Honestly, any pick to fix the OL and I'm fine. We protect Cousins, and we are a 13-3 14-3 team. I have no doubt about that.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
i take Sewell over Slater, but just barely. The more i think about it, the more i want--and think the Vikings want--their franchise LT from this draft...and not a guard.
I think the Vikings would be happiest with a Sewell, then a Slater, then a Darrisaw and if all three are gone, they will trade down with AVT still on the board to the frustration of many fans...then they will go edge and take an IOL like Meinerz in the middle round and look for their LT in free agency post draft.
Of course all this changes with a trade. And of course my mind will change six times before the draft.
I agree with your thinking quite a bit. People will blow a fuse if they don't take a lineman in round 1, but how much better are you with AVT or Slater as a LG? Perception would be, they're tremendously better. But using other teams and analytics as a barometer they won't be much better.
For better or worse your interior O-lineman besides the center don't make a massive difference. In my mind I walk through a few difference scenarios. Honestly want to hear your two-cents on them.
1. They draft an OT like Darrisaw in round 1. Maybe they follow-up with a mid-round OG but lets just say they don't start week one.
Starters: Darrisaw / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (takeaway: that should play)
2. They draft AVT in round one. Follow-up with a tackle later on but similar to option 1 you don't expect them to start week 1.
Starters: O'Neill / AVT / Bradbury / Cleveland / Udoh (takeaway: its better but how much better than a mid-round guard)?
3. They draft a mid-round guard and tackle (Christensen or Brown in round 3?) but sign an OT yet in FA.
Starters: Okung? / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (you add depth and a potential OT starter in 2022. Is that worse than #2?)
In my opinion option #1 is the ideal value/skill balance with #3 ending up surpassing #2 knowing you also added depth. Where I ultimately am going with this is as much as fans want an O-lineman I think only an OT makes sense in round 1. If not a DE, trade backs, or simply taking the best player left at #14 is probably your better bet.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
i take Sewell over Slater, but just barely. The more i think about it, the more i want--and think the Vikings want--their franchise LT from this draft...and not a guard.
I think the Vikings would be happiest with a Sewell, then a Slater, then a Darrisaw and if all three are gone, they will trade down with AVT still on the board to the frustration of many fans...then they will go edge and take an IOL like Meinerz in the middle round and look for their LT in free agency post draft.
Of course all this changes with a trade. And of course my mind will change six times before the draft.
I agree with your thinking quite a bit. People will blow a fuse if they don't take a lineman in round 1, but how much better are you with AVT or Slater as a LG? Perception would be, they're tremendously better. But using other teams and analytics as a barometer they won't be much better.
For better or worse your interior O-lineman besides the center don't make a massive difference. In my mind I walk through a few difference scenarios. Honestly want to hear your two-cents on them.
1. They draft an OT like Darrisaw in round 1. Maybe they follow-up with a mid-round OG but lets just say they don't start week one.
Starters: Darrisaw / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (takeaway: that should play)
2. They draft AVT in round one. Follow-up with a tackle later on but similar to option 1 you don't expect them to start week 1.
Starters: O'Neill / AVT / Bradbury / Cleveland / Udoh (takeaway: its better but how much better than a mid-round guard)?
3. They draft a mid-round guard and tackle (Christensen or Brown in round 3?) but sign an OT yet in FA.
Starters: Okung? / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (you add depth and a potential OT starter in 2022. Is that worse than #2?)
In my opinion option #1 is the ideal value/skill balance with #3 ending up surpassing #2 knowing you also added depth. Where I ultimately am going with this is as much as fans want an O-lineman I think only an OT makes sense in round 1. If not a DE, trade backs, or simply taking the best player left at #14 is probably your better bet.
I have read posts from some here (football smarter than me) about how much Bradbury would improve with an even league avg LG next to him...
I have my reservations about Bradbury long-term in a passing league and with an immobile KC @ QB.
If you could improve that play along with better OG play? Maybe an AVT really is a lot of bang for the $$$...
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
i take Sewell over Slater, but just barely. The more i think about it, the more i want--and think the Vikings want--their franchise LT from this draft...and not a guard.
I think the Vikings would be happiest with a Sewell, then a Slater, then a Darrisaw and if all three are gone, they will trade down with AVT still on the board to the frustration of many fans...then they will go edge and take an IOL like Meinerz in the middle round and look for their LT in free agency post draft.
Of course all this changes with a trade. And of course my mind will change six times before the draft.
I agree with your thinking quite a bit. People will blow a fuse if they don't take a lineman in round 1, but how much better are you with AVT or Slater as a LG? Perception would be, they're tremendously better. But using other teams and analytics as a barometer they won't be much better.
