Minnesota acquired veteran back Phil King from Pittsburgh for…
Minnesota acquired veteran back Phil King from Pittsburgh for its 1967 sixth-round pick. King gave the Vikings one season of depth, but the move did not create significant long-term value. Pittsburgh received the No. 140 selection and used it on Mike Haggerty, giving the Steelers a future roster opportunity in exchange for a veteran who was nearing the end of his NFL career.
Minnesota Vikings Received
- player Phil King
Pittsburgh Steelers Received
- pick 1967 sixth round pick (#140- Mike Haggerty )
Trade Analysis
Why the Trade Happened
Minnesota acquired veteran back Phil King from Pittsburgh on July 26, 1966 for its 1967 sixth-round choice. The draft trail identifies that selection as No. 140, which Pittsburgh used on Mike Haggerty. The package is stated only to the level that published football histories can support, so an unidentified choice stays unidentified instead of being attached to an uncertain player. That keeps the exchange coherent while still allowing the football value on each side to be judged from the assets that are known.
What Minnesota Vikings Received
Minnesota received a veteran it already knew well, and King played all 14 games for the Vikings in 1966. His offensive role was small, with 40 rushing yards and limited receiving work, so the immediate return was modest. The grade weighs both the price paid and the practical value that followed. A named draft choice is credited only when the selection can be connected to the exchange, while a general future choice remains general. That approach makes the historical comparison useful without overstating details that surviving accounts do not settle.
What Pittsburgh Steelers Received
Pittsburgh received a defined sixth-round choice and used it on Mike Haggerty. The pick was not premium capital, but it gave the Steelers a future roster opportunity for a veteran who was near the end of his NFL career. The other side is judged by the same standard: immediate games, starting value, later career impact, and the quality of any draft assets received. Where one part of the package produced little or no NFL value, that matters even if the original transaction looked balanced on paper.
Final Verdict
Pittsburgh earns a B and Minnesota a C. King supplied one season of depth, while the Steelers converted him into a future selection. The difference is modest, but the draft asset gives Pittsburgh the cleaner long-term return. The verdict reflects the strongest supportable version of the transaction and the career value that followed. It does not depend on assigning an uncertain pick to a player simply to make the package look more complete. The result is a full historical evaluation of the trade that can stand on the known facts.