Vikings listening to trade offers on Hunter

[VikingLord]

I agree with you but the Vikings don't. Kwesi has said in the past that the goal is to have many above average chances to win the super bowl as opposed to going all in for one or two years. I'm sure the Vikings believe they can win it all this year.

I believe we can win it all this year.

I agree with you for the following reasons:

- The Vikings have the productive vet QB
- They have continuity along the offensive line
- They arguably got better at receiver and tight end compared to last year
- The offense overall was pretty good last year
- The main question marks are on the defensive side of the ball, an area which was almost historically bad last year
- With a new defensive coordinator and an infusion of young talent, it is reasonable to expect the defense to improve
- Special teams were pretty good last year and should remain the same or be better
- The Vikings head coach has a year under his belt now as the head coach and has likely learned some things he can improve on
- The division overall got weaker with the departure of Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay

[JJBreaksRecords]

Wow, lol. A few of you have been hitting the purple koolaid a bit hard.

[StumpHunter]

Wow, lol. A few of you have been hitting the purple koolaid a bit hard.

The Vikings took two strengths of the team and made them both weakness for salary cap space, presumably to help them in future seasons assuming they don't make a big trade and use the cap to pay who they trade for(there isn't a current FA available who could help this team significantly, aside from Cook that is).

The VIKINGS do not believe this is a championship caliber team or they don't do that. A team with championship aspirations probably cut Kendricks and Thielen, but not Cook and they don't trade Smith for basically nothing. Not unless they have something good waiting behind them and we KNOW they don't.

They don't need to trade away Hunter to be in full rebuild mode, they are already there.

[VikingLord]

Wow, lol. A few of you have been hitting the purple koolaid a bit hard.

The Vikings took two strengths of the team and made them both weakness for salary cap space, presumably to help them in future seasons assuming they don't make a big trade and use the cap to pay who they trade for(there isn't a current FA available who could help this team significantly, aside from Cook that is).

The VIKINGS do not believe this is a championship caliber team or they don't do that. A team with championship aspirations probably cut Kendricks and Thielen, but not Cook and they don't trade Smith for basically nothing. Not unless they have something good waiting behind them and we KNOW they don't.

They don't need to trade away Hunter to be in full rebuild mode, they are already there.

What were the two strengths? Z. Smith was a strength early in the season when fully healthy. He wasn't later on, and he was never a strong run defender even early in the season. IMHO, they replaced him with a guy (Davenport) who has equal potential to impact the game when healthy, so I'm not sure I agree they made that position a weakness (assuming that is what you're referring to). With Smith they got what the market would bear. They can't create demand that isn't there.

For Cook, I'm not sure why they waited to make their move when they did. Maybe they thought they could reach an agreement with him, but even there, I'm not convinced the Dalvin Cook of this year is going to perform any better over the course of a full season than the players they have at the position. You won't get an argument from me that Mattison is no Cook even if Cook is diminished, but it also doesn't seem like KOC is going to emphasize the run like Zimmer did, and thus there is no need for a star at RB, and certainly not one who would have taken up the cap space that Cook was going to take up.

You're pretty glib about your conclusion that the Vikings are in full rebuild mode. For me, being in full rebuild mode would have meant they got rid of Bradbury at center and went with a younger guy at that position or a transitional vet FA, got rid of Cousins and went with a younger player or even Mullens at QB, and definitely shipped Hunter, which hasn't happened yet. The Vikings did move on from some of their veteran defensive starters, but it bears mentioning those were the defensive starters on a unit that basically finished last in defense overall.

I'm not going to say I think the Vikings are a lock to compete for a Superbowl. I just pointed out reasons for optimism which I think are valid. On the flip side of that, there are plenty of reasons for pessimism as well, but even if those are equally valid, even you have to admit there is a lot of potential for this team to make more out of relatively less heading into this upcoming season, especially with Flores coming in as head coach and KOC having a full year of experience as a head coach.

I just see no benefit to already concluding the 2023 Vikings as they sit today basically have no chance this year.

[StumpHunter]

The Vikings took two strengths of the team and made them both weakness for salary cap space, presumably to help them in future seasons assuming they don't make a big trade and use the cap to pay who they trade for(there isn't a current FA available who could help this team significantly, aside from Cook that is).

