Vikings RB Adrian Peterson wants to return, open to pay cut

[fiestavike]

1.) How Competitive can AP be in an offense that is competitive for SB?
2.) Can they afford not having AP in the offense? (2016 would say No)
3.) How much can they pay AP and still compete for the help they need at T?
4.) If they get the help they need at T, what impact is there on Ques #1/#2/#5? (and how do they know?)
5.) What value will continuity for existing players add to the OL?

Good thoughts. I don't think they need Peterson in order to complete the vision for the offense. On the other hand, I think the vision for the offense could be achieved with such little financial investment that they COULD afford Peterson if they want to keep him. It may come down to whether they view him as a net negative or positive within the Shurmur offense.

[Laserman]

I'd rather have average to good RB who doesn't have to leave the field on third and long, who can block and catch passes out of the backfield. AD is old and limited and he fumbles. His plateau has been hit 3 years ago. It only gets worse from here. He's a detrement. Holding onto the "Idea" of AD in his youth is nonsense.

[Pondering Her Percy]

PHP, it is a tough nut to crack because the last full season that AP played he lead the NFL in rushing and was a significant threat in the Red Zone. The Vikings Yards Per Attempt got a lot of press in 2016 because it was so pathetic, but IMO, the bigger contribution is the Red Zone threat. Being a viable threat to score on the ground in the red zone helps the entire offense. I think it will be VERY hard for the Vikings to give that up unless AP's contract demands are egregious.

The OL thing factors into this quite a bit as well. On the contract side it is fair to ask, just how much cap space the team needs in order to chase the type of FA the team needs at Tackle? I think that is THE question.

In rebuilding mode I would say there would be zero change they'd pay top $$$ for top LT in the open market. However, this roster is built up to a point where it can contend. In light of that it makes more sense to pay somebody to fix the problem in order to maximize the window.

To me the Front Office needs to navigate a difficult web of variables to answer what I listed as question #3:

1.) How Competitive can AP be in an offense that is competitive for SB?
2.) Can they afford not having AP in the offense? (2016 would say No)
3.) How much can they pay AP and still compete for the help they need at T?
4.) If they get the help they need at T, what impact is there on Ques #1/#2/#5? (and how do they know?)
5.) What value will continuity for existing players add to the OL?

Random thoughts:
#5 has been completely lost in assessing OL performance this season. Assuming we have continuity next season, it will be a general value add. (How much?) How much boost does a good FA pickup T add alone and in conjuction with #5? I might look at the corrollary of this: How much better is the OL with even an average T vs. TJ Clemmings? (Clemmings was REALLY bad) To me this means there is A LOT of potential upside if they can slot in a more competitive player. Clemmings literally wrecked something like 40% of their drives all by himself in 2016.

#1 / #2 are tough questions to answer. AP is getting old. his history says he'll come back and compete, but NFL "norms" say every year it is less and less likely. At some point age will catch #28. Is this that year?

#3 is the ultimate question, but how they get there will be important.

I have no idea what the correct answer is. It is easy to make comments on the individual pieces, but when you start relating them to one another it gets really difficult. There is a lot of "chicken or the egg" in how those questions interact with each other. The FO has to attempt to assign value to both the individual pieces as well as the impact each piece can/will have on the other pieces and they all come together at the same time.

Good post. I think they can find a viable red zone threat in the draft though as well. We had a guy that couldn't run between the tackles in McKinnon and a guy that had awful vision in Asiata. Plus a bad OL

As for the OL, there probably isn't going to be a "big contract" type LT in FA. Right tackle? Yes. Wagner being one. Guys like Whitworth are more of a stop gap. It's RT that we are going to have to fork out the money for if anything. I just don't see a ton of options better than Kalil at LT. In the draft, sure. But not in FA. Which is why I would like to retain him and then draft someone to compete with him.

