Treadwell trade?

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Bowhunting Viking
Pro Bowl Elite Player
Posts: 811
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:39 am
Location: Convoy, Ohio
x 421

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by Bowhunting Viking »

S197 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:32 pm
VikingLord wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:13 pm The Treadwell situation just underscores why I think rookie contracts should offer less guaranteed money. Just because a guy is taken in the 1st, or high in the 1st, doesn't mean he's going to work out, and when he doesn't, the team that signed him is stuck in the situation the Vikings are this year with possibly significant dead weight for a player who may not even see the field or be on the team.

Plus, that dead money is cash that can't go to a worthy vet, either a player who is already on the team or a FA the team could use to improve itself. It's just wasteful in every way to ink guys who haven't done anything as pros to big money contracts based solely on potential.

While I'm sure the player's union probably wouldn't go for it, the argument for allocating more money to established vets who have proven their worth in the league should be a good one that looks after the interest of players just as much as richly rewarding untested rookies.
The rookies already get less guaranteed as part of a deal to give more to vets. They used to get $100M contracts at the peak. I don’t see another negotiation anytime soon.
Bradford was the last one to get in on the huge rookie contract action.
I just wanna die as a Super Bowl Champion Viking Fan!!
User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8230
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 933

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by VikingLord »

S197 wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:32 pm
VikingLord wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2019 12:13 pm The Treadwell situation just underscores why I think rookie contracts should offer less guaranteed money. Just because a guy is taken in the 1st, or high in the 1st, doesn't mean he's going to work out, and when he doesn't, the team that signed him is stuck in the situation the Vikings are this year with possibly significant dead weight for a player who may not even see the field or be on the team.

Plus, that dead money is cash that can't go to a worthy vet, either a player who is already on the team or a FA the team could use to improve itself. It's just wasteful in every way to ink guys who haven't done anything as pros to big money contracts based solely on potential.

While I'm sure the player's union probably wouldn't go for it, the argument for allocating more money to established vets who have proven their worth in the league should be a good one that looks after the interest of players just as much as richly rewarding untested rookies.
The rookies already get less guaranteed as part of a deal to give more to vets. They used to get $100M contracts at the peak. I don’t see another negotiation anytime soon.
Yeah, relative to the insanity of rookie contracts at their peak, Treadwell's deal looks reasonable, but in terms of his proven and potential production as a pro receiver, it's ludicrous the guy is going to suck up $2.5 million in cap space.

I doubt the issue will be revisited even in the next CBA, but if it were I think the owners could get the player's union to accept more incentive-based rookie contracts, perhaps offsetting the reduction in guaranteed money with higher incentives payouts for players who reach the potential implied by their position in the draft. Really, you're just looking at ways to avoid wasting money on duds, presumably to better reward guys who perform, whether they are on rookie deals or established vets.
User avatar
9man
Transition Player
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2010 8:23 pm
x 11

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by 9man »

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-vik ... 16280.html

I can't believe there will be many teams looking to give a 5th, as the writer suggests. But you never know.
PurpleMustReign
Starting Wide Receiver
Posts: 19150
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Crystal, MN
x 114
Contact:

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by PurpleMustReign »

9man wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:39 am https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-vik ... 16280.html

I can't believe there will be many teams looking to give a 5th, as the writer suggests. But you never know.
It would have to be a team who needs a WR who thinks they are close to competing. I highly doubt the Giants (as some have suggested) would be interested unless they like him enough to extend him now, which would be stupid.
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." ‪#‎SKOL2018
StumpHunter
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3668
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 639

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by StumpHunter »

PurpleMustReign wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:45 am
9man wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:39 am https://www.yahoo.com/sports/report-vik ... 16280.html

I can't believe there will be many teams looking to give a 5th, as the writer suggests. But you never know.
It would have to be a team who needs a WR who thinks they are close to competing. I highly doubt the Giants (as some have suggested) would be interested unless they like him enough to extend him now, which would be stupid.
If Shurmur saw anything out of Tread while he was here, he will make that trade. If however, he doesn't think Treadwell is even worth a 6th or 7th, Tread might be one of the worst picks in the history of the franchise.

