Jump to content

Krauser

Veteran Members
  • Content count

    5,634
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Krauser last won the day on April 30 2018

Krauser had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,644 All-Pro
  1. ...which was written and originally recorded by LL Cool J, who’s from New York.
  2. Vikings by the Numbers

    Oh please. Extra points were 10 yard kicks for most of his career. He hit less than half his FGs from beyond 40 yards (53/159 career), and almost none from beyond 50 (2/24). The credit for the great teams of the Grant era belongs to many great players and coaches. The glow from those years doesn't have to be extended to the kicker. Diggs has been one of the best receivers in the NFL over the last 5 years, and he's one of the best in team history. He is responsible for the Miracle -- probably the single best play in the NFL since The Catch in 1981, and likely the best single moment in franchise history. No matter what you think of his "demeanor", a WR as good as Diggs has a much higher impact on the team than any kicker.
  3. The Iron Chef!!

    Cheaper veteran contracts are typically short, just a year or two. All the other non-rookie CBs in Alexander’s price range (Brian Poole, Kevin Johnson, Pierre Desir, Bashaud Breeland, Xavier Rhodes) are on 1 year deals. If you sign Alexander or similar this year, the options next year to use that $4M will again be similar — veteran stopgaps on a short term deal. Not literally every year, OK. But you said you would have a Latavius Murray type most years. We’re not arguing over each dollar, just trying to see roughly how far Cook’s money would go in real life. Probably not. The difference between Cook and Warford on a long term deal is not going to be enough to fit the 2 short-term veteran contracts you chose in a given year. Warford was making $8.5M with the Saints on a deal he signed back in 2017. There’s no reason to think he’d be cheaper now. The Broncos gave Graham Glasgow $11M AAV this year, and he’s the same age and less successful than Warford. Billy Turner is mediocre but got $7M AAV from the Packers last year. Cook in the worst realistic scenario exceeds what Warford gets on a long term deal by $5M. Alexander is getting $4M, Miller is unsigned but Murray’s cap number is $4M and you’re budgeting $3M per year on average for veteran RB depth — I think you’re over budget. If you want a veteran guard you can afford in this scenario, how about Wes Schweitzer ($13.5M/3 from Washington) or Quinton Spain ($15M/3 from Buffalo).
  4. The Iron Chef!!

    It's similar, but not quite the same argument: the Panthers had an extra year of McCaffrey on his rookie contract since he was drafted in the 1st round. Cook will be cheaper and would need to be replaced a year earlier The comparison would also be more useful if we compared the results of long-term extensions / UFA contracts given to players at other positions. By this analysis, multiple long-term contracts were failures for the Vikings in recent years, including Griffen and Joseph's extensions (both terminated 3 years early with declining performance), and most of their UFA deals (Kline, Boone, Remmers, Jennings, etc). It's easy to make one option look bad if you only look at the bad outcomes for that one option. Again I'll ask you to outline specifically what you'd do instead, as if Cook was being replaced this year. Do you sign Melvin Gordon or a veteran RB? How high do you draft a new RB? How specifically do you spend the money that would have gone to Cook?
  5. 5.176 - MIN: KJ Osborn WR/Miami

    Good question. Not that I know of. Osborn isn't another Harvin, doesn't play with that level of aggression and explosion. He's fast but not a burner. He's more elusive, weaving through traffic, not a hammer but hard to bring down. Hopefully Kubiak will find a way to get Osborn the ball in space on offense. Along with the gadget role, he can also contribute as a downfield receiver especially from the slot. He's good at finding holes in intermediate zones, and he can get deep. Here's the rest of my video edits of Osborn:
  6. The Iron Chef!!

