Vikes need to snag a DT

Then it would be a party!

Can we add a couple IOL as well please?

@"JimmyinSD" said: Can we add a couple IOL as well please?

@"StickyBun" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said: Can we add a couple IOL as well please?

Fingers crossed. I see Dalton Risner is taking to social media to plea for 'starting OG' money from Minnesota. I don't think the Vikings view him that way, I hope they hold firm and upgrade that spot. 

Reader was injured in our game vs. Cincy. Still not 100%. My preference would be Armstead as he was released by SF & therefore wouldn't factor into the comp pick formula.

@"StickyBun" said:

@"JimmyinSD" said: Can we add a couple IOL as well please?

Fingers crossed. I see Dalton Risner is taking to social media to plea for 'starting OG' money from Minnesota. I don't think the Vikings view him that way, I hope they hold firm and upgrade that spot. 

While we're at it, why not take a flier on Chase Young? He can be had relatively cheap, still young, with potential to live up to his physical ability. He played pretty well toward the end of last year. We need depth and rotation opposite Greenard. 

@"mgobluevikes" said: While we're at it, why not take a flier on Chase Young? He can be had relatively cheap, still young, with potential to live up to his physical ability. He played pretty well toward the end of last year. We need depth and rotation opposite Greenard. 

DT does seem to be our biggest remaining need. I've wanted DJ Reader for a few months now, but he did get hurt in our game and he's 29. Armstead is 30. I think Kwesi wants younger players. Neville Gallimore (27) is a player I liked a lot in the draft, but he's been hit and miss, certainly not a slam dunk upgrade to anyone. 

DT might have to be our target at 42, if'n we still have a 2nd rounder when the time comes. Fiske and Newton stand an even chance of being there. 

I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

@"supafreak84" said: I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

Where do we get the QB? 

I@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said:
I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

Where do we get the QB? 

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

Where do we get the QB? 

I'd envision if they went defense with the first pick, they'd move back up into the late 1st for Nix or Penix. I just don't think we mortgage our future moving up into the top 3 or having to jockey for whatever is ledtover with Denver and Vegas. Going defense at 11 and picking up one of those other two later on isnt a bad idea 

@"HappyViking" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

Where do we get the QB? 

I'd envision if they went defense with the first pick, they'd move back up into the late 1st for Nix or Penix. I just don't think we mortgage our future moving up into the top 3 or having to jockey for whatever is ledtover with Denver and Vegas. Going defense at 11 and picking up one of those other two later on isnt a bad idea 

I think it's safer to nab the QB at 11 then trade back into the 1st to grab the Edge or DT you want.

@"supafreak84" said:

@"HappyViking" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

Where do we get the QB? 

I'd envision if they went defense with the first pick, they'd move back up into the late 1st for Nix or Penix. I just don't think we mortgage our future moving up into the top 3 or having to jockey for whatever is ledtover with Denver and Vegas. Going defense at 11 and picking up one of those other two later on isnt a bad idea 

I think it's safer to nab the QB at 11 then trade back into the 1st to grab the Edge or DT you want.

Maybe, but we still need an impact player along our defensive front and where does that come from at this point? I don't consider Greenard/Van Ginkel to be an upgrade over Hunter/Wonnum and at minimum you are hoping they can come close to matching that production. So where do we get better and upgrade a position of need? 

@"supafreak84" said:

@"HappyViking" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

Where do we get the QB? 

I'd envision if they went defense with the first pick, they'd move back up into the late 1st for Nix or Penix. I just don't think we mortgage our future moving up into the top 3 or having to jockey for whatever is ledtover with Denver and Vegas. Going defense at 11 and picking up one of those other two later on isnt a bad idea 

I think it's safer to nab the QB at 11 then trade back into the 1st to grab the Edge or DT you want.

Maybe, but we still need an impact player along our defensive front and where does that come from at this point? I don't consider Greenard/Van Ginkel to be an upgrade over Hunter/Wonnum and at minimum you are hoping they can come close to matching that production. So where do we get better and upgrade a position of need? 

I think we really need to improve the DL as outside of Phillips we had little impact there, would love to see a space eating NT and then a true 3-4 DE which is something we do not currently have.

@"HappyViking" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"HappyViking" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

Where do we get the QB? 

I'd envision if they went defense with the first pick, they'd move back up into the late 1st for Nix or Penix. I just don't think we mortgage our future moving up into the top 3 or having to jockey for whatever is ledtover with Denver and Vegas. Going defense at 11 and picking up one of those other two later on isnt a bad idea 

I think it's safer to nab the QB at 11 then trade back into the 1st to grab the Edge or DT you want.

Maybe, but we still need an impact player along our defensive front and where does that come from at this point? I don't consider Greenard/Van Ginkel to be an upgrade over Hunter/Wonnum and at minimum you are hoping they can come close to matching that production. So where do we get better and upgrade a position of need? 

I guess I'm assuming a stud DT or Edge would still be available after the 11th pick, and somehow Kwesi can package a deal to get back into the first round and get their guy.  It's the same theory for trading back up to nab a 1st round QB.  Would a QB they covet be more likely available in the mid to late rounds of the first or DL player?  I'm not sure.I think they have to get the QB at 11, and then go D in round 2, if the trade up doesn't work.  It's a rebuild year, and they need the picks anyway.

@"supafreak84" said:

@"HappyViking" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"HappyViking" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"MaroonBells" said:

@"supafreak84" said: I still think Byron Murphy is in the conversation for us at 11. It would be nice however to have either EDGE or DT addressed before the draft. I'm just not sure if the front office envisions Van Ginkel as "the guy" opposite Greenard or just a rotation piece? 

Where do we get the QB? 

I'd envision if they went defense with the first pick, they'd move back up into the late 1st for Nix or Penix. I just don't think we mortgage our future moving up into the top 3 or having to jockey for whatever is ledtover with Denver and Vegas. Going defense at 11 and picking up one of those other two later on isnt a bad idea 

I think it's safer to nab the QB at 11 then trade back into the 1st to grab the Edge or DT you want.

Maybe, but we still need an impact player along our defensive front and where does that come from at this point? I don't consider Greenard/Van Ginkel to be an upgrade over Hunter/Wonnum and at minimum you are hoping they can come close to matching that production. So where do we get better and upgrade a position of need? 

I guess I'm assuming a stud DT or Edge would still be available after the 11th pick, and somehow Kwesi can package a deal to get back into the first round and get their guy.  It's the same theory for trading back up to nab a 1st round QB.  Would a QB they covet be more likely available in the mid to late rounds of the first or DL player?  I'm not sure.I think they have to get the QB at 11, and then go D in round 2, if the trade up doesn't work.  It's a rebuild year, and they need the picks anyway.

Maybe, but what if the quarterback they want isn't there at #11 or we get jumped in a trade up by either Denver or Vegas? You don't take a quarterback just to take a quarterback is my point, and the choices of quality defenders is going to be much more plentiful at 11 than quarterbacks I would guess. This team needs a sure thing in the first round.