A Legend Ages
While there is plenty of bemoaning to be done in regards to how the Vikings have handled the offensive line in past years, leading to the catastrophe that nearly got our QBOTF killed last season, there is one thing we can all agree the Vikings got right- the ‘theft' of one Mr. Steve Hutchinson from the Seattle Seahawks back in the 2006 free agency. (As a side note- how has all of the Seahawk's attempts at ‘revenge' via snatching up our receivers gone? I swear there's a curse, they all end up injured.) Hutchinson was, for a long time, a bright spot in the growing dim that was our O-line, and I would even dare say that his career may be worthy of some Hall of Fame consideration one day.
Sadly, that said, numbers don't lie. Numbers like 34- his current age- and 6.95 million- what his salary for 2012 will be, the last year on his contract. And while these numbers on the surface might not always mean a lot, they do in this case. Hutch's age is starting to show, in the form of both injuries (two seasons in a row now he has missed games due to injuries, including a concussion), as well as a decline in his usual awesomeness. And for a team looking to get younger, and make a massive roster turnover, that salary hit is going to be a big deal, as Chris pointed out in his recent article regarding the space we'll have to make at least one or two big splashes in free agency. (Although, let's not go overboard with that. I refer you to my Nostradamus-style prediction regarding the Philadelphia Eagles last offseason.)
That all said- let's not jump the gun in terms of cutting Hutch, however. If Hutchinson were to be released by the team, he would likely find himself in a similar situation to former players Pat Williams and Bernard Berrian. (Not to really compare those two, by any means- Phat Pat was and still remains the man. BB? Not so much.) What are the odds that he will be picked up by another team? Slim, I would say. And I doubt Hutch feels differently. In all likelihood, with that consideration, a contract re-negotiation is probably not out of the question.
Let's continue this thought after the Leap of Faith, and get your thoughts on what we should do with Starsky Hutch.
I understand that there may not be a lot of point in keeping Hutchinson around. His skills have been fading and his reliability to take the field is as well. And for a player of his age, that's likely to only become worse, not better, in 2012. And I understand again that we're looking to get younger, not keep an aging group of veterans, once superstars but now fading, together. And with that in mind, a good argument can be made to simply say "thank you" for all he's done, and give him a handshake as he heads out the door.
But who are we going to replace him with? Our entire O-line outside of center is due for a major overhaul. Even if we end up getting Matt Kalil in the draft, that's only one position solved- two, if we move Charlie Johnson to guard; but even that second move is really not much more than a stopgap for now. There's rumblings that Anthony Herrera might be seeing the cutting block too, so that means Johnson would likely take that place. Joe Berger is there to fill in at left guard- but is he any sort of a long term answer, or even a considerable upgrade over Hutch?
Let's also keep in mind that, despite fading skills, Hutchinson does still retain one key value- veteran experience. Right now, he's really the only person on our line that has that form of leadership. Sure, some of the other players are ‘vets', but only in terms of time in the league- Hutch is the vet with a successful career, the one who brings that knowledge to the table. If we're getting younger along the O-line- which we need to be- then there might be some value in having his leadership around for one more season to help some of the rookies grow. Even Kalil will be a bit of a ‘diamond in the rough' his first season out: left tackle, like quarterback, often takes a season or two to truly develop.
There's good arguments for both sides of this debate. Hutchinson is quickly becoming a shadow of his former self, and he needs to have a restructured salary to stick around. But, if he does restructure, there might be some real value in having him stick around for just one more season while our offensive line makes the transition from beat-up piece of swiss cheese to the impenetrable, dominant line that gives Christian Ponder/ Joe Webb some "Tom Brady Time" to throw the football. (OK, not ‘TBT' in terms of the last Super Bowl... but seriously, in the vast majority of games, that guy has time to text his receivers a route change.)
What say you, fellow Viking faithful? Yes, the contract renegotiation is a given- it has to be done if we're keeping Hutchinson around, he's simply not worth nearly 7 mil right now, especially with our team in the second year of reloading. But if he does agree to renegotiate- would it still be the right move to keep him around for 2012, not worry about LOG for one more season while we address the other three positions of need, and have his veteran savvy help the kids grow into men?