    Lamar Miller, OK. 29 and missed last year for an ACL but he was good in 2018. OK, you get John Simpson instead of Dantzler plus a late round RB to be named later. If you’re paying Alexander or a similar CB $4M every year and a veteran RB $3.5M every year, you don’t really have $7M left over. Remember our discussion about the AAV for Cook — that number will be higher than what the Vikings effectively have to pay, given that the last year or two will be higher paid but unlikely to be earned. Even if Cook’s extension is $14M AAV, there’s zero chance that his cap hit will be $14M in the first year, and it may be substantially lower than that in year 2 as well. Meanwhile your plan to sign veteran stopgap CBs and RBs to one year deals will have a more direct effect on the cap — $4M/1 for Alexander is actually $4M this year, $3M on Lamar Miller would be $3M. You’re certainly not getting Clowney for the cap space difference between Cook and a CB+RB. Clowney’s contract will be more expensive than Cook’s. I don’t think you can afford more than a cheap vet OL (our old friend Tom Compton is getting $2.7M from SF this year) under the cap space opened up by forgoing year one of Cook’s extension, though maybe year 2 would let you be a little more ambitious. You could have Warford if you skip the CB, but then you’re probably drafting Dantzler, so you lose Simpson. ... So the Vikings in this scenario have Cook extended, draft Dantzler, and use their current stable of OL. Your version is Lamar Miller as RB1 in a RBBC, Alexander or similar stopgap vet CB, a cheap veteran OL (Warford if you can afford him, though I don’t think you can), John Simpson, and a late round flyer on a RB. Nicely done. I’d be interested to see @whitehops’s attempt, and any others.
  7. The Iron Chef!!

    Anyone who doesn’t want to pay Cook more than $8M should be violently allergic to the idea of using a 1st round pick to replace him. You only get one 1st round pick a year — they’re worth way more than 5% of the cap. There’s no world where it’s worthwhile letting Cook walk over $4M a year (the difference between what he likely gets and what people here are willing to pay him), only to turn around and use a top draft pick to replace him. That’s Dan Bailey money, or CJ Ham money. If they let the FB or the kicker leave to save a few million, would you be OK with drafting their replacement in round 2? Either running backs matter, and you draft them in the top 50, or they don’t, and you don’t. Pick one. If RBs do matter, and you’re willing to draft them early, then no — a RB drafted on day 2 is unlikely to be top 10 in the league. The 2019 day 2 RBs included Miles Sanders, David Montgomery and Devin Singletary, who had their moments but were nowhere near elite, Damien Harris and Darrell Henderson, who did little or nothing, and our own Alexander Mattison, who played well but was still obviously not as good as Cook. The 2018 group includes Nick Chubb, who’s really good but who went 35th, higher than anyone should take a RB who they don’t value paying more than a nickel corner, and a bunch of disappointing picks like Kerryon Johnson, Ronald Jones and Derrius Guice. If they’d had to replace Cook in 2018 or 2019, those options would have made the team worse. If you want to argue that RBs don’t matter, and downgrading at RB1 doesn’t really affect the team’s chances of winning and losing games (PFF’s argument), that’s fine. But then you shouldn’t be willing to draft JK Dobbins either. It’s no smarter to use a round 2 pick on a position than to pay 5% of the cap for a veteran that allows you to use that pick on a different position.
  8. The Iron Chef!!

    Dalvin Cook is 24, turns 25 this summer. His extension would start the year he turns 26. RB aging curves are real but the articles you linked to put RB peak performance at ages 27-28. If they sign Cook for 4-5 years with an out after 3 years, they get him for ages 26-28. PFF’s argument has everything to do with a statistical model of football that says that running the ball is useless, or at least that no one is more valuable in the run game than a replacement level player like a UDFA. That’s nothing to do with aging curves. They are also assessing the value of RB contracts based on PFF grades. But it’s a little weird to think that their grades are useful given that they themselves find no value in what they’re grading. Makes you wonder if those grades are valid for what they’re describing. If PFF are right, and RBs are useless, the Vikings should let Cook walk, trade Mattison and roll with Mike Boone as RB1. Is that what you’re recommending? To keep the discussion more relevant — despite PFF’s best efforts, RB talent does still have some value in the NFL. Melvin Gordon got a cheap contract but he’s paid better than most 2 down NTs, slot corners and blocking TEs. JK Dobbins went in the 2nd round to the Ravens, not as a UDFA. And the Vikings evidently share the opinion of most of the rest of the league. Under Spielman, they have consistently valued RB1 with a high value pick (Peterson then Cook) and RB2 with a day 2 pick or similar investment (Gerhart, McKinnon, Murray, Mattison). So letting Cook walk will not likely result in them following the suggestions of that PFF article and going with UDFAs as their only option at RB. They will instead draft his replacement, probably no later than round 2 next year. So the choice for the Vikings is $12M ish for Cook or a top 50 ish pick on a new RB.
  9. The Iron Chef!!

