Note to guests/lurkers of this site. To continue reading content on some of our boards you will need to create an account.

Registration is free and easy, just remember your password and check back after your account has been approved by an administrator.

Please use the "contact us" link at the bottom of the page if you have any issues.

T.J. Hockenson

A place to discuss the MN Vikings
User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 7922
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Ash Ketchum »

Car Ramrod wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:28 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote: Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:01 pm
Car Ramrod wrote: Fri Mar 22, 2019 7:51 am

I agree with everything you wrote. I think it was Daniel Jeremiah who I read or heard say that Hockenson is one of the best blocking TE he has ever scouted. That would go a long way to improving the run game as well provide a “real” threat at that position that we simply don’t have right now.

It’s basically OL, Ed Oliver, T.J. Hockenson or bust at 18.

If we could somehow get a suitor for Waynes to give us a 2nd, that would really give us more options.

A juicy tid bit was brought up on kfan yesterday. Mayock loved Waynes coming out of Michigan St. They need CB help badly and already have three 1sts (the CB class this year lacks a true stud/sure thing) Maybe package Waynes with a future 5th or 4th for pick 35?
Would love to do that trade, but if you’re Mayock, you’ve got to realize that there’s going to be better CBs available in 2020, and Trae Waynes himself might be available in 2020 without having to give up #35. Why give up a Top 40 draft pick just for one guaranteed season of Trae Waynes when you could use that pick yourself and still pick up a good CB in free agency in 2020?

The Raiders offseason feels like Gruden made all the splashy free agency signings/trades, and Mayock will be tasked with being the shrewd operator and talent evaluator in the draft with all the picks they have.

If the roles were flipped and the Vikings were coming off a season that earned them the #4 pick in the draft, would we be calling for Rick to give up our second round pick for a 27 year old (not old, but significantly older than a 21 year old rookie) who only has one more season on his deal?

Seems like wishful thinking on our part, and if we’re so excited about getting a second round pick for Waynes, chances are the Raiders wouldn’t do it.
Yeah totally wishful thinking on our part, but it’s fun to theorize about!

I guess the thinking would be they get him in the building this year and work on an extension for the future?

Also their first three picks will determine if they are believers in Carr or not. If they are convinced they could do a fast rebuild with him at the helm then an experienced corner like Waynes could go a long ways toward their defense and probably better than anybody they can get in the draft.

Or they take Greedy or Baker in the first but I’m not entirely sure either will be as good as Waynes is/can be. And I am a big LSU fan.
Agreed.

I just don’t know why you’d care so much to get Waynes in the building for 2019 that you’d give up a very good pick just to get the right to extend him.

Maybe if Waynes was a truly elite shutdown CB, but he’s not. And he’s going to be 27.

You aren’t winnin the SB in 2019, be patient and use the pick.
User avatar
whiskerbiscuit
Posts: 19153
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2017 12:13 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by whiskerbiscuit »

I would rather have Hockenson or Oliver over any Olineman other than the top ranked T Taylor I think it is...


Should be able to get functional interior OL in rds 2-4. Probably have to trade up from 50, but you have to do it.
Froobchat's resident:
Modern dating expert
Meat expert
Global armed conflict expert
Psychedelic expert


And I walk around like I got a 36 inch chain...

🇳🇪Z
RubeTube
***Official Gibby Award Winner - November 2018***
Posts: 44228
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by RubeTube »

Ash Ketchum wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:45 pm
Car Ramrod wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:28 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote: Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:01 pm

Would love to do that trade, but if you’re Mayock, you’ve got to realize that there’s going to be better CBs available in 2020, and Trae Waynes himself might be available in 2020 without having to give up #35. Why give up a Top 40 draft pick just for one guaranteed season of Trae Waynes when you could use that pick yourself and still pick up a good CB in free agency in 2020?

The Raiders offseason feels like Gruden made all the splashy free agency signings/trades, and Mayock will be tasked with being the shrewd operator and talent evaluator in the draft with all the picks they have.

If the roles were flipped and the Vikings were coming off a season that earned them the #4 pick in the draft, would we be calling for Rick to give up our second round pick for a 27 year old (not old, but significantly older than a 21 year old rookie) who only has one more season on his deal?

Seems like wishful thinking on our part, and if we’re so excited about getting a second round pick for Waynes, chances are the Raiders wouldn’t do it.
Yeah totally wishful thinking on our part, but it’s fun to theorize about!

I guess the thinking would be they get him in the building this year and work on an extension for the future?

Also their first three picks will determine if they are believers in Carr or not. If they are convinced they could do a fast rebuild with him at the helm then an experienced corner like Waynes could go a long ways toward their defense and probably better than anybody they can get in the draft.

Or they take Greedy or Baker in the first but I’m not entirely sure either will be as good as Waynes is/can be. And I am a big LSU fan.
Agreed.

I just don’t know why you’d care so much to get Waynes in the building for 2019 that you’d give up a very good pick just to get the right to extend him.

Maybe if Waynes was a truly elite shutdown CB, but he’s not. And he’s going to be 27.

You aren’t winnin the SB in 2019, be patient and use the pick.
They have just as good of a chance to win it all this year as anyone. They are all in right now with Cousins. This team is only going to get worse over the next couple year's.

The future is now.
“We are nonviolent with people who are nonviolent with us.”
— Malcolm X

The Puppet Master
User avatar
whiskerbiscuit
Posts: 19153
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2017 12:13 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by whiskerbiscuit »

Sergeant Rubetube wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:15 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:45 pm
Car Ramrod wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:28 pm

Yeah totally wishful thinking on our part, but it’s fun to theorize about!

I guess the thinking would be they get him in the building this year and work on an extension for the future?

Also their first three picks will determine if they are believers in Carr or not. If they are convinced they could do a fast rebuild with him at the helm then an experienced corner like Waynes could go a long ways toward their defense and probably better than anybody they can get in the draft.

Or they take Greedy or Baker in the first but I’m not entirely sure either will be as good as Waynes is/can be. And I am a big LSU fan.
Agreed.

I just don’t know why you’d care so much to get Waynes in the building for 2019 that you’d give up a very good pick just to get the right to extend him.

Maybe if Waynes was a truly elite shutdown CB, but he’s not. And he’s going to be 27.

You aren’t winnin the SB in 2019, be patient and use the pick.
They have just as good of a chance to win it all this year as anyone. They are all in right now with Cousins. This team is only going to get worse over the next couple year's.

The future is now.
No reason we can't rebuild on the fly especially if Cousins does well into his mid thirties.
Froobchat's resident:
Modern dating expert
Meat expert
Global armed conflict expert
Psychedelic expert


And I walk around like I got a 36 inch chain...

🇳🇪Z
vikesbumeout
***Official Gibby Award Winner - August 2018***
Posts: 22632
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2017 7:17 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by vikesbumeout »

Cousins needs an extra 0.5 seconds.....+/-

Or 3
Liberals are always so confident in their ideas until history meets up with them
User avatar
Herky
Posts: 17063
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2017 11:09 am
Location: Mar-a-Lago

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Herky »

Hector wrote: Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:47 am
Herky wrote: Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:34 am Not being biased but he's the best overall TE in the draft. Great pass catcher and blocker. I'd love for Minnesota to draft him.
I like both of Iowa's tight ends, it seems Fant was getting more attention during the Penn State game (the only one I watched) but does TJ ever play fullback. I'm just trying to figure out how drafting him would make sense unless he's a Gronk/Sharpe type prospect.

Kittle was a steal- 4.57 40 and I thought I read he gave up one QB pressure in college and was drafted in the fifth round, probably why TJ is getting the appropriate draft grade coming from the same college.
Fant plays more like a big WR. He’s not a very good blocker and has had some drop issues in the past.

TJ has never played FB before. I don’t know how he would be in the backfield as a blocker. He’s a legit pass catcher and blocker though and excels in both.

Kittle should have put up monster numbers at Iowa but for some reason he didn’t get a ton of targets. Iowa has a really good history of Tight Ends in the NFL even going back to Hayden Fry. Almost every class Ferentz has had featured a TE who played in the pros.
User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 7922
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Ash Ketchum »

Sergeant Rubetube wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:15 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:45 pm
Car Ramrod wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:28 pm

Yeah totally wishful thinking on our part, but it’s fun to theorize about!

I guess the thinking would be they get him in the building this year and work on an extension for the future?

Also their first three picks will determine if they are believers in Carr or not. If they are convinced they could do a fast rebuild with him at the helm then an experienced corner like Waynes could go a long ways toward their defense and probably better than anybody they can get in the draft.

Or they take Greedy or Baker in the first but I’m not entirely sure either will be as good as Waynes is/can be. And I am a big LSU fan.
Agreed.

I just don’t know why you’d care so much to get Waynes in the building for 2019 that you’d give up a very good pick just to get the right to extend him.

Maybe if Waynes was a truly elite shutdown CB, but he’s not. And he’s going to be 27.

You aren’t winnin the SB in 2019, be patient and use the pick.
They have just as good of a chance to win it all this year as anyone. They are all in right now with Cousins. This team is only going to get worse over the next couple year's.

The future is now.
Bro, I’m talking about the Raiders.
RubeTube
***Official Gibby Award Winner - November 2018***
Posts: 44228
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by RubeTube »

Ash Ketchum wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:26 am
Sergeant Rubetube wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:15 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:45 pm

Agreed.

I just don’t know why you’d care so much to get Waynes in the building for 2019 that you’d give up a very good pick just to get the right to extend him.

Maybe if Waynes was a truly elite shutdown CB, but he’s not. And he’s going to be 27.

You aren’t winnin the SB in 2019, be patient and use the pick.
They have just as good of a chance to win it all this year as anyone. They are all in right now with Cousins. This team is only going to get worse over the next couple year's.

The future is now.
Bro, I’m talking about the Raiders.
Oh sorry lol.

I agree then. The Raiders would be idiots to trade for Waynes.
“We are nonviolent with people who are nonviolent with us.”
— Malcolm X

The Puppet Master
User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 7922
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Ash Ketchum »

Sergeant Rubetube wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:27 am
Ash Ketchum wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:26 am
Sergeant Rubetube wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:15 pm

They have just as good of a chance to win it all this year as anyone. They are all in right now with Cousins. This team is only going to get worse over the next couple year's.

The future is now.
Bro, I’m talking about the Raiders.
Oh sorry lol.

I agree then. The Raiders would be idiots to trade for Waynes.
Lol all good. It’s hard to keep track sometimes.

I was responding to those who think Waynes is going to net the Vikings a high draft pick.
RubeTube
***Official Gibby Award Winner - November 2018***
Posts: 44228
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by RubeTube »

Ash Ketchum wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:30 am
Sergeant Rubetube wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:27 am
Ash Ketchum wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:26 am

Bro, I’m talking about the Raiders.
Oh sorry lol.

I agree then. The Raiders would be idiots to trade for Waynes.
Lol all good. It’s hard to keep track sometimes.

I was responding to those who think Waynes is going to net the Vikings a high draft pick.
Ya, not happening. We need to just keep Waynes at this point. There is no one left worth the cap money. I never wanted him traded anyway as I'm not convinced we have a viable replacement. Like I said before, the NFL changes so quick, whos to say he isn't our #1 CB to keep after this year.

We didn't think we would keep Barr either. If there is a deal you can't refuse, take it. There won't be though.

They also shopped Barr last year at this time.
“We are nonviolent with people who are nonviolent with us.”
— Malcolm X

The Puppet Master
Jimmy Butler
Posts: 93
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 6:47 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Jimmy Butler »

Trade Trae Waynes for a second round pick then you roll like this

1st TJ Hockenson
2nd round any combination of Bradbury/Lindstrom/McCoy/Mcgovern/Jenkins probably a few other dudes that fit the bill.

Hockenson might be a game changer and allows us to move on from Rudy and his salary.
Car Ramrod
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 4:54 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Car Ramrod »

Ash Ketchum wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:30 am
Sergeant Rubetube wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:27 am
Ash Ketchum wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 12:26 am

Bro, I’m talking about the Raiders.
Oh sorry lol.

I agree then. The Raiders would be idiots to trade for Waynes.
Lol all good. It’s hard to keep track sometimes.

I was responding to those who think Waynes is going to net the Vikings a high draft pick.
If you are referring to me, I said it was wishful thinking. Waynes by himself in a trade would not get very much in return. Complete hypothetical situation with the Raiders.
User avatar
DC4MVP
Posts: 7297
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 10:03 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by DC4MVP »

Beef Supreme wrote: Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:55 am
Deep Purple wrote: Tue Mar 19, 2019 11:03 am You kill two major needs on this team by drafting TJ. Not only that you can free up the "other" TE's $7 million dollar salary.
If we draft hockenson im not sure it’s a given we cut Rudolph.
I don't think it would be.

Very rarely do rookie tight ends have a big first season (Probably around 550-625 yards and 3-5 touchdowns. )They usually take a year or two to come into their own so having someone like Rudolph to mentor Hockenson could be huge.

But yeah, I really want Hockenson if there's no worthwhile offensive linemen on the board. Now that Barr is back, I feel the defense is still at the level it was last year (even with Richardson leaving) and Richardson can be replaced in the middle rounds.

We have the defense now it's time to give Kirk some protection and 2 more weapons. A WR3 and a legit pass catching TE who might be able to turn a 3 yard catch into 10 yards)
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by hategreenticemase »

So is consensus Hockenson is a HR pick and Fant is not close to same caliber?
User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 7922
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Ash Ketchum »

Hockenson is a likely Top 15 pick because he’s a phenomenal blocker. Fant might be a bit more dynamic in the passing game but is not a good blocker.

Kubiak’s system, if we’re fully using it, requires two decent tight ends, so it will depend on how they view Conklin and Morgan I think.
Hector
Posts: 3194
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:06 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Hector »

Herky wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 7:27 pm
Hector wrote: Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:47 am
Herky wrote: Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:34 am Not being biased but he's the best overall TE in the draft. Great pass catcher and blocker. I'd love for Minnesota to draft him.
I like both of Iowa's tight ends, it seems Fant was getting more attention during the Penn State game (the only one I watched) but does TJ ever play fullback. I'm just trying to figure out how drafting him would make sense unless he's a Gronk/Sharpe type prospect.

Kittle was a steal- 4.57 40 and I thought I read he gave up one QB pressure in college and was drafted in the fifth round, probably why TJ is getting the appropriate draft grade coming from the same college.
Fant plays more like a big WR. He’s not a very good blocker and has had some drop issues in the past.

TJ has never played FB before. I don’t know how he would be in the backfield as a blocker. He’s a legit pass catcher and blocker though and excels in both.

Kittle should have put up monster numbers at Iowa but for some reason he didn’t get a ton of targets. Iowa has a really good history of Tight Ends in the NFL even going back to Hayden Fry. Almost every class Ferentz has had featured a TE who played in the pros.
I wish I would have watched him a bit more but you kind of reaffirmed I intial impression of Fant and Hock.

Iowa has been a TE powerhouse of late....Dallas Clark was there not so long ago also.
SKOLMN
Posts: 2930
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:15 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by SKOLMN »

Thrillkill wrote: Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:26 pm
SKOLMN wrote: Sun Mar 17, 2019 9:55 am For the record I would love to upgrade from Rudolph, someone more athletic and cheaper would do wonders for his team. That said, the main reason ppl want Rudolph gone is to be able to make better use of the cap space we’d save. Cutting him after the draft is a moot point because there won’t be anyone worth paying at that point in free agency. I wouldn’t mind drafting a tight end early but not at 18, unless Rudolph is let go immediately. That way we can make a competitive offer to Easton, possibly extend some of our own (Alexander, waynes). If Rudolph is still on the roster come draft time I’d have to think he’s on the team for 2019 which would be a poor decision using our 1st rounder on a position that will be a bench warmer
What are you talking about? Sooooo.......there won't be any players to spend his money on but we are going to draft his replacement and................cut him right? So we're the only team allowed to draft a replacement and cut a good player?
Not sure I understand what you’re saying. I’m saying if we were going to cut Rudolph we should’ve done it Day one of free agency so his money could’ve gone to better use than it will if we cut him now. Drafting a tight end round 1 would be a poor allocation of resources given our needs on the oline, especially now that Easton is gone. Not sure why that’s such a controversial take in your eyes.
User avatar
mglviks
Posts: 6172
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2017 1:22 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by mglviks »

I could see him making it to 18 if GB passes on him.

If so want him.
User avatar
Keith_Morrison
Posts: 3879
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:02 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Keith_Morrison »

mglviks wrote: Sat Mar 30, 2019 9:49 pm I could see him making it to 18 if GB passes on him.

If so want him.
Me too.

Diggs/Thielen/Hockenson/Cook
RubeTube
***Official Gibby Award Winner - November 2018***
Posts: 44228
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 2:10 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by RubeTube »

Keith_Morrison wrote: Sat Mar 30, 2019 10:46 pm
mglviks wrote: Sat Mar 30, 2019 9:49 pm I could see him making it to 18 if GB passes on him.

If so want him.
Me too.

Diggs/Thielen/Hockenson/Cook
Same.
“We are nonviolent with people who are nonviolent with us.”
— Malcolm X

The Puppet Master
User avatar
DC4MVP
Posts: 7297
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2017 10:03 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by DC4MVP »

SKOLMN wrote: Thu Mar 28, 2019 3:45 pm Not sure I understand what you’re saying. I’m saying if we were going to cut Rudolph we should’ve done it Day one of free agency so his money could’ve gone to better use than it will if we cut him now. Drafting a tight end round 1 would be a poor allocation of resources given our needs on the oline, especially now that Easton is gone. Not sure why that’s such a controversial take in your eyes.
Cutting Rudolph on day one would have been dangerous so I don't blame them for not doing it even if they do cut him later.

Just because we have the cap space doesn't mean the free agent is going to sign with us. So if the Vikings cut Rudolph early in the off-season to get cap space then fail to whichever lineman they were supposed to spend that money on, now we cut Rudy for no reason and don't have a tight end going into the season and we're forced to draft one. If we do draft a tight end when we're not forced to take one, then Rudy become a bit more expendable (but I still don't think we should get rid of him as rookie TE's rarely make a splash in year one).

As for drafting a tight end in round one....I have a bad, bad feeling fans are so hellbent on o-line to the point where they'll be pissed if the Vikings don't draft one and want one even if it means reaching for a guy. Are the Vikings supposed to take a 2nd round linemen at 18 just to take a lineman or do we take another position of need like DT, TE, or WR?

What if there's no worthwhile o-line in round one and they go Hockenson or another TE (or even another position)? Is that still a poor allocation of resources?
SKOLMN
Posts: 2930
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:15 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by SKOLMN »

DC4MVP wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 12:46 am
SKOLMN wrote: Thu Mar 28, 2019 3:45 pm Not sure I understand what you’re saying. I’m saying if we were going to cut Rudolph we should’ve done it Day one of free agency so his money could’ve gone to better use than it will if we cut him now. Drafting a tight end round 1 would be a poor allocation of resources given our needs on the oline, especially now that Easton is gone. Not sure why that’s such a controversial take in your eyes.
Cutting Rudolph on day one would have been dangerous so I don't blame them for not doing it even if they do cut him later.

Just because we have the cap space doesn't mean the free agent is going to sign with us. So if the Vikings cut Rudolph early in the off-season to get cap space then fail to whichever lineman they were supposed to spend that money on, now we cut Rudy for no reason and don't have a tight end going into the season and we're forced to draft one. If we do draft a tight end when we're not forced to take one, then Rudy become a bit more expendable (but I still don't think we should get rid of him as rookie TE's rarely make a splash in year one).

As for drafting a tight end in round one....I have a bad, bad feeling fans are so hellbent on o-line to the point where they'll be pissed if the Vikings don't draft one and want one even if it means reaching for a guy. Are the Vikings supposed to take a 2nd round linemen at 18 just to take a lineman or do we take another position of need like DT, TE, or WR?

What if there's no worthwhile o-line in round one and they go Hockenson or another TE (or even another position)? Is that still a poor allocation of resources?
If there’s no worthwhile olineman at 18 then you either trade up or down to a spot where there’s one worth taking. Getting cute and picking elsewhere and waiting till the next round for one burnt us big time last year where we completely missed the run on lineman in the early 2nd and killed our season, I’d like to not make the same mistake this year. This roster is virtually perfect literally in all areas except offensive line, by continuing to pay the defense (Barr, Griffen) instead of going after Saffold or Paradis we pigeonholed ourselves into drafting an olineman in the same sense cutting Rudolph would’ve pigeonholed us into drafting a tight end.
Small Hands
Posts: 6372
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Small Hands »

Ash Ketchum wrote: Sun Mar 24, 2019 1:09 pm Hockenson is a likely Top 15 pick because he’s a phenomenal blocker. Fant might be a bit more dynamic in the passing game but is not a good blocker.

Kubiak’s system, if we’re fully using it, requires two decent tight ends, so it will depend on how they view Conklin and Morgan I think.
Agree.


Fant has the ability to be a field stretcher, and a good red zone threat. I think it'll take a couple years for him to be a big contributor though. He got dinged up a lot in college too. Hock will be a Witten in his prime type TE that can find all the soft spots in coverage, and block like a lineman. His blocking ability should make an immediate impact. I'm sure it'll take him a while to figure out his role in the passing game.
Car Ramrod
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 4:54 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Car Ramrod »

I love Hockenson, but would be pretty upset and confused if they select him and one of Taylor, Williams, Ford, Dillard or even Bradbury were still on the board.
User avatar
Keith_Morrison
Posts: 3879
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:02 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Keith_Morrison »

Car Ramrod wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 9:47 am I love Hockenson, but would be pretty upset and confused if they select him and one of Taylor, Williams, Ford, Dillard or even Bradbury were still on the board.
I said it earlier in this thread that if Hockenson is still there at 18 and we draft him, that we’d need to trade back into the 1st round to snag one of the higher rated OL.
Car Ramrod
Posts: 742
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 4:54 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Car Ramrod »

Keith_Morrison wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 9:51 am
Car Ramrod wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 9:47 am I love Hockenson, but would be pretty upset and confused if they select him and one of Taylor, Williams, Ford, Dillard or even Bradbury were still on the board.
I said it earlier in this thread that if Hockenson is still there at 18 and we draft him, that we’d need to trade back into the 1st round to snag one of the higher rated OL.
I think if one of those guys is there that we would have to select them over Hockenson.

It’s just so risky waiting/hoping for a player to drop so you can try and trade up. And even if that happens, what capitol are we giving up?

If we take Hockenson at 18, that means we will have likely missed out on Taylor, Ford, Williams, Dillard, Bradbury, Lindstrom(the last two I think get selected in the 20’s) We would have to settle for trading up for the next tier of OL like Risner, Jenkins, McCoy, Little. I don’t know if those guys will have the same impact as rookies as the first group or would be worth trading up for.
User avatar
Keith_Morrison
Posts: 3879
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:02 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Keith_Morrison »

Car Ramrod wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 10:27 am
Keith_Morrison wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 9:51 am
Car Ramrod wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 9:47 am I love Hockenson, but would be pretty upset and confused if they select him and one of Taylor, Williams, Ford, Dillard or even Bradbury were still on the board.
I said it earlier in this thread that if Hockenson is still there at 18 and we draft him, that we’d need to trade back into the 1st round to snag one of the higher rated OL.
I think if one of those guys is there that we would have to select them over Hockenson.

It’s just so risky waiting/hoping for a player to drop so you can try and trade up. And even if that happens, what capitol are we giving up?

If we take Hockenson at 18, that means we will have likely missed out on Taylor, Ford, Williams, Dillard, Bradbury, Lindstrom(the last two I think get selected in the 20’s) We would have to settle for trading up for the next tier of OL like Risner, Jenkins, McCoy, Little. I don’t know if those guys will have the same impact as rookies as the first group or would be worth trading up for.
10-4. But adding Hockenson would make our receiving options elite.

Maybe we throw in Waynes and next year’s 3rd round pick to get back into the first round draft with of the higher rated OL prospects?
Small Hands
Posts: 6372
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Small Hands »

Car Ramrod wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 10:27 am
Keith_Morrison wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 9:51 am
Car Ramrod wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 9:47 am I love Hockenson, but would be pretty upset and confused if they select him and one of Taylor, Williams, Ford, Dillard or even Bradbury were still on the board.
I said it earlier in this thread that if Hockenson is still there at 18 and we draft him, that we’d need to trade back into the 1st round to snag one of the higher rated OL.
I think if one of those guys is there that we would have to select them over Hockenson.

It’s just so risky waiting/hoping for a player to drop so you can try and trade up. And even if that happens, what capitol are we giving up?

If we take Hockenson at 18, that means we will have likely missed out on Taylor, Ford, Williams, Dillard, Bradbury, Lindstrom(the last two I think get selected in the 20’s) We would have to settle for trading up for the next tier of OL like Risner, Jenkins, McCoy, Little. I don’t know if those guys will have the same impact as rookies as the first group or would be worth trading up for.
I want nothing to do with drafting Bradbury or Lindstrom at 18. Massive reaches of Ponder proportions. Those two are second round talents. The first 4 OL you listed would be good at 18 for me. Risner would be a good option in the second. McCoy would be OK as well.
User avatar
The Replacements
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:37 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by The Replacements »

Aren't the odds of Hockenson lasting to the Vikings like 2%?
User avatar
Keith_Morrison
Posts: 3879
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:02 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Keith_Morrison »

The Replacements wrote: Sun Mar 31, 2019 10:38 am Aren't the odds of Hockenson lasting to the Vikings like 2%?
:lol: yes

I’d be shocked if he was still on the board @18.
Post Reply