TDN Best And Worst Picks Of The Vikings' Draft Class

[JustinTime18™]

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/bes...raft-class

Wonder if the author took into account the number of games (17) that Cook has missed so far...

[Guest]

Yeah, his rationalize for kind of bashing the Mattison pick is goofy. This crap about teams not getting the 'value' at where they've taken guys, but the author still likes the pick and player is silly to me. Do you like the player? Yes? Then its a good pick. Its all that is going to matter when its all said and done anyway.

[Guest]

Honest question...  what would people have thought if we had flip flopped our 3rd and 4th round picks?  Let's say after all those trade backs in the 3rd, we then drafted Dru Samia (OG) and then traded up in the 4th to take Alexander Mattison (RB)?  We would have made the same exact moves, but the players would have been switched.

If Spielman had done that, does it make anyone think about this a bit differently?  I get the sense that the complaining about the Mattison pick was partly due to frustration with all the trade backs and then we took a RB when fans thought we could have addressed a different position.

[Guest]

It actually reminds me of the "outrage" when we took Jerick McKinnon late in the 3rd round a few years ago...  we took who?  A wildcat QB out of Georgia Southern when we have Adrian Peterson on the roster???  That ended up being a good pick in hindsight.

[Guest]

@Wetlander said:
Honest question...  what would people have thought if we had flip flopped our 3rd and 4th round picks?  Let's say after all those trade backs in the 3rd, we then drafted Dru Samia (OG) and then traded up in the 4th to take Alexander Mattison (RB)?  We would have made the same exact moves, but the players would have been switched.

If Spielman had done that, does it make anyone think about this a bit differently?  I get the sense that the complaining about the Mattison pick was partly due to frustration with all the trade backs and then we took a RB when fans thought we could have addressed a different position.

@Wetlander said:
It actually reminds me of the "outrage" when we took Jerick McKinnon late in the 3rd round a few years ago...  we took who?  A wildcat QB out of Georgia Southern when we have Adrian Peterson on the roster???  That ended up being a good pick in hindsight.

Both of these posts are exactly what I was thinking this morning. McKinnon was a surprise pick and he just signed a $30M contract. Also, if you switch Mattison and Samia the value LOOKS a little better. But value is more a perception than reality. 

Couple things. First, I love this player. I might be more excited about Mattison than even Bradbury. Second, I'm OK with reaching (if that's what you want to call the pick). Totally changed my mind about that, by the way. Back in the days of Michael Boireau and Willie Offord I hammered this team pretty hard for seemingly not having a clue about "consensus." You might think Willie Offord is a helluva a player. Fine. But if consensus says he's a 6th rounder, then don't take him in the freaking 3rd round. Playing fantasy has changed my mind about that completely. Whether you're an NFL GM or you're an armchair fantasy owner, if you trust your ability to evaluate, then identify the players you really believe in and try to get as many as possible. And you have to reach to do that. 

Now, here is where I get TDN's sort of "conflicted" take. It's not about the player, it's not about the reach. It's about the position. Your starting QB goes down, you lose the game. A starting wide goes down, defenses double the other and it gets very hard to pass the ball. Similar big problems if you lose a starting offensive lineman or a starting corner. The replacement gets targeted and exploited. Team is hobbled. 

But what happens if your starting back goes down? Really, not a lot. If we had to put in Mike Boone last year, would it have changed the outcome of a game? I kinda doubt it. Running the football is more about the scheme and the line than the back. So many times we see undrafted backups like Matt Brieda or CJ Anderson come in for starters and the team doesn't skip a beat. So that's my ONLY issue with this pick--a little high for a RB2. But very clearly picking at nits here. Not sure I've seen any "bashing" or "outrage." 

[Guest]

The value of a player in the draft might be 4th round pick for the other 31 teams.  But for the Vikings, they saw Mattison as a 3rd round pick due to his style of running and the fit he would be for the team.  You can't compare the players in generalized order, because every teams' needs and evaluations of players are different.

[Guest]

@MaroonBells said:


Both of these posts are exactly what I was thinking this morning. McKinnon was a surprise pick and he just signed a $30M contract. Also, if you switch Mattison and Samia the value LOOKS a little better. But value is more a perception than reality. 

Couple things. First, I love this player. I might be more excited about Mattison than even Bradbury. Second, I'm OK with reaching (if that's what you want to call the pick). Totally changed my mind about that, by the way. Back in the days of Michael Boireau and Willie Offord I hammered this team pretty hard for seemingly not having a clue about "consensus." You might think Willie Offord is a helluva a player. Fine. But if consensus says he's a 6th rounder, then don't take him in the freaking 3rd round. Playing fantasy has changed my mind about that completely. Whether you're an NFL GM or you're an armchair fantasy owner, if you trust your ability to evaluate, then identify the players you really believe in and try to get as many as possible. And you have to reach to do that. 

Now, here is where I get TDN's sort of "conflicted" take. It's not about the player, it's not about the reach. It's about the position. Your starting QB goes down, you lose the game. A starting wide goes down, defenses double the other and it gets very hard to pass the ball. Similar big problems if you lose a starting offensive lineman or a starting corner. The replacement gets targeted and exploited. Team is hobbled. 

But what happens if your starting back goes down? Really, not a lot. If we had to put in Mike Boone last year, would it have changed the outcome of a game? I kinda doubt it. Running the football is more about the scheme and the line than the back. So many times we see undrafted backups like Matt Brieda or CJ Anderson come in for starters and the team doesn't skip a beat. So that's my ONLY issue with this pick--a little high for a RB2. But very clearly picking at nits here. Not sure I've seen any "bashing" or "outrage." 

