Random FF Thoughts

[wilwhite]

Taylor was injured and they were down by 20 some playing a prevent defense. Even Chuck Long looks good against a prevent defense.

I think that was only the last possession - which was Indy's only possession in the last 8:30. Ryan was two for three for 41 yards on that one.

Take out that last possession and he was 13/14 for 142 yards and a TD in the second half - passer rating of 132.7.

 

[Payton]

I imagine you can find someone. Doubtfully anyone willing to pay what you probably invested on him on draft day, but someone will surely trade for him.

Here’s my question. If you have both Cook and Mattison, is trading both of them worth significantly more?

Is Mattison the heir apparent, or is he likely a stop gap starter once Cook is no more?

Is it advisable to try to offload Cook, but keep Mattison?

 

[SmokingMonkey]

Here’s my question. If you have both Cook and Mattison, is trading both of them worth significantly more?

Is Mattison the heir apparent, or is he likely a stop gap starter once Cook is no more?

Is it advisable to try to offload Cook, but keep Mattison?

I'm assuming this is a dynasty question and you're rebuilding, I think you just take what you can get. Maybe start negotiations without Mattison in the deal just in case he lands somewhere this offseason and has more value than today.

 

[Chef99]

I'm assuming this is a dynasty question and you're rebuilding, I think you just take what you can get. Maybe start negotiations without Mattison in the deal just in case he lands somewhere this offseason and has more value than today.

Also refer to cases like Elliot and Pollard.

 

[TREFF]

Here’s my question. If you have both Cook and Mattison, is trading both of them worth significantly more?

Is Mattison the heir apparent, or is he likely a stop gap starter once Cook is no more?

Is it advisable to try to offload Cook, but keep Mattison?

Imho....

If I'm trading for Cook, and his owner has Mattison, I'm probably not agreeing to a deal without Mattison added. I consider them one commodity, as I do with virtually any RB that has a true handcuff. And yes, I'd give a bit more because of that, but not extremely much more, and again, probably wouldn't even consider a deal without both.

Is Mattison the heir apparent? Not in my mind. He's been a solid fill in, but he hasn't shown me enough to say he's the kind of back to roll with as plan A. And given the state of RB's leaguewide, I can't imagine any other team signing him to be 'the guy' after his Vikes contract is up either. Most would likely feel that there will be a rookie or two or three, that can do what he does they can get much cheaper.

 

[Draft Crazy]

Tip #1 - Don't start Russell Wilson.

 

[TKOSpikes]

Here’s my question. If you have both Cook and Mattison, is trading both of them worth significantly more?

Is Mattison the heir apparent, or is he likely a stop gap starter once Cook is no more?

Is it advisable to try to offload Cook, but keep Mattison?

I agree with Treff.

Not significantly more, but not throwing him in.
Some owners might not care, and shrug off you adding him into the equation.

Is Mattison worth it after Cook or he leaves the Vikings? Who knows. But Mattison is probably worth it in a redraft as a Cook replacement (that goes for Cook owner and trade partner…if you can trade Cook and keep Mattison, that hurts them more than you).

 

[Manster7588]

If any of you have Amari Cooper on the bench, start him. I just beched him, so I know he'll light it up.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

If any of you have Amari Cooper on the bench, start him. I just beched him, so I know he'll light it up.

I wouldn't be benching him anyways... unless you start only 2 WRs and your top 2 are elite... He is ranked 24th this week by fantasypros

 

[Bandit]

Imho....

If I'm trading for Cook, and his owner has Mattison, I'm probably not agreeing to a deal without Mattison added. I consider them one commodity, as I do with virtually any RB that has a true handcuff. And yes, I'd give a bit more because of that, but not extremely much more, and again, probably wouldn't even consider a deal without both.

Is Mattison the heir apparent? Not in my mind. He's been a solid fill in, but he hasn't shown me enough to say he's the kind of back to roll with as plan A. And given the state of RB's leaguewide, I can't imagine any other team signing him to be 'the guy' after his Vikes contract is up either. Most would likely feel that there will be a rookie or two or three, that can do what he does they can get much cheaper.

I agree with Treff.

Not significantly more, but not throwing him in.
Some owners might not care, and shrug off you adding him into the equation.

Is Mattison worth it after Cook or he leaves the Vikings? Who knows. But Mattison is probably worth it in a redraft as a Cook replacement (that goes for Cook owner and trade partner…if you can trade Cook and keep Mattison, that hurts them more than you).

So here's the thing with Mattison. He's a free agent after this year and Cook is signed until 2025. Now his dead cap hit numbers really aren't that bad after this year, but unless he falls off a cliff he's still a lot better than Mattison is. I don't think Minnesota is going to pay Mattison enough to keep him there this off-season. They drafted Ty Chandler this season maybe to take Mattison's place next year, but it's unknown. I honestly think this will be the last year that Mattison is in Minnesota. He's been good enough to get a deal somewhere else along the Chase Edmonds lines somewhere else and the Vikings can't afford to pay him that much. With that being said though, for this year you can't deal one without the other. They have to be a package deal.

 

[TREFF]

So here's the thing with Mattison. He's a free agent after this year and Cook is signed until 2025. Now his dead cap hit numbers really aren't that bad after this year, but unless he falls off a cliff he's still a lot better than Mattison is. I don't think Minnesota is going to pay Mattison enough to keep him there this off-season. They drafted Ty Chandler this season maybe to take Mattison's place next year, but it's unknown. I honestly think this will be the last year that Mattison is in Minnesota. He's been good enough to get a deal somewhere else along the Chase Edmonds lines somewhere else and the Vikings can't afford to pay him that much. With that being said though, for this year you can't deal one without the other. They have to be a package deal.

Surely Chase Edmonds will stand as evidence to teams to NOT give those types of deals to backup RB's

 

[Manster7588]

I wouldn't be benching him anyways... unless you start only 2 WRs and your top 2 are elite... He is ranked 24th this week by fantasypros

I have Debo Samuel, Curtis Samuel, and T Higgins. Higgins is Q so I'll watch it closely.
So far out of Curtis, T, and Amari I have been wrong to bench.

Last week I benched Higgins for Cooper, that didn’t work out too well.

 

[TKOSpikes]

Barkley owners just love to see a two yard rush TD by the TE

 

[TREFF]

Barkley owners just love to see a two yard rush TD by the TE

Better than Barkley with a possible dislocated shoulder or broken collar bone...ouch

 

[Manster7588]

Barkley owners just love to see a two yard rush TD by the TE

Then the backup RB gets a 2yd TD.

 

[TKOSpikes]

Then the backup RB gets a 2yd TD.

Yeah. Barkley hurt shoulder. Looks like he’s done for the day

 

[TKOSpikes]

Yeah. Barkley hurt shoulder. Looks like he’s done for the day

I spoke too soon. He’s back

 

[TREFF]

I spoke too soon. He’s back

I would say so...I'm not sure Barkley looked this good when he used to be great

 

[wilwhite]

Um... kneeling? They can't count?

 

[leftypower]

It's hard to imagine that GB played a team known as NOT good against the run, has both RB average over 4.8yd/carry, yet limit them to 19 carries total, get no carries inside the 5, throw 39 times, then ultimately lose the game. ...... I've said this before - f*ckin Rodgers - the end.