UPDATE: Cam Akers - Traded to Vikings

[weepaws 2,024]

Mattison is avg 3:3 yards per att, he’s only had 19 rush att, the only other rb on the Vikings besides Mattison with a rush att is Chandler, and he’s had four of them.  Akers will have more then that his first game.  And he’ll be equal to Mattison by his second game.  I said over the summer I didn’t think Mattison could be their true rb1.  I think Akers is better.  

[Ray_T 553]

49 minutes ago, weepaws said:

Mattison is avg 3:3 yards per att, he’s only had 19 rush att, the only other rb on the Vikings besides Mattison with a rush att is Chandler, and he’s had four of them.  Akers will have more then that his first game.  And he’ll be equal to Mattison by his second game.  I said over the summer I didn’t think Mattison could be their true rb1.  I think Akers is better.  

they acquired him 3 or 4 days prior to the game.  they wont be playing him that much unless there is garbage time.

usually when teams trade for players in the regular season it coincides with a bye so the player has time to learn at least some of the playbook before they put him out there.   you cant expect players to play their best when they dont know what the play looks like.

only exception i have seen recently is Baker Mayfield.  but when he knows the play he stares down his receiver and tells the defense where hes gonna go.  so for him it was actually an advantage to not know the play because he doesnt know what hes gonna do with the ball.  so he couldnt possibly tip off the defense.

 

[weepaws 2,024]

Oh Akers is ready to play enough, I’m sure he’s been feeding on the play book already.  I would be surprised if Akers gets less then 5 touches this weekend if he plays.   

[GobbleDog 754]

On 9/21/2023 at 1:19 PM, show me the murray said:

Any point holding on to Ty Chandler now? On the chance Mattison loses the job and Akers still flops (they’ve not exactly got much invested in him to give him a long leash). 

Who’d be another RB handcuff/lottery ticket you’d want? 

After some soul searching, I decided to drop Ty Chandler as Akers signing makes it difficult for Chandler to ever get playing time, and speaks to what coaches think of him for whatever reason (pass protection my guess).

Looking over the pitiful remaining free agents I decided to add Zach Evans. With Akers gone he's a little closer to that starting spot. Kyren Williams had lots of playing time and hasn't looked special averaging 3.7 and 3.5 ypc the past two weeks. Evans is chomping at the bit to make his NFL debut and prove himself - there's a chance he gets that debut on Monday Night football. If Evans does play and looks as good as some "experts" say he is, he'll be a top waiver pick so I'm picking him up now.

[LaChup 125]

They need to get the ball to Zach. The play is called ball Zach.

[Ray_T 553]

On 9/21/2023 at 8:41 PM, weepaws said:

Mattison is avg 3:3 yards per att, he’s only had 19 rush att, the only other rb on the Vikings besides Mattison with a rush att is Chandler, and he’s had four of them.  Akers will have more then that his first game.  And he’ll be equal to Mattison by his second game.  I said over the summer I didn’t think Mattison could be their true rb1.  I think Akers is better.  

I think you are looking too much at the stats and not enough at what the stats actually tell you.

Eagles D?  top 5 across the board.  nobody will be running well against them except for teams with a top 5 O line.  and The Vikings dont have that.  I saw that game, and the line was manhandled for the most part.   there were one or two good plays that were well blocked but in general I dont think a better RB would have done a whole lot better in that situation.

Tampa D?  pretty good. despite what people will say they are the only reason Tampa even sniffed the playoffs last year.  2 years ago they were a top run Defense.  obviously with all the injuries on offense last year the Defense was on the field a whole lot more than they should have been so their numbers were not as good but they are still a top run stuffing defense in my opinion.

and both games the game script went negative in the second half which didnt help

so I was not expecting top numbers running the ball against these guys.

The chargers, on the other hand are a much weaker run (and pass) Defense.  if he cant run against them, then I'd start to agree with you.   but its far too early and the sample size of games you are drawing conclusions from is too small and tilted towards tougher run defenses.  Lets see what he can do against some weaker run defenses before we toss this guy to the wolves because I dont think its fair to do so at this point.

[GobbleDog 754]

34 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

 its far too early and the sample size of games you are drawing conclusions from is too small and tilted towards tougher run defenses.  Lets see what he can do against some weaker run defenses before we toss this guy to the wolves because I dont think its fair to do so at this point.

Mattison's poor performance has been the result of a mixture of good defenses, bad game scripts, MIN throwing a ridiculous 75% of the time, bad blocking... and lastly poor performance.  So it hasn't all been his fault.

But even if he does play better, against easier defenses, and the game scripts to more running the clock situations... MIN is still a pass first team and they don't run block well.  He might be doomed no matter what.

[Ray_T 553]

2 minutes ago, GobbleDog said:

Mattison's poor performance has been the result of a mixture of good defenses, bad game scripts, MIN throwing a ridiculous 75% of the time, bad blocking... and lastly poor performance.  So it hasn't all been his fault.

But even if he does play better, against easier defenses, and the game scripts to more running the clock situations... MIN is still a pass first team and they don't run block well.  He might be doomed no matter what.

maybe.  like I said, the sample size is still too small to say for sure.   

The next 2 matchups are better. if he doesnt perform by week 4 I would guess they would replace him at that point.   but right now this feels like an early season panic thread.   Too early to draw conclusions from yet.

[weepaws 2,024]

I don’t think they replace Mattison, but he’s going to share the load.  

[show me the murray 45]

16 hours ago, GobbleDog said:

After some soul searching, I decided to drop Ty Chandler as Akers signing makes it difficult for Chandler to ever get playing time, and speaks to what coaches think of him for whatever reason (pass protection my guess).

Looking over the pitiful remaining free agents I decided to add Zach Evans. With Akers gone he's a little closer to that starting spot. Kyren Williams had lots of playing time and hasn't looked special averaging 3.7 and 3.5 ypc the past two weeks. Evans is chomping at the bit to make his NFL debut and prove himself - there's a chance he gets that debut on Monday Night football. If Evans does play and looks as good as some "experts" say he is, he'll be a top waiver pick so I'm picking him up now.

Yeah I like that. For me it’s Evans as a flier or maybe Rico Dowdle. Cowboys look like they could go deep in the playoffs and won’t want to see Pollard get injured again, plus they could be running out the clock in lots of games. 

Sadly I can’t do it this week as I had to drop Ty Chandler for a backup QB with Anthony Richardson ruled out. Just hoping neither of them go off (or Pollard/Williams get injured) so I can pick one up next week. 

[GobbleDog 754]

3 hours ago, show me the murray said:

Yeah I like that. For me it’s Evans as a flier or maybe Rico Dowdle.

Dowdle was my second choice. Evans doesn't necessarily need an injury to become the starter. Dowdle does, but if Pollard goes down Dowdel becomes instant superstar.