Will The Vikings Trade For WR Vincent Jackson?

by Brandon on Sep 12, 2010 12:47 AM CDT in Green Bay Packers Free Agency

What I wrote after the Vikings loss on Thursday:

It looks like they miss WR Sidney Rice, and he can't come back fast enough.

But in case Rice doesn't come back, or comes back at less than 100%, the Vikings have found Plan B. According to Pro Football Talk, they've become the "primary suitor" for unsigned WR Vincent Jackson. He's probably about the most similar player to Rice (both are tall WRs who are more known for their size then their speed) and he's legit because he's been one of the best WRs in the NFL over the past two seasons.

Jackson's no easy trade target. The Chargers probably want value in return (unlike the Steelers who dumped WR Santonio Holmes for a low draft pick) and Jackson wants a big contract. Plus he's got a substance abuse suspension looming. He'll be suspended for three or six games, depending on how next week's hearing turns out, and obviously he's got some sort of problem with a banned substance. Maybe it's a big deal, but maybe it's not.

Since Jackson is certain to miss time over the first few weeks, the Vikings interest (if it's real) might not be about looking for a receiver to replace Rice while he's out. Rice is supposed to return after the first six weeks of the season and Jackson might not be available for six weeks either. But maybe the Vikings are concerned that Rice might not return to full health at all this season.

Tweet Comment 19 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I really hope not

by Yankees10 on Sep 12, 2010 12:51 AM CDT reply actions

Why don't the Vikes just shoot to try to get Sproles, Gates, or Rivers?

Ain’t happening. The Vikings really got nobody to offer that they might wanna give up either I’m sure, and San Diego wouldn’t give up their star wideout for a few magic beans.

When life gives ya lemons, shut up and eat your damn lemons.

by P-Townfan on Sep 12, 2010 1:11 AM CDT reply actions

You know, I think it would be a boon to GB if they did trade for him

Give Jackson a big numbers contract. As soon as Favre is finished for the Vikings the bottom is falling out (no QB, aging lines, weak secondary). Having millions upon millions tied up with an egotistical receiver would do wonders. They could have Jerry Rice out there, would it matter if T-Jack was throwing the ball?

by Danwood on Sep 12, 2010 6:44 AM CDT reply actions

If Jackson loses the hearing on whether his suspension gets extended to 6 weeks in the event of a trade it doesn’t make a lot of sense. Unless, of course, the Vikings either know or suspect that Rice is going to be out a lot longer than 6 weeks. If Rice is going to miss most of the year then I could see where getting Jackson makes a lot of sense.

It looks to me like the price (as far as trade compensation) is going to be relatively steep, but its hard to tell. The fact that the Chargers couldn’t work out a deal for Jackson after he reportedly negotiated a 1 year deal with another team suggests the trading price is high, but the likely absence of that team in the trade market, and the possibility that there isn’t anyone else interested (coupled with Jackson’s salary demands) suggests the opposite.

Of course, the team that negotiated the 1 year contract with Jackson and then failed to get a trade done might well be the Vikings themselves. Can’t blame the Vikes for being aggressive, can you? They know their window is closing with Favre over 40 and Phat Williams not far behind. Rice, Harvin, AP and others are still pretty young, but a bird in the hand, as the saying goes. I don’t know if Jackson is a head case or not and I sure as hell don’t think he’s worth all the money he’s asking for, but I wish Thompson were this aggressive and had the sense of urgency the Vikings FO apparently does. We’ve got a young QB, but Woodson, Barnett, Clifton and Tauscher aren’t getting any younger…

BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Sep 12, 2010 7:18 AM CDT reply actions

Dropping big $$$ rarely works out

Who was the last SB team that went out and spent big in FA? Maybe the Patriots?

Football has so many moving pieces and individual responsibilities that just landing one big FA isn’t going to improve everyone else.

by Danwood on Sep 12, 2010 7:32 AM CDT up reply actions

I know that's the broadly held opinion.

And I’ve gotten in enough arguments around here on that point to not want to get into another one. There’s some truth to it (though I’ve never said or believed you have to spend a ton of money in free agency to make a difference). It might even be right. But while I hate the Vikings down to their purple hearts, I very much respect the fact that no stone is left unturned over there.

BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Sep 12, 2010 7:41 AM CDT up reply actions

Well, I have to believe TT does look at the FA market

But doesn’t give it as much public consideration as other teams. And even that’s not true, look at Michael Vick last year.

I saw it on here and I think it bears repeating: If there is a big name on the FA market he is most likely there because his last team doesn’t want him. And anyone that we’d want, with a few exceptions, would be someone that the prior team would spend whatever to keep.

by Danwood on Sep 12, 2010 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions

I just don't agree with that...

… though I think it’s periodically true. Sometimes things go sour between a player and a team and they behave differently when they’ve moved on, at least for a while. The TO’s of the world are a different story, of course. But anyway, I wasn’t just referring to big names. I appreciate a bias in favor of the guys you’ve drafted and who’ve been coached up in a way you approve of. I just think Thompson takes it too far; I’m sure he looks at the FA list too, but looking and actually trying to make a move (or considering that possibility) are two different things. I’m no longer willing to assume Thompson does the latter given the lack of moves the last two years, and I get a bit jealous at times when teams we’re competing with demonstrate their willingness to make any move to try to win a title. That’s all.

BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Sep 12, 2010 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions

Well, going by this year

Who did you want?

http://walterfootball.com/freeagents2010recap.php

Looking at that list, a couple of things stand out:

1. The major signings are at positions for which we are already good (QB and WR)
2. Most of the positions where we have a need are the bad signings

The only one on that list I’d want is Chester Taylor.

by Danwood on Sep 12, 2010 11:41 AM CDT up reply actions

I'm not going there.

I’ve done this before, listed names, and it ends up being an argument about whether they were worth it, which tends to be pointless because it’s hard to know how they would have performed in GB’s system. And it’s not just UFA’s either that I’m talking about, it’s for-player trades, and it’s impossible to know who was available form the outside.

I agree with you on Taylor though.

Thanks for the chat.

BCB free since 8/24/10 and happier for it.

by Ted Simmons Speed Camp on Sep 12, 2010 12:08 PM CDT up reply actions

Yeah I hear ya…ultimately we’ll never know if any of them will or won’t work out. Just because the did or didn’t work out on a different team doesn’t mean they would be a fit for us. Taylor would have been great though…especially now with Grant’s injury.

by TrevorR on Sep 13, 2010 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions

But while I hate the Vikings down to their purple hearts, I very much respect the fact that no stone is left unturned over there.

It pains me to agree with you but I do. They seem like their doing everything they can to ensure they give themselves the best chance to win it all while they still can.

At the same time, I don’t think we’re at the point quite yet, and not really even close. I think it’ll be 2-3 years before we see Driver and Woodson really start to decline. And while Clifton and Tauscher will likely be gone, I think we’ve got good, capable replacements for them in Buluga and Lang. I hope if we ever get to the point where we really need to make a move Thompson will being willing to do it. In the back of my head though, I kind of doubt he will.

by packallday555 on Sep 12, 2010 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions

Thursday night

was more about rust and being out of sync than it was about missing Rice in my opinion. They still have weapons but Favre wasn’t hitting them right and when he did, they weren’t catching them. They looked like a team that didn’t get to practice together which is kind of what they deserve when you think about all the time their key components missed.

I’ve heard the Chargers want a lot for him and other trades havefallen apart because of their demands. The Vikes would have to give up a lot of compensation both financially (he wants 5 years $50 mil) and in players/picks to make this happen and for what…a one year stopgap that really won’t even fix anything?

I mean think about this…right now he has a 3 game suspension and then he has to sit out 3 more games for being on the roster exempt list so he wouldn’t be able to be with the team until the 7th week. Then he has NO experience in this system or with Favre so its weeks before they get in sync. Honestly, their playoff hopes might be over by then AND they gave up the future to get the guy. He’s wildly talented but I don’t think this is their solution.

by TrevorR on Sep 12, 2010 7:44 AM CDT reply actions

My Prediction:

Vincent Jackson stays in SD, but eventually earns the ire of everyone around him and is released. Bengals sign him to complete their trifecta of d-bag receivers… still accomplish nothing in the post season.

"Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Vince Lombardi

by AdamA on Sep 12, 2010 9:15 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs