Valhalla Mock Draft MMXXI: Final Results

[Snake Plissken]

28 minutes ago, PrplChilPill said:

14. Most of the time. I don't have a board of 100 players in front of me, and never will. I'd rather get a "sure fire" starter. 

You said most of the time.  So curious, If the board played out as it did in our Valhalla Mock, how far would you trade back to assure you could get one of the guys you would be content with?

 

I would have to get AVT, Parsons, or Paye and get enough back to get be able to get a Radunz, Leatherwood, Minerz, or Davis (or trade up) if I went defense.  If I still get AVT, then it is just stealing 🤑

Edited April 22, 2021 by Snake Plissken

[PrplChilPill]

40 minutes ago, Snake Plissken said:

You said most of the time.  So curious, If the board played out as it did in our Valhalla Mock, how far would you trade back to assure you could get one of the guys you would be content with?

 

I would have to get AVT, Parsons, or Paye and get enough back to get be able to get a Radunz, Leatherwood, Minerz, or Davis (or trade up) if I went defense.  If I still get AVT, then it is just stealing 🤑

I have no idea. I'm not as deep into this as y'all are........If they don't get a starting OL in this draft (or trade or whatever), they won't make the playoffs. I'd rather have the more sure thing given their current roster (aging, other than WR, among their best players). Most people are really into BPA.....but there are times when adding the right player (position) is crucial to taking advantage of your current roster. Plus, it's not like they won't need OL in a few years when they do reboot some......you need 5. Every play. 

[SemperFeist]

The whole concept of BPA is just ridiculous, quite frankly. Especially with the way media and fans portray it. 

[viking]

AVT @ 14 is a bad pick 

[viking]

rick spielman isn't that dumb to make that pick

[Vikes_Bolts1228]

On 4/21/2021 at 10:02 AM, DisplacedViking said:

 

Cleveland, AVT, Bradbury, Cole, O'Neil

 

22, 21, 25, 25, 25

Avg. Age: 23.6

[Ozzy]

4 minutes ago, Vikes_Bolts1228 said:

22, 21, 25, 25, 25

Avg. Age: 23.6

Sure they are young but sad thing is I do not have a ton of faith in Ezra being a great LT.  Good athlete but is more of a physical RT than a great pass blocking LT.  Better hope he is better at LT than OG which he did struggle at last year.  Real sucky part is Bradbury, if he was more solid in the middle the OG positions would not be as important but because he is kind of weak in the middle the other OG spots are absolutely huge because Bradbury gets overpowered a lot and if he does then the guards struggle as well.

Would be a totally different OL if say Ryan Kelly or Frank Ragnow was the center.  

[CriminalMind]

15 minutes ago, Vikes_Bolts1228 said:

22, 21, 25, 25, 25

Avg. Age: 23.6

The OL would still be glaring weakness in front of this QB, with his skill level

Youth is fine, but that C-RG combination is going to be bad regardless. 

[Ozzy]

1 minute ago, CriminalMind said:

The OL would still be glaring weakness in front of this QB, with his skill level

Youth is fine, but that C-RG combination is going to be bad regardless. 

I have some hope that either Dozier has improved after his first season in his career starting all year, or more likely that Mason Cole switching from center to guard which is a more natural position for him.  I had Cole as a solid RT coming out of college because he played pretty well there at Michigan, never a fan of him as a center.  Real interesting thing will be what in the world they do with Hill and Udoh.  

 

 

Even though O'Neill struggled big time in pass pro last year, I would not mind seeing Udoh out there at RT to see if he can push some guys around and be a physical force.

LT O'Neill
LG (Rookie?) M. Cole / Dozier
C Bradbury
RG Cleveland
RT Udoh
 

 

 

This is the starting group on some things I have seen in terms of a depth chart right now.  

LT R. Hill
LG Dozier / M. Cole
C Bradbury / M.Cole
RG E. Cleveland
RT O'Neill

 

Not awful but that is if Hill can play LT, and honestly if he was that good he would be getting a lot more than $2.37 for one year.  Will be curious how he does or if he plays and if so where.  Sucks a more elite LT was not around at #14, Darrisaw sure but I do not consider him that elite, because LT is a big need and Hill maybe could kick into guard possibly if they could find an elite LT.

 

Freaking sucks Slater is most likely not an option.

 

[DisplacedViking]

57 minutes ago, viking said:

AVT @ 14 is a bad pick 

Thank you for the insight, analysis, and superior alternative selection(s).

Who IS Spielman dumb enough to select in your expert opinion?

[viking]

12 hours ago, DisplacedViking said:

Thank you for the insight, analysis, and superior alternative selection(s).

Who IS Spielman dumb enough to select in your expert opinion?

If you read the thread you would have been able to see who I want to pick.

 

AVT is in the 2nd tier of O-linemen in this class, feeling pressured to pick him at 14 because the top 3 tackles are gone is a bad move. I could be on board with taking AVT if we could trade down and get him, otherwise it's a really bad value pick.

 

Last year the Vikings weren't losing games because of a bad O-line, we were losing it because of a terrible D-line. If we pick AVT @ 14 we're not going to suddenly boost our line to being good it's still going to be poor. We need to use pick 14 on a premium talent at a premium position (LT,DE,CB,WR). Not on a 2nd rate Offensive guard.

[wcblack34]

56 minutes ago, viking said:

If you read the thread you would have been able to see who I want to pick.

 

AVT is in the 2nd tier of O-linemen in this class, feeling pressured to pick him at 14 because the top 3 tackles are gone is a bad move. I could be on board with taking AVT if we could trade down and get him, otherwise it's a really bad value pick.

 

Last year the Vikings weren't losing games because of a bad O-line, we were losing it because of a terrible D-line. If we pick AVT @ 14 we're not going to suddenly boost our line to being good it's still going to be poor. We need to use pick 14 on a premium talent at a premium position (LT,DE,CB,WR). Not on a 2nd rate Offensive guard.

The hyperbole is strong. 

AVT isn't a "2nd rate Offensive Guard." He's a consensus first round pick. If you like a guy at pick 20, you had better be prepared to take him at 14. 

The team will have a better defense this year. Hunter, Pierce and Tomlinson are a vast upgrade to what we had last year. Our interior O-line was atrocious. AVT offers positional flexibility and will help to keep Cousins from having DTs in his face as soon as the ball is snapped. He's much more of a sure thing than the DEs in this class. 

I'd prefer Jenkins, but if the Vikings brass prefers AVT, I'm not going to argue. The offensive line has been far too bad for far too long. 

[swede700]

1 hour ago, viking said:

If you read the thread you would have been able to see who I want to pick.

 

AVT is in the 2nd tier of O-linemen in this class, feeling pressured to pick him at 14 because the top 3 tackles are gone is a bad move. I could be on board with taking AVT if we could trade down and get him, otherwise it's a really bad value pick.

 

Last year the Vikings weren't losing games because of a bad O-line, we were losing it because of a terrible D-line. If we pick AVT @ 14 we're not going to suddenly boost our line to being good it's still going to be poor. We need to use pick 14 on a premium talent at a premium position (LT,DE,CB,WR). Not on a 2nd rate Offensive guard.

Now, take his opinion FWIW, but Ben Leber believes AVT is the best offensive lineman in this draft period. 

[swede700]

FInal results are in and on page 1.  At least, according to us, USC offensive guard Alijah Vera-Tucker will be wearing the purple and gold.  We'll have to see if that actually happens.  Feel free to add any comments/suggestions on the polls for next year.  Thanks to all that participated!

[VikeManDan]

Going to be fun next Thursday night.