Cook and Mattison have become the league’s most explosive RB duo

The Mattison pick was almost universally panned in post-Draft stories. How you like dem apples? 

100 carries, 462 yards and a TD. The Vikings have to be ecstatic over this kind of production in a limited rookie role. 

Mattison would be a starter on many teams.  

Boone has some serious hops too.  Like to see him more than Abdullah as a change of pace.

The million dollar question becomes do you pay Cook to stay when his contract is up or do you roll with Mattison as your back and draft a replacement. 

@"AGRforever" said: The million dollar question becomes do you pay Cook to stay when his contract is up or do you roll with Mattison as your back and draft a replacement. 

You trade him to Dallas for a few first round picks, a starting OL and maybe a cornerback.  

@"AGRforever" said: The million dollar question becomes do you pay Cook to stay when his contract is up or do you roll with Mattison as your back and draft a replacement. 

I pay him. Mattison is good, but Dalvin is special. The salary puzzle will look a lot different then. I maybe trade Mattison and promote Boone. Considering where Dalvin and Alexander will be in terms of salary outlook, you could almost get as much for Mattison. Teams love (and will pay for) young players who aren't due to make money for a couple of years and has the perceived upside of a player behind another player. 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"AGRforever" said: The million dollar question becomes do you pay Cook to stay when his contract is up or do you roll with Mattison as your back and draft a replacement. 

I pay him. Mattison is good, but Dalvin is special. The salary puzzle will look a lot different then. I maybe trade Mattison and promote Boone. Considering where Dalvin and Alexander will be in terms of salary outlook, you could almost get as much for Mattison. Teams love (and will pay for) young players who aren't due to make money for a couple of years and has the perceived upside of a player behind another player. 

Cook's injury history is somewhat concerning.  But if he's healthy, there's none better, IMHO.

No clue. But we'll have a better idea next season when we have to make a decision. Generally, backs aren't worth as much as other positions, especially when you consider how many late round and undrafted runners are making an impact in the NFL. We'll see a another one this weekend in Austin Ekeler. And you don't replace Mattison with an unproven draft pick, you replace him with Mike Boone.

Look, I don't want to get rid of Mattison any more than anyone else. Just think if you're going to trade someone, it's him not Dalvin.  

@"A1Janitor" said:

@"AGRforever" said: The million dollar question becomes do you pay Cook to stay when his contract is up or do you roll with Mattison as your back and draft a replacement. 

You trade him to Dallas for a few first round picks, a starting OL and maybe a cornerback.  

Perfect marriage of scheme and skill...

@"StickyBun" said: The Mattison pick was almost universally panned in post-Draft stories. How you like dem apples? 

100 carries, 462 yards and a TD. The Vikings have to be ecstatic over this kind of production in a limited rookie role. 

Not in my universe.

:)

@"Ralphie" said: Cook's injury history is somewhat concerning.  But if he's healthy, there's none better, IMHO.

I can't believe you're the only person to say this, and Cook was discussed this afternoon on 1500 as a likely candidate for a new contract this offseason, again without mention of his injury history. He missed most of 2017, was hampered through most of 2018, and now he's hurt again - he's been averaging under 4 ypc since week 8 and very pedestrian since the Dallas game. Todd Gurley, David Johnson, Devonta Freeman - 3 RBs given huge contracts now diminished by injury and killing their teams' salary caps.

Cook has done great this year - but use him up and move on. Isn't it a feature of the Kubiak blocking system that you can plug in above-average RBs and still get production?

right cooks injury history makes me take a step back and really think about how much of the teams cap you want to use on him 

They're both 3-down backs that can block. 

Uncommon and difficult to defend. 

When they bash defenses in the 4th quarter. it's fun to watch.

Mattison brings a load.  He's no fun for LBs who are the same size to tackle.  I shamefully really like Seattle's duo, as well.

@"kahsmick" said: Mattison brings a load.  He's no fun for LBs who are the same size to tackle.  I shamefully really like Seattle's duo, as well.

I know a better one. We'll see them this Sunday. 

@"StickyBun" said: The Mattison pick was almost universally panned in post-Draft stories. How you like dem apples? 

100 carries, 462 yards and a TD. The Vikings have to be ecstatic over this kind of production in a limited rookie role. 

And rightfully so at the time. The near-universal consensus was that he would be available well into the 4th Round.

Minnesota traded down in the 3rd a bunch of times to pick a guy that would have been available the next day anyway. 

When analyzing the Draft right after it's over the ONLY thing you can do is look at consensus rankings and projections versus where the player was taken.

Really, post-Draft grades are a complete crapshoot because nobody knows how that 7th Round chubby QB from Michigan will pan out. What, he went on to win 6 Superbowls?

But we want some validation as fans that our team did a good job and we want it the second the Draft ends. So you get grades that are only able to operate based on projections. 

That's why I enjoy the Re-Drafts so much. Diggs goes from 5th to 1st Round. Hunter from 3rd to maybe overall #1 pick. Mattison is proving he should have gone in the 2nd already.

But it's not fair to use hindsight to criticize a fundamentally flawed grading system IMO.