The Vikings have three more days to decide what to do with Danielle Hunter before he's due $18 million. Both a trade and a re-structured contract remain options.
Quote: @JustinTime18™ said:
@ Rigby said:
First really large test for Kwesi. If he moves Hunter for below value...an exceptionally bad sign for the future.
Or, is it indicative of an incredibly strong edge draft class?
Definitely this but draftees are just as likely to bust. I think his recent injuries give the most pause.
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@ JustinTime18™ said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
This is what, the third straight year we have had offseason struggles with Danielle and his contract? News that his agent is being unreasonable and his upset about losing Dre. Trade him then as the dude does not wanna be in Minnesota and he’s already benefitted enough the last two years without hardly playing. Get a great return, draft one of these DE’s early and let’s move on
But it's the exact same with your boy Cousins, and we'll be dealing with his contract shit again next offseason with no long term solution in play. Hard to believe that we continue to let Cousins bend us over a barrel with his contract at the expense of losing guys like Hunter, who we can't find the money to pay. Hunter is 27, had more sacks before the age of 25 then anybody in NFL history, had 6 sacks in seven games last season before tearing his pec. He's a freak and an elite pass rusher. The injuries the last two seasons have been unfortunate weird injuries. I absolutely do not think he's "injury prone" because he's been fine the 5 years prior. Huge mistake trading Hunter so they could pay and extend Kirk for one more season
You're not obsessed? This thread is about Hunter. First thing you bring up is Cousins.
Only as it relates to the team choosing to continue re-signing Cousins to big money on short term extensions at the expense of losing or having to move other players such as Hunter. I'm not in the camp that believes thats in the best interest of the team and will never be in that camp. Hunter is still only 27 and elite when healthy. I'd rather gamble on Hunter's health and pay him over ever believing Cousins will be elite and continuing to pay him.
Your premise is correct only if Cousins' contract led to the unexpected loss of Hunter. I'd say it's a huge leap in logic to make that case.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Skodin said:
Send him to KC or Tenn for their 1st round pick and get over it.
He doesn't want to be here, the window on that group has closed. The Cousins signing was a debacle and will continue to be.
Sign Tretter with Adam and Harrison's money.
Take a 1st and cap room (resign Barr). Draft DE - CB - DT in BPA in the first 55 picks (Davis - Elam - Mafe)
Davis-Phillips-Tomlinson
Barr-Kendricks-Hicks-Mafe
Elam-Smith-Bynum-Dantzler
Can this defense be middle of the road? Can the 16th best defense in the league be enough for an offense loaded with weapons and a real anchor at Center, two studs at tackle?
i tend to agree, with the exception of Barr, to many unknowns with that knee IMO. Barr has only played 2 complete seasons in his 8 years in the league, and neither of those were in the last 4 years, the same arguments for trading off Hunter apply to Barr IMO.
Geez, if we come out of this month recommitted to Kirk and Barr and shipping out Hunter that would be the exact opposite of what I wanted or expected. Just saying
Happy we are keeping Theilan and Harry.
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ pattersaur said:
Unfortunately, the fact this news is out and not just a trade being announced tells me that our haul won’t be that big for him, if any. Hopefully I’m wrong and time will tell but nothing says, “we value this guy” quite like “we’re actively shopping him!”
I cant see how we get more then the Bears got for Mack.
Age and trajectory. But I do think we're all going to be disappointed when we see the return. I could be wrong, but I think the Vikings might've waited too long. I think they would've gotten more if they'd traded him as soon as they knew they were going to a 3-4.
Right now we have a hard deadline coming in three days and everyone knows it. Those deadlines typically come with a poor offer from a team who wants to avoid competing with other teams. Hunter's injuries and contract are not helping.
I agree, I dont see a DH trade happening...
I also think someone of his athleticism and age could be quite effective in a 3/4
Yeah, I don't know. He seems an odd fit to me, but I could be wrong about that.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ pattersaur said:
Unfortunately, the fact this news is out and not just a trade being announced tells me that our haul won’t be that big for him, if any. Hopefully I’m wrong and time will tell but nothing says, “we value this guy” quite like “we’re actively shopping him!”
I cant see how we get more then the Bears got for Mack.
Age and trajectory. But I do think we're all going to be disappointed when we see the return. I could be wrong, but I think the Vikings might've waited too long. I think they would've gotten more if they'd traded him as soon as they knew they were going to a 3-4.
Right now we have a hard deadline coming in three days and everyone knows it. Those deadlines typically come with a poor offer from a team who wants to avoid competing with other teams. Hunter's injuries and contract are not helping.
I agree, I dont see a DH trade happening...
I also think someone of his athleticism and age could be quite effective in a 3/4
Yeah, I don't know. He seems an odd fit to me, but I could be wrong about that.
same here, IMO his biggest asset is his explosive quickness in the short area out of that 3 point stance, OL have to respect that and as such leave themselves open to his quick attack moves, he will still have his quickness, but will it be as effective when he is standing up and operating from a little more space typically and not right in their business at the snap?
