RE: General Vikes Talk

RE: General Vikes Talk (Full Version)

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk

Message

Pager -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 9:13:27 AM)
I don't understand why Patterson is thought overrated on this site (and others). Bill posted all those drafted. Obenigbo, Stephen, Weatherly were all 7 rounders who got second contracts with other teams (didn't we draft weatherly and stephen in the 7th rounds?). That's pretty phenomenal. Hunter to all pro. Griffin - I personally believe, was helped by Patterson. Floyd was the only first or second round draft pick while Patterson's been here. True we've signed several guys, but only Joseph for relatively big money. Not other position group has gotten less $ and draft capital (without looking it up - maybe RBs?). And other than last year we've had very good DL.

Bill Johanesen -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 9:19:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pager I don't understand why Patterson is thought overrated on this site (and others). Bill posted all those drafted. Obenigbo, Stephen, Weatherly were all 7 rounders who got second contracts with other teams (didn't we draft weatherly and stephen in the 7th rounds?). That's pretty phenomenal. Hunter to all pro. Griffin - I personally believe, was helped by Patterson. Floyd was the only first or second round draft pick while Patterson's been here. True we've signed several guys, but only Joseph for relatively big money. Not other position group has gotten less $ and draft capital (without looking it up - maybe RBs?). And other than last year we've had very good DL. Good info on Stephen and Weatherly being drafted in the 7th. I didn't notice that or would have included all 7th rounders since that is pretty significant. Not going back to change the post and add in all the 7ths (no doubt someone will say I purposely omitted them to shape a narrative or whatnot).

Bill Johanesen -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 9:33:56 AM)
Ah what the heck. This includes Weatherly and Stephen but not several other 7th rounders who didn't make the team. Season prior In 2013, the depth chart was largely a group of aged starters: RDE - Allen, Griffen NT - Guion, Fred Evans UT - Kevin Williams, Floyd (R), Ballard LDE - Robison, D'Aundre Reed Draftees Here are the players with four years or less experience that could maybe be considered as having developed under Patt (round, excludes most 7th rounders and undrafted free agents like Bower). Note that Griffen had a few years in already but wasn't a starter. 2010 - Griffen (4) 2011 - Ballard (4) 2013 - Floyd (1) Players drafted while he was with the Vikings: 2014 - Crichton (3), Stephen (7) 2015 - Hunter (3), Dubose (6) 2016 - Weatherly (7) 2017 - Jaleel Johnson (4), Odenigbo (7) 2018 - Holmes (4), Aruna (6) 2019 - Watts (6) 2020 - a bunch with limited snaps Free agents I'm not going to look up free agents but recall Linval Joseph, Weatherly, Stephen, Tom Johnson doing ok for what was expected. Richardson, Ngakoue, already developed and limited sample size?

TJSweens -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 9:37:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro quote: ORIGINAL: kgdabom quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro the law office of KG-Bill would have us doLOL I'm in the middle on this one. Prefer he plays on existing contract through this season with the promise of entering good faith negotiations next off season. 1. Hunter needs to prove he's not damaged goods. 2. Current Covid cap restrictions are also something Hunter's team needs to take in for account. 3. Viking brass need to acknowledge Hunter has vastly out played his current deal. All this vastly outplaying his current deal is simply not true. In 2019 he outplayed it, but in 2020 he didn't even take the field for us. That is not vastly outplaying his current deal. He was 1st team all-pro for both the 2018 &19 seasons. (All-pro is the award where the rubber meets the road vs pro bowl.) So he was considered to be among the 4-5 best DE's/Edge guys in the league. Yet (at no fault of the Vikings) is now currently the 13 highest paid DE. As I noted it wasn't the Vikings fault that DE salaries really escalated. He did get hurt last season but I don't think we can throw rocks at him for that. He showed up to all voluntary OTA's ect and was injured. That's part of football. That Hunter missed last year is irrelevant when evaluating performance against his contract. Players get injured. A player gets injured, he still gets paid. Deal with it. If you want to bitch about last year, then Hunter can point to the fact that he racked up 40 sacks for the Vikings on a 3rd round rookie scale contract for 4 years. You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole. Hunter didn't miss a game due to injury for 5 years before last year. He piled up 54.5 sacks in that time. He holds the NFL record for most sacks by a player by age 25. Harp on him being out last year all you want, but the reality is that even factoring in last year, Hunter has been a bargain for the Vikings. I also don't buy the argument that you can't renegotiate with three years remaining on the contract. When a team goes to a player with the ultimatum to renegotiate or get cut, they don't care how many years are left on the contract. The only argument that has any validity is the "needs to prove he still has it after the injury" one. The Vikings have pretty well admitted that they have no concerns about the level of performance they expect out of Hunter. If they were concerned, they wouldn't have been satisfied with signing a journey man who had just been cut and using a couple of mid round picks on the position. The bottom line is that the DE market exploded after Hunter signed his contract. There are DE that aren't half as good Hunter, making more money than he is. I believe he is now the 17th highest paid DE. He wants a fair market deal and it appears he is ready to utilize the only leverage he has. I have no problem with him doing so. Like bohumm said, until the NFL fundamentally changes how contracts and guaranteed money are structured, this how the game will be played league wide. - FWIW, I think Hunter would be better served by attending mini camp and showing the coaches and brass that he is 100%. He can then pick the next camp for his battle if he chooses.

