Sorry for not making the snark more clear.
Mahomes is clearly one of the best, possibly the best, QB in the league today -- and nobody except KC saw that coming. So what does the phrase generational talent really mean when the guy who is clearly heads and shoulders above almost everyone wasn't seen as such? Hindsight is so damned easy, foresight on the other hand...
On the flip side, when was the has the last "generational talent" coming out of the draft at #1 actually panned out as such? Looking back a couple of years at the number 1 pick QB's -- because one would think that a obvious generational talent, well being obvious, would go #1 for sure :
Mayfield: runs hot and cold -- not generational
Goff -- oh please
Winston -- runs hot and cold -- not generational
Luck -- Damn good QB, but didn't change the game -- not generational
Newton -- on paper, looked like he might be, but his stats and record say otherwise
.
.
.
Vick
Manning (the good one) -- and we get all the way to 1998 to find a candidate that lived up to the billing
At least for me, the phrase "generational talent" when it's applied to a QB in the draft means some people had an opinion and hindsight suggests that they were almost always wrong. So using the phrase to justify "taking making any trade necessary to get your guy" is just a way to say "I really, really, really want that person" and doesn't add much to the conversation about how to value the cost of the trade.