Quote: @medaille said:
I don’t know how much of it is modeling the rams, and how
much of it is just the way the league as a whole is trending. The RB position as a whole is just dramatically
devalued and there’s big names still unsigned.
Agreed.
Quote: @medaille said:
I don’t know how much of it is modeling the rams, and how
much of it is just the way the league as a whole is trending. The RB position as a whole is just dramatically
devalued and there’s big names still unsigned.
RBs seem more likely to get dinged and miss time, their careers are typically shorter than other positions, and the difference between a top guy and the next tier down in money is not enough to justify the cap space unless you are flush with cap and really need a RB. A team that has as many holes as the Vikings do cant justify paying top tier RB money when their defense cant really put them into a position to try and win with a running game.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ medaille said:
I don’t know how much of it is modeling the rams, and how
much of it is just the way the league as a whole is trending. The RB position as a whole is just dramatically
devalued and there’s big names still unsigned.
RBs seem more likely to get dinged and miss time, their careers are typically shorter than other positions, and the difference between a top guy and the next tier down in money is not enough to justify the cap space unless you are flush with cap and really need a RB. A team that has as many holes as the Vikings do cant justify paying top tier RB money when their defense cant really put them into a position to try and win with a running game.
I'm a big Cook fan, but have been preaching from the same hymnal. They have to toss $ at the D and they have some big re-signings in the not too distant future. VOR (as @MB noted) is the way this has to be managed.
I think someone posted in another thread a list of the starting RB's on the teams that won the past # of SuperBowls. You just dont need to be paying Cook or S. Barkley $ at the position to win it all.
Not anymore and not in this era of how the game is played and regulated.
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ JR44 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Of course Cook impacts the game. But it's about value over replacement (VOR). In today's game, RB (along with guard, ILB, Safety, etc) isn't considered a premium position (QB, WR, OT, OLB, CB).
IOW, replacing Cook with Mattison doesn't negatively impact fortunes as much as, say, Cousins with Mullens (an extreme example), Jefferson with KJO or Hunter with Wonnum.
I think the devaluing of the RB is a narrative that is changing and that it is truly a premium position, this past draft we had two RBs taken in the top 12. I really like Mattison, he is a solid RB, but I do see a significant drop in the sense that he doesn't change the game like Cook, who is a home run hitter who can take it to the house at any time. I can think of several games last year starting with Buffalo that we do not win without Cook suddenly shifting the game. Cook also impacts the game without the ball, defenses have to account for him on every play and have to game plan around him, which I think has greatly benefitted Jefferson. If we are talking Mattison and Chandler, yes, but I think Cook is being really undervalued in what he brings to the game, also consider he is only 27 and played in every game last year. I just think in terms of your point regarding where we are getting the most impact for the money, my feeling is I would have rather used the money that we gave to a blocking TE to help keep Cook.
This...×1000
I think turning us into the Midwest Rams is a mistake. I've heard a lot of very smart people on NFL Radio over the last few weeks who universally consider it a mistake getting rid of Dalvin Cook and don't really understand the move if we are trying to compete next season. I feel the same
I'm not convinced the local, ink stained wretch got the Ram parallel right
KOC is trying to replicate the Ram formula to a tee. 3-4 defense-check, quarterback dominate throw the ball all over the field offense-check, running back by committee and essentially an afterthought-check. You could not flip a team more from what they were if you tried. We went from a defense dominant 4-3, a ball control run dominant offense that utilized play action as a strength, to all the changes we have become.
Those days were a few years gone when KOC got hear. I loved Zimmer's D, but without intelligent, decent DBs, his defense wasn't holding up. And the dominant offense wasn't there either.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ supafreak84 said:
@ JR44 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Of course Cook impacts the game. But it's about value over replacement (VOR). In today's game, RB (along with guard, ILB, Safety, etc) isn't considered a premium position (QB, WR, OT, OLB, CB).
IOW, replacing Cook with Mattison doesn't negatively impact fortunes as much as, say, Cousins with Mullens (an extreme example), Jefferson with KJO or Hunter with Wonnum.
I think the devaluing of the RB is a narrative that is changing and that it is truly a premium position, this past draft we had two RBs taken in the top 12. I really like Mattison, he is a solid RB, but I do see a significant drop in the sense that he doesn't change the game like Cook, who is a home run hitter who can take it to the house at any time. I can think of several games last year starting with Buffalo that we do not win without Cook suddenly shifting the game. Cook also impacts the game without the ball, defenses have to account for him on every play and have to game plan around him, which I think has greatly benefitted Jefferson. If we are talking Mattison and Chandler, yes, but I think Cook is being really undervalued in what he brings to the game, also consider he is only 27 and played in every game last year. I just think in terms of your point regarding where we are getting the most impact for the money, my feeling is I would have rather used the money that we gave to a blocking TE to help keep Cook.
This...×1000
I think turning us into the Midwest Rams is a mistake. I've heard a lot of very smart people on NFL Radio over the last few weeks who universally consider it a mistake getting rid of Dalvin Cook and don't really understand the move if we are trying to compete next season. I feel the same
I'm not convinced the local, ink stained wretch got the Ram parallel right
KOC is trying to replicate the Ram formula to a tee. 3-4 defense-check, quarterback dominate throw the ball all over the field offense-check, running back by committee and essentially an afterthought-check. You could not flip a team more from what they were if you tried. We went from a defense dominant 4-3, a ball control run dominant offense that utilized play action as a strength, to all the changes we have become.
Those days were a few years gone when KOC got hear. I loved Zimmer's D, but without intelligent, decent DBs, his defense wasn't holding up. And the dominant offense wasn't there either.
IMO it was the DL that made Zimmers D flow, especially the interior DL that made running the ball very difficult early on when LJ was still in his prime, teams that abandoned the run then had to deal with a relentless pass rush from Griff and BRob, as well as those blitzes that Zim liked to send. Yes the DBs were better, but their job was made much easier by the work of that front 4-6/7.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ medaille said:
I don’t know how much of it is modeling the rams, and how
much of it is just the way the league as a whole is trending. The RB position as a whole is just dramatically
devalued and there’s big names still unsigned.
RBs seem more likely to get dinged and miss time, their careers are typically shorter than other positions, and the difference between a top guy and the next tier down in money is not enough to justify the cap space unless you are flush with cap and really need a RB. A team that has as many holes as the Vikings do cant justify paying top tier RB money when their defense cant really put them into a position to try and win with a running game.
But then how do we justify giving a blocking TE with almost zero receiving stats, a 21 million dollar contract as our first order of free agency? Lol. Why not just use that money to retain Dalvin Cook, who does more for this offense, and honor the contract we signed him to? I just think if we are trying to compete this year, it makes zero sense to get rid of Dalvin Cook, and that's the sentiment of a lot of smart people I've heard on NFL Radio talking about it the last few weeks.
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ medaille said:
I don’t know how much of it is modeling the rams, and how
much of it is just the way the league as a whole is trending. The RB position as a whole is just dramatically
devalued and there’s big names still unsigned.
RBs seem more likely to get dinged and miss time, their careers are typically shorter than other positions, and the difference between a top guy and the next tier down in money is not enough to justify the cap space unless you are flush with cap and really need a RB. A team that has as many holes as the Vikings do cant justify paying top tier RB money when their defense cant really put them into a position to try and win with a running game.
But then how do we justify giving a blocking TE with almost zero receiving stats, a 21 million dollar contract as our first order of free agency? Lol. Why not just use that money to retain Dalvin Cook, who does more for this offense, and honor the contract we signed him to? I just think if we are trying to compete this year, it makes zero sense to get rid of Dalvin Cook, and that's the sentiment of a lot of smart people I've heard on NFL Radio talking about it the last few weeks.
I never said that made sense, but if you think that guy will enhance a running game, then he brings value to all parts of that running game, not just Cook so maybe there is a bigger plan in place? I dont think we are going to compete this year with or without Cook, but if you think a TE can help you long term, at that point in the future where the D is rounded into place, then I have no issue with the signing, nor any issue with moving on from Cook who is likely at the pinnacle of his game and wont likely be able to maintain this level of play.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ supafreak84 said:
KOC is trying to replicate the Ram formula to a tee. 3-4 defense-check, quarterback dominate throw the ball all over the field offense-check, running back by committee and essentially an afterthought-check. You could not flip a team more from what they were if you tried. We went from a defense dominant 4-3, a ball control run dominant offense that utilized play action as a strength, to all the changes we have become.
Those days were a few years gone when KOC got hear. I loved Zimmer's D, but without intelligent, decent DBs, his defense wasn't holding up. And the dominant offense wasn't there either.
IMO it was the DL that made Zimmers D flow, especially the interior DL that made running the ball very difficult early on when LJ was still in his prime, teams that abandoned the run then had to deal with a relentless pass rush from Griff and BRob, as well as those blitzes that Zim liked to send. Yes the DBs were better, but their job was made much easier by the work of that front 4-6/7.
Pass rush and coverage go hand in hand. Having DBs that could understand his route matching coverage and play within the scheme meant he could dial up different pressures. Having DEs that could get after the QB in different ways made the DBs job easier, or at least shorter.
Having LJ up front on early downs made it that much more fun on 3rd and long. They all worked together. But the dam busted when he lost X, Waynes and Mac all the same year.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ greediron said:
@ supafreak84 said:
KOC is trying to replicate the Ram formula to a tee. 3-4 defense-check, quarterback dominate throw the ball all over the field offense-check, running back by committee and essentially an afterthought-check. You could not flip a team more from what they were if you tried. We went from a defense dominant 4-3, a ball control run dominant offense that utilized play action as a strength, to all the changes we have become.
Those days were a few years gone when KOC got hear. I loved Zimmer's D, but without intelligent, decent DBs, his defense wasn't holding up. And the dominant offense wasn't there either.
IMO it was the DL that made Zimmers D flow, especially the interior DL that made running the ball very difficult early on when LJ was still in his prime, teams that abandoned the run then had to deal with a relentless pass rush from Griff and BRob, as well as those blitzes that Zim liked to send. Yes the DBs were better, but their job was made much easier by the work of that front 4-6/7.
Pass rush and coverage go hand in hand. Having DBs that could understand his route matching coverage and play within the scheme meant he could dial up different pressures. Having DEs that could get after the QB in different ways made the DBs job easier, or at least shorter.
Having LJ up front on early downs made it that much more fun on 3rd and long. They all worked together. But the dam busted when he lost X, Waynes and Mac all the same year.
I would argue they never did an adequate job replacing Shariff Floyd.
Report: If Dalvin Cook is released, Miami is a “real possibility” Posted by Mike Florio on June 3, 2023, 10:00 AM EDT Posted by Mike Florio on The Dolphins and Dalvin Cook has been linked for weeks. Weeks from now, will Cook be a Dolphin?
The question comes down to whether the Vikings can find a trade partner for Cook; ideally, one that will pay Cook the full $10.4 million he’s due to make this year.
If the Vikings can’t find someone else to pay him that amount and if they won’t pay it themselves, Cook would be cut and then possibly signed by the Dolphins.
Via Barry Jackson of the Miami Herald, Cook to the Dolphins is “ certainly a real possibility” if he’s cut.
A trade also would be possible if Cook would reduce his deal to something the Dolphins would accept, but why would he agree to do anything at this point? He should hold firm and, if necessary, force the Vikings to release him.
The question becomes when a release would happen. Cook continues to be absent from offseason workouts, following shoulder surgery. If/when he reports for training camp, the Vikings would risk Cook suffering an injury that would make it difficult, and possibly impossible, to release him and avoid the $10.4 million obligation.
Currently, $2 million of his salary is fully guaranteed, subject to offset. The rest of it becomes fully guaranteed as of Week One.
The Vikings seem to be determined to shed the eight-figure obligation to Cook. But how about this approach? If he’s willing to do a simple restructuring as long as he gets his $10.4 million, maybe the Vikings should do one, reducing his cap number and keeping him around for another year.
Maybe the Vikings are willing to go cheap at the position and sacrifice a home-run hitter like Cook because they’re still in the perpetual purple purgatory of “just good enough is just good enough.” Maybe they don’t think Cook can be the difference between another one-and-done postseason and a Super Bowl run.
Maybe they’re right about that. It would be sad for them to accept that fate pre-emptively.
Anything can happen in a football season, and the Vikings are in the second tier of contending teams in the NFC. If the Eagles and 49ers regress, the Vikings would have a chance to go deep into January — especially if their defense is simply a little bit better than the disaster that it was during last year’s 13-4 season.
So, yes, it’s not unreasonable to think that, with a healthy Dalvin Cook, the Vikings would have an outside chance to get back to the Super Bowl and lose, for the first time since 1976.
UPDATE 11:02 a.m. ET: Per a league source, the Vikings have the contractual right to do a restructuring of the Cook deal, if they want.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/06/03/report-if-dalvin-cook-is-released-miami-is-a-real-possibility/
|
