Dalvin Cook

[Maelstrom88]

Trade Cook and bring back AP?

Nah jk because I don't think you could get good value from trading Cook and he's perfect in our zone scheme. I'm hoping for a reasonable and satisfactory deal for both parties. Maybe that includes incentives for Dalvin to earn more based on health and milestones.

[StumpHunter]

How does that break down over the season? What happened to the scoring efficiency when Cook was out or was injured? Did the scoring efficiency metric change significantly when the Vikings played against teams with winning records versus teams without winning records?

He didn't miss enough games to really nail that down. However, his one non-week 17 game he missed did come against a team he had already played earlier in the season. The team scored 10 versus the 16 they scored against the Packers the first time with Cook. The offense also had less than 150 yards total compared to over 400 in the initial meeting.

Is your conclusion that improved play from the RB position the only explanation for the improved scoring efficiency?

No, as I said the offensive line improved some and the play calling was better. However, when the passing game takes a significant step back in production, and the run game a significant step forward, and that results in a lot more points, then I am going to give the majority of the credit to the running game, particularly the guy who ran the most.

Also, what do you want out of the RB position? Do you want that position to produce consistent yardage on 1st and 2nd downs that put the offense into favorable 3rd down situations? Do you want a credible threat that forces defenses to play honestly against the QB on those downs?

Or do you want a big-play threat at RB who might be inconsistent on 1st and 2nd downs, but who is capable of big runs on any given touch?

I want both. A RB who is limited in big play production isn't a very good running back, but I also don't want a guy who can't grind it out and keep the defense off the field.

In my view, those are different things and require different players. Further, in my view if you're going to invest in a QB like Kirk Cousins you don't need the home run threat at RB as much as you need the consistent production. Cousins is a lot like Jimmy G. of the 49ers. The 49ers were much more effective at running on 1st and 2nd downs despite lacking a big play threat, and as a result they put Jimmy G. into a lot of situations that were highly favorable to him when they chose to pass or even needed to pass.

I think Kirk and Jimmy G are similar QBs as well. SF gave us the blue print for how to get to the SB with Kirk, run the heck out of the football. With RBBC true, but that only worked because their Oline was insane. Which we could do, but honestly Rick is a lot better at finding RB talent than Oline talent.

That might be worth 16 million if your reasoning is correct. If it's not, you might be flushing that cap space down the toilet.

And let's be clear on one other thing - that top 6 scoring efficiency offense managed the lowest wildcard berth and didn't sniff the Superbowl. It consistently failed to beat teams with winning records all season. The 2018 team that was much less efficient in terms of scoring would have had almost that exact same result in terms of the playoffs had they managed to beat the Bears to end that season. The result wasn't *markedly* different.

I think even if my reasoning is correct you are probably flushing 16 million down the toilet.

Running backs are only valuable when they are on the field, and most RBs have a short shelf life. So, while Cook is worth 16 million when healthy, he probably isn't going to be healthy.

Beef up the OL and maybe you'd be surprised.

One thing the Vikings would likely not have without Cook is the homerun threat at RB. But that isn't a big deal if they are better and more consistent running on 1st and 2nd downs. I for one would gladly sacrifice the occasional highlight reel run for a running attack that puts Kubiak's offense consistently into 3rd-and-3 or less.

I think a line like SF's is obviously the ideal, but that is easier said than done. As I said, our GM is not good at identifying Oline. Not in free agency, not in the draft.

[Pondering Her Percy]

How does that break down over the season? What happened to the scoring efficiency when Cook was out or was injured? Did the scoring efficiency metric change significantly when the Vikings played against teams with winning records versus teams without winning records?

He didn't miss enough games to really nail that down. However, his one non-week 17 game he missed did come against a team he had already played earlier in the season. The team scored 10 versus the 16 they scored against the Packers the first time with Cook. The offense also had less than 150 yards total compared to over 400 in the initial meeting.

Is your conclusion that improved play from the RB position the only explanation for the improved scoring efficiency?

No, as I said the offensive line improved some and the play calling was better. However, when the passing game takes a significant step back in production, and the run game a significant step forward, and that results in a lot more points, then I am going to give the majority of the credit to the running game, particularly the guy who ran the most.

Also, what do you want out of the RB position? Do you want that position to produce consistent yardage on 1st and 2nd downs that put the offense into favorable 3rd down situations? Do you want a credible threat that forces defenses to play honestly against the QB on those downs?

Or do you want a big-play threat at RB who might be inconsistent on 1st and 2nd downs, but who is capable of big runs on any given touch?

I want both. A RB who is limited in big play production isn't a very good running back, but I also don't want a guy who can't grind it out and keep the defense off the field.

In my view, those are different things and require different players. Further, in my view if you're going to invest in a QB like Kirk Cousins you don't need the home run threat at RB as much as you need the consistent production. Cousins is a lot like Jimmy G. of the 49ers. The 49ers were much more effective at running on 1st and 2nd downs despite lacking a big play threat, and as a result they put Jimmy G. into a lot of situations that were highly favorable to him when they chose to pass or even needed to pass.

I think Kirk and Jimmy G are similar QBs as well. SF gave us the blue print for how to get to the SB with Kirk, run the heck out of the football. With RBBC true, but that only worked because their Oline was insane. Which we could do, but honestly Rick is a lot better at finding RB talent than Oline talent.

That might be worth 16 million if your reasoning is correct. If it's not, you might be flushing that cap space down the toilet.

And let's be clear on one other thing - that top 6 scoring efficiency offense managed the lowest wildcard berth and didn't sniff the Superbowl. It consistently failed to beat teams with winning records all season. The 2018 team that was much less efficient in terms of scoring would have had almost that exact same result in terms of the playoffs had they managed to beat the Bears to end that season. The result wasn't *markedly* different.

I think even if my reasoning is correct you are probably flushing 16 million down the toilet.

Running backs are only valuable when they are on the field, and most RBs have a short shelf life. So, while Cook is worth 16 million when healthy, he probably isn't going to be healthy.

Beef up the OL and maybe you'd be surprised.

One thing the Vikings would likely not have without Cook is the homerun threat at RB. But that isn't a big deal if they are better and more consistent running on 1st and 2nd downs. I for one would gladly sacrifice the occasional highlight reel run for a running attack that puts Kubiak's offense consistently into 3rd-and-3 or less.

I think a line like SF's is obviously the ideal, but that is easier said than done. As I said, our GM is not good at identifying Oline. Not in free agency, not in the draft.

Good convo here. One thing I will say is I don’t think Spielman is as bad as some think when it comes to finding OL. Some were bad breaks compared to bad scouting.

Guys like Kalil and Elflein. Kalil was a pro bowler as a rookie, took tyron smiths job at USC of all players and looked like he’d be an all pro left tackle for many years. Then Matt Kalil turned into Matt Kalils own problem. I would say in no way, shape or form is that on Spielman.

As for Elflein, many of us were very impressed with Elflein his rookie year and thought he was a big part in the OL taking a turn for the better. For a 3rd round pick, we thought it was a solid find. When Elflein went down in that NFCC game, his play spiraled each season after that. Not sure if that would be on the GM either.

Then you look at guys like Reiff (who I am not a fan of) and Remmers. Both were very solid in 2017. Maybe shurmurs scheme had something to do with their success, I don’t know. But I don’t think they were “bad” finds. Just not great ones.

Then guys like O’Neill who is an elite pass blocker and has allowed 1 sack in his 2 year career (which came in the SF playoff game this year). And Bradbury who struggles as a pass blocker due to strength but is a great run blocker, I would say the jury is still out there.

Sure Spielman has had his bad picks like beavers and clemmings but what GM hasn’t.

I think the main problem with our OL struggles is:

1.) How it is managed and handled. For example moving remmers to guard. Or them considering moving Reiff to guard this year. You’d think they would learn from the remmers experience.

2.) injuries and players becoming their own problems like Kalil.

3.) how Spielman went so long without addressing it early on in the draft. I mean if you look now, who are the “cornerstones” on this OL? O’Neill and Bradbury. What did Spielman do the last two years? Take O’Neill and Bradbury early. He hasn’t done that since Kalil in 2012. He was fishing into the middle to late rounds too often and then patching with free agents. I’m starting to think he might finally have it figured out given we took O’Neill and Bradbury the last 2 years in the early rounds and by the sounds of it, are going to invest early again this year. Stop gaps like josh Kline are tolerable but the line needs to be built through the draft and chances are, it needs to be fairly early.

We need to just stop doing patchwork and invest. It has worked as of late and he is indeed finding talent early on. I expect to see that again this year. Not only early but also the middle rounds. I also think Trent Williams is a move we need to make.

If I’m Spielman, id trade for Williams and then do whatever I possibly could to trade up for Wirfs. Could you imagine Williams, Wirfs, Bradbury and O’Neill?!! I could care less who takes the other guard spot. I could man that spot and we’d still be a top 10 OL and I weigh under 200 lbs. But maybe draft someone like Jonah Jackson out of Ohio st in the 3rd-4th. Boom, line solidified! For a long time no less. Paying Reiff and remmers big money in free agency is one thing, trading for an elite LT is another. Trade for Williams and build around him with draft picks. They could easily solve this OL issue in 1 offseason by pulling something like this off.

[J. Kapp 11]

Good convo here. One thing I will say is I don’t think Spielman is as bad as some think when it comes to finding OL. Some were bad breaks compared to bad scouting.

Guys like Kalil and Elflein. Kalil was a pro bowler as a rookie, took tyron smiths job at USC of all players and looked like he’d be an all pro left tackle for many years. Then Matt Kalil turned into Matt Kalils own problem. I would say in no way, shape or form is that on Spielman.

As for Elflein, many of us were very impressed with Elflein his rookie year and thought he was a big part in the OL taking a turn for the better. For a 3rd round pick, we thought it was a solid find. When Elflein went down in that NFCC game, his play spiraled each season after that. Not sure if that would be on the GM either.

Then you look at guys like Reiff (who I am not a fan of) and Remmers. Both were very solid in 2017. Maybe shurmurs scheme had something to do with their success, I don’t know. But I don’t think they were “bad” finds. Just not great ones.

Then guys like O’Neill who is an elite pass blocker and has allowed 1 sack in his 2 year career (which came in the SF playoff game this year). And Bradbury who struggles as a pass blocker due to strength but is a great run blocker, I would say the jury is still out there.

Sure Spielman has had his bad picks like beavers and clemmings but what GM hasn’t.

I think the main problem with our OL struggles is:

1.) How it is managed and handled. For example moving remmers to guard. Or them considering moving Reiff to guard this year. You’d think they would learn from the remmers experience.

2.) injuries and players becoming their own problems like Kalil.

3.) how Spielman went so long without addressing it early on in the draft. I mean if you look now, who are the “cornerstones” on this OL? O’Neill and Bradbury. What did Spielman do the last two years? Take O’Neill and Bradbury early. He hasn’t done that since Kalil in 2012. He was fishing into the middle to late rounds too often and then patching with free agents. I’m starting to think he might finally have it figured out given we took O’Neill and Bradbury the last 2 years in the early rounds and by the sounds of it, are going to invest early again this year. Stop gaps like josh Kline are tolerable but the line needs to be built through the draft and chances are, it needs to be fairly early.

We need to just stop doing patchwork and invest. It has worked as of late and he is indeed finding talent early on. I expect to see that again this year. Not only early but also the middle rounds. I also think Trent Williams is a move we need to make.

If I’m Spielman, id trade for Williams and then do whatever I possibly could to trade up for Wirfs. Could you imagine Williams, Wirfs, Bradbury and O’Neill?!! I could care less who takes the other guard spot. I could man that spot and we’d still be a top 10 OL and I weigh under 200 lbs. But maybe draft someone like Jonah Jackson out of Ohio st in the 3rd-4th. Boom, line solidified! For a long time no less. Paying Reiff and remmers big money in free agency is one thing, trading for an elite LT is another. Trade for Williams and build around him with draft picks. They could easily solve this OL issue in 1 offseason by pulling something like this off.

Interesting.

I recently read a quote from Mike Tice, who knows a thing or two about coaching an O-line, that he believes Riley Reiff could play any position on the line at a very high level with the exception of center and left tackle (where he actually plays).

Tice said the Vikings should move him inside and draft the next left tackle. He thinks O'Neill is great right where he is and should stay there.

Take it as you will, perhaps with a grain of salt, but the fact is that Riley Reiff ranks just below the halfway point for offensive tackles. I know you said you're not a fan, so I get that. IDK, maybe Reiff would actually benefit from a position change.

[fiestavike]

Good convo here. One thing I will say is I don’t think Spielman is as bad as some think when it comes to finding OL. Some were bad breaks compared to bad scouting.

Guys like Kalil and Elflein. Kalil was a pro bowler as a rookie, took tyron smiths job at USC of all players and looked like he’d be an all pro left tackle for many years. Then Matt Kalil turned into Matt Kalils own problem. I would say in no way, shape or form is that on Spielman.

As for Elflein, many of us were very impressed with Elflein his rookie year and thought he was a big part in the OL taking a turn for the better. For a 3rd round pick, we thought it was a solid find. When Elflein went down in that NFCC game, his play spiraled each season after that. Not sure if that would be on the GM either.

Then you look at guys like Reiff (who I am not a fan of) and Remmers. Both were very solid in 2017. Maybe shurmurs scheme had something to do with their success, I don’t know. But I don’t think they were “bad” finds. Just not great ones.

Then guys like O’Neill who is an elite pass blocker and has allowed 1 sack in his 2 year career (which came in the SF playoff game this year). And Bradbury who struggles as a pass blocker due to strength but is a great run blocker, I would say the jury is still out there.

Sure Spielman has had his bad picks like beavers and clemmings but what GM hasn’t.

I think the main problem with our OL struggles is:

1.) How it is managed and handled. For example moving remmers to guard. Or them considering moving Reiff to guard this year. You’d think they would learn from the remmers experience.

2.) injuries and players becoming their own problems like Kalil.

3.) how Spielman went so long without addressing it early on in the draft. I mean if you look now, who are the “cornerstones” on this OL? O’Neill and Bradbury. What did Spielman do the last two years? Take O’Neill and Bradbury early. He hasn’t done that since Kalil in 2012. He was fishing into the middle to late rounds too often and then patching with free agents. I’m starting to think he might finally have it figured out given we took O’Neill and Bradbury the last 2 years in the early rounds and by the sounds of it, are going to invest early again this year. Stop gaps like josh Kline are tolerable but the line needs to be built through the draft and chances are, it needs to be fairly early.

We need to just stop doing patchwork and invest. It has worked as of late and he is indeed finding talent early on. I expect to see that again this year. Not only early but also the middle rounds. I also think Trent Williams is a move we need to make.

If I’m Spielman, id trade for Williams and then do whatever I possibly could to trade up for Wirfs. Could you imagine Williams, Wirfs, Bradbury and O’Neill?!! I could care less who takes the other guard spot. I could man that spot and we’d still be a top 10 OL and I weigh under 200 lbs. But maybe draft someone like Jonah Jackson out of Ohio st in the 3rd-4th. Boom, line solidified! For a long time no less. Paying Reiff and remmers big money in free agency is one thing, trading for an elite LT is another. Trade for Williams and build around him with draft picks. They could easily solve this OL issue in 1 offseason by pulling something like this off.

Interesting.

I recently read a quote from Mike Tice, who knows a thing or two about coaching an O-line, that he believes Riley Reiff could play any position on the line at a very high level with the exception of center and left tackle (where he actually plays).

Tice said the Vikings should move him inside and draft the next left tackle. He thinks O'Neill is great right where he is and should stay there.

Take it as you will, perhaps with a grain of salt, but the fact is that Riley Reiff ranks just below the halfway point for offensive tackles. I know you said you're not a fan, so I get that. IDK, maybe Reiff would actually benefit from a position change.

