Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
10 Reasons
Yes, I know, it's a Bleacher Report article, some "yutz" spewing forth crap, but how is that any different than anyone on here? He does make some good points, and I've been in favor of tradinig AP for a year or so. I love him and what he's done for Minnesota football, but the fact is, we won't win a championship basing our team around a RB, no matter how special he is. Yah, he's a great RB, a wonderful all around player, and an exceptional person/teammate, but we simply have too many holes on this team right now. And to be honest, I feel like we are squandering his potential and talent on this team. I wish he would go to some team that I don't hate, like the Falcons, and win a championship or two there while we are rebuilding. I know most would disagree with this, but from an objective viewpoint, with no purple pride and glasses clouding our view, it makes sense.
Re: Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
I would love to trade him to the Cowboys for about 7 starters and several first and second round draft picks.
Aw hell, what type of fool would make a trade like that?
Re: Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
Why the Minnesota Vikings should NOT trade AP.
1. we'd NEVER get fair market value for him. A 5th year RB won't get what we think he's worth. Probably best case we get a first and second. He's a great talent, but as a big, physical runner, teams will be unlikely to give up what we deem to be worth it.
Also, not to mention he's got one year left on his deal, worth almost $11 mil. That's an awfully steep price for a team to pick a guy up for only one year guaranteed.
2. Our offense consists of one player: Harvin. Harvin won't win many games by himself. We have a poor line, we have no QB, and no WR depth at all. Assuming Rice leaves, we have Harvin and Berrian. Shank at TE, then Gerhart. Sorry, but Gerhart doesn't scare anybody. He's not as big or intimidating as other powerbacks in recent memory, and he's not quick enough to be that big play guy we want.
3. Rookie QB with no RB to take the load off = failed QB. We see it happen again and again. Look at some of the teams with rookie QB's in the past few years. The good QB's just happen to have a good run game. Matt Ryan has Turner, Flacco has Rice and McGahee. Hell, Even Vick came in this season, and the Eagles had one of their better RB productions in recent memory, including many of Westbrooks years. Roethlisberger had the Bus and Parker, Eli had earth wind and fire.
Some of the less good QB's, Croyle had nobody in KC, Fitzpatrick/Edwards had Lynch for a season, and looked OK. Without, they looked pretty bad(although Fitz had some good games), Derek Anderson/Skelton/Hall had nobody in Arizona.
While yes, those guys don't compare to the likes of Ryan and Flacco, you can't deny it's just a hell of alot easier when you have a back you can hand off to, and he can put up 1300 yards regularly without blocking
4. Nobody of quality will want to come here. When you're the best in the league at your position, and we throw you to the curb, you can bet other players will take note. When it comes to maybe signing that big-name free agent that would complete the team, they'll definitely keep that in mind.
5. Current players will distrust the coaches. Already, guys are speaking out about how they don't trust the FO(Pat Williams), when you can a greatly talented player who's an all-around great professional as well, teammates won't like that.
Like PF says, we're never going to get a Herschel Walker-type deal. There's just no point.
Remember what happened the last time we traded a big-name superstar, and kept telling ourselves it would make us better?
Re: Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1091652
Why the Minnesota Vikings should NOT trade AP.
1. we'd NEVER get fair market value for him. A 5th year RB won't get what we think he's worth. Probably best case we get a first and second. He's a great talent, but as a big, physical runner, teams will be unlikely to give up what we deem to be worth it.
Also, not to mention he's got one year left on his deal, worth almost $11 mil. That's an awfully steep price for a team to pick a guy up for only one year guaranteed.
I don't know, a team that is primed for a SB run like the Pats, Ravens etc just might make that move to give them another threat and i could see the cowboys jumping on it to give them a HOF type RB. They could always reno his contract to a longer term deal with more up front money and a lower cap hit.
Quote:
2. Our offense consists of one player: Harvin. Harvin won't win many games by himself. We have a poor line, we have no QB, and no WR depth at all. Assuming Rice leaves, we have Harvin and Berrian. Shank at TE, then Gerhart. Sorry, but Gerhart doesn't scare anybody. He's not as big or intimidating as other powerbacks in recent memory, and he's not quick enough to be that big play guy we want.