The VIKINGS do not believe this is a championship caliber team or they don't do that. A team with championship aspirations probably cut Kendricks and Thielen, but not Cook and they don't trade Smith for basically nothing. Not unless they have something good waiting behind them and we KNOW they don't.

They don't need to trade away Hunter to be in full rebuild mode, they are already there.

What were the two strengths? Z. Smith was a strength early in the season when fully healthy. He wasn't later on, and he was never a strong run defender even early in the season. IMHO, they replaced him with a guy (Davenport) who has equal potential to impact the game when healthy, so I'm not sure I agree they made that position a weakness (assuming that is what you're referring to). With Smith they got what the market would bear. They can't create demand that isn't there.

For Cook, I'm not sure why they waited to make their move when they did. Maybe they thought they could reach an agreement with him, but even there, I'm not convinced the Dalvin Cook of this year is going to perform any better over the course of a full season than the players they have at the position. You won't get an argument from me that Mattison is no Cook even if Cook is diminished, but it also doesn't seem like KOC is going to emphasize the run like Zimmer did, and thus there is no need for a star at RB, and certainly not one who would have taken up the cap space that Cook was going to take up.

You're pretty glib about your conclusion that the Vikings are in full rebuild mode. For me, being in full rebuild mode would have meant they got rid of Bradbury at center and went with a younger guy at that position or a transitional vet FA, got rid of Cousins and went with a younger player or even Mullens at QB, and definitely shipped Hunter, which hasn't happened yet. The Vikings did move on from some of their veteran defensive starters, but it bears mentioning those were the defensive starters on a unit that basically finished last in defense overall.

I'm not going to say I think the Vikings are a lock to compete for a Superbowl. I just pointed out reasons for optimism which I think are valid. On the flip side of that, there are plenty of reasons for pessimism as well, but even if those are equally valid, even you have to admit there is a lot of potential for this team to make more out of relatively less heading into this upcoming season, especially with Flores coming in as head coach and KOC having a full year of experience as a head coach.

I just see no benefit to already concluding the 2023 Vikings as they sit today basically have no chance this year.

Adjusted for cap inflation Bradbury took a pay cut compared to his rookie contract and is essentially on a one year prove it deal. They needed someone to play center and he was a really cheap option. Cousins had a fully guaranteed deal with a no trade clause. Getting rid of him would have been very difficult as we saw with Carr this off season when the Raiders were forced to cut him(an option we didn't have).

All of the other vets who are not a part of the future who could be cut were cut or forced to take a pay cut. Moving/cutting every player I wanted gone in my rebuild plan except Smith and Hicks, and both of those guys took pay cuts to stay. Knowing that, it is very hard for me to not call this a rebuild since they did almost exactly what I would have done in a rebuild.

That doesn't mean the GM thinks the Vikings don't have ANY chance of winning it all, but it does mean he thinks it is unlikely and not worth sacrificing future cap to increase the odds.

[VikingLord]

That doesn't mean the GM thinks the Vikings don't have ANY chance of winning it all, but it does mean he thinks it is unlikely and not worth sacrificing future cap to increase the odds.

They needed to do some pruning for sure and have done that, but most of the pruning was done on the defensive side where the bar was already set as low as it could go. Letting Cook go when they did was a little puzzling, but it suggests more they thought they could work out a deal to keep him and their hand was forced when that assumption proved invalid. I look at the Hunter situation the same way. They either believe they had the framework of a deal worked out or will be able to reach a deal with him, so they didn't trade him or cut him, and that tells me they're not willing to concede this upcoming season.

I just don't think their chances of winning a Superbowl have decreased as compared to this time last year. We can call it a rebuild year, and I get where you're coming from in your assessment, but the defense can't be worse, the offense might actually be better overall despite the loss of Cook, and the special teams look to be about the same. And that is against the backdrop of no more Rodgers or Adams in Green Bay, a clearly rebuilding team in Chicago, and an inconsistent Lions team that could continue playing well or might take a step back. The main headwind against this year's Vikings is their 1st place schedule, but teams change so much year-to-year now that even that might not be as much of a headwind.

[CharVike]

Some good reading in this block. We are an improving team that is also rebuilding. We have an avg OL which is a tremendous improvement and I think our weakest link Ingram will get better at pass blocking in year 2 because the coaching we have now is better. I also think Flores will improve our D. He's a vet coach who knows what it takes. I think he will put the players into a position that suites their skill set best. I think the players will play hard for the guy. We have a good team while we go through the rebuild. Some of the blow out losses last year were hard to take. But hanging in and finding a way to win was great also. That Bill victory was a thing of beauty. It's hard to beat a good team on the road. Good reading.

