PDA

View Full Version : Vikings Offseason



TheLeviathan
02-28-2013, 09:19 PM
So here is my take on important things for the Vikes to do this offseason:

1. Keep Felton and Loadholt. You're going to have to pay out the ear for Phil (5M a year I'm guessing) but I probably give that to him. This line played WAY too well to be broken up. Felton shouldn't be too expensive and really was excellent last year.

2. Pursue Dannell Ellerbe - love this guy and I think LB is the team's number one priority this offseason. Or should be. I know people will bring up WR, but give me a LB first. Especially if we keep Percy around.

3. Keep Percy around. Unless you're blown away by a deal, this guy is too dangerous to move for what you would likely get. Judging by the Brandon Marshall deal, we're just not likely to get what I think he's worth. So keep him.

4. I'd also call in on Levitre and Vasquez - either of them would only help more. They're very good and football still starts up front.

5. I'd try to land one of the big safeties - Delmas, Goldson, or Phillips. Smith is a beast, let's give him a partner back there that can come close to matching his talent.

6. Draft LB or DL as your top priorities in the first. WR is a better 2nd or 3rd round option. I'd come out of this draft's top 5 picks with something like this: 1 OL, 1 DT, 1 LB, 2 WR, and 1 DB.

Just my thoughts.

luke829
03-01-2013, 05:05 PM
I feel it could all come down to one thing: Has Ponder proven that he can be "The Man"? I do like your Ellerbe suggestion (certainly an area that needs improving).

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-01-2013, 10:58 PM
For better or worse Ponder is going to be the starter for us in 2013. I wouldn't mind in bringing Flynn to compete with him if the price is right, or drafting a guy like Landry Jones if he slips to the 3rd round. (Keep in mind if Jones came out last year he was an easy top 15 pick)

TheLeviathan
03-02-2013, 07:51 AM
I agree Dave but I don't think they bring anyone near that level in - I think they are aware of the fanbase's uncertainty and don't want to feed them anything more to question Ponder.

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-02-2013, 09:17 PM
I think its a different "NFL" these days, you need two solid QB's that can both play at a "starter's" level, **** having zero back up last season literally screwed us when it mattered most.

A guy like Landry or Flynn isn't nesc an upgrade, but they can at least push Ponder if he struggles, this team has WAYYY to much other talent to be dealing with a Ponder/Webb 1/2 or the likes moving forward. Hopefully they bring in someone who can compete.

luke829
03-04-2013, 04:05 PM
I think its a different "NFL" these days, you need two solid QB's that can both play at a "starter's" level, **** having zero back up last season literally screwed us when it mattered most.

A guy like Landry or Flynn isn't nesc an upgrade, but they can at least push Ponder if he struggles, this team has WAYYY to much other talent to be dealing with a Ponder/Webb 1/2 or the likes moving forward. Hopefully they bring in someone who can compete.

I can help but agree more. When I think back to this past season and envision the Webb performance against Green Bay in the first round, it makes my stomach turn somersaults.

TheLeviathan
03-04-2013, 06:09 PM
I'm all about a better backup, I just don't think we get one.

mike wants wins
03-08-2013, 11:55 AM
I'd rather they concentrate on D and WR than anything else this year, assuming they keep Loadholt.

Ideally, they'll keep Loadholt.
Ideally, they'll keep Harvin, but I think he gets traded. I would consider taking a later 2nd this year, if it comes with a first next year. If Ponder stinks it up, having a high first and another first should get you to one of the elite QBs next year. If Ponder is good, then they can fill in DE and CB with the two picks next year.....which they'll need to do if they don't get a CB/S/DT/DE this year.

Assuming spielman will not sign expensive FAs, there are OGs and DTs that could come in and start, and not break the bank. I think he goes that way, but lots of WRs are being re-signed right now, so that could be tough. I don't think any of the 2nd tier LBers are all that good. I don't think he'll spend the money on a top CB or S. If they lose Loadholt, I think they'll sign a 2nd tier OT.

In the draft, DT and WR (if not elite at WR) is deep, so if they can trade down from the first pick to an early 2nd, and get a third or early pick next year, I'd do that. There are a coupld of players I'd stay at 23 for, but I think they'll be gone.

The priority has to be DL, LB, WR.....they have one legit LB, and need at least one DT. They have one legit WR if they let Harvin go, maybe.

TheLeviathan
03-08-2013, 04:30 PM
Given that Marshall landed a third, I think the odds of Harvin landing a late second and a first is something far less than remote.

Musk21
03-11-2013, 09:03 AM
Given that Marshall landed a third, I think the odds of Harvin landing a late second and a first is something far less than remote.

Marshall was traded from Denver to Miami in 2010 for 2 2nd round picks. Then Chicago acquired him from Miami last offseason for 2 3rd round picks.

I think the Vikings could probably get a 2nd round pick for Harvin and perhaps a 2nd pick for 2014 that would depend on Harvin's health or playing time (A 4th that could become a 3rd?).

Please
03-11-2013, 11:18 AM
Harvin traded to Seattle...that was quick.

Gernzy
03-11-2013, 12:08 PM
We got a 1st and 7th for Harvin. WAY more then I thought we would. 2 1st rounds picks will be nice. We can sign Mike Wallace and still draft a WR and LB in the first round.

luke829
03-11-2013, 01:10 PM
Receiving a first rounder was huge. And Gernzy was right, having the two first rounders will be big, allows for a lot of flexibility and "creativity" (if the Vikings practice such a thing).

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-11-2013, 01:14 PM
I think we also got a 3 or 4 next year to.

mike wants wins
03-11-2013, 02:09 PM
hate to see a talent like that off the roster, but they were NOT going to pay him top dollar. So, great value, imo. Now they need to pick well. I predict they deal one of those first rounders for a 2nd this year, and first next year.....

diehardtwinsfan
03-11-2013, 02:19 PM
yeah, I'd go for Wallace now. Wright wasn't a bad replacement for Harvin. There's a drop off there, but it is easily replaced with Wallace stretching the field. Then they use their two first rounders to get another wideout and help at DT...


Either that or they can use one of them and get Cruz.

Shane Wahl
03-11-2013, 04:22 PM
Harvin's 531 YAC (out of 677 total--an ABSURD ratio for a WR) made Christian Ponder a bad QB instead of a terrible one--which he was even with AP.

I am not sure that people are really understanding how vital he was. Now if the Vikings are really going to make Ponder the backup or something, then maybe it is a different story. But I am pretty damn concerned about AP producing at 80-90% of his 2012 output and no Percy Harvin around if indeed Christian Ponder is going to be the QB. There's just no recipe for success there. They will NOT return to the playoffs next year.

FrodaddyG
03-11-2013, 06:20 PM
Harvin's 531 YAC (out of 677 total--an ABSURD ratio for a WR) made Christian Ponder a bad QB instead of a terrible one--which he was even with AP.

I am not sure that people are really understanding how vital he was. Now if the Vikings are really going to make Ponder the backup or something, then maybe it is a different story. But I am pretty damn concerned about AP producing at 80-90% of his 2012 output and no Percy Harvin around if indeed Christian Ponder is going to be the QB. There's just no recipe for success there. They will NOT return to the playoffs next year.
Yeah, they had best have some serious plans to be players in the free agent market for someone like Jennings or Wallace while hoping they strike gold in the draft or Peterson will need to run for 4000 next year against 10 man fronts to make them competitive.

Hornhead
03-11-2013, 06:34 PM
Harvin's 531 YAC (out of 677 total--an ABSURD ratio for a WR) made Christian Ponder a bad QB instead of a terrible one--which he was even with AP.

I am not sure that people are really understanding how vital he was. Now if the Vikings are really going to make Ponder the backup or something, then maybe it is a different story. But I am pretty damn concerned about AP producing at 80-90% of his 2012 output and no Percy Harvin around if indeed Christian Ponder is going to be the QB. There's just no recipe for success there. They will NOT return to the playoffs next year.
Maybe not. I lost all hope when Harvin went down, yet they were able to enjoy good success without him. Now if I'm wrong and Ponder actually develops into a top 20 QB, it will be a good 2013.

FrodaddyG
03-11-2013, 10:11 PM
Now if I'm wrong and Ponder actually develops into a top 20 QB
Such sky high expectations we're setting.

"If he can somehow slip into the top 2/3 of players at his position."

Shane Wahl
03-12-2013, 09:34 AM
Wallace AND Harvin would have been a fantastic combo. Oh well.

Thor
03-12-2013, 04:32 PM
The interesting thing for those who look is that AP averages almost a yard a carry more when Percy is not on the field than when he is. Not sure if it is because Percy doesn't block as well or if the D doesn't fear the big play when they are both out there.

This shouldn't suprise anyone. Percy was gone from the day he got hurt. I am just glad GM did a good job of bluffing at least one team into thinking they actually were going to plan on him and get such a haul of picks. I would have been disapointed but I really thought we would get a 3rd and a 4th next year or something like that. Draft picks are to be coveted and to get 3 for somebody who was done here is a good thing. Now let's hit on 2 of the 3 and we will be in business.

Gernzy
03-13-2013, 06:32 AM
No Wallace, but no way the Vikings would pay him what Miami did. Let's hope we can at least get Jennings. I've heard it's between us and GB so we'll see...

diehardtwinsfan
03-13-2013, 02:44 PM
With the extra pick and cap space, they could tender Cruz an offer if they wanted to. I think I'd rather have Jennings and 2 first rounders (one of which could be used to get another wideout), but not bad.

Also, gotta say I'm a bit surprised by Winfield. Vikings really end up looking classless in that deal.

luke829
03-13-2013, 03:10 PM
I too thought that the Winfield situation could have been handled a bit better, but as they say "business is business". Hopefully he can be brought back at a reduced salary (assuming the team still feels his skills are at a competitive level).

Gernzy
03-14-2013, 07:17 AM
Greg Jennings will be in town today for a visit. Normally when this happens the player is signed. Let's hope Jennings doesn't leave town without a contract.

Badsmerf
03-14-2013, 09:22 PM
My bro saw him and Cassle come out of an Olive Garden wearing Vikings hats....

Fatt Crapps
03-14-2013, 10:31 PM
My bro saw him and Cassle come out of an Olive Garden wearing Vikings hats....

Keepin it classy

Shane Wahl
03-14-2013, 11:47 PM
The Vikings managed to add another QB who sucks as much as Ponder: Matt Cassel.

biggentleben
03-15-2013, 07:13 PM
ESPN reporting that Greg Jennings is your newest Viking.

diehardtwinsfan
03-16-2013, 12:16 PM
Like the signing. Kind of wonder what they are going to do with those 2 first rounders. I figure at least one will be a wideout, which if that's the case, I almost wonder if they'd still go after Cruz. Cruz, Jennings, Wright, and Simpson would be a nice set of wideouts for Ponder to throw to.

TheLeviathan
03-16-2013, 05:08 PM
Man was I happy to be wrong about Harvins value. Great haul!

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-18-2013, 09:10 PM
Like the signing. Kind of wonder what they are going to do with those 2 first rounders. I figure at least one will be a wideout, which if that's the case, I almost wonder if they'd still go after Cruz. Cruz, Jennings, Wright, and Simpson would be a nice set of wideouts for Ponder to throw to.

I doubt they have enough money to go get Cruz, I'd rather they just draft a WR in the first round and one later in the draft.

Shane Wahl
03-18-2013, 10:53 PM
The Vikings would be better off signing Michael Turner in a backup role and the drafting defensively after the one WR pick in the first round. I am serious. Turner still has legitimate power as a back and would totally screw defenses up. The Wishbone could re-emerge. The Niners brought it back.

Backing up AP with Turner after the Jennings signing might be the best idea. Jennings, Rudolph, AP, and Turner means 4 legit players. Just sayin.

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-18-2013, 11:01 PM
I don't see why Turner would want to back up AP when he could get some possible starting gigs or at least 50/50 gigs. Also he is not going to be cheap, so paying a guy a bunch of money for 6-8 carries a game is not a good use of funds, besides Toby is a perfectly acceptable back up RB.

I think in the draft you go: WR, LB (teo?) in the first round and then try to find a CB, DT and more LB's the rest of the draft. Spend a 4th rounder or so on another WR as well.

mike wants wins
03-19-2013, 07:50 AM
I think it is 50% likely they go WR in round 1, but I can see them going CB/LB/ DT in some combo instead. They really, really, really need a starting LBer and CB, and probably another CB as a backup. They also need a DT, if they want the DTs to be good, instead of below average, but the DT position is deep, so I could see that in round 2.

Some place they also need to find an OG, and if they never take one early in the draft, they will always have guys like Johnson and Fusco (and Ponder getting crushed, and AP continuing to leading the league in hits behind the line ).

There are no shortage of holes. Frankly, I'd have cut KWill, and kept Winfield. DT is super deep in the draft, and easier to start as a rookie......so I can't quite get the decision.

Mr. Brooks
03-19-2013, 11:55 AM
I think it is 50% likely they go WR in round 1, but I can see them going CB/LB/ DT in some combo instead. They really, really, really need a starting LBer and CB, and probably another CB as a backup. They also need a DT, if they want the DTs to be good, instead of below average, but the DT position is deep, so I could see that in round 2.

Some place they also need to find an OG, and if they never take one early in the draft, they will always have guys like Johnson and Fusco (and Ponder getting crushed, and AP continuing to leading the league in hits behind the line ).

There are no shortage of holes. Frankly, I'd have cut KWill, and kept Winfield. DT is super deep in the draft, and easier to start as a rookie......so I can't quite get the decision.

The decision is because Winfield was due to be paid way more than his market value, and he wasnt going to take less.
The fun thing about the NFL, is with the hard cap, you cant just look at guys and say, "are they still good enough to start?", like you can in say, baseball.
You really have to look at every single position, every single year, and say, "no matter how good this guy is, is he making a dime more than he's worth?"
If the answer is yes, you either need to move on or restructure.

mike wants wins
03-19-2013, 12:38 PM
Agreed, but I think Winfield at CB is less overpaid than KWill at DT...and would have cut KWill first. They basically cannot sign another FA, keep their current players, and sign their draft picks at this point. So, either they are done in FA, or something else has to give......but to me, to get this point, KWill was more expendable than Winfield. Clearly, the vikings disagree with me, and that's cool.

Mr. Brooks
03-19-2013, 02:07 PM
Agreed, but I think Winfield at CB is less overpaid than KWill at DT...and would have cut KWill first. They basically cannot sign another FA, keep their current players, and sign their draft picks at this point. So, either they are done in FA, or something else has to give......but to me, to get this point, KWill was more expendable than Winfield. Clearly, the vikings disagree with me, and that's cool.

I would disagree, but only because KWill is younger, and he's also at a position where older guys can still play at a high level.
Obviously that hasnt been the case the last couple years, but the Vikings must feel that he has enough in the tank that he COULD live up to his salary this year, whereas they must feel that Winfield is at a point where 100% of expectation would still not be enough to justify the salary.
I wouldnt be surprised if Winfield sees the offers that he's getting in FA (I think he's going to be surprised at how little he's offered), and ends up resigning with the Vikings anyways.

TheLeviathan
03-19-2013, 03:41 PM
I really hope if one of those stud MLBs is at 23 that they hop all over that. That should be priority number one - receivers you can take later. Especially in this draft.

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-19-2013, 03:57 PM
I really hope if one of those stud MLBs is at 23 that they hop all over that. That should be priority number one - receivers you can take later. Especially in this draft.
I think if Austin is somehow available at 23 (he prob won't with the Rams having two picks) then I think you HAVE to take him, that kid has game changer written all over him.

But yeah, you def need a line backer with one of the picks as well, right now we have Greenway and nobody else I believe?

It sucks losing Winfield but I absolutely would rather have KWill at this point over him, we can find a quality CB in round 2 or 3 IMO. Or we can always sign a few more guys in free agency to fill some holes as well.

Now obviously this team has some holes to fill, but heading into 2013 I am much more enthusiastic then heading into 2012, if we can somehow repeat the 2012 draft success I think you are looking at a team that makes the playoffs again.

TheLeviathan
03-19-2013, 05:37 PM
I think if Austin is somehow available at 23 (he prob won't with the Rams having two picks) then I think you HAVE to take him, that kid has game changer written all over him.

Some mocks have him going in the top 15....are you seeing him slide in any?


But yeah, you def need a line backer with one of the picks as well, right now we have Greenway and nobody else I believe?

The resigned Erin Henderson as well. (Bleh) My dream scenario:

We draft: MLB Ogletree, WR Justin Hunter, NT John Jenkins,CB Honey Badger, WR Robert Woods, FS Bacarri Rambo. Try to beat that kind of blind optimism Dave! But boy would that make my day. Not totally impossible either.

Joe
03-19-2013, 06:16 PM
Some mocks have him going in the top 15....are you seeing him slide in any?



The resigned Erin Henderson as well. (Bleh) My dream scenario:

We draft: MLB Ogletree, WR Justin Hunter, NT John Jenkins,CB Honey Badger, WR Robert Woods, FS Bacarri Rambo. Try to beat that kind of blind optimism Dave! But boy would that make my day. Not totally impossible either.

They're going to have to trade up to get Honey Badger in the 2nd. Someone is going to take a flier on the guy.

I'd love that scenario by all means. I'm fairly certain though, if Manti is available, they're going to take him. Its just fate.

TheLeviathan
03-19-2013, 06:22 PM
They're going to have to trade up to get Honey Badger in the 2nd. Someone is going to take a flier on the guy.

I'd love that scenario by all means. I'm fairly certain though, if Manti is available, they're going to take him. Its just fate.

Good god I hope not. I may actually break down and cry. Ponder would easily become my second least-favorite Viking.

I'm hearing most mocks put Honey Badger in the fourth....am I just reading the wrong ones or is steam building on him?

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-19-2013, 07:20 PM
Good god I hope not. I may actually break down and cry. Ponder would easily become my second least-favorite Viking.

I'm hearing most mocks put Honey Badger in the fourth....am I just reading the wrong ones or is steam building on him?
Nobody is going to take Honey Badger in the 2nd, even without the long list of personal issues he was never viewed a first round talent in the first place.

I could see a team like the Raiders (why not) taking a chance on him in the 3rd round because they are stupid, but he would still be around in the late 3rd more than likely or early 4th.

I don't know what to think about Te'o, if he actually is gay and was nervous about coming out, I have no issue taking him and I think you get great value, if he is just a weirdo who makes up gf's and ****, yeah pass.

Either way I prob don't want him with a first round pick, maybe if he is sitting in the middle of round 2 then you think about trading up?

Lev, on the Austin thing, yeah I have seen a lot of chatter about him going around 15-16, hypothetically would you trade a 1 and 3(next years?) to move up a few spots to grab him if he is still around?

I think you have to think long and hard about it, especially if it was the extra pick in the Harvin trade, the kid was amazing in college (watch the OU game where he had 400+ yards) and apparently killed it at the combine (I don't follow that at all though)

2 first rounds to move up for him? no.
1st round and a 3rd round? Yeah, I think you take the chance!

TheLeviathan
03-19-2013, 07:29 PM
Nobody is going to take Honey Badger in the 2nd, even without the long list of personal issues he was never viewed a first round talent in the first place.

I think before the whole drug fiasco he was considered a top 10 talent. Granted, that was almost two years ago. That's why I'm thinking you could snag him with a third, but who knows.


Either way I prob don't want him with a first round pick, maybe if he is sitting in the middle of round 2 then you think about trading up?

Who are you referring to? Te'o? I wouldn't draft him with a seventh.


Lev, on the Austin thing, yeah I have seen a lot of chatter about him going around 15-16, hypothetically would you trade a 1 and 3(next years?) to move up a few spots to grab him if he is still around?

I don't know if I deal up for a guy his size. I do think he could be a game breaker, but I think I worry about how often he's going to be useful and functional for this team. Percy was small, but he was physical as all hell for his size. I'm not sure he's the right fit for us at this point. I'd much rather have a big possession receiver and go for that small, scat-back/WR type later in the draft. Maybe Ace Sanders from SC or Josh Boyce from TCU instead?

Joe
03-19-2013, 07:46 PM
Nobody is going to take Honey Badger in the 2nd, even without the long list of personal issues he was never viewed a first round talent in the first place.

Never? Are you ****ing kidding me? He was the best defensive player in the NCAA as a sophmore, and was an elite return guy. Just cuz he's not an OSU alum Dave.....

The draft rubes are saying someone is going to take a flier on him in the 2nd. I've heard a couple comparisons to Ahmad Brooks.

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-19-2013, 10:00 PM
Never? Are you ****ing kidding me? He was the best defensive player in the NCAA as a sophmore, and was an elite return guy. Just cuz he's not an OSU alum Dave.....

The draft rubes are saying someone is going to take a flier on him in the 2nd. I've heard a couple comparisons to Ahmad Brooks.
Tommie Fraiser was also the best offensive player in NCAA his junior year but that didn't make him a 1st round talent. Mathieu is a dynamic player, but the fact is he always lacked the size to be a true "1st round talent" and if he was it was boarderline, sure he will be a very good PR or KR but teams don't draft those guys in the first round typically (unless they are the Radiers) also the rest of his combine numbers were more on the "meh to bad" side of things then the "he blew us away!" parts. Again I am not a huge combine guy, but the fact that he had the least reps of ANYONE on the bench press is pretty telling that he A. Isn't strong/big enough for the NFL game or B. Just a lazy sack of ****/the next Pac Man jones.

FWIW: I think there is nothing wrong with smoking weed....at all. But you are a damn fool if you manage to screw up that many times with that many millions on the line.

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-19-2013, 10:02 PM
I think before the whole drug fiasco he was considered a top 10 talent. Granted, that was almost two years ago. That's why I'm thinking you could snag him with a third, but who knows.


See my comment above about him, don't get me wrong I would be perfectly happoy with taking him in the third, because at the very least you have a game changer returning punts etc and at the best you could have a decent CB as well who could make some plays/get people pumped. But no way do I think he was ever a "legit" top ten talent, I think the hype machine made him to be out more than he was. If he was a legit top ten talent you would see him picked in the first round this year. (see: Randy Moss etc)

mike wants wins
03-20-2013, 07:20 AM
The Honey Badger is a 3rd or 4th round pick....he is a great returner, and mediocre coverage guy. He's basically Devin Hester, I think. Given the depth of this draft, he's likely a 3rd rounder or 4th rounder.

Unfortunately, the Vikes are right up against the cap, now. I think if they draft every pick they currently have, and pay them, they would actually be over the cap......so we are unlikely to see much in FA the rest of the way unless KWill or Allen re-do their deals.

Assuming no trades, I'd like to see Arthur Brown, Keenan Allen, Kwann Short as the first three picks. I'd be ok if Brown was replaced with a CB in that scenario.

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-20-2013, 08:06 AM
Why on earth did they resign Jerome Simpson :s-instagib: could have used that money somewhere else. Good point on the cap "space" or lack thereof.

TheLeviathan
03-20-2013, 02:48 PM
But no way do I think he was ever a "legit" top ten talent, I think the hype machine made him to be out more than he was. If he was a legit top ten talent you would see him picked in the first round this year. (see: Randy Moss etc)

Well, that's your opinion Dave, but in 2011 there was a lot of talk about him being a 2012 top ten pick. There is a lot of talent there, I'd love to gamble on that in the third.

TheLeviathan
03-21-2013, 10:35 AM
I hear a lot of Arthur Brown talk.....what's the lowdown on him mike?

SpiritofVodkaDave
03-21-2013, 11:19 AM
I would take a flier on Urlacher for the trolling aspects alone.

mike wants wins
03-28-2013, 02:04 PM
Arthur Brown is fast, and can probably cover the TE/RB much better than any LBer they vikes have had for a long time......he supposedly tackles well also. He's a 3 down LBer, from what little I've read so far on him. They really like a legit 3rd down LBer, imo.

jay
04-09-2013, 03:40 PM
It seems there's a general consensus on what we need, which is at least a start.

As long as they get a WR early and 2 of 3 from ILB, DB, DT before the end of the 2nd rd, I'll be happy.

Some pretty decent DBs and ILBs still on the free agent market that I would mind seeing come in either.

Fatt Crapps
04-18-2013, 10:33 PM
Opponents for the 2013 NFL season - NFL Nation Blog - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/69566/opponents-for-the-2013-nfl-season)

Oooof. 5-11?

mike wants wins
04-19-2013, 10:18 AM
I think they are about what they were last year, 8-8, plus or minus 2 games.

Fatt Crapps
04-19-2013, 06:40 PM
I don't know, that schedule looks tough. Which games do you think they can win?

SpiritofVodkaDave
04-20-2013, 11:16 PM
I don't know, that schedule looks tough. Which games do you think they can win?
I think they can sweep the division at home. (4 wins)
I think they beat Det on the road and Chicago on the road (2 wins)
Eagles, Redskins, Browns at home should/could all be wins and the Vikes would be favored in all.
The Pittsburgh game is 50/50 since its in London.

@Bengals and @Cowboys are winnable games.

@Ravens looks tough on paper, but honestly I see the Ravens as a 7 win team this year.

@GB and @NYG are almost sure losses.

So basically I see 7 or so games they most certainly should win (obviously there might be an upset in there) another 6 that are 50/50 or close at least. 2 sure loses and one upset special (@Bal)

With that said I could see them winning anything between 9 wins and 11 next year. If things break all the way they could sniff 12 wins and if they get some bad luck you are looking at 8 wins.

TheLeviathan
04-20-2013, 11:47 PM
It's hard for me to predict win totals when our most important position is such a wild-card. I'm still very down on Ponder, but he certainly showed some positives from time to time last year. If he's the "I can't throw for 100 yards" guy we saw for a few stretches last year, it won't matter what the schedule is.

mike wants wins
04-22-2013, 08:30 AM
I'm willing to give Ponder one more year to show what he has. Hardest position in all of sports, and that first year there was no training camp. Plus, that is one of the worst WR corps ever.....but he has to show a lot more this year to keep his job, imo. I really don't know what to expect. I'm just as worried about the D, though. Not one CB is a guy you can trust. The DL didn't get as much pressure last year, and I can't even name the 3rd LBer right now.

Joe
04-22-2013, 09:41 AM
Well, that's your opinion Dave, but in 2011 there was a lot of talk about him being a 2012 top ten pick. There is a lot of talent there, I'd love to gamble on that in the third.

Seeing a lot of steam now on Honey Badger going in the back end of the first round!

TheLeviathan
04-22-2013, 03:49 PM
I will let Dave chew on that but if true - too rich for my blood.

biggentleben
04-22-2013, 04:34 PM
I will let Dave chew on that but if true - too rich for my blood.

Exactly. Third is a good spot for a talent-heavy, character-questionable type. Going early tends to blow up a lot. The problem is that people remember the ones that excel (Randy Moss, et al).

SpiritofVodkaDave
04-23-2013, 03:05 PM
Seeing a lot of steam now on Honey Badger going in the back end of the first round!Where????

diehardtwinsfan
04-24-2013, 08:11 PM
I've gotten the impression that honey badger was more a 3rd rounder due to the question marks... I'd certainly consider blowing the second round or third rounder on the guy... He has talent.

