Dalvin Cook

[J. Kapp 11]

Our OC has literally made a career out of taking RBs no one has ever heard of and making them highly productive. I don't see anyone saying Cook isn't worth $4M, and he's not taking $4M from anyone anyway, the question is should the Vikings be the ones to give him his payday.

That's when you need to look at Kubiaks model for success. The lack of prior success by teams who overpay RBs. Our cap situation. And also Cook's durability concerns. It all adds up to a poor investment in my opinion.

THIS.

Kubiak has done it over and over and over. Even in Denver his first go-round as OC in the 90s. We make a big deal out of Terrell Davis. Remember, he was a lightly regarded 6th-round draft choice out of Georgia who became a HOFer with Kubiak as his OC. You look at all the guys that have rushed for 1,000 yards under him, only Clinton Portis was a high pick, and even HE was only a 2nd rounder. The others are guys like Reuben Droughns (3rd round), Mike Anderson (6th round), Justin Forsett (7th round), and Arian Foster (UFA).

It simply makes no sense to pay a running back big money when Gary Kubiak has proven he can make just about anyone a 1,000 yard rusher.

[J. Kapp 11]

You're not quite quoting me accurately.

I said I wouldn't pay MORE than $4 million for a RB, and I stand by that.

So you're OK with $4 million, but not $4,000,001.
Thinks of all the bums making 5-14 million in the NFL. Waynes for $14 million does not help a team win any more than Cook does.
It's obviously irrelevant because IMO the absolute minimum extension Cook would sign would be $10 million with incentives to earn up to $16 million. Really all that matters is the guaranteed money.

Come on man. Don't be silly. Yes, I'd pay Dalvin Cook $4 million and one dollar.

However, as you said, there is no way on this earth that Dalvin Cook is going to sign for less than $10 million per. And if I were the Vikings, there's no way on this earth I'd be the team paying him that. Somebody will shell out the cash. Let the Jets do it, or somebody like that. I can just about guarantee you ... it won't be a contender.

As for Trae Waynes, good for him. Here's a message for ya, Trae. That $14 million won't help when you're the Bengals' "shutdown corner" and you're getting torched play after play by the other team's best receiver.

[Pondering Her Percy]

So you're OK with $4 million, but not $4,000,001.
Thinks of all the bums making 5-14 million in the NFL. Waynes for $14 million does not help a team win any more than Cook does.
It's obviously irrelevant because IMO the absolute minimum extension Cook would sign would be $10 million with incentives to earn up to $16 million. Really all that matters is the guaranteed money.

Come on man. Don't be silly. Yes, I'd pay Dalvin Cook $4 million and one dollar.

However, as you said, there is no way on this earth that Dalvin Cook is going to sign for less than $10 million per. And if I were the Vikings, there's no way on this earth I'd be the team paying him that. Somebody will shell out the cash. Let the Jets do it, or somebody like that. I can just about guarantee you ... it won't be a contender.

As for Trae Waynes, good for him. Here's a message for ya, Trae. That $14 million won't help when you're the Bengals' "shutdown corner" and you're getting torched play after play by the other team's best receiver.

Kapp what about $4,000,002? Just messing around

[VikingsVictorious]

Come on man. Don't be silly. Yes, I'd pay Dalvin Cook $4 million and one dollar.

However, as you said, there is no way on this earth that Dalvin Cook is going to sign for less than $10 million per. And if I were the Vikings, there's no way on this earth I'd be the team paying him that. Somebody will shell out the cash. Let the Jets do it, or somebody like that. I can just about guarantee you ... it won't be a contender.

As for Trae Waynes, good for him. Here's a message for ya, Trae. That $14 million won't help when you're the Bengals' "shutdown corner" and you're getting torched play after play by the other team's best receiver.

Kapp what about $4,000,002? Just messing around

I understand that Kapp is saying he wouldn't keep Cook, but don't go with $4 million. Come on that's ridiculous Cook is easily worth that. I think the most negative possible value for Cook should be at $8 Million. I'd go 10. That won't be enough to keep him unless heavy incentives are added.

[Pondering Her Percy]

Kapp what about $4,000,002? Just messing around

I understand that Kapp is saying he wouldn't keep Cook, but don't go with $4 million. Come on that's ridiculous Cook is easily worth that. I think the most negative possible value for Cook should be at $8 Million. I'd go 10. That won't be enough to keep him unless heavy incentives are added.

