last year.

@Mighty Joe Young @EDPeezy

 

[Anytime23]

Suddenly he was seeing many more targets, and he made the most of them.

This is what its all about. When called upon, make a play. I don't think he's great by any means but i much prefer him to the previously rumored Lazard or MVS, who seem to be 50/50 when it comes to making a play. He'll most likely be a 4th option for them anyways. If Fields is good, this doesnt matter. They have to find a guy to pair with Mooney and for the love of God, Kmet needs to play tough when a ball comes his way.

 

[gpphat]

So the Byron Pringle thread is still getting traction...255 posts and counting for a WR who likely wont be on the team next year

 

[nc0gnet0]

Like who?

DJ Chark? Pringle had comparable stats while having more guys in the offense to spread it around to

Now you're gonna try and shit on a solid signing because of your dumb ass premature topic

Proving once again you are one of the biggest dumb-fucks on this forum.

 

[remydat]

Proving once again you are one of the biggest dumb-fucks on this forum.

Why arent the Lions signing Chark if he is so great?

 

[remydat]

@Mighty Joe Young still think the Chiefs WR core was loaded?

 

[nc0gnet0]

Why arent the Lions signing Chark if he is so great?

Because they drafted Williams?