Percy's future w/ Vikings looking uncertain

[Mothman]

Jim, in no way am I trying to give you a problem here, my friend. But very honestly I have to say that I still see a problem with this. If Pelissero really wants to talk to someone that Rick Spielman might take seriously, then he should talk to the Vikings head coach Leslie Frazier and the team's best player Adrian Peterson. Both of those guys want Harvin to remain with the team. I feel they carry more weight than a parade of Pelissero's unnamed sources ever could or should within the Vikings organization.

They do but Pelissero's not writing to Spielman. He's reporting to the public and I didn't get the impression he was trying to convince anyone in the Vikings organization of anything. It seemed to me that he was writing to inform people like us about the situation and the point of the quotes he provided from unnamed execs and personnel men was to indicate how some people around the league perceive Harvin and his value. That's relevant IF Harvin ends up on the trading block.

Let's forget Harvin for a second and look at the upcoming draft. Who will Spielman want inside the Vikings war room? I imagine Pelissero and his unnamed sources will have no say whatsoever regarding the draft board.

Of course they won't but I'm not seeing the connection you're trying to make. Pelissero's a reporter. His only connection to the Vikings is as a reporter. It's not his business to convince them of anything or to have any input into what they actually do. All he can do is report and/or opine on the team and issues relevant to the team.

Last but not least, Pelissero's sources might be unnamed but he has been outwardly vocal in his advocacy to get rid of Harvin. Maybe he doesn't like Percy's facial hair, or he detests short slot receivers or any player that is #12, or he can't help but hate anybody from Florida, I don't know. I just know that Pelissero is fanning the trade talk flames in this story and I don't believe that's an accident. It's probably just to exploit the situation but that doesn't make his role in this any more valid.

We'll have to disagree about this. I don't think he was fanning the trade flames in that story, just discussing that issue in some more depth now that it's clearly out there everywhere. I honestly don't recall him ever openly advocating that the Vikings should get rid of Harvin. He's certainly talked about the possibility that it could happen but if he ever took a strong position like that, I must have missed it. He strikes me as a pretty fair, balanced and unbiased reporter.

I agree with this and understand your concern. However, another Vikings player just came back from a serious injury and won the league's MVP award. And Peterson did that with a hernia injury near the end of the season. AD got banged up a few times for the Sooners in college ball too, so much so that his durability was in question when he was drafted. Yet we saw AD carry the team on his back during the latter part of last season. Want to give him some much needed rest? Put another offensive stud like Harvin on the field with him. Who knows? That might even help extend Peterson's career. Maybe Ponder's health as well, given that he's been injured throughout his college and pro careers.

It depends on the exact nature of Harvin's injury history.

[VikingLord]

The more I think about this situation the more I believe it will resolve itself for the following reasons:

- If it's Harvin's attitude, where is he going to go where that will result in anything better? Does he think he can find a head coach who is more tolerant or easier to work with than Leslie Frazier? Good luck if so.
- If it's the contract demands, well, he still has one year left on his rookie deal. So let's say he doesn't like the Vikes offer. What are his options? He can hold out, get fined, and cement the perception that he's a malcontent, which in turn should dramatically reduce future interest in his services when his rookie deal runs out, or he can play out the year and hit the FA market. Even if the Vikes franchise him at that point he's going to get monster money on a 1-year deal. But as long as the average of any new deal pays him well enough, he really has no incentive to do that, either, because he'd end up playing this upcoming season for less. In other words, the potential difference between what the Vikes are offering him to extend versus what he could command as a FA would have to be pretty substantial to overcome the gap between what he's going to make playing out the last year of his rookie deal and what he'd get as an unrestricted FA or as a franchised player.
- If the Vikes have concerns about his attitude or health, incentives are the answer. Pay him like a top-flight receiver if he performs like one on and off the field. Pay him according to his actual production. Harvin shouldn't have a problem with that, because if he's as good as he apparently thinks he is, he'll end up with the bling commensurate with that.

I tend to think most of what is happening right now is just dead-zone reporting. This is a notoriously slow time of the year in the NFL and Harvin's mysterious end to his season on IR is just a story that can fill in that time IMHO. If one looks at the options on the table, its a lot less intriguing.

[Mothman]

- If the Vikes have concerns about his attitude or health, incentives are the answer. Pay him like a top-flight receiver if he performs like one on and off the field. Pay him according to his actual production. Harvin shouldn't have a problem with that, because if he's as good as he apparently thinks he is, he'll end up with the bling commensurate with that.

I told a friend the same thing this morning. Load a contract with incentives and if Harvin wants to be paid like a superstar, all he has to do is earn it. However, I suspect he'll be far more interested in guaranteed money than incentives that he might achieve so an incentive-laden deal might be problematic and paying him like a top-flight receiver without an incentive-laden contract might be a problem for the Vikings.

I tend to think most of what is happening right now is just dead-zone reporting. This is a notoriously slow time of the year in the NFL and Harvin's mysterious end to his season on IR is just a story that can fill in that time IMHO. If one looks at the options on the table, its a lot less intriguing.

I definitely think a lot of this is dead-zone reporting but there are egos, emotions and millions involved so even though what you wrote above is logical, things may not play out logically.

[Eli]

I told a friend the same thing this morning. Load a contract with incentives and if Harvin wants to be paid like a superstar, all he has to do is earn it. However, I suspect he'll be far more interested in guaranteed money than incentives that he might achieve so an incentive-laden deal might be problematic and paying him like a top-flight receiver without an incentive-laden contract might be a problem for the Vikings.

No question about it. If a guy values himself highly (no matter how delusional that idea may be) then offering a contract like that can easily be seen as a slap in the face. Harvin may simply choose to sacrifice a big payday this season in order to negotiate with every team in the league next spring, leaving the Vikings with nothing. In fact, if he harbors ill-feelings about how he's been treated by the franchise, that's exactly what he'll do.

[losperros]

Of course they won't but I'm not seeing the connection you're trying to make. Pelissero's a reporter. His only connection to the Vikings is as a reporter. It's not his business to convince them of anything or to have any input into what they actually do. All he can do is report and/or opine on the team and issues relevant to the team.

My point is the exact one you just made above. Start with the "His only connection to the Vikings is as a reporter" and go from there. It's exactly what I'm saying about Pelissero.

We'll have to disagree about this. I don't think he was fanning the trade flames in that story, just discussing that issue in some more depth now that it's clearly out there everywhere. I honestly don't recall him ever openly advocating that the Vikings should get rid of Harvin. He's certainly talked about the possibility that it could happen but if he ever took a strong position like that, I must have missed it. He strikes me as a pretty fair, balanced and unbiased reporter.

That's odd because I thought you posted something from Pelissero and Zulgad where you said it was obvious that they don't like Percy Harvin all that much. If I'm wrong, I apologize. My memory is even less reliable than reports from unnamed sources.

Don't get me wrong, Jim. I really liked listening to Pelissero after the games this last season, so I'm not saying he's the scourge of mankind. Normally, he's an excellent reporter, in my view. I'm just getting from him that he would like to see Harvin gone. Maybe I'm misinterpreting something in his writing because I'm firmly in the "pay and keep Harvin" camp.

One last thought. I just reread Pelissero's article and I now agree that he didn't take any swipes at anyone. He just reported the story. I guess I was overreacting to the unnamed sources part. There have been a lot of "unnamed sources" from the media during this ordeal and I find them to be tiring. But then, I feel some of these guys are much less reportorial than Pelissero and far more exploitative. YMMV.

It depends on the exact nature of Harvin's injury history.

Sorry but I'm not sure what you mean. What nature of what injury history? You mean the present injury or with the Gators?

Part of what I'm saying is that Harvin usually bounces back from injury. I also feel that his presence on the field actually takes heat (strategically and even physically) off of both AD and Ponder because I see Harvin as being a first class playmaker that opposing teams have to take in account during the games.

[Mothman]

My point is the exact one you just made above. Start with the "His only connection to the Vikings is as a reporter" and go from there. It's exactly what I'm saying about Pelissero.