Bill Johanesen -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 9:39:43 AM)
Seems Crichton was a bad pick and I've never understood how Holmes is still around but other than that the DL under Patterson looks pretty good as far as draftees and FAs. It was too bad the doc botched Floyd's surgery because while the jury was still out he was showing promise and maybe would have really rounded out the DL.

thebigo -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 9:49:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TJSweens quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro quote: ORIGINAL: kgdabom quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro the law office of KG-Bill would have us doLOL I'm in the middle on this one. Prefer he plays on existing contract through this season with the promise of entering good faith negotiations next off season. 1. Hunter needs to prove he's not damaged goods. 2. Current Covid cap restrictions are also something Hunter's team needs to take in for account. 3. Viking brass need to acknowledge Hunter has vastly out played his current deal. All this vastly outplaying his current deal is simply not true. In 2019 he outplayed it, but in 2020 he didn't even take the field for us. That is not vastly outplaying his current deal. He was 1st team all-pro for both the 2018 &19 seasons. (All-pro is the award where the rubber meets the road vs pro bowl.) So he was considered to be among the 4-5 best DE's/Edge guys in the league. Yet (at no fault of the Vikings) is now currently the 13 highest paid DE. As I noted it wasn't the Vikings fault that DE salaries really escalated. He did get hurt last season but I don't think we can throw rocks at him for that. He showed up to all voluntary OTA's ect and was injured. That's part of football. That Hunter missed year is irrelevant when evaluating performance against his contract. Players get injured. A player gets injured, he still gets paid. Deal with it. If you want to bitch about last year, then Hunter can point to the fact that he racked up 40 sacks for the Vikings on a 3rd round rookie scale contract for 4 years. You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole. Hunter didn't miss a game due to injury for 5 years before last year. He piled up 54.5 sacks in that time. He holds the NFL record for most sacks by a player by age 25. Harp on him being out last year all you want, but the reality is that even factoring in last year, Hunter has been a bargain for the Vikings. I also don't buy the argument that you can't renegotiate with three years remaining on the contract. When a team goes to a player with the ultimatum to renegotiate or get cut, they don't care how many years are left on the contract. The only argument that has any validity is the "needs to prove he still has it after the injury" one. The Vikings have pretty well admitted that they have no concerns about the level of performance they expect out of Hunter. If they were concerned, they wouldn't have been satisfied with signing a journey man who had just been cut and using a couple of mid round picks on the position. The bottom line is that the DE market exploded after Hunter signed his contract. There are DE that aren't half as good Hunter, making more money than he is. I believe he is now the 17th highest paid DE. He wants a fair market deal and it appears he is ready to utilize the only leverage he has. I have no problem with him doing so. Like bohumm said, until the NFL fundamentally changes how contracts and guaranteed money are structured, this how the game will be played league wide. - FWIW, I think Hunter would be better served by attending mini camp and showing the coaches and brass that he is 100%. He can then pick the next camp for his battle if he chooses. So a 32 year old player that played at a HOF level until he was 30, but whose play has fallen of significantly over the last 2 seasons, you continue to pay him at, or close to at, HOF $, because "You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole"?

thebigo -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 9:51:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Pager I don't understand why Patterson is thought overrated on this site (and others). It's what we do.

TJSweens -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 9:54:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thebigo quote: ORIGINAL: TJSweens quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro quote: ORIGINAL: kgdabom quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro the law office of KG-Bill would have us doLOL I'm in the middle on this one. Prefer he plays on existing contract through this season with the promise of entering good faith negotiations next off season. 1. Hunter needs to prove he's not damaged goods. 2. Current Covid cap restrictions are also something Hunter's team needs to take in for account. 3. Viking brass need to acknowledge Hunter has vastly out played his current deal. All this vastly outplaying his current deal is simply not true. In 2019 he outplayed it, but in 2020 he didn't even take the field for us. That is not vastly outplaying his current deal. He was 1st team all-pro for both the 2018 &19 seasons. (All-pro is the award where the rubber meets the road vs pro bowl.) So he was considered to be among the 4-5 best DE's/Edge guys in the league. Yet (at no fault of the Vikings) is now currently the 13 highest paid DE. As I noted it wasn't the Vikings fault that DE salaries really escalated. He did get hurt last season but I don't think we can throw rocks at him for that. He showed up to all voluntary OTA's ect and was injured. That's part of football. That Hunter missed year is irrelevant when evaluating performance against his contract. Players get injured. A player gets injured, he still gets paid. Deal with it. If you want to bitch about last year, then Hunter can point to the fact that he racked up 40 sacks for the Vikings on a 3rd round rookie scale contract for 4 years. You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole. Hunter didn't miss a game due to injury for 5 years before last year. He piled up 54.5 sacks in that time. He holds the NFL record for most sacks by a player by age 25. Harp on him being out last year all you want, but the reality is that even factoring in last year, Hunter has been a bargain for the Vikings. I also don't buy the argument that you can't renegotiate with three years remaining on the contract. When a team goes to a player with the ultimatum to renegotiate or get cut, they don't care how many years are left on the contract. The only argument that has any validity is the "needs to prove he still has it after the injury" one. The Vikings have pretty well admitted that they have no concerns about the level of performance they expect out of Hunter. If they were concerned, they wouldn't have been satisfied with signing a journey man who had just been cut and using a couple of mid round picks on the position. The bottom line is that the DE market exploded after Hunter signed his contract. There are DE that aren't half as good Hunter, making more money than he is. I believe he is now the 17th highest paid DE. He wants a fair market deal and it appears he is ready to utilize the only leverage he has. I have no problem with him doing so. Like bohumm said, until the NFL fundamentally changes how contracts and guaranteed money are structured, this how the game will be played league wide. - FWIW, I think Hunter would be better served by attending mini camp and showing the coaches and brass that he is 100%. He can then pick the next camp for his battle if he chooses. So a 32 year old player that played at a HOF level until he was 30, but whose play has fallen of significantly over the last 2 seasons, you continue to pay him at, or close to at, HOF $, because "You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole"? We're not talking about a has been with declining performance. We are talking about a player early in his prime who was a pro bowler and had 14.5 sacks in his last season.

Bill Johanesen -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 10:17:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TJSweens quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro quote: ORIGINAL: kgdabom quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro the law office of KG-Bill would have us doLOL I'm in the middle on this one. Prefer he plays on existing contract through this season with the promise of entering good faith negotiations next off season. 1. Hunter needs to prove he's not damaged goods. 2. Current Covid cap restrictions are also something Hunter's team needs to take in for account. 3. Viking brass need to acknowledge Hunter has vastly out played his current deal. All this vastly outplaying his current deal is simply not true. In 2019 he outplayed it, but in 2020 he didn't even take the field for us. That is not vastly outplaying his current deal. He was 1st team all-pro for both the 2018 &19 seasons. (All-pro is the award where the rubber meets the road vs pro bowl.) So he was considered to be among the 4-5 best DE's/Edge guys in the league. Yet (at no fault of the Vikings) is now currently the 13 highest paid DE. As I noted it wasn't the Vikings fault that DE salaries really escalated. He did get hurt last season but I don't think we can throw rocks at him for that. He showed up to all voluntary OTA's ect and was injured. That's part of football. That Hunter missed last year is irrelevant when evaluating performance against his contract. Players get injured. A player gets injured, he still gets paid. Deal with it. If you want to bitch about last year, then Hunter can point to the fact that he racked up 40 sacks for the Vikings on a 3rd round rookie scale contract for 4 years. You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole. Hunter didn't miss a game due to injury for 5 years before last year. He piled up 54.5 sacks in that time. He holds the NFL record for most sacks by a player by age 25. Harp on him being out last year all you want, but the reality is that even factoring in last year, Hunter has been a bargain for the Vikings. I also don't buy the argument that you can't renegotiate with three years remaining on the contract. When a team goes to a player with the ultimatum to renegotiate or get cut, they don't care how many years are left on the contract. The only argument that has any validity is the "needs to prove he still has it after the injury" one. The Vikings have pretty well admitted that they have no concerns about the level of performance they expect out of Hunter. If they were concerned, they wouldn't have been satisfied with signing a journey man who had just been cut and using a couple of mid round picks on the position. The bottom line is that the DE market exploded after Hunter signed his contract. There are DE that aren't half as good Hunter, making more money than he is. I believe he is now the 17th highest paid DE. He wants a fair market deal and it appears he is ready to utilize the only leverage he has. I have no problem with him doing so. Like bohumm said, until the NFL fundamentally changes how contracts and guaranteed money are structured, this how the game will be played league wide. - FWIW, I think Hunter would be better served by attending mini camp and showing the coaches and brass that he is 100%. He can then pick the next camp for his battle if he chooses. Having heard all the speculative evidence, you've got the jurors nodding and taking notes with that hell of a closing argument. Even the part justifying negotiating with three years to go is compelling. I'm sure opposing counsel will muster up their same points while the jury stews the wasted time could be used to wrap this thing up.

Bill Johanesen -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 10:25:16 AM)
The judge has just been informed she needs to get this wrapped up ASAP because the fourth appeal of "Hoiseth vs. Cousins" is on the docket in 30 minutes. The jurors have been sequestered for a record-setting two years on that one and are seething.

TJSweens -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 10:26:03 AM)
Only two years?

Bill Johanesen -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 10:46:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TJSweens Only two years? Look man, I just quit the law firm of Sykes & KGB. Got this low paying courtroom reporter gig. I can't say that it's really been over three years because few would believe it. Trying to build up street cred.

