Hock is going to be an edge lineman who will be a monster for not only the running game but also play action roll out opportunities either as the drop down in the flat or using his speed and size to come across the field on the second level.
His role will hide the preference to run or pass vs having either Mundt or Irv on the field
Get him up to speed ASAP, he could be an X factor that draws attention opening up the deep ball and lessening team's abilities to double JJ.
The Vikings arguably took on little risk in the deal even if Hockenson isn't in their long-term plans. But there are few things I've thought on the past few days.
Arguably the Vikings were looking for a 'weapon' regardless if that was a TE or WR. The cost to add Hockenson, who is still on a rookie deal, was far less than the WR market. Look at Claypool going for a top 40 pick. Cooks who isn't on a rookie deal would have gone for a higher price (if traded) too. So the Vikings end up saying heck with it needing to be a WR and add a TE they can use in multiple ways for a fraction of a cost. They move down about 60 spots in 2023 and a round in 2024 for a guy who will be here both years.
Without the deal the Vikings were likely spending a pick in rounds 1-4 on a TE anyways so it also relieves that constraint too.
The analytics side of the deal is around the exploding WR2 market. League-wide WR2 salaries are exploding while TE pay is not. So there is a level of inefficiency here. The likes of Christian Kirk, Diontae Johnson, and Chris Godwin are making $18M, $18.35M, and $20M respectively. A comparable TE who recently signed an extension (Dallas Goedert) is making $14M/year on a long-term deal. The very top of the TE market only sits at $17M a year. So they are likely saving $5M or so by going to the TE vs. WR2 route.
Long-term how they handle Hockenson will be interesting. He fits the now and future but they do have the option of letting him play on his $9M 5th year option next year followed by a franchise tag in the neighborhood of $12.5M. A long-term deal end up helping them massage the cap a bit. But even that would likely be palatable for a guy who is only 25 years old.
Detroit's FO can make the case that they thought the value was reasonable or that paying a TE big money isn't worth it at the beginning of a rebuild. But trading him for what effectively the value of a 3rd round pick to a division rival is questionable. Just playing out the next two seasons would have net them a 4th round comp pick at minimum, assuming they don't play in FA. Bad teams stay bad by trading 25 year old core pieces regardless of position. The Vikings gain I suppose.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
The Vikings arguably took on little risk in the deal even if Hockenson isn't in their long-term plans. But there are few things I've thought on the past few days.
Arguably the Vikings were looking for a 'weapon' regardless if that was a TE or WR. The cost to add Hockenson, who is still on a rookie deal, was far less than the WR market. Look at Claypool going for a top 40 pick. Cooks who isn't on a rookie deal would have gone for a higher price (if traded) too. So the Vikings end up saying heck with it needing to be a WR and add a TE they can use in multiple ways for a fraction of a cost. They move down about 60 spots in 2023 and a round in 2024 for a guy who will be here both years.
Without the deal the Vikings were likely spending a pick in rounds 1-4 on a TE anyways so it also relieves that constraint too.
The analytics side of the deal is around the exploding WR2 market. League-wide WR2 salaries are exploding while TE pay is not. So there is a level of inefficiency here. The likes of Christian Kirk, Diontae Johnson, and Chris Godwin are making $18M, $18.35M, and $20M respectively. A comparable TE who recently signed an extension (Dallas Goedert) is making $14M/year on a long-term deal. The very top of the TE market only sits at $17M a year. So they are likely saving $5M or so by going to the TE vs. WR2 route.
Long-term how they handle Hockenson will be interesting. He fits the now and future but they do have the option of letting him play on his $9M 5th year option next year followed by a franchise tag in the neighborhood of $12.5M. A long-term deal end up helping them massage the cap a bit. But even that would likely be palatable for a guy who is only 25 years old.
Detroit's FO can make the case that they thought the value was reasonable or that paying a TE big money isn't worth it at the beginning of a rebuild. But trading him for what effectively the value of a 3rd round pick to a division rival is questionable. Just playing out the next two seasons would have net them a 4th round comp pick at minimum, assuming they don't play in FA. Bad teams stay bad by trading 25 year old core pieces regardless of position. The Vikings gain I suppose.
NFL economics suggests that you are generally better off spending a high draft pick on a WR than trying to get an established WR in a trade or via FA. If you have both the draft capital and the salary cap space to pull off a deal like Miami did for Tyreke Hill or Philly did with AJ Brown, then OK. But most teams, including the Vikings, are not there. We need to extend JJ soon and he will break the bank. Thielen is well past his prime and KJ is just OK but nothing more. My guess is that neither Reagor (despite being a first round pick) nor Nailor will ever be difference makers. (Note: if your first round WR selection causes other teams to laugh maybe you should just trade for an established star.)
The opposite appears to be true for TEs. Few TEs really make a difference and even the good ones can be had fairly cheap compared to WRs. It's OK even for cap-strapped teams to trade for productive TEs rather than waste a relatively high pick on just a guy - looking at you ISM.
I guess the Vikes looked at the trade and felt that the offense is maybe one really good player away from making it elite, while the defense is what it is (although appears to be improving).
The O-Line seems set, or at least the best we've seen in quite a long time. You have front line playmakers in JJ, Dalvin, and now TJ. You have great secondary weapons in AT, KJ, and Mattison. Once Kirk gets into a groove, watch out. This is going to be something fun to watch down the stretch.
