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.

Assessment so far

A place to discuss the MN Vikings
User avatar
beetlebum71
Posts: 9272
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 5:25 pm
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere

Re: Assessment so far

Post by beetlebum71 »

I think something to think about with an OT late in the 1st like that is that it is maybe a bit presumptuous to assume a rookie can come in here and be an upgrade over Reiff without any offseason workouts. When you consider that the likely move would be to slide Reiff inside and shift Elflein to the right side, where he's never played in the pros, or to have Samia take that spot, when he's hardly played at the NFL level, you're making a lot of changes along that line that involves inexperienced players with way less practice and installation time than you would normally have.

That's why a guy like TW might be more appetizing to a team like MN, who is trying to do a mini-rebuild, but has enough to still try to compete. You're still moving pieces around, but at least your new addition knows the ropes.
User avatar
weimy froob
Posts: 88504
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Assessment so far

Post by weimy froob »

beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:02 pm I think something to think about with an OT late in the 1st like that is that it is maybe a bit presumptuous to assume a rookie can come in here and be an upgrade over Reiff without any offseason workouts. When you consider that the likely move would be to slide Reiff inside and shift Elflein to the right side, where he's never played in the pros, or to have Samia take that spot, when he's hardly played at the NFL level, you're making a lot of changes along that line that involves inexperienced players with way less practice and installation time than you would normally have.

That's why a guy like TW might be more appetizing to a team like MN, who is trying to do a mini-rebuild, but has enough to still try to compete. You're still moving pieces around, but at least your new addition knows the ropes.
leber made kind of the same point last night in that he said that the vikings window is 1-2 years so you go get williams. is he here yet?
mlhouse
Posts: 24753
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 9:00 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by mlhouse »

beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:02 pm I think something to think about with an OT late in the 1st like that is that it is maybe a bit presumptuous to assume a rookie can come in here and be an upgrade over Reiff without any offseason workouts. When you consider that the likely move would be to slide Reiff inside and shift Elflein to the right side, where he's never played in the pros, or to have Samia take that spot, when he's hardly played at the NFL level, you're making a lot of changes along that line that involves inexperienced players with way less practice and installation time than you would normally have.

That's why a guy like TW might be more appetizing to a team like MN, who is trying to do a mini-rebuild, but has enough to still try to compete. You're still moving pieces around, but at least your new addition knows the ropes.
It wasn't seen as an "upgrade" over Reiff this season, but a developmental move to replace Reiff over the long run with some versatility for this season in making a move.
User avatar
The Replacements
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:37 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by The Replacements »

Overall, I'm happy with the draft. They filled 2 big areas of need with players who could start year 1. I was against drafting a receiver in round 1 but I guess you have to be true to your draft board. I really wanted an upgrade on the offensive line and will be curious to see if they draft a tackle or work out a deal for Trent Williams. I do think you have to consider the possibility of no 2020 season so maybe they shouldn't be aggressive. My last point would be to wait until the entire draft is complete before making such strong opinions. I've been on this board for years, read draft threads every year and their comical in how obsessed some get with one player or one pick. I've been right and wrong about players just like everyone.

Enjoy. This is all we have for now.
User avatar
Style
Posts: 4309
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2017 9:57 am

Re: Assessment so far

Post by Style »

beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:02 pm I think something to think about with an OT late in the 1st like that is that it is maybe a bit presumptuous to assume a rookie can come in here and be an upgrade over Reiff without any offseason workouts. When you consider that the likely move would be to slide Reiff inside and shift Elflein to the right side, where he's never played in the pros, or to have Samia take that spot, when he's hardly played at the NFL level, you're making a lot of changes along that line that involves inexperienced players with way less practice and installation time than you would normally have.

That's why a guy like TW might be more appetizing to a team like MN, who is trying to do a mini-rebuild, but has enough to still try to compete. You're still moving pieces around, but at least your new addition knows the ropes.
Good points. Hadn't really thought of it like that.
“Juiceless = useless” - Pat Fitzgerald
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »

Oriole81 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:39 am
hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:24 am
Oriole81 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:09 am

so I asked you above too, would you have done the Chargers trade for 37 and 71?
otherwise, there probably wasn't a market where we could stay in the first AND get a Top 70 pick that you think is needed.

