Reljac wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2017 9:03 am
I drafted him and held him since then. The writing is on the wall. Vikings get to see more of McKinnon than we do and it's clear they see him as less valuable than Matt Asiata.
? Why do you say that? Glancing at the numbers, McKinnon got 38 more carries, 11 more receptions (on 15 more targets), and although he only averaged 3.39ypc, it was still more than Asiata averaged. McKinnon beat Asiata in all these numbers while playing through and missing time due to an ankle injury.
Reljac wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2017 9:03 am
He's been given chances and failed to capitalize
Look no further than 2016 to value him... 159 attempts 3.39 ypc. As a receiving back he did pretty well, but his yards per catch were a lackluster below 6.
His chances he failed to capitalize on:
2014 - Rookie year. Playing behind the more established team vet Asiata. McKinnon was a running QB in college, so for him to over-take a vet to the system his first year as a RB is a bit much to ask. No way they are not playing Asiata when they are trying to protect their rookie QB Bridgewater. The criticism of how he couldn't even find time over Asiata has just that TINY flaw in its short-sighted view. Despite being fairly new to the RB position and needing to protect a rookie QB behind a pretty relentless blitz the Vikings usually faced, McKinnon was given 113 carries at a 4.8 ypc clip.
Not failing to capitalize, at all.
2015 - Peterson was back off his suspension. McKinnon's carries dropped down to 52 attempts, at a 5.2 ypc clip while spelling Peterson. I get why that 5.2 is inflated with the 3rd and long carries, but this was
not failing to capitalize on his opportunities.
2016 - He was playing behind the worst OL play I've watched in my time, in one of the most predictable offenses I've watched. Todd Gurley just averaged 3.2ypc in a similarly predictable offense behind a better OL (but with a worse QB). Are we writing off Gurley, too? He did less per carry than McKinnon with a better line, and wasn't playing on a bum ankle I don't believe. Actually I just checked this. Gurley was playing through a thigh injury of some sort, McKinnon an ankle injury. Gurley gets the excuses though, whereas McKinnon just sucks? 2016 was not a fair assessment of anything with the Vikings running game. The only players that averaged more ypa than McKinnon were Patterson (on 7 carries) and Thielen (on 2 carries), on end around plays. Peterson averaged 1.9 ypa. McKinnon was running hurt, and I don't think I need to go over how injured that line was again. They lost so many starters and backups they played multiple waiver claim linemen, one being an undrafted rookie FA. You must realize that he's more than a 3.4 ypc RB behind even an adequate OL, and he'd make for a good ppr back in an open passing system, not ideal for a predictable up the gut system like the Vikings have been running. My honest assessment of his 2016 season, I'd say he actually performed pretty well behind that historically bad line, but it
wasn't capitalizing on the open job, either. I doubt even NFL savior Elliott could have "capitalized" in that situation, though.
Reljac wrote: ↑Tue May 02, 2017 9:03 am
Any other position and I'd give him a shot, but RBs are a dime a dozen to NFL teams. Only way I get excited is if the Patriots bring him in somehow.
I do agree with you that his value doesn't look so great now. He's got an uphill battle to be fantasy useful this year, unless Cook gets injured. I think McKinnon gets carries still, but not enough to win games in fantasy. He's useful to the Vikings at this point, but not us. If you have the roster space and decide to hold, it's likely you have to either root for a Cook injury (I don't think Murray is all that great) or for McKinnon to find a better suited role in '18.
I think the main reason the Vikings grabbed Murray is they needed depth, as McKinnon has been injured and Asiata is nothing special. They then grabbed Cook because the value was there, and when you are a running team it doesn't hurt to have a couple good RBs. I don't think the signing of Murray OR the drafting of Cook was an indictment that the coaches have no trust in McKinnon's effectiveness. They were just the right football moves to make at the time. I still think McKinnon plays a good amount for the Vikings, but not enough to be fantasy relevant in '17 without an injury to one of the other two. His fantasy value now is as a handcuff (if you like to hold handcuffs) or as a '18 free agent bet if you have the roster depth to hold players like that.
I'm probably delusional though. I wouldn't be shocked, one bit, to see all three of Cook, Murray and McKinnon have games where they get the majority of the carries. I wouldn't want to count on a single one of them in my lineup, but would feel ok flexing Cook on and off.