Yeah let’s put it this way, Ingram is making what? $6 million? And he’s 30 years old. Dalvin cook is just scratching the surface. Bottom line is, it doesn’t matter what anyone thinks. What matters is what the market is showing for an elite RB entering his prime with some injury history. In turn, that won’t be the $16 million mccaffery is making but it’s going to be over $10 million. I say do it but that’s just me. I mean if cook said “hey I want $17 million bottom dollar” then yeah let him walk but he won’t. He doesn’t have the leverage given the injuries. But if he comes in saying he wants $11 million let’s say, I’m pulling the trigger. With the ways guys like Bryzinski structure contracts now, it might not be as bad as some think. Money could be pushed down the road and something cook never sees if he slumps. Somewhat similar to cousins in the sense that even cousins knows he won’t be seeing $45 million in 2022.

[StumpHunter]

I think if both sides of the Dalvin debate looked at this honestly they could both agree that:

A) A repeat, or close to a repeat of Dalvin's 2019 season each of the next 5 seasons would be worth 16 million a year.

B) A repeat, or close to a repeat of Dalvin's 2019 season each of the next 5 seasons is very unlikely. In fact, getting 2 more seasons like that does not seem likely based on the production of most RBs in their 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th seasons.

C) It is not as easy as just deciding to go with running back by committee and boom, you have a quick replacement for Cook. Odds are that if we traded Cook or let him walk after the next season the RB position would be seriously downgraded.

The Vikings have a tough choice to make, but they would be wise to make it sooner rather than later. They should trade or extend him before the draft to avoid a hold out and allow themselves the opportunity to find his replacement via the draft if they go the trade route. The worst thing they can do IMO, is nothing.

[fiestavike]

The team should go to a rb and a qb on rookie deals, pour resources into OL. Run Kubiak's system, which doesnt require elite skill positions, and wins first with scheme, second in the trenches. That leaves a lot of money for the defense, and seems like a coherent plan based on our coaches and their philosophy.

I like the suggestion that we ignore the names and just talk about it from a team construction and allocation of resources point of view.

[Pondering Her Percy]

I think if both sides of the Dalvin debate looked at this honestly they could both agree that:

A) A repeat, or close to a repeat of Dalvin's 2019 season each of the next 5 seasons would be worth 16 million a year.

B) A repeat, or close to a repeat of Dalvin's 2019 season each of the next 5 seasons is very unlikely. In fact, getting 2 more seasons like that does not seem likely based on the production of most RBs in their 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th seasons.

C) It is not as easy as just deciding to go with running back by committee and boom, you have a quick replacement for Cook. Odds are that if we traded Cook or let him walk after the next season the RB position would be seriously downgraded.

The Vikings have a tough choice to make, but they would be wise to make it sooner rather than later. They should trade or extend him before the draft to avoid a hold out and allow themselves the opportunity to find his replacement via the draft if they go the trade route. The worst thing they can do IMO, is nothing.

I agree with all of this except one thing. I dont know why $16 million continues to get mentioned in regards to Cook. Nobody on here (that is in favor of resigning Cook) has said anything about him deserving $16 million. Cook doesnt have the leverage to get $16 million given his injury history.

McCaffery and Cook are very similar. They are both elite carrying the ball and catching the ball. But McCaffery has gone 3 years not missing a single game. Cook has gone 3 years missing 19 games. I would have to imagine Cook himself even knows he cant match McCafferys contract. But Cook should also be making more than a 30 year old Mark Ingram.

[Pondering Her Percy]

In regards to drafting a RB this year, I've seen a lot of questionable ideas in regards to what positions we should draft this year. Some may differ but IMO, we dont have time to waste on positions we're well off at given the amount of holes on this roster and limited cap room. For example, RB, RT, TE, NT, LB, S (if they plan on keeping Harris). Some depth picks late in the draft at a position like safety, sure. But going after these positions early on, no.

Many might disagree but I know that if we took a LB in round 1 when we have two studs on two big contracts and use a WLB very little, I'd be ticked. I get the whole BPA approach but I feel like positions like LB (outside of depth) you can cross off the list.

