Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Matt Asiata = jackpot
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
RB Jerick McKinnon, KC (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Faust
- Start date
Biabreakable
Footballguy
If McKinnon can’t play, could Hillman make an impact?
Asiata should be the best play for a Vikings RB. I don't really see Hillman being involved much.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Nor I. If Holman had something they would have used him long ago. The Asiata/McKinnon combo wasn't productive enough to keep Hillman on the bench if he could contribute.
i see Holman as COP only. Huge night coming for Asiata - already the receiving & short yardage option, with 25 touches he could have a monster night.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Tough to say - having held both for the last 6 weeks I've figured they'd both suffer unless one was injured.
I'm holding both - Asiata has been more valuable PPR for two weeks straight, and had outscored McKinnon several other games.but should something happen to Asiata in the next couple weeks, McKinnon would be a lock and load RB1a-2 as a feature back. He's arguably the more talented of the two, but so long as Asiata is there his value will be depressed.
for now Asiata is the must own and McKinnon is the handcuff. When McKinnon comes back it's back to RBBC.
Bugg
Footballguy
I could not watch the 11/20/16 Arizona @ Minnesota game, so I had to rely on the stats:
...4.7 yards/carry...
...check the RW blurb again..."The efficiency doesn't look great on the stat sheet"...?
Really?
Now, I know very well to be wary of RW commentary, but I must ask those of you who got to see the game, how did Jerick look? From the stats alone, this seems to be a major accomplishment relative to the year-to-date rushing efficiency of the '16 Vikings.
Am I missing something?
EDIT: Yes, I am missing something. Actual ypc = 2.8 See below for clarification.
OK, so then I check RW:
Hmmm...so, I don't trust math in my head...get the calculator out...
...4.7 yards/carry...
...check the RW blurb again..."The efficiency doesn't look great on the stat sheet"...?
Really?
Now, I know very well to be wary of RW commentary, but I must ask those of you who got to see the game, how did Jerick look? From the stats alone, this seems to be a major accomplishment relative to the year-to-date rushing efficiency of the '16 Vikings.
Am I missing something?
EDIT: Yes, I am missing something. Actual ypc = 2.8 See below for clarification.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chicago Hooligan
Footballguy
So long of 12, 32 yards on the other 15 carries. Efficiency!
Cut the dude this week with no remorse. Surprisingly worthless for someone who gets 15+ touches most games.
Cut the dude this week with no remorse. Surprisingly worthless for someone who gets 15+ touches most games.
Bugg
Footballguy
I see my error now...I used RW's stats to calculate his ypc. And, as usual, RW has issues...they list it at 14 carries for 66 yards...in fact, he had 16 carries for 44 yards.
Yes, I see the error now.
EDIT: And the actual ypc is: 2.8
Not very efficient. Same old Vikes.
Yes, I see the error now.
EDIT: And the actual ypc is: 2.8
Not very efficient. Same old Vikes.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
The O-line is a disaster for sure, but I find it odd that a 205 pound speed and agility back is being used up the gut almost exclusively. Haven't seen his runs this week yet, but so far this year there's been nothing wide or trying to get him in space at all.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
McKinnon did have a couple good runs in the first half of the game, gaining 8 or more yards on 1st down and setting up some second and short situations which I think the Vikings converted into 1st downs and keep the drives going.
He did not do this consistently enough obviously as most of his runs were either tackle for loss, no gain or getting 2 yards.
He had a reception off a flare pass that I thought he could have gotten more out of if he had taken the ball outside, he had the angle on the nearest defender, just needed to outrun that guy to the sideline. Instead McKinnon runs the ball back to the inside, finds a crowd and doesn't gain additional yardage. The official stats for this play show McKinnon losing 3 yards, which surprises me. I guess he really shouldn't have taken this back inside. I am pretty sure he could have at least gotten back to the LOS if not more had he took this outside of the defender instead of running it back inside.
McKinnon still hasn't developed into a receiving threat that he has the physical tools to be.
