To Hopkins or not to Hopkins? Looking at both sides of the current Chiefs' trade rumors

There's a lot of debate surrounding the Chiefs' WR room and trying to acquire DeAndre Hopkins (or go another route). Let's look at both sides of the argument.

One of the most useful tools a person can have is the ability to see issues from both sides and effectively argue either way.

It’s one of the primary lessons they teach you in law school. In one of their exercises (mock appellate court arguments), they have you spend an entire semester developing your caselaw and arguments for one side of the issue being litigated. Then, after months of making those arguments, they have you switch sides and argue the opposing position. The value from an attorney’s perspective is the better you understand the opposition’s argument, the better you’ll be able to anticipate how to thwart it.

There’s real-world value in that ability. Being able to at least attempt to understand why others are thinking/acting the way that they are is a valuable skill that can, if one utilizes it correctly, lead to better communication with people one disagrees with.

With that in mind, let’s talk about DeAndre Hopkins and the Kansas City Chiefs.

Ian Rapoport @RapSheet

As the status of #AZCardinals star WR DeAndre Hopkins comes into focus, talks are ramping up among the interested teams, sources say. Similar to Brandin Cooks, a trade would likely mean an altered contract.

Hopkins, a 10-year veteran wide receiver who doesn’t really need much of an introduction, is said to be on the trade market. Between Arizona not being a contender, his age, and his contract, it appears that the Cardinals are trying to get something of value for him rather than cutting him outright or paying a guy big money when they are rebuilding with new coaching and management.

Enter the Chiefs, who certainly ARE contending and have (on the surface) a relatively bare cupboard at wide receiver since the departure of Juju Smith-Schuster. Their top three group of Marquez Valdes-Scantling (a useful receiver but one who is at his best as a deep threat and third option), Kadarius Toney (a dynamic player with significant injury concerns), and Skyy Moore (a 2nd-year player who flashed some skills but overall underperformed as a rookie) doesn’t appear sufficient heading into the season, even with All-World tight end Travis Kelce as the primary guy.

And so a great debate has been raging across Chiefs Kingdom social media; Should the Chiefs trade for Hopkins? It’s an issue that has both sides quite thoroughly convinced of their own correctness and has been ferociously argued. And so, as I did years ago regarding the debate surrounding Chris Jones’ contract extension, I thought it might be useful to look at both sides of the “to Hopkins or not to Hopkins” issue.

Let’s talk about talent, value, salary cap, the draft, what it means to contend in the short term and long term, and a whole slew of other issues surrounding the “should they or shouldn’t they” argument for Hopkins to be a Chief. Because in this case, there really are good arguments on both sides.