Adrian Peterson Reinstated

[mondry]

Something I've been curious about is AD is under contract, if we wanted to, we could make him play for us right? I feel like once these guys start playing football again and WINNING could be a cure all for the whole situation in a lot of ways.

But maybe it's just not possible.

[The Breeze]

Something I've been curious about is AD is under contract, if we wanted to, we could make him play for us right? I feel like once these guys start playing football again and WINNING could be a cure all for the whole situation in a lot of ways.

But maybe it's just not possible.

I certainly agree about winning...if it gets that far. The 2009 team is a good example of a group galvanized through victories. With the stories of how diminishing was the respect for BC and the team winning in spite of him etc.

If AD does play and they start clicking it could be his FU to the FO......but he would have even a bigger bird to fly them if it was on the wings of a Cardinal.

[PurpleMustReign]

I'm referring to the long term future. It's just a bad situation for this team and it needs to end IMO. I won't rule anything out when it comes to his trade value. Especially after seeing every analyst say we would get a 3rd for Harvin and we end up getting a 1st, 3rd and 7th. The biggest question is: Is AP worth keeping for another year or two? I say no.

But to be fair, you don't know that either... Adrian Peterson has shown that less than a year removed from essentially a new knee was put in, he rushed for well over 2,000 yards. Only a handful of RBs have done that, and none of them did it AFTER a major injury like he did.
He is 30, you are right. But to say he will decrease in value, to me, seems very simplistic. You don't know, I don't know, and no one else knows what AD will do this year. He could run for 3,000 yards... he could also run for 300 and get hurt.
I want AD on this team. If someone said we have to get rid of him and held a gun to my head, I would say I could be ok with a 1st and 5th MINIMUM, and it would depend on how high the picks were (I would feel more comfortable with him going to JAX than ARZ).

[VikingLord]

Something I've been curious about is AD is under contract, if we wanted to, we could make him play for us right? I feel like once these guys start playing football again and WINNING could be a cure all for the whole situation in a lot of ways.

But maybe it's just not possible.

Under the current circumstances, AD's only choices are:

- Play for the Vikings
- Sit out and throw a tantrum trying to force the Vikings to trade or release him (seems like this is where things might be headed)
- Retire ala Brett Favre, which terminates his current contract. He'd have to sit out the season before filing to reinstate and be free to sign with another team.

That's it. Notice the second two options would both require him to miss more time unpaid.

Winning might help, but then again, if the team is winning without AD, adding AD back into the mix could actually hurt them more than help.

Nothing really to see here. If I'm Spielman, I say fine, you want out we have to get compensation for your loss, and this is the compensation I need. If I can't get that, then you're not going anywhere and it's up to you to decide whether you feel so strongly as to lose more time and money and reputation in this whole mess created solely by your own hand.

[frosted]

Under the current circumstances, AD's only choices are:

- Play for the Vikings
- Sit out and throw a tantrum trying to force the Vikings to trade or release him (seems like this is where things might be headed)
- Retire ala Brett Favre, which terminates his current contract. He'd have to sit out the season before filing to reinstate and be free to sign with another team.

That's it. Notice the second two options would both require him to miss more time unpaid.

Winning might help, but then again, if the team is winning without AD, adding AD back into the mix could actually hurt them more than help.

Nothing really to see here. If I'm Spielman, I say fine, you want out we have to get compensation for your loss, and this is the compensation I need. If I can't get that, then you're not going anywhere and it's up to you to decide whether you feel so strongly as to lose more time and money and reputation in this whole mess created solely by your own hand.

I don't believe he can retire for any amount of time and come back as a free agent. No matter how long he's "retired", the Vikings would continue to retain his rights when he came back. The Jets had to grant Favre his release.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Purple bruise]

I don't believe he can retire for any amount of time and come back as a free agent. No matter how long he's "retired", the Vikings would continue to retain his rights when he came back. The Jets had to grant Favre his release.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quot
I am pretty sure that you are correct. They would still "own his rights".