Which is why we would use all of the picks we can get to build depth back into the roster.
3. Rookie QB with no RB to take the load off = failed QB. We see it happen again and again. Look at some of the teams with rookie QB's in the past few years. The good QB's just happen to have a good run game. Matt Ryan has Turner, Flacco has Rice and McGahee. Hell, Even Vick came in this season, and the Eagles had one of their better RB productions in recent memory, including many of Westbrooks years. Roethlisberger had the Bus and Parker, Eli had earth wind and fire.
If we are going to stick with the WCO like Marr thinks, then we could pick up Chester Taylor when the bears release him. He is a better WCO RB anyway because he can block and catch a screen pass.
Quote:
Some of the less good QB's, Croyle had nobody in KC, Fitzpatrick/Edwards had Lynch for a season, and looked OK. Without, they looked pretty bad(although Fitz had some good games), Derek Anderson/Skelton/Hall had nobody in Arizona.
There are backs who we could get who could be serviceable in the WCO as stated above.
Quote:
While yes, those guys don't compare to the likes of Ryan and Flacco, you can't deny it's just a hell of alot easier when you have a back you can hand off to, and he can put up 1300 yards regularly without blocking
It is not that impossible anymore to get a 1200-1300 yard back in the league if the OL is a good one. CT could get 1300 yards and be cheaper
Quote:
4. Nobody of quality will want to come here. When you're the best in the league at your position, and we throw you to the curb, you can bet other players will take note. When it comes to maybe signing that big-name free agent that would complete the team, they'll definitely keep that in mind
.
Guys looking for an opportunity will always follow the money. And this year we can get a RB late in the draft if we need one.
Quote:
5. Current players will distrust the coaches. Already, guys are speaking out about how they don't trust the FO(Pat Williams), when you can a greatly talented player who's an all-around great professional as well, teammates won't like that.
They understand it is a business and it might be just as likely AP walks the next year and we lose him anyway.
Quote:
Like PF says, we're never going to get a Herschel Walker-type deal. There's just no point.
Yeah, he is one smart cookie:woohoo: :woohoo: JK.
In all honesty I could see the Raiders or the Cowboys making a better than market trade for him.
Remember what happened the last time we traded a big-name superstar, and kept telling ourselves it would make us better?
Re: Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1091637
10 Reasons
Yes, I know, it's a Bleacher Report article, some "yutz" spewing forth crap, but how is that any different than anyone on here? He does make some good points, and I've been in favor of tradinig AP for a year or so. I love him and what he's done for Minnesota football, but the fact is, we won't win a championship basing our team around a RB, no matter how special he is. Yah, he's a great RB, a wonderful all around player, and an exceptional person/teammate, but we simply have too many holes on this team right now. And to be honest, I feel like we are squandering his potential and talent on this team. I wish he would go to some team that I don't hate, like the Falcons, and win a championship or two there while we are rebuilding. I know most would disagree with this, but from an objective viewpoint, with no purple pride and glasses clouding our view, it makes sense.
If you have a pothole in your street, you do not dig a hole in the other side of the street and use the material to fill the first hole.
Re: Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
[quote="Purple Floyd" #1091653]
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1091652
Why the Minnesota Vikings should NOT trade AP.
1. we'd NEVER get fair market value for him. A 5th year RB won't get what we think he's worth. Probably best case we get a first and second. He's a great talent, but as a big, physical runner, teams will be unlikely to give up what we deem to be worth it.
Also, not to mention he's got one year left on his deal, worth almost $11 mil. That's an awfully steep price for a team to pick a guy up for only one year guaranteed.
I don't know, a team that is primed for a SB run like the Pats, Ravens etc just might make that move to give them another threat and i could see the cowboys jumping on it to give them a HOF type RB. They could always reno his contract to a longer term deal with more up front money and a lower cap hit.
I have my doubts. The Pats make an effort to NOT overspend, and generally seem to let their vets go. They don't break the bank on runningbacks, considering their offense isn't very run-heavy.
Ravens have Ray Rice, who is a better option for what they do on offense than AP would be anyway.
Again, 5 years in with one year left on his deal, I just can't see anybody offering what we would think to be fair-market value
Quote:
Quote:
2. Our offense consists of one player: Harvin. Harvin won't win many games by himself. We have a poor line, we have no QB, and no WR depth at all. Assuming Rice leaves, we have Harvin and Berrian. Shank at TE, then Gerhart. Sorry, but Gerhart doesn't scare anybody. He's not as big or intimidating as other powerbacks in recent memory, and he's not quick enough to be that big play guy we want.
Which is why we would use all of the picks we can get to build depth back into the roster.
Like what? We get a first rounder, ok, that's hopefully one player. Maybe we get a second rounder? Ok, another if we draft well. That's trading a HOF-calibre RB still in his prime for a chance at two or three players, who in all likelihood will not be as good as AP is.
There's a reason big-name RB's don't seem to get traded very often. You normally don't get your value. When some idiot comes along and offers you a dynasty in the 90's for a RB, they'd be fools not to accept. Unfortunately, Mike Lynn doesn't work in the league anymore, so a trade like the Walker trade isn't likely to materialize.
But continuing on that point. Look at a comparable RB. LT. The Chargers didn't even try and trade LT. He was getting older, and hurt, but they felt he had more value to the team than they would get in a trade. Even some lesser players, guys like Thomas Jones was just allowed to walk instead of traded.
Look at the Rams. They could be in the exact same situation. Why not trade Steven Jackson, acquire some good picks and work on depth and get a couple good starters? It would help the team in the long run, but it would hurt them in the short run. They'd probably rather hang onto him, than get what teams would offer, which likely isn't what they'd be willing to accept anyway.
Quote:
Quote:
3. Rookie QB with no RB to take the load off = failed QB. We see it happen again and again. Look at some of the teams with rookie QB's in the past few years. The good QB's just happen to have a good run game. Matt Ryan has Turner, Flacco has Rice and McGahee. Hell, Even Vick came in this season, and the Eagles had one of their better RB productions in recent memory, including many of Westbrooks years. Roethlisberger had the Bus and Parker, Eli had earth wind and fire.
If we are going to stick with the WCO like Marr thinks, then we could pick up Chester Taylor when the bears release him. He is a better WCO RB anyway because he can block and catch a screen pass.
Is that so? Firstly, there's no indication that we will be doing that, and besides, many WCO schemes are very different. Musgrave was most recently AHC/QB coach in Atlanta, yet Atlanta doesn't use Turner a whole lot in the passing/screen game. He's a powerful runner with speed to hit the home run, much like AP.
And CT is a better receiver than AP? Says who? CT definitely had a down year last year, only 139 rec. yards, but the prior two years here, he had 389 and 399 yards on 89 catches for 8.85 ypc and 1 TD
The past two years here AP had 341 and 436 yards on 79 catches for 9.83 ypc and 1 TD.
AP has shown some drops, but so has CT. Ct was a good player for us, but at his age and from what he's shown, he's definitely NOT an improvement over AP. AP has more big-play ability, he's shown he can make more out of passes and runs than CT can.
in CT's year as a starter here, he had 1216 yards and 6 TD's, 288 yards on 42 catches, 1504 total yards. Now, that's not too bad, except when you consider he had 303 carries for 4.0ypc. furthermore, that's 345 total touches, 4.35 yards per touch with 5 fumbles. not quite a huge threat, just solid.
AP has never had numbers that low. His lowest was 1609 yards, 5.13 yards per touch. Better yet, only one fumble.
So to claim that CT would be better here than AP is untrue to say the least. Unless he's going to somehow get better after 30, not going to happen.
Quote:
Quote:
Some of the less good QB's, Croyle had nobody in KC, Fitzpatrick/Edwards had Lynch for a season, and looked OK. Without, they looked pretty bad(although Fitz had some good games), Derek Anderson/Skelton/Hall had nobody in Arizona.
There are backs who we could get who could be serviceable in the WCO as stated above.
In that case, why bother signing a big-name RB ever? When we can be content with a "servicable" back, why wouldn't we? Fact is, AP scares defenses. Ahmad Bradshaw does not. He's somebody that needs to be accounted for, but he doesn't force 8 and 9 man fronts the way AP does. With a QB who could actually pass, we saw what happened when defenses went to 8 and 9 man fronts.
