Jump to content

The Iron Chef!!


Illadelegend215

Recommended Posts

another thing to think about when it comes to ROI on extending cook this season. the top 8 running backs this season in terms of cap hit MISSED the playoffs. for that i'm not including mckinnon or lamar miller, who went on IR while their teams made the playoffs. 

 

meanwhile, having productive backs on cheap contracts has helped a lot of playoff teams: dalvin cook ($1.7 mil), derrick henry ($1.7 mil), chris carson ($661K), aaron jones ($695K). the teams that "splurged" on veteran running backs got guys that were reliable and relatively cheap: james white and dion lewis make less than $5 million and mark ingram's cap hit is $3.3 mil this season. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

He has no leverage to do so. He’s never healthy and he’s only been good for maybe half a season in his career. Cook really hasn’t been relevant since November this year. 

I agree with you that he doesn’t. Hopefully he wants to really prove himself next season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
2 hours ago, Illadelegend215 said:

So guys, what do you think happens with the chef?

I do think he'll get extended (much to the chagrin of many people here), but I do think it'll be at a more reasonable cost than the likes of Elliott, Gurley and Johnson.  Unlike the management of those franchises, I think Spielman and Co are a lot more sensible than that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

When has Spielman and Co not given a guy top tier money on a 2nd contract? 

If they extend Cook, I’d be surprised if it’s not a top 5 running back contract. 

The great majority of their defensive players did not get top tier money on their 2nd contracts.  They got very good and competitive deals, but they weren't top tier.  Often they were dwarfed a year or 2 later.  Hell, Harry's not even a top-10 paid safety any longer and he was extended only 4 years ago. $9M per year would put him in the top 5...and as far as I'm concerned, that's awfully reasonable.

Edited by swede700
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, swede700 said:

The great majority of their defensive players did not get top tier money on their 2nd contracts.  They got very good and competitive deals, but they weren't top tier.  Often they were dwarfed a year or 2 later.  Hell, Harry's not even a top-10 paid safety any longer and he was extended only 4 years ago. $9M per year would put him in the top 5...and as far as I'm concerned, that's awfully reasonable.

Well you can't compare a contact 4 years ago to today's AAV contracts. I'm sure Harry's contact was top 5 safety, after his rookie deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CriminalMind said:

Well you can't compare a contact 4 years ago to today's AAV contracts. I'm sure Harry's contact was top 5 safety, after his rookie deal.

You can when, in 4 years potentially a top-5 contract for a RB now may be outside of the top 10.  While the salaries for top RBs haven't elevated as quickly as other positions, it's still going up on average.  We talk about how teams like the 49ers don't pay any big name RBs...that's a mistaken theory...they spend more money on that position than any other team in the entire NFL, while the Vikings are #24 (and only 2 other teams below them actually made the playoffs last year).  The Vikings actually have been one of the most balanced teams in the NFL in positional spending.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, swede700 said:

You can when, in 4 years potentially a top-5 contract for a RB now may be outside of the top 10.  While the salaries for top RBs haven't elevated as quickly as other positions, it's still going up on average.  We talk about how teams like the 49ers don't pay any big name RBs...that's a mistaken theory...they spend more money on that position than any other team in the entire NFL, while the Vikings are #24 (and only 2 other teams below them actually made the playoffs last year).  The Vikings actually have been one of the most balanced teams in the NFL in positional spending.

 

I’m still not on the side to support Cook getting a contract extension, period. Forget top 5 money, or even top 10. It’s hard for me to see justification for a player who simply doesn’t stay healthy and even in his best year last year, really struggled down the stretch. I’d let him play out his rookie contract and negotiate next year when he’s a free agent. Cook isn’t the type of player for me that I want to prevent from hitting the open market.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...