[Pondering Her Percy]

But to be fair, you don't know that either... Adrian Peterson has shown that less than a year removed from essentially a new knee was put in, he rushed for well over 2,000 yards. Only a handful of RBs have done that, and none of them did it AFTER a major injury like he did.
He is 30, you are right. But to say he will decrease in value, to me, seems very simplistic. You don't know, I don't know, and no one else knows what AD will do this year. He could run for 3,000 yards... he could also run for 300 and get hurt.
I want AD on this team. If someone said we have to get rid of him and held a gun to my head, I would say I could be ok with a 1st and 5th MINIMUM, and it would depend on how high the picks were (I would feel more comfortable with him going to JAX than ARZ).

It's not that I do or don't know that....it's just common sense

In 2015 Peterson will be 30 and owed ~$13 million
In 2016 Peterson will be 31 and owed ~$15 million

....how can you say his trade value will be higher next year than it is now by looking at the above factors. He's not a 25 year old RB anymore. He isn't getting any younger. I don't care if the guy runs for 2500, it doesnt increase his value next year. Many are saying his trade value is minimal right now because of his high cap number....he's owed $2 million MORE next year and will be a year older!! Who is going to be able to afford that or be willing to pay him that in general??

I know what the guy is capable of. You don't have to repeat that to me. But bottom line is, at this point, he isn't worth it IMO. The media frenzy he is currently bringing now, the fact that he is already 30 and not getting any younger, the amount of money he is owed, etc. I know everyone wants to see him with Teddy but you have to think towards the long term future of this team and the fact that we are approaching a loaded RB draft class and could get a very good YOUNG, MUCH CHEAPER RB.

If we can land a Jeremy Hill type RB in this draft, is he really going to be THAT much worse than Peterson?? No. Mind you, that RB will be very young and cheap which will allow us to invest our money elsewhere. Smith, Rhodes, Floyd and down the road Teddy and Barr will probably be receiving extensions.

But yeah lets keep AP for 1-2 more years, paying him a total of ~$28 million (when supposedly he doesn't even want to be here), and let him walk down the road and get nothing for him because he will have little to no trade value left.....Just so we can see Teddy hand the ball off to him a few times

[VikingPaul73]

PHP you make a lot of great points and I respect your opinion.

But I am a bit torn.....the biggest value I see for AD in the next 2 years is helping the development of Teddy B. I really really think having AD in the backfield taking some of the pressure off would make a HUGE difference in Teddy's progress - particularly given the ????? on the left side of the offensive line. I just don't want to see Teddy on his back on 50% of the plays next year.

Like I said I am torn....right now I am leaning towards hoping he's traded for even decent value, but I have to admit I'm not as 100% convinced as you and others are.....

it should be an exciting few weeks leading up to the draft!!!!

[Mothman]

It's not that I do or don't know that....it's just common sense

In 2015 Peterson will be 30 and owed ~$13 million
In 2016 Peterson will be 31 and owed ~$15 million

....how can you say his trade value will be higher next year than it is now by looking at the above factors. He's not a 25 year old RB anymore. He isn't getting any younger. I don't care if the guy runs for 2500, it doesnt increase his value next year

Perhaps not but it would certainly make your assertion that he's not worth keeping for another year look pretty questionable.

Many are saying his trade value is minimal right now because of his high cap number....he's owed $2 million MORE next year and will be a year older!! Who is going to be able to afford that or be willing to pay him that in general??

I know what the guy is capable of. You don't have to repeat that to me. But bottom line is, at this point, he isn't worth it IMO. The media frenzy he is currently bringing now, the fact that he is already 30 and not getting any younger, the amount of money he is owed, etc. I know everyone wants to see him with Teddy but you have to think towards the long term future of this team and the fact that we are approaching a loaded RB draft class and could get a very good YOUNG, MUCH CHEAPER RB.

