Hunting Problems?

[Illadelegend215]

I haven’t seen a thread on Danielle Hunter. Any updates on his contract situation?

[swede700]

Nothing has changed thus far.  We'll have to wait and see if he shows up to minicamp in a couple of weeks.  I still think he'll show up...and then once the extensions for Harrison Smith and Brian O'Neill get done, he'll be next on the list.

[babababa]

8 hours ago, swede700 said:

Nothing has changed thus far.  We'll have to wait and see if he shows up to minicamp in a couple of weeks.  I still think he'll show up...and then once the extensions for Harrison Smith and Brian O'Neill get done, he'll be next on the list.

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.

 

 

[swede700]

6 hours ago, babababa said:

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.

 

 

He has 3 years left on his deal, while the other 2 are on the last year of their deals.  He can wait...he's in this position because of his own and his agent's doing.  There's no reason for the Vikings to cater to him before the other 2.

Edited June 3, 2021 by swede700

[SemperFeist]

42 minutes ago, swede700 said:

He has 3 years left on his deal, while the other 2 are on the last year of their deals.  He can wait...he's in this position because of his own and his agent's doing.  There's no reason for the Vikings to cater to him before the other 2.

Not to mention, Hunter doesn’t have much, if any, leverage. 

[babababa]

4 hours ago, swede700 said:

He has 3 years left on his deal, while the other 2 are on the last year of their deals.  He can wait...he's in this position because of his own and his agent's doing.  There's no reason for the Vikings to cater to him before the other 2.

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. 

[swede700]

1 minute ago, babababa said:

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. 

He does himself no favors if he sits out.  I have full confidence that they'll eventually come to an agreement, but the other 2 have to come first IMO.  They are just as critical to the team as he is.  

[babababa]

4 hours ago, SemperFeist said:

Not to mention, Hunter doesn’t have much, if any, leverage. 

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.

[SemperFeist]

1.) The CBA makes the threat of holding out near non existent. 

2.) With 3 years remaining in his current contract, there’s no threat of free agency to leverage a new deal.

3.) Hunter is coming off significant neck surgery for a herniated disk. That’s not a simple injury. So a.) which team would offer a trade package that makes it worth while for the Vikings to enterrain? And b.) which team is going to give Hunter the contract he wants sight unseen? 

 

There have been no reports, to my knowledge, to suggest that any of Hunter’s displeasure is anything other than a financial dispute. That’s an easy fix. And the fastest way to fix it, and for Hunter to get the contract that he wants, is for him to show everybody that he can still play at that superstar DE level. 

[babababa]

5 minutes ago, swede700 said:

He does himself no favors if he sits out.  I have full confidence that they'll eventually come to an agreement, but the other 2 have to come first IMO.  They are just as critical to the team as he is.  

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 now and Hunter is aware of this. He can leverage this against them.

----------------------------------------------

Regarding the second count:

It can be argued right now, that a fully healthy Hunter in his prime is the MVP on this team -- even over Cousins.

O'Neil is good but not elite RT. He's also going to get paid market value by some other team if the team parts ways. 

Smith is a great, but he's 32 years old. He's also a Safety. 

Hunter is Bruce Smith 2.0 and is in his prime.

[babababa]

13 minutes ago, SemperFeist said:

1.) The CBA makes the threat of holding out near non existent. 

2.) With 3 years remaining in his current contract, there’s no threat of free agency to leverage a new deal.

3.) Hunter is coming off significant neck surgery for a herniated disk. That’s not a simple injury. So a.) which team would offer a trade package that makes it worth while for the Vikings to enterrain? And b.) which team is going to give Hunter the contract he wants sight unseen? 

 

There have been no reports, to my knowledge, to suggest that any of Hunter’s displeasure is anything other than a financial dispute. That’s an easy fix. And the fastest way to fix it, and for Hunter to get the contract that he wants, is for him to show everybody that he can still play at that superstar DE level. 

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 point forward. 

[SemperFeist]

17 minutes ago, babababa said:

If you told that to Hunter he wouldn't play another down for this team.

Or any other team, and he wouldn’t get paid.

He’d lose another year of earning potential. He’d create more questions than answers about his health and his ability moving forward. And his value would become even lower, making it even less of a reason for the team to move him. 

Hunter’s fastest route to getting what he wants is still to show up, play, and prove that he’s worth the money that he wants. 

[swede700]

Whether he has any guaranteed money left on his deal is completely irrelevant.  It just means that the team could cut him without any financial impact.  That doesn't give him any additional leverage. If he doesn't play, then that isn't going to improve his situation...it just makes it more likely that the team will do nothing, because they don't have to do anything.  

In reality though, @babababa, I think you're just overreacting.  It'll get done.  If they address Smith and O'Neill first, it's no skin off of Hunter's back.  It's not a sign of disrespect if they address them first...and I'm sure Hunter realizes that.  If he doesn't, then he's not as smart as I think he is.  Of course he's displeased...who wouldn't be, but in the end, it's just business.  Business is business and football is football.  From a business perspective, it'd be unwise to elevate Hunter in the priority just because he's upset (or thrown a fit, if you prefer that phrase), because what you do when the next guy comes complaining about how he's outplayed his contract that he just signed basically last week?        

Edited June 3, 2021 by swede700

[SemperFeist]

56 minutes ago, babababa said:

It can be argued right now, that a fully healthy Hunter in his prime is the MVP on this team

Maybe.

A herniated disk in his neck and the surgery that followed could have easily altered that. And it will remain an unknown until he steps on the field and shows that he’s still that player we all hope he still is.

[Cearbhall]

If I was making the decision, it is an easy and fairly clear decision to deal with O'Neill first. I wouldn't make that same statement about Smith, but if he I would at least check in with him to see what he would want. There is plenty time to deal with Hunter. It isn't urgent. I see no real threat of Hunter holding out. If he said he was thinking of doing that is a bluff that I would call.