Minnesota Sports Forum

Check out number 6.

http://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/6_nfl_players_that_could_be_traded_before_the_deadline/s1_13132_19678306

Anyone else wonder if Patterson would be a better RB then WR? I am not really impressed with our backups behind Peterson.

bleedspeed177 wrote:Anyone else wonder if Patterson would be a better RB then WR? I am not really impressed with our backups behind Peterson.

I think he would be dynamic for a few plays back there no doubt and another reason why I bet there are a few teams willing to give up a decent (mid rounder at least) pick to get him.

For years we have tried to find the right guys to backup AP. Gerhert was pretty solid but it felt like we don't have that quick change of pace guy to go with him and AP. plus I never really felt Gethert was that goal line guy you wanted and you never knew when he would get hurt and he was a backup. Asiata gives you a little of everything and he is gonna give you a shot at getting a needed yard. McKinnon is the change of pace guy we haven't had in forever and he might also be the future guy. He isn't as fluid as some change of pace guys but he has more power too.

Back to CP the last few days there had been a lot written about him being traded. What do you think is it legit or speculation which does make sense? I would understand if they dealt him but I kinda want to give him more time.

bleedspeed177 wrote:Anyone else wonder if Patterson would be a better RB then WR? I am not really impressed with our backups behind Peterson.

Well, then we would have two guys in the backfield who have no idea where to line up until Teddy shows them. I swear we either have the two dumbest players in the NFL, or Norv forgot to issue them a playbook. It has to frustrate Bridgewater when he has to talk to each one of them individually before the snap.

I'm sure they are shopping Patterson. Not sure what, if anything they'd get for him now. I'd rather they just keep him as a KR at this point. He's still pretty dangerous back there. I also feel he can still add something as a deep threat occasionally on offense. Even if he never actually catches a ball, they have to account for him which would open things up for other guys (in theory). But yeah, some team offers up some young O-Line talent or a reasonable draft pick - pull that trigger. It doesn't look like he's going to be the player we had hoped.

monsterpile wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Anyone else wonder if Patterson would be a better RB then WR? I am not really impressed with our backups behind Peterson.

I think he would be dynamic for a few plays back there no doubt and another reason why I bet there are a few teams willing to give up a decent (mid rounder at least) pick to get him.

For years we have tried to find the right guys to backup AP. Gerhert was pretty solid but it felt like we don't have that quick change of pace guy to go with him and AP. plus I never really felt Gethert was that goal line guy you wanted and you never knew when he would get hurt and he was a backup. Asiata gives you a little of everything and he is gonna give you a shot at getting a needed yard. McKinnon is the change of pace guy we haven't had in forever and he might also be the future guy. He isn't as fluid as some change of pace guys but he has more power too.

Back to CP the last few days there had been a lot written about him being traded. What do you think is it legit or speculation which does make sense? I would understand if they dealt him but I kinda want to give him more time.

He's just not going to play for Norv or Zimmerman. AP is really the only guy getting away with not knowing what he's supposed to do half the time and still playing because he's the best running back in football the other half of the time. I think Patterson is a guy like AP who's good outweighs his bad (not by as much, but still an overall positive) but it looks like they aren't going to give him a chance to prove that. Just like with Percy, we don't have a coach who knows how to use him outside the traditional receiver box. He's not a traditional wideout. He's a playmaker. He's a guy you just have to get the ball to 10-15 plays a game (both in the run and the pass) because he's likely to make a big play on any of them. You could also decoy the hell out of him if you did it right. They wanted him to be a traditional outside receiver, but he needs to lineup basically everywhere to get the most out of him. Maybe he doesn't have the smarts to be that guy, but I find it hard to believe you couldn't create a package for him that involves 20 plays where he lines up in different spots and we go to him sometimes and use him as a decoy other times and get some value out of him. I don't think he's so dumb he can't run 20 plays (that are designed around him) correctly.

Carlos Danger wrote:I'm sure they are shopping Patterson. Not sure what, if anything they'd get for him now. I'd rather they just keep him as a KR at this point. He's still pretty dangerous back there. I also feel he can still add something as a deep threat occasionally on offense. Even if he never actually catches a ball, they have to account for him which would open things up for other guys (in theory). But yeah, some team offers up some young O-Line talent or a reasonable draft pick - pull that trigger. It doesn't look like he's going to be the player we had hoped.