thebigo -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 11:36:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TJSweens quote: ORIGINAL: thebigo quote: ORIGINAL: TJSweens quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro quote: ORIGINAL: kgdabom quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro the law office of KG-Bill would have us doLOL I'm in the middle on this one. Prefer he plays on existing contract through this season with the promise of entering good faith negotiations next off season. 1. Hunter needs to prove he's not damaged goods. 2. Current Covid cap restrictions are also something Hunter's team needs to take in for account. 3. Viking brass need to acknowledge Hunter has vastly out played his current deal. All this vastly outplaying his current deal is simply not true. In 2019 he outplayed it, but in 2020 he didn't even take the field for us. That is not vastly outplaying his current deal. He was 1st team all-pro for both the 2018 &19 seasons. (All-pro is the award where the rubber meets the road vs pro bowl.) So he was considered to be among the 4-5 best DE's/Edge guys in the league. Yet (at no fault of the Vikings) is now currently the 13 highest paid DE. As I noted it wasn't the Vikings fault that DE salaries really escalated. He did get hurt last season but I don't think we can throw rocks at him for that. He showed up to all voluntary OTA's ect and was injured. That's part of football. That Hunter missed year is irrelevant when evaluating performance against his contract. Players get injured. A player gets injured, he still gets paid. Deal with it. If you want to bitch about last year, then Hunter can point to the fact that he racked up 40 sacks for the Vikings on a 3rd round rookie scale contract for 4 years. You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole. Hunter didn't miss a game due to injury for 5 years before last year. He piled up 54.5 sacks in that time. He holds the NFL record for most sacks by a player by age 25. Harp on him being out last year all you want, but the reality is that even factoring in last year, Hunter has been a bargain for the Vikings. I also don't buy the argument that you can't renegotiate with three years remaining on the contract. When a team goes to a player with the ultimatum to renegotiate or get cut, they don't care how many years are left on the contract. The only argument that has any validity is the "needs to prove he still has it after the injury" one. The Vikings have pretty well admitted that they have no concerns about the level of performance they expect out of Hunter. If they were concerned, they wouldn't have been satisfied with signing a journey man who had just been cut and using a couple of mid round picks on the position. The bottom line is that the DE market exploded after Hunter signed his contract. There are DE that aren't half as good Hunter, making more money than he is. I believe he is now the 17th highest paid DE. He wants a fair market deal and it appears he is ready to utilize the only leverage he has. I have no problem with him doing so. Like bohumm said, until the NFL fundamentally changes how contracts and guaranteed money are structured, this how the game will be played league wide. - FWIW, I think Hunter would be better served by attending mini camp and showing the coaches and brass that he is 100%. He can then pick the next camp for his battle if he chooses. So a 32 year old player that played at a HOF level until he was 30, but whose play has fallen of significantly over the last 2 seasons, you continue to pay him at, or close to at, HOF $, because "You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole"? We're not talking about a has been with declining performance. We are talking about a player early in his prime who was a pro bowler and had 14.5 sacks in his last season. Who is coming off a season missed due to a neck injury, one of the most unpredictable injuries in terms of future performance expectations.

Tom Sykes -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 11:40:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen quote: ORIGINAL: TJSweens quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro quote: ORIGINAL: kgdabom quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro the law office of KG-Bill would have us doLOL I'm in the middle on this one. Prefer he plays on existing contract through this season with the promise of entering good faith negotiations next off season. 1. Hunter needs to prove he's not damaged goods. 2. Current Covid cap restrictions are also something Hunter's team needs to take in for account. 3. Viking brass need to acknowledge Hunter has vastly out played his current deal. All this vastly outplaying his current deal is simply not true. In 2019 he outplayed it, but in 2020 he didn't even take the field for us. That is not vastly outplaying his current deal. He was 1st team all-pro for both the 2018 &19 seasons. (All-pro is the award where the rubber meets the road vs pro bowl.) So he was considered to be among the 4-5 best DE's/Edge guys in the league. Yet (at no fault of the Vikings) is now currently the 13 highest paid DE. As I noted it wasn't the Vikings fault that DE salaries really escalated. He did get hurt last season but I don't think we can throw rocks at him for that. He showed up to all voluntary OTA's ect and was injured. That's part of football. That Hunter missed last year is irrelevant when evaluating performance against his contract. Players get injured. A player gets injured, he still gets paid. Deal with it. If you want to bitch about last year, then Hunter can point to the fact that he racked up 40 sacks for the Vikings on a 3rd round rookie scale contract for 4 years. You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole. Hunter didn't miss a game due to injury for 5 years before last year. He piled up 54.5 sacks in that time. He holds the NFL record for most sacks by a player by age 25. Harp on him being out last year all you want, but the reality is that even factoring in last year, Hunter has been a bargain for the Vikings. I also don't buy the argument that you can't renegotiate with three years remaining on the contract. When a team goes to a player with the ultimatum to renegotiate or get cut, they don't care how many years are left on the contract. The only argument that has any validity is the "needs to prove he still has it after the injury" one. The Vikings have pretty well admitted that they have no concerns about the level of performance they expect out of Hunter. If they were concerned, they wouldn't have been satisfied with signing a journey man who had just been cut and using a couple of mid round picks on the position. The bottom line is that the DE market exploded after Hunter signed his contract. There are DE that aren't half as good Hunter, making more money than he is. I believe he is now the 17th highest paid DE. He wants a fair market deal and it appears he is ready to utilize the only leverage he has. I have no problem with him doing so. Like bohumm said, until the NFL fundamentally changes how contracts and guaranteed money are structured, this how the game will be played league wide. - FWIW, I think Hunter would be better served by attending mini camp and showing the coaches and brass that he is 100%. He can then pick the next camp for his battle if he chooses. Having heard all the speculative evidence, you've got the jurors nodding and taking notes with that hell of a closing argument. Even the part justifying negotiating with three years to go is compelling. I'm sure opposing counsel will muster up their same points while the jury stews the wasted time could be used to wrap this thing up. I agree the Sweens post is compelling. IMO everything is subjuct to personal viewpoint but the central issue of the case, pre-injury Hunter vs post-injury Hunter. Ofcourse, desciptions like, ‘if you want to bitch’ and ‘deal with it’ betray the otherwise sound logic presented ... We are fans. Fans are emotional. The contract however is a cold business document that requires guaranteed assurances from both sides. I’m sure the team would love to redo his contract right now this very moment because they would be able add in insurance language above the standard ‘what happens in case of injury’ ... since Hunter is currently damaged goods. There’s no other way to interpret it ... until he proves otherwise. The team would pay their player fairly what he deserves on the market but structure it with a much heavier emphasis on incentives and probably an escape clause after season 1 or 2 for worst case health scenarios that wouldn’t be there if Hunter had played ladt year. Whatever ... let him sign his second sub-standard team-friendly contract in a row, I just want him to stay a Viking.

