Purplexing Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 7 minutes ago, vikingsrule said: Ideally, we wouldn't look to pay a backup RB $5m per year, but I think it's going to be too difficult to replace both in one offseason. I hope we take a RB in the mold of McKinnon ... Which of Murray (current contract salary for 2018) or McKinnon (potential re-signing salary) is likely to be paid reasonable 'backup' money? Murray's 2018 salary is known... (but not to me; too lazy to look it up). McKinnon's salary can be projected. Drafting Cook should change the perspective taken on Murray and McKinnon. In essence, both should be considered to be free agents, one of which is desirable to re-sign. Consideration needs to be given to Cook's recovery and salary in 2018-xx, CJ Ham's salary in 2018-xx, and projected market salary levels for backup vet RBs in 2018-xx. I fail to see the logic in creating a hole to fill (RB#2 or RB#3) by dumping a roster RB or allowing McKinnon to leave, which, allegedly, must be filled with a rookie. The production and potential of Murray and McKinnon are estimable from their recent experience in Minnesota. A rookie RB's production and potential is uncertain. For that reason, I see Cook, Ham, and one of the M's returning in 2018, with Murray's contract reduced if he is chosen as RB#2. {Re-signing key defensive players in 2018 means Spielman will look to save $ by some means}. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gopherwrestler Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 McKinnon will probably get around that $4M a year as I see it at top dollar. Not enough to show he is a #1 back thru his time here to any team, but $4M is reasonable to be a duo back. Murray will be a $6.35M Cap hit next year. Cutting him gives us $1.2M in dead money. Reason he was signed so high was because he was looked at as coming here to be RB #1, a proven 1,000 yard back while still having his struggles so he didn't get top dollar. With Bell, Dion Lewis, Carlos Hyde, Rex Burkhead, Lagarette Blount, Orleans Darkwa, Alfred Morris, Jeremy Hill, along with McKinnon and the rookie draft class, McKinnon won't be able to demand too much money with those free agents. So: resigning McKinnon and cutting Murray leaves us with basically $5.2M cap hit next year + a rookie RB/another free agent salary keeping Murray and letting McKinnon walk leaves us with $6.35M cap hit next year + a rookie RB/another free agent salary Keeping both you are looking at paying $10.35M in RB#2 and RB#3 salary. (hard to imagine we pay this) really going to come down to is how much the team values their RB's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wcblack34 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 I think that we've seen that the team views Murray as the lead back between him and McKinnon. Cook is still on a very reasonable rookie deal. We know that McKinnon couldn't get it done as the #1 guy last season (albeit behind a vastly inferior O-Line). A player with McKinnon's skill set can be drafted with a drastic reduction in salary. However, I don't think that McKinnon will command top dollar on the market with all of the other options available. Conceivably, I think we could see the band back together for next year. However, I think it is most likely that Murray stays and is the top-level backup to Dalvin. We don't want to be left with an Asiata/McKinnon situation like we had when AP went down. That said, if we sign a QB to a 20 million dollar deal, Murray's salary becomes a much bigger eyesore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purplexing Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 59 minutes ago, gopherwrestler said: ...resigning McKinnon and cutting Murray leaves us with basically $5.2M cap hit next year + a rookie RB/another free agent salary keeping Murray and letting McKinnon walk leaves us with $6.35M cap hit next year + a rookie RB/another free agent salary Keeping both you are looking at paying $10.35M in RB#2 and RB#3 salary. (hard to imagine we pay this) really going to come down to is how much the team values their RB's Also is dependent on which "M" vet RB is willing to soften their salary demand, seeing the potential for playoff earnings in the future, and the excess supply of RBs on the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelKing728 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 2 hours ago, gopherwrestler said: Yeah, and he will be taking a ton away from Murray. I still hope we take another RB right around round 3 this year. Nah, we need more help/depth on the lines, another corner. I'd wait till like round 6 for a back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 3 hours ago, wcblack34 said: I think that we've seen that the team views Murray as the lead back between him and McKinnon. Cook is still on a very reasonable rookie deal. We know that McKinnon couldn't get it done as the #1 guy last season (albeit behind a vastly inferior O-Line). A player with McKinnon's skill set can be drafted with a drastic reduction in salary. However, I don't think that McKinnon will command top dollar on the market with all of the other options available. Conceivably, I think we could see the band back together for next year. However, I think it is most likely that Murray stays and is the top-level backup to Dalvin. We don't want to be left with an Asiata/McKinnon situation like we had when AP went down. That said, if we sign a QB to a 20 million dollar deal, Murray's salary becomes a much bigger eyesore. With Cook back, I think McKinnon’s pass protection stands out more than Murray’s running ability. And he’s more valuable as a 3rd down/x-factor player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klomp Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Just now, SemperFeist said: With Cook back, I think McKinnon’s pass protection stands out more than Murray’s running ability. And he’s more valuable as a 3rd down/x-factor player. Cook is the best pass protector of the three. Cook is the best receiver/runner after the catch of the three. Murray is the best goal line back of the three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 13 minutes ago, Klomp said: Cook is the best pass protector of the three. Cook is the best receiver/runner after the catch of the three. Murray is the best goal line back of the three. I disagree that Murray is the best goal line back of the three, Cook is a more effective short yardage back. Murray’s just the best we’ve got with Cook out. But my point is that Cook can do everything that Murray does, and then some, as the starter, but Murray can’t do everything that McKinnon does as the “backup”. With Cook back as the starter, McKinnon’s role essentially wouldn’t change, and there’d really no longer be a need for Murray. Especially at his contract price. Ultimately, I think you can re-sign McKinnon on a 3-4 year deal for not much more than what Murray is slated to make next year, alone. And with Cook on a rookie deal, I think it would be a much better use of resources than paying Murray $6M+ in 2018. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klomp Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 24 minutes ago, SemperFeist said: But my point is that Cook can do everything that Murray does, and then some, as the starter, but Murray can’t do everything that McKinnon does as the “backup”. McKinnon can't do everything Murray does, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 12 minutes ago, Klomp said: McKinnon can't do everything Murray does, either. But Cook can. Cook replaces Murray in this offense, completely. However, Murray doesn’t replace McKinnon. That would put Murray 3rd on the depth chart, and not worth his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wcblack34 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 But if Cook goes down, which guy do you want as the lead back? McKinnon has shown in the past that he's not capable of being that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 2 minutes ago, wcblack34 said: But if Cook goes down, which guy do you want as the lead back? McKinnon has shown in the past that he's not capable of being that guy. Exactly. Give me Murray as my top backup knowing that Cook should get many of the passing looks than McKinnon has gotten this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purplexing Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 26 minutes ago, vikingsrule said: Exactly. Give me Murray as my top backup knowing that Cook should get many of the passing looks than McKinnon has gotten this year. Would work if his salary is adjusted to backup level, to make space for the necessary re-signings of 2-3 key defensive players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelKing728 Posted January 7, 2018 Share Posted January 7, 2018 Finding a scat back should be easier to find than a borderline starter, right? I would think its easier to replace McKinnon than Murray. If Cook goes down again or is ineffective, Murray is an adequate replacement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted January 8, 2018 Share Posted January 8, 2018 49 minutes ago, Purplexing said: Would work if his salary is adjusted to backup level, to make space for the necessary re-signings of 2-3 key defensive players. Ideally the Vikes would work on Murray's contract. I'm not sure it's a necessity though. MN doesn't have many priority resignings this offseason other than picking a QB to go with $40+ million in cap space. Wrights contract will need to be evaluated too and if Coley or Adams could replace him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.