Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
We'll see. I think there's still a very good chance that dino-arms moves inside and starts at RG, where he's much better suited. That's a nice competition at RG between Isadora, Remmers and Compton. Easton, Gossett and Andrews compete for LG. Then Hill, O'Neill and Collins compete for the RT spot. If O'Neill doesn't win that, then they'll probably just put him on the left right away to backup Reiff.
Vikings typically keep 9 OL. So maybe...
LT - Reiff, O'Neill
LG - Easton, Gossett
C - Elflein, Easton
RG - Remmers, Isadora
RT - Hill, Collins
A very experienced Compton doesn't make this list, so I it's possible that if Isadora beats out Remmers, Remmers is released and Compton stays. Or we try to sneak Gossett onto the PS.
God the right side of that list just gave me an anxiety attack...
only if you dont think that those younger players will continue to improve. I happen to think that they will all show marked improvement in their 2nd and 3rd years, and make for a decent battle at the positions. I also think they keep 10 OL this year. If the last 2 years havent shown Zimmer the need for more depth at OL then that should be the move that draws the sword for his head more than anything else that has transpired to this point. Its really been the injuries at OL (and DL) more than the lack of talent at the starting spots that has derailed the last 2 campaigns IMO.
In reality, Remmers is the backup at RT on that list. Hill can also backup LT. The good thing about this line is position flexibility. Easton, Hill and Remmer could all be starters at 2 spots.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ TBro said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Wetlander said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Well...it sounds as if you're suggesting that this was a strange draft in that no one could've predicted that so many interior linemen would go off the board in the top two rounds. When, in fact, many did. Brandt had 11 interior offensive linemen ranked in his top 64. 11! Now THAT'S insane. Mayock had 9. So I'd argue that the CLASS was strange, not the draft. Those interior guys went about where they were supposed to.
I said many times that I would prefer a tackle, but that the real VALUE in this draft was at G/C, and most of those guys were clumped in the 20 to 40 range. And, hey, how fortunate are we to have a pick right in that value cluster? That we weren't able to tap into that great interior class is a source of frustration for many. It's understandable.
That said, if TBro's right in that we decided before the draft to move Remmers inside, then what we did makes a lot more sense: guard was not a pressing need and there were no tackles worth taking there. So I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that's true. And if it is, our draft looks a lot better. We didn't reach for anyone and we drafted several promising players.
I am suggesting that. You reference Gil Brandt's top 150... well 7 of those 11interior OL in his rankings were clustered between 35 and 64.... not 20-40. Most of them went much earlier than expected and one (Crosby) dropped big time.
To clarify, I was the one who said they were clustered between 20 and 40, not Gil. And that's exactly where they piled up. Ragnow, Price, Wynn, Corbett, Hernandez, Daniels and Braden Smith all went between 20 and 39. You might be able to argue that Corbett and Smith went a little higher than they were predicted to go, but not much. Corbett especially was getting late 1st round buzz. The point is that it was fairly clear before the draft that the meat of this great interior class would be off the board by 62. And that held true. After Daniels went at 39, there would be another 40 selections before the next interior guy was taken. Not that any of it really matters. If we decided Remmers would move inside before the draft, it's mostly irrelevant.
As much as I would like to give them credit for that strategy, I don't think it was the case. I tried to convince myself, you, and others that it was a calculated plan and why they took Hughes. However, with the lack of tackle depth, and guys like Kolton Miller going off the board at 15, it wouldn't have made sense to stick with that approach. The quality of interior line prospects was outstanding in this draft and that certainly was proven right by the teams that invested high draft picks on those players in the first two rounds. Rick admitting they were surprised by the "run" on interior lineman didn't blindside them. It was obvious what was going on right in front of their eyes as those picks were methodically selected ahead of us. I think they had Mike Hughes as their #1 selection from the minute the first round started and felt they could get an O'Line starter with their second pick. As we know, that didn't work out and Rick was forced into taking the Best Offensive Lineman left on the board who is a fantastic developmental prospect for Left Tackle, but won't fix out issues for this season on the right side.
