Sage to Minnesota? (Speculation)

[da Bull]

Since Childress benched Tarvaris Jackson for Gus Frerotte this says Jackson isn't going to lead them to the promised land this year. Also, the Vikings gave up the farm for Jared Allen, telling me the team is looking at a fairly small window of opportunity. These factors combined may make the Vikings serious buyers for an above average quarterback such as Sage; allowing them the possibility to have a successful season which Frerotte may not give them.

I'm not big on dumping Sage, but, if we could get good starter value for him what is our position of greatest need? Rush DE, NT or even a serviceable RB? Obviously, Adrian Peterson would be my choice, but, that doesn't even touch reality.

Such a trade just might make both team's season. Just a thought, but interesting none-the-less.

[southtexan]

Originally Posted by da Bull

Since Childress benched Tarvaris Jackson for Gus Frerotte this says Jackson isn't going to lead them to the promised land this year. Also, the Vikings gave up the farm for Jared Allen, telling me the team is looking at a fairly small window of opportunity. These factors combined may make the Vikings serious buyers for an above average quarterback such as Sage; allowing them the possibility to have a successful season which Frerotte may not give them.

I'm not big on dumping Sage, but, if we could get good starter value for him what is our position of greatest need? Rush DE, NT or even a serviceable RB? Obviously, Adrian Peterson would be my choice, but, that doesn't even touch reality.

Such a trade just might make both team's season. Just a thought, but interesting none-the-less.

I was thinking about a trade that would send Sage to the Chiefs for Larry Johnson, that'd be great in my opinion.

[papabear]

Originally Posted by southtexan

I was thinking about a trade that would send Sage to the Chiefs for Larry Johnson, that'd be great in my opinion.

Sage isn't going anywhere. He's too valuable to us, especially after the shaky start for Schaub. I think it would take a first or second rounder to get the Texans to do it, and no one is going to offer that mid-season for a guy who hasn't proven he can do it for more than a few games at a time. It took Manning a game and a half to get going, and that was one of the best quarterbacks of this generation running the same offense he's been running since he came into the league....how long do you think it would take a career back up learning a new system.

As for Larry Johnson... I wouldn't be all that interested if he was a free agent. I wouldn't mind it if he was cheap, but there's no way I'm giving up anything for a RB with that many miles.

[Mike]

Trading Sage at this time would be silly. Who is going to back-up Matt? If we were to trade Sage our 53 man roster takes a serious hit.

[dadmg]

Originally Posted by da Bull

Since Childress benched Tarvaris Jackson for Gus Frerotte this says Jackson isn't going to lead them to the promised land this year. Also, the Vikings gave up the farm for Jared Allen, telling me the team is looking at a fairly small window of opportunity. These factors combined may make the Vikings serious buyers for an above average quarterback such as Sage; allowing them the possibility to have a successful season which Frerotte may not give them.

One thing to take into consideration is that Rosenfels hasn't been in camp with the Vikings and, while he's been in a West Coast system here, he doesn't know Childress's specific offense. I think its unlikely the Vikes would part with a higher level draft choice for less than a season from a quarterback who will, at the very least, take a while to learn the playbook. While Rosenfels may be the better quarterback, Frerotte's the better bet for Childress and doesn't cost them a thing.

[HPF Bob]

While I was gung-ho to trade Sage during the spring, that was with the understanding that we would a) get a 2008 draft choice to replace our second and b) find a decent replacement for Sage in the off-season. Neither of those is possible now plus Schaub seems to have a bit of a glass jaw.

I wouldn't do it now. It's way too risky unless you are ready to mail in the 2008 season.

[nero THE zero]

Sage is entirely too overvalued by our fans. He'll suffice as a starter, but he's nothing exception and certainly not irreplacable. He's gone after this season, so if you can get a starter and/or draft picks for him there is no question you make that move. I understand the hesitation based in the fact that, if Schaub goes down again, Sage is possibly the difference in a 7 win season and a 10 win season. But, in the bigger picture, at the end of the season, would you rather have 10 wins and nothing for sage or 7 wins and a starting player (Chester Taylor for example) for years to come?

I'll take Taylor over the next few years over Sage for this year everyday of the week. And if Matt doesn't work out this season, sign a back-up comparable to Sage in the offseason and draft a QB in the draft.

[cadams]

Originally Posted by nero THE zero

Sage is entirely too overvalued by our fans. He'll suffice as a starter, but he's nothing exception and certainly not irreplacable. He's gone after this season, so if you can get a starter and/or draft picks for him there is no question you make that move. I understand the hesitation based in the fact that, if Schaub goes down again, Sage is possibly the difference in a 7 win season and a 10 win season. But, in the bigger picture, at the end of the season, would you rather have 10 wins and nothing for sage or 7 wins and a starting player (Chester Taylor for example) for years to come?

I'll take Taylor over the next few years over Sage for this year everyday of the week. And if Matt doesn't work out this season, sign a back-up comparable to Sage in the offseason and draft a QB in the draft.

I could be wrong, but I believe Sage is under contract through next season.

[cadams]

Originally Posted by HPF Bob

While I was gung-ho to trade Sage during the spring, that was with the understanding that we would a) get a 2008 draft choice to replace our second and b) find a decent replacement for Sage in the off-season. Neither of those is possible now plus Schaub seems to have a bit of a glass jaw.

I wouldn't do it now. It's way too risky unless you are ready to mail in the 2008 season.

I agree with this, unless someone got crazy desperate and offered a #1 round pick. he will still have another year left on his contract after this season, so if you can get solid value for him after the season then that would be something to think about. getting rid of him now would be gambling that schaub will stay healthy all season long, which isn't a given by any means. especially now that they get to play the next 15 games without a bye week.

[da Bull]

My point was not specifically to trade Sage, but to spectulate on value for value. Minnesota has a strong team, especially defensively, but is starting to panic because of the lack of quarterback play. If they were to have a capable quarterback such as Sage (admittedly he hasn't played in there system) would it strengthen their team? Taking a piece out of their puzzle, either offensively or defensively what would strengthen our team now (DE, NT, RB and etc.), not draft choices? Each side giving something up of defined value yet potentially gaining more in return by filling a definite hole.......and maybe backup quarterback is the biggest hole we have to fill. I don't know, but, personally I think an experienced, double handful of double meat/double cheese in the middle of the defensive line to stop the run would go a long way to curing our defensive ills, thus bettering the team as a whole.

[Joshua]

I agree that now is probably not the time to pull the trigger on a trade since Schaub's durability is still a question mark and we have no one even remotely ready to step in as the backup. However, I do think the mindset that "in the NFL, in order to win, you have to have a good backup who can come in and play when your starter goes down" is highly overrated. I quickly looked at the last few Superbowls. The Superbowl winning QBs from the 2001 season to present missed a combined 7 regular season games. That's an average of 1 game a year. Further, 5 of these 7 QBs (Eli, Peyton, Brady 3 times) didn't miss a start. Only Brad Johnson, who missed 3 in '02 and Big Ben, who missed 4 in '05, actually missed a start (and notably, both of these guys were on really good defensive teams where their main job was to not screw it up).

What this tells me is that to win in the NFL you need a good and extremely durable QB. Without one, you're chances of winning are pretty slim, no matter who your backup is. For the most part, backups have not played a meaningful role in a Superbowl champs season in years.

[cadams]

the last one i can think of was warner for the rams. before that, i have no idea

[painekiller]

Originally Posted by cadams

the last one i can think of was warner for the rams. before that, i have no idea

Warner was the 3rd string guy going into camp and there was a backup for Drew Bledsoe in New England who I think took that team to a Super Bowl.

So lightning has struck more than once in the NFL in last few years.

[Joshua]

I think Warner and Brady fall into a different category. While they may have started the season as a backup, both proved to be better than the original starters and won the starting jobs (and Superbowls and MVPs). This is not your traditional backyp who is merely a seat warmer until the starter comes back. Now, if you believe Sage falls in this category and is a starter in waiting who is better than Schaub (and someone we can win superbowls with), that's a different discussion.

[cadams]

yeah, if sage was a brady he wouldnt still be a backup 6 or so years into his career.

[da Bull]

So, the consensus of opinion is that a good backup quarterback is more important than a good (not necessarily great, but good) starting Nose Tackle, Defensive End or Running Back?

[Nconroe]

Originally Posted by da Bull

So, the consensus of opinion is that a good backup quarterback is more important than a good (not necessarily great, but good) starting Nose Tackle, Defensive End or Running Back?

This is one of those wait and see, take your best guess , type of questions.
We don't know who might get hurt, or which young player we have at NT, DE, or RB might develop into a good starter over the course of this season. I guess I'd vote for keep Sage just due to such a large risk of throwing away the season if he isn't here as the backup QB.

[cadams]

after last night i am starting to think they need to sit schaub for a week and have sage start. it would cause a lot of controversy, but schaub has not looked good so far this year.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by cadams

after last night i am starting to think they need to sit schaub for a week and have sage start. it would cause a lot of controversy, but schaub has not looked good so far this year.

I disagree. If you make the change you make it for good or not at all. If you bench a QB for a week, all you do is cut the legs off your QB.

[Nconroe]

a few teams have already made a QB swap after a couple of games, I think we should as well. I can't see defending Schaub right now, but up to you. maybe continuing to loose and stink it up cuts out any self confidence still remaining.