Tom Sykes -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 11:51:10 AM)
IMO if Hunter could wait 6 months to a full-season ... he could set the contract standard for his position. right now ... ‘you are only as good as your last game’ has no full-season injury exceptions or clauses or footnotes.

kwheats -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 11:59:27 AM)
Tweet See new Tweets Conversation Chris Tomasson @christomasson According to NFL Network analyst James Jones, a former NFL wide receiver, DE Danielle Hunter will be at #Vikings mandatory minicamp after missing each of the three previous weeks of voluntary OTAs. [:D]

kwheats -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 12:02:34 PM)
James Jones @89JonesNTAF The #Vikings kick off their mandatory mini-camp tomorrow with players reporting today. Sources say that Danielle Hunter WILL be in attendance. @nflnetwork

kwheats -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 12:11:36 PM)
Ben Goessling @GoesslingStrib · 3m The #Vikings have heard Danielle Hunter will show up for minicamp this week, a source confirms. Some development in the defensive end’s saga with the team. Looks like it's a legit report!!!

Bill Johanesen -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 12:15:17 PM)
Just as the closing arguments conclude! Even Hunter himself wants the case of rampant speculation over so the juicy "Hoiseth v Cousins" trial can continue on time.

ratoppenheimer -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 12:19:06 PM)
. . that is so huge...danielle hunter is a viking - always was, and always will be...they will work out the money....

Bill Johanesen -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 12:22:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ricky J Sure that's all great stuff for the owner and oh the poor players .... I really don't care about either of them. I do care that if Hunter, under contract for three years, gets his way because, it's only fair to him, my team, the one I want to see win at least one F Super Bowl, now has a lot less talent because we're worrying about being fair to a guy that signed the contract to be in the position he is in. Had the saga drawn out, this post would have aged well because it would have represented the eventual viewpoints of the majority of fans.

kgdabom -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 12:28:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes quote: ORIGINAL: bohumm Remember, the reason Hunter is so integral is that he plays Zimmer's system perfectly: stop the run first, rush the passer second. If he were on a team where he could just go upfield to seal the edge (maybe) on the way to the passer, he'd get a lot more sacks. If he were on a team that would start/play a youngster over a declining vet just because he's better, he would have had a lot more snaps and an extra year as a starter under his belt when he negotiated his second contract. Yes, he signed it, but reward him and recognize the entire context. quote: ORIGINAL: bohumm I guess I just don't see it as a given that Hunter is only this good because he was with the Vikings. I think that's helped, but he was extremely young when drafted and likely would be as good anywhere, with even more sacks in a system that allowed him to focus more on rushing the passer. But maybe not. As for college, apples to oranges. If it were all about sacks, he likely wouldn't have been drafted at all. This is all conjecture assuming Hunter would have overcome any obstacle thrown in his path. I could also speculate that if Hunter had not been drafted by the Vikings, he might have lasted until the 5th rd by a team with no DL coach named Patterson ... who can say where he'd be in his development ... a lot of world class athletes and much better college players than Hunter fall through the cracks in their transition to the nfl because they land in the wrong situation. Or, he might have been drafted by a team with a Von Miller instead of a Robison, and played even less his first two years. Yes, he has transformed himself into a great football player ... over time, with the help of the people around him, not in spite of. [:D]