Or a starting SS.

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Anyone else wonder if Patterson would be a better RB then WR? I am not really impressed with our backups behind Peterson.

I think he would be dynamic for a few plays back there no doubt and another reason why I bet there are a few teams willing to give up a decent (mid rounder at least) pick to get him.

For years we have tried to find the right guys to backup AP. Gerhert was pretty solid but it felt like we don't have that quick change of pace guy to go with him and AP. plus I never really felt Gethert was that goal line guy you wanted and you never knew when he would get hurt and he was a backup. Asiata gives you a little of everything and he is gonna give you a shot at getting a needed yard. McKinnon is the change of pace guy we haven't had in forever and he might also be the future guy. He isn't as fluid as some change of pace guys but he has more power too.

Back to CP the last few days there had been a lot written about him being traded. What do you think is it legit or speculation which does make sense? I would understand if they dealt him but I kinda want to give him more time.

He's just not going to play for Norv or Zimmerman. AP is really the only guy getting away with not knowing what he's supposed to do half the time and still playing because he's the best running back in football the other half of the time. I think Patterson is a guy like AP who's good outweighs his bad (not by as much, but still an overall positive) but it looks like they aren't going to give him a chance to prove that. Just like with Percy, we don't have a coach who knows how to use him outside the traditional receiver box. He's not a traditional wideout. He's a playmaker. He's a guy you just have to get the ball to 10-15 plays a game (both in the run and the pass) because he's likely to make a big play on any of them. You could also decoy the hell out of him if you did it right. They wanted him to be a traditional outside receiver, but he needs to lineup basically everywhere to get the most out of him. Maybe he doesn't have the smarts to be that guy, but I find it hard to believe you couldn't create a package for him that involves 20 plays where he lines up in different spots and we go to him sometimes and use him as a decoy other times and get some value out of him. I don't think he's so dumb he can't run 20 plays (that are designed around him) correctly.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying. What they have done is given a lot of those touches to Jarius Wright and while he is not the game breaker that CP is he has done a lot with the opportunities he has been given and he is a versatile player. Now the the Vikings have Diggs who may be a versatile guy with the possible game breaking athletic ability that's closer to what CP has. Will Diggs end up being a good player? Idk but the early returns and hype are promising. We just don't have enough information not being at practices etc to know where CP is at but there have been other options and it's partly why he hasn't gotten some opportunities.

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Anyone else wonder if Patterson would be a better RB then WR? I am not really impressed with our backups behind Peterson.

I think he would be dynamic for a few plays back there no doubt and another reason why I bet there are a few teams willing to give up a decent (mid rounder at least) pick to get him.

For years we have tried to find the right guys to backup AP. Gerhert was pretty solid but it felt like we don't have that quick change of pace guy to go with him and AP. plus I never really felt Gethert was that goal line guy you wanted and you never knew when he would get hurt and he was a backup. Asiata gives you a little of everything and he is gonna give you a shot at getting a needed yard. McKinnon is the change of pace guy we haven't had in forever and he might also be the future guy. He isn't as fluid as some change of pace guys but he has more power too.

Back to CP the last few days there had been a lot written about him being traded. What do you think is it legit or speculation which does make sense? I would understand if they dealt him but I kinda want to give him more time.

He's just not going to play for Norv or Zimmerman. AP is really the only guy getting away with not knowing what he's supposed to do half the time and still playing because he's the best running back in football the other half of the time. I think Patterson is a guy like AP who's good outweighs his bad (not by as much, but still an overall positive) but it looks like they aren't going to give him a chance to prove that. Just like with Percy, we don't have a coach who knows how to use him outside the traditional receiver box. He's not a traditional wideout. He's a playmaker. He's a guy you just have to get the ball to 10-15 plays a game (both in the run and the pass) because he's likely to make a big play on any of them. You could also decoy the hell out of him if you did it right. They wanted him to be a traditional outside receiver, but he needs to lineup basically everywhere to get the most out of him. Maybe he doesn't have the smarts to be that guy, but I find it hard to believe you couldn't create a package for him that involves 20 plays where he lines up in different spots and we go to him sometimes and use him as a decoy other times and get some value out of him. I don't think he's so dumb he can't run 20 plays (that are designed around him) correctly.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying. What they have done is given a lot of those touches to Jarius Wright and while he is not the game breaker that CP is he has done a lot with the opportunities he has been given and he is a versatile player. Now the the Vikings have Diggs who may be a versatile guy with the possible game breaking athletic ability that's closer to what CP has. Will Diggs end up being a good player? Idk but the early returns and hype are promising. We just don't have enough information not being at practices etc to know where CP is at but there have been other options and it's partly why he hasn't gotten some opportunities.

