Vikings better hope they're right about draft and PFF is Wrong

[Guest]

@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)

I think the Vikings could keep 10 OL this year as well...  we have a good mix of youth and veterans that would be handy to draw on in the event of injuries.  I actually think we may only keep 5 CBs instead of 6 this year.  That may be a positional group we could gain a roster spot for a 10th offensive lineman. 
Rhodes, Waynes, Alexander, Hughes, and Newman...  don't really see a spot for Sherels and we're pretty stacked with that top 5 in the event of an injury or two.

[Guest]

@Wetlander said:

@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)

I think the Vikings could keep 10 OL this year as well...  we have a good mix of youth and veterans that would be handy to draw on in the event of injuries.  I actually think we may only keep 5 CBs instead of 6 this year.  That may be a positional group we could gain a roster spot for a 10th offensive lineman. 

Brought to you by the "our 1st pick is Sherel's replacement".  If Hughes can man the PR spot and develop into a starting level CB, we just elevated a good part of the roster.  Sherels stuck because he was dynamite on special teams and could function as a DB.  But if we just replaced him on PR and Hughes develops in a year or so, that is how you improve the roster.

[Guest]

@greediron said:

@Wetlander said:

@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)

I think the Vikings could keep 10 OL this year as well...  we have a good mix of youth and veterans that would be handy to draw on in the event of injuries.  I actually think we may only keep 5 CBs instead of 6 this year.  That may be a positional group we could gain a roster spot for a 10th offensive lineman. 

Brought to you by the "our 1st pick is Sherel's replacement".  If Hughes can man the PR spot and develop into a starting level CB, we just elevated a good part of the roster.  Sherels stuck because he was dynamite on special teams and could function as a DB.  But if we just replaced him on PR and Hughes develops in a year or so, that is how you improve the roster.

yea so in a way drafting a CB who can play both ST/CB might allow us to retain another OL - thus depth upgrade at OL and not just a replacement of Sherels.  Maybe.

That said we also had multiple CB dinged later in the year so not sure if we take-away there or LB, maybe?  Plus, Zimmer has been hinting at using 4 CB's and switching out either a LB or Safety, so we will need 6 CB's - IMO.  

[Guest]

@minny65 said:

@greediron said:

@Wetlander said:

@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)

I think the Vikings could keep 10 OL this year as well...  we have a good mix of youth and veterans that would be handy to draw on in the event of injuries.  I actually think we may only keep 5 CBs instead of 6 this year.  That may be a positional group we could gain a roster spot for a 10th offensive lineman. 

Brought to you by the "our 1st pick is Sherel's replacement".  If Hughes can man the PR spot and develop into a starting level CB, we just elevated a good part of the roster.  Sherels stuck because he was dynamite on special teams and could function as a DB.  But if we just replaced him on PR and Hughes develops in a year or so, that is how you improve the roster.

yea so in a way drafting a CB who can play both ST/CB might allow us to retain another OL - thus depth upgrade at OL and not just a replacement of Sherels.  Maybe.

That said we also had multiple CB dinged later in the year so not sure if we take-away there or LB, maybe?  Plus, Zimmer has been hinting at using 4 CB's and switching out either a LB or Safety, so we will need 6 CB's - IMO.  

Orrr,   maybe since Sherels isn't really much of a CB they can run with 1 less CB and 1 less LB that only plays ST... :p

[Guest]

@greediron said:

@Wetlander said:

@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)

I think the Vikings could keep 10 OL this year as well...  we have a good mix of youth and veterans that would be handy to draw on in the event of injuries.  I actually think we may only keep 5 CBs instead of 6 this year.  That may be a positional group we could gain a roster spot for a 10th offensive lineman. 

Brought to you by the "our 1st pick is Sherel's replacement".  If Hughes can man the PR spot and develop into a starting level CB, we just elevated a good part of the roster.  Sherels stuck because he was dynamite on special teams and could function as a DB.  But if we just replaced him on PR and Hughes develops in a year or so, that is how you improve the roster.

I truly do hope that we now have tremendous 5-man depth at CB. But if Hughes was drafted because our coaches have given up on Mac Alexander, that dream is shot. I heard some talk before the draft (e.g. Ben Leber on KFAN) that was the case, to the extent Alexander could be in danger of losing his roster spot this summer.

[Guest]

@Jor-El said:

@greediron said:

@Wetlander said:

@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)

I think the Vikings could keep 10 OL this year as well...  we have a good mix of youth and veterans that would be handy to draw on in the event of injuries.  I actually think we may only keep 5 CBs instead of 6 this year.  That may be a positional group we could gain a roster spot for a 10th offensive lineman. 

Brought to you by the "our 1st pick is Sherel's replacement".  If Hughes can man the PR spot and develop into a starting level CB, we just elevated a good part of the roster.  Sherels stuck because he was dynamite on special teams and could function as a DB.  But if we just replaced him on PR and Hughes develops in a year or so, that is how you improve the roster.

I truly do hope that we now have tremendous 5-man depth at CB. But if Hughes was drafted because our coaches have given up on Mac Alexander, that dream is shot. I heard some talk before the draft (e.g. Ben Leber on KFAN) that was the case, to the extent Alexander could be in danger of losing his roster spot this summer.

I dont see him losing his roster spot as in off the team,  but perhaps he will be shuffled down the depth chart.  if anybody is losing their roster spot I think it will be Sherels because of somebody taking away his PR role.

[Guest]

PFF right... over thee... Ha Ha Ha! Prepare my army, the North is Ours... !  B)

[Guest]

@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...

[Guest]

@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...

Yea, Hill was horrible on the Right side and I want him to remain at Left backup.  I thought Remmers was fine all year at RT until the injury switch so I want him to remain at RT starter.  I think O'Neil maybe a long term LT prospect but I can see him starting as a swing or even RT backup behind Remmers.  It is the RG spot that we have a ton of competition for and don't forget late cuts if nobody stands out.  

[Guest]

@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.  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.