I have a recollection of it being Reiff who was very resistant to playing another position than LT. Maybe that was because of the financial side of it. I thought Reiff and Remmers played well enough to be fairly effective when they had a QB who could step up in the pocket a bit more. They are both middle of the pack OTs, better in the run than the pass, and both very ill suited to protecting a QB who tends to stand at the top of his drop. If Rick Spielman can be criticized for anything, its failing to have a coherent approach to building the team. The constant turnover in offensive coaching philosophy has not helped. Its time for a coherent plan!

[VikingPaul73]

Interesting.

I recently read a quote from Mike Tice, who knows a thing or two about coaching an O-line, that he believes Riley Reiff could play any position on the line at a very high level with the exception of center and left tackle (where he actually plays).

Tice said the Vikings should move him inside and draft the next left tackle. He thinks O'Neill is great right where he is and should stay there.

Take it as you will, perhaps with a grain of salt, but the fact is that Riley Reiff ranks just below the halfway point for offensive tackles. I know you said you're not a fan, so I get that. IDK, maybe Reiff would actually benefit from a position change.

Interesting. I hadn't read that so thanks for posting. I've been opposed to the idea of moving Reiff inside but maybe it's not such a bad idea after all. He'd be a pretty expensive G though, and doesn't seem open to a pay cut...

[J. Kapp 11]

Interesting.

I recently read a quote from Mike Tice, who knows a thing or two about coaching an O-line, that he believes Riley Reiff could play any position on the line at a very high level with the exception of center and left tackle (where he actually plays).

Tice said the Vikings should move him inside and draft the next left tackle. He thinks O'Neill is great right where he is and should stay there.

Take it as you will, perhaps with a grain of salt, but the fact is that Riley Reiff ranks just below the halfway point for offensive tackles. I know you said you're not a fan, so I get that. IDK, maybe Reiff would actually benefit from a position change.

Interesting. I hadn't read that so thanks for posting. I've been opposed to the idea of moving Reiff inside but maybe it's not such a bad idea after all. He'd be a pretty expensive G though, and doesn't seem open to a pay cut...

That definitely the issue, isn't it? Even if he would be great at left guard, it's pretty hard to justify paying a guard $13 million.

[VikingLord]

No, as I said the offensive line improved some and the play calling was better. However, when the passing game takes a significant step back in production, and the run game a significant step forward, and that results in a lot more points, then I am going to give the majority of the credit to the running game, particularly the guy who ran the most.

But not to the guys up front blocking for that guy who ran the most?

What in your view was the main reason for Cook's low-output games? Would you give the majority of the criticism for those games to the guy who ran the most, or do those belong on the guys blocking?

I honestly want to understand where you are drawing your conclusion on this one. If Cook is a stud RB and he *doesn't* run well, who or what gets the blame for that if he gets primary credit when the running game does well?

I want both. A RB who is limited in big play production isn't a very good running back, but I also don't want a guy who can't grind it out and keep the defense off the field.

I think you can have both. It might just require that you redefine how you look at the RB position overall, though. Instead of a single uber RB you have two (or more) RBs who each bring a unique set of skills on the field.

Most successful teams seem to be using that approach in their running games and saving cap resources that they deploy elsewhere.

I think Kirk and Jimmy G are similar QBs as well. SF gave us the blue print for how to get to the SB with Kirk, run the heck out of the football. With RBBC true, but that only worked because their Oline was insane. Which we could do, but honestly Rick is a lot better at finding RB talent than Oline talent.

Is that a fair assessment? He did after all pick Brian O'Neill who I think most people agree has rapidly developed into the best offensive linemen on the team and one of the better right tackles in the NFL. He just drafted Bradbury at center and while Bradbury struggled at times he did pretty well for his first year and likely will develop into a regular fixture at center.

I'm also still very optimistic about Udoh. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him get on the field this year..

Spielman has had his misses on the OL, but he's not been terrible acquiring talent there.

