Eric Kendrick’s Signs Extension 5Yr/$50M

[CriminalMind]

To me, this signing puts better talent in jeopardy of possibly not being retained (all 4 Barr, Hunter, Sheldon, Diggs). So due to that, I'm not a fan on the deal.

I almost expect to see a CB taken in the top 2 rounds, to replace Waynes next season, as I can't see us picking up his 5th year option (being merely an ok talent) & even further risk jeopardizing retaining those big 4.

[Kparty15]

I think Diggs an Barr will get around $10M per year.  I don’t think it’s smart to let one of our best offensive talents walk.  I think that would really frustrate our new QB.  I think it is important that we keep our team balanced.  We already have a ton of star players locked up on defense.

I also think we might be overestimating what Hunter will be worth.  He does play a premiere position, but outside of the Panthers game a few years ago he is still just potential at this point.

Guys like Murray, Easton, and Remmers could all likely be gone next year to make room for all of these extensions.

 

[Cearbhall]

9 minutes ago, Kparty15 said:

Guys like Murray, Easton, and Remmers could all likely be gone next year to make room for all of these extensions.

Stating the obvious but want to make sure nobody reads into this statement something that they should not: since Easton and Murray are not under contract for next year getting rid of them will not give the team any more room under the cap than what is already projected based on current contracts.

[vikestyle]

I like it. With the addition of Richardson on the DL, he's gonna be kept even more clean than he was last year and should have a gigantic year. Smart to lock him up now.

The only problem is that also applies to Barr, Hunter, and Richardson on defense, and Diggs on offense with the addition of Cousins. Having a bunch of young guys lined up to have career years? Not a bad problem to have, it'd just be nice if all of their contracts weren't up at the same time.

[Krauser]

17 minutes ago, vikestyle said:

I like it. With the addition of Richardson on the DL, he's gonna be kept even more clean than he was last year and should have a gigantic year. Smart to lock him up now.

Good point -- if they're going to keep him at all, might as well sign him right now because he's going to be racking up the tackles behind Joseph and Richardson. 

 

43 minutes ago, Kparty15 said:

I also think we might be overestimating what Hunter will be worth.  He does play a premiere position, but outside of the Panthers game a few years ago he is still just potential at this point.

Here's the complete list of NFL players since 2000 with a 10-sack season by the age of 23, ordered from youngest to oldest. 

How many players on that list were let go by their teams at the end of their rookie contracts? Aldon Smith, because he's an idiot, but I think that's it. 

Hunter is one of the biggest steals in the draft in the last 5 years. If the NFL had projected his production to date, given his age and size, he would've gone in the top 10, maybe the top 5. He leads the class of edge rushers in sacks, while being the youngest of them, and with only starting for one season so far.

Closest to him is Vic Beasley, who went 8th overall, and has 24.5 career sacks to Hunter's 25.5, after starting for 3 years to Hunter's 1. Beasley turns 26 in July, while Hunter will still be 23, which was Beasley's draft age. 

The idea that the Vikings, having drafted Danielle Hunter, should let him go to save cap space because he's "just potential at this point" is completely wrong headed. If you're lucky enough to find a guy that good, you pay him. He's one of the most valuable players on the team right now -- given his age, health and production, arguably one of the most valuable non-QBs in the league. 

[CriminalMind]

I agree with the Hunter analysis, he is most worth the tag (out of everyone given age & production & talent & position), but that's an expensive number, so I definitely would like to see him extended instead.

[Kparty15]

7 hours ago, Krauser said:

Here's the complete list of NFL players since 2000 with a 10-sack season by the age of 23, ordered from youngest to oldest. 

How many players on that list were let go by their teams at the end of their rookie contracts? Aldon Smith, because he's an idiot, but I think that's it. 

Hunter is one of the biggest steals in the draft in the last 5 years. If the NFL had projected his production to date, given his age and size, he would've gone in the top 10, maybe the top 5. He leads the class of edge rushers in sacks, while being the youngest of them, and with only starting for one season so far.

Closest to him is Vic Beasley, who went 8th overall, and has 24.5 career sacks to Hunter's 25.5, after starting for 3 years to Hunter's 1. Beasley turns 26 in July, while Hunter will still be 23, which was Beasley's draft age. 

The idea that the Vikings, having drafted Danielle Hunter, should let him go to save cap space because he's "just potential at this point" is completely wrong headed. If you're lucky enough to find a guy that good, you pay him. He's one of the most valuable players on the team right now -- given his age, health and production, arguably one of the most valuable non-QBs in the league. 

Those are great numbers, but part of me wonders how much of his production is because of his own talent and how much of it is benefitting from Joseph and Griffen getting double teamed.

[SemperFeist]

You don’t put up those types of numbers without talent. 

[Guest]

I am confused by the statements that Hunter is most worthy of a new, bigger contract, of Kendricks, Barr, Diggs and Hunter.  It seems to me that he was more or less a non-factor in most games last season.  I still think he's not very good against the run, and his technique as a pass rusher remains limited.  Yes, he's a physical freak and athlete.  Yet, from my observation, he had difficulty in shedding blockers.  I wouldn't be heart broken to see him not get a contract.

[The Gnat]

19 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

I am confused by the statements that Hunter is most worthy of a new, bigger contract, of Kendricks, Barr, Diggs and Hunter.  It seems to me that he was more or less a non-factor in most games last season.  I still think he's not very good against the run, and his technique as a pass rusher remains limited.  Yes, he's a physical freak and athlete.  Yet, from my observation, he had difficulty in shedding blockers.  I wouldn't be heart broken to see him not get a contract.

