Jerick McKinnon

Mercy Percy · Post by **Mercy Percy** » Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:15 pm

I was just wondering why people dont think Jerick cant be an every down back or carry the load when he was playing he was pretty effective and the kid has size hes near 220 lbs. Tbh even if AD isnt here next year I have faith McKinnon can be the guy for us.

PurpleKoolaid · Post by **PurpleKoolaid** » Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:40 pm

As a 3rd Rd. pick, i think Rick hopes(d) he can be for the majority of the games. But the NFL rarely just uses 1 back these days. If AD stays, I would assume he would get the majority of plays, with McKinnon in on some plays, maybe some screen stuff. If we trade AD, I am guessing they will be looking for his replacement right away. Either way, I expect a lot more of Mckinnon this year. If he doesnt get hurt off the field again...

Mercy Percy · Post by **Mercy Percy** » Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:57 pm

See I think he can be more than the guy who comes in on screen's and has little plays out of the backfield, I just think people think hes to small to be an every down back when hes actually pretty stout.

vatusay · Post by **vatusay** » Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:29 pm

Picture Darren Sproles role in Saaaaan Diaaago

The Breeze · Post by **The Breeze** » Wed Mar 25, 2015 7:13 pm

Sproles is about 30 lbs lighter. McKinnon can also be an emergency QB. The kid has a mountain of potential for this team.

vatusay · Post by **vatusay** » Wed Mar 25, 2015 7:25 pm

I didn't mean by phisical stature, but by utilization in norvs offense.

Demi · Post by **Demi** » Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:33 pm

Still a project. Is he durable enough? How well does he know the position? He was a liability as a blocker...a pretty big one.

The Breeze · Post by **The Breeze** » Thu Mar 26, 2015 12:22 am

vatusay wrote:I didn't mean by phisical stature, but by utilization in norvs offense.

Yeah, I understood ya. I meant to emphasize that he has potential beyond Sproles just due to his size(weight) strength and other experience.....but it's only potential, as Demi pointed out, until he establishes himself fundamentally as a RB.
-
It's unfortunate he hurt himself in nonaction, otherwise we may not be hearing concerns about his durability at all.
It's pretty odd to me to suggest that a 220lb man lacks durability only because he not 6ft tall. He is a load.
-
There is cause for concern because he now has an injury history...but everything I've read says he's fully healed as well as motivated.

So, we'll see....but I like him. ~

Ooki · Post by **Ooki** » Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:35 am

Demi wrote:Still a project. Is he durable enough? How well does he know the position? He was a liability as a blocker...a pretty big one.

This.
If he could improve his blocking he would immediately be an much lager asset to the team.

DK Sweets · Post by **DK Sweets** » Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:39 am

I'm not saying that blocking isn't a valid concern, but I think given how stout he is it might be fair to give him a temporary pass considering it wasn't that long ago that he was a QB. He has the physical tools, so I'd like to think he can pick it up.

Then again, Adrian never did, so who knows.

vatusay · Post by **vatusay** » Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:54 am

The Breeze wrote: Yeah, I understood ya. I meant to emphasize that he has potential beyond Sproles just due to his size(weight) strength and other experience.....but it's only potential, as Demi pointed out, until he establishes himself fundamentally as a RB.
-
It's unfortunate he hurt himself in nonaction, otherwise we may not be hearing concerns about his durability at all.
It's pretty odd to me to suggest that a 220lb man lacks durability only because he not 6ft tall. He is a load.
-
There is cause for concern because he now has an injury history...but everything I've read says he's fully healed as well as motivated.

So, we'll see....but I like him. ~

Yes I like him too. Very quick for being a big back. I just think we will see him more third down packages coming out of the back field. Of course he could be IMO an every down back if the AP situation doesnt work out.

Didnt Mckinnon put up the best SPARQ numbers since Megatron or something? Measure speed, agility, quickness, and burst?

It was obvious last year when he finally got a chance that he is a legitimate threat when he has the ball in his hands.

Crax · Post by **Crax** » Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:06 am

McKinnon currently has two problems. He can fix the first, I'm not sure on the second.
1. Blocking - It's not good, but hopefully with coaching and time, he can get better at it.
2. Yards after contact. He goes down too easy and while he's fast, he has seemed to struggle if the blocking isn't clean or he gets hit early.

In another thread, people brought up his athletic scores compared to guys like Chris Johnson and Reggie Bush. I would say they have had the same issue as well. One thing about Peterson is he has pretty much led the league or been right at the top for average yards after contact the years he's been playing. Even the year that Johnson ran over 2000 yds, Johnson wasn't at the top for avg yards after contact. He had a hell of a line that year. I don't know how much a guy can improve in that area. Guys like Peterson and Lynch are hard to bring down and can take hits or break tackles. I haven't seen that from McKinnion yet.

Post by **dead_poet** » Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:21 am

Crax wrote:2. Yards after contact. He goes down too easy and while he's fast, he has seemed to struggle if the blocking isn't clean or he gets hit early.

FYI:

http://espn.go.com/blog/minnesota-vikin ... e-hard-way

The 5-foot-9 McKinnon joined Ivory as the only backs in the league to gain more yards after contact than before it Sunday. McKinnon now has 143 of his 309 yards this season after contact, and his 2.38 yards-per-carry average is the third-highest rate after contact in the NFL this year. It's still nowhere near what Adrian Peterson did in his otherworldly 2012 season -- when he averaged 3.26 yards after contact -- but McKinnon's proving he can get the hard yards, in addition to running in space.

Last year, McKinnon averaged 2.15 yards after contact, 11th in the NFL, according to ESPN Stats & Information.

http://www.twincities.com/vikings/ci_27 ... t-guy-next

Crax · Post by **Crax** » Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:22 am

dead_poet wrote: http://www.twincities.com/vikings/ci_27 ... t-guy-next

Good to hear. Bad remembering on my part. I guess I'm too spoiled with Peterson being #1 all the time.

I hope McKinnon works out. Other than Gordon, I'm not all that interested in drafting a RB this year already. Expectations for a RB have just been so high as a Vikings fan. Even before Peterson, Chester was pretty good and Robert Smith was great. It's been awhile since we've seen the RB position struggle like it did a bit last year.

Boon · Post by **Boon** » Thu Mar 26, 2015 9:42 am

Crax wrote:McKinnon currently has two problems. He can fix the first, I'm not sure on the second.
1. Blocking - It's not good, but hopefully with coaching and time, he can get better at it.
2. Yards after contact. He goes down too easy and while he's fast, he has seemed to struggle if the blocking isn't clean or he gets hit early.

In another thread, people brought up his athletic scores compared to guys like Chris Johnson and Reggie Bush. I would say they have had the same issue as well. One thing about Peterson is he has pretty much led the league or been right at the top for average yards after contact the years he's been playing. Even the year that Johnson ran over 2000 yds, Johnson wasn't at the top for avg yards after contact. He had a hell of a line that year. I don't know how much a guy can improve in that area. Guys like Peterson and Lynch are hard to bring down and can take hits or break tackles. I haven't seen that from McKinnion yet.

goes down too easy? i would imagine durability as a secondary concern but I didn't notice him being a paper plate. he seems pretty sturdy

Vikings Message Board.Com

Jerick McKinnon

Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon

Re: Jerick McKinnon