To sum, I think Cook is an amazing player and he's fun to watch when he finds some room and can get into space. He does demand a lot of attention from the defense and can change games all by himself. So my view is nothing personal and in no way do I want to impugn Cook's talent which is amazing.

My perspective has a lot more to do with the value of the position itself, and more specifically, how individual players at that position evolve during their careers. RB's tend to take a lot of punishment, and their production tends to drop fairly quickly as result. This isn't my opinion - it's backed up by years of stats taken over the careers of many pro backs. There are few pro backs who remain highly productive through their second contract (assuming they make it to their second contract), and with the way most contracts are structured, that means guys on their second deals are declining most rapidly at just the point where their cap costs are going to increase most rapidly. That is also when the trade value of such players plummets as well. It's just not good team management to hitch the future to that particular horse.

As much as that reality sucks, it *is* reality, and it's reality moreso for backs who have missed substantial time due to injuries during their rookie deals. It stretches belief to think such players will become less prone to future injury as they age and take more punishment.

In my view, Spielman is far better off modeling what is proven to work, even accepting the assumption he's not as astute at finding OL talent (which I personally don't accept).

The Vikings should let Cook play out his final year. If he doesn't want to do that, then find a trade partner and get what they can for him, preferably before this draft so they know what they're dealing with at RB heading into the draft. Cook has value to the team. The trick is maximizing it over time, and the great GM's know how to do that.

[J. Kapp 11]

To sum, I think Cook is an amazing player and he's fun to watch when he finds some room and can get into space. He does demand a lot of attention from the defense and can change games all by himself. So my view is nothing personal and in no way do I want to impugn Cook's talent which is amazing.

My perspective has a lot more to do with the value of the position itself, and more specifically, how individual players at that position evolve during their careers. RB's tend to take a lot of punishment, and their production tends to drop fairly quickly as result. This isn't my opinion - it's backed up by years of stats taken over the careers of many pro backs. There are few pro backs who remain highly productive through their second contract (assuming they make it to their second contract), and with the way most contracts are structured, that means guys on their second deals are declining most rapidly at just the point where their cap costs are going to increase most rapidly. That is also when the trade value of such players plummets as well. It's just not good team management to hitch the future to that particular horse.

As much as that reality sucks, it *is* reality, and it's reality moreso for backs who have missed substantial time due to injuries during their rookie deals. It stretches belief to think such players will become less prone to future injury as they age and take more punishment.

You know where you're smart, VL?

You didn't attach a value to the position. Say ... $4 million. Apparently it's OK to have that viewpoint, but it's not OK to assign a value to it.

Sorry. Venting.

The Vikings should let Cook play out his final year. If he doesn't want to do that, then find a trade partner and get what they can for him, preferably before this draft so they know what they're dealing with at RB heading into the draft. Cook has value to the team. The trick is maximizing it over time, and the great GM's know how to do that.

There you go.

Let's give the Bengals a call. I'm sure the they'd pay Cook whatever he wants. After all, they hitched up gladly to the Trae Waynes wagon at $14 million per year. Plus, we'd never have to worry about Cook coming back to haunt us, since the Bengals probably would have a hard time beating their own coaches in a scrimmage.

[StumpHunter]

No, as I said the offensive line improved some and the play calling was better. However, when the passing game takes a significant step back in production, and the run game a significant step forward, and that results in a lot more points, then I am going to give the majority of the credit to the running game, particularly the guy who ran the most.

But not to the guys up front blocking for that guy who ran the most?

What in your view was the main reason for Cook's low-output games? Would you give the majority of the criticism for those games to the guy who ran the most, or do those belong on the guys blocking?

I honestly want to understand where you are drawing your conclusion on this one. If Cook is a stud RB and he *doesn't* run well, who or what gets the blame for that if he gets primary credit when the running game does well?

I want both. A RB who is limited in big play production isn't a very good running back, but I also don't want a guy who can't grind it out and keep the defense off the field.

I think you can have both. It might just require that you redefine how you look at the RB position overall, though. Instead of a single uber RB you have two (or more) RBs who each bring a unique set of skills on the field.

Most successful teams seem to be using that approach in their running games and saving cap resources that they deploy elsewhere.