Quote: @mgobluevikes said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ JustinTime18™ said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ Hawkvike25 said:
This is what, the third straight year we have had offseason struggles with Danielle and his contract? News that his agent is being unreasonable and his upset about losing Dre. Trade him then as the dude does not wanna be in Minnesota and he’s already benefitted enough the last two years without hardly playing. Get a great return, draft one of these DE’s early and let’s move on
But it's the exact same with your boy Cousins, and we'll be dealing with his contract shit again next offseason with no long term solution in play. Hard to believe that we continue to let Cousins bend us over a barrel with his contract at the expense of losing guys like Hunter, who we can't find the money to pay. Hunter is 27, had more sacks before the age of 25 then anybody in NFL history, had 6 sacks in seven games last season before tearing his pec. He's a freak and an elite pass rusher. The injuries the last two seasons have been unfortunate weird injuries. I absolutely do not think he's "injury prone" because he's been fine the 5 years prior. Huge mistake trading Hunter so they could pay and extend Kirk for one more season
You're not obsessed? This thread is about Hunter. First thing you bring up is Cousins.
Only as it relates to the team choosing to continue re-signing Cousins to big money on short term extensions at the expense of losing or having to move other players such as Hunter. I'm not in the camp that believes thats in the best interest of the team and will never be in that camp. Hunter is still only 27 and elite when healthy. I'd rather gamble on Hunter's health and pay him over ever believing Cousins will be elite and continuing to pay him.
Your premise is correct only if Cousins' contract led to the unexpected loss of Hunter. I'd say it's a huge leap in logic to make that case.
Yes and considering they were the two biggest domino's to figure out from a cap standpoint its a reasonable assumption to conclude if they weren't paying and extending Cousins they'd have more flexibility in retaining Hunter.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ pattersaur said:
Unfortunately, the fact this news is out and not just a trade being announced tells me that our haul won’t be that big for him, if any. Hopefully I’m wrong and time will tell but nothing says, “we value this guy” quite like “we’re actively shopping him!”
I cant see how we get more then the Bears got for Mack.
Age and trajectory. But I do think we're all going to be disappointed when we see the return. I could be wrong, but I think the Vikings might've waited too long. I think they would've gotten more if they'd traded him as soon as they knew they were going to a 3-4.
Right now we have a hard deadline coming in three days and everyone knows it. Those deadlines typically come with a poor offer from a team who wants to avoid competing with other teams. Hunter's injuries and contract are not helping.
I agree, I dont see a DH trade happening...
I also think someone of his athleticism and age could be quite effective in a 3/4
Yeah, I don't know. He seems an odd fit to me, but I could be wrong about that.
same here, IMO his biggest asset is his explosive quickness in the short area out of that 3 point stance, OL have to respect that and as such leave themselves open to his quick attack moves, he will still have his quickness, but will it be as effective when he is standing up and operating from a little more space typically and not right in their business at the snap?
Same. His strengths seem to be converting speed to power, hand fighting, etc. That translates to OLB, but maybe not as directly. Vikings have been a 4-3 for so long, I don't know that much about the ins and outs of the 3-4 OLB.
I am thinking if they are looking at a trade that Hunter doesn't want to restructure. If that is the case, he has to go. I don't like it but something has got to give.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ pattersaur said:
Unfortunately, the fact this news is out and not just a trade being announced tells me that our haul won’t be that big for him, if any. Hopefully I’m wrong and time will tell but nothing says, “we value this guy” quite like “we’re actively shopping him!”
I cant see how we get more then the Bears got for Mack.
Age and trajectory. But I do think we're all going to be disappointed when we see the return. I could be wrong, but I think the Vikings might've waited too long. I think they would've gotten more if they'd traded him as soon as they knew they were going to a 3-4.
Right now we have a hard deadline coming in three days and everyone knows it. Those deadlines typically come with a poor offer from a team who wants to avoid competing with other teams. Hunter's injuries and contract are not helping.
I agree, I dont see a DH trade happening...
I also think someone of his athleticism and age could be quite effective in a 3/4
Yeah, I don't know. He seems an odd fit to me, but I could be wrong about that.
same here, IMO his biggest asset is his explosive quickness in the short area out of that 3 point stance, OL have to respect that and as such leave themselves open to his quick attack moves, he will still have his quickness, but will it be as effective when he is standing up and operating from a little more space typically and not right in their business at the snap?
Same. His strengths seem to be converting speed to power, hand fighting, etc. That translates to OLB, but maybe not as directly. Vikings have been a 4-3 for so long, I don't know that much about the ins and outs of the 3-4 OLB.
Agree, when I compare Hunter to Mack I think Hunter is the better pure pass rusher but Mack is the better at run/contain etc.. Mack has played in the 3-4 as well and I think the Chargers area 3-4, right? The age difference is what makes a decent difference to me. I just hope if we are forced to trade him we don't get fleeced. Fleeced for me would be a 3rd rounder or later and that's it.
|
