RE: General Vikes Talk

Talk Vikes and Other MN Sports

Forums Register Login My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums

Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ Ticket List Log Out

RE: General Vikes Talk

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> Vikes Talk >> RE: General Vikes Talk

Page: << < prev 56 57 [58] 59 60 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/24/2023 5:31:51 PM

David Levine

Posts: 77939
Joined: 7/14/2007
From: Las Vegas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

We have some real issues over our picks that supposedly arent' working out but we'll take a 3rd over-all pick that SF supposedly doesn't want ... huh!

I know that's a little unfair so, who do we let go to keep him on the roster?

Hall.

Post #: 1426

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/24/2023 6:05:58 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33770
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

What hock is doing is unofficially referred to as a “hold in”. It’s like a hold-out except you show up so you don’t incur any fines but you still make it clear that you’re not going to be available to play. He’s probably worth a huge contract. Why did we trade for him if we didn’t anticipate this? I’d like to know what number they’re arguing over.

Not sure how faking an injury like vertigo anyone would expect that would increase their value

His value is established. He wants an extension and fears the franchise tag.

In reality he has reason to worry about it, doesn't he? I mean, cant the Vikes get 3 years out of him and he really can't do anything about it other than refuse to play?

Since the Vikings have the franchise tag option how about Hock accepts a reasonable contract. If the tag is at 12 million and the Vikings offer 13.5 that seems like a nice compromise.

Granted that the average annual value can be irrelevant depending on what the guaranteed money is, a contract averaging 13.5 million would put Hock at the 8th highest AAV, right between David Njoku and Dawson Knox. He's going to get more than that. Hock's contract is going to have to look A LOT like George Kittle's contract. Kittle got $75 million over 5 years with $40 million guaranteed. And considering that Kittle's contract was signed in 2020 we could easily add 20% to those numbers - say $90 million over 5 years with $50 million guaranteed.

All that being said - Kittle put up way bigger stats than Hockenson - it's just that Kirk threw to him so damn much last year that Hock has never looked better at any point in his career.

Hock has one very good half season. If he won't be reasonable franchise tag him for the next two years and let him go to get a comp pick or would we?

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 1427

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/24/2023 7:46:34 PM

David F.

Posts: 10864
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

What hock is doing is unofficially referred to as a “hold in”. It’s like a hold-out except you show up so you don’t incur any fines but you still make it clear that you’re not going to be available to play. He’s probably worth a huge contract. Why did we trade for him if we didn’t anticipate this? I’d like to know what number they’re arguing over.

Not sure how faking an injury like vertigo anyone would expect that would increase their value

His value is established. He wants an extension and fears the franchise tag.

In reality he has reason to worry about it, doesn't he? I mean, cant the Vikes get 3 years out of him and he really can't do anything about it other than refuse to play?

Since the Vikings have the franchise tag option how about Hock accepts a reasonable contract. If the tag is at 12 million and the Vikings offer 13.5 that seems like a nice compromise.

Granted that the average annual value can be irrelevant depending on what the guaranteed money is, a contract averaging 13.5 million would put Hock at the 8th highest AAV, right between David Njoku and Dawson Knox. He's going to get more than that. Hock's contract is going to have to look A LOT like George Kittle's contract. Kittle got $75 million over 5 years with $40 million guaranteed. And considering that Kittle's contract was signed in 2020 we could easily add 20% to those numbers - say $90 million over 5 years with $50 million guaranteed.

All that being said - Kittle put up way bigger stats than Hockenson - it's just that Kirk threw to him so damn much last year that Hock has never looked better at any point in his career.

Hock has one very good half season. If he won't be reasonable franchise tag him for the next two years and let him go to get a comp pick or would we?

I took a look at his stats to see what his next best season was and it's easily 2020 with 67 catches for 723 yards and 6 TDs. Then something else caught my eye that is troubling. His 2022 stats. In seven games with the Lions he had 26 catches for 395 yards and 3 TDs. In 10 games with the Vikes he had 60 catches for 519 yards and also 3 TDs. The troublesome stat is that with the Lions he averaged 15.2 yards per catch. With the Vikes he averaged 8.6 yards. He's a checkdown target with us.

We don't need to break the bank for a checkdown target and/or we need to start getting him the ball in space and/or further down the field.

_____________________________

I wouldn't give ANY qb $30-50+ mil unless that QB had won me a Super Bowl. Did you win a Super Bowl on your rookie deal? Yes? Great! Here's your hugenormous contract. F it let's just run victory laps and love life. No? Good luck. Next!