If we can land a Jeremy Hill type RB in this draft, is he really going to be THAT much worse than Peterson?? No. Mind you, that RB will be very young and cheap which will allow us to invest our money elsewhere. Smith, Rhodes, Floyd and down the road Teddy and Barr will probably be receiving extensions.

But yeah lets keep AP for 1-2 more years, paying him a total of ~$28 million (when supposedly he doesn't even want to be here), and let him walk down the road and get nothing for him because he will have little to no trade value left.....Just so we can see Teddy hand the ball off to him a few times

... or perhaps because he still has the talent to possibly help the team win a Super Bowl in the next 3 years.

You've made some valid points and I don't think there's an obvious right or wrong "common sense" answer here but your position relies on some pretty big assumptions, foremost among them the assumption that the Vikings could get a return in trade that would prove more valuable to them than keeping Peterson. Your faith in Spielman aside, that's not a given. A trade requires a partner and a trade that would yield a return worth giving up Peterson to receive requires a partner willing to pay that price and take on Peterson's contract (or it requires Peterson's cooperation with that trade partner to modify his contract and make himself more affordable).

Keeping Peterson doesn't prevent the Vikes from getting a younger, cheaper RB in the draft, nor does keeping him under his current contract mean the Vikes couldn't cut him next year without a big cap hit or renegotiate his deal after the dust has settled on all of the current craziness. Heck, for all we know that may still be a key issue in all the current craziness! In the end, the continued focus on his age and salary cuts both ways: if he's too old and expensive and not worth the money than the likelihood of getting very good trade value for him is reduced. On the other hand, the assumption that his age means he's going to seriously decline as a player in a year or two is just an assumption, and not necessarily what we can expect to actually happen.

The current media frenzy is irritating but ultimately pretty harmless and if the Vikes and Peterson can settle their differences in the next few months, by the time the season rolls around that frenzy will be pretty insignificant. Once his situation is settled and we know when and where he'll be playing, the media will latch onto something else.

The bottom line: it might be worth trading him IF the price is right but if it's not right, trading him would probably be a foolish move.

[frosted]

Perhaps not but it would certainly make your assertion that he's not worth keeping for another year look pretty questionable.
... or perhaps because he still has the talent to possibly help the team win a Super Bowl in the next 3 years.

You've made some valid points and I don't think there's an obvious right or wrong "common sense" answer here but your position relies on some pretty big assumptions, foremost among them the assumption that the Vikings could get a return in trade that would prove more valuable to them than keeping Peterson. Your faith in Spielman aside, that's not a given. A trade requires a partner and a trade that would yield a return worth giving up Peterson to receive requires a partner willing to pay that price and take on Peterson's contract (or it requires Peterson's cooperation with that trade partner to modify his contract and make himself more affordable).

Keeping Peterson doesn't prevent the Vikes from getting a younger, cheaper RB in the draft, nor does keeping him under his current contract mean the Vikes couldn't cut him next year without a big cap hit or renegotiate his deal after the dust has settled on all of the current craziness. Heck, for all we know that may still be a key issue in all the current craziness! In the end, the continued focus on his age and salary cuts both ways: if he's too old and expensive and not worth the money than the likelihood of getting very good trade value for him is reduced. On the other hand, the assumption that his age means he's going to seriously decline as a player in a year or two is just an assumption, and not necessarily what we can expect to actually happen.

The current media frenzy is irritating but ultimately pretty harmless and if the Vikes and Peterson can settle their differences in the next few months, by the time the season rolls around that frenzy will be pretty insignificant. Once his situation is settled and we know when and where he'll be playing, the media will latch onto something else.

The bottom line: it might be worth trading him IF the price is right but if it's not right, trading him would probably be a foolish move.

Your points are legitimate, but there's a chance that it becomes the only option (that is, trading him). If he truly refuses to cooperate with the Vikings management, and is hell bent on playing elsewhere, I find it to be unlikely that Zimmer and Spielman try to force his hand and keep him here. I realize they can keep him here if they wish, since he's under contract, but at what point do you stop trying to appease someone who's (allegedly) acting like a baby back #### and move on?