kgdabom -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 12:31:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro quote: ORIGINAL: kgdabom quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro the law office of KG-Bill would have us doLOL I'm in the middle on this one. Prefer he plays on existing contract through this season with the promise of entering good faith negotiations next off season. 1. Hunter needs to prove he's not damaged goods. 2. Current Covid cap restrictions are also something Hunter's team needs to take in for account. 3. Viking brass need to acknowledge Hunter has vastly out played his current deal. All this vastly outplaying his current deal is simply not true. In 2019 he outplayed it, but in 2020 he didn't even take the field for us. That is not vastly outplaying his current deal. He was 1st team all-pro for both the 2018 &19 seasons. (All-pro is the award where the rubber meets the road vs pro bowl.) So he was considered to be among the 4-5 best DE's/Edge guys in the league. Yet (at no fault of the Vikings) is now currently the 13 highest paid DE. As I noted it wasn't the Vikings fault that DE salaries really escalated. He did get hurt last season but I don't think we can throw rocks at him for that. He showed up to all voluntary OTA's ect and was injured. That's part of football. His contract is for 2019-23. 2018 has nothing to do with over or under performing based on his contract. If he's back to 2018-19 levels of play the next three years and no changes are made to his contract he will be overperforming. That's a huge IF.

kgdabom -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 12:38:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TJSweens quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro quote: ORIGINAL: kgdabom quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro the law office of KG-Bill would have us doLOL I'm in the middle on this one. Prefer he plays on existing contract through this season with the promise of entering good faith negotiations next off season. 1. Hunter needs to prove he's not damaged goods. 2. Current Covid cap restrictions are also something Hunter's team needs to take in for account. 3. Viking brass need to acknowledge Hunter has vastly out played his current deal. All this vastly outplaying his current deal is simply not true. In 2019 he outplayed it, but in 2020 he didn't even take the field for us. That is not vastly outplaying his current deal. He was 1st team all-pro for both the 2018 &19 seasons. (All-pro is the award where the rubber meets the road vs pro bowl.) So he was considered to be among the 4-5 best DE's/Edge guys in the league. Yet (at no fault of the Vikings) is now currently the 13 highest paid DE. As I noted it wasn't the Vikings fault that DE salaries really escalated. He did get hurt last season but I don't think we can throw rocks at him for that. He showed up to all voluntary OTA's ect and was injured. That's part of football. That Hunter missed last year is irrelevant when evaluating performance against his contract. Players get injured. A player gets injured, he still gets paid. Deal with it. If you want to bitch about last year, then Hunter can point to the fact that he racked up 40 sacks for the Vikings on a 3rd round rookie scale contract for 4 years. You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole. Hunter didn't miss a game due to injury for 5 years before last year. He piled up 54.5 sacks in that time. He holds the NFL record for most sacks by a player by age 25. Harp on him being out last year all you want, but the reality is that even factoring in last year, Hunter has been a bargain for the Vikings. I also don't buy the argument that you can't renegotiate with three years remaining on the contract. When a team goes to a player with the ultimatum to renegotiate or get cut, they don't care how many years are left on the contract. The only argument that has any validity is the "needs to prove he still has it after the injury" one. The Vikings have pretty well admitted that they have no concerns about the level of performance they expect out of Hunter. If they were concerned, they wouldn't have been satisfied with signing a journey man who had just been cut and using a couple of mid round picks on the position. The bottom line is that the DE market exploded after Hunter signed his contract. There are DE that aren't half as good Hunter, making more money than he is. I believe he is now the 17th highest paid DE. He wants a fair market deal and it appears he is ready to utilize the only leverage he has. I have no problem with him doing so. Like bohumm said, until the NFL fundamentally changes how contracts and guaranteed money are structured, this how the game will be played league wide. - FWIW, I think Hunter would be better served by attending mini camp and showing the coaches and brass that he is 100%. He can then pick the next camp for his battle if he chooses. Hunter not playing last year is incredibly relevant to evaluating performance against his contract. Sure he got paid and should have got paid, but there was zero performance/production last year. I agree with you that is water under the bridge and no longer matters going forward other than your question of does he still have it? If the answer is yes hopefully he will come to mini camp and prove he still has it. Why would he not want to prove he still has it. It would put him in a much stronger negotiating position. I'm hoping the speculation that he won't show up to mini-camp is just stupid speculation and wrong. Edit: I just read he's reporting to mini-camp. Great news.