I've seen more than a few posts complaining that this pick was a reach...  outrage was probably too strong of a word (that's why I put it in quotes), but there have been a lot of people questioning the pick and sounding frustrated because they thought we should have drafted someone else.  Very similar reaction to when we drafted McKinnon.

I do think people would view the draft differently if those picks were flip flopped though.  Overall, I thought the Vikings did an excellent job of adding some talented players to the offense.  And I love what we did with the offensive line.  The Mattison pick was the cherry on top...  with Dalvin's injury history in the NFL, I think the Vikings looked at Mattison and viewed him as the last true 3-down RB in the late Day 2/3 tier of RBs.  That pick was all about making sure we have a guy that can carry the load if Dalvin gets hurt again...  and he'll form a nice 1-2 punch if Cook can stay healthy and deliver on his immense potential.

[Guest]

@Wetlander said:

@MaroonBells said:


Both of these posts are exactly what I was thinking this morning. McKinnon was a surprise pick and he just signed a $30M contract. Also, if you switch Mattison and Samia the value LOOKS a little better. But value is more a perception than reality. 

Couple things. First, I love this player. I might be more excited about Mattison than even Bradbury. Second, I'm OK with reaching (if that's what you want to call the pick). Totally changed my mind about that, by the way. Back in the days of Michael Boireau and Willie Offord I hammered this team pretty hard for seemingly not having a clue about "consensus." You might think Willie Offord is a helluva a player. Fine. But if consensus says he's a 6th rounder, then don't take him in the freaking 3rd round. Playing fantasy has changed my mind about that completely. Whether you're an NFL GM or you're an armchair fantasy owner, if you trust your ability to evaluate, then identify the players you really believe in and try to get as many as possible. And you have to reach to do that. 

Now, here is where I get TDN's sort of "conflicted" take. It's not about the player, it's not about the reach. It's about the position. Your starting QB goes down, you lose the game. A starting wide goes down, defenses double the other and it gets very hard to pass the ball. Similar big problems if you lose a starting offensive lineman or a starting corner. The replacement gets targeted and exploited. Team is hobbled. 

But what happens if your starting back goes down? Really, not a lot. If we had to put in Mike Boone last year, would it have changed the outcome of a game? I kinda doubt it. Running the football is more about the scheme and the line than the back. So many times we see undrafted backups like Matt Brieda or CJ Anderson come in for starters and the team doesn't skip a beat. So that's my ONLY issue with this pick--a little high for a RB2. But very clearly picking at nits here. Not sure I've seen any "bashing" or "outrage." 

I've seen more than a few posts complaining that this pick was a reach...  outrage was probably too strong of a word (that's why I put it in quotes), but there have been a lot of people questioning the pick and sounding frustrated because they thought we should have drafted someone else.  Very similar reaction to when we drafted McKinnon.

I do think people would view the draft differently if those picks were flip flopped though.  Overall, I thought the Vikings did an excellent job of adding some talented players to the offense.  And I love what we did with the offensive line.  The Mattison pick was the cherry on top...  with Dalvin's injury history in the NFL, I think the Vikings looked at Mattison and viewed him as the last true 3-down RB in the late Day 2/3 tier of RBs.  That pick was all about making sure we have a guy that can carry the load if Dalvin gets hurt again...  and he'll form a nice 1-2 punch if Cook can stay healthy and deliver on his immense potential.

Agree. If Mattison hits (and I think he will) and just one of those 7th rounders hits then Spielman is going to come out looking pretty good. Of course, we also have to watch those players taken between our original pick and the pick where we landed. Some really nice names in there. 

[Guest]

I’m quite sure Rick would’ve traded down into the 4th to take Mattison if he could have, he only had to drop 1 more spot!  B) 

[Guest]

So here's my take. This Draft didn't have 32 players with a 1st Round Grade. More like 14-16. Luckily, several teams reached and Minnesota landed one of those true 1st Round Grade kids at #18.

What made this Draft interesting was just how many players had a 2nd Round Grade. You could get a legitimate 2nd Round Talent deep into the 3rd Round.

Smith at #50 was great because he had a high 2nd Round Grade on him and could have gone in the late 1st.

But the chance to grab another steal was traded away...more than once. And the result was to get a kid that at best went where he was rated and at worst was a reach value-wise.

Spielman righted the ship after that with several value picks in Samia, Watts, Udo and both WRs. The LB from USC that makes Rey Maualuga look fast is a headscratcher. Epps and Boyd have some intriguing qualities.

But to leave all that value just sitting there in the 3rd is not something I can defend. 

Drafting human beings is an inexact science to say the least. But I bet we all agree that a Team that consistently reaches vs. the consensus grade ala the Raiders will almost always fail to win consistently.

So the consensus grade clearly has relevancy. Rick traded down from where he could have nabbed any number of players with a 2nd Round Grade. And then he did it again. And again. And again.

But all that movement just to land a possible reach that wasn't on any of our radars? Every single freaking one of us had a player we would have jumped up and down to get that was available with their original 3rd. Most of those players were available after the first trade down. A few were still on the board during the final two trades.

It's maddening. Oli Udoh may very well become a better OT than Chuma Edoga. But the percent chance Edoga becomes a quality Starter is significantly higher and he was just sitting there.

You can name at least one player at almost  any position of need  (and in some cases two or three) sitting there during the first few trade downs. And they were all passed over so Rick could get 5th Round Grade players in the 6th and 6th Round Grade Players in the 7th.

Spielman did this a few years ago and missed out on a ton of O-Line talent and ended up with Danny Isadora instead.  And that cost the team. I think he left Day 1 Starters on the table again this year in the 3rd and simply can't give him an A for that.

Bradbury, Irv Smith, Samia, Watts, Udoh..all good value picks. Trading down 4 damn times for Mattison is not good value. This Draft is a B for me.