Vikings Message Board.Com

Fiesta-
If I only watched the combine video, then yeah, I'd be concerned too. He does leave his feet when not needed on a few of those plays. But I've watched a few other scouting reports and highlight videos of him and the one thing he is praised for is his YAC. I'm not going to argue that there were better 'value' pics at #2 because I don't pay attention to college FB much. But I really don't think him falling down is going to be a problem.

808vikingsfan wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 1:44 pm Fiesta-
If I only watched the combine video, then yeah, I'd be concerned too. He does leave his feet when not needed on a few of those plays. But I've watched a few other scouting reports and highlight videos of him and the one thing he is praised for is his YAC. I'm not going to argue that there were better 'value' pics at #2 because I don't pay attention to college FB much. But I really don't think him falling down is going to be a problem.

As long as he is running drag routes and sitting in zone he should be fine. If he catches it in space he has the speed to turn it up field and make hay. I see him as a poor man's David Morgan. He is a poorer route runner than Morgan with better top speed and he could be very effective if they use him to block and chip and find room within 10 or 15 yards of the LOS. Deeper than that, target him inside the numbers on seam routes and he'll probably be fine. Its not like he's worthless, but he's limited in a way that, to me, makes him not a good choice in the 2nd round. Yes, someone (perhaps Cincinnati) would have selected him if the Vikings hadn't. That's not relevant to me. Many saw him as a first rounder, that has no effect on my view of him. I hope I'm wrong and he turns out to be able to do everything, though I suspect what he does well is what he was drafted to do, and he'll be a solid player in Kubiak's system.

CharVike wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 10:39 am

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2019 8:27 pm Smith was an excellent choice. Selfish me wanted us to trade up to get Taylor or Ford though. Great pick.

Selfish me wanted Lock. Elway took him so he must be awful and won't be in the league very long. A couple camps and see ya. Ford wasn't a fit for the scheme. Too big and no movement. This isn't a power OL. It's a wuss scheme which I feel somebody will get their head knocked off eventually. Cousins? Smith only being 20 was a nice pick. That is very young but as another pointed out Hunter was only 20 also.

I think the perceived lack of movement people have attached to Cody Ford is a misnomer. The guy has fantastic movement speed. I think he was quick enough to play tackle but the NFL kind of typecast you when you're a Mauler. Mauler = slow.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2019 11:12 am

fiestavike wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2019 10:28 am

I'm just curios, did you watch the link or did you see him during combine coverage? I am not talking about not measuring well in drill x or y.

If we don't ask him to do what he can't do, which seems to be locate and catch the ball over the shoulder, he could be very effective.

I did watch it. Him falling to the ground and missing two balls results in "you not drafting him until late due to a terrible combine performance"? I mean outside of those two passes he didnt drop a single ball. That's a poor reason not to draft a player until late if you ask me.

Man never have I ever seen a year where this board has been this critical on the combine performances of the players we drafted. I dont even remember hardly talking about the combine numbers after the draft in previous years. It's almost like guys HAVE to find a way to complain about Spielman or his draft so we're resorting to combine numbers to say they are bad picks (not saying you, just in general). But like, come on guys. Between Mattison and now Irv Smith, some of you are acting like we just made two bone-headed picks by taking these two and you're basing it off the NFL combine when guys are running around in shorts. I dont get it. I know some of it is due to Spielman not drafting certain players that fans wanted but I mean in all reality, what do we know? Nothing. And what does the combine prove? Nothing. I could literally name hundreds of players over the years that were/are great players in this league but had "bad" combine numbers. I shouldnt even name numbers as plural because Mattison is being knocked for his 40 time and Smith is being knocked for two over the shoulder throws. And knocked to the point of saying "he was a reach", "he was a bad pick", or "I wouldnt have drafted him until late"....because of the NFL combine.....my mind is blown.

Those combine numbers don't mean a thing. Sure a guy runs a 4.4 in shorts. Big deal. Throw the pads on him and it changes. Football speed is what counts and that involves many different things.and is hard to measure and it may be impossible to measure it. This Smith guy looks good on tape. But that was against a bunch of bums when compared to the pro level. But a good pick IMO. Even this Mattison guy who is getting creamed because of a lack of combine speed might be a very good draft pick. Does he have football speed? That is the question. But if he fails the word will be Speilman don't know players. I like this pick and we needed a guy. Our main man will miss time. That's already been proven.

CharVike wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:00 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2019 11:12 am

I did watch it. Him falling to the ground and missing two balls results in "you not drafting him until late due to a terrible combine performance"? I mean outside of those two passes he didnt drop a single ball. That's a poor reason not to draft a player until late if you ask me.

Man never have I ever seen a year where this board has been this critical on the combine performances of the players we drafted. I dont even remember hardly talking about the combine numbers after the draft in previous years. It's almost like guys HAVE to find a way to complain about Spielman or his draft so we're resorting to combine numbers to say they are bad picks (not saying you, just in general). But like, come on guys. Between Mattison and now Irv Smith, some of you are acting like we just made two bone-headed picks by taking these two and you're basing it off the NFL combine when guys are running around in shorts. I dont get it. I know some of it is due to Spielman not drafting certain players that fans wanted but I mean in all reality, what do we know? Nothing. And what does the combine prove? Nothing. I could literally name hundreds of players over the years that were/are great players in this league but had "bad" combine numbers. I shouldnt even name numbers as plural because Mattison is being knocked for his 40 time and Smith is being knocked for two over the shoulder throws. And knocked to the point of saying "he was a reach", "he was a bad pick", or "I wouldnt have drafted him until late"....because of the NFL combine.....my mind is blown.

Those combine numbers don't mean a thing. Sure a guy runs a 4.4 in shorts. Big deal. Throw the pads on him and it changes. Football speed is what counts and that involves many different things.and is hard to measure and it may be impossible to measure it. This Smith guy looks good on tape. But that was against a bunch of bums when compared to the pro level. But a good pick IMO. Even this Mattison guy who is getting creamed because of a lack of combine speed might be a very good draft pick. Does he have football speed? That is the question. But if he fails the word will be Speilman don't know players. I like this pick and we needed a guy. Our main man will miss time. That's already been proven.

Mattison isnt being creamed because he ran a slow time. He's being creamed because we drafted him in the 3rd round. That is typically a round where near elite rbs go. Elite (1st and 2nd round). Based on the draft. he could have been had in the 4th or 5th. A player of greater value was available. He may turn out to be an absolute stud but that doesn't negate draft value.

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 4:07 pm

CharVike wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:00 am
Those combine numbers don't mean a thing. Sure a guy runs a 4.4 in shorts. Big deal. Throw the pads on him and it changes. Football speed is what counts and that involves many different things.and is hard to measure and it may be impossible to measure it. This Smith guy looks good on tape. But that was against a bunch of bums when compared to the pro level. But a good pick IMO. Even this Mattison guy who is getting creamed because of a lack of combine speed might be a very good draft pick. Does he have football speed? That is the question. But if he fails the word will be Speilman don't know players. I like this pick and we needed a guy. Our main man will miss time. That's already been proven.

Mattison isnt being creamed because he ran a slow time. He's being creamed because we drafted him in the 3rd round. That is typically a round where near elite rbs go. Elite (1st and 2nd round). Based on the draft. he could have been had in the 4th or 5th. A player of greater value was available. He may turn out to be an absolute stud but that doesn't negate draft value.

IMO this draft was paper thin. He wouldn't last long after our pick and I think we miss. The Giants made a ridiculous reach for a QB from a crap program. There GM even said you never reach for need. It never works. He just did that. Who knows with Mattison. He's nothing special but will see time spelling Cook. I've never seen him play but I hope he's a battering ram. 3 yards and a cloud of dust works for me. I know that's old school and teams no longer do that. But that's what I would like to see.

