For what my opinion is worth I think you are all overthinking it a bit. The Vikings create "clusters" of players and their draft rule to take a player from the highest remaining cluster. The alternative would be to trade back and they place values on the difference in talent between tiers. So for example it would cost more to give up a tier one player and take one from tier two vs. say tiers three and four.
From my film study specific to the Vikings I think they're going to have the O-lineman tiered something along the lines of:
Tier 1: Jonah Williams, Andre Dillard, Jawaan Taylor
Tier 2: Cody Ford (could be tier 1), Garrett Bradbury, Chris Lindstrom, Erik McCoy, Dalton Risner
Tier 3: Dalton Risner, Greg Little, Tytus Howard
When they get on the clock at #18 if anyone from tier 1 is left on the clock, they run to the podium. If not it really comes down to what they get offered to move back and how many of the tier 2 lineman are already off the board. If the answer is none you need to risk at least one of them and pick up additional draft capital. You go through the process and place the players in tiers for this exact reason.
The caveat is that the Vikings could easily have Linstrom in their top tier without anybody knowing it. But point being is that I wouldn't panic if the Vikings opt to move back a few spots and Cody Ford or another player goes off the board.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
For what my opinion is worth I think you are all overthinking it a bit. The Vikings create "clusters" of players and their draft rule to take a player from the highest remaining cluster. The alternative would be to trade back and they place values on the difference in talent between tiers. So for example it would cost more to give up a tier one player and take one from tier two vs. say tiers three and four.
From my film study specific to the Vikings I think they're going to have the O-lineman tiered something along the lines of:
Tier 1: Jonah Williams, Andre Dillard, Jawaan Taylor
Tier 2: Cody Ford (could be tier 1), Garrett Bradbury, Chris Lindstrom, Erik McCoy, Dalton Risner
Tier 3: Dalton Risner, Greg Little, Tytus Howard
When they get on the clock at #18 if anyone from tier 1 is left on the clock, they run to the podium. If not it really comes down to what they get offered to move back and how many of the tier 2 lineman are already off the board. If the answer is none you need to risk at least one of them and pick up additional draft capital. You go through the process and place the players in tiers for this exact reason.
The caveat is that the Vikings could easily have Linstrom in their top tier without anybody knowing it. But point being is that I wouldn't panic if the Vikings opt to move back a few spots and Cody Ford or another player goes off the board.
I think the one caviot is the Vikings do this with every group of players. Then based on need and rating of the remaining players the picks are made. I'd assume the top 3 are going to probably be close to top of their board based on need and value. Where it gets tricky is when a top rated DT or TE is still on the board with a second tier line prospect. Do you take a lineman who has a 2nd round grade with plenty more rated between the 2nd and 4th rounds or do you take a DT with a top 10 grade?
The best players in my generation haven't been need based picks, but the top 2 in Moss and Peterson were value vs guys like Ponder, Williamson and Treadwell who were needs based. Our line has been a focus but the players were not the only reason we didnt win last year. We lost a top level oline coach, had 2 guys replace him at the last minute. We had some bad injuries in 2018 vs 2017.
If anyone expects us to go line at all costs is going to most likely be disappointed.
Quote: @Amazonviking said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
For what my opinion is worth I think you are all overthinking it a bit. The Vikings create "clusters" of players and their draft rule to take a player from the highest remaining cluster. The alternative would be to trade back and they place values on the difference in talent between tiers. So for example it would cost more to give up a tier one player and take one from tier two vs. say tiers three and four.
From my film study specific to the Vikings I think they're going to have the O-lineman tiered something along the lines of:
Tier 1: Jonah Williams, Andre Dillard, Jawaan Taylor
Tier 2: Cody Ford (could be tier 1), Garrett Bradbury, Chris Lindstrom, Erik McCoy, Dalton Risner
Tier 3: Dalton Risner, Greg Little, Tytus Howard
When they get on the clock at #18 if anyone from tier 1 is left on the clock, they run to the podium. If not it really comes down to what they get offered to move back and how many of the tier 2 lineman are already off the board. If the answer is none you need to risk at least one of them and pick up additional draft capital. You go through the process and place the players in tiers for this exact reason.
The caveat is that the Vikings could easily have Linstrom in their top tier without anybody knowing it. But point being is that I wouldn't panic if the Vikings opt to move back a few spots and Cody Ford or another player goes off the board.
I think the one caviot is the Vikings do this with every group of players. Then based on need and rating of the remaining players the picks are made. I'd assume the top 3 are going to probably be close to top of their board based on need and value. Where it gets tricky is when a top rated DT or TE is still on the board with a second tier line prospect. Do you take a lineman who has a 2nd round grade with plenty more rated between the 2nd and 4th rounds or do you take a DT with a top 10 grade?
The best players in my generation haven't been need based picks, but the top 2 in Moss and Peterson were value vs guys like Ponder, Williamson and Treadwell who were needs based. Our line has been a focus but the players were not the only reason we didnt win last year. We lost a top level oline coach, had 2 guys replace him at the last minute. We had some bad injuries in 2018 vs 2017.
If anyone expects us to go line at all costs is going to most likely be disappointed.
That is the narrative I'm also trying to get across. They will address the offensive line, they need to. But it would be foolish to pass on a player you've graded as a potential pro bowler.
Here is a real world example for some to wrap their head around. In the 2017 draft Dalvin Cook fell down the draft board much further than the Vikings thought he would. Although they had a clear need along O-line they weren't going to pass down the opportunity to trade up for a player they had a 1st round grade on for a 4th round pick. The alternative was to sit back and take Ethan Pocic at their own 2nd round selection. He hasn't really panned out like most have expected to date.
Point being, you go get your guys with need somewhat baked in. So if they don't go O-line at #18 they may be taking a D-lineman or TE they believe to be an impact player vs. the lineman who may be solid but won't swing the needle long-term.
Quote: @Amazonviking said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
For what my opinion is worth I think you are all overthinking it a bit. The Vikings create "clusters" of players and their draft rule to take a player from the highest remaining cluster. The alternative would be to trade back and they place values on the difference in talent between tiers. So for example it would cost more to give up a tier one player and take one from tier two vs. say tiers three and four.
From my film study specific to the Vikings I think they're going to have the O-lineman tiered something along the lines of:
Tier 1: Jonah Williams, Andre Dillard, Jawaan Taylor
Tier 2: Cody Ford (could be tier 1), Garrett Bradbury, Chris Lindstrom, Erik McCoy, Dalton Risner
Tier 3: Dalton Risner, Greg Little, Tytus Howard
When they get on the clock at #18 if anyone from tier 1 is left on the clock, they run to the podium. If not it really comes down to what they get offered to move back and how many of the tier 2 lineman are already off the board. If the answer is none you need to risk at least one of them and pick up additional draft capital. You go through the process and place the players in tiers for this exact reason.
The caveat is that the Vikings could easily have Linstrom in their top tier without anybody knowing it. But point being is that I wouldn't panic if the Vikings opt to move back a few spots and Cody Ford or another player goes off the board.
I think the one caviot is the Vikings do this with every group of players. Then based on need and rating of the remaining players the picks are made. I'd assume the top 3 are going to probably be close to top of their board based on need and value. Where it gets tricky is when a top rated DT or TE is still on the board with a second tier line prospect. Do you take a lineman who has a 2nd round grade with plenty more rated between the 2nd and 4th rounds or do you take a DT with a top 10 grade?
The best players in my generation haven't been need based picks, but the top 2 in Moss and Peterson were value vs guys like Ponder, Williamson and Treadwell who were needs based. Our line has been a focus but the players were not the only reason we didnt win last year. We lost a top level oline coach, had 2 guys replace him at the last minute. We had some bad injuries in 2018 vs 2017.
If anyone expects us to go line at all costs is going to most likely be disappointed.
Value and need aren't mutually exclusive. Sure, if one of the top pass rushers falls for some crazy reason--say, an Oliver or a Sweat (I might even put Gary and Burns in that category)--the Vikings probably would, and should, jump on them. Don't forget DL is a need, too. But after that there's a cluster of players that IMO are pretty evenly matched among needed DLs like Lawrence and Ferrell and needed OLs like Bradberry and Ford. I think the Vikings go OL in that case because while they may have one of those DLs ranked a little higher, they're not ranked ENOUGH higher to justify the risk of watching all those OLs go off the board ahead of their pick at 50.
I also think the old BPA vs. Need argument was never a legitimate debate. I don't think ANY team drafts purely BPA, except in the late rounds. This is just my opinion but I think teams draft best players available AMONG THEIR NEEDS in the 1st round (for example, Vikings absolutely won't take a CB, WR or LB in the first), they fill needs in rounds 2-4 and then draft pure BPAs (or even the less restrictive "best athlete available") in rounds 5 thru 7.
I think the mostly likely scenario is the Vikings trade Waynes for a day-two pick and with four picks on the first two days, they will take OL and DL with their first two picks in that order. Then follow that up with OL and WR/TE in whichever order they fall.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Amazonviking said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
For what my opinion is worth I think you are all overthinking it a bit. The Vikings create "clusters" of players and their draft rule to take a player from the highest remaining cluster. The alternative would be to trade back and they place values on the difference in talent between tiers. So for example it would cost more to give up a tier one player and take one from tier two vs. say tiers three and four.
From my film study specific to the Vikings I think they're going to have the O-lineman tiered something along the lines of:
Tier 1: Jonah Williams, Andre Dillard, Jawaan Taylor
Tier 2: Cody Ford (could be tier 1), Garrett Bradbury, Chris Lindstrom, Erik McCoy, Dalton Risner
Tier 3: Dalton Risner, Greg Little, Tytus Howard
When they get on the clock at #18 if anyone from tier 1 is left on the clock, they run to the podium. If not it really comes down to what they get offered to move back and how many of the tier 2 lineman are already off the board. If the answer is none you need to risk at least one of them and pick up additional draft capital. You go through the process and place the players in tiers for this exact reason.
The caveat is that the Vikings could easily have Linstrom in their top tier without anybody knowing it. But point being is that I wouldn't panic if the Vikings opt to move back a few spots and Cody Ford or another player goes off the board.
I think the one caviot is the Vikings do this with every group of players. Then based on need and rating of the remaining players the picks are made. I'd assume the top 3 are going to probably be close to top of their board based on need and value. Where it gets tricky is when a top rated DT or TE is still on the board with a second tier line prospect. Do you take a lineman who has a 2nd round grade with plenty more rated between the 2nd and 4th rounds or do you take a DT with a top 10 grade?
The best players in my generation haven't been need based picks, but the top 2 in Moss and Peterson were value vs guys like Ponder, Williamson and Treadwell who were needs based. Our line has been a focus but the players were not the only reason we didnt win last year. We lost a top level oline coach, had 2 guys replace him at the last minute. We had some bad injuries in 2018 vs 2017.
If anyone expects us to go line at all costs is going to most likely be disappointed.
That is the narrative I'm also trying to get across. They will address the offensive line, they need to. But it would be foolish to pass on a player you've graded as a potential pro bowler.
Here is a real world example for some to wrap their head around. In the 2017 draft Dalvin Cook fell down the draft board much further than the Vikings thought he would. Although they had a clear need along O-line they weren't going to pass down the opportunity to trade up for a player they had a 1st round grade on for a 4th round pick. The alternative was to sit back and take Ethan Pocic at their own 2nd round selection. He hasn't really panned out like most have expected to date.
Point being, you go get your guys with need somewhat baked in. So if they don't go O-line at #18 they may be taking a D-lineman or TE they believe to be an impact player vs. the lineman who may be solid but won't swing the needle long-term.
I think that's a misleading narrative. The Vikings NEEDED a RB that year. I think most of us thought the Vikings would pick a RB with their first pick. No one knew that Cook would fall so most of our conversations were about Mixon, Kamara, Hunt, etc. I just know that I typically have time to focus on only one position thoroughly and one other position secondarily and I choose what I think are our greatest needs. That year it was definitely RB.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
@ dadevike said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Calminnfan said:
The thing that is appealing with Lindstrom, along with his seeming to be a fit for zone blocking is that the Vikes could probably trade back a few picks and still get him if he is the OLman they want! If Taylor and Williams are gone, he, along with Bradbury may still be available even a few picks back!
if you are talking of only moving a few spots (4-5?) whats the point in risking somebody else jumping up and grabbing your guy? Is a late 3rd or early 4th round pick worth losing the guy that we should be able to drop into a starting spot this year and not worry about for the next 5 years? I dont think so.
Typically teams trade down based on their intelligence of teams needs below them and a ranked series of players they'd be happy with if one or two get sniped. But yeah, if it's not worth the risk you don't trade down.
sure you can know that the next 4 or 5 teams might not want the guy you are after, but the very next pick after your could change all that and then you are in scramble mode to move back up to get your guy because suddenly he is on another teams radar when their guy got taken surprisingly.. or worse yet, some other team jumps into the bidding for the spot you want to trade up into now and you spend more to move up than what you gained by trading back or end up losing out again.
if its not a big need then yeah go ahead and roll the dice but this team has a huge need and cant afford to get cute IMO.
Like I said, teams typically don't trade down for "one guy" they want to get a little cheaper. If it's "one guy" they just take him. They typically trade down when there's a series of players they have equal grades on and the worst-case math tells them they'll get at least one of them. Works better if you're drafting BPA obviously, because then your list of players is longer.
Maroon is exactly right. If there are 5 players that I would be happy with when it is my turn to pick, I can trade back 4 spots.
A team can also have tiers of players. Picking at 18 the Vikings may have a first tier of 10 players and if any player in that tier falls to 18, he is the pick regardless of need, even if the best OL in the second tier is still available. Then we are looking for an OL in the second round. And that's fine with me.
I think a lot of us must be seeing the draft as different than it is. These guys may look, on paper, like a bunch of interchangeable stats and triangle numbers: if we miss Lindstrom, McCoy is still there and he is the same height and almost same weight and hand size is blah blah blah. But seriously, aren't these HIRING decisions? In the early rounds, they meet with these guys, talk to them, get a feel for who can do the job, who can fit with the group. (If the Vikings aren't vetting them that way, I wonder if that's a problem..)
If you have ever hired anyone for a significant job, do you usually think, "4 or 5 of these people are roughly the same"? Never in my experience. And NEVER have I thought, "Candidate #1 is perfect for the job, but maybe I should risk losing him and get Candidate #3 if they give me a chance to get a better choice for the janitor position (extra pick in round 5) that I also need to hire..."
I hire people for a living for the largest online retailer in the world. Trying to apply business world practices to how sports teams select is not all that applicable IMO. We dont get to pick who we want, we have to offer them the job and hope they say yes. Other than the occasional Number #1 overall QB refusing to sign with the team who drafted him in the NFL you start your career with the team that picked you.
Also, we're not limited to a single night or series of nights to make a hire. There I the pressure to backfill someone who left or to staff up a new site from scratch. But it's still nothing like the truncated time frame in which the Draft occurs.
And we will absolutely stack-rank our candidate pool and select the best of that group instead of just hiring the first person in the door that is qualified.
Quote: @FSUVike said:
@ Jor-El said:
@ dadevike said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Calminnfan said:
The thing that is appealing with Lindstrom, along with his seeming to be a fit for zone blocking is that the Vikes could probably trade back a few picks and still get him if he is the OLman they want! If Taylor and Williams are gone, he, along with Bradbury may still be available even a few picks back!
if you are talking of only moving a few spots (4-5?) whats the point in risking somebody else jumping up and grabbing your guy? Is a late 3rd or early 4th round pick worth losing the guy that we should be able to drop into a starting spot this year and not worry about for the next 5 years? I dont think so.
Typically teams trade down based on their intelligence of teams needs below them and a ranked series of players they'd be happy with if one or two get sniped. But yeah, if it's not worth the risk you don't trade down.
sure you can know that the next 4 or 5 teams might not want the guy you are after, but the very next pick after your could change all that and then you are in scramble mode to move back up to get your guy because suddenly he is on another teams radar when their guy got taken surprisingly.. or worse yet, some other team jumps into the bidding for the spot you want to trade up into now and you spend more to move up than what you gained by trading back or end up losing out again.
if its not a big need then yeah go ahead and roll the dice but this team has a huge need and cant afford to get cute IMO.
Like I said, teams typically don't trade down for "one guy" they want to get a little cheaper. If it's "one guy" they just take him. They typically trade down when there's a series of players they have equal grades on and the worst-case math tells them they'll get at least one of them. Works better if you're drafting BPA obviously, because then your list of players is longer.
Maroon is exactly right. If there are 5 players that I would be happy with when it is my turn to pick, I can trade back 4 spots.
A team can also have tiers of players. Picking at 18 the Vikings may have a first tier of 10 players and if any player in that tier falls to 18, he is the pick regardless of need, even if the best OL in the second tier is still available. Then we are looking for an OL in the second round. And that's fine with me.
I think a lot of us must be seeing the draft as different than it is. These guys may look, on paper, like a bunch of interchangeable stats and triangle numbers: if we miss Lindstrom, McCoy is still there and he is the same height and almost same weight and hand size is blah blah blah. But seriously, aren't these HIRING decisions? In the early rounds, they meet with these guys, talk to them, get a feel for who can do the job, who can fit with the group. (If the Vikings aren't vetting them that way, I wonder if that's a problem..)
If you have ever hired anyone for a significant job, do you usually think, "4 or 5 of these people are roughly the same"? Never in my experience. And NEVER have I thought, "Candidate #1 is perfect for the job, but maybe I should risk losing him and get Candidate #3 if they give me a chance to get a better choice for the janitor position (extra pick in round 5) that I also need to hire..."
I hire people for a living for the largest online retailer in the world. Trying to apply business world practices to how sports teams select is not all that applicable IMO. We dont get to pick who we want, we have to offer them the job and hope they say yes. Other than the occasional Number #1 overall QB refusing to sign with the team who drafted him in the NFL you start your career with the team that picked you.
Also, we're not limited to a single night or series of nights to make a hire. There I the pressure to backfill someone who left or to staff up a new site from scratch. But it's still nothing like the truncated time frame in which the Draft occurs.
And we will absolutely stack-rank our candidate pool and select the best of that group instead of just hiring the first person in the door that is qualified.
I understand that the process has a lot of differences, and the players are forced to one team through a very unique process. My point is that the team hopefully has a lot of information about their potential high picks, personal info about fit/coachability/whatever, and those make players much less interchangeable.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Amazonviking said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
For what my opinion is worth I think you are all overthinking it a bit. The Vikings create "clusters" of players and their draft rule to take a player from the highest remaining cluster. The alternative would be to trade back and they place values on the difference in talent between tiers. So for example it would cost more to give up a tier one player and take one from tier two vs. say tiers three and four.
From my film study specific to the Vikings I think they're going to have the O-lineman tiered something along the lines of:
Tier 1: Jonah Williams, Andre Dillard, Jawaan Taylor
Tier 2: Cody Ford (could be tier 1), Garrett Bradbury, Chris Lindstrom, Erik McCoy, Dalton Risner
Tier 3: Dalton Risner, Greg Little, Tytus Howard
When they get on the clock at #18 if anyone from tier 1 is left on the clock, they run to the podium. If not it really comes down to what they get offered to move back and how many of the tier 2 lineman are already off the board. If the answer is none you need to risk at least one of them and pick up additional draft capital. You go through the process and place the players in tiers for this exact reason.
The caveat is that the Vikings could easily have Linstrom in their top tier without anybody knowing it. But point being is that I wouldn't panic if the Vikings opt to move back a few spots and Cody Ford or another player goes off the board.
I think the one caviot is the Vikings do this with every group of players. Then based on need and rating of the remaining players the picks are made. I'd assume the top 3 are going to probably be close to top of their board based on need and value. Where it gets tricky is when a top rated DT or TE is still on the board with a second tier line prospect. Do you take a lineman who has a 2nd round grade with plenty more rated between the 2nd and 4th rounds or do you take a DT with a top 10 grade?
The best players in my generation haven't been need based picks, but the top 2 in Moss and Peterson were value vs guys like Ponder, Williamson and Treadwell who were needs based. Our line has been a focus but the players were not the only reason we didnt win last year. We lost a top level oline coach, had 2 guys replace him at the last minute. We had some bad injuries in 2018 vs 2017.
If anyone expects us to go line at all costs is going to most likely be disappointed.
That is the narrative I'm also trying to get across. They will address the offensive line, they need to. But it would be foolish to pass on a player you've graded as a potential pro bowler.
Here is a real world example for some to wrap their head around. In the 2017 draft Dalvin Cook fell down the draft board much further than the Vikings thought he would. Although they had a clear need along O-line they weren't going to pass down the opportunity to trade up for a player they had a 1st round grade on for a 4th round pick. The alternative was to sit back and take Ethan Pocic at their own 2nd round selection. He hasn't really panned out like most have expected to date.
Point being, you go get your guys with need somewhat baked in. So if they don't go O-line at #18 they may be taking a D-lineman or TE they believe to be an impact player vs. the lineman who may be solid but won't swing the needle long-term.
I think that's a misleading narrative. The Vikings NEEDED a RB that year. I think most of us thought the Vikings would pick a RB with their first pick. No one knew that Cook would fall so most of our conversations were about Mixon, Kamara, Hunt, etc. I just know that I typically have time to focus on only one position thoroughly and one other position secondarily and I choose what I think are our greatest needs. That year it was definitely RB.
The narrative is that they don't have to go O-line in round one to address their O-line need. Entering the 2017 draft the Vikings needs were Interior O-line, RB, and LB. Without a first round pick they ended up drafting RB - C - DT - LB in that order. They easily could have gone C - RB - LB - DT but the board suggested they could walk away with a better haul waiting on O-line and taking a dropping RB.
In this draft class their biggest needs are O-line, D-line, TE. The larger point I am trying to make is if they draft a TE or D-lineman in round 1 its not time to panic. This is not O-line in round 1 or the season is doomed.
|