Post #: 1428

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/24/2023 7:47:52 PM

Ricky J

Posts: 18357
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

What hock is doing is unofficially referred to as a “hold in”. It’s like a hold-out except you show up so you don’t incur any fines but you still make it clear that you’re not going to be available to play. He’s probably worth a huge contract. Why did we trade for him if we didn’t anticipate this? I’d like to know what number they’re arguing over.

Not sure how faking an injury like vertigo anyone would expect that would increase their value

His value is established. He wants an extension and fears the franchise tag.

In reality he has reason to worry about it, doesn't he? I mean, cant the Vikes get 3 years out of him and he really can't do anything about it other than refuse to play?

Since the Vikings have the franchise tag option how about Hock accepts a reasonable contract. If the tag is at 12 million and the Vikings offer 13.5 that seems like a nice compromise.

Granted that the average annual value can be irrelevant depending on what the guaranteed money is, a contract averaging 13.5 million would put Hock at the 8th highest AAV, right between David Njoku and Dawson Knox. He's going to get more than that. Hock's contract is going to have to look A LOT like George Kittle's contract. Kittle got $75 million over 5 years with $40 million guaranteed. And considering that Kittle's contract was signed in 2020 we could easily add 20% to those numbers - say $90 million over 5 years with $50 million guaranteed.

All that being said - Kittle put up way bigger stats than Hockenson - it's just that Kirk threw to him so damn much last year that Hock has never looked better at any point in his career.

Hock has one very good half season. If he won't be reasonable franchise tag him for the next two years and let him go to get a comp pick or would we?

Maybe the Vikes are being unreasonable bc they can actually play hard ball if they want?
(although I don't believe they would)

Post #: 1429

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/24/2023 9:50:41 PM

Richard Neussendorfer

Posts: 19617
Joined: 12/7/2007
From: Alamogordo, NM
Status: offline

Hell no to Murray. He's gonna be in the ice tub too much.

Post #: 1430

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/24/2023 10:41:38 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33770
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thebigo

quote:

ORIGINAL: David F.

What hock is doing is unofficially referred to as a “hold in”. It’s like a hold-out except you show up so you don’t incur any fines but you still make it clear that you’re not going to be available to play. He’s probably worth a huge contract. Why did we trade for him if we didn’t anticipate this? I’d like to know what number they’re arguing over.

Not sure how faking an injury like vertigo anyone would expect that would increase their value

His value is established. He wants an extension and fears the franchise tag.

In reality he has reason to worry about it, doesn't he? I mean, cant the Vikes get 3 years out of him and he really can't do anything about it other than refuse to play?

Since the Vikings have the franchise tag option how about Hock accepts a reasonable contract. If the tag is at 12 million and the Vikings offer 13.5 that seems like a nice compromise.

Granted that the average annual value can be irrelevant depending on what the guaranteed money is, a contract averaging 13.5 million would put Hock at the 8th highest AAV, right between David Njoku and Dawson Knox. He's going to get more than that. Hock's contract is going to have to look A LOT like George Kittle's contract. Kittle got $75 million over 5 years with $40 million guaranteed. And considering that Kittle's contract was signed in 2020 we could easily add 20% to those numbers - say $90 million over 5 years with $50 million guaranteed.

All that being said - Kittle put up way bigger stats than Hockenson - it's just that Kirk threw to him so damn much last year that Hock has never looked better at any point in his career.

Hock has one very good half season. If he won't be reasonable franchise tag him for the next two years and let him go to get a comp pick or would we?

I took a look at his stats to see what his next best season was and it's easily 2020 with 67 catches for 723 yards and 6 TDs. Then something else caught my eye that is troubling. His 2022 stats. In seven games with the Lions he had 26 catches for 395 yards and 3 TDs. In 10 games with the Vikes he had 60 catches for 519 yards and also 3 TDs. The troublesome stat is that with the Lions he averaged 15.2 yards per catch. With the Vikes he averaged 8.6 yards. He's a checkdown target with us.

We don't need to break the bank for a checkdown target and/or we need to start getting him the ball in space and/or further down the field.

Good sleuthing DF. Appreciate the stats and they tell a tale.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 1431

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 7:24:34 AM

Bill Jandro

Posts: 17928
Joined: 8/13/2007
Status: offline

I'd put Hock contract talks on hold. If Addison becomes what he appears to look like there isn't going to be a need for a high volume target TE. The offense may very well function better with Oliver in the lineup vs a TE who is a poor blocker.

_____________________________

Oline...early and often this draft

Post #: 1432

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 7:39:28 AM

Phil Riewer

Posts: 27426
Joined: 8/24/2007
From: MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I'd put Hock contract talks on hold. If Addison becomes what he appears to look like there isn't going to be a need for a high volume target TE. The offense may very well function better with Oliver in the lineup vs a TE who is a poor blocker.

