Quote: @"greediron" said:
@"supafreak84" said:
Love Hock as a player, but I still question how we fit all these contracts into the long term equation especially if we have to re-up Cousins on another extension. JJ, Darrisaw, Hunter is on a one year deal. That's a lot of cash and we still need upgrading at several positions. Was it the wisest thing to trade for a TE you knew you had to pay and reset the TE market on? It could be argued
Indeed. It is the internet, indeed it could be argued. Should it be? That is the question.
I don't understand why we needed to prioritize his Contract now when the other Contracts that need to get done are higher in priority IMO. We had all the leverage. We could have let it play out this year and used the Franchise Tag next year. I know that would piss him and his agent off, but if he wants to sit out a year so be it. Look how well that worked out for Le'Veon Bell?. Besides JJ, they still need to deal with Kirk and his $28.5 Million in dead cap next year, plus Hunter's dead cap of almost $15 Million.
Quote: @"pattersaur" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"TBro" said:
I'm glad he got the extension, and I love what he adds to the offense, but I don't like the contract. He's not the best TE's in Football by a long shot. $17.125M per year is an overpay IMO.
It's just the timing. Next top 5-6 TE will reset the market too. Happens at every position and it's not going to ever stop. In three years, Hock's contract will rank 4th or 5th or even lower. In 3 years he'll want a new deal ha. He's really good and we need him, so I'm not mad about it. But it's an overpay. Oh well though! Glad he's in the fold for a while. Now do JJ!
In three years, if he's earned a new deal, and the Vikings haven't drafted his replacement, he'll get a new deal.
Quote: @"greediron" said:
@"supafreak84" said:
Love Hock as a player, but I still question how we fit all these contracts into the long term equation especially if we have to re-up Cousins on another extension. JJ, Darrisaw, Hunter is on a one year deal. That's a lot of cash and we still need upgrading at several positions. Was it the wisest thing to trade for a TE you knew you had to pay and reset the TE market on? It could be argued
Indeed. It is the internet, indeed it could be argued. Should it be? That is the question.
Oh, its going to be argued. Free money would be argued. A date with Sophia Vergara would be argued.
Quote: @"TBro" said:
@"greediron" said:
@"supafreak84" said:
Love Hock as a player, but I still question how we fit all these contracts into the long term equation especially if we have to re-up Cousins on another extension. JJ, Darrisaw, Hunter is on a one year deal. That's a lot of cash and we still need upgrading at several positions. Was it the wisest thing to trade for a TE you knew you had to pay and reset the TE market on? It could be argued
Indeed. It is the internet, indeed it could be argued. Should it be? That is the question.
I don't understand why we needed to prioritize his Contract now when the other Contracts that need to get done are higher in priority IMO. We had all the leverage. We could have let it play out this year and used the Franchise Tag next year. I know that would piss him and his agent off, but if he wants to sit out a year so be it. Look how well that worked out for Le'Veon Bell?. Besides JJ, they still need to deal with Kirk and his $28.5 Million in dead cap next year, plus Hunter's dead cap of almost $15 Million.
What does priority have to do with anything? They can work on multiple contract negotiations at the same time. It's just the first one they agreed to.
Quote: @"medaille" said:
@"TBro" said:
@"greediron" said:
@"supafreak84" said:
Love Hock as a player, but I still question how we fit all these contracts into the long term equation especially if we have to re-up Cousins on another extension. JJ, Darrisaw, Hunter is on a one year deal. That's a lot of cash and we still need upgrading at several positions. Was it the wisest thing to trade for a TE you knew you had to pay and reset the TE market on? It could be argued
Indeed. It is the internet, indeed it could be argued. Should it be? That is the question.
I don't understand why we needed to prioritize his Contract now when the other Contracts that need to get done are higher in priority IMO. We had all the leverage. We could have let it play out this year and used the Franchise Tag next year. I know that would piss him and his agent off, but if he wants to sit out a year so be it. Look how well that worked out for Le'Veon Bell?. Besides JJ, they still need to deal with Kirk and his $28.5 Million in dead cap next year, plus Hunter's dead cap of almost $15 Million.
What does priority have to do with anything? They can work on multiple contract negotiations at the same time. It's just the first one they agreed to.
Agree, multiple reports have indicated they are currently working on JJ's extension too.
Quote: @"TBro" said:
@"greediron" said:
@"supafreak84" said:
Love Hock as a player, but I still question how we fit all these contracts into the long term equation especially if we have to re-up Cousins on another extension. JJ, Darrisaw, Hunter is on a one year deal. That's a lot of cash and we still need upgrading at several positions. Was it the wisest thing to trade for a TE you knew you had to pay and reset the TE market on? It could be argued
Indeed. It is the internet, indeed it could be argued. Should it be? That is the question.