The real question is what will Spielman do with this his picks. Something tells me there will be a trade or two on Friday.

TheLeviathan
04-24-2013, 08:46 PM
I hope if he's trading it's up to the second and not up in the first. I very much like our chances of grabbing two huge cogs for this team in the first round already.

SpiritofVodkaDave
04-24-2013, 11:31 PM
I hope if he's trading it's up to the second and not up in the first. I very much like our chances of grabbing two huge cogs for this team in the first round already.
From the sounds of the "experts" it won't take as much this year to move up. If the Vikes can package their first round pick and a third round to move up high enough to draft Austin, I think they have to seriously consider it. Jennings+Austin is a pretty nice start to a WR corp to be honest.

I'm not a huge Te'o fan, but if you end up with him at 25 I think he could be a nice steal.

Let's be honest, with the way "hype, ESPN, etc" works, if he has even a decent National Championship game and the whole fake girlfriend thing doesn't come out, we are prob looking at a guy who goes in the top 5 possibly or top 10 for sure.

So my ideal draft:

Trade up to get Austin (true gamechanger)
draft Teo (or some other LB)

and then spend the 2nd round pick on a CB.

And find a OG somewhere in the 4th round (or trade up to the 3rd round again to grab one)

Load up on LB, CB, WR, CB the rest of the draft.

Also if Landry Jones is sitting around in the 4th round, snatch him up.

mike wants wins
04-25-2013, 08:25 AM
I predict they deal one of the picks to buffalo or the Jets to move up to take a QB. The Vikes get their 2nd this year, and 2nd and 5th next year.

The other pick will be used on defense.

Kobs
04-25-2013, 05:59 PM
Let's be honest, with the way "hype, ESPN, etc" works, if he has even a decent National Championship game and the whole fake girlfriend thing doesn't come out, we are prob looking at a guy who goes in the top 5 possibly or top 10 for sure.

Not as a middle linebacker who isn't particularly fast. It is a situational position at this point. You aren't drafting a guy you hope to be a great nickel cornerback in the top ten.

Westgaard66
04-25-2013, 10:05 PM
Vikes D just got beefed up....a big ass D tackle and a big Corner.


They gonna target a WR in round 2 or maybe Te'o keeps falling.

TheLeviathan
04-25-2013, 10:08 PM
Yeah, love those two picks. Instantly make the defense even better.

B Richard
04-25-2013, 10:25 PM
Great picks- looked like we traded with the Pats for the 29th pick!

SpiritofVodkaDave
04-25-2013, 11:56 PM
That first round was ****ing perfect!!!!

SpiritofVodkaDave
04-26-2013, 01:01 AM
We still have a huge hole at LB though, hopefully we can find one, but so far, we got two insane talents at DT/WR who could honestly become the Warren Sapp/Randy Moss of this draft, the CB we got is solid as well, clearly an upgrade.

I'd argue if we get to the mid to late part of the 2nd round we should trade up and grab Te'o as well. Or another LB.

Either way, I give the Vikes an A+ thus far, they have done the best on "day one" by far.

Westgaard66
04-26-2013, 05:30 AM
Could be happier with how aggressive the Vikes were yesterday.

Yes the Vikes are thin at LB, but Urlacher is still out there :-)

TheLeviathan
04-26-2013, 06:52 AM
It was a steep price to pay but if you love the guy (and they must have) then I'm excited to see what he can do. I'm just glad it wasn't Teo!

SpiritofVodkaDave
04-26-2013, 07:46 AM
It was a steep price to pay but if you love the guy (and they must have) then I'm excited to see what he can do. I'm just glad it wasn't Teo!

According to the "draft points thing" it was a pretty even trade.

I would have preferred to hold onto the 3rd just so we had a pick tonight... but honestly a laterish 3rd round pick doesn't have a ton of value.

Frankly, I hope we can somehow trade Toby and a 5th or 6th tonight for a 3rd round pick.

kab21
04-26-2013, 09:44 AM
According to the "draft points thing" it was a pretty even trade.

I would have preferred to hold onto the 3rd just so we had a pick tonight... but honestly a laterish 3rd round pick doesn't have a ton of value.

Frankly, I hope we can somehow trade Toby and a 5th or 6th tonight for a 3rd round pick.

The spin machine just keeps going... It was good to get a WR that they apparently like since that is an essential need for the Vikings.