I don't think you would call TJ a poor blocker; Oliver is one of the best. You need multiple TE's.

I remember when we overpaid Rudolph 9 million a year and he was a 500 yard 9 TD guy then.....TJ runs circles around Kyle and is 2-3 years younger than Rudolph was at that stage. I would be willing to give him the Kmet contract.

Even if we used is as a check down guy at times as we had JJ, AT, and KJ at that point....he still is the medium middle, deep middle threat.

_____________________________

SSG Riewer, Greg A Co 2/136 CAB
KIA 23 March 2007 Habbaniyah Iraq

Post #: 1433

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 8:21:31 AM

ronhextall

Posts: 6271
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I'd put Hock contract talks on hold. If Addison becomes what he appears to look like there isn't going to be a need for a high volume target TE. The offense may very well function better with Oliver in the lineup vs a TE who is a poor blocker.

I tend to agree, Jefferson and the future of the QB position is way more important and screwing up JJ or the QB position will make who is playing TE meaningless.

Post #: 1434

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 8:43:22 AM

Bill Jandro

Posts: 17928
Joined: 8/13/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ronhextall

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I'd put Hock contract talks on hold. If Addison becomes what he appears to look like there isn't going to be a need for a high volume target TE. The offense may very well function better with Oliver in the lineup vs a TE who is a poor blocker.

I tend to agree, Jefferson and the future of the QB position is way more important and screwing up JJ or the QB position will make who is playing TE meaningless.

Add Darrisaw to the picture as well. We also need to reserve a little more than just chump change for the defense in future years.

_____________________________

Oline...early and often this draft

Post #: 1435

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 8:51:03 AM

Bill Jandro

Posts: 17928
Joined: 8/13/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I'd put Hock contract talks on hold. If Addison becomes what he appears to look like there isn't going to be a need for a high volume target TE. The offense may very well function better with Oliver in the lineup vs a TE who is a poor blocker.

I don't think you would call TJ a poor blocker; Oliver is one of the best. You need multiple TE's.

I remember when we overpaid Rudolph 9 million a year and he was a 500 yard 9 TD guy then.....TJ runs circles around Kyle and is 2-3 years younger than Rudolph was at that stage. I would be willing to give him the Kmet contract.

Even if we used is as a check down guy at times as we had JJ, AT, and KJ at that point....he still is the medium middle, deep middle threat.

Problem is Hock is seeking a needle moving TE contract which would probably be 18ml avv vs Kmet's 12.5. We already invested 7ml avv in Oliver. How much money do we want to tie up in TE's esp with a JJ and Darrisaw contract loomimg in the weeds?

_____________________________

Oline...early and often this draft

Post #: 1436

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 9:28:01 AM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 39282
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I'd put Hock contract talks on hold. If Addison becomes what he appears to look like there isn't going to be a need for a high volume target TE. The offense may very well function better with Oliver in the lineup vs a TE who is a poor blocker.

I don't think you would call TJ a poor blocker; Oliver is one of the best. You need multiple TE's.

I remember when we overpaid Rudolph 9 million a year and he was a 500 yard 9 TD guy then.....TJ runs circles around Kyle and is 2-3 years younger than Rudolph was at that stage. I would be willing to give him the Kmet contract.

Even if we used is as a check down guy at times as we had JJ, AT, and KJ at that point....he still is the medium middle, deep middle threat.

Problem is Hock is seeking a needle moving TE contract which would probably be 18ml avv vs Kmet's 12.5. We already invested 7ml avv in Oliver. How much money do we want to tie up in TE's esp with a JJ and Darrisaw contract loomimg in the weeds?

It's shifting Theilen money to TJ really. We have WRs, a bunch of them, other that JJ very soon, at very cheap rates. TJ is effectively taking ATs passes now.

_____________________________

“There is no hate like Christian love.”

Post #: 1437

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 11:23:13 AM

Tom Sykes

Posts: 5872
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I'd put Hock contract talks on hold. If Addison becomes what he appears to look like there isn't going to be a need for a high volume target TE. The offense may very well function better with Oliver in the lineup vs a TE who is a poor blocker.

I don't think you would call TJ a poor blocker; Oliver is one of the best. You need multiple TE's.

I remember when we overpaid Rudolph 9 million a year and he was a 500 yard 9 TD guy then.....TJ runs circles around Kyle and is 2-3 years younger than Rudolph was at that stage. I would be willing to give him the Kmet contract.