    Sorry, I’m just saying the Vikings probably didn’t have the option of keeping Alexander. They didn’t let him leave because they couldn’t afford him. He wanted to leave. And he probably wasn’t going to sign anywhere for $4M per year long term, he wants a chance at a bigger contract. You’re right that if you choose Alexander for one year, you get the extra cap space in the following years. Most other options for DB signings in that price range would also be one year contracts, but then you could always bring in a different vet the following year for similar money. With Alexander or similar under contract, you’re under no obligation to draft both Gladney and Dantzler. I was trying to make it simple by saying the Vikings probably would. Feel free to specify which of the 2 you wouldn’t pick, and who you would’ve drafted in that position instead. You’re under no obligation to spend the remaining $8M on a veteran RB. In this scenario you can sign Gordon if you want, but not if you don’t want. You could have Alexander (or similar) plus an $8M vet at a different position. You don’t have to add a RB at all if you’re OK with Mattison, Boone and a UDFA. So you want Alexander on a $4M/1, ~$8M on ???, and ??? drafted instead of Dantzler (or Gladney). If there’s no RB there, let us know what your plan is for RB1.
  10. The Iron Chef!!

    Melvin Gordon is a good example for this exercise. You get Gordon for $16M/2 for his age 27-28 seasons. His contract is written such that he probably sees all of it (little cap savings if he's released after a year). And that leaves you ~$4-5M left over. Alexander wasn't going to stay with the Vikings for $4M. He took a prove-it deal because he wants to play as an outside corner. But OK, for the purpose of this exercise you get one more year of Mac Alexander: $4M/1 for 2020. You probably still want to draft both Gladney and Dantzler, since CB depth is important and Hughes/Hill are question marks plus Alexander is leaving in 2021. But you get to pick a different player in the 5th instead of Harrison Hand. ... My analysis of that is that Dalvin Cook is a better RB than Melvin Gordon, but not 50% better, so you're probably getting a good deal. I don't think Alexander is entirely realistic for the Vikings but you could have a comparable mid-tier vet CB for similar money, like Pierre Desir or Brian Poole. So you get Gordon for 2 years, a CB of Alexander's quality for a year, and still probably draft Gladney and Dantzler. We'll compare that to Cook for 2-3 years (2021-23 or -24, which will be the likely-to-be-earned part of his extension), no stopgap vet CB this year and the same draft class. ... I will point out that paying Gordon $8M instead of drafting a RB1 is a different tactic than @whitehops is recommending. $8M is actually the 7th highest AAV for a RB in the league right now. So you're willing to buy a veteran RB of the sort that we're being told can't possibly live up to that contract, you just don't want to pay full price.
  11. The Iron Chef!!

    You don't know that for a fact. You're inferring that based on the last 5 years or so of RBs coming off their rookie contracts. But that trend may not continue.
  12. The Iron Chef!!

    Right, it’s not realistic. It’s just an exercise. Use the players who were available this offseason so we can actually comparison shop. It’s one thing to consider one specific choice (Cook, extended) vs an abstraction (that same money, spent wisely according to you). You get to imagine the worst for Cook, and the best for whatever hypothetical alternative. Instead, let’s consider one specific choice vs a different specific choice, and see how those pan out. You can even float a few different scenarios. Just be realistic about their availability (this offseason and draft) and cost. In 2016, the Vikings were going to draft a WR. We all watched highlights and looked at combine times. 4 WRs were drafted in the 1st round: Coleman, Fuller, Doctson and Treadwell. Only one of them is still a starter, and still with the team who drafted him. None of them have been extended (Fuller is on his 5th year option, and presumably will be). In 2015, the Vikings were going to draft a CB. 4 CBs went in the first round: Waynes, Kevin Johnson, Peters, and Byron Jones. None of them are still with their drafted teams. 3 of them are still starters, but none of them were extended by the team that drafted them (Jones should’ve been). 2014, QBs: Bortles, Manziel, Teddy. None of them with their drafted team. One of them a starter. 2013, DTs: Richardson, Lotulelei, Floyd. None of them with their drafted team. Two of them starters. etc... Theres a lot of turnover in the NFL. A lot of players don’t pan out, especially over the long term. You’re painting the RB contract situation in black and white. But that analysis is based on a narrow data set, and you’re ignoring some exceptions (current and recent past) to reach the conclusion that you’re presenting as stone cold fact. Do you really think all the good RBs who are currently heading into year 3-5 of their careers (Elliott, Henry, Gordon, McCaffrey, Cook, Mixon, Kamara, Mack, Aaron Jones, Barkley, Chubb) are going to collectively turn to dust just because they turn 26? No doubt, some of them won’t maintain their level of play. But some of them will. Some of them will have better careers going forward than Trae Waynes or Robby Anderson or Robert Quinn.
  13. I don't mean game manager in the sense of not elite, but in terms of playing within structure. Brady and Brees are game managers, in that sense. Kubiak/Shanahan teams need a QB who will run the play as called. Rodgers is best when he can improvise.
  14. The Iron Chef!!