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 4:07 pm
Mattison isnt being creamed because he ran a slow time.

See I disagree here. He IS being creamed over his combine performance. As well as Irv Smith. That's all that's been talked about when it comes to guys saying they didnt like this pick or didnt like that pick. Anyone that's argued about the Mattison pick has said "he's slow" .....based off of what? Yeah the combine. And then it's his 3 cone time, another combine number. I keep bringing up the tape but nobody says anything about that. Its just "he's slow" because he ran a 4.67 at the combine (something he ended up shattering at his pro day) and had a "slow" 3 cone time. That's what everyone is honing in on because that's all anyone has to go off of outside of tape, which I can guarantee some havent watched. The combine literally means nothing. There are hundreds of good to elite players in this league that had bad combine perfomances. There are hundreds of awful to out of the league players that had great combine performances. In the end, it doesnt mean squat. It's how you perform on the field and that's exactly what Mattison did at Boise St was perform on the field. They always say, "the tape doesnt lie". Have you ever heard anyone say "the combine doesnt lie". I can guarantee you havent.

He's being creamed because we drafted him in the 3rd round.

I dont get why guys keep splitting hairs by saying "he was a projected 4th to 5th rounder and went in the 3rd"?? He was picked with the LAST pick in the 3rd. Which was 7 picks deep into compensatory range. If we traded back just one single pick, he would've been labeled a "4th rounder". Would guys still be arguing that?? If he was picked in the top end to middle of the 3rd, then ok, you have an argument but as the last pick in the 3rd round (a round that's longer than normal because of compensatory picks), I dont understand what you're bickering over. Irv Smith is being referred to as a reach or poor pick because he fell down a few times catching the ball at the combine. Again, it means nothing.

That is typically a round where near elite rbs go. Elite (1st and 2nd round). Based on the draft. he could have been had in the 4th or 5th.

I also 100% disagree. Yes, the great to elite ones are going in the first and second but as for the 3rd, the only current starting RBs I even know of that were drafted in the 3rd round were Kamara and Hunt. Both considered elite or at least close to elite right? Well as for Hunt, here are his combine numbers next to Mattison:

40 yard dash
Hunt- 4.62
Mattison- 4.67

3 cone drill
Hunt- 7.22
Mattison- 7.13

20 yard shuttle
Hunt- 4.53
Mattison- 4.29

Bench
Hunt- 18
Mattison- 22

Broad Jump
Hunt- 119 in.
Mattison- 127 in.

Vertical Jump
Hunt- 36.5 in.
Mattison- 35 in.


And Hunt's knock coming out......

The knock on Hunt is that he is a below average athlete coming in at just the 27th percentile for NFL running backs. He lacks breakaway speed and will not be a home run threat.

Hunt also played for Toledo, who plays in an even worse conference than Boise St. does.

Either way, this is just one of many examples of why combine numbers mean nothing. That's an elite to near elite RB in Hunt that pretty much matched Mattisons numbers across the board. Mattison actually had better times than him in 4 out of the 6 major drills I listed. Again, he was the LAST pick in the 3rd round. He was a 3rd round compensatory pick. He couldn't get closer to the 4th round if he tried.

A player of greater value was available. He may turn out to be an absolute stud but that doesn't negate draft value.

Again, according to who?! You? You're talking like you know that there was a guaranteed stud out there that we passed on. This is your own opinion that you are trying to claim as a fact. Clearly we had Mattison higher on our board than Hakeem Butler. And clearly a lot of teams had players on their board ahead of Hakeem Butler. Otherwise he wouldnt have fell to the 4th round. The Bills took TE Dawson Knox ahead of Butler and Knox had 15 catches his entire senior year and Buffalo is thin at WR. Baltimore took Boykin before Butler and Boykin didnt even break 900 yards his final year at ND and had all of 12 catches the year before. The 49ers drafted a gadget player out of Baylor over Butler. So clearly Butler wasnt as high of a priority for teams as you thought he was.