Even if we used is as a check down guy at times as we had JJ, AT, and KJ at that point....he still is the medium middle, deep middle threat.

Problem is Hock is seeking a needle moving TE contract which would probably be 18ml avv vs Kmet's 12.5. We already invested 7ml avv in Oliver. How much money do we want to tie up in TE's esp with a JJ and Darrisaw contract loomimg in the weeds?

It's shifting Theilen money to TJ really. We have WRs, a bunch of them, other that JJ very soon, at very cheap rates. TJ is effectively taking ATs passes now.

I thought Osborn was usurping Thielen's role ...

then we used our #1 pick NOT on a defensive player ... but on another WR to improve on both Osborn and Thielen's production. At least long term.

Besides the fact that, as David F. has already pointed out, we simply haven't used Hock as a downfield target. The Giants game might have turned out differently.

Maybe Oliver will free up Hock's role a bit ... that remains to be seen.

Post #: 1438

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 11:27:35 AM

ratoppenheimer

Posts: 9563
Joined: 12/9/2007
From: cascais, portugal...still in exile
Status: offline

.
.
kwesi overpaid oliver....

we can keep hockenson for the next two seasons for $9mm + $12mm = $21mm, or $10.5mm/yr....

if we figure he's worth $15mm/yr after that, we should offer him a four-year deal at $51mm, with a $21mm signing bonus and $36mm guaranteed....

$21mm /4 = $5.25mm/yr for the signing bonus, and then salaries of $1mm, $3mm, $11mm, and $15mm....

cap hits:
2023 - $6.25mm
2024 - $8.25mm
2025 - $16.25mm
2026 - $20.25mm

we can cut him before the 2026 season with a $5.25mm dead cap....

_____________________________

the journey...is paradise.

Post #: 1439

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 11:39:27 AM

Tom Sykes

Posts: 5872
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phil Riewer

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bill Jandro

I'd put Hock contract talks on hold. If Addison becomes what he appears to look like there isn't going to be a need for a high volume target TE. The offense may very well function better with Oliver in the lineup vs a TE who is a poor blocker.

I don't think you would call TJ a poor blocker; Oliver is one of the best. You need multiple TE's.

I remember when we overpaid Rudolph 9 million a year and he was a 500 yard 9 TD guy then.....TJ runs circles around Kyle and is 2-3 years younger than Rudolph was at that stage. I would be willing to give him the Kmet contract.

Even if we used is as a check down guy at times as we had JJ, AT, and KJ at that point....he still is the medium middle, deep middle threat.

Problem is Hock is seeking a needle moving TE contract which would probably be 18ml avv vs Kmet's 12.5. We already invested 7ml avv in Oliver. How much money do we want to tie up in TE's esp with a JJ and Darrisaw contract loomimg in the weeds?

Excellent point.

Just how much cap % are we going dedicate to the TE position? Before taking on the serious money for QB, LT, superstar WR, or any solid defensive player worthy of more than a two year contract.

Maybe KOC is a genius who has cracked the code of modern nfl defenses ... we simply rain TEs on their butts.

Maybe this is all blown out of proportion, Hock has a soar back and we sign him in the 5-10 range for TEs and move forward quietly.

Post #: 1440

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 11:41:57 AM

Ricky J

Posts: 18357
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
kwesi overpaid oliver....

we can keep hockenson for the next two seasons for $9mm + $12mm = $21mm, or $10.5mm/yr....

if we figure he's worth $15mm/yr after that, we should offer him a four-year deal at $51mm, with a $21mm signing bonus and $36mm guaranteed....

$21mm /4 = $5.25mm/yr for the signing bonus, and then salaries of $1mm, $3mm, $11mm, and $15mm....

cap hits:
2023 - $6.25mm
2024 - $8.25mm
2025 - $16.25mm
2026 - $20.25mm

we can cut him before the 2026 season with a $5.25mm dead cap....

1. will his back mysteriously still be hurt if he's not signed by 9/10?
2. will he sign the tag?
(obviously Im stealing this from the Twitter pros but the longer this goes on the more it makes me wonder what this rural Iowa boy is capable of)

Post #: 1441

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 12:04:00 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33770
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
kwesi overpaid oliver....

we can keep hockenson for the next two seasons for $9mm + $12mm = $21mm, or $10.5mm/yr....

if we figure he's worth $15mm/yr after that, we should offer him a four-year deal at $51mm, with a $21mm signing bonus and $36mm guaranteed....

$21mm /4 = $5.25mm/yr for the signing bonus, and then salaries of $1mm, $3mm, $11mm, and $15mm....

cap hits:
2023 - $6.25mm
2024 - $8.25mm
2025 - $16.25mm
2026 - $20.25mm

we can cut him before the 2026 season with a $5.25mm dead cap....

