Seifert: Vikings open to trading Greenard

That would be interesting if we were to get a day 2 pick out of him. Not crazy about a day 3 pick for him, as I think he does quite a lot for Bflo.

AGRforever wrote:
That would be interesting if we were to get a day 2 pick out of him.  Not crazy about a day 3 pick for him, as I think he does quite a lot for Bflo.

He's a very tradable asset from an age, production and contract standpoint. Still has two years left on a modest deal. Pass rushers are always in demand. I'd start by calling New England and offer Greenard, our 3rd (82) for their 1st (31). I wouldn't entertain anything from teams that didn't include a 2nd round pick.

This seems closer to the truth...

Albert Breer@AlbertBreer
The Vikings' situation with OLB Jonathan Greenard is a bit complex—Greenard is seeking a market correction to his contract, per sources. He's due $19 million and would like a raise. Minnesota is comfortable with him at his current number.

The team views him as one of their best players, and won't just let him go. But if someone comes with a big offer, a deal could be had.

supafreak84 wrote:

He's a very tradable asset from an age, production and contract standpoint. Still has two years left on a modest deal. Pass rushers are always in demand. I'd start by calling New England and offer Greenard, our 3rd (82) for their 1st (31). I wouldn't entertain anything from teams that didn't include a 2nd round pick.

I think it would be a mistake to trade him just for a pick where we would have to use to try and replace him.  If we can get a couple of picks out of him and a chance to improve.  My concern is we ship him off and then the depth behind him is crapola.  Right now it's Tyler Batty and Chas Chambliss if Grenard isn't around.  

It is smart to get rid of a player a year too early then too late though, so here I am contradicting myself...I would add though, if they are going to trade him, get assets for the 2027 draft. Much better draft I think.

MaroonBells wrote:
This seems closer to the truth...

Albert Breer@AlbertBreer
The Vikings' situation with OLB Jonathan Greenard is a bit complex—Greenard is seeking a market correction to his contract, per sources. He's due $19 million and would like a raise. Minnesota is comfortable with him at his current number.

The team views him as one of their best players, and won't just let him go. But if someone comes with a big offer, a deal could be had.

Vikesrock wrote:

I think it would be a mistake to trade him just for a pick where we would have to use to try and replace him.  If we can get a couple of picks out of him and a chance to improve.  My concern is we ship him off and then the depth behind him is crapola.  Right now it's Tyler Batty and Chas Chambliss if Grenard isn't around.  

It is smart to get rid of a player a year too early then too late though, so here I am contradicting myself...I would add though, if they are going to trade him, get assets for the 2027 draft.  Much better draft I think.

I'd be very comfortable moving forward with Dallas Turner taking that spot and starting full time, but yes there would have to be some depth pieces added behind AVG and Turner. I think that might be a position where we could add a player or two in free agency on modest, backup type contracts. Maybe roll the dice on a guy like Kwite Paye who was a first round pick who hasn't lived up to expectations on his first stop? There's some names out there of interest

I would be in the "no camp"

I think he's still got plenty in the tank and I dont know where Turner's ceiling is yet.

I'll take that back quickly if someone makes an offer we cant refuse - but I dont sense that tbh.

Because of all the QB issues last year, one aspect that went under the radar was the huge difference in the defense when either Van Ginkel or Greenard were out. Turner is not close the level of either, he had looked so badly that the bar really dropped for him so anything he did remotely positive really stood out. Do not think he is nearly ready to take over.

Vikesrock wrote:

I think it would be a mistake to trade him just for a pick where we would have to use to try and replace him.  If we can get a couple of picks out of him and a chance to improve.  My concern is we ship him off and then the depth behind him is crapola.  Right now it's Tyler Batty and Chas Chambliss if Grenard isn't around.  

It is smart to get rid of a player a year too early then too late though, so here I am contradicting myself...I would add though, if they are going to trade him, get assets for the 2027 draft.  Much better draft I think.

This.  I dont want to lose Greenard.  It better be a good haul or I dont think it is worth getting rid of him.  Turner has shown flashes but I dont think he is ready to be the main dog yet

JR44 wrote:
Because of all the QB issues last year, one aspect that went under the radar was the huge difference in the defense when either Van Ginkel or Greenard were out.  Turner is not close the level of either, he had looked so badly that the bar really dropped for him so anything he did remotely positive really stood out.  Do not think he is nearly ready to take over.

To Turners defense, he is only 23 and led the team in sacks by year 2. 

So I wouldn't fault the Vikings for putting him in the starting line-up if that happens. He's doing exactly what they hoped most likely. 

That said, I still like the Turner/Gink/Greenard rotation best

I think it’s a year early for this conversation to really come into fruition.