[J. Kapp 11]

Here's an ultra-optimistic outlook for 2023.

The NFC is nowhere near the depth and quality of the AFC. So with that in mind, I ask: Why not the Vikings?

Yes, San Fran is going to be good — IF they get the quarterback figured out, and IF Christian McCaffrey manages to stay healthy.

Yes, Philly should be good — if their defense doesn't take a step back and if THEIR first-place schedule doesn't bite them. Or injuries. Or regression from Jalen Hurts.

In the division, the Bears may be better, but they're still the Bears. Detroit is supposed to be "all that," but I won't apologize for saying they're the Lions until they're not, with a coach who's frankly a big rah-rah guy but also a moron. And Green Bay? Any time you lose a first-ballot HOFer, and one of your receivers claims his replacement is the best QB in the league, I have to believe I'm being sold a bill of goods. I still believe the Vikings are the best team in the division, which means a home playoff game at a minimum.

I also believe the Vikings will be a better football team.

The Vikings will be better on offense than last year. Of that I have no doubt. This is the first time in nearly 10 years that Kirk Cousins will have had the same HC and OC for two years in a row. That stability will definitely help him. JJ is already the best WR in the NFL, and he's only going to get better. TJ is a top-3 tight end. KJ is getting better all the time. And Jordan Addison has a chance to thrive with all the single coverage he's likely to see (single coverage that Adam Thielen couldn't beat regularly). That doesn't even account for Josh Oliver, who is not only one of the best blocking tight ends in the league, but he's also a very underrated receiver whose massive size could help him excel in the red zone. It would not surprise me one bit to see TJ end up with 90+ receptions and Oliver with 30+.

The O-line should be improved. Ingram's issues are coachable. Bradbury seems to have settled in. Our tackles are among the best in the NFL. Oliver will help the running game.

As far as the RB room is concerned, losing Cook is tough. Yet while he had some big-time runs last year, he was also very inefficient. His EPA per play was among the lowest in the NFL. It could be that a committee approach, which the Vikings used to great success in 2017 when then-rookie Dalvin Cook went down, actually helps this team. Ride the hot hand. Use the back who matches up the best.

Then there's the defense. Who knows how good or bad it will be? It's impossible to tell. But one thing we do know ... there's nowhere to go but up. You can't get much worse than 31st.

Finally, Kevin O'Connell has a year under his belt. A year of team building ... a year of game-planning ... a year of play-calling ... a year of operating under the pressure of game day. He's going to be improved. So will his staff.

I see the Vikings winning the division. They may not win 13 games again, but they're kings of the North until they're not. Get in the playoffs, and we'll see what happens in a conference that's up for grabs.

[CharVike]

Here's an ultra-optimistic outlook for 2023.

The NFC is nowhere near the depth and quality of the AFC. So with that in mind, I ask: Why not the Vikings?

Yes, San Fran is going to be good — IF they get the quarterback figured out, and IF Christian McCaffrey manages to stay healthy.

Yes, Philly should be good — if their defense doesn't take a step back and if THEIR first-place schedule doesn't bite them. Or injuries. Or regression from Jalen Hurts.

In the division, the Bears may be better, but they're still the Bears. Detroit is supposed to be "all that," but I won't apologize for saying they're the Lions until they're not, with a coach who's frankly a big rah-rah guy but also a moron. And Green Bay? Any time you lose a first-ballot HOFer, and one of your receivers claims his replacement is the best QB in the league, I have to believe I'm being sold a bill of goods. I still believe the Vikings are the best team in the division, which means a home playoff game at a minimum.

I also believe the Vikings will be a better football team.

The Vikings will be better on offense than last year. Of that I have no doubt. This is the first time in nearly 10 years that Kirk Cousins will have had the same HC and OC for two years in a row. That stability will definitely help him. JJ is already the best WR in the NFL, and he's only going to get better. TJ is a top-3 tight end. KJ is getting better all the time. And Jordan Addison has a chance to thrive with all the single coverage he's likely to see (single coverage that Adam Thielen couldn't beat regularly). That doesn't even account for Josh Oliver, who is not only one of the best blocking tight ends in the league, but he's also a very underrated receiver whose massive size could help him excel in the red zone. It would not surprise me one bit to see TJ end up with 90+ receptions and Oliver with 30+.

The O-line should be improved. Ingram's issues are coachable. Bradbury seems to have settled in. Our tackles are among the best in the NFL. Oliver will help the running game.

As far as the RB room is concerned, losing Cook is tough. Yet while he had some big-time runs last year, he was also very inefficient. His EPA per play was among the lowest in the NFL. It could be that a committee approach, which the Vikings used to great success in 2017 when then-rookie Dalvin Cook went down, actually helps this team. Ride the hot hand. Use the back who matches up the best.

Then there's the defense. Who knows how good or bad it will be? It's impossible to tell. But one thing we do know ... there's nowhere to go but up. You can't get much worse than 31st.

Finally, Kevin O'Connell has a year under his belt. A year of team building ... a year of game-planning ... a year of play-calling ... a year of operating under the pressure of game day. He's going to be improved. So will his staff.

I see the Vikings winning the division. They may not win 13 games again, but they're kings of the North until they're not. Get in the playoffs, and we'll see what happens in a conference that's up for grabs.

Conference that's up for grabs is the bottom line. SF and Philly are the most well rounded teams in our conference. SF can't make it through the playoffs. They are lacking something. Philly is very strong at the point on both sides of the ball which means they will be tough to beat. But they still need to play sound football beyond the point. Most times it happens but sometimes it don't. You called it the same way I see it. It's anybody's game provided you are not a door mat team. We are not a door mat and not a run away favorite. But there is more hope than we have had in decades.

[VikingLord]

Then there's the defense. Who knows how good or bad it will be? It's impossible to tell. But one thing we do know ... there's nowhere to go but up. You can't get much worse than 31st.

Nice take overall. For me, the above is the crucial factor that will determine their overall success this year. They are heading into the season with a new, more aggressive defensive coordinator who is know for designing a scheme that emphasizes his player's strengths and have a higher percentage of younger talent at LB and in the defensive backfield than they've had for a long time. Both of those factors make it much harder to predict how the defense will perform this season. They could be much better than they were last season even if there are some hiccups along the way, or they could be about the same or worse than last season. But it bears repeating that this team won 13 games last year with one of the worst defenses in the league and was competitive in almost every game, largely due to the offense and special teams. So if the defense surprises to the upside, its very reasonable to expect overall improvement.

I'm also really excited about what TJ Hockenson can bring to the table with a full offseason under his belt, and what Addison is going to add to the passing game. Cousins is going to have a wealth of reliable receivers who can get separation and run great routes. I expect the number of explosive gains in the passing game to go up this year.

[VikingsVictorious]

I think the offers for Hunter are going to get worse rather than better as time goes by. Maybe if a contender loses a talented Edge to injury that might result in a good offer.

[StumpHunter]

I remember hearing these same conversations last year when the Vikings actually kept everyone and added pieces to the defense rather than subtracting at every level. Yes the NFC is top heavy, but that doesn't matter when you can't even get past a team like the Giants in the playoffs.

As bad as the defense was on paper, they did come in clutch multiple times at the end of games, and made stops more often than the offense scored. They averaged giving up 20 points in their 13 wins when you remove the TDs given up by the offense, which is is less than the SB champs. They had some awful games in the 5 losses, but then the offense had some awful games in 4 of those losses too.

That D is now worse, as is the offense, and they weren't nearly good enough to begin with. A top heavy NFC isn't going to change that.

[CharVike]

I remember hearing these same conversations last year when the Vikings actually kept everyone and added pieces to the defense rather than subtracting at every level. Yes the NFC is top heavy, but that doesn't matter when you can't even get past a team like the Giants in the playoffs.

As bad as the defense was on paper, they did come in clutch multiple times at the end of games, and made stops more often than the offense scored. They averaged giving up 20 points in their 13 wins when you remove the TDs given up by the offense, which is is less than the SB champs. They had some awful games in the 5 losses, but then the offense had some awful games in 4 of those losses too.

That D is now worse, as is the offense, and they weren't nearly good enough to begin with. A top heavy NFC isn't going to change that.