In the end, players like Mattison go every year between the 3rd and 5th rounds. He's no different than anyone else. I mean the 49ers drafted a punter 8 picks after the Vikings took Mattison for gods sake. Saying Mattison was a poor pick and creaming him for being drafted one pick before the 4th round started when he was a projected 4th rounder is a poor argument. Trying to judge Mattisons talent off of his combine numbers is also a poor argument. I respect your opinion but you're really trying too hard with this. It's something different each time. First it was his 40, then it was his 3 cone, now it's where he was drafted. Maybe it was all 3 at the same time, but either way, I just proved why those are poor arguments. And the one thing that's the true tell, the tape, is something you have yet to say a word about. You're basing your argument off of combine numbers and (your version of) draft value. Those just arent valid enough to claim if he was a bad pick or not. Neither carry enough weight to say so.

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 10:03 pm

CharVike wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 10:39 am
Selfish me wanted Lock. Elway took him so he must be awful and won't be in the league very long. A couple camps and see ya. Ford wasn't a fit for the scheme. Too big and no movement. This isn't a power OL. It's a wuss scheme which I feel somebody will get their head knocked off eventually. Cousins? Smith only being 20 was a nice pick. That is very young but as another pointed out Hunter was only 20 also.

I think the perceived lack of movement people have attached to Cody Ford is a misnomer. The guy has fantastic movement speed. I think he was quick enough to play tackle but the NFL kind of typecast you when you're a Mauler. Mauler = slow.

I liked Ford a lot about a month before the draft, but then as I learned more about him and watched him more in his highlight tape on Youtube, I cooled on him. He is big, but he's not powerful. I think this reflected a bit in his combine bench press results too.

He moves well, but doesn't have great feet, which is one reason he was being projected back inside as a pro. He could probably play outside in the pros, true, and he may end up there, but if you watch him those aforementioned highlights, you'll see him struggle to get to spots. He's much better in a small area where he can lock on to the defensive player quickly.

I also thought he struggled a bit to control his momentum. He's a big guy, and when he got moving in one direction he struggled to control that momentum. Because he's so large, he was able to mask that a bit, but in my opinion he'd be susceptible to defensive rushers who can get him leaning and then rip past him or pull him off balance.

With some time in an NFL strength program and some coaching, he will probably learn to mitigate these weaknesses, and with his natural size he's got the potential to be an impact player as a pro no doubt, but if Ford comes into the NFL as a "mauler", then so does Eli Udoh, who is just as big and seems to have a lot of the same question marks. The main difference between Udoh and Ford is that Ford played at the top level of college football and Udoh didn't, but in terms of what they bring to the table physically, they're amazingly similar players with the same core challenges to overcome going forward.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 11:51 am In the end, players like Mattison go every year between the 3rd and 5th rounds. He's no different than anyone else. I mean the 49ers drafted a punter 8 picks after the Vikings took Mattison for gods sake. Saying Mattison was a poor pick and creaming him for being drafted one pick before the 4th round started when he was a projected 4th rounder is a poor argument. Trying to judge Mattisons talent off of his combine numbers is also a poor argument. I respect your opinion but you're really trying too hard with this. It's something different each time. First it was his 40, then it was his 3 cone, now it's where he was drafted. Maybe it was all 3 at the same time, but either way, I just proved why those are poor arguments. And the one thing that's the true tell, the tape, is something you have yet to say a word about. You're basing your argument off of combine numbers and (your version of) draft value. Those just arent valid enough to claim if he was a bad pick or not. Neither carry enough weight to say so.

I think Mattison merited the round where he was chosen.

I'm just not sure I liked the pick from a positional perspective. Granted Murray is gone, but I thought the Vikings did OK with Boone and Thomas. I don't know why Mattison made positional sense in the 3rd unless they saw something in him that they didn't believe Boone or Thomas could do as well or better. And given that the primary deficiency on offense was the blocking, and no matter how you look at Mattison he's not a blocking back, it seems puzzling to me that in the 3rd round they're going RB when it's hard to argue that Mattison was consensus BPA at that spot in the draft.

