2014 Free Agent Tracker & Discussion

[dead_poet]

Mark Craig's Free Agency Don'ts:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 80781.html
LOL!

The article is worth reading and among Mark Craig's "don'ts" are rules that would mean Gerhart, Simpson, Allen, Williams and Cook should all be playing elsewhere next year.

I agree with many of his takes, though there are some exceptions, and I don't think it's as black-and-white as he contends it should be. For example, re-signing Kevin Williams on a very reasonable contract as a reserve or light rotational guy wouldn't be a bad move considering our lack of quality depth at the position and how devoid we are on the line of quality leaders (especially after Allen likely walks). Seriously, what if Floyd (who hasn't exactly lit it up yet) gets injured? Sometimes moves like this are great in the short-term as if you lose a guy to injury the quality of your team can go down quite dramatically (only look at our DBs the last several years. With Winfield in the lineup, even as a reserve, I'm guessing they're not nearly as bad). Starting a guy like Williams in place of Guion (if HE'S not cut) may contribute to a win or a loss.

I also disagree a bit with his "No receivers without a franchise quarterback." In an ideal world, perhaps. But franchise QBs aren't exactly growing on trees and this draft is highly suspect in that department. Signing Eric Decker or Golden Tate may not be a priority, given several decent starting options, but if we didn't have Patterson or Jennings, having a talented guy on the outside sure makes your offense run more effectively, especially if you don't have a "franchise" QB behind center.

You also have to take his "No players currently in or possibly on their way to Commissioner Roger Goodell’s woodshed" with a grain of salt. This isn't a blanket statement. If you do your due diligence on a player, taking the chance can pay dividends. Just look at Vontae Davis, Aqib Talib or, heck, Jared Allen for that matter. They all have "red flags" but after landing with their respective teams I don't believe they were ever again suspended by the league and have been more or less top players at their positions.

I think a lot of his "rules" need to be taken with a grain of salt. There are clearly exceptions.

[dead_poet]

For the record, Craig also thinks the Vikings should take another shot at Freeman, a guy that, if I'm not mistaken, violates his own rule #10: "No extending the “potential” on guys based purely on height, weight, speed and what the prototypical player at their position is supposed to look like."

2, Josh Freeman: He's 26. He's made a Pro Bowl. He's athletic. And he has a big-time arm. But should the Vikings try to go down that path again? In short, what do they have to lose, assuming, of course, the price is reasonable? Christian Ponder is the only quarterback on the roster and there are no guarantees of landing a worthy quarterback in the draft. Remember the general perception when Freeman was signed by the Vikings last October? Remember thinking, `Wow, he's got the perfect arm to push the ball down the field, which would complement an offense built around Adrian Peterson'? Should we really scrap all that because of one stinker performance? Granted, that Oct. 22 Monday Nighter in New York was the mother of all fiascos. But the guy was thrown into the game after four meaningful practices and then asked to throw the ball 53 times. My goodness, what else, realistically, was supposed to happen? Signing Freeman mid-season when Bill Musgrave was your offensive coordinator and then turning your back on him in the offseason when Norv Turner is your offensive coordinator makes no sense. Verdict: Turner is the QB Whisperer and Freeman has the tools. Put them together and see if something good can finally come from last year's disaster.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 37491.html

[Mothman]

I agree with many of his takes, though there are some exceptions, and I don't think it's as black-and-white as he contends it should be. For example, re-signing Kevin Williams on a very reasonable contract as a reserve or light rotational guy wouldn't be a bad move considering our lack of quality depth at the position and how devoid we are on the line of quality leaders (especially after Allen likely walks). Seriously, what if Floyd (who hasn't exactly lit it up yet) gets injured? Sometimes moves like this are great in the short-term as if you lose a guy to injury the quality of your team can go down quite dramatically (only look at our DBs the last several years. With Winfield in the lineup, even as a reserve, I'm guessing they're not nearly as bad). Starting a guy like Williams in place of Guion (if HE'S not cut) may contribute to a win or a loss.

I also disagree a bit with his "No receivers without a franchise quarterback." In an ideal world, perhaps. But franchise QBs aren't exactly growing on trees and this draft is highly suspect in that department. Signing Eric Decker or Golden Tate may not be a priority, given several decent starting options, but if we didn't have Patterson or Jennings, having a talented guy on the outside sure makes your offense run more effectively, especially if you don't have a "franchise" QB behind center.

You also have to take his "No players currently in or possibly on their way to Commissioner Roger Goodell’s woodshed" with a grain of salt. This isn't a blanket statement. If you do your due diligence on a player, taking the chance can pay dividends. Just look at Vontae Davis, Aqib Talib or, heck, Jared Allen for that matter. They all have "red flags" but after landing with their respective teams I don't believe they were ever again suspended by the league and have been more or less top players at their positions.

I think a lot of his "rules" need to be taken with a grain of salt. There are clearly exceptions.

I agree. They should be viewed more like guidelines than rules and teams should really consider each player on a case-to-case basis. I think you're absolutely right about a player like Williams and I also disagreed with Mark Craig's comment that "With few exceptions, quarterbacks make receivers good, not vice versa". He mentioned exceptions, so I suppose he has it covered, but I think that kind of statement perpetuates a myth that needs to go the way of the dodo.

[Mothman]

For the record, Craig also thinks the Vikings should take another shot at Freeman, a guy that, if I'm not mistaken, violates his own rule #10: "No extending the “potential” on guys based purely on height, weight, speed and what the prototypical player at their position is supposed to look like."
http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 37491.html

I see what he's thinking but you're right, that breaks one of his own rules for free agency.

Freeman's a weird case. If the Vikings decide not to make an effort to re-sign him, I think it's safe to say that decision would be based on more than just his MNF performance. After all, the point of bringing him in was to get a close look at him, to work with him. Did they like how he practiced, his work ethic, his dedication to improvement, etc.? Were they impressed by the way he handled himself as a part of their team during the remainder of last season, even when it became clear he wasn't going to play again? If they don't try to re-sign him, I'm guessing the answer to those questions is "no".

[dead_poet]

Zimmer on Chris Cook: "My impression is he probably shouldn't be tweeting our conversations." Still likes possibility of working with him.

[Funkytown]

Love it!

[dead_poet]

Mike Zimmer has talked to Matt Cassel, wants him back but knows he's "got a bunch of pretty girls looking for him." #Vikings

[Funkytown]

Again, I love it! Zimmer seems like a fun guy. Real, too.

[Mothman]

Again, I love it! Zimmer seems like a fun guy. Real, too.

He really does have a good sense of humor.

[mosscarter]

look on the bright side if cassel leaves the odds rise the texans won't take a qb with the first pick.

[dead_poet]

look on the bright side if cassel leaves the odds rise the texans won't take a qb with the first pick.

Disagree. Cassel would be a bridge QB so they wouldn't be forced to start their rookie.

[NextQuestion]

I'm done if we touch Schaub. He is AWFUL

[saint33]

I'm done if we touch Schaub. He is AWFUL

Really? He had a horrible year, but was consistently producing very good numbers the rest of his career. Compared to the other options on the market, you could do a lot worse

[Purpnation]

I'm done if we touch Schaub. He is AWFUL

Better then Cassel.

[dead_poet]

Zimmer reiterated he wants guys "that want to be here." talked about Cassel, Griffen: "There's a line ($$) in the sand" that MN won't cross