Even Musgrave took a shot on Ponder after he went to the Raiders.
PurpleMustReign
Starting Wide Receiver
Posts: 19150
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Crystal, MN
x 114
Contact:

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by PurpleMustReign »

StumpHunter wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:50 am
PurpleMustReign wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:45 am

It would have to be a team who needs a WR who thinks they are close to competing. I highly doubt the Giants (as some have suggested) would be interested unless they like him enough to extend him now, which would be stupid.
If Shurmur saw anything out of Tread while he was here, he will make that trade. If however, he doesn't think Treadwell is even worth a 6th or 7th, Tread might be one of the worst picks in the history of the franchise.

Even Musgrave took a shot on Ponder after he went to the Raiders.
True. I still would be surprised if he went there, unless like I said, they extend him.
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." ‪#‎SKOL2018
CharVike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3449
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
x 680

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by CharVike »

StumpHunter wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:50 am
PurpleMustReign wrote: Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:45 am

It would have to be a team who needs a WR who thinks they are close to competing. I highly doubt the Giants (as some have suggested) would be interested unless they like him enough to extend him now, which would be stupid.
If Shurmur saw anything out of Tread while he was here, he will make that trade. If however, he doesn't think Treadwell is even worth a 6th or 7th, Tread might be one of the worst picks in the history of the franchise.

Even Musgrave took a shot on Ponder after he went to the Raiders.
I doubt Speilman takes a 7th rounder. We have 2 legit guys who start. Then we have Beebe. He is untested right now. Basically an unknown. After that there is nothing. If Diggs misses a couple games, which he has, who takes over the 3rd spot? At least Tread has some experience. If Beebe gets hurt again who will step in? It we plan to challenge is it worth it to be paper thin at WR for a 7th rounder? Yes Tread was a bad pick because he has done nothing yet. But what will we get with a 7th rounder. We have one or two this year and what will they do for us? Make the practice squad if they are lucky? But none of us know if there was an offer. I highly doubt there was. At least one that made sense for us. If the Giants are interested he will be a FA next year and they can sign him for nothing and not trade any picks.
S197
Fenrir
Posts: 12790
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Hawaii
x 662

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by S197 »

Treadwell had a good game, granted against backups. Beebe hasn't really done anything in two games now, I would like to see him more involved in the offense if he really is the #3.
CharVike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3449
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:28 pm
x 680

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by CharVike »

S197 wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:37 pm Treadwell had a good game, granted against backups. Beebe hasn't really done anything in two games now, I would like to see him more involved in the offense if he really is the #3.
That's what Speilman decided to go with. Beebe is the 3rd guy and who really knows what he is. Treadwell certainly has better physical skills but again he's in a new offense. Every year it's a new offense for him. It could take 1/2 the season for him to get comfortable. This will be a two TE offense based on Kub's history. So maybe the 3rd WR isn't that important. I really don't like this switching offenses every year. Obviously some think it's the way to go. I'm not one of them. The first two games will tell alot about our team. Rodgers and Ryan are a tough out. If we aren't top 3 ranked pass D after those two then it's the same story.
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN
x 117

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by mansquatch »

It could also be that Stefanski/Kubiak might think they can get something more out of Treadwell? Just speculating.

I still think the cap impact of re-signing him will make it almost impossible for him to return to the Vikings even if he has a great season. He has cap casualty written all over him even if he performs.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4959
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am
x 395

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by fiestavike »

S197 wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:37 pm Treadwell had a good game, granted against backups. Beebe hasn't really done anything in two games now, I would like to see him more involved in the offense if he really is the #3.
Beebe and either Johnson or Badet have a good chance to make it for special teams value. Zylstra seems to be ahead of Treadwell too. Since Diggs, Thielen, and Beebe are locks at this point, Treadwell will have to beat out Johnson or Badet for special teams play (not going to happen) or Zylstra for regular WR reps. His only chance is Zylstra's injury history. That is, he makes the team because of availability. I'm betting he's cut/traded for peanuts.
"You like that!"
-- Cap'n Spazz Cousins
J. Kapp 11
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9772
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
x 1857

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by J. Kapp 11 »

