Jump to content

babababa

Members
  • Content Count

    222
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

63 Starter

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't think so. I watched Pierce's statement to the media at minicamp and I had the impression that he was in a good place with the team. He said Patterson was talking to him all throughout the offseason and let him know how they planned to pair him with Tomlinson. He appears to be in shape and ready to go. It's good to have 3 capable DTs that you can rotate in and out.
  2. It can be argued that for the type of defense that Minnesota runs that Hunter is just as valuable as Mack and Barrett are to their respective defenses. Historically the 4-3 depends on LEs to to play the run and the pass equally at an effective level. Hunter does that to a very high degree in terms of both. Myles Garrett is the current comparison. Also, I get that the Vikings may have improved the Defense up the gut and at corner, but generating pressure off the edge is the one thing every team in the NFL needs to do most. We weren't pressuring QBs at all the final five games of the season
  3. I don't have an opinion either way. Calvin Johnson was projected to be the next Randy Moss after a few seasons. Nobody figured he'd retire as early as he did.
  4. He's on pace. Whether someone thinks it's unlikely he achieves it is a matter of opinion.
  5. I get that. That's a fine argument. Maybe he needs to run through some sort of team medical evaluation. If it was determined to be such a risk though, why wasn't this team all in on finding adequate help this offseason at the DE position. 4th round rookies aren't an answer. If the Vikings play hardball with Hunter they may be banking on a worse unit (on paper) than we had last season with Ngakoue and Odeigbo that was 25th in the league in pass-rushing. I was one of the few who worried about Hunter's injury going into FA and the draft. I wanted a first round pass-rusher but everyone
  6. Strahan was also a 4-3 LE pass rusher who is sized about the same and played the run and the pass at an extremely high level using power and leverage effectively. Right now, if Hunter played for another 10 years at his current pace he'd have 150 sacks. That's not an unreasonable comparison. I amended what I said before you declared me to be a lunatic -- see my post to Viginia Viking. I was talking about the level of play right now. I didn't think I had to add that to the conversation or that it would derail the argument to the point of spitting out your Wheaties.
  7. OK. On Pace to possibly be Michael Strahan. That's still an all-time great.
  8. At 25 Hunter was the fastest player to 50 sacks. He's on pace to be an all-time great even after a lost season. I hope that clears it up. If I over-amplified it was due to projection as a ceiling which he is capable of. You have done just the opposite. Now I see why you're not interested in making Hunter a priority.
  9. Overreacting to what? It's my opinion that they should deal with him first -- that's all. I could easily turn it around and say that you could get O'Neil's deal done afterwards. What's your priority? That's what this comes down to. Forgive me for making my argument as always. Yes the team could cut him without financial impact. Hunter sees that as leverage against him. He in turn can use HIS leverage as arguably the best DE in the league to veer this season into mediocrity.
  10. If you told that to Hunter he wouldn't play another down for this team. He's not going to starve in the streets if he doesn't play. He'd lose out on money this season and the Vikings would lose out on the playoffs IMO. There goes the entire FO and coaching staff. He would be traded under a rebuild with a disgruntled player. Why let it come to that? Your 3rd point is admittedly your strongest. I don't know. He risks losing his future though, without guaranteed money after THIS season. He wants the security that he feels he deserves right now. I'm sure that neck injury thrust that poi
  11. Disagree there on both counts. Consider this Hunter's last year on his current contract: 1) No guaranteed money after this season. If he sits it's because he feels disrespected and he doesn't want to get injured without security moving forward. So I wouldn't expect him to suit up until he sees guaranteed money in the future years of his contract. His contract is basically up after this season in that regard. 2) He puts pressure on the Vikings to make a decision before the start of the season. He can say "Renegotiate or Trade me because I won't play." The Vikings FO needs to win
  12. He's a superstar DE. If he sits out good luck having a competent defense considering the Vikings were 25th in the league rushing the QB without him -- most of that skewed from Ngakoue's 5 games. That's leverage enough for a team needing to make a deep playoff run this year.
  13. I get that the other 2 are on the last years of their deals, but you could trade both of those guys (both good players) for Hunter and it wouldn't be enough as he's a premier player at a premier position in his prime. He's being paid like a middle of the road DE and could sit out if we treat him like one. Why play it like that? https://www.skornorth.com/zulgad-is-danielle-hunter-headed-for-a-holdout-or-will-defensive-end-show-up-for-minicamp/ Of note in his contract per this attached is that he has no guaranteed money after this season.
  14. He should be 1st on the list. He's the only missing Viking because it's apparent that he's unhappy with his contract. Don't fart around with him.
  15. This was the guard I wanted all along. To get him in the 3rd is already a steal. I would have picked him at the top of the 3rd rather than waiting, but they got him anyway.
×
×
  • Create New...