kgdabom -> RE: General Vikes Talk (6/14/2021 12:40:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thebigo quote: ORIGINAL: TJSweens quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro quote: ORIGINAL: kgdabom quote: ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro the law office of KG-Bill would have us doLOL I'm in the middle on this one. Prefer he plays on existing contract through this season with the promise of entering good faith negotiations next off season. 1. Hunter needs to prove he's not damaged goods. 2. Current Covid cap restrictions are also something Hunter's team needs to take in for account. 3. Viking brass need to acknowledge Hunter has vastly out played his current deal. All this vastly outplaying his current deal is simply not true. In 2019 he outplayed it, but in 2020 he didn't even take the field for us. That is not vastly outplaying his current deal. He was 1st team all-pro for both the 2018 &19 seasons. (All-pro is the award where the rubber meets the road vs pro bowl.) So he was considered to be among the 4-5 best DE's/Edge guys in the league. Yet (at no fault of the Vikings) is now currently the 13 highest paid DE. As I noted it wasn't the Vikings fault that DE salaries really escalated. He did get hurt last season but I don't think we can throw rocks at him for that. He showed up to all voluntary OTA's ect and was injured. That's part of football. That Hunter missed year is irrelevant when evaluating performance against his contract. Players get injured. A player gets injured, he still gets paid. Deal with it. If you want to bitch about last year, then Hunter can point to the fact that he racked up 40 sacks for the Vikings on a 3rd round rookie scale contract for 4 years. You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole. Hunter didn't miss a game due to injury for 5 years before last year. He piled up 54.5 sacks in that time. He holds the NFL record for most sacks by a player by age 25. Harp on him being out last year all you want, but the reality is that even factoring in last year, Hunter has been a bargain for the Vikings. I also don't buy the argument that you can't renegotiate with three years remaining on the contract. When a team goes to a player with the ultimatum to renegotiate or get cut, they don't care how many years are left on the contract. The only argument that has any validity is the "needs to prove he still has it after the injury" one. The Vikings have pretty well admitted that they have no concerns about the level of performance they expect out of Hunter. If they were concerned, they wouldn't have been satisfied with signing a journey man who had just been cut and using a couple of mid round picks on the position. The bottom line is that the DE market exploded after Hunter signed his contract. There are DE that aren't half as good Hunter, making more money than he is. I believe he is now the 17th highest paid DE. He wants a fair market deal and it appears he is ready to utilize the only leverage he has. I have no problem with him doing so. Like bohumm said, until the NFL fundamentally changes how contracts and guaranteed money are structured, this how the game will be played league wide. - FWIW, I think Hunter would be better served by attending mini camp and showing the coaches and brass that he is 100%. He can then pick the next camp for his battle if he chooses. So a 32 year old player that played at a HOF level until he was 30, but whose play has fallen of significantly over the last 2 seasons, you continue to pay him at, or close to at, HOF $, because "You can't just cherry pick the point in time. You take performance and pay as a whole"? [sm=dillydilly.jpg][sm=ditto.gif]

Page: << < prev 108 109 [110] 111 112 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode