Sorry I meant that NE is interested in Ant Harris. I should have clearer on that.
Quote: @VikeMike52 said:
Just read another unsubstantiated rumor that the Patriots are very interested in him. Could it be Harris for Thuney? Both are tag and trade candidates valued at around 3rd round value.
What I know. Do the Vikings have some level of interest in Thuney? Yes. Does it involve trading Ant straight up for Thuney.. ehhh, maybe not.
I figured, there are alot of floating around right now.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
Maybe they will stupidly give Cook a massive extension with that money?
You should probably just get used to it. Cook is a part of this.
I never post what I think they will do. I usually post what I would do. Paying Cook big bucks does not seem like a good idea.
What would you offer him if you were GM and what are the chances you think he would accept your offer?
I like that you specify whether you're predicting the Vikings' actual actions or what you would recommend- too often we don't distinguish the two.
If it were me, I would ask him to play in 2020 on the contract he signed, and show us a full season of health and productivity. There are too many examples of teams losing piles of money by overpaying RBs (Todd Gurley, David Johnson, Jerrick McKinnon), NFL teams are not fighting to sign RBs, and a hallmark of the Gary Kubiak offense is running success without a premier RB. Cook wouldn't like that, but what are his options? Holding out and demanding a trade achieved nothing for Melvin Gordon last year. Besides, holding out is a weakened threat if the NFL season might be delayed or even canceled.
Whether or not they extend Cook, Vikings should pick another RB in the draft - maybe Darrynton Evans in the 3rd.
But I think the Vikings will give Cook a large extension soon.
I agree with you. The only thing I would say is that the market already knows about the "RB problem." You can argue about overpaying Gurley, McKinnon, etc., But the "problem" is already baked into their contracts. Last time I checked, among the top 50 highest paid players in the NFL, only 1 was a running back.
This also spells out how RBs were the biggest losers with the new CBA. But analytics as a whole have really poked quite a few holes in the value of running backs, even those on rookie contracts. At the end of the day the value is in the O-line, and scheme. Regardless of how talented you are as a player what happens before you touch the ball has the most bearing on the outcome of the play.
I agree...to a degree. It would be a big mistake to discount how good Cook really is. Because the way you have it painted here, the Vikings already have one of the best offensive lines in the NFL.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ VikeMike52 said:
Just read another unsubstantiated rumor that the Patriots are very interested in him. Could it be Harris for Thuney? Both are tag and trade candidates valued at around 3rd round value.
What I know. Do the Vikings have some level of interest in Thuney? Yes. Does it involve trading Ant straight up for Thuney.. ehhh, maybe not.
So... either we don't want to trade Harris for Thuney... or it's not enough (for one of the teams)? Any idea what the plan is for Harris? PA said yesterday that our best hope is for a 5th rounder for him. Is that how you see it?
Quote: @pumpf said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ VikeMike52 said:
Just read another unsubstantiated rumor that the Patriots are very interested in him. Could it be Harris for Thuney? Both are tag and trade candidates valued at around 3rd round value.
What I know. Do the Vikings have some level of interest in Thuney? Yes. Does it involve trading Ant straight up for Thuney.. ehhh, maybe not.
So... either we don't want to trade Harris for Thuney... or it's not enough (for one of the teams)? Any idea what the plan is for Harris? PA said yesterday that our best hope is for a 5th rounder for him. Is that how you see it?
I turn in my Viking fan card if that went down for a 5th rounder...
Quote: @pumpf said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ VikeMike52 said:
Just read another unsubstantiated rumor that the Patriots are very interested in him. Could it be Harris for Thuney? Both are tag and trade candidates valued at around 3rd round value.
What I know. Do the Vikings have some level of interest in Thuney? Yes. Does it involve trading Ant straight up for Thuney.. ehhh, maybe not.
So... either we don't want to trade Harris for Thuney... or it's not enough (for one of the teams)? Any idea what the plan is for Harris? PA said yesterday that our best hope is for a 5th rounder for him. Is that how you see it?
PA also was going on an on about how Hunter "took one for the team" and restructured his deal... from what I have heard it wasnt anything Hunter actually did, it didnt cost him a dime, it simply moved money from this cap year to the future, but it was in the prorated bonus department so it doesnt affect him at all.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
Maybe they will stupidly give Cook a massive extension with that money?
You should probably just get used to it. Cook is a part of this.
I never post what I think they will do. I usually post what I would do. Paying Cook big bucks does not seem like a good idea.