For something like RB, I dont think there is any point for 2 reasons. #1 being if we are planning on resigning Cook and have Mattison on a rookie deal, there is no point. And #2 being, IF we were for some reason going with Kapp's route of renting a RB every 4 years, why draft one this year? Cook will be on the team no matter what. Drafting a RB this year does nothing but waste him on the bench for a year. But either way, I think they would resort to relying on Mattison if they felt Cook wouldnt resign. And find someone to back him up. Bottom line, dont draft a RB this year.

I didnt list QB because given development is key at this position, I wouldnt rule it out. Do we NEED one? No. Can we develop one, yes.

In the end, we need to fill these holes. Granted we have 12 picks but we also have holes at:

WR
RG
LG
Possibly LT?
3 tech DT
Possibly DE
CB x at least 2
Possibly safety

That's 9+ players. And given the later rounds are a lot more difficult to "hit" on, that's a lot to fill. I'm sure we add a few vets after the draft but it's still a lot. We need to draft accordingly this year. We can look at BPA more so in 2021 if we draft well this year.

[fiestavike]

The sooner the vikings realize they wont be in the championship picture this year the better. Make some wise moves aimed past 2020, including getting some draft capital for cook.

[StumpHunter]

I think if both sides of the Dalvin debate looked at this honestly they could both agree that:

A) A repeat, or close to a repeat of Dalvin's 2019 season each of the next 5 seasons would be worth 16 million a year.

B) A repeat, or close to a repeat of Dalvin's 2019 season each of the next 5 seasons is very unlikely. In fact, getting 2 more seasons like that does not seem likely based on the production of most RBs in their 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th seasons.

C) It is not as easy as just deciding to go with running back by committee and boom, you have a quick replacement for Cook. Odds are that if we traded Cook or let him walk after the next season the RB position would be seriously downgraded.

The Vikings have a tough choice to make, but they would be wise to make it sooner rather than later. They should trade or extend him before the draft to avoid a hold out and allow themselves the opportunity to find his replacement via the draft if they go the trade route. The worst thing they can do IMO, is nothing.

I agree with all of this except one thing. I dont know why $16 million continues to get mentioned in regards to Cook. Nobody on here (that is in favor of resigning Cook) has said anything about him deserving $16 million. Cook doesnt have the leverage to get $16 million given his injury history.

McCaffery and Cook are very similar. They are both elite carrying the ball and catching the ball. But McCaffery has gone 3 years not missing a single game. Cook has gone 3 years missing 19 games. I would have to imagine Cook himself even knows he cant match McCafferys contract. But Cook should also be making more than a 30 year old Mark Ingram.

I didn't mean to imply people want him to make 16 million, just that his year was worth that.

I agree that he isn't going to be looking to get McCaffery money.

Gordon is making 8 million per year, while David Johnson got a 13 million per year contract after just one good season. Cook probably is looking to get as much as Johnson, while the Vikings are probably looking at the Gordon's contract as a baseline. In the end I think he ends up closer to Gordon than Johnson.

[J. Kapp 11]

Kapp what about $4,000,002? Just messing around

I understand that Kapp is saying he wouldn't keep Cook, but don't go with $4 million. Come on that's ridiculous Cook is easily worth that. I think the most negative possible value for Cook should be at $8 Million. I'd go 10. That won't be enough to keep him unless heavy incentives are added.

Not gonna budge.

If I'm running the team, I take the player's name out of it and consider the position. Period.

Let's say Gary Kubiak can get 1,100 yards out of Player B at $880,000. That's not far-fetched considering Kubiak's long-standing track record of getting big production out of relative nobodies.

You say you'd give Player A $10 million.

Looking at the production alone, is Player A worth $9 million more than Player B? I say no.

Now add the names back in. It just so happens that Player B is Alexander Mattison, and that's his actual cap hit for 2020.

You can apply the same principle to every position, and it still works. Obviously it's impossible to completely remove the name. Danielle Hunter is going to outproduce Stacy Keely, for example. But if you base it on production at the position, it's not hard to conclude that NO running back in our system is worth $10 million.

[VikingsVictorious]

I understand that Kapp is saying he wouldn't keep Cook, but don't go with $4 million. Come on that's ridiculous Cook is easily worth that. I think the most negative possible value for Cook should be at $8 Million. I'd go 10. That won't be enough to keep him unless heavy incentives are added.

