Quote: @Jor-El said:
@ Maple Surple said:
“Funny how they didn't re-sign Terence Newman until a few days after the draft...his absence helped make it seem like CB was a really urgent need on draft day, didn't it?“
Rest of NFL: “ Hmmmm, looks like Vikings have a really urgent need at CB “
Vikings: “ With the 30th overall pick we select a CB “
Rest of NFL: “ Hmmmmm, looks like the Vikings have a really urgent need at OL now”
B)
I was thinking more along the line that Newman's absence made it easier to "sell" the public on the idea of picking a CB at the top of the draft for the 3rd time in 6 years. How many stories about the Hughes pick included something like, "Without Terence Newman, the Vikings only have 3 experienced cornerbacks"? Now, unless there are injuries, Hughes will be our 5th CB.
Of course, that implies that Spielman and Zimmer were planning to go CB for a while.
at Newmans age I dont think you really count him, the wheels were wobbly at times last year and it will only become more frequent with age. he has said this is it, no more after this year so taking his replacement this season in the absence of a starting OT available IMO is a good use of the pick. If they are moving Remmers inside they have Hill and Collins with experience and Remmers as the back up plan, and possibly Oneil but I expect him to concentrate on LT as Reiffs back up. I actually feel better about the line this year than I did last year but time will tell.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ Poiple said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ Poiple said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ TBro said:
We can spend the rest of the offseason arguing Rick's draft strategy. I know I could because I started this thread and I'm still not happy with his approach. I don't care how good your Corners are, without a good pass rush they will be exposed. We saw it first hand the last quarter of the season and definitely in the playoffs when Griff was hurt and the Pass Rush became non-existent. Is starts up front on both sides of the ball and I don't think Rick has ever placed enough importance on building an Offensive Line through early round draft picks. He has always prided himself into thinking he can outsmart everyone else and find value in the lower rounds. That was the old model that doesn't work anymore. Too many teams are investing their high draft picks on offensive line talent. What's left are prospects who more than likely won't pan out. I won't even begin to list the late round offensive line talent failures we've had since he's been here. For every Pat Elflein, there are 10 TJ Clemmings and Willie Beavers that never made it. Clearly a lot of you feel differently by defending the Hughes pick and thinking the other career backups and developmental players we have for offensive line will be able to get it done. I don't agree because we didn't do what we needed to do and that was upgrading the starting 5 with better talent in this draft for 2018. We are in a window to win now and need to show some urgency. I think he failed to do that this year with the draft by over-evaluating existing offensive line players with a hope and prayer model they will somehow miraculously improve into solid starters when they haven't show any signs they are capable to do so.
Our OL is not the shit show that its made out to be, yes at times Keenum made them look better than they were, but his damn holding the ball and waiting for his favorite target to come open created a fair amount of pressure as well.
Do you stay up late dreaming up new backhanded insults... I mean compliments? lol. some crazy insane shit ur smokin.
What's back handed about the truth? Seriously your love of case has clouded your perception of the past.
love of case? more backhanded insults. Im wondering what your aze to vrins is. I give a man credit for doing a job well. There are a dew of you here that get creative with the truth just to fit your version.
screw you. you know that you have come to his rescue anytime somebody has said anything even remotely close to disparaging about keenum. go ahead and start that poll as was suggested by another poster. I am not alone in saying that case was far from perfect last season. I have said on many occasions that he played better than I expected, and even stood up for him in some instances, but I am not going to blow smoke and say that he wasnt part of the issue with our offense at times including holding the ball to long or locking onto targets. I am done with you on this matter, keenum is gone and 2017 is over.
screw yourself. you keep bringing him up. The guy came feom off the bench and played his heart out. He deserves better than the crap meatheads sling. Several commentaters also noticed how he kept his eyes downfield while feelig fhe press7re and moving around the pocket, sliding and breaking when he needed to. Deal with it.
I'll try and divert back to OP:
When the vast majority of us reflect back before the draft the Vikings showed strong interest in both Price and Ragnow. Not as much in Wynn but I thought he was the best fit and I think he was a real target for us at 30. I didn't see one pre draft report that showed those 3 all gone by pick 23.
Even though a lot of poster liked Hernandez ( I know I did initially) it is clear the Vikings did not deem him as a fit for us, we will see. I don't know if I would call it a risk to pass on a guy that we didn't rate very high for our team like Hernandez. I am assuming the Giants run a man blocking scheme so we won't even be able to judge because of scheme. I think their is a higher risk of just taking Hernandez and trying the square peg then to draft a guy that we deemed as a perfect scheme fit in hughes and even O'Neil. O'Neil's strength is his movement skills. His highlights show a guy that can move his feet and get downfield very easily which is ideal for our ZBS.
Back to the big 3 above - Price/Ragnow/Wynn - did folks want us to move up for them pre draft or during? I know I was looking at Wynn but we did not even have the ammo to move up past 23 and grab Wynn - we would have had to given up our 1st, 2nd and 4th and maybe more and still missed out on all our targets. Plus you need a trade partner.
Once those 3 were gone I think our whole strategy changed and we went BPA at a position of need in CB - which many of us predicted pre draft. Hughes is going to see the field a lot more then people think because Zimmer is going 4 CB's and rotations with a guy like Newman/Alex. I can even see Zimmer moving Waynes in the slot on some plays and sliding a guy like Alexander or Hughes outside on some plays. Hughes looks like a utility knife for Zimmer's secondary that he has been looking for the last few years. I can see us playing a corner in place of a 2nd safety or even a second LB'er. It is clear on defense that we don't value ILB very highly because we keep decreasing those snaps in favor of the above.
I don't think we got "lucky" the way the draft fell but I do think we stuck to our plan of BPA at several positions of need in both CB/OT in the first two rounds. I'll add the ole saying "sometimes its better to be good then lucky", yep I reversed it 
Quote: @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.
I also think the Vikings were going to be fluid with what happened to Remmers... if there was an OG they really liked at #30 or in the 2nd round, I think they would have kept Remmers outside to compete with Hill at RT. If there was a OT they liked in the first two rounds, then they would kick Remmers inside to compete with Isidora, Compton, and others at RG.
I don't have an issue with what the Vikings did. They got two players at positions of need with very high ceilings. I don't know why some are complaining about that... that's all. It's like some had tunnel vision that we needed to fill that RG spot to replace Berger with our 1st round pick. When that didn't happen, some fans flipped.
Quote: @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.
Quote: @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.
Quote: @TBro said:
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.
I highly doubt that. I would suspect there were at least 15-20 players rated higher than Hughes on our board. Maybe a bit less as the QBs tend to go too high, especially this years crop. But if some of the O-line studs fell, or a DE, nobody would know Hughes' name.
Quote: @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.
Quote: @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.
after the mash unit approach to OL last year, I think Zim should consider keeping 10 OL this year to avoid having to reshuffle the deck as soon as we have 2 starters out. There has to be another position that we dont need as much depth (thinking LB since we rarely play 3)
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
after the mash unit approach to OL last year, I think Zim should consider keeping 10 OL this year to avoid having to reshuffle the deck as soon as we have 2 starters out. There has to be another position that we dont need as much depth (thinking LB since we rarely play 3)
that is a very good point. With defenses using fewer LBs and the rising injuries on O-line, it could be the way of the future.
|
