Vikings Message Board.Com

JJBreaksRecords wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 9:42 pm Cook isnt that good anymore. He is weak, easy to take down. And he has lost a step (or 2). I dont know what the Vikings could even do with him, and his existing contract. I dont like the idea of Mattison either. Our Oline is so weak. I really hope this time they blow everything up. Im done with competitive rebuilds and our RBs. Hoping Chandler can pick up the offense cause we will need him if they do get rid of Cook somehow.

Blow up what on the OL? Outside of ingram, the line was much better than it was in the past. Who are you going to get rid of? Darrisaw, O’Neill, Cleveland? That doesn’t even make sense

Still not completely sold on Bradbury, He improved some this year, but is that enough.
Ingram they have to do better than him.

Mattison didn’t even take a handoff today. Which is kind of discouraging.

halfgiz wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 10:05 pm Still not completely sold on Bradbury, He improved some this year, but is that enough.
Ingram they have to do better than him.

Mattison didn’t even take a handoff today. Which is kind of discouraging.

Super discouraging. Especially when you see dalvin get his typical inside handoff that loses 3. That happened multiple times today

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 9:41 pm

VikingsVictorious wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 5:00 pm
I guess we are. How many of Cooks was it 20 TDs a couple of season's ago from short yardage. He has no problem with short yardage plays.

The problem is, this isn’t “a couple of seasons ago” anymore

He didn't suddenly become a behind the line dancer. He's a good short yardage runner. He hits the line hard.

Cook is still making a significant impact on the offense, and Mattison is clearly not the answer. I don't think that means you continue to pay Cook what he is making now, I don't think the Vikings can afford that, but you do at least try to renegotiate his deal, because losing him will hurt an offense that needs to improve significantly to compete with the big boys.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 9:45 pm

JJBreaksRecords wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 9:42 pm Cook isnt that good anymore. He is weak, easy to take down. And he has lost a step (or 2). I dont know what the Vikings could even do with him, and his existing contract. I dont like the idea of Mattison either. Our Oline is so weak. I really hope this time they blow everything up. Im done with competitive rebuilds and our RBs. Hoping Chandler can pick up the offense cause we will need him if they do get rid of Cook somehow.

Blow up what on the OL? Outside of ingram, the line was much better than it was in the past. Who are you going to get rid of? Darrisaw, O’Neill, Cleveland? That doesn’t even make sense

Ezra, Turdbury and Ingram. Maybe Cousins can survive a year or 2 longer if he actually gets a little protection. And neither Mattison or Cook can run behind the IOL. Since we only have a few picks, it will take a few years.

JJBreaksRecords wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 9:15 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 9:45 pm

Blow up what on the OL? Outside of ingram, the line was much better than it was in the past. Who are you going to get rid of? Darrisaw, O’Neill, Cleveland? That doesn’t even make sense

Ezra, Turdbury and Ingram. Maybe Cousins can survive a year or 2 longer if he actually gets a little protection. And neither Mattison or Cook can run behind the IOL. Since we only have a few picks, it will take a few years.

IOL is definitely a weakness, but I'm not sure that's our most glaring one. Our D has more glaring holes, IMO. But this site has us taking O'Cyrus Torrence, IOL from Florida with #24 pick: https://www.tankathon.com/nfl/mock_draft

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 8:45 am

Cook is still making a significant impact on the offense, and Mattison is clearly not the answer. I don't think that means you continue to pay Cook what he is making now, I don't think the Vikings can afford that, but you do at least try to renegotiate his deal, because losing him will hurt an offense that needs to improve significantly to compete with the big boys.

Stats without proper context. Cook was more likely to be on the field during longer yardage plays in general.

For this statistic to be useful at all it needs to compare based on them being in the same situations. Ideally the same exact plays against the same exact defense but that's not happening. At least coming out of the same formations or during the same down and yardage situations would get closer to a useful number.

JJBreaksRecords wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 9:15 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 9:45 pm

Blow up what on the OL? Outside of ingram, the line was much better than it was in the past. Who are you going to get rid of? Darrisaw, O’Neill, Cleveland? That doesn’t even make sense

Ezra, Turdbury and Ingram. Maybe Cousins can survive a year or 2 longer if he actually gets a little protection. And neither Mattison or Cook can run behind the IOL. Since we only have a few picks, it will take a few years.

Wrong and wrong. You want to get rid of Ezra? The 11th ranked overall guard out of 73 qualifiers this year? That makes sense.

Bradbury had a resurgence in this offense. #9 in run blocking and #17 in pass blocking. I was very skeptical here, but he played much better this year and is worth looking at keeping.

As for cook and mattison, they’ve had wayyyyyy worse offensive lines in front of them that they COULD run behind. So let’s not use that as an excuse. Mattison doesn’t get enough carries and cook is gradually slowing down.

