Cam Akers Official Thread

[Pac_Eddy]

Mattison is still the RB to own. Akers is a backup IMO.

Neither would be my option to own.

Agree, but RB scarcity is real these days. I'd be OK starting Mattison as my RB2 or flex in hopes of goal line carries.

[ericanadian]

Are they cutting Gaskin or rolling four RBs?

Not to mention they have Ham as well. I imagine Gaskin is cut now that they have Mattison/Akers/Chandler

Also worth noting is that Akers hasn’t really played special teams, so you have to assume they’ve brought him in to actually take offensive snaps. That could be bad news for Mattison, but this has way bigger implications for Chandler. Chandler probably survives over Gaskin, but if he’s reduced to a purely special teams role at that point, I’m not sure he survives Nwangwu coming off IR.

[Two Cents]

For as much as many here bang the drum about draft capital I have not seen that mentioned here at all.

So I pose this question....when do you believe draft capital ceases to be relevant?

If I was a betting man, I would bet that by seasons end this will be Akers' backfield. This feels like a Fournette/Bucs type of arc. With this being Cousins' final year in Minneapolis potentially, I believe the Vikings have clearly determined that 2 games was all they needed to assess whether or not Mattison was the RB that could help get them over the top. Cam Akers has been that guy already. If Mattison was the guy, they wouldn't need someone with this level of pedigree. They could have signed someone like Kareem Hunt or Trey Sermon, or traded for someone non-threatening like the Browns did with Pierre Strong. Point being this was a major acquisition and I don't think it should be taken lightly.

[Jigga94]

For as much as many here bang the drum about draft capital I have not seen that mentioned here at all.

So I pose this question....when do you believe draft capital ceases to be relevant?

If I was a betting man, I would bet that by seasons end this will be Akers' backfield. This feels like a Fournette/Bucs type of arc. With this being Cousins' final year in Minneapolis potentially, I believe the Vikings have clearly determined that 2 games was all they needed to assess whether or not Mattison was the RB that could help get them over the top. Cam Akers has been that guy already. If Mattison was the guy, they wouldn't need someone with this level of pedigree. They could have signed someone like Kareem Hunt or Trey Sermon, or traded for someone non-threatening like the Browns did with Pierre Strong. Point being this was a major acquisition and I don't think it should be taken lightly.

Draft capital gets thrown out the window when your original team trades you for peanuts. See Kadarious Toney

[YouMightDieTryin]

For as much as many here bang the drum about draft capital I have not seen that mentioned here at all.

So I pose this question....when do you believe draft capital ceases to be relevant?

If I was a betting man, I would bet that by seasons end this will be Akers' backfield. This feels like a Fournette/Bucs type of arc. With this being Cousins' final year in Minneapolis potentially, I believe the Vikings have clearly determined that 2 games was all they needed to assess whether or not Mattison was the RB that could help get them over the top. Cam Akers has been that guy already. If Mattison was the guy, they wouldn't need someone with this level of pedigree. They could have signed someone like Kareem Hunt or Trey Sermon, or traded for someone non-threatening like the Browns did with Pierre Strong. Point being this was a major acquisition and I don't think it should be taken lightly.

Draft capital gets thrown out the window when your original team trades you for peanuts. See Kadarious Toney

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWmQbk5h86w

[Pac_Eddy]

For as much as many here bang the drum about draft capital I have not seen that mentioned here at all.

So I pose this question....when do you believe draft capital ceases to be relevant?

If I was a betting man, I would bet that by seasons end this will be Akers' backfield. This feels like a Fournette/Bucs type of arc. With this being Cousins' final year in Minneapolis potentially, I believe the Vikings have clearly determined that 2 games was all they needed to assess whether or not Mattison was the RB that could help get them over the top. Cam Akers has been that guy already. If Mattison was the guy, they wouldn't need someone with this level of pedigree. They could have signed someone like Kareem Hunt or Trey Sermon, or traded for someone non-threatening like the Browns did with Pierre Strong. Point being this was a major acquisition and I don't think it should be taken lightly.

Draft capital gets thrown out the window when your original team trades you for peanuts. See Kadarious Toney

Bingo.

Same happens when a new coaching staff takes over a team. The draft capital of the players the old regime drafted is nearly zero. It's all about fit and performance.

[Cameron Giles]

For as much as many here bang the drum about draft capital I have not seen that mentioned here at all.

So I pose this question....when do you believe draft capital ceases to be relevant?

If I was a betting man, I would bet that by seasons end this will be Akers' backfield. This feels like a Fournette/Bucs type of arc. With this being Cousins' final year in Minneapolis potentially, I believe the Vikings have clearly determined that 2 games was all they needed to assess whether or not Mattison was the RB that could help get them over the top. Cam Akers has been that guy already. If Mattison was the guy, they wouldn't need someone with this level of pedigree. They could have signed someone like Kareem Hunt or Trey Sermon, or traded for someone non-threatening like the Browns did with Pierre Strong. Point being this was a major acquisition and I don't think it should be taken lightly.

When has Akers proven he's an RB that can put a team over the top? Because he put up numbers on a team whose season was basically over? Draft capital no longer matters when we have a meaningful sample size to see how a player has translated to the league.

In this case, the Rams traded a 2026 7th for a 2026 6th to unload Akers. The Vikings basically just got Akers for nothing and that was the best deal they could get. It's an incredible indictment to Akers value around the league right now.

Crazier things have happened, so there's a chance Akers could turn it around, but I don't think the Rams or Vikings are counting on it.

[Two Cents]

For as much as many here bang the drum about draft capital I have not seen that mentioned here at all.

So I pose this question....when do you believe draft capital ceases to be relevant?

If I was a betting man, I would bet that by seasons end this will be Akers' backfield. This feels like a Fournette/Bucs type of arc. With this being Cousins' final year in Minneapolis potentially, I believe the Vikings have clearly determined that 2 games was all they needed to assess whether or not Mattison was the RB that could help get them over the top. Cam Akers has been that guy already. If Mattison was the guy, they wouldn't need someone with this level of pedigree. They could have signed someone like Kareem Hunt or Trey Sermon, or traded for someone non-threatening like the Browns did with Pierre Strong. Point being this was a major acquisition and I don't think it should be taken lightly.

When has Akers proven he's an RB that can put a team over the top? Because he put up numbers on a team whose season was basically over? Draft capital no longer matters when we have a meaningful sample size to see how a player has translated to the league.

In this case, the Rams traded a 2026 7th for a 2026 6th to unload Akers. The Vikings basically just got Akers for nothing and that was the best deal they could get. It's an incredible indictment to Akers value around the league right now.

Crazier things have happened, so there's a chance Akers could turn it around, but I don't think the Rams or Vikings are counting on it.

Like I said.....the same song was sung for Fournette. And at one point...Marshawn Lynch, a 1st round draft pick traded to the Seahawks for a 4th round pick and a 5th round pick. The difference is Fournette wasn't traded, and Lynch was more productive than Akers before he was traded to the Seahawks (albeit still relatively inefficient and disappointing compared to the expectations). The goal of trading is to get out of the trade more than what you put into it. Why wouldn't the Vikings put themselves in a position to optimize value and win the trade by actualizing Akers' potential? Do we think just because the Vikings traded a 6th rounder means they are going to treat him like a Day 3 pick? If the Vikings wanted a JAG they would have gotten one off the waiver wire or stuck with what they have. This trade gives them upside and I think it would be foolish for us and for the Vikings to ignore that potential. Is it guaranteed? No. But teams don't make moves like this just to sit on their hands and resign to mediocrity. The Vikings are a team urgently seeking to win NOW. This is a swing for the fence and if we aren't reading it that way then I think we are a little out of touch. Whether or not they hit is the only question....but if you believed Mattison could be a hit, then why would you believe Akers couldn't?

On a personal note Im personally more inclined to trust teams that take chances like this on an established player in the league in opposed to swinging for the fence on a rookie that has never played a down in the NFL.

[Pac_Eddy]

but if you believed Mattison could be a hit, then why would you believe Akers couldn't?

I think the fantasy football reasoning is that this is Mattison's first chance to prove he can be the lead dog. He did really well in spot starts in previous years. Akers has a much larger sample size and has shown mediocrity. I think we know his likely ceiling.

The same logic might apply to the Vikings in real life. Maybe they are ok with adding him as cheap and experienced depth.

[Cameron Giles]

Like I said.....the same song was sung for Fournette. And at one point...Marshawn Lynch, a 1st round draft pick traded to the Seahawks for a 4th round pick and a 5th round pick. The difference is Fournette wasn't traded, and Lynch was more productive than Akers before he was traded to the Seahawks (albeit still relatively inefficient and disappointing compared to the expectations). The goal of trading is to get out of the trade more than what you put into it. Why wouldn't the Vikings put themselves in a position to optimize value and win the trade by actualizing Akers' potential? Do we think just because the Vikings traded a 6th rounder means they are going to treat him like a Day 3 pick? If the Vikings wanted a JAG they would have gotten one off the waiver wire or stuck with what they have. This trade gives them upside and I think it would be foolish for us and for the Vikings to ignore that potential. Is it guaranteed? No. But teams don't make moves like this just to sit on their hands and resign to mediocrity. The Vikings are a team urgently seeking to win NOW. This is a swing for the fence and if we aren't reading it that way then I think we are a little out of touch. Whether or not they hit is the only question....but if you believed Mattison could be a hit, then why would you believe Akers couldn't?

On a personal note Im personally more inclined to trust teams that take chances like this on an established player in the league in opposed to swinging for the fence on a rookie that has never played a down in the NFL.

The Vikings didn't just trade a 6th round pick. They swapped a 6th round pick for a 7th round pick that's three years out. This wasn't a situation of the Vikings being smart and pulling some heist on the Rams. This was a situation of both teams agreeing that a player has no value around the league.

This isn't a swing for any sort of fence. A swing implies some sort of risk as if you gave up something significant for a desired outcome. The Vikings practically gave up nothing. There's no meaningful difference between the career odds of a 6th round pick to a 7th round pick, especially for picks that are three years away lol.

Akers will certainly play, but the Vikings investment is not necessarily one of having vested interest in seeing hm succeed at a high level.

[CGW]

I make this move before I cut people too. Look around the league for a way to bump up a future 4th or 5th to a 3rd or 4th.

[YouMightDieTryin]

For as much as many here bang the drum about draft capital I have not seen that mentioned here at all.

So I pose this question....when do you believe draft capital ceases to be relevant?

If I was a betting man, I would bet that by seasons end this will be Akers' backfield. This feels like a Fournette/Bucs type of arc. With this being Cousins' final year in Minneapolis potentially, I believe the Vikings have clearly determined that 2 games was all they needed to assess whether or not Mattison was the RB that could help get them over the top. Cam Akers has been that guy already. If Mattison was the guy, they wouldn't need someone with this level of pedigree. They could have signed someone like Kareem Hunt or Trey Sermon, or traded for someone non-threatening like the Browns did with Pierre Strong. Point being this was a major acquisition and I don't think it should be taken lightly.

When has Akers proven he's an RB that can put a team over the top? Because he put up numbers on a team whose season was basically over? Draft capital no longer matters when we have a meaningful sample size to see how a player has translated to the league.

In this case, the Rams traded a 2026 7th for a 2026 6th to unload Akers. The Vikings basically just got Akers for nothing and that was the best deal they could get. It's an incredible indictment to Akers value around the league right now.

Crazier things have happened, so there's a chance Akers could turn it around, but I don't think the Rams or Vikings are counting on it.

I'm going to side with Cameron on this one.

We've seen Akers falter at Florida State. We gave him the excuse that his line was terrible and he always was contacted 2 yards behind scrimmage. Yet somehow he'd make a plus play out of nothing. We move to the NFL and it's the same song and dance. Eventually a spade is a spade. He's a volume back that provides depth. I am glad he finally gets a fresh team, but I'm not holding my breath that he'll be much different than Mattison.

[ericanadian]

It needs to be pointed out that Akers value is depressed because he was clearly in a dispute with the coaching staff. A lot of teams are going to look at him as a head case and the one team that took interest has a coach that’s worked with him before and probably thinks he can get him mentally turned around. I think his value as a football player is higher than what the trade would suggest.

Further, he has zero value in pass protection or receiving or special teams. He’s a pure rusher and that’s just not worth that much anymore. Knowing he has no value other than as a pure rusher, you know he’s going to get carries in Minnesota so that probably means he’s already pushed aside Chandler who was barely getting any offensive snaps even with just Mattison to compete with. If Mattison continues to suck, Akers could get some run and might just need to suck less than Mattison… which might not be that hard.

[Needalife]

I think we see more Mattison this week with Akers mixing in small spots. Akers will probably look a little better if Mattison continues as he has. They split in Week 4 and then Akers gets the majority of the work after that.

All that said, the Vikes haven’t been giving the “Dalvin volume” to any RB yet and that may no longer be how they want to play, rendering any RB kind of middling at best.

[Ice]

Pretty obvious looking back this player was never special. There was passionate debate back in the day on this player. Glad I never owned him. At least my big miss hasn't been traded yet...

They don't all pan out so Akers is in that long line. Maybe a new home will help no matter how unlikely at this point.