Dalvin Cook's Future

[J. Kapp 11]

This is where I disagree.

Before the 3-point shot, and really before the basketball world discovered that you could win by making the 3-pointer a significant part of the game, you could hide bad defenders by packing the lane. The court was clogged. The game was all about which team had the best big man. The objective was to score from as close to the basket as possible, and that’s where the 7-footers lived.

Now if you don’t defend all over the floor, you get exposed. The floor is much more spread, which means you don’t get as much help on defense. It has opened up the passing game and more motion-based offenses. Teams with 7-footers are often at a disadvantage because most of those guys aren’t mobile enough defensively. I live in Iowa and watch a lot of Hawkeye basketball. They are perennially one of the highest-scoring teams in the nation. They play a fan-pleasing style of up-tempo basketball with lots of players having the green light to put up threes whenever they want. They win 20 games every year. But they’re never a true contender, either in the Big Ten or nationally. The reason? Fran McCaffery’s teams are never any good defensively.

Bottom line, defense is anything but outlawed. If you can’t defend, you don’t win. It’s true in college ball, and it’s true in the NBA. Golden State won four titles, and everybody thought it was because of Curry, Durant and Thompson raining 3s. But the truth is that they won those titles in large part because they were the best defensive team in the NBA, by every meaningful metric. Defense may not win championships in football anymore, but it certainly does in basketball.

Good points Kapp. Adding the 3pt shot has made the game much better for all the reasons you described. You're simply forced to defend the entire half court, and not just post up under the hoop. It's also played a huge role in the overall evolution of the basketball player. Big men can do things that dominant big men were never able to do 20+ years ago. And because of this you have to defend them completely different as well.

If we're changing the game we may as well start giving 2 points for free throws too....

Here's what they do in the G-League.

When you're fouled in the act of shooting, you get one shot. If you make it, you get 2 points. If you miss, it's like you missed both free throws. Same when you're in the penalty and it's a non-shooting foul. They call it "one for two."

Don't know if I like it, but it sure speeds the game up. They play a full 48-minute game in about 2 hours. Of course, no TV timeouts helps.

[VikingsVictorious]

Good points Kapp. Adding the 3pt shot has made the game much better for all the reasons you described. You're simply forced to defend the entire half court, and not just post up under the hoop. It's also played a huge role in the overall evolution of the basketball player. Big men can do things that dominant big men were never able to do 20+ years ago. And because of this you have to defend them completely different as well.

If we're changing the game we may as well start giving 2 points for free throws too....

Here's what they do in the G-League.

When you're fouled in the act of shooting, you get one shot. If you make it, you get 2 points. If you miss, it's like you missed both free throws. Same when you're in the penalty and it's a non-shooting foul. They call it "one for two."

Don't know if I like it, but it sure speeds the game up. They play a full 48-minute game in about 2 hours. Of course, no TV timeouts helps.

It's a goal it's one point. It's a TD it's 6 points. The distance doesn't matter. It's a basket. It's 2 points the distance shouldn't matter. It's ridiculous whether it opens up the court and makes people defend from 50 feet away or whatever. .Actually they should change the basket to 1 point and make the FT 1 point and only give 1 FT.

[fiestavike]

I could live with the 3 point shot if they let them play defense again. But like most sports, defense has been diminished almost to the point of being outlawed to make the game 'more exciting'. That people actually find it more exciting is the mystery to me.

This is where I disagree.

Before the 3-point shot, and really before the basketball world discovered that you could win by making the 3-pointer a significant part of the game, you could hide bad defenders by packing the lane. The court was clogged. The game was all about which team had the best big man. The objective was to score from as close to the basket as possible, and that’s where the 7-footers lived.