So outside of maybe ingram who was only in his rookie year, I’m not quite sure why you think blowing this OL up makes any sort of sense

Cliff wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 9:35 am

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 8:45 am

Cook is still making a significant impact on the offense, and Mattison is clearly not the answer. I don't think that means you continue to pay Cook what he is making now, I don't think the Vikings can afford that, but you do at least try to renegotiate his deal, because losing him will hurt an offense that needs to improve significantly to compete with the big boys.

Stats without proper context. Cook was more likely to be on the field during longer yardage plays in general.

For this statistic to be useful at all it needs to compare based on them being in the same situations. Ideally the same exact plays against the same exact defense but that's not happening. At least coming out of the same formations or during the same down and yardage situations would get closer to a useful number.

Exactly. That is definitely a flawed statistic.

Cliff wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 9:35 am

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 8:45 am

Cook is still making a significant impact on the offense, and Mattison is clearly not the answer. I don't think that means you continue to pay Cook what he is making now, I don't think the Vikings can afford that, but you do at least try to renegotiate his deal, because losing him will hurt an offense that needs to improve significantly to compete with the big boys.

Stats without proper context. Cook was more likely to be on the field during longer yardage plays in general.

For this statistic to be useful at all it needs to compare based on them being in the same situations. Ideally the same exact plays against the same exact defense but that's not happening. At least coming out of the same formations or during the same down and yardage situations would get closer to a useful number.

I am not sure how much more context you can add to a stat like EPA. It actually takes into account those short yardage situations and rewards picking up a first or TD in those spots. It is a stat full of context, more than just about any other stat.

I would also point out that while Mattison was used more in short yardage to run the football, he was also out there a lot on 3rd and long, a longer yardage play.

It isn't a perfect stat comparison, none are, but it does point to Cook being a lot more important in this offense than many want to believe.

JJBreaksRecords wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 9:15 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Sun Jan 15, 2023 9:45 pm

Blow up what on the OL? Outside of ingram, the line was much better than it was in the past. Who are you going to get rid of? Darrisaw, O’Neill, Cleveland? That doesn’t even make sense

Ezra, Turdbury and Ingram. Maybe Cousins can survive a year or 2 longer if he actually gets a little protection. And neither Mattison or Cook can run behind the IOL. Since we only have a few picks, it will take a few years.

Among 57 qualifying guards this year, Cleveland was 52nd in pass blocking efficiency and Ingram was 55th.

Bradbury was 28th out of 32 centers.

Who would want to move on from 3 guys who are bottom 6 or worse at half their job?

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 12:08 pm

JJBreaksRecords wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 9:15 am

Ezra, Turdbury and Ingram. Maybe Cousins can survive a year or 2 longer if he actually gets a little protection. And neither Mattison or Cook can run behind the IOL. Since we only have a few picks, it will take a few years.

Among 57 qualifying guards this year, Cleveland was 52nd in pass blocking efficiency and Ingram was 55th.

Bradbury was 28th out of 32 centers.

Who would want to move on from 3 guys who are bottom 6 or worse at half their job?

I saw both Bradbury and Ingram get pushed around during the Giant game. IMO I'm not sold on Darrisaw. He has missed many games. And he screwed up our 4th down conversion. money won't fix it. Teams keep good OL players. For the most part. I don't know the answer.

CharVike wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 4:08 pm

StumpHunter wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 12:08 pm
Among 57 qualifying guards this year, Cleveland was 52nd in pass blocking efficiency and Ingram was 55th.

Bradbury was 28th out of 32 centers.

Who would want to move on from 3 guys who are bottom 6 or worse at half their job?

I saw both Bradbury and Ingram get pushed around during the Giant game. IMO I'm not sold on Darrisaw. He has missed many games. And he screwed up our 4th down conversion. money won't fix it. Teams keep good OL players. For the most part. I don't know the answer.

The only answer I can see is blow the IOL up. A lot of talking heads are saying the same thing. Its like some people ignore Cousins is taking hit in every passing play. I would be KAM picks a IOL before a defensive player is drafted. The Wilfs will not allow any type of a rebuild, other then their competitive rebuild, which FAILED. Now we should start the process of a real rebuild. Put the blame on wasting a year on the Wilfs.

JJBreaksRecords wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 4:53 pm

CharVike wrote: ↑Mon Jan 16, 2023 4:08 pm
I saw both Bradbury and Ingram get pushed around during the Giant game. IMO I'm not sold on Darrisaw. He has missed many games. And he screwed up our 4th down conversion. money won't fix it. Teams keep good OL players. For the most part. I don't know the answer.

The only answer I can see is blow the IOL up. A lot of talking heads are saying the same thing. Its like some people ignore Cousins is taking hit in every passing play. I would be KAM picks a IOL before a defensive player is drafted. The Wilfs will not allow any type of a rebuild, other then their competitive rebuild, which FAILED. Now we should start the process of a real rebuild. Put the blame on wasting a year on the Wilfs.

What makes you say it failed. We won the division. Isn't that competitive. So if we dump 50 pct of the roster would that be a rebuild. If you bought season tickets would you be pissed if they cut that many players. I'd want a refund. So if you have a half filled stadium the wilfs would lose money. Then the corporate income. It gets beyond my thought.