Jump to content
vike daddy

Are we at the end of the Rhodes...?

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

Finding a QB like Mahomes or Rodgers might have more to do with having good luck and coaching than anything else. 

The Vikes won't be in a position to get a top 3 pick, they'll have to trade up from the teens and hope for some luck in a deep class like the Chiefs did. I'm not sure when the best time would be for the Vikes to make such a move. 2020? 2021?

No doubt.  But it also requires you to be within striking distance of making a move for that QB.  The problem is Minnesota hasn't been close enough to make that jump.  And the Vikings have a strong enough foundation that they're probably not going to be close enough.  Unless they bottom out at the QB position, that likely isn't happening.  And given Cousins' contract, that's going to be hard unless he gets injured.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

No doubt.  But it also requires you to be within striking distance of making a move for that QB.  The problem is Minnesota hasn't been close enough to make that jump.  And the Vikings have a strong enough foundation that they're probably not going to be close enough.  Unless they bottom out at the QB position, that likely isn't happening.  And given Cousins' contract, that's going to be hard unless he gets injured.

 

Agreed.  In my entire lifetime, they've rarely, if ever, been within striking distance of getting a QB.  The only one, that I can recall, that they even really had a chance to get was your guy, Aaron Rodgers...but even, then they still had Daunte coming off the best year of his career.  Who woulda thunk that he'd blow out his knees that year and never be the same guy again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, swede700 said:

 

Agreed.  In my entire lifetime, they've rarely, if ever, been within striking distance of getting a QB. 

On the plus side, that means we've had very minimal "dreadful" seasons. 1984 and 2011 with 3 wins each and besides those two, no seasons worse than 5 wins in the 16 game era.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Vikes_Bolts1228 said:

On the plus side, that means we've had very minimal "dreadful" seasons. 1984 and 2011 with 3 wins each and besides those two, no seasons worse than 5 wins in the 16 game era.

1984 was the worst VIkings year in my lifetime.  Of course, I was only about 10-11 years old, so I was a little emotional at the time.  xD  I still rue the day they hired Les Steckel...him and his marine boot camp style training camp.  It was the Pecos River before Pecos River.   

2011 was bad because of how many games they lost in the final minutes, but it wasn't nearly as bad as that '84 season, where the team quit on the coach about half of the way in.  They weren't even competitive at the end of the season.   

Edited by swede700

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Vikes_Bolts1228 said:

On the plus side, that means we've had very minimal "dreadful" seasons. 1984 and 2011 with 3 wins each and besides those two, no seasons worse than 5 wins in the 16 game era.

You don't need to be dreadful to get a QB though, luck plays a huge role in it but it certainly helps to get in the top 10 at the end of the day. We've been close enough to strike (top 10 in 2014, top 11, in 2015, 22 in 2016). The Bradford trade was horrible, we very well could have used that pick to draft Mahomes or Watson.

Rodgers was taken outside the top 20.

The Vikes could have taken Andy Dalton over Ponder in 2011, Dalton's not that far off from our current starter and clearly better than Ponder.

The Vikes passed on Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins and Nick Foles in 2012.

Teddy loooked like the right pick in 2014, but bad luck killed his career.

There were a lot of bad QB classes from 2006-2010. Seems like there is a void in talent at QB during this time frame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

The Vikes passed on Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins and Nick Foles in 2012.

 

So did the Seahawks, Washington and Eagles too.  xD   They passed on them several times before taking them later.  

I'll continue to disagree that the Bradford trade was horrible, because it truly was the best option at the time, but that discussion has been hashed and re-hashed. 

On topic though, I'm still more than willing to trade Xavier Rhodes, if it would net them something of value, such as an offensive lineman and a draft pick.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, swede700 said:

So did the Seahawks, Washington and Eagles too.  xD   They passed on them several times before taking them later.  

I'll continue to disagree that the Bradford trade was horrible, because it truly was the best option at the time, but that discussion has been hashed and re-hashed. 

On topic though, I'm still more than willing to trade Xavier Rhodes, if it would net them something of value, such as an offensive lineman and a draft pick.  

Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. The Seahawks are lucky. 

I doubt a player for player trade happens, I'd need a top 50 pick at least to move on from Rhodes or Waynes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, vikingsrule said:

 

I doubt a player for player trade happens, I'd need a top 50 pick at least to move on from Rhodes or Waynes. 

Agree.

We don't have to trade either so no sense in trading them for scraps just to trade them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Vikes_Bolts1228 said:

Agree.

We don't have to trade either so no sense in trading them for scraps just to trade them.

I doubt a player for player trade would happen either, but that would be my price.  A player and a pick.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, swede700 said:

 

If Rhodes is traded, I'd imagine that the Vikes would go out and spend $3-4m on a veteran boundary CB. Knowing Zimmer, I can't imagine he'd be comfortable with Hill or Hughes starting in Rhodes spot without someone experienced ready to play.

My concern with trading Rhodes is losing his ability to shadow the oppositions best WR. Waynes hasn't ever really been asked to do this. Maybe the CBs would just play side but it changes the scheme a little bit. 

I'd still prefer to trade Waynes and he very well could get a more significant return given that he is several years younger.

Edited by vikingsrule

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing around on OTC and it is showing we'd still be responsible for part of Rhodes salary (dead money) and only gain ~$6M in cap space.

It all depends on what the return would be but there are other moves I'd look to make before moving Rhodes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, VikeManDan said:

Playing around on OTC and it is showing we'd still be responsible for part of Rhodes salary (dead money) and only gain ~$6M in cap space.

It all depends on what the return would be but there are other moves I'd look to make before moving Rhodes.

We only gain $6m by trading Rhodes. That will probably be $3m once you factor in the CB the Vikes will most certainly sign.

Trading Waynes clears $9m in cap space, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

We only gain $6m by trading Rhodes. That will probably be $3m once you factor in the CB the Vikes will most certainly sign.

Trading Waynes clears $9m in cap space, right?

But, trading Rhodes would save $27M over the next 2 years beyond this year, which can be used to help extend guys like Waynes, Dalvin Cook, Pat Elflein and Stephen Weatherly.  And I don't know what CB they'd need to sign in the event they trade him (or Waynes for that matter).  They have sufficient depth to let go either one of them (but not both, certainly).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, swede700 said:

But, trading Rhodes would save $27M over the next 2 years beyond this year, which can be used to help extend guys like Waynes, Dalvin Cook, Pat Elflein and Stephen Weatherly.  And I don't know what CB they'd need to sign in the event they trade him (or Waynes for that matter).  They have sufficient depth to let go either one of them (but not both, certainly).

Elflein hasn't earned a new contract as far as I am concerned. He's in a make or break year, but he was one of the biggest problems up front last year. 

Cook doesn't deserve a new deal until he can actually stay healthy. 

Weatherly will get one, I'm guessing between $6-8m.

Its not certain but Waynes very well could be making more than Rhodes going forward when he signs his new deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×