Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" What are the chances if the Vikes trade down into the 20s and pick up another second rounder that they take Linderbaum? In this scenario I'm assuming their top 3 corners are gone. We have talked a lot about their first pick being DE, DL or CB, but curious if you have heard anything different.
I don't think they'll take Linderbaum even if they trade back. The new coaching staff thinks they can get more out of Bradbury with a few schematic adjustments.
There does seem to be some support for the idea that his problems are more scheme and technique related than size and strength.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" What are the chances if the Vikes trade down into the 20s and pick up another second rounder that they take Linderbaum? In this scenario I'm assuming their top 3 corners are gone. We have talked a lot about their first pick being DE, DL or CB, but curious if you have heard anything different.
I don't think they'll take Linderbaum even if they trade back. The new coaching staff thinks they can get more out of Bradbury with a few schematic adjustments.
There does seem to be some support for the idea that his problems are more scheme and technique related than size and strength.
I dont know how much I can buy into that or not...
Its asking me as a fan to take a really big leap that this coaching staff is x% smarter than the previous one...
Maybe it is? We'll find out.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
Davis posted a respectable grade back in2018 when he played full time at right guard. In 2020, he played right guard for 8 games and was average at pass blocking. Vikings OL coach Chirs Kuper was the asst OL coach in 2017 and 2018 which were Davis' first two seasons. I'm guessing familiarity is the reasoning here.
But whatevs. It likely is around the minimum. I cannot imagine it would be for more than a couple of mil but he does have experience even if it is bad.
We're desperate here people.
Or $3M...
The value in Davis is that he can play across the line and projects as a starting RG for the time being. If they improve on him during the draft he's basically in the Mason Cole role of last year.
This has been a very Spielman-esque offseason thus far put together by Kwesi:
- Sign Cousins to a short term, big dollar extension...check
- Re-sign Mannion...check
- Bring in your Mike Remmers, Mason Cole's and Josh Klines in Schlottman and Jesse Davis...check
- Attempt to plug the hole in the middle of the defense this time with relative unknown Harrison Phillips...check
- Zadarius Smith is the one "big" signing on defense ala Tomlinson...check
- Sullivan is your Mac Alexander...check
Analytics be damned, it really is like trader Rick is still running the show.
I get the point, I don't 100% disagree. But I do think there are some key differences.
1. Kirk's extension is team friendlier than most believe. People just don't take it that way since its Kirk Cousins.
2. I am not going to write-off the O-line until they get through the draft. This isn't the same O-line where they were signing multiple low-tier players. We can circle back after the draft but I would bet Davis becomes the multi-versatile chess piece who can fill in across the line if there were an injury.
3. Zadarius Smith is a big defensive signing, but they're spending money on premium positions which is more ideal.
4. Chandon Sullivan is better than Alexander and you can't blame them for signing any DB at this point.
This is all to say that they have chosen the path of competing now while keep flexibility for the future. The #1 thing Kwesi has done this off-season is preserved long-term roster flexibility while hoping the coaching staff can get more out of the current roster. Not sure if you follow other MN sports, but I relate this FOs approach to Guerin and the Wild. There is no rush to tear the doors off, but get to know this roster. Then come next off-season move out the pieces that need to be moved and bring in fresh blood. Its more effective in my mind than trading everyone and regretting who you moved.
1. Maybe so, but we only have him for two seasons and he goes into next offseason with a no trade clause. If we don't sign him to yet another extension...was it worth holding onto him and squandering any trade value we would have received for essentially a "looksie" season in the new offense? I'm not convinced it was the right move to make after rebooting the entire front office and coaching staff in an attempt to move bryond mediocrity. I hope it works, but anything other then the playoffs in these next two seasons in a weak NFC would be a complete failure in this decision to hold on to Cousins. The Wilfs are "all in" on Cousins and this roster, so go win us some football games and show the fanbase that you actually know what you're doing this time.
2. Hopefully that's not at tackle being that Davis was the lowest rated tackle in pass protection last season. He's just another bandaid in case of injury and very reminiscent of past Spielman bandaids on the offensive line without actually fixing the problem. But I'm with you, let's see how the draft plays out...
3. I'm on board with the Smith signing and hope he can stay free from injury.
4. I honestly don't know a lot about Sullivan. I see he is a 4.6/40 guy who's PFF grade has dropped steadily over the last three seasons to a paltry 55.0 in 2021. Is he better then Alexander? We'll see but I won't hold my breath.
