Quote: @"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Jor-El" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Zulgad: Barr or Diggs? If Vikings can pick only one whom should they keep?
Barr continues to have the potential to be fantastic, but that means four years into his career we continue to talk about what could be as opposed to what he’s done. Zimmer has put together a fantastic defense and many of the key pieces still will be in place if Barr departs. The Vikings offense and Cousins, meanwhile, will suffer if Diggs is elsewhere.
Fair comment regarding Barr, but couldn't you say the same thing about Diggs? Yes, he has the potential to be fantastic - but still has not produced even 1,000 yards in a season, in a passing-crazy league where that level is not an especially high bar.
Also, Zimmer always says that we fans can't evaluate his defensive players because his scheme de-emphasizes stats, so how do we know Barr has not been playing up to his potential? Diggs, meanwhile, plays a position where most of his production is pretty easily measurable.
You're forgetting one huge factor. Diggs performance relies heavily on the QB. And last year the Vikings were playing with a backup. Also, while, yes, this is a pass-crazy league the Vikings were very much a running football team the last few years. Last year, despite losing Cook early, the Vikings ranked near the top in rushing attempts.
I sign Diggs before the season while he still hasn't played 16 games or gone over 1K. His price could be reasonable. I think we've seen the best Barr has. But this is Diggs' 4th season and he'll playing with a QB who can get him the ball deep. I'd hate to have to pay him after what could be an enormous season.
It could work out. By signing him now you save alot more. What if he has another 13 game 900 yard season? What if we are paying him top 5 wr money? That's the only thing some of us are worried about.
I get it, but that's where it comes down to matters of opinion. I trust my eyes more than stats and I see a young, potentially dominant receiver who has yet to put it all together. I'd use that to my advantage and sign him now to a top 5 to top 10 type contract. If we wait, and he plays like we all know he's capable of, we could be looking at the highest receiver contract in the NFL. And it's not like a season similar to '17 is going to save us a bunch of money compared to what he'd cost us right now.
Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Jor-El" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Zulgad: Barr or Diggs? If Vikings can pick only one whom should they keep?
Barr continues to have the potential to be fantastic, but that means four years into his career we continue to talk about what could be as opposed to what he’s done. Zimmer has put together a fantastic defense and many of the key pieces still will be in place if Barr departs. The Vikings offense and Cousins, meanwhile, will suffer if Diggs is elsewhere.
Fair comment regarding Barr, but couldn't you say the same thing about Diggs? Yes, he has the potential to be fantastic - but still has not produced even 1,000 yards in a season, in a passing-crazy league where that level is not an especially high bar.
Also, Zimmer always says that we fans can't evaluate his defensive players because his scheme de-emphasizes stats, so how do we know Barr has not been playing up to his potential? Diggs, meanwhile, plays a position where most of his production is pretty easily measurable.
You're forgetting one huge factor. Diggs performance relies heavily on the QB. And last year the Vikings were playing with a backup. Also, while, yes, this is a pass-crazy league the Vikings were very much a running football team the last few years. Last year, despite losing Cook early, the Vikings ranked near the top in rushing attempts.
I sign Diggs before the season while he still hasn't played 16 games or gone over 1K. His price could be reasonable. I think we've seen the best Barr has. But this is Diggs' 4th season and he'll playing with a QB who can get him the ball deep. I'd hate to have to pay him after what could be an enormous season.
It could work out. By signing him now you save alot more. What if he has another 13 game 900 yard season? What if we are paying him top 5 wr money? That's the only thing some of us are worried about.
I get it, but that's where it comes down to matters of opinion. I trust my eyes more than stats and I see a young, potentially dominant receiver who has yet to put it all together. I'd use that to my advantage and sign him now to a top 5 to top 10 type contract. If we wait, and he plays like we all know he's capable of, we could be looking at the highest receiver contract in the NFL. And it's not like a season similar to '17 is going to save us a bunch of money compared to what he'd cost us right now.
I agree with what you said, but also think "...I see a young, potentially dominant linebacker who has yet to put it all together." etc.
The reason why this debate is seeing so many split opinions is that both players. We could sign both and look like genius or sign neither and end up dodging 2 bullets or anything in between.
Quote: @"Scoog" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Jor-El" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Zulgad: Barr or Diggs? If Vikings can pick only one whom should they keep?
Barr continues to have the potential to be fantastic, but that means four years into his career we continue to talk about what could be as opposed to what he’s done. Zimmer has put together a fantastic defense and many of the key pieces still will be in place if Barr departs. The Vikings offense and Cousins, meanwhile, will suffer if Diggs is elsewhere.
Fair comment regarding Barr, but couldn't you say the same thing about Diggs? Yes, he has the potential to be fantastic - but still has not produced even 1,000 yards in a season, in a passing-crazy league where that level is not an especially high bar.
Also, Zimmer always says that we fans can't evaluate his defensive players because his scheme de-emphasizes stats, so how do we know Barr has not been playing up to his potential? Diggs, meanwhile, plays a position where most of his production is pretty easily measurable.
You're forgetting one huge factor. Diggs performance relies heavily on the QB. And last year the Vikings were playing with a backup. Also, while, yes, this is a pass-crazy league the Vikings were very much a running football team the last few years. Last year, despite losing Cook early, the Vikings ranked near the top in rushing attempts.
I sign Diggs before the season while he still hasn't played 16 games or gone over 1K. His price could be reasonable. I think we've seen the best Barr has. But this is Diggs' 4th season and he'll playing with a QB who can get him the ball deep. I'd hate to have to pay him after what could be an enormous season.
It could work out. By signing him now you save alot more. What if he has another 13 game 900 yard season? What if we are paying him top 5 wr money? That's the only thing some of us are worried about.
I get it, but that's where it comes down to matters of opinion. I trust my eyes more than stats and I see a young, potentially dominant receiver who has yet to put it all together. I'd use that to my advantage and sign him now to a top 5 to top 10 type contract. If we wait, and he plays like we all know he's capable of, we could be looking at the highest receiver contract in the NFL. And it's not like a season similar to '17 is going to save us a bunch of money compared to what he'd cost us right now.
I agree with what you said, but also think "...I see a young, potentially dominant linebacker who has yet to put it all together." etc.
The reason why this debate is seeing so many split opinions is that both players. We could sign both and look like genius or sign neither and end up dodging 2 bullets or anything in between.
We can say that both are young, potentially dominant players. What I'm trying to get across is that while Barr has had every opportunity to realize his potential (plus an extra year), Diggs has had to deal with a series of nagging injuries, 3 different OCs and 4 different QBs throwing him the ball. I tend to think that what we've seen from Diggs so far is just scratching the surface.
Good conversation, but I look at it as what will be, will be. The team will prioritize and move forward. The important thing is to keep the pipeline filled with draft picks that contribute on their original contracts to supplement paying talented guys on their 2nd.
Whether Diggs/Barr stays or goes is ok with me either way, but let's keep this new culture of winning and camaraderie going.
Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"Scoog" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Jor-El" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Zulgad: Barr or Diggs? If Vikings can pick only one whom should they keep?
Barr continues to have the potential to be fantastic, but that means four years into his career we continue to talk about what could be as opposed to what he’s done. Zimmer has put together a fantastic defense and many of the key pieces still will be in place if Barr departs. The Vikings offense and Cousins, meanwhile, will suffer if Diggs is elsewhere.
Fair comment regarding Barr, but couldn't you say the same thing about Diggs? Yes, he has the potential to be fantastic - but still has not produced even 1,000 yards in a season, in a passing-crazy league where that level is not an especially high bar.
Also, Zimmer always says that we fans can't evaluate his defensive players because his scheme de-emphasizes stats, so how do we know Barr has not been playing up to his potential? Diggs, meanwhile, plays a position where most of his production is pretty easily measurable.
You're forgetting one huge factor. Diggs performance relies heavily on the QB. And last year the Vikings were playing with a backup. Also, while, yes, this is a pass-crazy league the Vikings were very much a running football team the last few years. Last year, despite losing Cook early, the Vikings ranked near the top in rushing attempts.
I sign Diggs before the season while he still hasn't played 16 games or gone over 1K. His price could be reasonable. I think we've seen the best Barr has. But this is Diggs' 4th season and he'll playing with a QB who can get him the ball deep. I'd hate to have to pay him after what could be an enormous season.
It could work out. By signing him now you save alot more. What if he has another 13 game 900 yard season? What if we are paying him top 5 wr money? That's the only thing some of us are worried about.
I get it, but that's where it comes down to matters of opinion. I trust my eyes more than stats and I see a young, potentially dominant receiver who has yet to put it all together. I'd use that to my advantage and sign him now to a top 5 to top 10 type contract. If we wait, and he plays like we all know he's capable of, we could be looking at the highest receiver contract in the NFL. And it's not like a season similar to '17 is going to save us a bunch of money compared to what he'd cost us right now.
I agree with what you said, but also think "...I see a young, potentially dominant linebacker who has yet to put it all together." etc.
The reason why this debate is seeing so many split opinions is that both players. We could sign both and look like genius or sign neither and end up dodging 2 bullets or anything in between.
We can say that both are young, potentially dominant players. What I'm trying to get across is that while Barr has had every opportunity to realize his potential (plus an extra year), Diggs has had to deal with a series of nagging injuries, 3 different OCs and 4 different QBs throwing him the ball. I tend to think that what we've seen from Diggs so far is just scratching the surface.
I agree he has been hamstrung with alot of QB and scheme changes is his short career. It is the nagging injury thing you mentioned that has me concerned. He has never played all 16 games yet. I dont know if I'd be willing to simply give him twice as much as Thielan this year. It could bite us in the @ss but I let him play this year. If he misses 2-3 games and has 800-900 yards agian then you offer him a contract inline with that production. Barr and Diggs have the highest expectations with regard to what they think they should be paid...imo. They also, as we've both noted, have the most potential to make us sorry we gave them big contracts. This is why they are the last 2. I think you let both play it out and see where they rank to us next year. Could be costly and might lose them. This is better then making a $14 million a year mistake. Richardson might prove more valuable then either at years end. He is another consideration.
Quote: @"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Scoog" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Jor-El" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Zulgad: Barr or Diggs? If Vikings can pick only one whom should they keep?
Barr continues to have the potential to be fantastic, but that means four years into his career we continue to talk about what could be as opposed to what he’s done. Zimmer has put together a fantastic defense and many of the key pieces still will be in place if Barr departs. The Vikings offense and Cousins, meanwhile, will suffer if Diggs is elsewhere.
Fair comment regarding Barr, but couldn't you say the same thing about Diggs? Yes, he has the potential to be fantastic - but still has not produced even 1,000 yards in a season, in a passing-crazy league where that level is not an especially high bar.
Also, Zimmer always says that we fans can't evaluate his defensive players because his scheme de-emphasizes stats, so how do we know Barr has not been playing up to his potential? Diggs, meanwhile, plays a position where most of his production is pretty easily measurable.
You're forgetting one huge factor. Diggs performance relies heavily on the QB. And last year the Vikings were playing with a backup. Also, while, yes, this is a pass-crazy league the Vikings were very much a running football team the last few years. Last year, despite losing Cook early, the Vikings ranked near the top in rushing attempts.
I sign Diggs before the season while he still hasn't played 16 games or gone over 1K. His price could be reasonable. I think we've seen the best Barr has. But this is Diggs' 4th season and he'll playing with a QB who can get him the ball deep. I'd hate to have to pay him after what could be an enormous season.
It could work out. By signing him now you save alot more. What if he has another 13 game 900 yard season? What if we are paying him top 5 wr money? That's the only thing some of us are worried about.
I get it, but that's where it comes down to matters of opinion. I trust my eyes more than stats and I see a young, potentially dominant receiver who has yet to put it all together. I'd use that to my advantage and sign him now to a top 5 to top 10 type contract. If we wait, and he plays like we all know he's capable of, we could be looking at the highest receiver contract in the NFL. And it's not like a season similar to '17 is going to save us a bunch of money compared to what he'd cost us right now.
I agree with what you said, but also think "...I see a young, potentially dominant linebacker who has yet to put it all together." etc.
The reason why this debate is seeing so many split opinions is that both players. We could sign both and look like genius or sign neither and end up dodging 2 bullets or anything in between.
We can say that both are young, potentially dominant players. What I'm trying to get across is that while Barr has had every opportunity to realize his potential (plus an extra year), Diggs has had to deal with a series of nagging injuries, 3 different OCs and 4 different QBs throwing him the ball. I tend to think that what we've seen from Diggs so far is just scratching the surface.