These conversations have been going on since I started to follow in 1970. Our D did make some plays that helped us win games. Peg kicked a monster FG to win a game and IMO he is not a clutch kicker. To win 13 a team needs some breaks and all three phases need to contribute. I've seen it go the other way. We have too much talent on offense to fall completely out of the picture. For the first time since who knows when our OL is average. That was with a rookie RG who was one of the worst pass blockers I have ever seen. Looked like he never pass blocked in his life. He will be better this year. Even Bradbury become a better player. That's coaching. I think every O player will be more comfortable in the offense. Osbourne or some other player could step up.
I don't see how the D will be worse. Losing Smith is no big deal. He played great in October when he was defensive player of the month but did little outside of that. Is this Murphy who we signed in FA a shut down CB. Nope. If he was he wouldn't be a FA. But he's better than what we had out there last year and I do believe Flores had some input into the signing. The same with Davenport.
Last year was weird with the fact that we could get blown out. I'm not looking it up but I doubt a division winner ever was hammered into the ground like we were in our loses. Basically expansion team loses. We could win 8 games or 14 and neither would surprise me. We could win a playoff game or be dumped round 1. Again neither would surprise me.

[StumpHunter]

I remember hearing these same conversations last year when the Vikings actually kept everyone and added pieces to the defense rather than subtracting at every level. Yes the NFC is top heavy, but that doesn't matter when you can't even get past a team like the Giants in the playoffs.

As bad as the defense was on paper, they did come in clutch multiple times at the end of games, and made stops more often than the offense scored. They averaged giving up 20 points in their 13 wins when you remove the TDs given up by the offense, which is is less than the SB champs. They had some awful games in the 5 losses, but then the offense had some awful games in 4 of those losses too.

That D is now worse, as is the offense, and they weren't nearly good enough to begin with. A top heavy NFC isn't going to change that.

These conversations have been going on since I started to follow in 1970. Our D did make some plays that helped us win games. Peg kicked a monster FG to win a game and IMO he is not a clutch kicker. To win 13 a team needs some breaks and all three phases need to contribute. I've seen it go the other way. We have too much talent on offense to fall completely out of the picture. For the first time since who knows when our OL is average. That was with a rookie RG who was one of the worst pass blockers I have ever seen. Looked like he never pass blocked in his life. He will be better this year. Even Bradbury become a better player. That's coaching. I think every O player will be more comfortable in the offense. Osbourne or some other player could step up.
I don't see how the D will be worse. Losing Smith is no big deal. He played great in October when he was defensive player of the month but did little outside of that. Is this Murphy who we signed in FA a shut down CB. Nope. If he was he wouldn't be a FA. But he's better than what we had out there last year and I do believe Flores had some input into the signing. The same with Davenport.
Last year was weird with the fact that we could get blown out. I'm not looking it up but I doubt a division winner ever was hammered into the ground like we were in our loses. Basically expansion team loses. We could win 8 games or 14 and neither would surprise me. We could win a playoff game or be dumped round 1. Again neither would surprise me.

They lost a double digit sack guy and replaced him with a guy who had 2 more pressures and 1 fewer sack on the entire season than Smith had in the second half of the year when he was supposedly doing so little (12th in pressures from week 10-18). They also lost their best interior defensive lineman by far, and replaced him with Green Bay's worst player on the interior. PP was very good for the Vikings last season, playing at a level Murphy could only dream of. All three downgraded significantly, and downgrading 3 of your top 5 defensive players is not how you build a championship defense.

[VikingLord]

They lost a double digit sack guy and replaced him with a guy who had 2 more pressures and 1 fewer sack on the entire season than Smith had in the second half of the year when he was supposedly doing so little (12th in pressures from week 10-18). They also lost their best interior defensive lineman by far, and replaced him with Green Bay's worst player on the interior. PP was very good for the Vikings last season, playing at a level Murphy could only dream of. All three downgraded significantly, and downgrading 3 of your top 5 defensive players is not how you build a championship defense.

The Vikings stunk on defense last year. It would be one thing if the defense had been good and they lost supposedly "good" players, but they stunk. We all saw with our eyes how ineffective Smith was through the second half of the season. The stats might say he was good, but he was basically invisible from what I saw, especially compared with how he started.

I'm not saying the Vikings objectively got better on defense this offseason, but I'm also not worried at all that they lost the players you mentioned given the impact those players made on the overall defense. New DC, lots of younger guys who will have a chance to step up under the new DC, and a new season ahead. I'm going to wait to see how it all pans out. Like I said before, it's not like they can be much worse than they were, and even if they do turn out worse my guess is we'll see the seeds of a future turnaround start to grow.