PS - With an offensive minded head coach, I really wish they'd find a way to incorporate Reagor into the offense. Don't make the same mistake that Zimmer admitted to with CP. Throw him out there for a few plays here and there like jet sweeps, bubble screens, some slants, backfield, etc.
Quote: @PurpleCrush said:
I guess the Vikes looked at the trade and felt that the offense is maybe one really good player away from making it elite, while the defense is what it is (although appears to be improving).
The O-Line seems set, or at least the best we've seen in quite a long time. You have front line playmakers in JJ, Dalvin, and now TJ. You have great secondary weapons in AT, KJ, and Mattison. Once Kirk gets into a groove, watch out. This is going to be something fun to watch down the stretch.
PS - With an offensive minded head coach, I really wish they'd find a way to incorporate Reagor into the offense. Don't make the same mistake that Zimmer admitted to with CP. Throw him out there for a few plays here and there like jet sweeps, bubble screens, some slants, backfield, etc.
They seem to be using him. He was in on Dalvin's TD up the gut. Ran motion and it seems the D respected him because they hustled to keep up with him.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ PurpleCrush said:
I guess the Vikes looked at the trade and felt that the offense is maybe one really good player away from making it elite, while the defense is what it is (although appears to be improving).
The O-Line seems set, or at least the best we've seen in quite a long time. You have front line playmakers in JJ, Dalvin, and now TJ. You have great secondary weapons in AT, KJ, and Mattison. Once Kirk gets into a groove, watch out. This is going to be something fun to watch down the stretch.
PS - With an offensive minded head coach, I really wish they'd find a way to incorporate Reagor into the offense. Don't make the same mistake that Zimmer admitted to with CP. Throw him out there for a few plays here and there like jet sweeps, bubble screens, some slants, backfield, etc.
They seem to be using him. He was in on Dalvin's TD up the gut. Ran motion and it seems the D respected him because they hustled to keep up with him.
They have, but it seems sparingly to me. It feels like they could do a bit more.
Quote: @PurpleCrush said:
@ greediron said:
@ PurpleCrush said:
I guess the Vikes looked at the trade and felt that the offense is maybe one really good player away from making it elite, while the defense is what it is (although appears to be improving).
The O-Line seems set, or at least the best we've seen in quite a long time. You have front line playmakers in JJ, Dalvin, and now TJ. You have great secondary weapons in AT, KJ, and Mattison. Once Kirk gets into a groove, watch out. This is going to be something fun to watch down the stretch.
PS - With an offensive minded head coach, I really wish they'd find a way to incorporate Reagor into the offense. Don't make the same mistake that Zimmer admitted to with CP. Throw him out there for a few plays here and there like jet sweeps, bubble screens, some slants, backfield, etc.
They seem to be using him. He was in on Dalvin's TD up the gut. Ran motion and it seems the D respected him because they hustled to keep up with him.
They have, but it seems sparingly to me. It feels like they could do a bit more.
I wonder if Reagor has the CP problem....politely.....not the brightest bulbs. It took the "run Forrest run" approach after about 10 years in the league for the light to turn on (results) for CP. He seems to hit the right hole in the run game. But I suspect the gadget plays came as a shock to CP (maybe Reagor) as they do to the defenses. From a QB perspective your WR's need to be at the right place at the right time and CP has struggled with that his whole career.
It's interesting listening to some Detroit writers on TJH...
Give Lions a B grade for the trade
TJH is not a good run blocker; more 1 dimensional player
TJH has been good, but not great as you'd expect a top 10 pick to be
I said it the day of the trade; the excitement about getting TJH is not because of what's he's done, but the potential for what he can be here with this system, KOC calling plays and his offensive surround.
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
It's interesting listening to some Detroit writers on TJH...
Give Lions a B grade for the trade
TJH is not a good run blocker; more 1 dimensional player
TJH has been good, but not great as you'd expect a top 10 pick to be
I said it the day of the trade; the excitement about getting TJH is not because of what's he's done, but the potential for what he can be here with this system, KOC calling plays and his offensive surround.
Writers/Fans look at it in a vacuum. He is not a good gap-scheme blocker, he was a top 5-10 blocking TE in a zone scheme more similar to what MN runs. From an all-around perspective MN is betting on the fact that he was good not great because of the supporting cast. In an offense surrounded by weapons they should find up more ways to get him yards after the catch, which is his greatest skillset in the passing game. TE is also a position that takes awhile to develop so all of the traits are still there. Detroit is misguided thinking they got out from paying him. If it works out KOC is going to use him exactly how Shannahan leverages Kittle.
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
It's interesting listening to some Detroit writers on TJH...
Give Lions a B grade for the trade
TJH is not a good run blocker; more 1 dimensional player
TJH has been good, but not great as you'd expect a top 10 pick to be
I said it the day of the trade; the excitement about getting TJH is not because of what's he's done, but the potential for what he can be here with this system, KOC calling plays and his offensive surround.
After looking into it further, he's not quite the run blocker that I thought he was. At the very least I think he's an upgrade from Irv in that department.
As a top 10 pick? No. HELL NO. Don't get me going AGAIN on the stupidity of taking tight ends in the 1st round. Top 10? Madness.
|