CharVike wrote: Mon Aug 19, 2019 5:29 am
S197 wrote: Sun Aug 18, 2019 10:37 pm Treadwell had a good game, granted against backups. Beebe hasn't really done anything in two games now, I would like to see him more involved in the offense if he really is the #3.
That's what Speilman decided to go with. Beebe is the 3rd guy and who really knows what he is. Treadwell certainly has better physical skills but again he's in a new offense. Every year it's a new offense for him. It could take 1/2 the season for him to get comfortable. This will be a two TE offense based on Kub's history. So maybe the 3rd WR isn't that important. I really don't like this switching offenses every year. Obviously some think it's the way to go. I'm not one of them. The first two games will tell alot about our team. Rodgers and Ryan are a tough out. If we aren't top 3 ranked pass D after those two then it's the same story.
Thielen and Diggs are in the same situation with new offenses every year, and they seem to be just fine.

Also, I disagree that Treadwell has better physical skills than Beebe. Zimmer talks about how Beebe gets separation because he doesn't have to slow down at the top of the route to make his break. The same can't be said for Treadwell. The only thing Treadwell has going for him over Beebe is size, which means little if you can't get open. He's also shown that he's prone to drops, which has nothing to do with scheme.

Where I can agree is that I wish we could see more of Beebe, so that we could see what he's capable of. He's playing with the 1s, and they're played 3 series in two games. Hopefully we'll see more of Beebe against the Cardinals. Since the Vikings are actively shopping Treadwell, I'd guess he gets targeted a bunch this week.
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
S197
Fenrir
Posts: 12790
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Hawaii
x 662

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by S197 »

My worry with Beebe is he has trouble staying healthy and he's also prone to drops. I think there's a misconception that he has good hands but if you read the beat writers reports, they all say he's had a number of drops in camp. I'm not saying he has poor hands, just that he's not the Edelman-like WR some people perceive him to be.

His route running is great, so if he can stay healthy I think he'll be fine as the #3 (esp in a heavily utilized TE offense).

I was hoping Bisi Johnson would have another good outing but he was quiet. I think there's a very close battle for the #4 and #5 spots. That can be good if you have a lot of guys performing well but I don't know that that's the case here. Two more games for someone to step up.
S197
Fenrir
Posts: 12790
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Hawaii
x 662

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by S197 »

Just saw this:
“They’re hard to separate right now,” Zimmer said, via the Pioneer Press. “When we talk about it in the personnel meetings and things like that, it’s one guy has a good day, then he has a bad day. The consistency of what they’re trying to do is really hard to get a handle on. That’s why I say that special teams, they need to get their rear ends going on that.”

The two seventh-rounders — Dillon Mitchell and Olabisi Johnson — are joined by Brandon Zylstra, Laquon Treadwell, Jordan Taylor, Jeff Badet, Davion Davis, and Alexander Hollins in the mix for roster spots. Treadwell and Taylor have the most experience, although Zimmer said that “doesn’t matter” when it comes to picking the players who will be on the 53-man roster.
https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... going/amp/
J. Kapp 11
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9772
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:57 pm
x 1857

Re: Treadwell trade?

Post by J. Kapp 11 »

S197 wrote: Wed Aug 21, 2019 2:02 pm My worry with Beebe is he has trouble staying healthy and he's also prone to drops. I think there's a misconception that he has good hands but if you read the beat writers reports, they all say he's had a number of drops in camp. I'm not saying he has poor hands, just that he's not the Edelman-like WR some people perceive him to be.
Fair point.

Just remember ... Julian Edelman was a quarterback in college and wasn't "Julian Edelman" for the first four years of his career, not breaking out until his 5th season. Interestingly enough, he also couldn't stay on the field, suffering a number of injuries.

And for the ultimate irony ... in October of 2015, Edelman appeared in a Sports Illustrated article entitled "From Edelman to Hankerson, the 10 WRs with the worst hands in the NFL." As a starter (since 2013) he's never had a drop rate of less than 9.8%, which consistently ranks him among the top 10 in drops. In spite of the drops, he's a pretty valuable member of the Patriots.

Not saying Beebe is Edelman. Just saying that if a guy shows real potential, stick with him. If that means fewer snaps for Beebe until he sharpens things up, then great. But at least he can separate, unlike Laquon Treadwell.
Image
Go ahead. I dare you.
Underestimate this man.
Post Reply