Vikings Message Board.Com

Pondering Her Percy wrote: I still disagree. A QB doesn't have to be our first pick. Nor do I think it will be. I think we will either stay put and draft the BPA defensively or trade down and go defense. I doubt Spielman reaches on a QB again. I'm sure he's learned his lesson.

I might start a thread before the draft with the gist being QB vs LB. Do we draft a QB in the 1st rnd and a LB in the 2nd, or visa versa?

But the odds of trading down are small, mostly due to our circumstance and we have a new head coach in his first job.

* I posted in another thread that the front office is researching QB's hard for this draft

headless_norseman wrote:I might start a thread before the draft with the gist being QB vs LB. Do we draft a QB in the 1st rnd and a LB in the 2nd, or visa versa?

Maybe they won't even draft one of those positions in the first two rounds.

Mothman wrote: If there's huge value after 15, I'm not sure I grasp how it's possible for picks 7-15 to be a no man's land.

Value relative to individual projections of where that player should go. You can get a player with same value at 15 or so as though he were an 8th pick. Biggest difference is you pay that player less and you also get additional draft picks.

And 7-15 is an arbitrary number. It very well could be shrunk down, but it definitely appears that some teams can do themselves a favor by trading down.

PacificNorseWest wrote:Value relative to individual projections of where that player should go. You can get a player with same value at 15 or so as though he were an 8th pick. Biggest difference is you pay that player less and you also get additional draft picks.

And 7-15 is an arbitrary number. It very well could be shrunk down, but it definitely appears that some teams can do themselves a favor by trading down.

I see what you mean now but it seems to me that depends on entirely on who's determining the value of those players. Such determinations are highly subjective in nature and there are considerations like fit and need to factor in as well. Spielman is said to assign pretty specific point values to players on his board, even rating them out to multiple decimal places, so I imagine he'll have a board that makes clear distinctions between at least some of those "same value" players.

If the Vikes actually have a trading partner and don't have to move too far down, it could make sense for them to trade back but they really need a QB and some impact players on defense so it might end up making even more sense to stay at #8. If there's a player someone would be willing to trade up to select there, that might also be a player worth drafting for the Vikes. If there's a run on QBs early, as so many people seem to expect, the Vikes may have a great chance to draft a blue chip player on defense if they stay put.

Mothman wrote: Maybe they won't even draft one of those positions in the first two rounds.

Agreed and very possible. But I was just going to run with the seeminngly running consensus of drafting a LB as opposed to "reaching" for a QB in the first.

Mothman wrote: I see what you mean now but it seems to me that depends on entirely on who's determining the value of those players. Such determinations are highly subjective in nature and there are considerations like fit and need to factor in as well. Spielman is said to assign pretty specific point values to players on his board, even rating them out to multiple decimal places, so I imagine he'll have a board that makes clear distinctions between at least some of those "same value" players.

If the Vikes actually have a trading partner and don't have to move too far down, it could make sense for them to trade back but they really need a QB and some impact players on defense so it might end up making even more sense to stay at #8. If there's a player someone would be willing to trade up to select there, that might also be a player worth drafting for the Vikes. If there's a run on QBs early, as so many people seem to expect, the Vikes may have a great chance to draft a blue chip player on defense if they stay put.

Of course. Lots of variables that come into play and heck...we haven't even gotten to the combine yet. "Value" will almost certainly change.

After watching the SB I vote to focus on and draft defense

After watching the SB I vote to focus on and draft defense

im4mnvikes wrote:After watching the SB I vote to focus on and draft defense

how many 1st round picks do the Seahawks have on defense.....?

saint33 wrote:
how many 1st round picks do the Seahawks have on defense.....?

No kidding. Its scary what the GM there, and Carroll have done with that D. With really late rounders. Gives us some hope.

ESPN's Chris Mortensen stated on NFL Insiders that new Browns OC Kyle Shanahan "loves" Kirk Cousins.

ESPN NFC East reporter Dan Graziano chimed in, saying he recently spoke to an executive on a quarterback-needy club who "wouldn't give up more than a three (third-round pick)" for Cousins. Cousins has essentially asked the Redskins to trade him, but they won't get a premium draft choice. The Browns do have a lot of 2014 picks and could conceivably make Washington a mid-round offer.

I'm really starting to believe there is a very good chance Bridgewater or Manziel fall to us at 8. Granted, this is no guarantee, but at the same time, there have now been reports linking Cousins to Cleveland, Sanchez to Oakland, Freeman to Oakland, and Schaub to Oakland. Oakland was reportedly the team that said, "Sanchez would be a day 1 starter if he walked in the door" and they have already had inner circle talks about adding him when he's released by the Jets. If the Raiders and Browns end up making moves for these guys, that will leave Houston and Jacksonville (possibly TB) to possibly draft QBs before 8. I really hope one of those teams really want Bortles because I want nothing to do with him. If we want Teddy or JFB, we really have to hope these teams above go after Cousins and Sanchez and it wouldn't hurt to pray for Houston or Jacksonville to take Bortles.

As for LB, the more I research and watch game tape, I would much rather wait for a LB until the 2nd-3rd round. I wouldn't mind Mack or Mosely but I don't think guys like Ryan Shazier (Ohio St.) and Shayne Skov (Stanford) aren't far off. I see Shazier and Skov as possibilities to be the "Kiko Alonso" of this years draft and would love to get either of them.

I know im in the minority, but I rate the LBs Mach, Mosely and then Barr. After that, its like the QBs, good ones out there all over. Its picking the good ones from the trash that I hope Zimmer has input on. Cause Rickie isn't too big on late talent.

PurpleKoolaid wrote:I know im in the minority, but I rate the LBs Mach, Mosely and then Barr.

I agree. I'm not that big of a Barr fan. I would compare him to this year's Dion Jordan. I would take Mack or Mosely any day over Barr.

PurpleKoolaid wrote:Its picking the good ones from the trash that I hope Zimmer has input on. Cause Rickie isn't too big on late talent.

I disagree here though. I've broke down the late round talent Spielman has brought in over the years in another thread. To be honest, if you put up every teams last 3-5 drafts on the table and look at rounds 4-7, they won't look much different than Spielmans. Outside of maybe Seattle's But either way, finding consistent late round talent that can come in and contribute isn't very easy to do. I almost feel that it's more "who the coach is" rather than who is drafting. Many players drafted that late can have a lot of potential but just need the coaching. This was something Frazier was never known for as you can see. However, this is something that Zimmer has been known for. Granted, there are many players that just don't pan out in general but it's nice to finally have a coach that gets the most out of what he has and it makes me more and more excited for this coming season.

Yeah theres a lot of truth to that. The later draft picks may need to be coached better then we have seen since the Wilfs came to town. Regardless, this is as exciting an offseason as ever, at least for me.

PurpleKoolaid wrote: Regardless, this is as exciting an offseason as ever, at least for me.

I hear ya on that