The only way this choice makes sense to me is that Mattison was clearly atop the Vikings board at that point and they're just not convinced Cook can stay healthy for an entire season and felt like with Murray gone they needed a starting-caliber RB, and neither Boone nor Thomas can fill that role.

VikingLord wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 4:27 pm

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 11:51 am In the end, players like Mattison go every year between the 3rd and 5th rounds. He's no different than anyone else. I mean the 49ers drafted a punter 8 picks after the Vikings took Mattison for gods sake. Saying Mattison was a poor pick and creaming him for being drafted one pick before the 4th round started when he was a projected 4th rounder is a poor argument. Trying to judge Mattisons talent off of his combine numbers is also a poor argument. I respect your opinion but you're really trying too hard with this. It's something different each time. First it was his 40, then it was his 3 cone, now it's where he was drafted. Maybe it was all 3 at the same time, but either way, I just proved why those are poor arguments. And the one thing that's the true tell, the tape, is something you have yet to say a word about. You're basing your argument off of combine numbers and (your version of) draft value. Those just arent valid enough to claim if he was a bad pick or not. Neither carry enough weight to say so.

I think Mattison merited the round where he was chosen.

I'm just not sure I liked the pick from a positional perspective. Granted Murray is gone, but I thought the Vikings did OK with Boone and Thomas. I don't know why Mattison made positional sense in the 3rd unless they saw something in him that they didn't believe Boone or Thomas could do as well or better. And given that the primary deficiency on offense was the blocking, and no matter how you look at Mattison he's not a blocking back, it seems puzzling to me that in the 3rd round they're going RB when it's hard to argue that Mattison was consensus BPA at that spot in the draft.

The only way this choice makes sense to me is that Mattison was clearly atop the Vikings board at that point and they're just not convinced Cook can stay healthy for an entire season and felt like with Murray gone they needed a starting-caliber RB, and neither Boone nor Thomas can fill that role.

I personally have very little faith in Boone or Thomas if he stays with the team being able to be a feature back. I can see Mattison in that role.

VikingLord wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 4:27 pm

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 11:51 am In the end, players like Mattison go every year between the 3rd and 5th rounds. He's no different than anyone else. I mean the 49ers drafted a punter 8 picks after the Vikings took Mattison for gods sake. Saying Mattison was a poor pick and creaming him for being drafted one pick before the 4th round started when he was a projected 4th rounder is a poor argument. Trying to judge Mattisons talent off of his combine numbers is also a poor argument. I respect your opinion but you're really trying too hard with this. It's something different each time. First it was his 40, then it was his 3 cone, now it's where he was drafted. Maybe it was all 3 at the same time, but either way, I just proved why those are poor arguments. And the one thing that's the true tell, the tape, is something you have yet to say a word about. You're basing your argument off of combine numbers and (your version of) draft value. Those just arent valid enough to claim if he was a bad pick or not. Neither carry enough weight to say so.

I think Mattison merited the round where he was chosen.

I'm just not sure I liked the pick from a positional perspective. Granted Murray is gone, but I thought the Vikings did OK with Boone and Thomas. I don't know why Mattison made positional sense in the 3rd unless they saw something in him that they didn't believe Boone or Thomas could do as well or better. And given that the primary deficiency on offense was the blocking, and no matter how you look at Mattison he's not a blocking back, it seems puzzling to me that in the 3rd round they're going RB when it's hard to argue that Mattison was consensus BPA at that spot in the draft.

The only way this choice makes sense to me is that Mattison was clearly atop the Vikings board at that point and they're just not convinced Cook can stay healthy for an entire season and felt like with Murray gone they needed a starting-caliber RB, and neither Boone nor Thomas can fill that role.