I'm still not quite sure I understand. Do you think he's overstepping the parameters of his job a bit? Again, I apologize if I'm being dense here. As you know, it wouldn't be the first time!

That's odd because I thought you posted something from Pelissero and Zulgad where you said it was obvious that they don't like Percy Harvin all that much. If I'm wrong, I apologize. My memory is even less reliable than reports from unnamed sources.

LOL! Make that your memory and my memory. I don't think I posted anything like that about Pelissero but perhaps I did. I do sometimes get the impression Zulgad's not exactly a Harvin fan. The main vibe I get from Pelissero is that he thinks the Vikings may believe Harvin is more trouble than he's worth.

One last thought. I just reread Pelissero's article and I now agree that he didn't take any swipes at anyone. He just reported the story. I guess I was overreacting to the unnamed sources part. There have been a lot of "unnamed sources" from the media during this ordeal and I find them to be tiring. But then, I feel some of these guys are much less reportorial than Pelissero and far more exploitative. YMMV.

No, I'm pretty much with you on that. I think there are writers who abuse the unnamed source stuff and I'm much less inclined to trust a piece that quotes "a league source" than when a reporter posts a direct quote from "an AFC personnel man". It might be a silly distinction to make but because Pelissero tends to be more specific about his sources, they seem more credible to me.

Sorry but I'm not sure what you mean. What nature of what injury history? You mean the present injury or with the Gators?

I was referring to the line in the Pelissero column where he wrote, "There also are concerns within the Vikings organization about the rate at which Harvin will age, given his style of play and a variety of health concerns more extensive and complicated than anyone outside the organization knows." It's that last part that concerns me. You're absolutely correct that Harvin has usually bounced back from injury but that line makes me wonder just how much wear and tear is already on Percy's "tires" at this point and how long a player his size, who plays very physically, will be able to keep bouncing back from injuries.

I absolutely agree that Harvin's presence takes pressure off other key players in the offense and there's no doubt he's a terrific playmaker. He's one of those players a defense has to game plan to handle and that's a big positive for the Vikings. I'm hoping they can reach a reasonable agreement that will keep him on the roster and that he'll be able to get a better handle on his temper. I'd much rather see that than a trade. However, I don't want to see the Vikings make Harvin one of the 3 or 4 highest-paid WRs in the NFL because as good as he can be, I don't think his overall production merits that investment. I'd have no problem with an incentive-based deal that could put him among the highest-paid WRs in the league because if he reached that goal, he would have earned it.

I guess I'm in the "weigh all of the factors and do what;s ultimately best for the team" camp. I'm just not sure what that is...

[losperros]

I'm still not quite sure I understand. Do you think he's overstepping the parameters of his job a bit? Again, I apologize if I'm being dense here. As you know, it wouldn't be the first time!

Yes, I thought he was overstepping the parameters of his influence on the team. It was a ridiculous notion on my part. I no longer think that, not after rereading his article with a cooler disposition. Admittedly, some of the other articles by other...ahem..."sports reporters" (that's as nice as I can be about them) had me feeling a bit edgy and probably overly defensive on Harvin's behalf.

I absolutely agree that Harvin's presence takes pressure off other key players in the offense and there's no doubt he's a terrific playmaker. He's one of those players a defense has to game plan to handle and that's a big positive for the Vikings. I'm hoping they can reach a reasonable agreement that will keep him on the roster and that he'll be able to get a better handle on his temper. I'd much rather see that than a trade. However, I don't want to see the Vikings make Harvin one of the 3 or 4 highest-paid WRs in the NFL because as good as he can be, I don't think his overall production merits that investment. I'd have no problem with an incentive-based deal that could put him among the highest-paid WRs in the league because if he reached that goal, he would have earned it.

I guess I'm in the "weigh all of the factors and do what;s ultimately best for the team" camp. I'm just not sure what that is...