1. will his back mysteriously still be hurt if he's not signed by 9/10?
2. will he sign the tag?
(obviously Im stealing this from the Twitter pros but the longer this goes on the more it makes me wonder what this rural Iowa boy is capable of)

The tag isn't until next year. I'll worry about that one when we get to it.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 1442

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 12:05:20 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33770
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
kwesi overpaid oliver....

we can keep hockenson for the next two seasons for $9mm + $12mm = $21mm, or $10.5mm/yr....

if we figure he's worth $15mm/yr after that, we should offer him a four-year deal at $51mm, with a $21mm signing bonus and $36mm guaranteed....

$21mm /4 = $5.25mm/yr for the signing bonus, and then salaries of $1mm, $3mm, $11mm, and $15mm....

cap hits:
2023 - $6.25mm
2024 - $8.25mm
2025 - $16.25mm
2026 - $20.25mm

we can cut him before the 2026 season with a $5.25mm dead cap....

Everything I hear about Oliver he's worth that contract and if we decide to move on from Hock it will seem like a genius move.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 1443

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 12:15:53 PM

Ricky J

Posts: 18357
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

quote:

ORIGINAL: ratoppenheimer

.
.
kwesi overpaid oliver....

we can keep hockenson for the next two seasons for $9mm + $12mm = $21mm, or $10.5mm/yr....

if we figure he's worth $15mm/yr after that, we should offer him a four-year deal at $51mm, with a $21mm signing bonus and $36mm guaranteed....

$21mm /4 = $5.25mm/yr for the signing bonus, and then salaries of $1mm, $3mm, $11mm, and $15mm....

cap hits:
2023 - $6.25mm
2024 - $8.25mm
2025 - $16.25mm
2026 - $20.25mm

we can cut him before the 2026 season with a $5.25mm dead cap....

1 (this year). will his back mysteriously still be hurt if he's not signed by 9/10?
2 (next year). will he sign the tag?
(obviously Im stealing this from the Twitter pros but the longer this goes on the more it makes me wonder what this rural Iowa boy is capable of)

The tag isn't until next year. I'll worry about that one when we get to it.

of course

Post #: 1444

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 3:14:30 PM

Ricky J

Posts: 18357
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

Vikings sign CB Jameson Houston, waive T Chim Okorafor.

Post #: 1445

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 3:20:30 PM

Trekgeekscott

Posts: 39282
Joined: 7/16/2007
From: United Federation of Planets
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ricky J

Vikings sign CB Jameson Houston, waive T Chim Okorafor.

Chim chimminy chim chiminy chim chim cheree
a Sweep is as lucky as lucky can be...

_____________________________

“There is no hate like Christian love.”

Post #: 1446

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 7:10:29 PM

kgdabom

Posts: 33770
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline

Trey Lance traded to Dallas. Thank you Cowpukes.

_____________________________

"So let it be written.
So let it be done."

Post #: 1447

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 7:34:49 PM

Tom Sykes

Posts: 5872
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Trey Lance traded to Dallas. Thank you Cowpukes.

I would love to have Lance over Hall as a project ... much higher cieling IMO ... just not for a 4th rd pick at this point (as its being reported by nfl.com).

I give SF credit for quickly course correcting (although they got ridiculously lucky with Purdy). I give Dallas credit for gambling on a project at QB with MAYBE some ceiling. Certainly more than the usual 1 out of 1 million chance late rd draft pick.

Post #: 1448

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 8:04:39 PM

Tom Sykes

Posts: 5872
Joined: 7/27/2007
Status: offline

2 players that got some pre-draft
pining from me that may be on the trade/chop block (nfl.com) ste Gs Ben Cleveland and Kendrick Green.

I was wrong about them but they too, like Lance, may benefit from a new environment. Would love to take a stab at a G/C backup type. We seem to be avoiding IOL like the covid.

Post #: 1449

RE: General Vikes Talk - 8/25/2023 8:09:26 PM

Ricky J

Posts: 18357
Joined: 7/19/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes

quote:

ORIGINAL: kgdabom

Trey Lance traded to Dallas. Thank you Cowpukes.

I would love to have Lance over Hall as a project ... much higher cieling IMO ... just not for a 4th rd pick at this point (as its being reported by nfl.com).

I give SF credit for quickly course correcting (although they got ridiculously lucky with Purdy). I give Dallas credit for gambling on a project at QB with MAYBE some ceiling. Certainly more than the usual 1 out of 1 million chance late rd draft pick.