I agree he has been hamstrung with alot of QB and scheme changes is his short career. It is the nagging injury thing you mentioned that has me concerned. He has never played all 16 games yet. I dont know if I'd be willing to simply give him twice as much as Thielan this year. It could bite us in the @ss but I let him play this year. If he misses 2-3 games and has 800-900 yards agian then you offer him a contract inline with that production. Barr and Diggs have the highest expectations with regard to what they think they should be paid...imo. They also, as we've both noted, have the most potential to make us sorry we gave them big contracts. This is why they are the last 2. I think you let both play it out and see where they rank to us next year. Could be costly and might lose them. This is better then making a $14 million a year mistake. Richardson might prove more valuable then either at years end. He is another consideration.
I would treat the injury history the way I treat them in fantasy football. I ignore them. When you avoid a player because of an injury rep is when the player you chose instead of him gets hurt and the player with the injury rep is MVP. (Thanks for the championship, Todd Gurley). :-)
I wouldn't factor in the injuries at all when determining WHO to sign, but it would factor into the amount. But that's just me. I get why some would.
Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Scoog" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Jor-El" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Zulgad: Barr or Diggs? If Vikings can pick only one whom should they keep?
Barr continues to have the potential to be fantastic, but that means four years into his career we continue to talk about what could be as opposed to what he’s done. Zimmer has put together a fantastic defense and many of the key pieces still will be in place if Barr departs. The Vikings offense and Cousins, meanwhile, will suffer if Diggs is elsewhere.
Fair comment regarding Barr, but couldn't you say the same thing about Diggs? Yes, he has the potential to be fantastic - but still has not produced even 1,000 yards in a season, in a passing-crazy league where that level is not an especially high bar.
Also, Zimmer always says that we fans can't evaluate his defensive players because his scheme de-emphasizes stats, so how do we know Barr has not been playing up to his potential? Diggs, meanwhile, plays a position where most of his production is pretty easily measurable.
You're forgetting one huge factor. Diggs performance relies heavily on the QB. And last year the Vikings were playing with a backup. Also, while, yes, this is a pass-crazy league the Vikings were very much a running football team the last few years. Last year, despite losing Cook early, the Vikings ranked near the top in rushing attempts.
I sign Diggs before the season while he still hasn't played 16 games or gone over 1K. His price could be reasonable. I think we've seen the best Barr has. But this is Diggs' 4th season and he'll playing with a QB who can get him the ball deep. I'd hate to have to pay him after what could be an enormous season.
It could work out. By signing him now you save alot more. What if he has another 13 game 900 yard season? What if we are paying him top 5 wr money? That's the only thing some of us are worried about.
I get it, but that's where it comes down to matters of opinion. I trust my eyes more than stats and I see a young, potentially dominant receiver who has yet to put it all together. I'd use that to my advantage and sign him now to a top 5 to top 10 type contract. If we wait, and he plays like we all know he's capable of, we could be looking at the highest receiver contract in the NFL. And it's not like a season similar to '17 is going to save us a bunch of money compared to what he'd cost us right now.
I agree with what you said, but also think "...I see a young, potentially dominant linebacker who has yet to put it all together." etc.
The reason why this debate is seeing so many split opinions is that both players. We could sign both and look like genius or sign neither and end up dodging 2 bullets or anything in between.
We can say that both are young, potentially dominant players. What I'm trying to get across is that while Barr has had every opportunity to realize his potential (plus an extra year), Diggs has had to deal with a series of nagging injuries, 3 different OCs and 4 different QBs throwing him the ball. I tend to think that what we've seen from Diggs so far is just scratching the surface.
I agree he has been hamstrung with alot of QB and scheme changes is his short career. It is the nagging injury thing you mentioned that has me concerned. He has never played all 16 games yet. I dont know if I'd be willing to simply give him twice as much as Thielan this year. It could bite us in the @ss but I let him play this year. If he misses 2-3 games and has 800-900 yards agian then you offer him a contract inline with that production. Barr and Diggs have the highest expectations with regard to what they think they should be paid...imo. They also, as we've both noted, have the most potential to make us sorry we gave them big contracts. This is why they are the last 2. I think you let both play it out and see where they rank to us next year. Could be costly and might lose them. This is better then making a $14 million a year mistake. Richardson might prove more valuable then either at years end. He is another consideration.
I would treat the injury history the way I treat them in fantasy football. I ignore them. When you avoid a player because of an injury rep is when the player you chose instead of him gets hurt and the player with the injury rep is MVP. (Thanks for the championship, Todd Gurley). :-)
I wouldn't factor in the injuries at all when determining WHO to sign, but it would factor into the amount. But that's just me. I get why some would.