Yeah let’s put it this way, Ingram is making what? $6 million? And he’s 30 years old. Dalvin cook is just scratching the surface. Bottom line is, it doesn’t matter what anyone thinks. What matters is what the market is showing for an elite RB entering his prime with some injury history. In turn, that won’t be the $16 million mccaffery is making but it’s going to be over $10 million. I say do it but that’s just me. I mean if cook said “hey I want $17 million bottom dollar” then yeah let him walk but he won’t. He doesn’t have the leverage given the injuries. But if he comes in saying he wants $11 million let’s say, I’m pulling the trigger. With the ways guys like Bryzinski structure contracts now, it might not be as bad as some think. Money could be pushed down the road and something cook never sees if he slumps. Somewhat similar to cousins in the sense that even cousins knows he won’t be seeing $45 million in 2022.

I'd do $10 million and I wouldn't be upset if we pay him $11 million. Wonder what kind of guaranteed Money it will take.

[VikingsVictorious]

In regards to drafting a RB this year, I've seen a lot of questionable ideas in regards to what positions we should draft this year. Some may differ but IMO, we dont have time to waste on positions we're well off at given the amount of holes on this roster and limited cap room. For example, RB, RT, TE, NT, LB, S (if they plan on keeping Harris). Some depth picks late in the draft at a position like safety, sure. But going after these positions early on, no.

Many might disagree but I know that if we took a LB in round 1 when we have two studs on two big contracts and use a WLB very little, I'd be ticked. I get the whole BPA approach but I feel like positions like LB (outside of depth) you can cross off the list.

For something like RB, I dont think there is any point for 2 reasons. #1 being if we are planning on resigning Cook and have Mattison on a rookie deal, there is no point. And #2 being, IF we were for some reason going with Kapp's route of renting a RB every 4 years, why draft one this year? Cook will be on the team no matter what. Drafting a RB this year does nothing but waste him on the bench for a year. But either way, I think they would resort to relying on Mattison if they felt Cook wouldnt resign. And find someone to back him up. Bottom line, dont draft a RB this year.

I didnt list QB because given development is key at this position, I wouldnt rule it out. Do we NEED one? No. Can we develop one, yes.

In the end, we need to fill these holes. Granted we have 12 picks but we also have holes at:

WR
RG
LG
Possibly LT?
3 tech DT
Possibly DE
CB x at least 2
Possibly safety

That's 9+ players. And given the later rounds are a lot more difficult to "hit" on, that's a lot to fill. I'm sure we add a few vets after the draft but it's still a lot. We need to draft accordingly this year. We can look at BPA more so in 2021 if we draft well this year.

Your logic regarding Kapp's thinking is flawless. All RBs are equal (Hyperbole) so why waste a year of Rookie Contract by Drafting one this year or either of the next two since we have Mattison locked up through the 22 season.

[VikingsVictorious]

I understand that Kapp is saying he wouldn't keep Cook, but don't go with $4 million. Come on that's ridiculous Cook is easily worth that. I think the most negative possible value for Cook should be at $8 Million. I'd go 10. That won't be enough to keep him unless heavy incentives are added.

Not gonna budge.

If I'm running the team, I take the player's name out of it and consider the position. Period.

Let's say Gary Kubiak can get 1,100 yards out of Player B at $880,000. That's not far-fetched considering Kubiak's long-standing track record of getting big production out of relative nobodies.

You say you'd give Player A $10 million.

Looking at the production alone, is Player A worth $9 million more than Player B? I say no.

Now add the names back in. It just so happens that Player B is Alexander Mattison, and that's his actual cap hit for 2020.

You can apply the same principle to every position, and it still works. Obviously it's impossible to completely remove the name. Danielle Hunter is going to outproduce Stacy Keely, for example. But if you base it on production at the position, it's not hard to conclude that NO running back in our system is worth $10 million.

You already did budge. You said you wouldn't pay any RB over $4 million, but then you changed that to 4,000,001. Just budge $4 million more and you will be getting in the ballpark of getting it right. What you are saying you can say about any position. I realize that the RB position is one of the few that Rookies can be great right out of the gate. So the stance makes a bit more sense, but I don't expect Mattison or any RB we might draft to do as well as Cook.