For better or worse your interior O-lineman besides the center don't make a massive difference. In my mind I walk through a few difference scenarios. Honestly want to hear your two-cents on them.
1. They draft an OT like Darrisaw in round 1. Maybe they follow-up with a mid-round OG but lets just say they don't start week one.
Starters: Darrisaw / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (takeaway: that should play)
2. They draft AVT in round one. Follow-up with a tackle later on but similar to option 1 you don't expect them to start week 1.
Starters: O'Neill / AVT / Bradbury / Cleveland / Udoh (takeaway: its better but how much better than a mid-round guard)?
3. They draft a mid-round guard and tackle (Christensen or Brown in round 3?) but sign an OT yet in FA.
Starters: Okung? / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (you add depth and a potential OT starter in 2022. Is that worse than #2?)
In my opinion option #1 is the ideal value/skill balance with #3 ending up surpassing #2 knowing you also added depth. Where I ultimately am going with this is as much as fans want an O-lineman I think only an OT makes sense in round 1. If not a DE, trade backs, or simply taking the best player left at #14 is probably your better bet.
after watching Dozier get owned game after game last year, how can you say OGs dont make a massive difference between good and bad players? IMO an OG that can take a DT out of the equation on his own is huge as it allows the center to either help the other OG or to pick up blitzers.
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
i take Sewell over Slater, but just barely. The more i think about it, the more i want--and think the Vikings want--their franchise LT from this draft...and not a guard.
I think the Vikings would be happiest with a Sewell, then a Slater, then a Darrisaw and if all three are gone, they will trade down with AVT still on the board to the frustration of many fans...then they will go edge and take an IOL like Meinerz in the middle round and look for their LT in free agency post draft.
Of course all this changes with a trade. And of course my mind will change six times before the draft.
I agree with your thinking quite a bit. People will blow a fuse if they don't take a lineman in round 1, but how much better are you with AVT or Slater as a LG? Perception would be, they're tremendously better. But using other teams and analytics as a barometer they won't be much better.
For better or worse your interior O-lineman besides the center don't make a massive difference. In my mind I walk through a few difference scenarios. Honestly want to hear your two-cents on them.
1. They draft an OT like Darrisaw in round 1. Maybe they follow-up with a mid-round OG but lets just say they don't start week one.
Starters: Darrisaw / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (takeaway: that should play)
2. They draft AVT in round one. Follow-up with a tackle later on but similar to option 1 you don't expect them to start week 1.
Starters: O'Neill / AVT / Bradbury / Cleveland / Udoh (takeaway: its better but how much better than a mid-round guard)?
3. They draft a mid-round guard and tackle (Christensen or Brown in round 3?) but sign an OT yet in FA.
Starters: Okung? / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (you add depth and a potential OT starter in 2022. Is that worse than #2?)
In my opinion option #1 is the ideal value/skill balance with #3 ending up surpassing #2 knowing you also added depth. Where I ultimately am going with this is as much as fans want an O-lineman I think only an OT makes sense in round 1. If not a DE, trade backs, or simply taking the best player left at #14 is probably your better bet.
after watching Dozier get owned game after game last year, how can you say OGs dont make a massive difference between good and bad players? IMO an OG that can take a DT out of the equation on his own is huge as it allows the center to either help the other OG or to pick up blitzers.
Remember that the NT is going to end up over Bradbury and the 3-tech over Cleveland. So the LG is arguably the least important spot on the field in the modern NFL. My take isn't so much that Dozier isn't bad, he was. Its that even if you replace him with Quenton Nelson you're only going to see a miniscule differences. How miniscule? Well analytics would suggest it to be about 3 pts over the course of an entire season. The loss of Reiff is a much bigger issue that needs to be addressed.
What remains the largest issue with the O-line isn't the talent, its Kirk holding the ball at times. Nearly no pocket passer hold the ball as long as Kirk does which invites plenty of pressure. Its also why he arguably why his metrics under pressure are so good as well, he invites it to wait for his shots.
I agree the line needs to be upgraded. But I don't think spending a 1st round pick on a guard is going to net you a strong ROI.
Quote: @"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MaroonBells said:
i take Sewell over Slater, but just barely. The more i think about it, the more i want--and think the Vikings want--their franchise LT from this draft...and not a guard.
I think the Vikings would be happiest with a Sewell, then a Slater, then a Darrisaw and if all three are gone, they will trade down with AVT still on the board to the frustration of many fans...then they will go edge and take an IOL like Meinerz in the middle round and look for their LT in free agency post draft.
Of course all this changes with a trade. And of course my mind will change six times before the draft.
I agree with your thinking quite a bit. People will blow a fuse if they don't take a lineman in round 1, but how much better are you with AVT or Slater as a LG? Perception would be, they're tremendously better. But using other teams and analytics as a barometer they won't be much better.