We'll see. I think there's still a very good chance that dino-arms moves inside and starts at RG, where he's much better suited. That's a nice competition at RG between Isadora, Remmers and Compton. Easton, Gossett and Andrews compete for LG. Then Hill, O'Neill and Collins compete for the RT spot. If O'Neill doesn't win that, then they'll probably just put him on the left right away to backup Reiff.
Vikings typically keep 9 OL. So maybe...
LT - Reiff, O'Neill
LG - Easton, Gossett
C - Elflein, Easton
RG - Remmers, Isadora
RT - Hill, Collins
A very experienced Compton doesn't make this list, so I it's possible that if Isadora beats out Remmers, Remmers is released and Compton stays. Or we try to sneak Gossett onto the PS.
God the right side of that list just gave me an anxiety attack...
only if you dont think that those younger players will continue to improve. I happen to think that they will all show marked improvement in their 2nd and 3rd years, and make for a decent battle at the positions.
Mike Remmers is on his 7th team and going into his 7th season. I think we've seen the best we're going to see from him. But you're right, Hill, Collins, and Easton will likely improve. And they're not limited physically the way Remmers is.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ TBro said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Wetlander said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Well...it sounds as if you're suggesting that this was a strange draft in that no one could've predicted that so many interior linemen would go off the board in the top two rounds. When, in fact, many did. Brandt had 11 interior offensive linemen ranked in his top 64. 11! Now THAT'S insane. Mayock had 9. So I'd argue that the CLASS was strange, not the draft. Those interior guys went about where they were supposed to.
I said many times that I would prefer a tackle, but that the real VALUE in this draft was at G/C, and most of those guys were clumped in the 20 to 40 range. And, hey, how fortunate are we to have a pick right in that value cluster? That we weren't able to tap into that great interior class is a source of frustration for many. It's understandable.
That said, if TBro's right in that we decided before the draft to move Remmers inside, then what we did makes a lot more sense: guard was not a pressing need and there were no tackles worth taking there. So I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that's true. And if it is, our draft looks a lot better. We didn't reach for anyone and we drafted several promising players.
I am suggesting that. You reference Gil Brandt's top 150... well 7 of those 11interior OL in his rankings were clustered between 35 and 64.... not 20-40. Most of them went much earlier than expected and one (Crosby) dropped big time.
To clarify, I was the one who said they were clustered between 20 and 40, not Gil. And that's exactly where they piled up. Ragnow, Price, Wynn, Corbett, Hernandez, Daniels and Braden Smith all went between 20 and 39. You might be able to argue that Corbett and Smith went a little higher than they were predicted to go, but not much. Corbett especially was getting late 1st round buzz. The point is that it was fairly clear before the draft that the meat of this great interior class would be off the board by 62. And that held true. After Daniels went at 39, there would be another 40 selections before the next interior guy was taken. Not that any of it really matters. If we decided Remmers would move inside before the draft, it's mostly irrelevant.
As much as I would like to give them credit for that strategy, I don't think it was the case. I tried to convince myself, you, and others that it was a calculated plan and why they took Hughes. However, with the lack of tackle depth, and guys like Kolton Miller going off the board at 15, it wouldn't have made sense to stick with that approach. The quality of interior line prospects was outstanding in this draft and that certainly was proven right by the teams that invested high draft picks on those players in the first two rounds. Rick admitting they were surprised by the "run" on interior lineman didn't blindside them. It was obvious what was going on right in front of their eyes as those picks were methodically selected ahead of us. I think they had Mike Hughes as their #1 selection from the minute the first round started and felt they could get an O'Line starter with their second pick. As we know, that didn't work out and Rick was forced into taking the Best Offensive Lineman left on the board who is a fantastic developmental prospect for Left Tackle, but won't fix out issues for this season on the right side.
We'll see. I think there's still a very good chance that dino-arms moves inside and starts at RG, where he's much better suited. That's a nice competition at RG between Isadora, Remmers and Compton. Easton, Gossett and Andrews compete for LG. Then Hill, O'Neill and Collins compete for the RT spot. If O'Neill doesn't win that, then they'll probably just put him on the left right away to backup Reiff.
Vikings typically keep 9 OL. So maybe...
LT - Reiff, O'Neill
LG - Easton, Gossett
C - Elflein, Easton
RG - Remmers, Isadora
RT - Hill, Collins
A very experienced Compton doesn't make this list, so I it's possible that if Isadora beats out Remmers, Remmers is released and Compton stays. Or we try to sneak Gossett onto the PS.
God the right side of that list just gave me an anxiety attack...
only if you dont think that those younger players will continue to improve. I happen to think that they will all show marked improvement in their 2nd and 3rd years, and make for a decent battle at the positions.
Mike Remmers is on his 7th team and going into his 7th season. I think we've seen the best we're going to see from him. But you're right, Hill, Collins, and Easton will likely improve. And they're not limited physically the way Remmers is.
in fairness you counted the Vikings twice and 2 of those teams he was only on the team in the offseason and ended up with another team during the season or was a practice squad guy that got claimed, but yeah, hes moved around a bit.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ TBro said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Wetlander said:
@ MaroonBells said:
Well...it sounds as if you're suggesting that this was a strange draft in that no one could've predicted that so many interior linemen would go off the board in the top two rounds. When, in fact, many did. Brandt had 11 interior offensive linemen ranked in his top 64. 11! Now THAT'S insane. Mayock had 9. So I'd argue that the CLASS was strange, not the draft. Those interior guys went about where they were supposed to.
I said many times that I would prefer a tackle, but that the real VALUE in this draft was at G/C, and most of those guys were clumped in the 20 to 40 range. And, hey, how fortunate are we to have a pick right in that value cluster? That we weren't able to tap into that great interior class is a source of frustration for many. It's understandable.
That said, if TBro's right in that we decided before the draft to move Remmers inside, then what we did makes a lot more sense: guard was not a pressing need and there were no tackles worth taking there. So I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that's true. And if it is, our draft looks a lot better. We didn't reach for anyone and we drafted several promising players.
I am suggesting that. You reference Gil Brandt's top 150... well 7 of those 11interior OL in his rankings were clustered between 35 and 64.... not 20-40. Most of them went much earlier than expected and one (Crosby) dropped big time.
To clarify, I was the one who said they were clustered between 20 and 40, not Gil. And that's exactly where they piled up. Ragnow, Price, Wynn, Corbett, Hernandez, Daniels and Braden Smith all went between 20 and 39. You might be able to argue that Corbett and Smith went a little higher than they were predicted to go, but not much. Corbett especially was getting late 1st round buzz. The point is that it was fairly clear before the draft that the meat of this great interior class would be off the board by 62. And that held true. After Daniels went at 39, there would be another 40 selections before the next interior guy was taken. Not that any of it really matters. If we decided Remmers would move inside before the draft, it's mostly irrelevant.
As much as I would like to give them credit for that strategy, I don't think it was the case. I tried to convince myself, you, and others that it was a calculated plan and why they took Hughes. However, with the lack of tackle depth, and guys like Kolton Miller going off the board at 15, it wouldn't have made sense to stick with that approach. The quality of interior line prospects was outstanding in this draft and that certainly was proven right by the teams that invested high draft picks on those players in the first two rounds. Rick admitting they were surprised by the "run" on interior lineman didn't blindside them. It was obvious what was going on right in front of their eyes as those picks were methodically selected ahead of us. I think they had Mike Hughes as their #1 selection from the minute the first round started and felt they could get an O'Line starter with their second pick. As we know, that didn't work out and Rick was forced into taking the Best Offensive Lineman left on the board who is a fantastic developmental prospect for Left Tackle, but won't fix out issues for this season on the right side.
