Jump to content


Veteran Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

483 Veteran

Recent Profile Visitors

426 profile views
  1. I remember that Grant didn't like his QBs being the holder because he didn't want someone having that job that might be tempted the throw the ball. Maybe that is some other coach I am thinking of though. If so, anyone know who?
  2. Valhalla Villager: News, Rumors and Gossip

    The benefit to the player is enhanced job security. More money prorated later means there would be a larger dead cap hit for the team to move on from the player later. Ergo, the team is less likely to move on from that player. Another potential benefit is the tag ramifications. If it is a player that is earning enough it will enhance the amount a team would be required to devote to holding that player for a year on one of the tags. There really is no downside for players so they'll pretty much always agree. There are some potential downsides for teams so they have to be careful. The team avoids some risk if they do not have to do it. However, when tight against the cap the benefit is enough for teams to go forward with giving players simple restructures. The wise team will choose players that they are most certain are guys they want to have for a few more years. The team will also look for players with as many years left on their contract as possible to mitigate some of the risks by spreading the proration between as many years as possible in order to minimize the total amount they have to convert.
  3. Valhalla Villager: News, Rumors and Gossip

    Kendricks is a good choice too. I know someone here thought that the team wouldn't restructure a player a year after they just signed him. This is why I didn't bother to argue too much. Everything has its time. The time for reality is has come for that person. Just like the Eagles would restructure Lane Johnson and Bennett, the Vikings will choose players early in their contract to restructure. The earlier, the better. And the player will agree to do it because it is beneficial to the player too.
  4. Valhalla Villager: News, Rumors and Gossip

    I don't disagree with that. But that doesn't change the fact that the Cousins contract is a significant factor contributing to the Vikings tight cap situation.
  5. Valhalla Villager: News, Rumors and Gossip

    Looking at the cap figures of players on the team, I can't understand the statement that the cap squeeze has little to do with Cousins. Cousins' cap number is more than twice that of the second highest cap number on the team. And that second highest cap number on the team, $13.5M for Danielle Hunter looks like great value to me. Kirk Cousins number does not look anything near value given the cost and what he brings to the team. The cap squeeze most certainly has more to do with Kirk Cousins than anyone else on the roster. If you think it has little to do with Cousins, what five players on the roster do you think it has more to do with than Kirk Cousins? I would even submit that if Cousins is even in the top ten players that are binding up the Vikings cap it would have more than a little to do with him. I don't know what it means to you, but to me saying it has little to do with Kirk Cousins is saying that Kirk Cousins isn't in the top half of the players on the roster causing the cap squeeze. I am not so worried about having that much cap space dedicated to the QB position as I am looking at the value the team is getting out of each cap dollar they have allocated. Kirk Cousins is a terrible cap value IMO. And since it is guaranteed the team has almost no flexibility with Cousins' contract.
  6. The Greatest Viking? All Hail Alan Page