For better or worse your interior O-lineman besides the center don't make a massive difference. In my mind I walk through a few difference scenarios. Honestly want to hear your two-cents on them.
1. They draft an OT like Darrisaw in round 1. Maybe they follow-up with a mid-round OG but lets just say they don't start week one.
Starters: Darrisaw / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (takeaway: that should play)
2. They draft AVT in round one. Follow-up with a tackle later on but similar to option 1 you don't expect them to start week 1.
Starters: O'Neill / AVT / Bradbury / Cleveland / Udoh (takeaway: its better but how much better than a mid-round guard)?
3. They draft a mid-round guard and tackle (Christensen or Brown in round 3?) but sign an OT yet in FA.
Starters: Okung? / Cole / Bradbury / Cleveland / O'Neill (you add depth and a potential OT starter in 2022. Is that worse than #2?)
In my opinion option #1 is the ideal value/skill balance with #3 ending up surpassing #2 knowing you also added depth. Where I ultimately am going with this is as much as fans want an O-lineman I think only an OT makes sense in round 1. If not a DE, trade backs, or simply taking the best player left at #14 is probably your better bet.
after watching Dozier get owned game after game last year, how can you say OGs dont make a massive difference between good and bad players? IMO an OG that can take a DT out of the equation on his own is huge as it allows the center to either help the other OG or to pick up blitzers.
Remember that the NT is going to end up over Bradbury and the 3-tech over Cleveland. So the LG is arguably the least important spot on the field in the modern NFL. My take isn't so much that Dozier isn't bad, he was. Its that even if you replace him with Quenton Nelson you're only going to see a miniscule differences. How miniscule? Well analytics would suggest it to be about 3 pts over the course of an entire season. The loss of Reiff is a much bigger issue that needs to be addressed.
What remains the largest issue with the O-line isn't the talent, its Kirk holding the ball at times. Nearly no pocket passer hold the ball as long as Kirk does which invites plenty of pressure. Its also why he arguably why his metrics under pressure are so good as well, he invites it to wait for his shots.
I agree the line needs to be upgraded. But I don't think spending a 1st round pick on a guard is going to net you a strong ROI.
NT can either play 0, 1 or shade. The 3T can line up over the outside shoulder of either G. Your LG is potentially responsible for the RDE on a stunt.
So is it fair to say Ezra at LT is a long shot?
MINNESOTA VIKINGS MOVE FROM NO. 14 TO NO. 9 ( DENVER BRONCOS) TO DRAFT NORTHWESTERN T RASHAWN SLATERFull trade details: - Vikings receive: No. 9, No. 152
- Broncos receive: No. 14, No. 78, 2022 2nd
- Comparison Trade: 2016 Jack Conklin (Titans receive No. 8, No. 176 for No. 15, No. 76 and 2022 2nd)
New Broncos general manager George Paton was the assistant general manager of the Vikings dating back to 2012, and here he takes a lesson from his old regime by executing a big-time trade-down. No one has traded down more since 2011 than Rick Spielman and the Minnesota Vikings, and frankly, it’s not even close, with their 28 moves back in the draft being five clear of the next team (New England Patriots — 23).
During the 2020 NFL Draft, the Vikings traded down four more times, adding 2021 fourth and fifth-round picks. An aggressive trade before the 2020 season to land edge defender Yannick Ngakoue backfired, but they managed to recoup a third-rounder from Baltimore at the trade deadline. Nevertheless, even though this isn’t exactly Minnesota’s modus operandi, the team pounces on an elite tackle prospect in Northwestern’s Rashawn Slater.
The Vikings parted ways with left tackle Riley Reiff after they were unable to come to terms on an extension — and following a forced salary cut in order to pay the aforementioned Ngakoue — so the Vikings are once again heading into the season with major question marks along the offensive line.
The team drafted Boise State tackle Ezra Cleveland in the second round in 2020 but played him at guard during the season. This pick enables them flexibility along the offensive line for 2021, as either Cleveland or Slater could play tackle or guard.
Slater’s dominance in both the run game and pass game will certainly excite Minnesota. He was one of just five offensive linemen in 2019 with a grade of 87.0 or better in both facets. He allowed just five pressures on 355 pass-blocking snaps as a 20-year-old true junior, with only one hit on the quarterback and no sacks surrendered all season.
With the possibility that every team picking from No. 10 to No. 13 — the Cowboys, Giants, Eagles and Chargers — will at least have some interest in taking Slater, Minnesota makes a move with an old friend and lands an elite prospect to shore up a shaky offensive line.
Quote: @PurpleCrush said:
So is it fair to say Ezra at LT is a long shot?
IMO, if we get Darrisaw, probably. If we get Slater, maybe. If we get AVT, Ezra is the LT.
|