Maybe I should be in that camp as well since I really do want what's best for the team. But I honestly and fully believe that Harvin remaining with the team is the best case scenario for the Vikings. I'm basing this solely on what little knowledge I have of the situation, given what I've read and heard. And I admit that I have dismissed some of the reporting as being merely exploitative hyperbole.

Now if Harvin turns out to be an ax-wielding psychopath that belongs to a Druid cult practicing human sacrifices, then I can see the team abruptly parting ways with Harvin because of his attitude. However, I'm with Souhan in believing (from what WE the public know so far - and that's a critical fact) that Harvin is more of an overly passionate player with a sometimes hair-trigger temper that calms down after a few days. Also, I greatly respect Leslie Frazier and put a lot of credence in his assessment of Harvin, which I actually found to be more touching than terse.

All that aside, keep in mind that I have been an absolute fan of Percy Harvin's abilities since his days with the Florida Gators. That's why I freely admit to being biased about the guy. I think all of us have those kind of biases about certain players or coaches at different times. For example, I know what kind of angry reaction you would have if anyone dared to say anything bad about Brad Childress.

[Demi]

Unnamed sources are never questioned when the report supports that persons opinion. Funny.

[Mothman]

Yes, I thought he was overstepping the parameters of his influence on the team. It was a ridiculous notion on my part. I no longer think that, not after rereading his article with a cooler disposition. Admittedly, some of the other articles by other...ahem..."sports reporters" (that's as nice as I can be about them) had me feeling a bit edgy and probably overly defensive on Harvin's behalf.

That's understandable.

All that aside, keep in mind that I have been an absolute fan of Percy Harvin's abilities since his days with the Florida Gators. That's why I freely admit to being biased about the guy. I think all of us have those kind of biases about certain players or coaches at different times. For example, I know what kind of angry reaction you would have if anyone dared to say anything bad about Brad Childress.

Oh, yes, nothing makes me angrier than that!

[VikeMike]

I guess it depends on three things: does Harvin want to leave Minnesota, exactly how big the extension is and what positions those draft choices would be. If they aren't in the top half of the round, I wouldn't do it.

Seems to me that most of the speculation is originating from the beat writers in Minnesota. Are they just tired of dealing with Percy and nudging this situation along? No one is going to give the Vikings anything higher than a second rounder, and maybe not even that. Two picks? If they are in the bottom part of a round, maybe. A high second and fourth? Possibly.

If he wants to play for Frasier and the contract doesn't get bigger than five years and $40-50 million, I say keep him. I don't care if he's cranky now and again. There just isn't that many players that is as explosive has he is.

Get one outside receiver with hands and speed to add to AD, Harvin and Rudolph, then they have something on offense to really see if Ponder can be a legit QB next season. If you create another hole in the lineup, then we're #### around for another two years.

If they dump Harvin and can't dig up a legitimate outside receiver, then Peterson better run for 2,500 or the offense is going to be mediocre. Again. (Yes, Wright might be able to fill in the slot, but the return game is back to being average and we don't have as much versatility in the backfield, especially on third down).

Tell you now thing: if they do trade Harvin, then he's a bigger pain in the rear than any of us know at this point.

[Mothman]

ya, its funny how that works. if the report said that "unknown sources have told Harry Richard that Mike wallace wouldnt mind playing in Minnesota" or "unknown sources say Mike Jenkins got in a heated argument with Adrian Peterson and demanded to be traded", I guarantee people would say " ya, yup that sounds like we need to get rid of the guy, we cant have those kinds of players messing with the team chemistry".

I think a lot of the reason people are denying and not wanting to even consider the possibility of these sources being legit, is because its PH, and he is one of the only playmakers on the offense. Everything that is floating around right now regarding Harvin is automatically dismissed because we dont want it to be true. We want our best players to be what they are on the field, professional.

I think there is definitely some truth to some of these reports, considering anyone that has watched the offseason debacle and the temper tantrum which took place in Seattle.

It's always best when a writer can get someone on the record but using unnamed, protected sources has been an established practice in journalistic circles for decades. My understanding is that even though those sources remain unnamed in print, reporters often have to reveal their sources to their editors to establish credibility before publication. In cases where there is no editor, a layer of doubt is obviously added.