What would you offer him if you were GM and what are the chances you think he would accept your offer?
I like that you specify whether you're predicting the Vikings' actual actions or what you would recommend- too often we don't distinguish the two.
If it were me, I would ask him to play in 2020 on the contract he signed, and show us a full season of health and productivity. There are too many examples of teams losing piles of money by overpaying RBs (Todd Gurley, David Johnson, Jerrick McKinnon), NFL teams are not fighting to sign RBs, and a hallmark of the Gary Kubiak offense is running success without a premier RB. Cook wouldn't like that, but what are his options? Holding out and demanding a trade achieved nothing for Melvin Gordon last year. Besides, holding out is a weakened threat if the NFL season might be delayed or even canceled.
Whether or not they extend Cook, Vikings should pick another RB in the draft - maybe Darrynton Evans in the 3rd.
But I think the Vikings will give Cook a large extension soon.
I agree with you. The only thing I would say is that the market already knows about the "RB problem." You can argue about overpaying Gurley, McKinnon, etc., But the "problem" is already baked into their contracts. Last time I checked, among the top 50 highest paid players in the NFL, only 1 was a running back.
This also spells out how RBs were the biggest losers with the new CBA. But analytics as a whole have really poked quite a few holes in the value of running backs, even those on rookie contracts. At the end of the day the value is in the O-line, and scheme. Regardless of how talented you are as a player what happens before you touch the ball has the most bearing on the outcome of the play.
I agree...to a degree. It would be a big mistake to discount how good Cook really is. Because the way you have it painted here, the Vikings already have one of the best offensive lines in the NFL.
I agree with that. I should have clarified that it shouldn't discount how good Cook is. But the core idea would be to spend more on the O-line than it would be to spend big on a Cook extension.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
Maybe they will stupidly give Cook a massive extension with that money?
You should probably just get used to it. Cook is a part of this.
I never post what I think they will do. I usually post what I would do. Paying Cook big bucks does not seem like a good idea.
What would you offer him if you were GM and what are the chances you think he would accept your offer?
I like that you specify whether you're predicting the Vikings' actual actions or what you would recommend- too often we don't distinguish the two.
If it were me, I would ask him to play in 2020 on the contract he signed, and show us a full season of health and productivity. There are too many examples of teams losing piles of money by overpaying RBs (Todd Gurley, David Johnson, Jerrick McKinnon), NFL teams are not fighting to sign RBs, and a hallmark of the Gary Kubiak offense is running success without a premier RB. Cook wouldn't like that, but what are his options? Holding out and demanding a trade achieved nothing for Melvin Gordon last year. Besides, holding out is a weakened threat if the NFL season might be delayed or even canceled.
Whether or not they extend Cook, Vikings should pick another RB in the draft - maybe Darrynton Evans in the 3rd.
But I think the Vikings will give Cook a large extension soon.
I agree with you. The only thing I would say is that the market already knows about the "RB problem." You can argue about overpaying Gurley, McKinnon, etc., But the "problem" is already baked into their contracts. Last time I checked, among the top 50 highest paid players in the NFL, only 1 was a running back.
This also spells out how RBs were the biggest losers with the new CBA. But analytics as a whole have really poked quite a few holes in the value of running backs, even those on rookie contracts. At the end of the day the value is in the O-line, and scheme. Regardless of how talented you are as a player what happens before you touch the ball has the most bearing on the outcome of the play.
I agree...to a degree. It would be a big mistake to discount how good Cook really is. Because the way you have it painted here, the Vikings already have one of the best offensive lines in the NFL.
I agree with that. I should have clarified that it shouldn't discount how good Cook is. But the core idea would be to spend more on the O-line than it would be to spend big on a Cook extension.
Yes, because a good offensive line can make both Cook and Cousins go. And as we've seen in other Kubiak offenses, it can make average backs very good.
The more I think about it, the more I would love to turn an abundance of safeties into OL help. That's one less position we have to address in the draft. If you draft your safety in the 2nd round, you have two 1st rounders to address 3T, CB or WR.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
Yes, because a good offensive line can make both Cook and Cousins go. And as we've seen in other Kubiak offenses, it can make average backs very good.
The more I think about it, the more I would love to turn an abundance of safeties into OL help. That's one less position we have to address in the draft. If you draft your safety in the 2nd round, you have two 1st rounders to address 3T, CB or WR.
Keep talkin', MB. You're starting to turn my opinion.
|