The no trade clause is taken out of context. It isn't to say that Kirk wouldn't accept being traded, its the fact he could control where he goes. The way the contract is written with the $20M roster bonus is a mutual option in a way. Vikings are forced to decide his future early in the off-season while Kirk on the other-hand has the control to veto any trade. If they decide to part ways I don't foresee Kirk holding the hammer and not accepting a move.
I just don't see it as good practice to give the player the ability to dictate where he wants to go, because where he wants to go might not be in our best interest in trade compensation. It's just Cousins and his agent bending us over a barrel again and limiting our options. It seems like Kirk and his agent are always one step ahead of the front offices he's played for. Bill Polian absolutely ripped the Vikings and Texans on NFL radio for granting "no trade clauses" into player contracts because such clauses were never included in the collective bargaining agreement and sets s terrible precident.
Why did Kirk want that language on the extension, and why did the Vikings grant it on an only 1 year extension?
Think of it this way. If the Vikings didn't extend Kirk and retained him he would have been on a $45M cap number with no relief. They drop that by $10M this year and he took a discount and allowed the Vikings some favorable terms in return for a $35M cap number or so in 2023. In-trade Kirk gets to dictate where he is or isn't traded to if they proceed down that path.
The media is painting the picture Kirk bent the Vikings over another barrel. He did well but did give the Vikings what they were looking for.
Truth is, trading Kirk this off-season on a $45M cap number was going to take paying a considerable amount of his salary. By the time you did that, paid for the draft picks, and ultimate signed a bridge QB it was going to cost $30-40M. So keeping Kirk was equally the cheapest alternative for superior play.
The expense of that is they likely won't be able to move him for as much in return if the trade him. Ultimately that is probably ok since you aren't trading him to rebuild at that point. You're trading him to move on.
This is interesting. Would the lower cap figure in ‘23 actually make him a more attractive QB trade target?
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
Davis posted a respectable grade back in2018 when he played full time at right guard. In 2020, he played right guard for 8 games and was average at pass blocking. Vikings OL coach Chirs Kuper was the asst OL coach in 2017 and 2018 which were Davis' first two seasons. I'm guessing familiarity is the reasoning here.
But whatevs. It likely is around the minimum. I cannot imagine it would be for more than a couple of mil but he does have experience even if it is bad.
We're desperate here people.
Or $3M...
The value in Davis is that he can play across the line and projects as a starting RG for the time being. If they improve on him during the draft he's basically in the Mason Cole role of last year.
This has been a very Spielman-esque offseason thus far put together by Kwesi:
- Sign Cousins to a short term, big dollar extension...check
- Re-sign Mannion...check
- Bring in your Mike Remmers, Mason Cole's and Josh Klines in Schlottman and Jesse Davis...check
- Attempt to plug the hole in the middle of the defense this time with relative unknown Harrison Phillips...check
- Zadarius Smith is the one "big" signing on defense ala Tomlinson...check
- Sullivan is your Mac Alexander...check
Analytics be damned, it really is like trader Rick is still running the show.
I get the point, I don't 100% disagree. But I do think there are some key differences.
1. Kirk's extension is team friendlier than most believe. People just don't take it that way since its Kirk Cousins.
2. I am not going to write-off the O-line until they get through the draft. This isn't the same O-line where they were signing multiple low-tier players. We can circle back after the draft but I would bet Davis becomes the multi-versatile chess piece who can fill in across the line if there were an injury.
3. Zadarius Smith is a big defensive signing, but they're spending money on premium positions which is more ideal.
4. Chandon Sullivan is better than Alexander and you can't blame them for signing any DB at this point.
This is all to say that they have chosen the path of competing now while keep flexibility for the future. The #1 thing Kwesi has done this off-season is preserved long-term roster flexibility while hoping the coaching staff can get more out of the current roster. Not sure if you follow other MN sports, but I relate this FOs approach to Guerin and the Wild. There is no rush to tear the doors off, but get to know this roster. Then come next off-season move out the pieces that need to be moved and bring in fresh blood. Its more effective in my mind than trading everyone and regretting who you moved.
Think of it this way. If the Vikings didn't extend Kirk and retained him he would have been on a $45M cap number with no relief. They drop that by $10M this year and he took a discount and allowed the Vikings some favorable terms in return for a $35M cap number or so in 2023. In-trade Kirk gets to dictate where he is or isn't traded to if they proceed down that path.
The media is painting the picture Kirk bent the Vikings over another barrel. He did well but did give the Vikings what they were looking for.
Truth is, trading Kirk this off-season on a $45M cap number was going to take paying a considerable amount of his salary. By the time you did that, paid for the draft picks, and ultimate signed a bridge QB it was going to cost $30-40M. So keeping Kirk was equally the cheapest alternative for superior play.
