Klomp Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 1 minute ago, SemperFeist said: People would have looked at big boards, and seen Williams and Hernandez ranked higher than Corbett, then we would be reading about how the Vikings reached. Or the fact that "you could've gotten Corbett in the 2nd or 3rd" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitehops Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 2 hours ago, Krauser said: Either stay put and draft the BOLA or trade down and still get Daniels or Williams, probably. spielman said that when they were on the clock no teams called to trade up so trading down wasn't an option. so the option was either to take the highest player on their board or take a player a clear tier below that at a position of higher need. they obviously opted for the former. they obviously predicted incorrectly how the board would fall but i'm not sure there's much they could have done. they could have traded up in the first and lost most of their draft capital (would've cost their second rounder to move to 19 and draft ragnow) and they likely thought they wouldn't have had to. there were 11 guards drafted, six of them went in the first 50 picks. the next one selected? cole madison, the first pick of the fifth round. the top three centers were all drafted in the top 40 picks, the next one selected after that was mason cole at the end of the third round. so yeah, after the vikings missed on the premier iOL talent in round one they thought they could get one with their second pick but didn't foresee an unprecedented amount of iOL go in the first 50 picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krauser Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 6 minutes ago, SemperFeist said: People would have looked at big boards, and seen Williams and Hernandez ranked higher than Corbett, then we would be reading about how the Vikings reached. Been around this board for 12 years, a group of people will always find a way to complain about what happens. I guess so? I'm not one who usually complains. Just because some other people might be unhappy no matter what, I don't see how that should affect my analysis of what happened with the Vikings draft this year, either way. I do agree that perceived value ("reach" vs "steal") is a big part of how drafts are initially perceived, and that can lead to some incorrect evaluations (Floyd, Yankey, Clemmings, Crichton, Alexander -- none of them were actually steals in retrospect), but also some correct ones (Beavers really was a reach, Teddy really was a steal before he got hurt). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 3 minutes ago, whitehops said: spielman said that when they were on the clock no teams called to trade up so trading down wasn't an option. so the option was either to take the highest player on their board or take a player a clear tier below that at a position of higher need. they obviously opted for the former. they obviously predicted incorrectly how the board would fall but i'm not sure there's much they could have done. they could have traded up in the first and lost most of their draft capital (would've cost their second rounder to move to 19 and draft ragnow) and they likely thought they wouldn't have had to. there were 11 guards drafted, six of them went in the first 50 picks. the next one selected? cole madison, the first pick of the fifth round. the top three centers were all drafted in the top 40 picks, the next one selected after that was mason cole at the end of the third round. so yeah, after the vikings missed on the premier iOL talent in round one they thought they could get one with their second pick but didn't foresee an unprecedented amount of iOL go in the first 50 picks. I can't fathom how anybody couldn't have predicted the run on interior offensive linemen!! I don't know...it seems like Spielmen might have been hanging out with Percy Harvin, in Percy's basement during the draft! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wcblack34 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 Perhaps Alexander will be traded for an OL in camp. There’s still a lot of time for wheeling and dealing. Regardless, I think it’s good that they stayed true to their board. We’ll get better QB play this year, which helps the line. We’ll get better RB production if Cook is healthy, which helps the line. No question that the line was our biggest need, but if you fee the guy you’re contemplating for need is a risky reach, stay with your board. Add talent and maybe you can move other talent to help improve the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 16 minutes ago, SemperFeist said: People would have looked at big boards, and seen Williams and Hernandez ranked higher than Corbett, then we would be reading about how the Vikings reached. Been around this board for 12 years, a group of people will always find a way to complain about what happens. What the hell are you doing drafting Sidney Rice with Dwayne Jarrett still on the board! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SemperFeist Posted May 1, 2018 Author Share Posted May 1, 2018 12 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said: I can't fathom how anybody couldn't have predicted the run on interior offensive linemen!! I don't know...it seems like Spielmen might have been hanging out with Percy Harvin, in Percy's basement during the draft! Sure, it’s easy to predict something that hasn’t happened in 40 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 7 minutes ago, SemperFeist said: Sure, it’s easy to predict something that hasn’t happened in 40 years. What's so hard about it? Finally some worthwhile IOL's are available...most clubs need some upgrade to the O line... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krauser Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 6 minutes ago, SemperFeist said: Sure, it’s easy to predict something that hasn’t happened in 40 years. It wasn't that hard. Before the draft, it was well known that: IOL are increasingly valuable, and getting bigger contracts in free agency OL play in general is poor across the league, and IOL is an immediate need for many teams developing OL has been harder since the new CBA limited practice time, so teams are placing more of a premium on finding plug and play prospects who don't need a lot of coaching up to be effective Even with the "run" on OL, only a few went off the board much earlier than predicted. NFL.com had them pegged as: Rounds 1-2: Daniels, Hernandez, Williams Round 2: Ragnow, Corbett, Price, Wynn CBS had Wynn, Hernandez, Smith, Ragnow, Daniels, Price and Williams in the top 50, with only Corbett ranked lower than a late 2nd (86). Those high grades and the widespread need across the league led to a lot of IOL coming off the board early. Pre-draft the Vikings had to be able to guess that was at least a possibility (I assume they game out numerous scenarios). And during the draft, around the time Ragnow and Price (both common targets for the trade down and take IOL early 2nd strategy) came off the board in the mid 1st round, they had to recognize it wasn't likely that Daniels or Williams or Corbett would make it to 62. So if they wanted a day one upgrade at IOL, which we know they did (since Ragnow was their plan), they had to have a plan to get one in the scenario where they were all coming off the board between picks 20 and 50. If by pick 25 (with Ragnow, Wynn and Price gone), Spielman wasn't happy taking who was left for IOL at 30, and he had a trade down offer that came through before he was on the clock (he said he got calls when their pick was still 5 or so picks away), he could've taken that, with a plan to draft IOL in the early 2nd. That would've been Daniels vs Williams, which I think most people would've been fine with at that value, especially if they picked up something like a high 4th along the way with the trade down. I think they valued Hughes very highly and thought they should grab that value and figure out the OL later. It's a defensible decision, but I think it clearly leaves them worse at their biggest position of need than if they'd taken the IOL at 30, or traded down a few picks with the offers that came through earlier in the round and then made their choice from whoever was left on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 51 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said: What's so hard about it? Finally some worthwhile IOL's are available...most clubs need some upgrade to the O line... It was more the lack of good Ts than it was a significant influx of good OGs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CriminalMind Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 I don't think it was hard to predict OL run. Ragnow & Price even went round 1, & were the candidates to drop, so the usual round 1 suspects that made it to round 2 were bound to go early. On Friday before round 2 I said: A) run on OL before pick 40 B) 2nd & 3rd needed to get to ~#49 for OL C) Rick would not make trade in b) Aside: generally I found DE\LB to be the most value position with our 2nd pick, if CB was taken #30 & there was an OL run... So I think O'Neil was a reach, & I think Rick basically confirmed that he was a reach since he kept talking about the round 2 OL running suprising him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RpMc Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 About this Mike Hughes guy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krauser Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 O'Neill wasn't a reach, in the sense of taken earlier than he should have been. Developmental athletic TE to OT converts usually go in the 2nd round (Spriggs, Jake Fisher). He was ranked somewhere around the 50s-70s on most boards. He's more like a "stretch" -- they need a guy who can play week one, and even if O'Neill is worth spending a 2nd on (I think so, more or less), he's probably not going to be ready. So unless they stretch what they should expect him to be able to do, the pick didn't fill that immediate need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heimdallr Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 Drafting based on immediate need instead of getting the best available players that fit into your 2-3 year plan is extremely short-sighted an d foolish Rookies should NOT be starting on a 13-3, NFC Championship caliber team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RpMc Posted May 1, 2018 Share Posted May 1, 2018 3 minutes ago, Heimdallr said: Drafting based on immediate need instead of getting the best available players that fit into your 2-3 year plan is extremely short-sighted an d foolish Rookies should NOT be starting on a 13-3, NFC Championship caliber team. I think that's too black and white a stance. Had we drafted Harrison Smith to this team (picked 29th), a player of that caliber absolutely would have started. Plus, half of our starting lineup next year will be from the undrafted free agents we just signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.