We'll see what happens. Seems like a lot of pigheadedness from Peterson's camp though. Allegedly.

[PurpleMustReign]

I realize they can keep him here if they wish, since he's under contract, but at what point do you stop trying to appease someone who's (allegedly) acting like a baby back #### and move on?

We'll see what happens. Seems like a lot of pigheadedness from Peterson's camp though. Allegedly.

If he doesn't play, he doesn't get paid, or at least he would get paid less because he would be fined big time. Plus he looks even worse than he already does. The Vikings should not trade him just to get rid of him. They should trade him because they feel it would be best for the franchise. As much as I like him, if we keep him and he chooses not to play, it would be his life he would be ruining, not the Vikings.

[The Breeze]

Sounds like 2 different points are being debated in one. His trade value vs his value to the team.
I think it's a given that his trade value will only go down as time wears on,so yeah he's as good a commodity as he's going to get. That value is yet to be determined.
His value to the team in the next 2 seasons? Also an unknown.
---
I really am beginning to doubt this is soley about money and more about integrity and if I'm forced to wager on it in terms of honesty, I'd say Peterson has more of it than the jokers signing the checks.

[IrishViking]

Sounds like 2 different points are being debated in one. His trade value vs his value to the team.
I think it's a given that his trade value will only go down as time wears on,so yeah he's as good a commodity as he's going to get. That value is yet to be determined.
His value to the team in the next 2 seasons? Also an unknown.
---
I really am beginning to doubt this is soley about money and more about integrity and if I'm forced to wager on it in terms of honesty, I'd say Peterson has more of it than the jokers signing the checks.

I disagree. It should have been as simple as; Our job is to protect the team. No one here took shots at you. Everyone has said they want you back now that your court issues are settle.

There is absolutely nothing to point to except AP's highly unrealistic expectation that he should have been placed ahead of the teams security. His personal beef with folks behind the scenes appears to be entirely one sided. IF it isn't, it doesn't matter AP will not be the first human to work with people he doesn't like.

Guy's slowly turning into a Manlet.

[The Breeze]

@Irish
I doubt anyone is going to agree with the way my take has turned, but I've yet to see anything definitive suggesting AD has desired to be placed ahead of the teams security. That seems to be a source of partially informed speculation based upon individual judgements regardless of facts known and unknown.

He has an issue that he and his family feels very strongly about. An issue that has provoked in him a sense of feeling justified that the integrity of his contract has been broken, by that I mean he feels slighted in a way significant enough that he feels he can walk away from the deal with a clear conscience.
-
He doesn't work with the Wilfs or Warren, he works for them. I can clearly see a scenario in which it goes completely against his integrity to continue to do so.
I would feel the same way if I was in his shoes...if that scenario is fact.
-
Nothing they have told him so far has changed his opinion of them and has only seemed to embolden the stance of his camp.
-
We're talking about a 30 year old who has banked well over $100m and absolutely loves the game of football....and practically everyone with an opinion is suggesting this is about a few more finances and face instead of it being far simpler and more explanatory when considering his behavior.
-
To continue to assume that ownership is completely innocent in all of this and that Peterson is acting out of unprovoked malicious selfishness, traits that completely go against both camps histories, is giving credit to those who really haven't earned it....both ways.
-
They all want him back blah blah blah...of course they do! Dude gives 1000% every down, is always ready without ever needing outside motivation, finishes plays and is an absolute beast. And evidently he said just cut me I don't want your money, your contract or your team.
Now what does that really mean? A bluff? I'm saying no. He's basically giving them the same tone as he does a saftey in the open field.
-
It means that he doesn't want to work for these people any more and is willing to take significantly less money somewhere else in order for that to happen.
-
I hope to god they trade him and that it's just taking awhile to milk out the best offer they can get.
Dude does not want to be here.
Peterson may be a lot of things but I do not believe he is dishonest.

[Purple bruise]

From ProSportsDaily: http://www.prosportsdaily.com/Headlines ... eId=347538