And I'm not even saying that the Chargers deal would be wrong, I'm just confused on what exactly you want because just saying you want to trade down and get another Top 70 pick doesn't line up with the market.
100% I would have. Commensurate return for sure. Then at 25 I still do other deal that we did. Not commensurate return, but must have been what market was which is all that matters.

You are more a draft expert than I - is Blacklock or Gallimore "over drafted " at 31? Thats what I would have done, but my question is is Gladney a tier above those guys?

My main beef is taking a receiver in first, I just completely disagree unless maybe one of the 3 studs dropped, and secondly once board played out I wanted to move down from 22 and get an extra top 75 pick.
I don't think it would have been "overdrafted" to take Blacklock or Gallimore at 31 if a certain team really liked them specifically in comparison to the litany of other DTs available on Day 2, especially if they're not a team known for developing mid round DL.
But for a team like the Vikes that has a track record in developing mid round guys, I don't think they're much above the likes of Madabuike, Davis or Elliott. I think Patterson should be able to turn any of those 3 into impact starters.

I do still think though they'll move up today, perhaps multiple times, and DL is probably one of those targets. But if it had fallen Blacklock at 31 and do the trade up for CB Jaylon Johnson and lose out on Gladney, I'd probably feel the same as I do now.
Thanks for the info, O. Good stuff!

You make an interesting point on DT. Maybe I'm being too worried? You are saying the next guys after the Gallimore/Blacklock aren't much different? That would be encouraging to me.

I sure as F wished I knew if we end up with Williams.
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »

beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:02 pm I think something to think about with an OT late in the 1st like that is that it is maybe a bit presumptuous to assume a rookie can come in here and be an upgrade over Reiff without any offseason workouts. When you consider that the likely move would be to slide Reiff inside and shift Elflein to the right side, where he's never played in the pros, or to have Samia take that spot, when he's hardly played at the NFL level, you're making a lot of changes along that line that involves inexperienced players with way less practice and installation time than you would normally have.

That's why a guy like TW might be more appetizing to a team like MN, who is trying to do a mini-rebuild, but has enough to still try to compete. You're still moving pieces around, but at least your new addition knows the ropes.
I couldn't agree more. The other issue is, while yes I would like to improve LT, its not a needle mover as a stand alone move. Its why I was against a LT in first or worse yet trading up for one.

If this team isn't a little better at C and a lot better at BOTH G spots then every other fb pick is a moot point. LT improvement would be great but its not a needle mover absent G improvement.
User avatar
beetlebum71
Posts: 9272
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 5:25 pm
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere

Re: Assessment so far

Post by beetlebum71 »

mlhouse wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:05 pm
beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:02 pm I think something to think about with an OT late in the 1st like that is that it is maybe a bit presumptuous to assume a rookie can come in here and be an upgrade over Reiff without any offseason workouts. When you consider that the likely move would be to slide Reiff inside and shift Elflein to the right side, where he's never played in the pros, or to have Samia take that spot, when he's hardly played at the NFL level, you're making a lot of changes along that line that involves inexperienced players with way less practice and installation time than you would normally have.

That's why a guy like TW might be more appetizing to a team like MN, who is trying to do a mini-rebuild, but has enough to still try to compete. You're still moving pieces around, but at least your new addition knows the ropes.
It wasn't seen as an "upgrade" over Reiff this season, but a developmental move to replace Reiff over the long run with some versatility for this season in making a move.
I don't think it's a great idea to take a OT in the first who you don't think can play right away, or on someone who isn't going to actually improve you at the position he plays right away. Spielman and Zimmer also aren't under contract for 2021, so they're not going to be terribly interested in taking more of a long view at that position, because if they aren't successful this next season, they aren't going to be around for when the new guy starts playing. If you want to get a developmental tackle prospect who can act as a swing tackle for a year or two while you get him up to speed, you can find that guy later in the draft. You don't use a 1st rounder on a guy like that when you're paying your QB $30 million a year, you have one year left on your lead RB's contract, and your coach/GM aren't locked into long term deals.

This draft is going to be about getting polished football players who can step in and help right away as much as possible. There were probably higher upside WR's available at 22 than Jefferson, but I think Kubiak and Spielman thought he could come in and play right now without missing a beat. Same with Gladney. Maybe someone like Fulton or even Diggs has higher upside, but Gladney is a smart kid who knows how to play and can contribute right now. I still think we'll see them take some fliers later on. We'll see them go get a really raw, athletic edge rusher later in the draft because Patterson and Zimmer seem to have a knack for picking those guys out of a crowd. I think we'll see them take a safety later in the draft in the Jayron Kearse mold who has the size and athleticism to play, but lacks the polish. Other than that, I think they're going to find another WR they think can step in and play (Tyler Johnson, maybe?), I think they'll find an interior OL that they think has a chance to play right away, and I think they'll find a DT who can join a rotation from day 1. These guys might all lack big upside, but the idea will be that they can help right now.
mlhouse
Posts: 24753
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 9:00 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by mlhouse »

beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:22 pm
mlhouse wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:05 pm
beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:02 pm I think something to think about with an OT late in the 1st like that is that it is maybe a bit presumptuous to assume a rookie can come in here and be an upgrade over Reiff without any offseason workouts. When you consider that the likely move would be to slide Reiff inside and shift Elflein to the right side, where he's never played in the pros, or to have Samia take that spot, when he's hardly played at the NFL level, you're making a lot of changes along that line that involves inexperienced players with way less practice and installation time than you would normally have.

That's why a guy like TW might be more appetizing to a team like MN, who is trying to do a mini-rebuild, but has enough to still try to compete. You're still moving pieces around, but at least your new addition knows the ropes.
It wasn't seen as an "upgrade" over Reiff this season, but a developmental move to replace Reiff over the long run with some versatility for this season in making a move.
I don't think it's a great idea to take a OT in the first who you don't think can play right away, or on someone who isn't going to actually improve you at the position he plays right away. Spielman and Zimmer also aren't under contract for 2021, so they're not going to be terribly interested in taking more of a long view at that position, because if they aren't successful this next season, they aren't going to be around for when the new guy starts playing. If you want to get a developmental tackle prospect who can act as a swing tackle for a year or two while you get him up to speed, you can find that guy later in the draft. You don't use a 1st rounder on a guy like that when you're paying your QB $30 million a year, you have one year left on your lead RB's contract, and your coach/GM aren't locked into long term deals.

This draft is going to be about getting polished football players who can step in and help right away as much as possible. There were probably higher upside WR's available at 22 than Jefferson, but I think Kubiak and Spielman thought he could come in and play right now without missing a beat. Same with Gladney. Maybe someone like Fulton or even Diggs has higher upside, but Gladney is a smart kid who knows how to play and can contribute right now. I still think we'll see them take some fliers later on. We'll see them go get a really raw, athletic edge rusher later in the draft because Patterson and Zimmer seem to have a knack for picking those guys out of a crowd. I think we'll see them take a safety later in the draft in the Jayron Kearse mold who has the size and athleticism to play, but lacks the polish. Other than that, I think they're going to find another WR they think can step in and play (Tyler Johnson, maybe?), I think they'll find an interior OL that they think has a chance to play right away, and I think they'll find a DT who can join a rotation from day 1. These guys might all lack big upside, but the idea will be that they can help right now.
Teams drafting at the back end of the first round select developmental players all the time.
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »

Ash Ketchum wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:59 am
hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:01 am Of our 4 major needs (DT, WR, CB and OL) we took the 2 we can deal with later, first. Thats the big issue for me.
What are you even basing this on?

Which WR or CB are you expecting to be there at 58 that are going to be as good?
:lol:

If you are going to start your typical "you have to name names bullshit" just don't reply. I don't pretend to be an expert nor do i do 7 round mock drafts. Please don't start that crap.

Its based on A. Deepest Wr pool in years. Its reasonable to expect to find a starter in 2nd or 3rd most years, its very likely this year. B. The paramount strength of this coach staff is developing DBs. So philosophically, its not as important to this team to draft elite corners. Again, reasonable to expect can find a guy Zim can make into a starter in next two rounds.

As you know I would have loved trading up for Kinlaw. Maybe wasnt possible. Once the board fell as it did, I think we should have snapped up the Charger trade. I'd be feeling better today with 5 picks.

I dont hate yesterday, and if we pull off TW and can get a quality DT today I will feel better. However, I just strongly preferred an extra pick than drafting any receiver. But, hopefully he ends up being very good and ol hgtm is wrong. Again. :mrgreen:
Last edited by hategreenticemase on Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
beetlebum71
Posts: 9272
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 5:25 pm
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere

Re: Assessment so far

Post by beetlebum71 »

hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:17 pm
beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:02 pm I think something to think about with an OT late in the 1st like that is that it is maybe a bit presumptuous to assume a rookie can come in here and be an upgrade over Reiff without any offseason workouts. When you consider that the likely move would be to slide Reiff inside and shift Elflein to the right side, where he's never played in the pros, or to have Samia take that spot, when he's hardly played at the NFL level, you're making a lot of changes along that line that involves inexperienced players with way less practice and installation time than you would normally have.

That's why a guy like TW might be more appetizing to a team like MN, who is trying to do a mini-rebuild, but has enough to still try to compete. You're still moving pieces around, but at least your new addition knows the ropes.
I couldn't agree more. The other issue is, while yes I would like to improve LT, its not a needle mover as a stand alone move. Its why I was against a LT in first or worse yet trading up for one.

If this team isn't a little better at C and a lot better at BOTH G spots then every other fb pick is a moot point. LT improvement would be great but its not a needle mover absent G improvement.
Where a true upgrade at LT could move the needle is if they would be able to move Reiff inside, where he's probably better suited at this point of his career. He hasn't played there since college, though, so it's no guarantee that he slides in and plays well right off the bat. If he does, though, then we only have one real hole left on the OL, and I think it's reasonable to hope that between Elflein, Samia, and a G/C taken in the 3rd round, you could figure something out.

People are acting like Reiff can't play, though, and that any warm body would be an upgrade over there. That's just not a fair assessment. Reiff is fine. Serviceable. There's room to improve at that position, but like you said, it's going to be an incremental improvement, not a seismic one.
User avatar
whiskerbiscuit
Posts: 19153
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2017 12:13 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by whiskerbiscuit »

WR was a bigger need than OL period. An argument can be made that a first or second rd pick should've been made on WR even if we had kept Diggs. Now that he's gone we literally had no choice. Maybe if there was a surefire franshise LT staring us in the face we take him, but there wasn't.

We HAD to get a blue chip WR and Jefferson is more of one that we could ever get in rd 2. Before last night we might have had the worst group of wr's in the league.


Glad that brass saw it clearly, as did I. :thumbsup:
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
User avatar
The Replacements
Posts: 1846
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 6:37 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by The Replacements »

I read an interesting take on analytics and the 49ers draft today. I liked the Kinlaw pick but the author criticized the pick saying they should have taken Jeudy over Kinlaw because the value of a WR is much higher than DT. I am well versed in analytics regarding baseball but as much on football. I believe Aaron Gleeman wrote an article today in the Athletic on the Vikings picks and it was heavily based on analytics. Can with a subscription summarize what was said.
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »

beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:29 pm
hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:17 pm
beetlebum71 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:02 pm I think something to think about with an OT late in the 1st like that is that it is maybe a bit presumptuous to assume a rookie can come in here and be an upgrade over Reiff without any offseason workouts. When you consider that the likely move would be to slide Reiff inside and shift Elflein to the right side, where he's never played in the pros, or to have Samia take that spot, when he's hardly played at the NFL level, you're making a lot of changes along that line that involves inexperienced players with way less practice and installation time than you would normally have.

That's why a guy like TW might be more appetizing to a team like MN, who is trying to do a mini-rebuild, but has enough to still try to compete. You're still moving pieces around, but at least your new addition knows the ropes.
I couldn't agree more. The other issue is, while yes I would like to improve LT, its not a needle mover as a stand alone move. Its why I was against a LT in first or worse yet trading up for one.

If this team isn't a little better at C and a lot better at BOTH G spots then every other fb pick is a moot point. LT improvement would be great but its not a needle mover absent G improvement.
Where a true upgrade at LT could move the needle is if they would be able to move Reiff inside, where he's probably better suited at this point of his career. He hasn't played there since college, though, so it's no guarantee that he slides in and plays well right off the bat. If he does, though, then we only have one real hole left on the OL, and I think it's reasonable to hope that between Elflein, Samia, and a G/C taken in the 3rd round, you could figure something out.

People are acting like Reiff can't play, though, and that any warm body would be an upgrade over there. That's just not a fair assessment. Reiff is fine. Serviceable. There's room to improve at that position, but like you said, it's going to be an incremental improvement, not a seismic one.
Spot fn on. Again, they also say he is so overpaid. Its all nonsense. He is paid exactly to what he is, an avg LT. If all 5 of our lineman performed same level as Reiff, we would be vastly better. Period.

You are correct in would be needle mover IF he moves inside AND is pretty good. I too think he likely would be good at G, but I too have always said that aint a guarantee.

Was that a shot earlier "shocking hgtm doesn't like a RS draft"? :mrgreen:

Did you like yest?
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »

whiskerbiscuit wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:30 pm WR was a bigger need than OL period. An argument can be made that a first or second rd pick should've been made on WR even if we had kept Diggs. Now that he's gone we literally had no choice. Maybe if there was a surefire franshise LT staring us in the face we take him, but there wasn't.

We HAD to get a blue chip WR and Jefferson is more of one that we could ever get in rd 2. Before last night we might have had the worst group of wr's in the league.


Glad that brass saw it clearly, as did I. :thumbsup:
:lol:
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »

The Replacements wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:34 pm I read an interesting take on analytics and the 49ers draft today. I liked the Kinlaw pick but the author criticized the pick saying they should have taken Jeudy over Kinlaw because the value of a WR is much higher than DT. I am well versed in analytics regarding baseball but as much on football. I believe Aaron Gleeman wrote an article today in the Athletic on the Vikings picks and it was heavily based on analytics. Can with a subscription summarize what was said.
Utter nonsense. I will take a great DT over a great receiver every day of the week.
RM22
Posts: 1292
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2020 1:59 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by RM22 »

The Replacements wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:34 pm I read an interesting take on analytics and the 49ers draft today. I liked the Kinlaw pick but the author criticized the pick saying they should have taken Jeudy over Kinlaw because the value of a WR is much higher than DT. I am well versed in analytics regarding baseball but as much on football. I believe Aaron Gleeman wrote an article today in the Athletic on the Vikings picks and it was heavily based on analytics. Can with a subscription summarize what was said.
A couple know it all's around these parts say otherwise.

Injury prone and weight problem for a guy that screams red flags. San Francisco has the luxury of taking him with their defensive line.
Oriole81
Posts: 24845
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2018 4:48 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by Oriole81 »

hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:13 pm
Oriole81 wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:39 am
hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:24 am

100% I would have. Commensurate return for sure. Then at 25 I still do other deal that we did. Not commensurate return, but must have been what market was which is all that matters.

You are more a draft expert than I - is Blacklock or Gallimore "over drafted " at 31? Thats what I would have done, but my question is is Gladney a tier above those guys?

My main beef is taking a receiver in first, I just completely disagree unless maybe one of the 3 studs dropped, and secondly once board played out I wanted to move down from 22 and get an extra top 75 pick.
I don't think it would have been "overdrafted" to take Blacklock or Gallimore at 31 if a certain team really liked them specifically in comparison to the litany of other DTs available on Day 2, especially if they're not a team known for developing mid round DL.
But for a team like the Vikes that has a track record in developing mid round guys, I don't think they're much above the likes of Madabuike, Davis or Elliott. I think Patterson should be able to turn any of those 3 into impact starters.

I do still think though they'll move up today, perhaps multiple times, and DL is probably one of those targets. But if it had fallen Blacklock at 31 and do the trade up for CB Jaylon Johnson and lose out on Gladney, I'd probably feel the same as I do now.
Thanks for the info, O. Good stuff!

You make an interesting point on DT. Maybe I'm being too worried? You are saying the next guys after the Gallimore/Blacklock aren't much different? That would be encouraging to me.

I sure as F wished I knew if we end up with Williams.
There's just so much variance with all those guys that I honestly don't know what to think, especially considering they're all still developmental projects. Even respected analysts are all over the place on who they prefer, or if there's even any major difference.
So I go back to the fact that we have a track record with developing Day 2 guys, so I don't know if we need to be at the top of that position tier unless we've specifically outlined one guy that we're confident can not just be an impact starter, but to be an actual stud.

Had they made that call last night and said this was our guy no matter what, I would have been on board, but they didn't.
So for everyone that says CB and WR and deep and we can find one on Day 2, my response is it's the exact same boat with DL.
2020 All Time NBA Draft

A Iverson, K Irving
J Havlicek, M Ginobili, M Richmond
D Wilkins, B Bowen
T Duncan, B McAdoo
H Olajuwon, W Unseld, A Sabonis
mlhouse
Posts: 24753
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 9:00 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by mlhouse »

The Replacements wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:34 pm I read an interesting take on analytics and the 49ers draft today. I liked the Kinlaw pick but the author criticized the pick saying they should have taken Jeudy over Kinlaw because the value of a WR is much higher than DT. I am well versed in analytics regarding baseball but as much on football. I believe Aaron Gleeman wrote an article today in the Athletic on the Vikings picks and it was heavily based on analytics. Can with a subscription summarize what was said.
1. The value of football analytics is marginal at best.

2. What football analytics that do have values, trying to convert college production into NFL production does not. One factor in trying to do this is the much higher rate of injury in the NFL.

3. The claim that the value of a WR in the draft is higher than a DT could be true, but NFL GMs certainly do not agree with that claim.

4. Claiming that there is a uniform measure of value of a position also lacks merit. For the Vikings, there is absolutely zero doubt that the value of a DT is much greater than the value of a WR2. It isn't even close. In my opinion, even if Jefferson is a good player, the only way to justify the pick is if the Vikings offense shifts significantly to a more wide open passing offense, increases the number of pass attempts from 30th in the NFL by at least 100, and feeds Jefferson at least 90 targets.

5. The probability that the VIkings open up their passing offense with the level of changes they have made to date in the offensive line is zero.
User avatar
cunningham
Posts: 13440
Joined: Thu Sep 14, 2017 2:26 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by cunningham »

hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:36 am Not good.

1. In my opinion, drafting a receiver first was asinine. If one of the big 3 are there, maybe, but I couldnt be more disappointed and frustrated. When getting Kinlaw wasnt an option, moving down was the smarter move. Maybe there wasnt an opp to do so, I dont know. I just know that for a variety of reasons, taking WR first was moronic and so typical RS bullshit.

2. Got fleeced on the trade down. Half the points they should have gotten. Like the idea, hate what they got, and again, I would have strongly preferred trading 22 down and getting either a 2 or a good 3. Extra 4th is fine, and we got a quality guy in Gladney, but not what I would have preferred.

3. I would have thought DT would have been a priority. It should be. I guess I had hoped to trade down and then grab Blacklock or Gallimore. Maybe we get one of them anyway. Damn sure better get a good one soon.

If we get Williams, things look a little better. Its a pretty big key right now as if we get him and can draft a guard in next 2 or 3 rounds we maybe ok on OL. If not, well, shockingly we will still have OL as a huge issue.

We damn sure need a DT and soon.
We should have taken the best guard. You have complained about that for two years. You have complained about that more than I have complained about Cousins.

I thought we’d take a guard, but WR and CB is RS all the way! At least you and Rube are seeing the truth now.
User avatar
Deep Purple
Posts: 641
Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2018 10:25 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by Deep Purple »

One could argue that both JJ and JG were BAP. I wanted linemen but the value was no longer there by the time pick 22 came along. Great picks the way the board fell.
User avatar
weimy froob
Posts: 88504
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:10 am

Re: Assessment so far

Post by weimy froob »

Deep Purple wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 2:02 pm One could argue that both JJ and JG were BAP. I wanted linemen but the value was no longer there by the time pick 22 came along. Great picks the way the board fell.
i think you're right with that assessment. they were the BPA on the kfan analyst's charts. both PA and charch's on the WR-all three on the CB.
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »

cunningham wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:56 pm
hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 9:36 am Not good.

1. In my opinion, drafting a receiver first was asinine. If one of the big 3 are there, maybe, but I couldnt be more disappointed and frustrated. When getting Kinlaw wasnt an option, moving down was the smarter move. Maybe there wasnt an opp to do so, I dont know. I just know that for a variety of reasons, taking WR first was moronic and so typical RS bullshit.

2. Got fleeced on the trade down. Half the points they should have gotten. Like the idea, hate what they got, and again, I would have strongly preferred trading 22 down and getting either a 2 or a good 3. Extra 4th is fine, and we got a quality guy in Gladney, but not what I would have preferred.

3. I would have thought DT would have been a priority. It should be. I guess I had hoped to trade down and then grab Blacklock or Gallimore. Maybe we get one of them anyway. Damn sure better get a good one soon.

If we get Williams, things look a little better. Its a pretty big key right now as if we get him and can draft a guard in next 2 or 3 rounds we maybe ok on OL. If not, well, shockingly we will still have OL as a huge issue.

We damn sure need a DT and soon.
We should have taken the best guard. You have complained about that for two years. You have complained about that more than I have complained about Cousins.

I thought we’d take a guard, but WR and CB is RS all the way! At least you and Rube are seeing the truth now.
:lol:

There is one thing I like about you. You are extremely consistent. No matter how moronic you are, you at least stay locked onto your nonsense like a rabid dog.

No fucking clue what your babble about me agreeing with the VI, there is nothing I agree with super bit on.

There was never any G worth taking in first and it would nave been moronic to do so. There, that's all I can afford you reaponse wise.
User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 7922
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by Ash Ketchum »

hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:26 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:59 am
hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:01 am Of our 4 major needs (DT, WR, CB and OL) we took the 2 we can deal with later, first. Thats the big issue for me.
What are you even basing this on?

Which WR or CB are you expecting to be there at 58 that are going to be as good?
:lol:

If you are going to start your typical "you have to name names bullshit" just don't reply. I don't pretend to be an expert nor do i do 7 round mock drafts. Please don't start that crap.

Its based on A. Deepest Wr pool in years. Its reasonable to expect to find a starter in 2nd or 3rd most years, its very likely this year. B. The paramount strength of this coach staff is developing DBs. So philosophically, its not as important to this team to draft elite corners. Again, reasonable to expect can find a guy Zim can make into a starter in next two rounds.

As you know I would have loved trading up for Kinlaw. Maybe wasnt possible. Once the board fell as it did, I think we should have snapped up the Charger trade. I'd be feeling better today with 5 picks.

I dont hate yesterday, and if we pull off TW and can get a quality DT today I will feel better. However, I just strongly preferred an extra pick than drafting any receiver. But, hopefully he ends up being very good and ol hgtm is wrong. Again. :mrgreen:
That’s fair, but how can you have a strong take either way then?

If they think Jefferson is much better than the WRs available at 58, then how can you sit there and dispute the pick if you have no opinions on those players?
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »

Ash Ketchum wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 3:06 pm
hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:26 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 11:59 am

What are you even basing this on?

Which WR or CB are you expecting to be there at 58 that are going to be as good?
:lol:

If you are going to start your typical "you have to name names bullshit" just don't reply. I don't pretend to be an expert nor do i do 7 round mock drafts. Please don't start that crap.

Its based on A. Deepest Wr pool in years. Its reasonable to expect to find a starter in 2nd or 3rd most years, its very likely this year. B. The paramount strength of this coach staff is developing DBs. So philosophically, its not as important to this team to draft elite corners. Again, reasonable to expect can find a guy Zim can make into a starter in next two rounds.

As you know I would have loved trading up for Kinlaw. Maybe wasnt possible. Once the board fell as it did, I think we should have snapped up the Charger trade. I'd be feeling better today with 5 picks.

I dont hate yesterday, and if we pull off TW and can get a quality DT today I will feel better. However, I just strongly preferred an extra pick than drafting any receiver. But, hopefully he ends up being very good and ol hgtm is wrong. Again. :mrgreen:
That’s fair, but how can you have a strong take either way then?

If they think Jefferson is much better than the WRs available at 58, then how can you sit there and dispute the pick if you have no opinions on those players?
A. I never said Jefferson isn't better than the other WRs avail at 58. Maybe he is the "best of the rest". I dont know.

B. Many, many, many experts have said, almost as nauseum, this is a deep a WR draft as there has ever been. Therefore, the question is how much better is Jefferson than the rest when the rest is unusually deep and good?

C. How important is it on a run first offense for the #2 WR to be better than another guy who would also be good?

My point was simple. This year, in this draft, it is reasonable to expect that taking a receiver in 2nd or 3rd would net a quality starter. I strongly preferred being able to draft 5 or 6 guys in first 3 rounds and of course 1 or 2 of them be receivers, than get any particular receiver (unless they were named Lamb or from Bama).
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »




This is why I really preferred trading down BOTH picks once Kinlaw dream was done.
User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 7922
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by Ash Ketchum »

hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 3:41 pm


This is why I really preferred trading down BOTH picks once Kinlaw dream was done.
Do you think other teams also believe this and therefore there are fewer teams trying to move up?
User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 7922
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by Ash Ketchum »

hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 3:32 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 3:06 pm
hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 1:26 pm
:lol:

If you are going to start your typical "you have to name names bullshit" just don't reply. I don't pretend to be an expert nor do i do 7 round mock drafts. Please don't start that crap.

Its based on A. Deepest Wr pool in years. Its reasonable to expect to find a starter in 2nd or 3rd most years, its very likely this year. B. The paramount strength of this coach staff is developing DBs. So philosophically, its not as important to this team to draft elite corners. Again, reasonable to expect can find a guy Zim can make into a starter in next two rounds.

As you know I would have loved trading up for Kinlaw. Maybe wasnt possible. Once the board fell as it did, I think we should have snapped up the Charger trade. I'd be feeling better today with 5 picks.

I dont hate yesterday, and if we pull off TW and can get a quality DT today I will feel better. However, I just strongly preferred an extra pick than drafting any receiver. But, hopefully he ends up being very good and ol hgtm is wrong. Again. :mrgreen:
That’s fair, but how can you have a strong take either way then?

If they think Jefferson is much better than the WRs available at 58, then how can you sit there and dispute the pick if you have no opinions on those players?
A. I never said Jefferson isn't better than the other WRs avail at 58. Maybe he is the "best of the rest". I dont know.

B. Many, many, many experts have said, almost as nauseum, this is a deep a WR draft as there has ever been. Therefore, the question is how much better is Jefferson than the rest when the rest is unusually deep and good?

C. How important is it on a run first offense for the #2 WR to be better than another guy who would also be good?

My point was simple. This year, in this draft, it is reasonable to expect that taking a receiver in 2nd or 3rd would net a quality starter. I strongly preferred being able to draft 5 or 6 guys in first 3 rounds and of course 1 or 2 of them be receivers, than get any particular receiver (unless they were named Lamb or from Bama).
6 WRs went in R1 last night.

That's as many as the past 3 years combined.

The "depth" you speak of is just that there are more upper-tier WR prospects than normal.

The narrative that there's going to be all these starting caliber WRs available in the middle rounds more so than past years isn't as true as people are saying. The position might be "deeper" as in more top flight WR prospects are in this draft, but you still have to pull the trigger on one relatively early to capitalize.
hategreenticemase
Posts: 21488
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by hategreenticemase »

Ash Ketchum wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 3:49 pm
hategreenticemase wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 3:32 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote: Fri Apr 24, 2020 3:06 pm

That’s fair, but how can you have a strong take either way then?

If they think Jefferson is much better than the WRs available at 58, then how can you sit there and dispute the pick if you have no opinions on those players?
A. I never said Jefferson isn't better than the other WRs avail at 58. Maybe he is the "best of the rest". I dont know.

B. Many, many, many experts have said, almost as nauseum, this is a deep a WR draft as there has ever been. Therefore, the question is how much better is Jefferson than the rest when the rest is unusually deep and good?

C. How important is it on a run first offense for the #2 WR to be better than another guy who would also be good?

My point was simple. This year, in this draft, it is reasonable to expect that taking a receiver in 2nd or 3rd would net a quality starter. I strongly preferred being able to draft 5 or 6 guys in first 3 rounds and of course 1 or 2 of them be receivers, than get any particular receiver (unless they were named Lamb or from Bama).
6 WRs went in R1 last night.

That's as many as the past 3 years combined.

The "depth" you speak of is just that there are more upper-tier WR prospects than normal.

The narrative that there's going to be all these starting caliber WRs available in the middle rounds more so than past years isn't as true as people are saying. The position might be "deeper" as in more top flight WR prospects are in this draft, but you still have to pull the trigger on one relatively early to capitalize.
I never said middle rounds. I have steadfastly said we have 5 picks in first 3 rounds and 1, maybe even 2, should be a receiver.

As for your earlier question, the Chargers trade would have been just fine. Get a good player at 37 and then the 3rd rd pick was high as well. Would loved that trade.
RM22
Posts: 1292
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2020 1:59 pm

Re: Assessment so far

Post by RM22 »

ESPN's Adam Schefter said an executive is calling this “the deepest second round in the last 25 years" and added there are 20 players available who could have been first-round picks.

Good thing these arm chair QBs are not calling the shots.
Post Reply