Jump to content

2023 Sign, Draft, or Promote: Starting C


swede700

How should the Vikings handle the starting C?  

15 members have voted

  1. 1. How should the Vikings handle the starting C?

    • Re-sign Garrett Bradbury
    • Sign an external free agent (Specify preference in thread)
    • Draft a new starting C
    • Re-sign and promote Austin Schlottman
    • Promote Chris Reed
      0
    • Other (Specify preference in thread)
      0


Recommended Posts

Just now, JDBrocks said:

He's a good run blocker, and has been very good in the screen game. If you want to say he's not the right fit, then fine. I don't have an issue moving on either, for the right fit. But just blanket "he's bad" is not a fair assessment of him as a player.

He’s bad. He’s not the right fit. Semantics. 

He’s not worth spending money on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pioneer Press beat writer Chris Tomasson reported on February 8 that John Michael Schmitz had talked with the Vikings at the Senior Bowl — conversations that will likely continue at the NFL Combine starting February 28.

Schmitz has plenty of ties to the Vikings beyond playing for the University of Minnesota. The Flossmoor, Illinois, native is represented by former Vikings offensive lineman Jeremiah Sirles. Schmitz has also attended four Vikings games since he arrived in Minnesota in 2019 and was enamored by the atmosphere.

 Schmitz:  “It was electric. Those are some great fans, some of the best fans there are.”

https://heavy.com/sports/minnesota-vikings/john-schmitz-nfl-draft-news-gophers/?fbclid=IwAR36uwyKjD4kYyZEKELWZBgfa7iGBvw8vVpzBMRnoxln9Sl-3W7cZ8-RIrk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a decent chance that we have seen peek Bradbury.  And peek Bradbury was maybe just average. The majority of the time Bradbury has been flat out terrible.  And by that I mean, doesn't deserve to be a starter in the NFL terrible. He has been bad enough that it isn't even worth trying to rank if he was the worst center in the league or just maybe the third worst.  There were backups around the league performing better when they came in and played for their teams. Wherever the rank was, doesn't matter because it was in the territory where the team needed to move on.

For his first three years he was only starting because of hope that he would improve and the GM not having a viable contingency when Bradbury was showing consistently hideous performances. Finally, Bradbury improved this year to play at maybe an average level. I am unsure if he can keep that up; he was still getting walked back way too much.

I would hesitate to give Bradbury any contract that more or less guarantees him the starting job.  He does not deserve that. I would love to sign him to a deal that pays him a base at a high end backup level with with nice incentives that up his salary to above average starting center salary for each game in which he takes a snap.

My offer to Bradbury would be something like a one year $4.5MM pact with an additional $200k for each game he takes an offensive snap. That protects the Vikings from Bradbury regression towards his mean while also giving Bradbury $7.9MM if he holds the starting position all year. If Bradbury can get more than that somewhere else I would be happy for him, but IMO given the body of his work to date he doesn't deserve a contract that guarantees him a starting job. 

Anything guaranteeing $5MM or more to Bradbury if he is on the roster this year I would wait until after free agency starts to sign him so that I could explore other options.

Edited by Cearbhall
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, JDBrocks said:

He's a good run blocker, and has been very good in the screen game. If you want to say he's not the right fit, then fine. I don't have an issue moving on either, for the right fit. But just blanket "he's bad" is not a fair assessment of him as a player.

Aren’t we completely awful in the screen game? Like the worst in the league by a pretty wide margin? Thought we saw a stat indicating that at some point in the year. He’s a good run blocker but how come we can not run the ball in short yardage situations? If cook is dancing, isn’t that likely due to a lack of push by the interior? That’s been Bradbury’s biggest issue, anchoring in pass pro and holding up in short yardage run situations. Again, I’d make a decision based on his performance in his entire career, not half a year in a scheme that more likely hid his flaws to allow for a resurgence. Prior to this year, Bradbury was regularly ranked as a bottom five guard. I don’t want to pay average center money for that. I’d rather use that $6 to $8 million in an average level starter at DL and LB where we are really hurting. 
 

Bradbury is a hole at center if he returns so letting him walk doesn’t change much. 

Edited by vikingsrule
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cearbhall said:

There is a decent chance that we have seen peek Bradbury.  And peek Bradbury was maybe just average. The majority of the time Bradbury has been flat out terrible.  And by that I mean, doesn't deserve to be a starter in the NFL terrible. He has been bad enough that it isn't even worth trying to rank if he was the worst center in the league or just maybe the third worst.  There were backups around the league performing better when they came in and played for their teams. Wherever the rank was, doesn't matter because it was in the territory where the team needed to move on.

