T.J. Hockenson

A place to discuss the MN Vikings
User avatar
Keith_Morrison
Posts: 1394
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:02 am

T.J. Hockenson

Post by Keith_Morrison » Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:33 am

Mock drafts now trending T.J. Hockenson as the pick for the Vikes @18.

Some pundits are comping Hockenson to Travis Kelce.


Click here to learn how to add YouTube Videos to your phpBB forum

We desperately OL starters.

Would you be happy with Hockenson @18?
I couldn’t agree more.

User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 3943
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Ash Ketchum » Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:48 am

Keith_Morrison wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:33 am
Mock drafts now trending T.J. Hockenson as the pick for the Vikes @18.

Some pundits are comping Hockenson to Travis Kelce.


Click here to learn how to add YouTube Videos to your phpBB forum

We desperately OL starters.

Would you be happy with Hockenson @18?
Yes would be happy.

Fun fact, if we draft Hockenson, we get to have him for more than just 2019.

OL starters can be found later.

Small Hands
Posts: 1418
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Small Hands » Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:53 am

I think he goes top 10. He's gonna be special. I think the Kelce comparison is interesting. Except Kelce doesn't block at all. Hock is an excellent blocker. Kelce could be a good blocker. He was early in his career, but he doesn't even try now that he's a star. It'll be interesting to see if Hock does the same thing once he becomes a legit pass catching weapon.

User avatar
Da Gas Man
Posts: 4190
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:26 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Da Gas Man » Sun Mar 17, 2019 9:04 am

Hockenson is worth 18 obviously as he most likely won't even fall to there.

The problem with ALWAYS taking the best player available no matter what is that a team can end up with the worse OL in the league.

So I ask it this way: if Hockenson is there at 18 (and he is 14th on the Vikings board for example) and another OL is there ranked at 17. So they are both worth 18. Is it smart to take Hockenson? I don't know.

Tuck ya in
Posts: 819
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:00 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Tuck ya in » Sun Mar 17, 2019 9:52 am

Yeah, I've noticed a few different mocks with him for us at #18 lately. I like it a lot. But ultimately if the Vikes had a plan to take him I would think they would have addressed at least one guard position in free agency, and/or made a trade. I go around in circles with #18, but I think they go offensive line.

SKOLMN
Posts: 405
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:15 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by SKOLMN » 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

User avatar
mglviks
Posts: 2914
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2017 1:22 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by mglviks » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:06 am

I am all for it!

2 OLs must be taken r2-4. Which is good with me.
As for OL rate now I only have Taylor in top 20. But like 10 guys in 20-50 range. And Taylor because he stays at Tackle.

User avatar
Keith_Morrison
Posts: 1394
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:02 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Keith_Morrison » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:09 am

In my opinion, if we draft Hockenson @18 we need to trade back into round 1 and snag a day one OL starter.

Of course Waynes’ could also be traded for a late 1st to a team like the Colts. They have the $$ to resign Waynes and could use another young, top end DB.
I couldn’t agree more.

User avatar
BlackDog
Posts: 2487
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2017 4:42 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by BlackDog » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:13 am

Ash Ketchum wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:48 am
Keith_Morrison wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:33 am
Mock drafts now trending T.J. Hockenson as the pick for the Vikes @18.

Some pundits are comping Hockenson to Travis Kelce.


Click here to learn how to add YouTube Videos to your phpBB forum

We desperately OL starters.

Would you be happy with Hockenson @18?
Yes would be happy.

Fun fact, if we draft Hockenson, we get to have him for more than just 2019.

OL starters can be found later.
And Rick Spielman’s ability to find oline gems in the later rounds like Willie Beavers make this pick even easier to make.
Formerly Shalabi

Tuck ya in
Posts: 819
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:00 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Tuck ya in » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:15 am

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
Actually Kubiak likes the dual Tightend formations, so Rudy still being here fits with the theory they could still target Hock at #18. However they'd have to somehow acquire 2 startable guards in later rounds.

mlhouse
Posts: 5584
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 9:00 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by mlhouse » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:25 am

I like the two Iowa TEs as prospects for sure, and it can be very justifiable to draft them in the mid-first.

However, I think Juwaan Taylor, Cody Ford, and Jonah Williams are all better prospects. Even if you disagree with that, to argue that they are SUPERIOR prospects and the Vikings should draft away from their primary need is utterly ridiculous.

Tuck ya in
Posts: 819
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:00 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Tuck ya in » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:34 am

mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:25 am
I like the two Iowa TEs as prospects for sure, and it can be very justifiable to draft them in the mid-first.

However, I think Juwaan Taylor, Cody Ford, and Jonah Williams are all better prospects. Even if you disagree with that, to argue that they are SUPERIOR prospects and the Vikings should draft away from their primary need is utterly ridiculous.
Mostly agree, they'll have to pull the trigger on an olinemen at #18. Then see who slides down towards their second round pick, you never know they could trade up. Kelce was a 3rd rounder.

mlhouse
Posts: 5584
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 9:00 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by mlhouse » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:48 am

Tuck ya in wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:34 am
mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:25 am
I like the two Iowa TEs as prospects for sure, and it can be very justifiable to draft them in the mid-first.

However, I think Juwaan Taylor, Cody Ford, and Jonah Williams are all better prospects. Even if you disagree with that, to argue that they are SUPERIOR prospects and the Vikings should draft away from their primary need is utterly ridiculous.
Mostly agree, they'll have to pull the trigger on an olinemen at #18. Then see who slides down towards their second round pick, you never know they could trade up. Kelce was a 3rd rounder.
I think they have much bigger needs than tight end. Rudolph is a much better tight end than people are giving him credit for. The main problem with Rudolph isn't his skills, but the way he is used. The Vikings have not had a creative pass offense for more than 10 years.

WHile Rudolph has the worst RAC skills I have ever seen, he has a huge catch radius and has the skills to run a more diverse route tree than the fullback route tree the Vikings use him. While he isn't as fast as some other modern tight ends in the NFL, he is fast enough down the seam that linebackers can't cover him because of that catch radius and very good hands. The Vikings just do not use him that way and that is one of the problems with our pass offense.

User avatar
Da Gas Man
Posts: 4190
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:26 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Da Gas Man » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:49 am

Keith_Morrison wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:09 am
In my opinion, if we draft Hockenson @18 we need to trade back into round 1 and snag a day one OL starter.

Of course Waynes’ could also be traded for a late 1st to a team like the Colts. They have the $$ to resign Waynes and could use another young, top end DB.
I think I might agree with this. They don't have much success drafting OL later in draft (and that means 4th and on). So if they got Hockenson at 18, I would rather lose a draft pick and grab a better OL than hope to get two at our regular spots.

User avatar
Keith_Morrison
Posts: 1394
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:02 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Keith_Morrison » Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:50 am

Da Gas Man wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:49 am
Keith_Morrison wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:09 am
In my opinion, if we draft Hockenson @18 we need to trade back into round 1 and snag a day one OL starter.

Of course Waynes’ could also be traded for a late 1st to a team like the Colts. They have the $$ to resign Waynes and could use another young, top end DB.
I think I might agree with this. They don't have much success drafting OL later in draft (and that means 4th and on). So if they got Hockenson at 18, I would rather lose a draft pick and grab a better OL than hope to get two at our regular spots.
:knucks:
I couldn’t agree more.

mlhouse
Posts: 5584
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 9:00 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by mlhouse » Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:00 am

Da Gas Man wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:49 am
Keith_Morrison wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:09 am
In my opinion, if we draft Hockenson @18 we need to trade back into round 1 and snag a day one OL starter.

Of course Waynes’ could also be traded for a late 1st to a team like the Colts. They have the $$ to resign Waynes and could use another young, top end DB.
I think I might agree with this. They don't have much success drafting OL later in draft (and that means 4th and on). So if they got Hockenson at 18, I would rather lose a draft pick and grab a better OL than hope to get two at our regular spots.
So, while I am critical of Rick Spieilman's drafting offensive linemen to some extent what exactly do you think success in drafting OL later in the draft should be?

In SPielman's tenure with the Vikings, starting in 2006, the Vikings have drafted two reasonable 6th round starters although that was in 2008 and 2011.