I think Kirk and Jimmy G are similar QBs as well. SF gave us the blue print for how to get to the SB with Kirk, run the heck out of the football. With RBBC true, but that only worked because their Oline was insane. Which we could do, but honestly Rick is a lot better at finding RB talent than Oline talent.

Is that a fair assessment? He did after all pick Brian O'Neill who I think most people agree has rapidly developed into the best offensive linemen on the team and one of the better right tackles in the NFL. He just drafted Bradbury at center and while Bradbury struggled at times he did pretty well for his first year and likely will develop into a regular fixture at center.

I'm also still very optimistic about Udoh. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him get on the field this year..

Spielman has had his misses on the OL, but he's not been terrible acquiring talent there.

To sum, I think Cook is an amazing player and he's fun to watch when he finds some room and can get into space. He does demand a lot of attention from the defense and can change games all by himself. So my view is nothing personal and in no way do I want to impugn Cook's talent which is amazing.

My perspective has a lot more to do with the value of the position itself, and more specifically, how individual players at that position evolve during their careers. RB's tend to take a lot of punishment, and their production tends to drop fairly quickly as result. This isn't my opinion - it's backed up by years of stats taken over the careers of many pro backs. There are few pro backs who remain highly productive through their second contract (assuming they make it to their second contract), and with the way most contracts are structured, that means guys on their second deals are declining most rapidly at just the point where their cap costs are going to increase most rapidly. That is also when the trade value of such players plummets as well. It's just not good team management to hitch the future to that particular horse.

As much as that reality sucks, it *is* reality, and it's reality moreso for backs who have missed substantial time due to injuries during their rookie deals. It stretches belief to think such players will become less prone to future injury as they age and take more punishment.

In my view, Spielman is far better off modeling what is proven to work, even accepting the assumption he's not as astute at finding OL talent (which I personally don't accept).

The Vikings should let Cook play out his final year. If he doesn't want to do that, then find a trade partner and get what they can for him, preferably before this draft so they know what they're dealing with at RB heading into the draft. Cook has value to the team. The trick is maximizing it over time, and the great GM's know how to do that.

I am cool with that opinion. I think I would be more okay than you with a Cook extension, but I would also be okay if they traded him. The worst thing they could do imo, is get to a point where he holds out.

Anything but that I am good with.

[VikingsVictorious]

Interesting. I hadn't read that so thanks for posting. I've been opposed to the idea of moving Reiff inside but maybe it's not such a bad idea after all. He'd be a pretty expensive G though, and doesn't seem open to a pay cut...

That definitely the issue, isn't it? Even if he would be great at left guard, it's pretty hard to justify paying a guard $13 million.

If I understand it correctly we would save 8.8 million in cap money by releasing him or trading. Any more compensation he gets is sunk cost. So that is the number that has relevance to me. 8.8 Million isn't bad for a starting left tackle.

[StumpHunter]

That definitely the issue, isn't it? Even if he would be great at left guard, it's pretty hard to justify paying a guard $13 million.

If I understand it correctly we would save 8.8 million in cap money by releasing him or trading. Any more compensation he gets is sunk cost. So that is the number that has relevance to me. 8.8 Million isn't bad for a starting left tackle.

I think you meant guard, but you are correct.

The only way I see that happening though, is if they draft a stud LT, which they probably have to trade up to get. Otherwise if they trade for Williams I don't think there is any way they can afford Reiff as well.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Good convo here. One thing I will say is I don’t think Spielman is as bad as some think when it comes to finding OL. Some were bad breaks compared to bad scouting.

Guys like Kalil and Elflein. Kalil was a pro bowler as a rookie, took tyron smiths job at USC of all players and looked like he’d be an all pro left tackle for many years. Then Matt Kalil turned into Matt Kalils own problem. I would say in no way, shape or form is that on Spielman.

As for Elflein, many of us were very impressed with Elflein his rookie year and thought he was a big part in the OL taking a turn for the better. For a 3rd round pick, we thought it was a solid find. When Elflein went down in that NFCC game, his play spiraled each season after that. Not sure if that would be on the GM either.