Now if you don’t defend all over the floor, you get exposed. The floor is much more spread, which means you don’t get as much help on defense. It has opened up the passing game and more motion-based offenses. Teams with 7-footers are often at a disadvantage because most of those guys aren’t mobile enough defensively. I live in Iowa and watch a lot of Hawkeye basketball. They are perennially one of the highest-scoring teams in the nation. They play a fan-pleasing style of up-tempo basketball with lots of players having the green light to put up threes whenever they want. They win 20 games every year. But they’re never a true contender, either in the Big Ten or nationally. The reason? Fran McCaffery’s teams are never any good defensively.

Bottom line, defense is anything but outlawed. If you can’t defend, you don’t win. It’s true in college ball, and it’s true in the NBA. Golden State won four titles, and everybody thought it was because of Curry, Durant and Thompson raining 3s. But the truth is that they won those titles in large part because they were the best defensive team in the NBA, by every meaningful metric. Defense may not win championships in football anymore, but it certainly does in basketball.

Kapp. Is there a point between the advent if the 3 point shot and the wide open game today that you would call the best balance to date?

To me, getting rid of hand checking and allowing offensive players an extra step has combined to diminish the game.

Although there was a lot if dubious stuff going on with officiating/gambling in the 90s, I still think 80s-90s basketball was a much better product than what we have today.

[Cliff]

Back to Cook a bit. Anybody notice Mattison is having a better year than him? lol

[VikingLord]

Back to Cook a bit. Anybody notice Mattison is having a better year than him? lol

Cook was tailing off last year in terms of average yards per carry. He had some explosive runs, but was less productive overall and the trend seemed steadily downward to me.

I wonder how much of Mattison's struggles are the result of the offensive line and scheme. I raised this in a different thread. It seems like KOC likes to try quick hitters inside in the run game, which might work if the interior OL can execute their assignments, but so far they haven't managed to do that. That type of playcall would seem ideal for a north-south runner like Mattison as it plays to his strengths, but if the holes aren't there, he's not going anywhere, which has been the case so far this year. He's not a back who can jump cut into a different lane or, it appears, even see a different lane if a hole is open there.

He honestly reminds me a lot of Leroy Hoard. I actually liked Hoard, but he was a complementary back and, as he himself once said, if the team needed 2 yards he'd get them 3, and if they needed 4 yards he'd get them 3. Mattison is that kind of runner.He's not a home run hitter for sure. He's also not a back who is going to lose yardage provided he's not hit in the backfield. He's not going to go off script or try to get cute. He's going to hit whatever gap the play calls him to hit and he's going to try to bang his way forward for as many yards as he can get. If he has a hole to run through he's going to get more, and if he doesn't, he'll bull for as many as he can get. If his blockers and the rest of the offense are doing their part, I don't see any reason why the run game can't produce close to the league median in terms of rushing yards. Maybe Dalton Risner can help in that regard, as could a healthy Bradberry and a healthy Darrisaw.

[Cliff]

Back to Cook a bit. Anybody notice Mattison is having a better year than him? lol

Cook was tailing off last year in terms of average yards per carry. He had some explosive runs, but was less productive overall and the trend seemed steadily downward to me.

I wonder how much of Mattison's struggles are the result of the offensive line and scheme. I raised this in a different thread. It seems like KOC likes to try quick hitters inside in the run game, which might work if the interior OL can execute their assignments, but so far they haven't managed to do that. That type of playcall would seem ideal for a north-south runner like Mattison as it plays to his strengths, but if the holes aren't there, he's not going anywhere, which has been the case so far this year. He's not a back who can jump cut into a different lane or, it appears, even see a different lane if a hole is open there.

He honestly reminds me a lot of Leroy Hoard. I actually liked Hoard, but he was a complementary back and, as he himself once said, if the team needed 2 yards he'd get them 3, and if they needed 4 yards he'd get them 3. Mattison is that kind of runner.He's not a home run hitter for sure. He's also not a back who is going to lose yardage provided he's not hit in the backfield. He's not going to go off script or try to get cute. He's going to hit whatever gap the play calls him to hit and he's going to try to bang his way forward for as many yards as he can get. If he has a hole to run through he's going to get more, and if he doesn't, he'll bull for as many as he can get. If his blockers and the rest of the offense are doing their part, I don't see any reason why the run game can't produce close to the league median in terms of rushing yards. Maybe Dalton Risner can help in that regard, as could a healthy Bradberry and a healthy Darrisaw.

I think the offensive line has to do with it but I think opportunity is the biggest problem. There are X number of run plays that are just a back trying to get forward a few yards and a certain number that might get 5 or 6. There are only a handful of opportunities for an RB to get that really good hole or make someone miss in the open field with nobody behind him. The style of football the team plays already limits those opportunities even more. That's all to say I really don't know what we have in Mattison yet. I'd like to see what he looks like when he gets at least 15 or 16 attempts in a game or two.

He's only had 5 games with 20 or more carries in a game and he was a focal point of the offence and they're all pretty impressive.

2019: No games

2020:
21 carries 95 yards 1 TD/3 catches 50 1 TD
20 carries 112 yards/3 catches 24 yards

2021:
22 carries 90 yards/3 catches 34 yards
25 carries 113 yards/ 7 catches 40yards 1 TD
26 carries 112 yards/ 6 catches 59 yards

2022: No games

When he has a chance he can get it done, but he's not good enough to turn such a limited number of carries into magic like Adrian Peterson might have done and the team doesn't want to pay an RB that can.

[VikingLord]

When he has a chance he can get it done, but he's not good enough to turn such a limited number of carries into magic like Adrian Peterson might have done and the team doesn't want to pay an RB that can.

Fair point. We probably don't have enough of a sample set yet, but I still don't see the cutback ability or the dynamism the better running backs have.

[Cliff]

When he has a chance he can get it done, but he's not good enough to turn such a limited number of carries into magic like Adrian Peterson might have done and the team doesn't want to pay an RB that can.

Fair point. We probably don't have enough of a sample set yet, but I still don't see the cutback ability or the dynamism the better running backs have.

Got a game with 20 and he looked good at times. I am ready to see someone else that can maybe hold onto the ball. I'd rather he average 2 ypc and not fumble. Likely any RB we have other than him can accomplish that.

[VikingLord]

Fair point. We probably don't have enough of a sample set yet, but I still don't see the cutback ability or the dynamism the better running backs have.

Got a game with 20 and he looked good at times. I am ready to see someone else that can maybe hold onto the ball. I'd rather he average 2 ypc and not fumble. Likely any RB we have other than him can accomplish that.

It was weird though, because the Vikings came out with the intent of running and I think the Chargers just stayed back in a shell look and let them. I guess if an offense can't run against that kind of defense they probably can't run against anybody, but I do give Mattison credit for his toughness. He took some really hard shots including two to the head that I thought had to be concussers. Not sure how he stayed in the game after the first one that almost knocked him out. He took another one later that looked pretty brutal. He's lucky his progress was whistled dead on that fumble near the goal line, but I do wonder if the earlier hits might have contributed to it.

I think the real issue the Vikings have is that interior OL. Ingram was handsy again most of the game and just continues to lose leverage and get pushed around more than he's pushing. Schlottman gives about as good as he gets but 50-50 isn't a good bet when a lot of the runs are up the middle. I still don't know how Cleveland is a guard. He's not necessarily bad, but he just doesn't always match up well inside and seems to also get beat quite often ala Ingram, but with fewer holding calls against him. I'm not sure what RB is going to thrive with that kind of interior line play in front of him. If there is one it would be someone who has better vision, more patience and is more shifty, which is a runner not currently on the Vikings roster.

We'll see how they do against the Panthers. The Panthers haven't been great defending the run thus far. They're like 28th against the run, so it would make sense to see the Vikings attack that and try to establish more consistency there. Of course, if they don't stop turning it over it won't matter what they do, so that has got to get cleaned up as you note.

[J. Kapp 11]

Back to Cook a bit. Anybody notice Mattison is having a better year than him? lol

I’ve heard that Cook is a pretty good 3-point shooter.