But this is exactly why Sam Bradford wasn't resigned in Minnesota: injuries.
Quote: @"StickyBun" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Scoog" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Jor-El" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Zulgad: Barr or Diggs? If Vikings can pick only one whom should they keep?
Barr continues to have the potential to be fantastic, but that means four years into his career we continue to talk about what could be as opposed to what he’s done. Zimmer has put together a fantastic defense and many of the key pieces still will be in place if Barr departs. The Vikings offense and Cousins, meanwhile, will suffer if Diggs is elsewhere.
Fair comment regarding Barr, but couldn't you say the same thing about Diggs? Yes, he has the potential to be fantastic - but still has not produced even 1,000 yards in a season, in a passing-crazy league where that level is not an especially high bar.
Also, Zimmer always says that we fans can't evaluate his defensive players because his scheme de-emphasizes stats, so how do we know Barr has not been playing up to his potential? Diggs, meanwhile, plays a position where most of his production is pretty easily measurable.
You're forgetting one huge factor. Diggs performance relies heavily on the QB. And last year the Vikings were playing with a backup. Also, while, yes, this is a pass-crazy league the Vikings were very much a running football team the last few years. Last year, despite losing Cook early, the Vikings ranked near the top in rushing attempts.
I sign Diggs before the season while he still hasn't played 16 games or gone over 1K. His price could be reasonable. I think we've seen the best Barr has. But this is Diggs' 4th season and he'll playing with a QB who can get him the ball deep. I'd hate to have to pay him after what could be an enormous season.
It could work out. By signing him now you save alot more. What if he has another 13 game 900 yard season? What if we are paying him top 5 wr money? That's the only thing some of us are worried about.
I get it, but that's where it comes down to matters of opinion. I trust my eyes more than stats and I see a young, potentially dominant receiver who has yet to put it all together. I'd use that to my advantage and sign him now to a top 5 to top 10 type contract. If we wait, and he plays like we all know he's capable of, we could be looking at the highest receiver contract in the NFL. And it's not like a season similar to '17 is going to save us a bunch of money compared to what he'd cost us right now.
I agree with what you said, but also think "...I see a young, potentially dominant linebacker who has yet to put it all together." etc.
The reason why this debate is seeing so many split opinions is that both players. We could sign both and look like genius or sign neither and end up dodging 2 bullets or anything in between.
We can say that both are young, potentially dominant players. What I'm trying to get across is that while Barr has had every opportunity to realize his potential (plus an extra year), Diggs has had to deal with a series of nagging injuries, 3 different OCs and 4 different QBs throwing him the ball. I tend to think that what we've seen from Diggs so far is just scratching the surface.
I agree he has been hamstrung with alot of QB and scheme changes is his short career. It is the nagging injury thing you mentioned that has me concerned. He has never played all 16 games yet. I dont know if I'd be willing to simply give him twice as much as Thielan this year. It could bite us in the @ss but I let him play this year. If he misses 2-3 games and has 800-900 yards agian then you offer him a contract inline with that production. Barr and Diggs have the highest expectations with regard to what they think they should be paid...imo. They also, as we've both noted, have the most potential to make us sorry we gave them big contracts. This is why they are the last 2. I think you let both play it out and see where they rank to us next year. Could be costly and might lose them. This is better then making a $14 million a year mistake. Richardson might prove more valuable then either at years end. He is another consideration.
I would treat the injury history the way I treat them in fantasy football. I ignore them. When you avoid a player because of an injury rep is when the player you chose instead of him gets hurt and the player with the injury rep is MVP. (Thanks for the championship, Todd Gurley). :-)
I wouldn't factor in the injuries at all when determining WHO to sign, but it would factor into the amount. But that's just me. I get why some would.
But this is exactly why Sam Bradford wasn't resigned in Minnesota: injuries.
True, but I think there is a pretty big discrepancy between Diggs nagging injuries and what Sam is dealing with. Diggs reminds me more of Robert Smith with Strep Throat and Ear Infections.
Then one day? Robert blew-up on us and we all lamented when he smartly retired early before his brain scrambled playing football.
Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Scoog" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"suncoastvike" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"Jor-El" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Zulgad: Barr or Diggs? If Vikings can pick only one whom should they keep?
Barr continues to have the potential to be fantastic, but that means four years into his career we continue to talk about what could be as opposed to what he’s done. Zimmer has put together a fantastic defense and many of the key pieces still will be in place if Barr departs. The Vikings offense and Cousins, meanwhile, will suffer if Diggs is elsewhere.
Fair comment regarding Barr, but couldn't you say the same thing about Diggs? Yes, he has the potential to be fantastic - but still has not produced even 1,000 yards in a season, in a passing-crazy league where that level is not an especially high bar.
Also, Zimmer always says that we fans can't evaluate his defensive players because his scheme de-emphasizes stats, so how do we know Barr has not been playing up to his potential? Diggs, meanwhile, plays a position where most of his production is pretty easily measurable.
You're forgetting one huge factor. Diggs performance relies heavily on the QB. And last year the Vikings were playing with a backup. Also, while, yes, this is a pass-crazy league the Vikings were very much a running football team the last few years. Last year, despite losing Cook early, the Vikings ranked near the top in rushing attempts.
I sign Diggs before the season while he still hasn't played 16 games or gone over 1K. His price could be reasonable. I think we've seen the best Barr has. But this is Diggs' 4th season and he'll playing with a QB who can get him the ball deep. I'd hate to have to pay him after what could be an enormous season.
It could work out. By signing him now you save alot more. What if he has another 13 game 900 yard season? What if we are paying him top 5 wr money? That's the only thing some of us are worried about.
I get it, but that's where it comes down to matters of opinion. I trust my eyes more than stats and I see a young, potentially dominant receiver who has yet to put it all together. I'd use that to my advantage and sign him now to a top 5 to top 10 type contract. If we wait, and he plays like we all know he's capable of, we could be looking at the highest receiver contract in the NFL. And it's not like a season similar to '17 is going to save us a bunch of money compared to what he'd cost us right now.
I agree with what you said, but also think "...I see a young, potentially dominant linebacker who has yet to put it all together." etc.
The reason why this debate is seeing so many split opinions is that both players. We could sign both and look like genius or sign neither and end up dodging 2 bullets or anything in between.
We can say that both are young, potentially dominant players. What I'm trying to get across is that while Barr has had every opportunity to realize his potential (plus an extra year), Diggs has had to deal with a series of nagging injuries, 3 different OCs and 4 different QBs throwing him the ball. I tend to think that what we've seen from Diggs so far is just scratching the surface.
I agree he has been hamstrung with alot of QB and scheme changes is his short career. It is the nagging injury thing you mentioned that has me concerned. He has never played all 16 games yet. I dont know if I'd be willing to simply give him twice as much as Thielan this year. It could bite us in the @ss but I let him play this year. If he misses 2-3 games and has 800-900 yards agian then you offer him a contract inline with that production. Barr and Diggs have the highest expectations with regard to what they think they should be paid...imo. They also, as we've both noted, have the most potential to make us sorry we gave them big contracts. This is why they are the last 2. I think you let both play it out and see where they rank to us next year. Could be costly and might lose them. This is better then making a $14 million a year mistake. Richardson might prove more valuable then either at years end. He is another consideration.
I would treat the injury history the way I treat them in fantasy football. I ignore them. When you avoid a player because of an injury rep is when the player you chose instead of him gets hurt and the player with the injury rep is MVP. (Thanks for the championship, Todd Gurley). :-)
I wouldn't factor in the injuries at all when determining WHO to sign, but it would factor into the amount. But that's just me. I get why some would.
Will he accept less this year based on his injury history? I don't get how you can say I wouldn't factor injury history into who you resign. Only how much. I doubt you get Diggs camp to buy into this. He wants to be paid based on how great hes going to be once he puts in a full season. Or so it seems to me. I like Diggs. I like durability too. Too bad we can't put Diggs ability in Treadwell's body. Then we wouldn't be looking at maybe losing both. I want Diggs back. At no more than $8-10 million per. That plenty for 900 yards.
Even if you extrapolate Diggs stats for the games missed he is no where near a TOP 10 WR, statistically. 14 million average salary is TOP money.
I would consider around 11 million with heavy incentives to reach 14 million if he can produce Top 10 production like around 85-90 catches, 1200 yards and around 10 TD's.
Last year, in 14 games, he had 64 catches, for 849 yards and 8 TD's. Those stats, even extrapolated out for 2 games missed, are not Top 10 production. Again a heavy incentive package for him to produce what he thinks he is worth. Show me baby otherwise play out the year and then decide.
|