Then you look at guys like Reiff (who I am not a fan of) and Remmers. Both were very solid in 2017. Maybe shurmurs scheme had something to do with their success, I don’t know. But I don’t think they were “bad” finds. Just not great ones.

Then guys like O’Neill who is an elite pass blocker and has allowed 1 sack in his 2 year career (which came in the SF playoff game this year). And Bradbury who struggles as a pass blocker due to strength but is a great run blocker, I would say the jury is still out there.

Sure Spielman has had his bad picks like beavers and clemmings but what GM hasn’t.

I think the main problem with our OL struggles is:

1.) How it is managed and handled. For example moving remmers to guard. Or them considering moving Reiff to guard this year. You’d think they would learn from the remmers experience.

2.) injuries and players becoming their own problems like Kalil.

3.) how Spielman went so long without addressing it early on in the draft. I mean if you look now, who are the “cornerstones” on this OL? O’Neill and Bradbury. What did Spielman do the last two years? Take O’Neill and Bradbury early. He hasn’t done that since Kalil in 2012. He was fishing into the middle to late rounds too often and then patching with free agents. I’m starting to think he might finally have it figured out given we took O’Neill and Bradbury the last 2 years in the early rounds and by the sounds of it, are going to invest early again this year. Stop gaps like josh Kline are tolerable but the line needs to be built through the draft and chances are, it needs to be fairly early.

We need to just stop doing patchwork and invest. It has worked as of late and he is indeed finding talent early on. I expect to see that again this year. Not only early but also the middle rounds. I also think Trent Williams is a move we need to make.

If I’m Spielman, id trade for Williams and then do whatever I possibly could to trade up for Wirfs. Could you imagine Williams, Wirfs, Bradbury and O’Neill?!! I could care less who takes the other guard spot. I could man that spot and we’d still be a top 10 OL and I weigh under 200 lbs. But maybe draft someone like Jonah Jackson out of Ohio st in the 3rd-4th. Boom, line solidified! For a long time no less. Paying Reiff and remmers big money in free agency is one thing, trading for an elite LT is another. Trade for Williams and build around him with draft picks. They could easily solve this OL issue in 1 offseason by pulling something like this off.

Interesting.

I recently read a quote from Mike Tice, who knows a thing or two about coaching an O-line, that he believes Riley Reiff could play any position on the line at a very high level with the exception of center and left tackle (where he actually plays).

Tice said the Vikings should move him inside and draft the next left tackle. He thinks O'Neill is great right where he is and should stay there.

Take it as you will, perhaps with a grain of salt, but the fact is that Riley Reiff ranks just below the halfway point for offensive tackles. I know you said you're not a fan, so I get that. IDK, maybe Reiff would actually benefit from a position change.

Yeah I saw Tices comment today. Not sure how I feel about Reiff moving anywhere. But Tice definitely knows more than me

[VikingsVictorious]

If I understand it correctly we would save 8.8 million in cap money by releasing him or trading. Any more compensation he gets is sunk cost. So that is the number that has relevance to me. 8.8 Million isn't bad for a starting left tackle.

I think you meant guard, but you are correct.

The only way I see that happening though, is if they draft a stud LT, which they probably have to trade up to get. Otherwise if they trade for Williams I don't think there is any way they can afford Reiff as well.

Reiff would obviously be a part of any trade for Williams.

[phantom]

In my opinion Cook is a very fast running back and can make some huge plays, but lacks any ability to brake tackles. When other teams see this (The Bears) they make him try to brake through the line and the Vikings spend all day trying to figure out why they can only run against bad run defenses, and can't run against good run defense. And take to long to go to the pass and get them off Cook, or Adrian Peterson in the Past. Someone is to stubborn in that organization. Try going to the pass when they are taking away the run. They are not keeping them honest. We have to many runs for short yardage which I believe is worse then an incompletion. 2 yards and a cloud of dust. Please tell me they did not pay Cousins 26 million to hand off the ball to Cook. We can get Ponder to that for less.