My take is that it's probably rare for a quote from an unnamed source (or the source itself) to be completely fabricated when it appears in an article by a professional reporter. That sort of fabrication is a big "no-no" so it's probably rare. Consequently, the real issue is credibility. An unnamed source can never be as credible as a named source but personally, I'm willing to consider an unnamed source more likely to be real when a writer makes an effort to be specific without giving away so much info that his source is revealed. For example, when someone like Pelissero writes that a comment was made a by a "veteran teammate" or "a personnel man for another NFC team", I take that as an effort to tell us what he can and establish his source as real. We can probably safely assume he's actually quoting a personnel man for one of 16 NFC teams or a veteran Vikings player. When a rumor site like ProFootballTalk simply quotes a "league source", I think some credibility is lost. What is a "league source"? An executive, a player, an official, a scout, an agent...? There's probably an actual source but it's so vague that it's hard to know how seriously to take it.

On top of all that, just because an unnamed source actually exists and is a real person, that doesn't mean the source is wholly reliable or that they aren't simply providing an opinion that may or may not be accurate. The point is there is more reason to take some sources seriously than others and (to me anyway) those reasons have very little to do with whose opinion their comments support. I consider the reporter, the description of the source and the believability of what is reported when evaluating how I feel about an unnamed source quoted in an article. YMMV.

[mansquatch]

Coming back to this a tad late…

Bringing up Harvin’s health and durability issues reminds me of the Sidney Rice contract negotiation that didn’t work out. Spielman was willing to pay fair value but was conservative due to the player in question’s (Rice) history of health issues. Harvin doesn’t have Rice’s level of injury issues, but there has been a history there. IMO, this makes it more important to sign PH this offseason. If he hits Free Agency you run the risk of a team with a loose GM, like WSH, or Seattle, overpaying for him.

Looking at this from that angle, some of this story doesn’t make sense. Why would Harvin push for a trade or why would the Vikings let loose a trade rumor? It would seem to me that it is in Harvin’s best interest to holdoff on these antics until he is a true Free Agent and can create a market for himself, since he isn’t a FA this offseason, what is the motive? The comment about a “complicated set of medical issues” would point to impatience as a driver. Perhaps Harvin fears that this is his chance to earn lifestyle changing money and wants to make the most of what he believes is a relatively short window of opportunity? Perhaps… But, what is stuck in my craw on this is the fact that Harvin (assuming it is him) is being difficult about this issue in 2013 and not 2014. If he really wants the big $$$, then it makes more sense to shut up and play his rear off this season and then enter Free Agency as the marquee player on the market. (And he likely would be.) Then he could squeeze top dollar, despite whatever his medical history might be. So why act out now?

I do not know anything for sure, but the above makes it harder to rule out personality conflicts in the situation. I do agree with Siefert’s take that part of championship football is dealing with personalities like Harvin’s.

[VikeMike]

See post below ...

[VikeMike]

It's always best when a writer can get someone on the record but using unnamed, protected sources has been an established practice in journalistic circles for decades. My understanding is that even though those sources remain unnamed in print, reporters often have to reveal their sources to their editors to establish credibility before publication. In cases where there is no editor, a layer of doubt is obviously added.

If someone won't go on the record, you have to get at least one other source to confirm the report. In fact, no genuine news organization would run a one-source story. Sports is held to the same standard as news is.[/quote]

[Mothman]

If someone won't go on the record, you have to get at least one other source to confirm the report. In fact, no genuine news organization would run a one-source story. Sports is held to the same standard as news is.

Thanks for the info. That makes sense to me.

Of course, if someone is just being quoted with an opinion on a situation, there's nothing to confirm beyond their identity (and perhaps whether or not they actually said what is being attributed to them) so do you know how that works? Maybe the identity of the person being quoted needs to be confirmed to an editor or something?

These days, some of the info we get about this stuff isn't from genuine news organizations so it all has to be taken with a reasonable dose of skepticism. I think that's healthy anyway...