Greenard isn’t really coming off the year where he’s forcing our hand or really earned a pay bump.
Turner isn’t really coming off a year, where you feel rock solid in his ability as he’s still near the bottom in terms of sacks
I think there’s a lot of pressure to win this year or the coaching staff might get replaced or at least be under severe scrutiny. I can’t imagine that we really want to enter the season with only two edges, one CB and a bunch of hope for every other position on defense. Like if we’re going into the 2027 offseason after drafting a DT and a LB who both balled out like the one mock draft had for us, letting Greenard go somewhere to get paid more feels much more approachable.

I’d much rather have excellent depth than save a few bucks and get an upper 3rd round pick. If someone offered a first (around 20?) or something, I’d reconsider, but I consider that unlikely.

I would not trade Greenard this year. He is our best defensive player and has a cheap deal. Of course other teams want him.

StickierBuns wrote:
This is more about Minnesota needing top compensation than actually looking for a trade. They aren't going to give him away. My money says he'll be a Viking this season.

I think it's more about Greenard wanting more money than it is us wanting to trade him.

I think if some team offered us a first and a third, he'd be out of here, but if it's a day 2 pick as reported, I doubt that happens.

I think the most likely thing is that we end up paying him more this money this year, get one more year out of him, and we'll promise him an out or a raise next year.

JR44 wrote:
Because of all the QB issues last year, one aspect that went under the radar was the huge difference in the defense when either Van Ginkel or Greenard were out.  Turner is not close the level of either, he had looked so badly that the bar really dropped for him so anything he did remotely positive really stood out.  Do not think he is nearly ready to take over.

I think Turner did fine in Greenards role, but not in Ginks.  Van Ginkel is such a diverse tool for Flores.  So I might be okay with moving Greenard if the price is right.

dadevike wrote:
I would not trade Greenard this year. He is our best defensive player and has a cheap deal. Of course other teams want him.

I think this is the problem. He wants more money and he has a case.

To me this is a no-brainer. Dallas Turner just turned 23 years old and led the team in sacks (8) and forced fumbles (4) essentially playing in a part time roll last year. You invested a lot to move up and draft him. Not only has he earned the right to start, but the team has earned the right to maximize their investment and get younger in the process by way of trading Greenard for draft picks. If I can somehow parley Greenard into a late 1st round pick or an early to mid 2nd...done deal! I know this is not the standard Wilf way of doing things, which is to let good players play through their contracts and leave for nothing, but the moron bro's need to sit this one out

StickierBuns wrote:

Yeah, I'd agree if the team could get a pick from #30 to #45 overall. Dallas Turner's best spot is exactly where and what Greenard plays. But that's probably not the comp teams are willing to give.

Greenard getting hurt probably killed the chances of getting anything 30-45 range.

purplefaithful wrote:

Greenard getting hurt probably killed the chances of getting anything 30-45 range.

I don't think so. The injury was a shoulder and not considered lingering. He's 28, and had two seasons of at least 12 sacks prior to last season. I think teams are waiting to see what happens with Maxx Crosby, but once that is settled, the Greenard market could and should heat up. There are a handful of playoff teams last year in desperate need of pass rush help so there will be a market

StickierBuns wrote:

Yeah, I'd agree if the team could get a pick from #30 to #45 overall. Dallas Turner's best spot is exactly where and what Greenard plays. But that's probably not the comp teams are willing to give.

Yeah, I am all for keeping him unless the return is really good.

Pete thinks Greenard is our best defender.  He isn't far off.  Good character, good quiet leader, hustles, makes plays.  

https://www.vikings.com/video/film-room-breaking-down-jonathan-greenard-s-highlights-from-2025-season

Season Age Team Lg Pos G GS Int Yds IntTD Lng PD FF Fmb FR Yds FRTD Sk Comb Solo Ast TFL QBHits
2024 21 MIN NFL OLB 16 0 1 4 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 3.0 20 12 8 3 5
2025 22 MIN NFL OLB 17 10 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 8.0 66 29 37 11 15

Season Age Team Lg Pos G GS Int Yds IntTD Lng PD FF Fmb FR Yds FRTD Sk Comb Solo Ast TFL QBHits
2024 27 MIN NFL ROLB 17 17 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 12.0 59 41 18 18 22
2025 28 MIN NFL OLB 12 10 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 3.0 38 19 19 10 12


Turner is growing up and should continue to improve, but he isnt a replacement for JG yet IMO and we will likely see that if we go full time Turner. I think that unless we want to add OLB/DE to our needs list, we should hang onto JG unless they are not serious about making a deep run in 26.

EDIT: Sorry, the stats display fine in my reply box.