His best trait is actually gaining yards after contact moreso than making guys miss. At this point of having seen him play over 3 seasons now, I question his instincts and vision as a runner somewhat. I know he can make defenders miss, he just doesn't see cut back lanes as much as I think they are there for him at times and too often he puts his head down and just barrels forward.
Now this may be connected to the coaching as well. I think he is doing what the coaches want him to do, but the coaching for yards after contact may hinder him from taking chances at times to break off longer gains. As commented above, Zimmer wants less dancing/juking from McKinnon and more decisiveness. That is kind of asking him to be like Matt Asiata rather than a speed/agility RB as you describe.
I do think McKinnon has the ability to be a speed/agility style of runner, but he is not often used as such. I think this is a combination of play calling, blocking, coaching philosophy. I also think it is on McKinnon himself though as I do see some opportunities for him to possibly do more than he has but for whatever reason he doesn't.
His good runs were pretty much right up the middle run plays where he finds a crease. They are not runs that seem consistent or sustainable though, unlike David Johnson for example who was gaining good yards with almost every run. The Vikings got lucky when Arians stopped running the ball, because they were not stopping it at all.
He did not do this consistently enough obviously as most of his runs were either tackle for loss, no gain or getting 2 yards.
He had a reception off a flare pass that I thought he could have gotten more out of if he had taken the ball outside, he had the angle on the nearest defender, just needed to outrun that guy to the sideline. Instead McKinnon runs the ball back to the inside, finds a crowd and doesn't gain additional yardage. The official stats for this play show McKinnon losing 3 yards, which surprises me. I guess he really shouldn't have taken this back inside. I am pretty sure he could have at least gotten back to the LOS if not more had he took this outside of the defender instead of running it back inside.
I think they did do one toss sweep with him, but a handful of his runs came out of the wildcat formation. When Hillman gets in there they run to the outside with him. but you are right most of McKInnons runs are inside not to the perimeter.
McKinnon still hasn't developed into a receiving threat that he has the physical tools to be.
His best trait is actually gaining yards after contact moreso than making guys miss. At this point of having seen him play over 3 seasons now, I question his instincts and vision as a runner somewhat. I know he can make defenders miss, he just doesn't see cut back lanes as much as I think they are there for him at times and too often he puts his head down and just barrels forward.
Now this may be connected to the coaching as well. I think he is doing what the coaches want him to do, but the coaching for yards after contact may hinder him from taking chances at times to break off longer gains. As commented above, Zimmer wants less dancing/juking from McKinnon and more decisiveness. That is kind of asking him to be like Matt Asiata rather than a speed/agility RB as you describe.
I do think McKinnon has the ability to be a speed/agility style of runner, but he is not often used as such. I think this is a combination of play calling, blocking, coaching philosophy. I also think it is on McKinnon himself though as I do see some opportunities for him to possibly do more than he has but for whatever reason he doesn't.
His good runs were pretty much right up the middle run plays where he finds a crease. They are not runs that seem consistent or sustainable though, unlike David Johnson for example who was gaining good yards with almost every run. The Vikings got lucky when Arians stopped running the ball, because they were not stopping it at all.
simsarge
Footballguy
Totally agree here. I was hoping this was a Turner mindset and Shurmer would change this. But not so far.And can we stop with the stupid Wildcat? Mckinnon's probably a foot shorter (doesn't truly matter, I know) than his linemen. Seems the way they use it all the DL has to do is maintain their gap discipline and they'll stop what inevitably a McKinnon inside run or hand off inside. Either put someone like Patterson back there that might pose a dual threat or do something besides hand it off. Of course looking at what happened to Bradford when the Vikings line him up outside, kind of negates his likelihood of pulling a Russel Wilson type play.
But still...
Chicago Hooligan
Footballguy
Fool me seven or more times, shame on me.
Stompin' Tom Connors
Footballguy
If Cook is out ROY, even if McKinnon isn't getting looks early in the next few games he still has a chance to contribute and potentially overtake Lat Murray at some point. I am a Murray fan, but it's not as if he's super reliable -- or has been known to hold off the likes of a dust bunny blowing across a room by the AC kicking on.
I read this article last week, and it convinced me to pick him up on Saturday. Got him for $1 of FAAB. I imagine he's going to cost much more this week.
SameSongNDance
Footballguy
I'm not expecting this kind of output every week but in PPR his floor is going to be pretty safe. I thought I was boned with Cook going down but it looks like McKinnon will be more than serviceable.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
The Bears were missing some of their starting LBers in this game which certainly helped McKinnon find some room to run. The hurry up was a factor on his TD run.
It has been really hard to evaluate McKinnon the last two years because the offensive line was so bad.
McKinnon has been coached to not dance behind the line and to run with power and finish his runs, which he does a pretty good job of doing, but he puts his head down too early at times because of this instead of looking for cut back lanes that he does have the athleticism to create more than he does. I don't really expect that to change because that is how he has been coached to play. With Dalvin Cook the coaches let him do that a lot more because he has good vision and instinct. This would be the main thing that separates McKinnon from Cook in my opinion, I can't put that all on McKinnon though, he is doing what the coaches want him to do.
It makes a bit more sense to focus on finishing runs and gaining yards after contact when the offensive line was as bad as its been the last two years. The offensive line is creating better holes now than it has the last two years, so I wish they would let McKinnon freelance a bit more than he does.
The Vikings do have a new RB coach, so maybe this is changing now. The upside for McKinnon is really high if he could put it all together.
McKinnon wasn't very good as a receiver early on in his career, but he has seemed to get a better in that aspect of his game each season. He has been much better in pass protection this year than he has been in the past as well. That is the main area of improvement I have seen from him this season compared to last year.
SameSongNDance
Footballguy
This is what stuck out to me early in the season. It was after the first two weeks, where he looked much smoother than Cook as a pass catcher (where we all thought Cook had the yips) that I decided to cuff him (ffpc leagues, deep bench). He had one grab tonight on a low throw where he scooped it up an inch from the ground that was pretty impressive. I'll be honest, I did not expect him to dominate touches like he did tonight, he was more of a PPR hedge where if Cook went down I thought I'd have a solid flex but I think RB2 numbers are on the horizon if he can maintain similar volume as he did tonight.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Yeah I have seen him catch some dirt balls a few times now. Hard caches for any receiver.
He really didn't have a good feel as a receiver early on in his career. As an option QB in college it isn't really something he had game experience with. Its something I think he has gotten a bit better at each season. A couple years ago I would have called that a weakness in his game, but I think it has become one of his strengths now. He has come a long way in that area of his skill set.
He did have the drop against the Lions where he tried to turn with the ball before securing it. That was disappointing. I hope to not see him do that again. He really hasn't done that for the most part the last two years though.
Football Jones
Footballguy
I think they would like Murray to be their feature back & let McKinnon be their CoP, which is ideally what he's best suited for. It was evident they wanted to feature Murray in this game with him getting the start, but plans don't always work out. Hard to say how healthy Murray is, though.
It'll be interesting to see how the Vikings go about things next week. I was fairly high on McKinnon coming out & owned a share of him at one time, but he's pretty much disappointed overall. His production is likely to be spotty, but it looks like he could take over as their feature back this season.
It'll be interesting to see how the Vikings go about things next week. I was fairly high on McKinnon coming out & owned a share of him at one time, but he's pretty much disappointed overall. His production is likely to be spotty, but it looks like he could take over as their feature back this season.
Last edited by a moderator:
Looked fast, looked agile, and seemed to relish contact (might have been watching AP too closely all those years). Not sure how long he'll stay healthy, but he looks legit and should at least be in the RB2 range until he gets a concussion. His hands looked great, too. Expect a bunch of receptions next week while trailing vs. GB.
He was lucky he didn't fumble at the end of that 58 yard TD. Didn't seem to know there was a second defender chasing him and let up a few yards early. Almost got the ball punched out at the 1.
He was lucky he didn't fumble at the end of that 58 yard TD. Didn't seem to know there was a second defender chasing him and let up a few yards early. Almost got the ball punched out at the 1.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Murray played on 22 offensive snaps 31% mostly in the first half when Bradford was in and the offense was sputtering.
McKinnon played on 47 offensive snaps 67% mostly in the second half although I do think he played with Bradford for a series or two in the first half before they gave him the hook.
McKinnon was definitely the more effective RB.
McKinnon played on 47 offensive snaps 67% mostly in the second half although I do think he played with Bradford for a series or two in the first half before they gave him the hook.
McKinnon was definitely the more effective RB.
packersfan
Footballguy
I said in the Murray thread last week that people calling McKinnon a bum were way off base. Go back to the end of last season and he was a rock solid RB2 in PPR due to his receiving ability. I expected him to catch 5-6 passes last night so that wasn't a surprise. He's just so much better than Murray in the passing game it would've been a huge mistake by the Vikings not to use him there.
I did not see 95 yards and 20+ touches coming, but considering how awful Murray has looked that isn't a surprise either. I'm not sure anyone should expect that type of volume consistently - the Vikings did pay Murray to be their starter before drafting Cook so they have financial incentive to stick with him and he could get hot in a game or two. But the explosiveness McKinnon brings can't be ignored. I believed last week he was the Minnesota RB to own and he could carry RB2 upside in PPR and nothing I saw last night leads me to question that initial analysis.
I did not see 95 yards and 20+ touches coming, but considering how awful Murray has looked that isn't a surprise either. I'm not sure anyone should expect that type of volume consistently - the Vikings did pay Murray to be their starter before drafting Cook so they have financial incentive to stick with him and he could get hot in a game or two. But the explosiveness McKinnon brings can't be ignored. I believed last week he was the Minnesota RB to own and he could carry RB2 upside in PPR and nothing I saw last night leads me to question that initial analysis.
Keep in mind, McKinnon is the most athletic rb in the league.
Last year was completely lost for Minnesota rb's due to an injury-plagued offensive line, so I think it would be a mistake to extrapolate last year's stats to this season. Looking forward, if used in a similar way to Dalvin (which is a bit of a stretch given Murray got the start last night. Murray is awful though and any touch he receives over McKinnon is a missed opportunity), we can expect similar production to what Dalvin gave us through 4 weeks.
Last year was completely lost for Minnesota rb's due to an injury-plagued offensive line, so I think it would be a mistake to extrapolate last year's stats to this season. Looking forward, if used in a similar way to Dalvin (which is a bit of a stretch given Murray got the start last night. Murray is awful though and any touch he receives over McKinnon is a missed opportunity), we can expect similar production to what Dalvin gave us through 4 weeks.
Similar production to what Dalvin gave us? Whew, I don't mind hearing that as I have McKinnon, but that's a bit of a stretch. I need to see McKinnon produce for at least another few weeks and hold off Murray before I'd be willing to declare he's a legit RB2.
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
No question he had a good night.
Not sure I would count on facing a defense on its 5th signal caller every week. They did seem quite confused presnap on several occasions.
McKinnon was mostly a QB & WR in high school, started college as a DB, moved to tailback his senior year. Wasn’t ready for a full load his rookie year but had some good games (ADP’s suspension season), decent averages year two, ran behind a terrible line last season.
Guy has always had phenomenal athletic ability, fast, impressive in the weight room. Doesn’t really have that many moves to make people miss IMO. Doesn’t really seem to be a prototypical bell cow. But with his pass catching, should have a great floor RoS.
It's pretty obvious at this point Murray is bad, right? He barely cracked 4 ypc last year with a top 3 offensive line in Oakland. He was/is a touchdown dependent between the tackles grinder.
McKinnon doesn't have quite the 3-down skillset that Cook does, but the talent gap between McKinnon and Murray is so large it would be a mistake not to use McKinnon in that role I think.
packersfan
Footballguy
I like McKinnon a lot and think he's far superior to Murray but he ain't Dalvin Cook. Again, I think he has RB2 upside in PPR but I'd be shocked if he got 20+ touches consistently. I'm not sure he's built for that. He tends to get dinged often even with the reduced workload he's had in the past.
I don’t think Dalvins numbers were super impressive, so probably not too much of a stretch.
packersfan
Footballguy
4.8 YPC. 10 catches in his first 3 games. Over 60 yards rushing in every game, including 66 in a little over a half in his last one, two TDs (should've been three were it not for a putrid replay overturn in Week 2). There was a whole lot to like about Cook. Legit 3-down RB with huge volume potential. That was an enormous loss for fantasy owners and obviously the Vikings.
packersfan
Footballguy
RB9 in PPR despite missing nearly a half a game and having a TD stolen from him.
Elite fantasy potential without a doubt in my opinion. I like McKinnon and think he's a solid option but he isn't going to be an elite one, last night notwithstanding.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
The Bears were already missing Trevathon coming into the game due to suspension. Then had an injury to another inside LB during the game. That definitely left them short handed.
On the TD run there was some hurry up involved and they caught the defense in a bad run fit because of it.
Those two issues are not things that should happen very often.
I do think McKinnon has the elusiveness to make people miss, but we don't see him trying to do that as much as I would like. I think part of that is the way he is coached, part of it is that McKinnon may not process those opportunities quickly enough. He has the physical tools to make defenders miss in space, its just not something he tries to do enough in my opinion.
He has come a long way as a receiver and also in pass protection.
The second half of last season (after Norv left the team) McKinnon got used more as a receiver and became more consistent in that area of his game. In the last five weeks he averaged 6.2 targets per game and caught 90% of them. 31 of his 43 receptions (72%) in 2016 occurred in the last five games. His yards per target got a bit better but still room for improvement there. He has been below average for a RB in terms of yards per reception (6.2 career and 5.9 for the last 5 games).
This is what I mean. McKinnon may be a serviceable back, but he isn't Dalvin. Best case scenario he's an RB2 for the rest of the season. Most likely scenario he's boom-bust RB2/flex going forward. I just can't see him being a three-down back. Elite talent? Sure. But he's had chances in the past and never found a way to capitalize. Hope he proves me wrong.
packersfan
Footballguy
packersfan
Footballguy
As fantastic as the production was last night, I wouldn't look to it to profile McKinnon's value moving forward. He is not an elite talent who will be dropping 20+ point games with regularity.
However, I would look to the amount of time he got on the field and how quickly the Vikings went to him more consistently over Murray as key points in predicting where things will go. Again, the Vikings have a financial incentive to give Murray a shot but they were not so blindly locked to the money part they ignored who the clearly better RB option was last night. I think this will be a fluid situation many weeks but if McKinnon continues to show well as a receiver he should remain locked into close to double digit touches per week as a floor (5-6 catches, 5-6 or so rushing attempts).
However, I would look to the amount of time he got on the field and how quickly the Vikings went to him more consistently over Murray as key points in predicting where things will go. Again, the Vikings have a financial incentive to give Murray a shot but they were not so blindly locked to the money part they ignored who the clearly better RB option was last night. I think this will be a fluid situation many weeks but if McKinnon continues to show well as a receiver he should remain locked into close to double digit touches per week as a floor (5-6 catches, 5-6 or so rushing attempts).
BobbyLayne
Footballguy
I believe there’s a little NFC North bias in our shared opinion. This is third time he’s been declared The Man going forward, at least in FF owners minds. The SPARQ was off the charts, if they ever revive the Superstars he’d dominate a la Kyle Rote, Jr.
As an NFL RB, taking a wait and see. But there’s no question he was the best player on the field at Soldier Field last night.
Last edited by a moderator:
Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but who's to say McKinnon would not have done just as well against NO, Pit, and TB? 3 games is not enough to put Dalvin in the HoF. The OL was opening holes for Dalvin that simply weren't there last year.
packersfan
Footballguy
All comes down to how good you believe Cook is. I think he's an elite-level talent. I don't believe McKinnon is anywhere close to him in terms of talent. But as we know in fantasy, talent is only part of the equation. Opportunity is vital too. McKinnon clearly has an opportunity now but I'd caution against viewing him as a 20+ per game RB like Cook was.