We'll see. I think there's still a very good chance that dino-arms moves inside and starts at RG, where he's much better suited. That's a nice competition at RG between Isadora, Remmers and Compton. Easton, Gossett and Andrews compete for LG. Then Hill, O'Neill and Collins compete for the RT spot. If O'Neill doesn't win that, then they'll probably just put him on the left right away to backup Reiff.
Vikings typically keep 9 OL. So maybe...
LT - Reiff, O'Neill
LG - Easton, Gossett
C - Elflein, Easton
RG - Remmers, Isadora
RT - Hill, Collins
A very experienced Compton doesn't make this list, so I it's possible that if Isadora beats out Remmers, Remmers is released and Compton stays. Or we try to sneak Gossett onto the PS.
God the right side of that list just gave me an anxiety attack...
only if you dont think that those younger players will continue to improve. I happen to think that they will all show marked improvement in their 2nd and 3rd years, and make for a decent battle at the positions.
Mike Remmers is on his 7th team and going into his 7th season. I think we've seen the best we're going to see from him. But you're right, Hill, Collins, and Easton will likely improve. And they're not limited physically the way Remmers is.
in fairness you counted the Vikings twice and 2 of those teams he was only on the team in the offseason and ended up with another team during the season or was a practice squad guy that got claimed, but yeah, hes moved around a bit.
Isn't it more accurate to count the same team twice? The 2013 Vikings was a different team than the 2017 Vikings.
I thought Remmers was pretty good at RT last year and should start their again this year.
From the looks of reading the threads I guess I am in the minority in keeping Remmers at RT.
Hill was an embarrassment in both playoff at RT, really bad.
Quote: @minny65 said:
I thought Remmers was pretty good at RT last year and should start their again this year.
From the looks of reading the threads I guess I am in the minority in keeping Remmers at RT.
Hill was an embarrassment in both playoff at RT, really bad.
I don't think Remmers would've fared much better against those particular pass rushers. At least with Hill, there's hope for improvement. Last year was only his 2nd season. Plus he's got good feet and long arms.
Do you know who the highest graded offensive player on the Vikings was in the NFCC according to PFF? Mike Remmers. Playing guard. He's got 31 in arms. He's a guard. It's ridiculous he's been at tackle for so long.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ FSUVike said:
TBro, Daniels went 9 picks later and has many of the functional strength questions that O'Neill has.
Something nobody is taking about so far: this was a real learning experience for Rick and Mike. They aren't used to picking this deep in the Draft. And it showed.
Lesson learned for future years as I'm sure they will be in this spot again for the next 2-3 years and hopefully longer.
I don't think this was inexperience in picking this late... it was just a really weird draft with how some of these players came off the board. First time in how long that 5 QBs were drafted in the first round... then tell me the last draft where there were 4 OGs picked in the first round...
Most drafts will have a couple OTs go in the first and maybe 1-2 C/OGs in any given year, but to have four selected in the first round??? And then have 3 more C/OGs go in the first five picks of the 2nd round??? That's INSANE.
I really think that the Vikings were expecting at least one of Price, Ragnow, or Corbett to be there at 62. I also think they expected Wynn to be available at #30 and I have a feeling they would considered taking him there. When Wynn, Price, and Ragnow came off the board before their first round pick, I don't doubt for a second that the Vikings figured the next best OGs would drop into the latter half of the 2nd round.
They didn't... but I would say it was more of a strange draft than anything the Vikings did wrong.
I agree that I think it was just a weird draft with how things fell. I think some has to do with teams getting prepared to play defensive lines like the Vikings and Eagles. Protecting their QB
Quote: @Jor-El said:
Maybe he will alter his approach, but I think he has other goals that are not compatible with "going up to get his guy". I think he is really loathe to give up 2 picks to get 1, or any combination of that type. Spielman wants to turn 1 pick into 2 or more, instead. Unless that changes, he is NEVER going to get in front of a run on a position, because he's going to think he can find some diamond that the rest of the league doesn't know about, and that 6th-rounder will be just as good as the 2nd-rounder he passed up.