    Thanks Mr @Virginia Viking. That was a real treat to watch! It is so much fun getting to see things from back when football was still football. One thing that stuck out to me while watching that highlight real that I didn't remember was how many of Page's hits would even be considered clean today with the QBs wearing tutus. Almost all of Page's hits were in the strike zone. he wasn't aiming at the knees or head. He was a very clean player. It isn't that I ever thought of Page as dirty, but I just forgot how clean his hits were. It probably wasn't until the 80s that the NFL really started glamorizing the viscous hits but because of that it causes me to think of the big hits from prior eras of football. Allan Page was just flat out better than the rest of the players. He didn't need to do anything but play and tackle the guys cleanly. While he was amazing in aspects of the game I can't forget how he was a liability against the run at times. You don't see that in this highlight real, but I remember the Rams taking advantage of Page a few times in the playoffs. They used his speed upfield against him and ran right at his spot on the line during playoff games to beat the Vikings. Still, he was indeed a great player. A real joy to watch! Again, thanks for posting the highlight clip and sharing your thoughts!!!
  7. FBs are used a fair amount in Kubiak's system. From what I can tell, the FB can expect to catch more passes out of the backfield in this offense. Ham is just okay at that. The FB in the system needs to be more of an athlete than we are used to, not just a big back that can block. The FB will need to be more versatile. It wouldn't surprise me to see the team replace Ham. It also wouldn't surprise me to see a guy that plays both FB and TE in Kubiak's offense. He seems to like using multiple position players ( FB/TE, RB/WR, TE/WR, Outside/Slot WR ). I am not sure how Kyle Rudolph will fit in the system. He isn't a good enough blocker to be a FB/TE type nor does he move well enough to be a TE/WR type.
  8. That is an interesting take. It isn't really more likely to be accurate than any of our opinions IMO, but it is another voice to add to the crowd. Well, it is maybe more likely to be correct than what I posted in this thread because what I posted was more about how I would have them ranked right now than trying to predict where they ultimately will be at the time the cut to 53 happens. As far as that author's take on what it will be, I really like his take on the offensive line although I feel he is being a bit to bold predicting Samia will be the starter at guard. That could happen, but Samia has a long way to go to get there. Other than that, he generally agrees with me so that means I like his opinion as it relates to the offensive line. At LB, I agree with you @Ozzy that his take is pretty unlikely. I have trouble seeing his prediction as even a realistic possibility. For that reason, I don't like his opinion about the LBers. At Safety, I suppose his guess is as good as any of ours for how their depth will shake out but I am surprised to see that he has Epps on the cut list. Teams often give draft picks the benefit of the doubt. I don't know that is the best way to do it, but teams generally seem to do it anyway. On the other hand, all 12 draft picks were never going to make the team and Epps is one of the lower selections. On the DL, I hope he is right that Jaleel earns the starting job over Shamar. That would be a great sign for that his development is going well. I do wonder, however, whether Shamar would make the roster if he loses the starting job. I don't know how much of Shamar's contract is guaranteed. If it is much, that might keep him on the roster. However, keeping him on the roster cancels out the Nick Easton compensatory pick so it is one more thing counting against Stephen if he doesn't hold onto the starting job. In the end, coach Zimmer values defensive line depth enough that the compensatory ding isn't likely enough to sway him. It would probably have to be a cap thing that caused Zimmer to not keep Shamar on as a backup and that depends on contract details that I do not know. It is just something that I thought about when I saw the prediction of Stephen being a backup.
  9. 2018 Draft Picks, and where they stand today

    Correct. I don't believe in any grading system that results in more As than Cs. Success in the NFL is relative to your competitors so it makes sense grade relative to them rather than relative to some arbitrary standard that might allow for 15 As and only 3 grades lower than a C. I pretty much agree with all of this. The only possible difference is I consider only results to this point. I am not sure if you include possible future hopes like some others. In the end though, you are right that how any person grades it is a highly personal choice. There is nothing wrong with projecting future results, but then I would have to do it for all 32 teams and that is something that is far too difficult for me to undertake. Results to this point are far below many other teams. That is why I currently have the 2018 class at a D. That isn't to say that in a year or two that class won't accumulate more results and start looking better than some of the other teams that currently have gotten more above average production out of their 2018 draft class.
  10. 2018 Draft Picks, and where they stand today

    Graders choice. It would be hard to assign a percentage. If you make a Hall of Fame selection 100%, a pro bowl selection 95% and so on it would be hard for any draft to ever average the 93% required for an A, or even the 85% required for a B.
  11. 2018 Draft Picks, and where they stand today

    Rather than question them, I am just going to admire the optimism of @perrynoid and @DisplacedViking. I hope they're right, and there is a chance that they will eventually be right. I just can't find those results yet and I grade on results not on hope for future potential. Also, like I said I would have to convince myself that the Vikings 2018 draft was better than 27 other teams given what an 'A' means to me. Or conversely, if I find five other teams that have gotten more production out of their 2018 draft I couldn't justify giving an 'A' to the Vikings. Right now, I don't think finding 5 teams that have gotten more production after two years would be a very hard exercise (though admittedly I haven't done the exercise). I am not sure those two grew up in the same grading system. I took a graduate course in genomics ~15 years ago at the University of Minnesota and that was a walk in the park to get an 'A' in compared to how I remembered things -- only about 15 hours of work a week for an 'A' in that graduate class. Pretty sure 15 hours of work per week wouldn't have been such a high grade 20 years earlier. By now, who knows how easy it is to "earn" those grades. On the other hand, I can't rule out that the pendulum came back in the last 15 years making the grade mean something again. Though, judging by the Winona State kid I hired a few years ago with the impressive GPA, an A in a class means almost nothing at that school. You two didn't go to Winona State, did you?
  12. 2018 Draft Picks, and where they stand today