Wright and Diggs are both better in the traditional receiver role. Combine that with essentially giving the play away if Patterson only came on the field for plays designed for him like screens and it makes more sense to try those plays with the more traditional/versatile receivers even if they don't result in as many big plays. I think you could put him in enough plays running simple stuff like crossing routes and go routes to not tell the other team the ball is always going to him on the screens and sweeps, but I also understand why they'd play the guys who can do more of the traditional stuff better. I just wish they'd do more to get him involved because of his big play ability.

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

bleedspeed177 wrote:Anyone else wonder if Patterson would be a better RB then WR? I am not really impressed with our backups behind Peterson.

I think he would be dynamic for a few plays back there no doubt and another reason why I bet there are a few teams willing to give up a decent (mid rounder at least) pick to get him.

For years we have tried to find the right guys to backup AP. Gerhert was pretty solid but it felt like we don't have that quick change of pace guy to go with him and AP. plus I never really felt Gethert was that goal line guy you wanted and you never knew when he would get hurt and he was a backup. Asiata gives you a little of everything and he is gonna give you a shot at getting a needed yard. McKinnon is the change of pace guy we haven't had in forever and he might also be the future guy. He isn't as fluid as some change of pace guys but he has more power too.

Back to CP the last few days there had been a lot written about him being traded. What do you think is it legit or speculation which does make sense? I would understand if they dealt him but I kinda want to give him more time.

He's just not going to play for Norv or Zimmerman. AP is really the only guy getting away with not knowing what he's supposed to do half the time and still playing because he's the best running back in football the other half of the time. I think Patterson is a guy like AP who's good outweighs his bad (not by as much, but still an overall positive) but it looks like they aren't going to give him a chance to prove that. Just like with Percy, we don't have a coach who knows how to use him outside the traditional receiver box. He's not a traditional wideout. He's a playmaker. He's a guy you just have to get the ball to 10-15 plays a game (both in the run and the pass) because he's likely to make a big play on any of them. You could also decoy the hell out of him if you did it right. They wanted him to be a traditional outside receiver, but he needs to lineup basically everywhere to get the most out of him. Maybe he doesn't have the smarts to be that guy, but I find it hard to believe you couldn't create a package for him that involves 20 plays where he lines up in different spots and we go to him sometimes and use him as a decoy other times and get some value out of him. I don't think he's so dumb he can't run 20 plays (that are designed around him) correctly.

I agree with a lot of what you are saying. What they have done is given a lot of those touches to Jarius Wright and while he is not the game breaker that CP is he has done a lot with the opportunities he has been given and he is a versatile player. Now the the Vikings have Diggs who may be a versatile guy with the possible game breaking athletic ability that's closer to what CP has. Will Diggs end up being a good player? Idk but the early returns and hype are promising. We just don't have enough information not being at practices etc to know where CP is at but there have been other options and it's partly why he hasn't gotten some opportunities.

Wright and Diggs are both better in the traditional receiver role. Combine that with essentially giving the play away if Patterson only came on the field for plays designed for him like screens and it makes more sense to try those plays with the more traditional/versatile receivers even if they don't result in as many big plays. I think you could put him in enough plays running simple stuff like crossing routes and go routes to not tell the other team the ball is always going to him on the screens and sweeps, but I also understand why they'd play the guys who can do more of the traditional stuff better. I just wish they'd do more to get him involved because of his big play ability.

Yep you summed that up well.

It's a little amusing to me that Musgrave got a lot of hate by Vikings fans but with some time to look back we know now Ponder sucked and he got the most out of both Harvin and CP but he was working with a totally different situation. I am not saying Musgrave was good I was never convinced he was really good OR bad. Part of the reason I bring it up is one of the articles I read brought up that he is in Oakland maybe there would be some interest there. Total speculation but if this was the Raiders from a few years ago.... Lol