As for the front office questions I'll give my input in order:
1.) I think AP can definitely still be "competitive". However, I don't know if I can trust his health/age. This is a possible historic RB class. If we cut him, we have plenty of cap for RT and maybe RG. Plus have the picks to pull in a RB and OL.
2.) I think they can afford it IF they draft a RB. If they go in with Jet and Asiata and then pull a guy off the street in FA, they could very well be in trouble again. They're crazy not to draft one this year. This type of class doesnt come around often.
3.) That is where I am caught up. It all depends what kind of pay cut AP took if he did take one. Bottom line is, there is no big money going out to a LT this year. Kalil or Whitworth are the best options. Kalil if he comes cheap can have competition brought in and give us the chance to not have to force a rookie into action. Whitworth, same thing. They need to draft a tackle as early as possible to come in an compete. I look at both Kalil and Whitworth as stop gaps. I would just rather cut AP IF they intend to draft a RB. It's a tough call.
4.) If anyone thinks we're going to find a legit LT this year, then I would call you crazy. That position is more of a project not having a 1st rounder. But there should be value in the 2nd, maybe 3rd. This is why stop gaps would be necessary this year and hopefully find a good one to draft as well. How do you know the impact? You really don't at this point. Another tough call.
5.) This is why I kind of want Kalil back is because of continuity. But who knows really.

Yeah Clemmings should be cut or at best a 3rd string swing tackle. I mean even Rashod Hill showed promise over that guy.

Not sure if you've seen it or not but the mock that I did is something I would really like us to pull off. That usually never goes to plan though because I'm just going off the cuff. Overall, great post

[720pete]

... and when he did, he was typically a huge asset.

33 percent of the time, it works every time.

[Mothman]

33 percent of the time, it works every time.

[Pondering Her Percy]

... and when he did, he was typically a huge asset.

There is no reason we cant find a huge asset in the draft. By no means am I comparing RB's in this draft to AP. But there are plenty of options out there that could be just as good as AP AT THIS POINT of his career. Would you rather have a 32 year old AP or a 22 year old Semaje Perine/21 old D'Onta Foreman? I would take the latter any day of the week no questions asked.

[chicagopurple]

Go Young, NOW.
AP is no longer AD....he is broke down, unreliably physically, and fumbles, he CANNOT passblock, and lots of young kids can passblock.
Its time to move on.

[Mothman]

Keeping Peterson and drafting a running back aren't mutually exclusive options so I see no reason to continue describing them that way.

[IrishViking]

Keeping Peterson and drafting a running back aren't mutually exclusive options so I see no reason to continue describing them that way.

It may be mutually exclusive if Peterson's expectation is to get the bulk of the carries anytime he suits up.

[chicagopurple]

If your coach cant get your player working hard, you have real problems. Keeping an over the hill veteran because your players will be lazy without him is soooo wrong.

[Pondering Her Percy]

If your coach cant get your player working hard, you have real problems. Keeping an over the hill veteran because your players will be lazy without him is soooo wrong.

Where did that even come from??

[Alaskan]

There is no reason we cant find a huge asset in the draft. By no means am I comparing RB's in this draft to AP. But there are plenty of options out there that could be just as good as AP AT THIS POINT of his career. Would you rather have a 32 year old AP or a 22 year old Semaje Perine/21 old D'Onta Foreman? I would take the latter any day of the week no questions asked.

I would love to have both AP AND one of the options listed above! And I am not really much of an AP fan anymore. If he stays for the right price and understand his roll in the offense......He's and asset....regardless of the egomaniac of a person he is.

[Mothman]

It may be mutually exclusive if Peterson's expectation is to get the bulk of the carries anytime he suits up.

Even then, I don't think that's necessarily true and that's where coaching has to play a role.

[halfgiz]

That is where I am caught up. It all depends what kind of pay cut AP took if he did take one. Bottom line is, there is no big money going out to a LT this year. Kalil or Whitworth are the best options. Kalil if he comes cheap can have competition brought in and give us the chance to not have to force a rookie into action. Whitworth, same thing. They need to draft a tackle as early as possible to come in an compete. I look at both Kalil and Whitworth as stop gaps. I would just rather cut AP IF they intend to draft a RB. It's a tough call.

Kalil will not come cheap, nor will he take a prove it deal.
There will be a lot of teams looking for his services this year.
Myself I don't want Kalil...his body can't support the weight he is carrying, that is why he is always injured.
Nor do I want to tie up 10 million a year for him playing a couple games and then get injured.

There has to be a better option.

[Pondering Her Percy]

I would love to have both AP AND one of the options listed above! And I am not really much of an AP fan anymore. If he stays for the right price and understand his roll in the offense......He's and asset....regardless of the egomaniac of a person he is.

I would be fine with that if he took a hefty pay cut. It would be nice to have him starting the year off and then having insurance if he gets hurt vs. having our starting getting hurt and resorting to that debacle of a duo we had this year. I'm just going to be upset if they decide to give AP a pay cut and then we don't draft one. Then we could be in the same situation as this year.