I understand where you're coming from but here's my thing, would you trust Boone/Thomas combo to take over if Cook was to go down? No less we're turning this team into a run first team (which essentially could increase Cooks chances of getting banged up). This is a 2 RB league now. Mattison has proven workhorse ability. I mean Boone didnt even break 500 yards in either of his final 2 years at Cincinnati. And I personally think Thomas is a flash in the pan/preseason hero. Plus he's likely to face suspension. So in the end, we were down to Boone and that was it. Who is not a workhorse. Wasnt in college and theres a high probability he wont be in the NFL. RB was definitely a bigger need than some may think. Especially when you have a starter that cant stay healthy. Could we have drafted one later? Sure. But clearly they had Mattison high on their board and I'm fine with that. I had him as the #5 ranked RB coming out.

So no, I dont see how anyone could think that Boone and/or Thomas could do better than Mattison will. Boone was never a workhorse in college and Thomas is clearly a head case who was initially at Auburn, transferred to Jacksonville state and then gets slapped with a felony charge for weed when he gets to the NFL. Obviously he cant be trusted. So in the end, there wasnt anyone behind Cook that you could truly trust like you could with Murray. I can trust Mattison. He's carried full loads non-stop in college and has great hands. Not a great pass protector but hopefully that develops. I believe you'll see Mattison get a lot more carries than expected even if Cook stays healthy all year. It's not like Mattison is going to sit the bench and they're going to drive Cook into the ground given his history.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2019 9:49 am
So no, I dont see how anyone could think that Boone and/or Thomas could do better than Mattison will. Boone was never a workhorse in college and Thomas is clearly a head case who was initially at Auburn, transferred to Jacksonville state and then gets slapped with a felony charge for weed when he gets to the NFL. Obviously, he cant be trusted. So in the end, there wasn't anyone behind Cook that you could truly trust like you could with Murray. I can trust Mattison. He's carried full loads non-stop in college and has great hands. Not a great pass protector but hopefully that develops. I believe you'll see Mattison get a lot more carries than expected even if Cook stays healthy all year. It's not like Mattison is going to sit the bench and they're going to drive Cook into the ground given his history.

Who do you trust behind Diggs and AT? The argument is laughable. If one was to go down, we would be in trouble.
This draft was unusually loaded at both defense, OL and RBs. This drove the value of RBs down further. I'm not only on the Butler bandwagon. He is who I wanted but given the DEVALUED position of RBs, I strongly believed that there were other players we could have taken and still drafted this guy. Sometimes we nut up in the draft. I've seen almost everyone pan this pick based on the VALUE.

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2019 3:58 pm

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Tue May 07, 2019 9:49 am
So no, I dont see how anyone could think that Boone and/or Thomas could do better than Mattison will. Boone was never a workhorse in college and Thomas is clearly a head case who was initially at Auburn, transferred to Jacksonville state and then gets slapped with a felony charge for weed when he gets to the NFL. Obviously, he cant be trusted. So in the end, there wasn't anyone behind Cook that you could truly trust like you could with Murray. I can trust Mattison. He's carried full loads non-stop in college and has great hands. Not a great pass protector but hopefully that develops. I believe you'll see Mattison get a lot more carries than expected even if Cook stays healthy all year. It's not like Mattison is going to sit the bench and they're going to drive Cook into the ground given his history.

Who do you trust behind Diggs and AT? The argument is laughable. If one was to go down, we would be in trouble.
This draft was unusually loaded at both defense, OL and RBs. This drove the value of RBs down further. I'm not only on the Butler bandwagon. He is who I wanted but given the DEVALUED position of RBs, I strongly believed that there were other players we could have taken and still drafted this guy. Sometimes we nut up in the draft. I've seen almost everyone pan this pick based on the VALUE.