The expense of that is they likely won't be able to move him for as much in return if the trade him. Ultimately that is probably ok since you aren't trading him to rebuild at that point. You're trading him to move on.
So essentially the Vikings had to give up something to get them off the barrel that Kirk already had them bent over with his previous contract and cap hit. Again, Kirk and his agent are always a step ahead and he's put himself in another negotiating position of power heading into next offseason. Like I said, the NFLPA should really have Kirk and his agent go into every rookie symposium and teach a class on contract negotiation and maximizing income.
Where do you ultimately see this going with Cousins? Since trading him next offseason seems unlikely and difficult, are we re-signing him on yet another extension or do we just let him walk when he's played out his deal as an almost 36 year old?
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" What are the chances if the Vikes trade down into the 20s and pick up another second rounder that they take Linderbaum? In this scenario I'm assuming their top 3 corners are gone. We have talked a lot about their first pick being DE, DL or CB, but curious if you have heard anything different.
I don't think they'll take Linderbaum even if they trade back. The new coaching staff thinks they can get more out of Bradbury with a few schematic adjustments.
There does seem to be some support for the idea that his problems are more scheme and technique related than size and strength.
I dont know how much I can buy into that or not...
Its asking me as a fan to take a really big leap that this coaching staff is x% smarter than the previous one...
Maybe it is? We'll find out.
This refers to that anonymous OL "expert" on twitter who claimed that the Vikings IOL problems were 100% technique related. I suspect it was Mike Tice, but who knows.
But here's what maybe gives it a little bit of credence. The notion that Bradbury is small is just a myth. He's 10 pounds heavier than Jason Kelce, Corey Linsley and most other zone centers. He's also strong, finishing in the 93rd percentile in strength numbers at the combine.
I figured he was a trade candidate, but the Vikings might have other ideas. If you can fix his anchor, you might something.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" What are the chances if the Vikes trade down into the 20s and pick up another second rounder that they take Linderbaum? In this scenario I'm assuming their top 3 corners are gone. We have talked a lot about their first pick being DE, DL or CB, but curious if you have heard anything different.
I don't think they'll take Linderbaum even if they trade back. The new coaching staff thinks they can get more out of Bradbury with a few schematic adjustments.
There does seem to be some support for the idea that his problems are more scheme and technique related than size and strength.
I dont know how much I can buy into that or not...
Its asking me as a fan to take a really big leap that this coaching staff is x% smarter than the previous one...
Maybe it is? We'll find out.
This refers to that anonymous OL "expert" on twitter who claimed that the Vikings IOL problems were 100% technique related. I suspect it was Mike Tice, but who knows.
But here's what maybe gives it a little bit of credence. The notion that Bradbury is small is just a myth. He's 10 pounds heavier than Jason Kelce, Corey Linsley and most other zone centers. He's also strong, finishing in the 93rd percentile in strength numbers at the combine.
I figured he was a trade candidate, but the Vikings might have other ideas. If you can fix his anchor, you might something.
Strength at the combine is bench though...not what is the most important which is knees to core, meaning your squat and hang clean. Sure, having a nice bench amount is good to know, but you gotta have the lower body and core strength to keep pressure away. I have no idea what his marks are, but it sure seems like a strength thing to me.
Quote: @Hawkvike25 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" What are the chances if the Vikes trade down into the 20s and pick up another second rounder that they take Linderbaum? In this scenario I'm assuming their top 3 corners are gone. We have talked a lot about their first pick being DE, DL or CB, but curious if you have heard anything different.
I don't think they'll take Linderbaum even if they trade back. The new coaching staff thinks they can get more out of Bradbury with a few schematic adjustments.
There does seem to be some support for the idea that his problems are more scheme and technique related than size and strength.
I dont know how much I can buy into that or not...
Its asking me as a fan to take a really big leap that this coaching staff is x% smarter than the previous one...
Maybe it is? We'll find out.
This refers to that anonymous OL "expert" on twitter who claimed that the Vikings IOL problems were 100% technique related. I suspect it was Mike Tice, but who knows.
But here's what maybe gives it a little bit of credence. The notion that Bradbury is small is just a myth. He's 10 pounds heavier than Jason Kelce, Corey Linsley and most other zone centers. He's also strong, finishing in the 93rd percentile in strength numbers at the combine.
I figured he was a trade candidate, but the Vikings might have other ideas. If you can fix his anchor, you might something.
Strength at the combine is bench though...not what is the most important which is knees to core, meaning your squat and hang clean. Sure, having a nice bench amount is good to know, but you gotta have the lower body and core strength to keep pressure away. I have no idea what his marks are, but it sure seems like a strength thing to me.
I'm aware of that. But you can be the biggest, strongest beast on the field, but if you take a bad set that compromises your leverage, you're going to get bowled over by big nose tackles. I'm no OL coach, so I don't know what his problem is, just surmising based on what we've been hearing.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" What are the chances if the Vikes trade down into the 20s and pick up another second rounder that they take Linderbaum? In this scenario I'm assuming their top 3 corners are gone. We have talked a lot about their first pick being DE, DL or CB, but curious if you have heard anything different.
I don't think they'll take Linderbaum even if they trade back. The new coaching staff thinks they can get more out of Bradbury with a few schematic adjustments.
There does seem to be some support for the idea that his problems are more scheme and technique related than size and strength.
I dont know how much I can buy into that or not...
Its asking me as a fan to take a really big leap that this coaching staff is x% smarter than the previous one...
Maybe it is? We'll find out.
This refers to that anonymous OL "expert" on twitter who claimed that the Vikings IOL problems were 100% technique related. I suspect it was Mike Tice, but who knows.
But here's what maybe gives it a little bit of credence. The notion that Bradbury is small is just a myth. He's 10 pounds heavier than Jason Kelce, Corey Linsley and most other zone centers. He's also strong, finishing in the 93rd percentile in strength numbers at the combine.
I figured he was a trade candidate, but the Vikings might have other ideas. If you can fix his anchor, you might something.
Strength at the combine is bench though...not what is the most important which is knees to core, meaning your squat and hang clean. Sure, having a nice bench amount is good to know, but you gotta have the lower body and core strength to keep pressure away. I have no idea what his marks are, but it sure seems like a strength thing to me.
I'm aware of that. But you can be the biggest, strongest beast on the field, but if you take a bad set that compromises your leverage, you're going to get bowled over by big nose tackles. I'm no OL coach, so I don't know what his problem is, just surmising based on what we've been hearing.
Right, I'm just stating we have no idea how strong he really is based on the areas where OL need to be the strongest. The combine should switch to squat and/or hang clean for OL instead of bench.
Quote: @Hawkvike25 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" What are the chances if the Vikes trade down into the 20s and pick up another second rounder that they take Linderbaum? In this scenario I'm assuming their top 3 corners are gone. We have talked a lot about their first pick being DE, DL or CB, but curious if you have heard anything different.
I don't think they'll take Linderbaum even if they trade back. The new coaching staff thinks they can get more out of Bradbury with a few schematic adjustments.
There does seem to be some support for the idea that his problems are more scheme and technique related than size and strength.
I dont know how much I can buy into that or not...
Its asking me as a fan to take a really big leap that this coaching staff is x% smarter than the previous one...
Maybe it is? We'll find out.
This refers to that anonymous OL "expert" on twitter who claimed that the Vikings IOL problems were 100% technique related. I suspect it was Mike Tice, but who knows.
But here's what maybe gives it a little bit of credence. The notion that Bradbury is small is just a myth. He's 10 pounds heavier than Jason Kelce, Corey Linsley and most other zone centers. He's also strong, finishing in the 93rd percentile in strength numbers at the combine.
I figured he was a trade candidate, but the Vikings might have other ideas. If you can fix his anchor, you might something.
Strength at the combine is bench though...not what is the most important which is knees to core, meaning your squat and hang clean. Sure, having a nice bench amount is good to know, but you gotta have the lower body and core strength to keep pressure away. I have no idea what his marks are, but it sure seems like a strength thing to me.
I'm aware of that. But you can be the biggest, strongest beast on the field, but if you take a bad set that compromises your leverage, you're going to get bowled over by big nose tackles. I'm no OL coach, so I don't know what his problem is, just surmising based on what we've been hearing.
Right, I'm just stating we have no idea how strong he really is based on the areas where OL need to be the strongest. The combine should switch to squat and/or hang clean for OL instead of bench.
Yeah, I agree. That's been mentioned a few times.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" What are the chances if the Vikes trade down into the 20s and pick up another second rounder that they take Linderbaum? In this scenario I'm assuming their top 3 corners are gone. We have talked a lot about their first pick being DE, DL or CB, but curious if you have heard anything different.
I don't think they'll take Linderbaum even if they trade back. The new coaching staff thinks they can get more out of Bradbury with a few schematic adjustments.
There does seem to be some support for the idea that his problems are more scheme and technique related than size and strength.
Yea, I think you have been saying/advocating the same thing. It would be great if Bradburry develops with those changes.
|