If I'm wrong, why does he openly speak, year after year, about the goal of having 10 draft picks? And it's not just idle talk, he chases that number! Whether the idea is sound or not, why would he advertise such an aspiration to the rest of the league?? Doesn't that just tell everyone, "Spielman won't move up, and you can get his higher picks if you tempt him with some low-round candy"??
It also doesn't help that Zimmer is very obviously campaigning for added defensive players at every opportunity.
My guess: Spielman thought he would get someone at 30, but the guy went earlier. (BTW I am not sure it was an offensive lineman, but we won't know. As the draft unfolded, I figured he was watching Calvin Ridley slide and hoping to catch him...) Then he started taking calls to trade down, but apparently no calls came when they were on the clock (because the traders were looking for Taven Bryan perhaps?) Then he was stuck with no prized prospect, no offers, and Zimmer was pounding the table for Hughes, so...
As I've said elsewhere, I was - still am - not thrilled about Hughes. I just think he is too like players who could have been picked later - like DJ Reed, the undersized slot corner who is a great return man that the 49ers picked near the top of round 5. (Go check Reed's scouting report..is Hughes 3+ rounds better??) But, there are no Dimitrius Underwood picks here, so the chances are fair that Spielman won't get burned too badly for this draft. Hughes will probably be a fair contributor, O'Neill might develop into a functional OL in a couple years...there is no firing squad needed about this draft. I bet a lot of teams drafted worse! But Spielman probably won't change his approach, either.
I think this is a little misleading. Do the Vikings want to accumulate picks? Yes. Are they going to put that ahead of finding the best talent? No. It ends up working out both ways and evens out over time.
The number 1 way the Vikings have accumulated picks is by trading down in the 3rd-7th to gain picks in the 5th-7th that can be ST contributors and eventual starters. In the rare instances they've traded down in the first its been one spot to take advantage of a draft picks value and have ended up with the same player they would have taken originally (Matt Kalil / Anthony Barr). In those years they've turned right around and used those more valuable assets to move up from the 2nd and into the back end of the 1st for 5th round option years (Harrison Smith/ Teddy Bridgewater). So they aren't afraid to go up and get their guys to not only secure the additional year of control, but to start a run. Look at the safeties after Smith. Aside from financial control they moved up two times in 2017 to get Dalvin Cook in the 2nd round and Pat Elflein in the 3rd. Instead of sitting back they went to get the guys they felt more comfortable with.
From the other side do they always trade out of good player in the middle rounds? In 2016 they traded down twice to get themselves Danielle Hunter. Although raw at the time that has worked out well compared to players taken around their original pick prior to trades. The thing to remember is that when you trade down an accumulate late round picks there is statistically going to be more misses than hits. You can easily use that against someone but if the hit rates in rounds 4-7 is 30% (example) and you have 10 picks in those rounds you'll end up with 3 players that stick most years and 7 that won't. Those are the odds for all teams not just the Vikings. So in a vacuum 7 players may end up not making the team, so terrible. But league wide they kept 3 players on the roster while other teams kept 1. So in the end they actually built more depth.
This isn't meant to suggest that Spielman has taken full advantage of draft positions. But the philosophy works well if you can hit on your picks in rounds 1-3 regardless of who you are.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Jor-El said:
Maybe he will alter his approach, but I think he has other goals that are not compatible with "going up to get his guy". I think he is really loathe to give up 2 picks to get 1, or any combination of that type. Spielman wants to turn 1 pick into 2 or more, instead. Unless that changes, he is NEVER going to get in front of a run on a position, because he's going to think he can find some diamond that the rest of the league doesn't know about, and that 6th-rounder will be just as good as the 2nd-rounder he passed up.
If I'm wrong, why does he openly speak, year after year, about the goal of having 10 draft picks? And it's not just idle talk, he chases that number! Whether the idea is sound or not, why would he advertise such an aspiration to the rest of the league?? Doesn't that just tell everyone, "Spielman won't move up, and you can get his higher picks if you tempt him with some low-round candy"??
It also doesn't help that Zimmer is very obviously campaigning for added defensive players at every opportunity.
My guess: Spielman thought he would get someone at 30, but the guy went earlier. (BTW I am not sure it was an offensive lineman, but we won't know. As the draft unfolded, I figured he was watching Calvin Ridley slide and hoping to catch him...) Then he started taking calls to trade down, but apparently no calls came when they were on the clock (because the traders were looking for Taven Bryan perhaps?) Then he was stuck with no prized prospect, no offers, and Zimmer was pounding the table for Hughes, so...
As I've said elsewhere, I was - still am - not thrilled about Hughes. I just think he is too like players who could have been picked later - like DJ Reed, the undersized slot corner who is a great return man that the 49ers picked near the top of round 5. (Go check Reed's scouting report..is Hughes 3+ rounds better??) But, there are no Dimitrius Underwood picks here, so the chances are fair that Spielman won't get burned too badly for this draft. Hughes will probably be a fair contributor, O'Neill might develop into a functional OL in a couple years...there is no firing squad needed about this draft. I bet a lot of teams drafted worse! But Spielman probably won't change his approach, either.
I think this is a little misleading. Do the Vikings want to accumulate picks? Yes. Are they going to put that ahead of finding the best talent? No. It ends up working out both ways and evens out over time.
The number 1 way the Vikings have accumulated picks is by trading down in the 3rd-7th to gain picks in the 5th-7th that can be ST contributors and eventual starters. In the rare instances they've traded down in the first its been one spot to take advantage of a draft picks value and have ended up with the same player they would have taken originally (Matt Kalil / Anthony Barr). In those years they've turned right around and used those more valuable assets to move up from the 2nd and into the back end of the 1st for 5th round option years (Harrison Smith/ Teddy Bridgewater). So they aren't afraid to go up and get their guys to not only secure the additional year of control, but to start a run. Look at the safeties after Smith. Aside from financial control they moved up two times in 2017 to get Dalvin Cook in the 2nd round and Pat Elflein in the 3rd. Instead of sitting back they went to get the guys they felt more comfortable with.
From the other side do they always trade out of good player in the middle rounds? In 2016 they traded down twice to get themselves Danielle Hunter. Although raw at the time that has worked out well compared to players taken around their original pick prior to trades. The thing to remember is that when you trade down an accumulate late round picks there is statistically going to be more misses than hits. You can easily use that against someone but if the hit rates in rounds 4-7 is 30% (example) and you have 10 picks in those rounds you'll end up with 3 players that stick most years and 7 that won't. Those are the odds for all teams not just the Vikings. So in a vacuum 7 players may end up not making the team, so terrible. But league wide they kept 3 players on the roster while other teams kept 1. So in the end they actually built more depth.
This isn't meant to suggest that Spielman has taken full advantage of draft positions. But the philosophy works well if you can hit on your picks in rounds 1-3 regardless of who you are.
I think the strategy rests on the idea that the vast majority of successful NFL players come from the first three rounds. Round 4 is a control. But in rounds 5, 6 and 7, you're either taking special teams players or taking shots on players you don't want to bid for after the draft, and it makes very little difference what round you take them in, so why not get as many of those "shots" as you can. In fact, PFR did a study of 10 years of draft results, and it found that the success rate at OL and DL is exactly the same between rounds 5 and 6. And 6th round LBs actually hit at a higher rate then their 5th round counterparts.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ Jor-El said:
Maybe he will alter his approach, but I think he has other goals that are not compatible with "going up to get his guy". I think he is really loathe to give up 2 picks to get 1, or any combination of that type. Spielman wants to turn 1 pick into 2 or more, instead. Unless that changes, he is NEVER going to get in front of a run on a position, because he's going to think he can find some diamond that the rest of the league doesn't know about, and that 6th-rounder will be just as good as the 2nd-rounder he passed up.