I agree with you.

I also look at the system that we are running. While the Bengals had solid DE's with Zimmer running the defense, they didn't spend as much there because of how much they rotate along the defensive line. I'd prefer to get two players who can play at a Robison level the past few years than one guy who has the potential to get back to 10 sacks like Hunter.

[vikingsrule]

36 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

I am confused by the statements that Hunter is most worthy of a new, bigger contract, of Kendricks, Barr, Diggs and Hunter.  It seems to me that he was more or less a non-factor in most games last season.  I still think he's not very good against the run, and his technique as a pass rusher remains limited.  Yes, he's a physical freak and athlete.  Yet, from my observation, he had difficulty in shedding blockers.  I wouldn't be heart broken to see him not get a contract.

He may have been overworked as a full time starter. I'd be open to more of a rotation and bringing in another DE in the draft early. Adding a DE early should be a prority given the status of Hunter and Robison going forward. Could definitely call out CB as a prority too as I think it's unlikely that the Vikes pay Waynes $12+ million on that fifth year option. 

Or if Diggs is likely gone, WR should be a prority. The Vikes could go in so many directions with the draft yet no immediate starters are needed (except 1 OL). Not a bad spot to be in but there has to be a lot of pressure to get this draft right.

[Krauser]

49 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

I am confused by the statements that Hunter is most worthy of a new, bigger contract, of Kendricks, Barr, Diggs and Hunter.  It seems to me that he was more or less a non-factor in most games last season.  I still think he's not very good against the run, and his technique as a pass rusher remains limited.  Yes, he's a physical freak and athlete.  Yet, from my observation, he had difficulty in shedding blockers.  I wouldn't be heart broken to see him not get a contract.

PFF charting...

Griffen: 484 pass rush snaps, 12 sacks, 11 hits, 38 hurries. 61 total pressures. 10.1% “pass rush productivity”

Hunter: 479 pass rush snaps, 8 sacks, 4 hits, 49 hurries. 61 total pressures. 10.0% “pass rush productivity”

Griffen: 268 run snaps, 24 tackles, 7 assists, 3 missed tackles, 17 “stops”.  Stop percentage: 6.3%

Hunter: 246 run snaps, 22 tackles, 7 assists, 2 missed tackles, 17 “stops”.  Stop percentage: 6.9%

...so he was even more effective against the run than Griffen, and getting to the QB at a comparable rate of total pressures, just with more hurries and fewer sacks.  Total pressure by the way is a better way to predict future sacks than actual sacks. 

Robison’s pass rush productivity was 7.9 last year. Hunter’s PRP in 2016 was 11.5, Griffen 10.1, Robison 8.1. In 2015, Griffen’s was 11.3, Hunter 9.8, Robison 8.4. 2014, Griffen 9.9, Robison 8.0. So Hunter has the best single year (2016) on this score of pass rush effectiveness for the Vikings under Zimmer, and his 2017 performance ties Griffen’s 2nd best years (2017 and 2016). 

Run stop %: Robison 2017 was 5.6. 2016: Hunter 13.1, Griffen 6.2, Robison 3.7. 2015: Hunter 11.5, Robison 5.8, Griffen 5.0. 2014: Griffen 7.6, Robison 3.6. So Hunter has the top 2, and 3 of the top 4 run stop percentage seasons of the Zimmer era DEs.

Hunter is in fact the best DE on the team against the run, and just about as good a pass rusher as Griffen already. And he’s 23, while Griffen turns 31 this year. 

Letting Hunter go would be just about the worst personnel decision the Vikings can make. 

[Krauser]

31 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

 Could definitely call out CB as a prority too as I think it's unlikely that the Vikes pay Waynes $12+ million on that fifth year option. 

Waynes 5th year will be ~$9M, not $12M. It’s calculated by comparable (top 3-25) salaries, not cap hits. Matthew Collier got it wrong in an article and now everyone makes the same mistake. 

Kyle Fuller was in the same contract position this year, CB on the 5th year option drafted outside the top 10, and his option would’ve cost $8.6M. 

[Krauser]

53 minutes ago, The Gnat said:

I agree with you.

I also look at the system that we are running. While the Bengals had solid DE's with Zimmer running the defense, they didn't spend as much there because of how much they rotate along the defensive line. I'd prefer to get two players who can play at a Robison level the past few years than one guy who has the potential to get back to 10 sacks like Hunter.

Even if you want to run a rotation with 2 half-decent DEs, and one premium one, the smart way to do that is to trade or release Griffen after this year while extending Hunter. There’s an 8 year age difference, with one player ascending while the other is almost certainly going to decline by the end of his current contract.

Jared Allen was 32 in 2014, same age Griffen will be in 2019.

Griffen was 27 in 2014, while Hunter will be 24 next year. 

If you only keep one pass rusher for a premium price (really? Edge rusher is the 2nd most premium position in the league but that’s where you want to save costs?), you keep Hunter and move on from Griffen. It’s an even easier decision than Griffen over Allen heading into 2014. 

[swede700]

10 hours ago, Kparty15 said:

I also think we might be overestimating what Hunter will be worth.  He does play a premiere position, but outside of the Panthers game a few years ago he is still just potential at this point.

 

 

That's exactly why you have to pay him some good money now in an extension.  You pay him for his production potential, and if he pays off, he's probably a bargain (like Everson Griffen was) and if he doesn't, it's probably not going to kill you cap-wise because you only paid him on "potential" and not proven production, so it's probably less money overall.  You still can't ignore the fact that he's only 24 years old and is coming off his first year as a full-time starter.  He's still got significant room to grow and he has the work ethic to do so.