I don't understand why we needed to prioritize his Contract now when the other Contracts that need to get done are higher in priority IMO. We had all the leverage. We could have let it play out this year and used the Franchise Tag next year. I know that would piss him and his agent off, but if he wants to sit out a year so be it. Look how well that worked out for Le'Veon Bell?. Besides JJ, they still need to deal with Kirk and his $28.5 Million in dead cap next year, plus Hunter's dead cap of almost $15 Million.
I am not going to argue against your point. Seems like he should have been a lower priority, but we don't know what was going on behind the scenes. His "ear infection" seemed like a hold-in and maybe he was making some noise behind the scenes. He performed well and is a big piece to the offense, so IMO it is just another payday for another star.
Quote: @"medaille" said:
@"TBro" said:
@"greediron" said:
@"supafreak84" said:
Love Hock as a player, but I still question how we fit all these contracts into the long term equation especially if we have to re-up Cousins on another extension. JJ, Darrisaw, Hunter is on a one year deal. That's a lot of cash and we still need upgrading at several positions. Was it the wisest thing to trade for a TE you knew you had to pay and reset the TE market on? It could be argued
Indeed. It is the internet, indeed it could be argued. Should it be? That is the question.
I don't understand why we needed to prioritize his Contract now when the other Contracts that need to get done are higher in priority IMO. We had all the leverage. We could have let it play out this year and used the Franchise Tag next year. I know that would piss him and his agent off, but if he wants to sit out a year so be it. Look how well that worked out for Le'Veon Bell?. Besides JJ, they still need to deal with Kirk and his $28.5 Million in dead cap next year, plus Hunter's dead cap of almost $15 Million.
What does priority have to do with anything? They can work on multiple contract negotiations at the same time. It's just the first one they agreed to.
It goes back to what I said earlier. What was the urgency to make him the highest paid TE in the League? We have him under contract this year, and had the Franchise tag for leverage next year. He had a great 10 game season for us last year but I don't see how that was justification to make him the highest paid at his position when he has a questionable injury history. Hopefully that is behind him, but this was a clear overpay for a guy that doesn't find the end zone very often and can't block well in the running game ranking 24th overall by PFF.
Quote: @"medaille" said:
@"TBro" said:
@"greediron" said:
@"supafreak84" said:
Love Hock as a player, but I still question how we fit all these contracts into the long term equation especially if we have to re-up Cousins on another extension. JJ, Darrisaw, Hunter is on a one year deal. That's a lot of cash and we still need upgrading at several positions. Was it the wisest thing to trade for a TE you knew you had to pay and reset the TE market on? It could be argued
Indeed. It is the internet, indeed it could be argued. Should it be? That is the question.
I don't understand why we needed to prioritize his Contract now when the other Contracts that need to get done are higher in priority IMO. We had all the leverage. We could have let it play out this year and used the Franchise Tag next year. I know that would piss him and his agent off, but if he wants to sit out a year so be it. Look how well that worked out for Le'Veon Bell?. Besides JJ, they still need to deal with Kirk and his $28.5 Million in dead cap next year, plus Hunter's dead cap of almost $15 Million.
What does priority have to do with anything? They can work on multiple contract negotiations at the same time. It's just the first one they agreed to.
Exactly. And getting TJ done first, though not necessary, probably brings into better focus the cap landscape for structuring JJ's deal--iow, where and when those acceleration years occur.
Quote: @"greediron" said:
@"supafreak84" said:
Love Hock as a player, but I still question how we fit all these contracts into the long term equation especially if we have to re-up Cousins on another extension. JJ, Darrisaw, Hunter is on a one year deal. That's a lot of cash and we still need upgrading at several positions. Was it the wisest thing to trade for a TE you knew you had to pay and reset the TE market on? It could be argued
Indeed. It is the internet, indeed it could be argued. Should it be? That is the question.
One thing for sure is we'll have a front row seat for a lot of these decisions/trades within the division and we'll see which teams made the wiser decisions. Whether that's the Bears tear it down model or our "competitive rebuild" model. Whether it's the Lions moving Hockensen before they had to pay him with a record contract and going with rookie Sam LaPorta, or the Vikings trading for and extending Hock. Whether that's the Packers moving up for Christian Watson or the Vikings trading down with a division rival for Andrew Booth and Ed Ingram. This year will go a long way in answering some of these questions
Quote: @"supafreak84" said:
Love Hock as a player, but I still question how we fit all these contracts into the long term equation especially if we have to re-up Cousins on another extension. JJ, Darrisaw, Hunter is on a one year deal. That's a lot of cash and we still need upgrading at several positions. Was it the wisest thing to trade for a TE you knew you had to pay and reset the TE market on? It could be argued
It got said in one of the comments. He’s the 17th best paid reciver. I think you could make an argument that he is that. So was it actually cheaper to sign him then a second top flight reciver? I think you can make that argument.
Heck JJ is going to get $32m a season.
Hunter is going to walk. The real question is what do we do at QB?
|