They do it in Atlanta too, Turner demands 8 man fronts, they stack 8 in the box, he still churns out good yards and opens it up for Ryan to pass.
We've had mid-round RB's here before, and they did fairly well for us. However, we also had a QB who was pretty damn good too. Once you take him away, and defenses can key on the run, they didn't do nearly as well.
Quote:
Quote:
While yes, those guys don't compare to the likes of Ryan and Flacco, you can't deny it's just a hell of alot easier when you have a back you can hand off to, and he can put up 1300 yards regularly without blocking
It is not that impossible anymore to get a 1200-1300 yard back in the league if the OL is a good one. CT could get 1300 yards and be cheaper
our OL isn't a good one. CT had about 1300 yards, but it was a slow process. He wasn't a guy to get big gains the way AP has, he just picked up 2, 3 5, 9, 1, 3, yards etc. less frequent big plays. There were a few games that AP has singlehandedly won for us. CT doesn't do that.
Quote:
Quote:
4. Nobody of quality will want to come here. When you're the best in the league at your position, and we throw you to the curb, you can bet other players will take note. When it comes to maybe signing that big-name free agent that would complete the team, they'll definitely keep that in mind
.
Guys looking for an opportunity will always follow the money. And this year we can get a RB late in the draft if we need one.
There are opportunities and money elsewhere.
When it comes to signing big-name players, we're not the only ones out there with money. LT didn't come here. why? He felt NY was a better opportunity. I'm willing to bet the money was fairly similar.
Quote:
Quote:
5. Current players will distrust the coaches. Already, guys are speaking out about how they don't trust the FO(Pat Williams), when you can a greatly talented player who's an all-around great professional as well, teammates won't like that.
They understand it is a business and it might be just as likely AP walks the next year and we lose him anyway.
No, they won't. Some players will say, "yes, I understand it's a business", but alot also get pissed when their teammates and friends get traded.
Re: Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
Quote:
Remember what happened the last time we traded a big-name superstar, and kept telling ourselves it would make us better?
+1
Don't trade the known for the unknown. Mark Ingram could be the bust of the draft.
The only way I would even consider trading Peterson is if I thought we wouldn't be able to resign him. I don't think that is the case though. I look for him to get a new deal before the start of the season.
Re: Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
Also, regarding AP's blocking, re-watch the play where Favre got smacked against the bills.
Notice the only guy really making a good block?
Re: Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by "marshallvike" #1091654
Quote:
Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1091637
10 Reasons
Yes, I know, it's a Bleacher Report article, some "yutz" spewing forth crap, but how is that any different than anyone on here? He does make some good points, and I've been in favor of tradinig AP for a year or so. I love him and what he's done for Minnesota football, but the fact is, we won't win a championship basing our team around a RB, no matter how special he is. Yah, he's a great RB, a wonderful all around player, and an exceptional person/teammate, but we simply have too many holes on this team right now. And to be honest, I feel like we are squandering his potential and talent on this team. I wish he would go to some team that I don't hate, like the Falcons, and win a championship or two there while we are rebuilding. I know most would disagree with this, but from an objective viewpoint, with no purple pride and glasses clouding our view, it makes sense.
If you have a pothole in your street, you do not dig a hole in the other side of the street and use the material to fill the first hole.
Summed it up beautifully right there....
Caine
Re: Why the Minnesota Vikings Should Trade AP
Just wondering, do you guys think we'll win a super bowl with AP? What, we got 3-4 more actually good years out of him? By most people's posts on here, I guess it takes around 3 years for a QB to be NFL ready, so assuming we hit the jackpot this year and actually get a good QB, he won't be ready for 3-4 years. We will NOT win a superbowl with AP on this team. We had our chance 2 years ago, and we blew it. Our defense is falling apart, our o-line is shit, our receiving corp is over rated, and we have no QB. We are in a full-on rebuilding mode and we need to build around a QB and O-line. No one wins Super bowls because they have a great RB. Maybe a great RB and a great D, but we only have one of those.
I'm not an advocate of trading AP, but I wouldn't be pissed if we did.