For his first three years he was only starting because of hope that he would improve and the GM not having a viable contingency when Bradbury was showing consistently hideous performances. Finally, Bradbury improved this year to play at maybe an average level. I am unsure if he can keep that up; he was still getting walked back way too much.

I would hesitate to give Bradbury any contract that more or less guarantees him the starting job.  He does not deserve that. I would love to sign him to a deal that pays him a base at a high end backup level with with nice incentives that up his salary to above average starting center salary for each game in which he takes a snap.

My offer to Bradbury would be something like a one year $4.5MM pact with an additional $200k for each game he takes an offensive snap. That protects the Vikings from Bradbury regression towards his mean while also giving Bradbury $7.9MM if he holds the starting position all year. If Bradbury can get more than that somewhere else I would be happy for him, but IMO given the body of his work to date he doesn't deserve a contract that guarantees him a starting job. 

Anything guaranteeing $5MM or more to Bradbury if he is on the roster this year I would wait until after free agency starts to sign him so that I could explore other options.

If that's your offer, then it would be wise to not even bother offering it, because that would likely be insulting to him and his agent.  He has missed 8 games over the last 2 years, but has started every game he's been able to participate in.  Getting paid for taking snaps is something you maybe could get by with for a player with a significant injury history, but he doesn't have that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vikingsrule said:

Aren’t we completely awful in the screen game? Like the worst in the league by a pretty wide margin? Thought we saw a stat indicating that at some point in the year. He’s a good run blocker but how come we can not run the ball in short yardage situations? If cook is dancing, isn’t that likely due to a lack of push by the interior? That’s been Bradbury’s biggest issue, anchoring in pass pro and holding up in short yardage run situations. Again, I’d make a decision based on his performance in his entire career, not half a year in a scheme that more likely hid his flaws to allow for a resurgence. Prior to this year, Bradbury was regularly ranked as a bottom five guard. I don’t want to pay average center money for that. I’d rather use that $6 to $8 million in an average level starter at DL and LB where we are really hurting. 
 

Bradbury is a hole at center if he returns so letting him walk doesn’t change much. 

I don't think the screen game was a Bradbury issue. Most of the time the receiver was late getting to the spot, and was too close to the screeners to be effective. I thought that they used too many TE screens and long developing screens, and that it was a play design flaw, because we've seen Darrisaw, Cleveland, and Bradbury really excel in the screen game in the past.

I'm not going to argue with people who are ready to move on - that's certainly a valid opinion. I just value continuity to a certain price point, and would hope that KO is willing to work on his scheme to make it work better for the strengths of his personnel. If they decided to go get guys that fit the scheme better at C and RB this year, and LG next year, that's a valid path, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, JDBrocks said:

I don't think the screen game was a Bradbury issue. Most of the time the receiver was late getting to the spot, and was too close to the screeners to be effective. I thought that they used too many TE screens and long developing screens, and that it was a play design flaw, because we've seen Darrisaw, Cleveland, and Bradbury really excel in the screen game in the past.

I'm not going to argue with people who are ready to move on - that's certainly a valid opinion. I just value continuity to a certain price point, and would hope that KO is willing to work on his scheme to make it work better for the strengths of his personnel. If they decided to go get guys that fit the scheme better at C and RB this year, and LG next year, that's a valid path, too.

And I get the continuity piece. It’s important between the OL and QB, especially when we’re discussing the Center. But even if he walks, we’d return 4 of 5 starters. Can the entire OL and Cousins work through line changes, audibles, etc in the offseason with a new center. I’d think so, teams change centers all of the time. 

Edited by vikingsrule
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, swede700 said:

If that's your offer, then it would be wise to not even bother offering it, because that would likely be insulting to him and his agent.  He has missed 8 games over the last 2 years, but has started every game he's been able to participate in.  Getting paid for taking snaps is something you maybe could get by with for a player with a significant injury history, but he doesn't have that. 

Yeah, you're right. I wouldn't offer that before free agency starts. I am fine with the team not offering Bradbury a contract before free agency.  The lower contract can be offered later on if no team signs him in the first couple waves of free agency.  Players don't feel as insulted to be offered that kind of money when they haven't been able to find anyone else to offer them anything better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ended up voting for re-signing Bradbury, even though I'm not sure I'm a fan of that.  With the lack of draft picks and no real good alternatives in free agency, that seems to be the most reasonable choice.  If he prices himself out though, I'd roll with Chris Reed and look for alternatives over the next 2 years.  

  • Like 1
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...