    The grade is still incomplete, but early returns don't look good. If Hughes works out and becomes a starter that earns a second contract with this team that alone will bring the grade up to a C as long as O'Neill is playing at least average as a starter on our line too. Anything above that and the grade would only improve. At this early stage it doesn't look good. Looking back the previous couple years to see how drafts that have had more time would grade and the previous couple aren't real good either. 2017 might be a complete bust of a draft if Cook can't stay healthy. I wouldn't be shocked if not a single one of those guys gets a second contract with the team. While not shocking, it would be surprising given Cook's talent and a few others that look useful even if not core players. Gadeon is a mediocre third LB at this point. Johnson still hasn't become a reliable backup. Elflein has been starting but his play hasn't helped the grade of the draft. It looks like the team shouldn't have been starting him but had to for lack of decent options. These three have time to earn positive credit for the 2017 draft still. You can pretty much already write off the last seven picks. The best of them was Odenigbo but even he has already been released from the team. It is hard to count his second tour towards success of the draft even if he becomes a solid backup. I give this draft a D currently with potential for the final grade being an F. 2016 would be terrible if not for out second 6th rounder and two 7th rounders. That is a year that shows that later picks may be worth the effort to accumulate. Alexander looks like a decent pick int he second round but all the other picks through our first sixth rounder are fugly in 2016. Still, given the last three I would have to give 2016 a grade above C (that meant average when I got grades, not like today where average seems to be a B). Overall, a good draft should give a team at least two guys that are at least average starters by the end of year four that the team keeps on a second contract. One of those guys should be good enough to get a third contract. A third guy from the draft should be solid depth that the team keeps around on a second contract as depth. It is hard for me to give a draft anything better than a C until I see something like that, which usually means drafts start out as incomplete and work their way up towards a C and possibly even higher if things work out well. For an example of a draft that has shown to be better than average look at 2015. That year is looking like an A. Four guys that are above average starters by the end of their rookie contract. Three of them the team already has extended as core players of the future and a fourth, their first round pick, looks like he is worth extending as another core player going forward. That is so much success that they may not be able to keep the group together for cost reasons. While the story isn't finished being written after four years it is hard to imagine this not being an A graded draft when all is said and done. And by graded an A, I mean at least a top 15% draft, not the top 50% like some instructors hand out to students nowadays. Since grading scales change with time, for clarity this is roughly how I divide the letter grades: A - top 15% B: 16% - 35% C: 36% - 70% D: 71% - 90% F: bottom 10% draft. Right now, I have 2018 at a D, but it is still earning points towards better grades. Only time will tell if it gets there.
  13. Why isn't Elflein working out?

    Yikes. Reiff was the only above average player on the Vikings line last year according to PFF. I was hoping that O'Neill was average but it looks like he graded towards the top of the bottom quartile of tackles. I assume that was mostly because of his struggles in the run game.
  14. 2020 Draft Talk

    Yeah, trading for Bradford was a terrible mistake. I said it at the time and nothing since then changed my mind. There were definitely better options and rolling with Hill was just one of the better options. Other QBs off the scrap heap that didn't cost a draft pick would have also been better options. Mike Vick is a name I remember considering at the time. That isn't to say that I think that Vick would have been any good. Signing him would have been a better option for the team though.
  15. Made possible by having 12 draft picks. The roster was never going to have room for all 12. It isn't terrible deferring one of them a couple years if that is what happens. I would have rather traded a seventh this year for a 6th next year and then a sixth next year for a 5th in two years than defer the benefit for a long snapper at that time, but trading for future picks also requires having a dance partner.