    ...because of the opportunity cost of needing to use an early draft pick to replace the RB1 every 4 years, and the uncertainty that that replacement will be good. There were several not that long ago: Adrian Peterson, Lesean McCoy, Marshawn Lynch, Jamaal Charles, Matt Forte were all still good players on their 2nd contracts. There were also busts like Chris Johnson and Demarco Murray. Murray I think is still the classic example of not paying a RB after he had 400 carries one year for Dallas (Cook has 457 carries for his career). More recently, Gurley's extension is a notable bust, but anyone who watched the Rams at their peak knew he was a passenger in their offense, much more so than Cook for the Vikings last year. David Johnson is another one, though he was 24 when he came into the league and so was a couple of years further along the aging curve than most players coming off their rookie contracts. Bell was great in his franchise tagged year with the Steelers (not cheap at that point) but didn't play well with the Jets coming back from a year off. Might be too soon to rule him out from playing well going forward. I think the Cowboys will get value from Elliott and the Panthers from McCaffrey. ... Again, most UFA contracts are disappointing. Many players don't live up to their extensions. The Vikings have generally been good with contracts, but just in the Zimmer/Spielman era, we could point to Jennings, Wallace, Kalil (5th year option) and Barr as players who made the equivalent or more of what Cook will likely get on his extension, without playing as well as Cook, or fulfilling as important a role. ... Now it's your turn: write out a shopping list of players who the Vikings could/should sign for what we imagine Cook will get (~$13M), and what you would have done in the draft this year to replace him and account for that additional signing. You can pick a handful of scenarios but choose actual players that were available this offseason. The timeline will be wrong (since Cook will really get paid starting in 2021 and wouldn't need to be replaced this year), but this way the options are knowable. For instance: extend Waynes ($14M) and draft RB Darrynton Evans instead of Dantzler in the 3rd round. Or: sign Robert Quinn ($14M) and draft RB Antonio Gibson instead of Ezra Cleveland in the 2nd round. Then, instead of trading down with the Saints in the late 3rd round (for picks that turned into Wonnum, Hand, Brandel and Stanley) draft OT Saahdiq Charles. We can come back to this eventually and see how those scenarios panned out.
  15. The dead cap money wouldn't work in either direction. If and when the Packers trade Rodgers, it won't be for another expensive veteran QB. Rodgers probably ends up going to a team that's on the verge of contending except for young QB who can't quite get it done -- like the Vikings in 2008 with TJack. He'll want to go somewhere with talented receivers and coaches who are willing to let him be creative. Buffalo might be a good bet, or Cleveland. Or maybe it'll be a team with weapons whose QB moves on: the Bucs after Brady, Saints after Brees, or Dallas if they don't keep Dak (and if Rodgers and McCarthy make up, I guess). Rodgers talents would be relatively wasted in Minnesota as long as they're running Kubiak's scheme. The Vikings need a high level game manager / distributor QB, who's accurate and willing to work within the scheme. Cousins is good in that role (the elite version is Brady or Brees), but it would be a poor fit for Rodgers. So I can't imagine the Vikings would be interested unless they're planning a coaching/scheme change.
×