And the argument of who's behind Cook isnt laughable? Boone and Thomas combined for 19 carries last year. So everyone is really going off of preseason performance. Like I said before, that's like guys saying start Sloter because he showed promise in the preaseason. It's just not realistic and neither is relying on either Boone or Thomas. No less Thomas is going to be suspended. Mike Boone showed about as much promise as Chad Beebe showed last year. So what's the difference? No less, this offense is going to be way more run heavy and using a 3rd WR way less than before. So when you look at VALUE that way, what's more valuable? A guy that is going to spell your starter that cant stay healthy in a run first offense? Or a #3 that is going to catch about 20 balls over the course of the year. Maybe get a few extra catches for the 1-2 games Diggs misses a year?....in a run first offense? We'll see what was more valuable between the combination of Mattison/Mitchell vs. Butler and any 7th round RB.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: ↑Thu May 09, 2019 10:03 am

YikesVikes wrote: ↑Wed May 08, 2019 3:58 pm

Who do you trust behind Diggs and AT? The argument is laughable. If one was to go down, we would be in trouble.
This draft was unusually loaded at both defense, OL and RBs. This drove the value of RBs down further. I'm not only on the Butler bandwagon. He is who I wanted but given the DEVALUED position of RBs, I strongly believed that there were other players we could have taken and still drafted this guy. Sometimes we nut up in the draft. I've seen almost everyone pan this pick based on the VALUE.

And the argument of who's behind Cook isnt laughable? Boone and Thomas combined for 19 carries last year. So everyone is really going off of preseason performance. Like I said before, that's like guys saying start Sloter because he showed promise in the preaseason. It's just not realistic and neither is relying on either Boone or Thomas. No less Thomas is going to be suspended. Mike Boone showed about as much promise as Chad Beebe showed last year. So what's the difference? No less, this offense is going to be way more run heavy and using a 3rd WR way less than before. So when you look at VALUE that way, what's more valuable? A guy that is going to spell your starter that cant stay healthy in a run first offense? Or a #3 that is going to catch about 20 balls over the course of the year. Maybe get a few extra catches for the 1-2 games Diggs misses a year?....in a run first offense? We'll see what was more valuable between the combination of Mattison/Mitchell vs. Butler and any 7th round RB.

The WR because
1. We will pass more than run this season
2. When the team is losing that double tight nonsense goes out the window and we go 3 wide. We're in trouble if this happens, we're praying an unknown steps in.
3. Rookie TEs have taken time to become acclimated to the league.

Also, I'm not assuming we had to take him in the 7th. Maybe we take him in the 4th or we take Butler and Sumia and Ryquell Armstead in the 5th. IMO, Butler and Armstead I better for this team than Mattison. Also, I don't base his lack of top end speed on his combine, I base it on his lack of long runs against poor comp. 9 runs out of 300+ went for more than 15. You maybe right about his quickness to the hole. The tap show that.

fiestavike wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 4:58 pm

808vikingsfan wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2019 1:44 pm Fiesta-
If I only watched the combine video, then yeah, I'd be concerned too. He does leave his feet when not needed on a few of those plays. But I've watched a few other scouting reports and highlight videos of him and the one thing he is praised for is his YAC. I'm not going to argue that there were better 'value' pics at #2 because I don't pay attention to college FB much. But I really don't think him falling down is going to be a problem.

As long as he is running drag routes and sitting in zone he should be fine. If he catches it in space he has the speed to turn it up field and make hay. I see him as a poor man's David Morgan. He is a poorer route runner than Morgan with better top speed and he could be very effective if they use him to block and chip and find room within 10 or 15 yards of the LOS. Deeper than that, target him inside the numbers on seam routes and he'll probably be fine. Its not like he's worthless, but he's limited in a way that, to me, makes him not a good choice in the 2nd round. Yes, someone (perhaps Cincinnati) would have selected him if the Vikings hadn't. That's not relevant to me. Many saw him as a first rounder, that has no effect on my view of him. I hope I'm wrong and he turns out to be able to do everything, though I suspect what he does well is what he was drafted to do, and he'll be a solid player in Kubiak's system.

https://www.vikings.com/video/irv-smith ... ikings-nfl