In those years, if you look at the oLine draft picks the VIkings made in the 4th round or after, there really isn't anything that is out of line. A guy like Tyus Thompson in the 6th in 2015 seemed a reasonable pick.

And, people who claim that Beavers and Clemmings were not reasonable 4th round picks are out of line.

These picks just did not pan out as picks often do.

My biggest issue is that because they never developed any picks after 2011 for the oLine, they needed to be better using other rescources to develop the depth they needed. That they failed, although it is difficult to argue with some of the players Rick drafted instead.

User avatar
Da Gas Man
Posts: 4190
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:26 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Da Gas Man » Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:06 am

mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:00 am
Da Gas Man wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:49 am
Keith_Morrison wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:09 am
In my opinion, if we draft Hockenson @18 we need to trade back into round 1 and snag a day one OL starter.

Of course Waynes’ could also be traded for a late 1st to a team like the Colts. They have the $$ to resign Waynes and could use another young, top end DB.
I think I might agree with this. They don't have much success drafting OL later in draft (and that means 4th and on). So if they got Hockenson at 18, I would rather lose a draft pick and grab a better OL than hope to get two at our regular spots.
So, while I am critical of Rick Spieilman's drafting offensive linemen to some extent what exactly do you think success in drafting OL later in the draft should be?

In SPielman's tenure with the Vikings, starting in 2006, the Vikings have drafted two reasonable 6th round starters although that was in 2008 and 2011.

In those years, if you look at the oLine draft picks the VIkings made in the 4th round or after, there really isn't anything that is out of line. A guy like Tyus Thompson in the 6th in 2015 seemed a reasonable pick.

And, people who claim that Beavers and Clemmings were not reasonable 4th round picks are out of line.

These picks just did not pan out as picks often do.

My biggest issue is that because they never developed any picks after 2011 for the oLine, they needed to be better using other rescources to develop the depth they needed. That they failed, although it is difficult to argue with some of the players Rick drafted instead.
But that's just the point. OL is a classic spot where teams find players after the third who can start or even backup and yet the Vikings haven't. You can argue that Clemmings and Beavers made sense at the time but why is that relevant? When evaluating draft picks, you evaluate a few years later to know if they picked the right guy. If they flop like Clemmings and Beavers, either the coaching was bad and these players may have succeeded OR every other team that didn't draft these players might have known what Speilman didn't.

Here's the main point in short: There have been a few successes but when they don't draft OL early under the premise that OL can be found later in the draft, they better have more success than they have. And the truth is that with every round, the success rate goes down. The fact that Isidora can't play is not as bad as the two fourth rounders who failed.

hategreenticemase
Posts: 2318
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by hategreenticemase » Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:10 am

mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:25 am
I like the two Iowa TEs as prospects for sure, and it can be very justifiable to draft them in the mid-first.

However, I think Juwaan Taylor, Cody Ford, and Jonah Williams are all better prospects. Even if you disagree with that, to argue that they are SUPERIOR prospects and the Vikings should draft away from their primary need is utterly ridiculous.
"T is a primary need". Can't make this fucker up. :lol:

Here, im here to help. Since it's laughable to say T is a "primary" need, maybe instead shift your goalposts to trying to make a case that T is a bigger need than dynamic 3rd passing option. But good luck, because your dumbass will look silly there as well.

Certainly developing a T is a need to try and replace Reiff in 20 or 21. This nonsense it is a primary need or more important than two starting interior guys, a 3rd weapon on Off, DT etc, is nauseating, contrived and total hogwash.

mlhouse
Posts: 5584
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 9:00 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by mlhouse » Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:39 am

hategreenticemase wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:10 am
mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:25 am
I like the two Iowa TEs as prospects for sure, and it can be very justifiable to draft them in the mid-first.

However, I think Juwaan Taylor, Cody Ford, and Jonah Williams are all better prospects. Even if you disagree with that, to argue that they are SUPERIOR prospects and the Vikings should draft away from their primary need is utterly ridiculous.
"T is a primary need". Can't make this fucker up. :lol:

Here, im here to help. Since it's laughable to say T is a "primary" need, maybe instead shift your goalposts to trying to make a case that T is a bigger need than dynamic 3rd passing option. But good luck, because your dumbass will look silly there as well.

Certainly developing a T is a need to try and replace Reiff in 20 or 21. This nonsense it is a primary need or more important than two starting interior guys, a 3rd weapon on Off, DT etc, is nauseating, contrived and total hogwash.
And anyone who reads your crap knows you are an idiot. Keep it up!!!!

mlhouse
Posts: 5584
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2017 9:00 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by mlhouse » Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:48 am

Da Gas Man wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:06 am
mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:00 am
Da Gas Man wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:49 am


I think I might agree with this. They don't have much success drafting OL later in draft (and that means 4th and on). So if they got Hockenson at 18, I would rather lose a draft pick and grab a better OL than hope to get two at our regular spots.
So, while I am critical of Rick Spieilman's drafting offensive linemen to some extent what exactly do you think success in drafting OL later in the draft should be?

In SPielman's tenure with the Vikings, starting in 2006, the Vikings have drafted two reasonable 6th round starters although that was in 2008 and 2011.

In those years, if you look at the oLine draft picks the VIkings made in the 4th round or after, there really isn't anything that is out of line. A guy like Tyus Thompson in the 6th in 2015 seemed a reasonable pick.

And, people who claim that Beavers and Clemmings were not reasonable 4th round picks are out of line.

These picks just did not pan out as picks often do.

My biggest issue is that because they never developed any picks after 2011 for the oLine, they needed to be better using other rescources to develop the depth they needed. That they failed, although it is difficult to argue with some of the players Rick drafted instead.
But that's just the point. OL is a classic spot where teams find players after the third who can start or even backup and yet the Vikings haven't. You can argue that Clemmings and Beavers made sense at the time but why is that relevant? When evaluating draft picks, you evaluate a few years later to know if they picked the right guy. If they flop like Clemmings and Beavers, either the coaching was bad and these players may have succeeded OR every other team that didn't draft these players might have known what Speilman didn't.

Here's the main point in short: There have been a few successes but when they don't draft OL early under the premise that OL can be found later in the draft, they better have more success than they have. And the truth is that with every round, the success rate goes down. The fact that Isidora can't play is not as bad as the two fourth rounders who failed.
I think you are overrating the success rate of players drafted after the 3rd round.

GO through the Vikings oLine draft selections since 2006 and tell me a player that wasn't a reasonable pick. If you say Beavers or Clemmings, your opinion is false as they were for sure 4th-5th round value when they were drafted. David Yankey? People thought he was a day 1 or 2 pick.

If you are running your team with the concept that you should wait until after the 3rd because you can get offensive linemen later you would have the offensive line Rick has, if not worse. You need to develop offensive line quality and depth. We need to address it now, and going forward.

As I mention, Bud Grant essentially drafted an offensive lineman in the top 3 rounds every year with rare exceptions. He drafted AT LEAST one offensive lineman in the first 3 rounds in 1968,69,70,72,74,76,77,78,79,80,81, and 82. In all of those years he ran the team (with Jerry Reichow), from 1967 - 1983 they developed one starting offensive lineman drafted after the 3rd round: Chuck Goodrum 9th round in 1972.

hategreenticemase
Posts: 2318
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by hategreenticemase » Sun Mar 17, 2019 12:08 pm

mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:39 am
hategreenticemase wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:10 am
mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:25 am
I like the two Iowa TEs as prospects for sure, and it can be very justifiable to draft them in the mid-first.

However, I think Juwaan Taylor, Cody Ford, and Jonah Williams are all better prospects. Even if you disagree with that, to argue that they are SUPERIOR prospects and the Vikings should draft away from their primary need is utterly ridiculous.
"T is a primary need". Can't make this fucker up. :lol:

Here, im here to help. Since it's laughable to say T is a "primary" need, maybe instead shift your goalposts to trying to make a case that T is a bigger need than dynamic 3rd passing option. But good luck, because your dumbass will look silly there as well.

Certainly developing a T is a need to try and replace Reiff in 20 or 21. This nonsense it is a primary need or more important than two starting interior guys, a 3rd weapon on Off, DT etc, is nauseating, contrived and total hogwash.
And anyone who reads your crap knows you are an idiot. Keep it up!!!!

Yeah, I'd probably quit while I was beyond also. :lol:

User avatar
Da Gas Man
Posts: 4190
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 11:26 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Da Gas Man » Sun Mar 17, 2019 12:21 pm

mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:48 am
Da Gas Man wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:06 am
mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:00 am


So, while I am critical of Rick Spieilman's drafting offensive linemen to some extent what exactly do you think success in drafting OL later in the draft should be?

In SPielman's tenure with the Vikings, starting in 2006, the Vikings have drafted two reasonable 6th round starters although that was in 2008 and 2011.

In those years, if you look at the oLine draft picks the VIkings made in the 4th round or after, there really isn't anything that is out of line. A guy like Tyus Thompson in the 6th in 2015 seemed a reasonable pick.

And, people who claim that Beavers and Clemmings were not reasonable 4th round picks are out of line.

These picks just did not pan out as picks often do.

My biggest issue is that because they never developed any picks after 2011 for the oLine, they needed to be better using other rescources to develop the depth they needed. That they failed, although it is difficult to argue with some of the players Rick drafted instead.
But that's just the point. OL is a classic spot where teams find players after the third who can start or even backup and yet the Vikings haven't. You can argue that Clemmings and Beavers made sense at the time but why is that relevant? When evaluating draft picks, you evaluate a few years later to know if they picked the right guy. If they flop like Clemmings and Beavers, either the coaching was bad and these players may have succeeded OR every other team that didn't draft these players might have known what Speilman didn't.

Here's the main point in short: There have been a few successes but when they don't draft OL early under the premise that OL can be found later in the draft, they better have more success than they have. And the truth is that with every round, the success rate goes down. The fact that Isidora can't play is not as bad as the two fourth rounders who failed.
I think you are overrating the success rate of players drafted after the 3rd round.

GO through the Vikings oLine draft selections since 2006 and tell me a player that wasn't a reasonable pick. If you say Beavers or Clemmings, your opinion is false as they were for sure 4th-5th round value when they were drafted. David Yankey? People thought he was a day 1 or 2 pick.

If you are running your team with the concept that you should wait until after the 3rd because you can get offensive linemen later you would have the offensive line Rick has, if not worse. You need to develop offensive line quality and depth. We need to address it now, and going forward.

As I mention, Bud Grant essentially drafted an offensive lineman in the top 3 rounds every year with rare exceptions. He drafted AT LEAST one offensive lineman in the first 3 rounds in 1968,69,70,72,74,76,77,78,79,80,81, and 82. In all of those years he ran the team (with Jerry Reichow), from 1967 - 1983 they developed one starting offensive lineman drafted after the 3rd round: Chuck Goodrum 9th round in 1972.
But that is my point. If we accept your premise, that 4th rounders have a low success rate (and that is why Bud did what he did) then to not do it and rely on 4th rounders and later is a risk. To take that risk and then use the excuse of "4th rounders and on don't pan out that often" is bad drafting. Simply, if they are going to always wait on OL, then they better have a better success rate than average.

I think we agree on the end result. I just think we got there differently. (Unless I misunderstand you in which case, I apologize and please indicate where so I can better understand.)

Small Hands
Posts: 1418
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 8:08 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Small Hands » Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:19 pm

Tuck ya in wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:34 am
mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 10:25 am
I like the two Iowa TEs as prospects for sure, and it can be very justifiable to draft them in the mid-first.

However, I think Juwaan Taylor, Cody Ford, and Jonah Williams are all better prospects. Even if you disagree with that, to argue that they are SUPERIOR prospects and the Vikings should draft away from their primary need is utterly ridiculous.
Mostly agree, they'll have to pull the trigger on an olinemen at #18. Then see who slides down towards their second round pick, you never know they could trade up. Kelce was a 3rd rounder.
Kelce was a third round pick because of character issues. Hockenson is a top 10 talent in this draft. None of the Olineman are top ten talents. If Hockenson falls to 18, I run to the podium and don't think twice about it. He won't though. Vikings are going to draft Oline at 18. Restructuring Griffin and signing Barr ensures that.

User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 3943
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Ash Ketchum » Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:38 pm

hategreenticemase wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 12:08 pm
mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:39 am
hategreenticemase wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:10 am


"T is a primary need". Can't make this fucker up. :lol:

Here, im here to help. Since it's laughable to say T is a "primary" need, maybe instead shift your goalposts to trying to make a case that T is a bigger need than dynamic 3rd passing option. But good luck, because your dumbass will look silly there as well.

Certainly developing a T is a need to try and replace Reiff in 20 or 21. This nonsense it is a primary need or more important than two starting interior guys, a 3rd weapon on Off, DT etc, is nauseating, contrived and total hogwash.
And anyone who reads your crap knows you are an idiot. Keep it up!!!!

Yeah, I'd probably quit while I was beyond also. :lol:
The fuck does this even mean?

User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 3943
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Ash Ketchum » Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:40 pm

I think Rick and the scouting staff probably have acceptable grades for a handful of the OL expected to be at 18, and I think they are reasonably sure that at least one will be available.

hategreenticemase
Posts: 2318
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by hategreenticemase » Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:38 pm

Ash Ketchum wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:38 pm
hategreenticemase wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 12:08 pm
mlhouse wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:39 am


And anyone who reads your crap knows you are an idiot. Keep it up!!!!

Yeah, I'd probably quit while I was beyond also. :lol:
The fuck does this even mean?
For a smarmy arrogant fucker who thinks he is the smartest guy in the room, you sure do struggle with simple concepts. Pretty hard to discern when he has nothing to respond with due to being boxed - again - he responds with that really biting and clever shot. I'd quit also, if I was getting boxed also.

User avatar
Ash Ketchum
Posts: 3943
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 9:11 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Ash Ketchum » Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:51 pm

hategreenticemase wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:38 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:38 pm
hategreenticemase wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 12:08 pm



Yeah, I'd probably quit while I was beyond also. :lol:
The fuck does this even mean?
For a smarmy arrogant fucker who thinks he is the smartest guy in the room, you sure do struggle with simple concepts. Pretty hard to discern when he has nothing to respond with due to being boxed - again - he responds with that really biting and clever shot. I'd quit also, if I was getting boxed also.
Your sentence literally makes zero sense lol. Calm down.

hategreenticemase
Posts: 2318
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2017 6:34 pm

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by hategreenticemase » Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:00 pm

Ash Ketchum wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:51 pm
hategreenticemase wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 2:38 pm
Ash Ketchum wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 1:38 pm

The fuck does this even mean?
For a smarmy arrogant fucker who thinks he is the smartest guy in the room, you sure do struggle with simple concepts. Pretty hard to discern when he has nothing to respond with due to being boxed - again - he responds with that really biting and clever shot. I'd quit also, if I was getting boxed also.
Your sentence literally makes zero sense lol. Calm down.
I now see what you are correctly ripping me for. Many hours of driving and a little fricken autocorrect - it autocorrected "behind" to "beyond". Mea Culpa.

User avatar
Hector
Posts: 1446
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:06 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Hector » Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:46 pm

Keith_Morrison wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:33 am
Mock drafts now trending T.J. Hockenson as the pick for the Vikes @18.

Some pundits are comping Hockenson to Travis Kelce.


Click here to learn how to add YouTube Videos to your phpBB forum

We desperately OL starters.

Would you be happy with Hockenson @18?
[youtube]http://youtu.be/YnWZe7LVKY0[/youtube] I see a lot of Kelce in Sternberger.

User avatar
Keith_Morrison
Posts: 1394
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2018 11:02 am

Re: T.J. Hockenson

Post by Keith_Morrison » Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:36 pm

Hector wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 4:46 pm
Keith_Morrison wrote:
Sun Mar 17, 2019 8:33 am
Mock drafts now trending T.J. Hockenson as the pick for the Vikes @18.

Some pundits are comping Hockenson to Travis Kelce.


Click here to learn how to add YouTube Videos to your phpBB forum

We desperately OL starters.

Would you be happy with Hockenson @18?
[youtube]http://youtu.be/YnWZe7LVKY0[/youtube] I see a lot of Kelce in Sternberger.
Jace Sternberger is a rookie TE prospect out of Texas A&M that NFL Network pundits, Charles Davis and Dan Jeremiah like for the Vikes in the later rounds if we go OL and/or DL early in the draft.
I couldn’t agree more.

Post Reply