49 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Renegotiate to a one-year deal.
…let him leave on his own terms.
If for nothing else but his experience, he still certainly has value.
by Soybomb on Feb 21, 2012 1:28 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
with all do respect, letting players go out on their own terms and making their own decisions is how teams end up like the Vikings.
by Timothy Bryce on Feb 21, 2012 9:38 PM CST up reply actions
I would rather restructure than release
unless we can bring in someone like a Carl Nicks to replace him.
by Randytheviking17 on Feb 21, 2012 1:43 PM CST via Android app reply actions
unfortunately i think New Orleans will likely slap the franchise tag on him.
by Randytheviking17 on Feb 21, 2012 1:46 PM CST via Android app up reply actions
assuming they get a deal done with brees
by statue_left on Feb 21, 2012 2:44 PM CST via iPhone app up reply actions
Even if they don't,
he won’t leave. He is New Orleans.
by REVENGE4KLUWE on Feb 22, 2012 2:26 PM CST up reply actions
Re: restructure Hutch's contract
My question is this: How does the poison pill that the Vikings planted in Hutch’s contract apply now if he were to restructure the final year of his contract? If my memory serve’s me correctly, the only way the Vikings were able to secure Hutch for themselves was because they guaranteed that he would have to be the highest paid offensive lineman on the team. Would this caveat still apply now if he were asked to restructure? Would that be possible, especially if they select Kalil #3? How much money would actually be saved?
"At this point, what we got to lose, right? So we might as well throw caution to the wind and hit people in the face."
--Vikings DE Jared Allen
Ooooooh.
GOOD question… I hadn’t thought of that. Hmm. I suppose it would be possible to completely renegotiate the contract, including that provision as well… I’m actually not sure, though.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
well
at 4 mill he prob still would be highest paid oline. even if we draft a lt . but i think it was for first two or three years of contract and sea had just given the money to their left tackle and couldnt afford to paid hutch more ….
Marcel Dareus
Last year’s #3 pick signed a 4 year $20.4 million deal. That’s more in the neighborhood of $5.1 mil/year. If we operate with the poision pill still in play, that means Hutch would only be able to restructure for around $5.2-$5.5 milion, saving the team about $1.4-$1.7 million this year. If push comes to shove, I see why he might get the axe.
"At this point, what we got to lose, right? So we might as well throw caution to the wind and hit people in the face."
--Vikings DE Jared Allen
He'd have to renegotiate his contract
Which is why they would have to negotiate a one year deal for whatever amount is league minimum for a vet of his years. I don’t mind keeping him as I think we still have people that need to learn the position they are going to be playing, and with that in mind Charlie Johnson LT superstar might be playing some LT next year until Kalil get fully up to NFL speed… :p
The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.
Ugh.
I don’t like that idea, even if it does become true. Charlie Johnson proved this season what he should have proved in Indy- the man is not cut out to be a LT. Guard, maybe. Personally, if we did get Kalil, I’d throw him to the wolves day one. I have a hard time believing that he will be any worse at that point than Johnson has been, and at least he’d be improving with each error.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
The deal...
… stipulated that Hutchison had to be the highest paid offensive lineman at the time the contract was signed. At the time, the Seahawks had Walter Jones paid higher, but he wasn’t able to renegotiate as Hutchison had already signed his deal. Had the Seahawks matched, then the entire contract would be guaranteed. If Hutchison renegotiated his contract now, then there will be no issues or consequences.
I think if we can sign Hutchison to a reduced contract – say $6m/2years, then I say jump at it. We need experience on our offensive line, and Hutchison brings that with leadership. Having an athletic LT next to him instead of a slow McKinnie or under powered Johnson, will help Hutchison and his performance will improve. We need to focus more on our right side of the line. We need to seriously upgrade the RG position (Johnson may be in the hunt for the job), and we also need some competition at RT. I think that Loadholt will be much improved following a proper off season. I was impressed that he arrived in good shape after the lockout, especially when you consider how out of shape certain other players arrived at camp. I’d give him another year to lose the job rather than dump him now.
by blowfishes on Feb 21, 2012 3:33 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
Good point.
Man I wish I had a half way decent memory.
The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.
Don't get hard on yourself.
I don’t think anyone outside of Mark actually can remember the specifics of a complicated contract signed several years ago.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
I really don't see much room for debate
Let’s keep Hutch’s decline in perspective. He’s gone from “perennial All Pro” to “solid veteran starter.” The only reason to cut him now is his contract. So if he renegotiates to something more manageable, I think it would be crazy not to keep him. Unlike LT and RG, he’s a part that works for now, so we might as well keep him.
I also think he can probably sign elsewhere if he were cut. Again, he can still play, just not at nearly $8 mil a year.
To play devil's advocate...
there is an issue you’re not mentioning here, and that’s reliability. Two seasons in a row he’s had to sit due to injuries, and again, that remains a major risk going forward. A solid vet is great and all, but only when they’re on the field.
I also don’t think he would play for another team simply because he only has 1-2 years left in the tank, max. Most teams that aren’t named ‘Vikings’ don’t often go for ‘stop gaps’ when it comes to offensive line.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
kicked in your mellon
with your helmet off in todays nfl ….. and that could happen to any player at any time fluke injury circumstance there imo. injury prone is clinton portis… but he is and old war horse
Well agreed
that particular injury was just bad luck. But at his age, it’s still worth noting. And there was the dislocated finger.
I agree of course that injuries can happen to any player at any time, age irregardless. However, that said, the older the player, the more significance they can hold- longer healing time, greater side effects, etc.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
broken thumb
he missed the last 2 games of last season due to a broken thumb. i am certain had we been a play-off bound team, he would have played with the injury. however, since the season was already over for us, why chance it. hutch"s injury history is MUCH less concerning than sullivan’s.
GO VIKES!!!
by indianavikesfan on Feb 22, 2012 8:26 AM CST up reply actions
You're probably right.
If we had been playoff bound, I’m sure Hutch would have been playing with a club. But of course, there was no sense in taking any risk at that point. That said, at his age, something like a broken thumb can become a nagging injury- whereas the same injury for a 26 year old would be gone and done come next season. Granted, I could be wrong- I haven’t a clue right now how Hutch is feeling physically or will feel physically come pre-season. Just speaking in terms of generalities when it comes to injuries and age in the NFL.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
He might not play for another team
Because he might not be willing to play for the kind of money that is available for him. But a guy like him would have no difficulty finding a job if he was flexible on price.
When it come to o-line, yeah, lots of teams do go for stop gaps, or to put it less pejoratively, depth.
Reliability is certainly relevant, as I actually think it’s the deciding factor for Hererra. You can’t be just okay and get hurt a lot, like Hererra. Can you be good and hurt occasionally, like Hutch? It depend on how good and how occasionally. It’s a judgment call, but I still put him on the plus side of the judgment.
Granted, I didn't count him taking a job as a 'depth' position
by which I would assume you mean as more of a back-up role? In that he could find a job with pretty much every team in the NFL… but guys like Hutch don’t usually do that at the end of their career, nor should they/ he.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
Totally agree...
… upgrading the LT position will improve Hutchison. Imagine Hutchison having Kalil outside him with the improving Sullivan on the inside! Keeping Hutchison for another one or two years could help set our soon to be young line for years to come.
by blowfishes on Feb 21, 2012 3:43 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
abso--freakin--lutely restructure (i hope)
#76s presence in the lockerroom is not measured in dollars and cents … oline are a rare bread and in among themselves a core and the heart of that core for the last 6 seasons has been “MR ATTITUDE” (and i mean that with much respect) … the purple hav a number of young players already under contract … john sullivan / phil loadholt / chris degeare / demarcus love / patrick brown / brandon fusco / butch lewis / jose valdez … all of whom could learn how to be a pro from hutch … then Round 1 3rd Overall Pick … OT Matt Kalil – USC 6’7" 295# and i think maybe two additional young olinemen … Rnd 5 130th Overall Pick – G Ryan Miller Colorado 6’8" 295# … 7th rd comp. … G Will Blackwell – LSU – 6’4" 290# … i might be wrong but i think we can find 5 starters from those 11 … no disrespect to johnson / herrera or berger
MGR4FUN
i wanna second the idea for hutch to coach "WHEN" he says he is done
for all the reasons i previously mentioned hutch “IS A VIKING” by definition and there couldnt be a better coachin prospect available … “IF HUTCH IS OF A MIND TO COACH”
MGR4FUN
Cut him and spend the money on somebody younger.
On a rebuilding team there’s not much room for keeping aging high-priced vets that are at the end of their career. Even if he restructures his contract he’d only be kept for this season anyway. Wouldn’t it be better for the team to let Fusco, Johnson, Berger, or Love get more reps this coming season to build for the future rather than keep Hutch for sentimentalities sake. He was a great player for a long time but he’s not anymore, and outside of some leadership qualities he’s not going to help the Vikings get better.
The issue with something like that
is that if you start a guy who is considerably worse than Hutch, you place the QBs and RBs behind that line at considerable risk. Granted, most rookie O-linemen have a bit of a rough first season, but typically if they’re destined to be a solid starter, it’s not THAT bad of a start. Granted, I was all on board at the end of last season for just replacing nearly EVERYONE on the O-line with the depth guys just to see what happened, but I’m less inclined to do that at the start of a season, when things haven’t gone straight to 3-13 hell.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
Thing is, I didn't see any noticeable drop off when Hutch was out last year and Berger replaced him.
Hutch is still solid but he’s barely above average anymore. I just don’t see a 35 year old Hutchinson coming back for one year as helping the Vikings move forward. As to your point about replacing nearly everyone on the line last year I thought the O-line actually played it’s best when Fusco and Berger were both starting at guard for the injured Hutch and Hererra. The only way I see Hutch coming back is if he’s cut early and is willing to sign in camp for the veterans minimum. Why pay Hutch much more than that when we could spend 3-5 million on a younger starting guard like Ben Grubbs in FA?
I just see no upside in keeping guys like Hutch, Griffen, and Hererra when that money can be spent on younger players that should actually improve rather than keeping guys that are overpaid and declining.
by CanadianViking on Feb 21, 2012 9:05 PM CST up reply actions
Thing is, I didn’t see any noticeable drop off when Hutch was out last year and Berger replaced him.
I think Hutchison may have helped Berger get to that point in some way that’s why I say keep him for a year, especially if we think we are going to get Matt Kalil or another Olineman early. He could mentor Kalil or the new starter, hopefully giving them helpful tips.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 21, 2012 9:49 PM CST up reply actions
Enough of this mentoring crap!
Do you know why the Pats are compete for a SB every year? Because they don’t care about how great a player WAS for them. The are cold and calculating and make every decision based on getting better. There is no loyalty, there is no “He’s a good locker-room guy so we’ll keep him around” mentality. We need to be the same, we need to make smart, shrewd football moves. It is a business, players are pieces of meat to be traded and moved around the field, that’s it!
by FLSKOLMAN on Feb 22, 2012 12:42 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Not quite true.
While that is the cliche thought when it comes to teams like Green Bay and New England, there are plenty of examples that show the opposite. One of the best counter-examples to this would be Teddy Bruschi, who was brought back to New England largely because of his influence in the locker room, in hopes he would help spark a turn around in a declining defense. Granted, it didn’t work as well as hoped, but it still shows that teams, regardless of how young they are or how much they have built through the draft, still value veteran leadership. It’s also worth noting that New England has a veteran leader already in Tom Brady- which is often not considered as such, therefore increasing the perception that New England doesn’t make these kind of moves.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
I have a Prime Example
This isn’t an NFL team but still. The Washington Wizards are full of talent, with no direction or leadership, and look how it’s going for them.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 22, 2012 5:36 PM CST up reply actions
^^ Agree ^^
It’s time to stop being emotional when it comes to football decisions. He is 35 years old with declining skills and it is time to move on. I’m confident we’ll get a Left Tackle one way or another this off-season and slide Johnson over to LG.
by FLSKOLMAN on Feb 22, 2012 9:28 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
How is it being "emotional"
To keep your best offensive lineman if you can get him for the right price?
It's time to let him go.
He is the “Best offensive Lineman” on a 3-13 team with an atrocious offensive line. Even if you can get him to come back for another year he is 35 years old with declining skills. It’s time to slide Johnson over and move on. This team needs to get younger and keeping aging vets around because they are “Great guys” or they could “Teach younger players” is how this team got old and crappy real quick.
If I thought Johnson could play
I might agree. Otherwise, you don’t get better by jettisoning everyone on your team that can play.
Again, if they can renegotiate him to the right price, I don’t see how they get better by getting rid of him. They have too many other needs to make more holes.
“Declining” from All Pro is better than “blindly hoping for improvement” from a journeyman.
Not jettisoning everyone...
Just aging vets whose skills are declining. I believe that Jim Kleinsasser wasn’t initially going to retire, he walked away because the Vikes told him they were moving on and he didn’t want to up-root his family by going and playing for another team. This team needs to get young and if he refuses a pay cut will be rather costly. I’m pretty sure this point is moot anyway as I believe Spielman is going to get rid of him.
by FLSKOLMAN on Feb 22, 2012 12:32 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
If he refuses a pay cut
then it’s a non-issue: Hutch has to go. And above comments RE emotion are correct, we can’t let that affect the decision.
I’m not entirely sure I feel Berger will ever be a starting OG. He is a great depth guy, and has a lot of value in that regards, but I wouldn’t hand him the keys to that position. Again, outside of center, this entire O-line needs an overhaul, and that can’t be done in a single off-season… even if we were to draft solely O-line, and nothing but O-line, we’d still likely end up with one question mark. (Although maybe not, but then we’d still have a ton of holes to fill otherwise.) And with that in mind, Hutch would be the necessary stop-gap at one position, allowing us to relax on that for one season until we have another chance to aggresively solve the problem again in 2013.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
how would the poison pill
Work if we cut him and were to resign him? The packers did that with aj hawk last year, (granted he didn’t have a poison pill contract)
by Lunchpail on Feb 21, 2012 3:18 PM CST via mobile reply actions
The poison pill...
… dissolved the moment the Seahawks didn’t match the offer and Hutchison became a Viking.
by blowfishes on Feb 21, 2012 3:47 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
I would try to keep him around for another year
especially if we think we will get Matt Kalil, so he can mentor him for a year.
Rule #76: No excuses-play like a champion.
☠★☪Creator of http:/vikescity.info/
by UnBannedVikingholic on Feb 21, 2012 9:47 PM CST reply actions
He's a guard Kalil is a Tackle
If you are talking about just being there for the kid as he fits into the NFL, well we do have other leaders on the team.
Honestly, it’s up to the coaches. If they think we have someone younger who can start and play reliably then cut Hutch and wave goodbye. If they don’t think they have that then keep Hutch one more year while you work on his back up.
The Vikes aren't in a remodeling or reconstruction they are in a burn the place down and start praying they don't mimic the Lions rebuilding process.
Regardless of being 'tackle' or 'guard'
there are still things every O-lineman needs to know, and Hutch knows it all. Again, his skills are declining due to age and nothing else- the man was the man at offensive line for a long time, and there’s a wealth of knowledge that comes with that. He’s seen the mistakes made by Bryant McKinnie and Charlie Johnson, he’s seen when the line works and when it doesn’t. If Kalil is willing to listen (which I bet he would be), there would be a lot Hutch could teach him, regardless of their technical position on the line.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall
The poll speaks for itself
Hutch is no longer an elite LG, but he’s still a very good one. It would be nice to have some continuity at the position, especially with Kalil coming in to his left next season. (Yep, I’m already writing it in.)
Proud contributor to Daily Norseman and SB Nation Minnesota.
Follow @eric_j_thompson
by Eric J. Thompson on Feb 22, 2012 10:55 AM CST reply actions
Yeah, this poll was a lot more lopsided than I originally thought it would be.
Not that I disagree with it, but I’m still surprised at the landslide victory Hutch is getting here.
261 Daily Norseman readers and counting say I am a genius... the masses have spoke!
...and those who voted 'moron' were secretly Packer trolls.
Follow @KJSegall

by 