If I'm wrong, why does he openly speak, year after year, about the goal of having 10 draft picks? And it's not just idle talk, he chases that number! Whether the idea is sound or not, why would he advertise such an aspiration to the rest of the league?? Doesn't that just tell everyone, "Spielman won't move up, and you can get his higher picks if you tempt him with some low-round candy"??
It also doesn't help that Zimmer is very obviously campaigning for added defensive players at every opportunity.
My guess: Spielman thought he would get someone at 30, but the guy went earlier. (BTW I am not sure it was an offensive lineman, but we won't know. As the draft unfolded, I figured he was watching Calvin Ridley slide and hoping to catch him...) Then he started taking calls to trade down, but apparently no calls came when they were on the clock (because the traders were looking for Taven Bryan perhaps?) Then he was stuck with no prized prospect, no offers, and Zimmer was pounding the table for Hughes, so...
As I've said elsewhere, I was - still am - not thrilled about Hughes. I just think he is too like players who could have been picked later - like DJ Reed, the undersized slot corner who is a great return man that the 49ers picked near the top of round 5. (Go check Reed's scouting report..is Hughes 3+ rounds better??) But, there are no Dimitrius Underwood picks here, so the chances are fair that Spielman won't get burned too badly for this draft. Hughes will probably be a fair contributor, O'Neill might develop into a functional OL in a couple years...there is no firing squad needed about this draft. I bet a lot of teams drafted worse! But Spielman probably won't change his approach, either.
I think this is a little misleading. Do the Vikings want to accumulate picks? Yes. Are they going to put that ahead of finding the best talent? No. It ends up working out both ways and evens out over time.
The number 1 way the Vikings have accumulated picks is by trading down in the 3rd-7th to gain picks in the 5th-7th that can be ST contributors and eventual starters. In the rare instances they've traded down in the first its been one spot to take advantage of a draft picks value and have ended up with the same player they would have taken originally (Matt Kalil / Anthony Barr). In those years they've turned right around and used those more valuable assets to move up from the 2nd and into the back end of the 1st for 5th round option years (Harrison Smith/ Teddy Bridgewater). So they aren't afraid to go up and get their guys to not only secure the additional year of control, but to start a run. Look at the safeties after Smith. Aside from financial control they moved up two times in 2017 to get Dalvin Cook in the 2nd round and Pat Elflein in the 3rd. Instead of sitting back they went to get the guys they felt more comfortable with.
From the other side do they always trade out of good player in the middle rounds? In 2016 they traded down twice to get themselves Danielle Hunter. Although raw at the time that has worked out well compared to players taken around their original pick prior to trades. The thing to remember is that when you trade down an accumulate late round picks there is statistically going to be more misses than hits. You can easily use that against someone but if the hit rates in rounds 4-7 is 30% (example) and you have 10 picks in those rounds you'll end up with 3 players that stick most years and 7 that won't. Those are the odds for all teams not just the Vikings. So in a vacuum 7 players may end up not making the team, so terrible. But league wide they kept 3 players on the roster while other teams kept 1. So in the end they actually built more depth.
This isn't meant to suggest that Spielman has taken full advantage of draft positions. But the philosophy works well if you can hit on your picks in rounds 1-3 regardless of who you are.
I think the strategy rests on the idea that the vast majority of successful NFL players come from the first three rounds. Round 4 is a control. But in rounds 5, 6 and 7, you're either taking special teams players or taking shots on players you don't want to bid for after the draft, and it makes very little difference what round you take them in, so why not get as many of those "shots" as you can. In fact, PFR did a study of 10 years of draft results, and it found that the success rate at OL and DL is exactly the same between rounds 5 and 6. And 6th round LBs actually hit at a higher rate then their 5th round counterparts.
so use the current years 4th to get a 3rd rounder in next years draft, and trade down from the 5th in the current years draft for additional 6th and 7th rounders in the current year? =)
I got this shit down cold.
|