Bill Barnwell on day one of the NFL draft - Grantland (http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9214101/bill-barnwell-day-one-nfl-draft?ex_cid=facebook)


Minnesota acquires the 29th overall pick from New England for the 52nd, 83rd, 102nd, and 229th picks.
Quantitative winner: New England (59.5 percent more in return)
Real-life winner: New England


Note the dramatic gulf between what Stuart's model thought of the difference in value across the first four trades and what it thought of this one. The Patriots, simply put, took the Vikings to the cleaners. It's incredible that Bill Belichick seems to pull this off every year, but it's even more impressive in this draft. Chase's model estimates (http://www.footballperspective.com/draft-value-chart/), historically, that the 29th overall pick has delivered about 40 percent more value than the 52nd overall pick during their first five seasons in the league. That's really not that much, and in a flat draft like this year's, it's undoubtedly a smaller figure, probably closer to 10 percent or so. For that tiny chance of getting a better player, the Vikings gave up third- and fourth-round picks that could end up producing valuable contributors. In 2007, the 83rd pick delivered Charles Johnson, who became a double-digit pass rusher and one of the highest-paid players in football. The 102nd pick that year was Brian Robison, who himself has 30 sacks over six years in the league. The Patriots aren't getting worthless picks here.


The Vikings made this move to get Cordarrelle Patterson, which seems shortsighted considering the bevy of second-tier wideouts still left on the market. They could have waited through the end of the first round and the top of the second round, where few teams need wideouts, before pouncing in the middle of the second round. That might only have cost them a fifth-round pick or so. In any case, it took what had been an excellent Vikings draft and ruined their night. And while it might not have been the most exciting return for Patriots fans, it was very clearly the right move to make.

SpiritofVodkaDave
04-26-2013, 10:02 AM
Wow, a website created by the biggest Boston homer of them all said the Patriots won that trade? Color me ****ing shocked.

"it ruined their night" Give me a break, what a clown. I also like how he takes the stance that "Hey this guy may be a bust" and "Oh their have been good players picked in the 3rd round in the past!"

Genius, pure genius.

mike wants wins
04-26-2013, 12:25 PM
Bill is one of the best writers on the internet, and this has NOTHING to do with Boston. Very unbiased writer, very insightful and intelligent.

biggentleben
04-26-2013, 12:32 PM
One of the points I actually agree with is that with three first round contracts, moving the picks they did does help them this year to keep money, and they did avoid the one thing the Patriots are notorious for: give us less of a pick this year (keep the 2nd), and we'll just take your 1st next year.

Badsmerf
04-26-2013, 01:30 PM
Don't have any problem with this trade. If they believe in this guy he is much more valuable than 4 replacement level players. You can't predict guys in late rounds becoming great players, otherwise they would get drafted earlier. Impact players are what win in this league. From this draft, it appears to me the Vikings upgraded big time. Yes, they need a LB still, but adding depth at CB and D-Line will help mask LB deficiencies. Great strategy IMO.

mike wants wins
04-26-2013, 02:29 PM
I'm not sure 3rd and 4th rounders are "late rounds". I love the roll of the dice, I just worry about the price, and I don't share their belief they are really a 10-6 team year after year. Though, I love all three players as prospects. It's just a risk/reward issue for me. They should have gotten 3 starters from teh first three picks they had, plus 2-3 contributors. Now they ahve three starters, and will have difficulty getting a lot more contribution.

TheLeviathan
04-26-2013, 03:05 PM
I'm just thrilled we didn't mortgage all that for Teo.....I think my brain would have exploded. Love the contract angle and the talent they added. That fourth rounder is going to be really interesting.

drjim
04-26-2013, 03:54 PM
I appreciate Barnwell's point but I don't necessarily buy it. The Pats may have gotten more total value but it is spread over four roster spots instead of one. I think teams win with high quality guys instead of depth (of course ideally you want both). It is beneficial to consolidate as much value as possible in the one roster spot and try to fill in depth through other avenues. Vikes also had extra picks to work with and adequate depth already, it seems an acceptable risk to turn that into a better player.

I don't pretend to know much about the individual players involved but if the Vikes had the wr as one of the last guys on the impact player tier I would think that is worthwhile to sacrifice depth for no matter what some draft value point system might say.

Jocko87
04-26-2013, 07:59 PM
One of the points I actually agree with is that with three first round contracts, moving the picks they did does help them this year to keep money, and they did avoid the one thing the Patriots are notorious for: give us less of a pick this year (keep the 2nd), and we'll just take your 1st next year.


It's not like they are out of picks either. They weren't going to draft and pay 11 players that make the roster so the move makes sense to me. I call Floyd the first rounder, Rhodes the second and Patterson the 3rd. If those first three rounds don't delight people I dunno what to tell them. Taking on more first round money doesn't bother me, as long as it isn't an every year thing.

I'm damn happy, now they can go gold mining on Saturday.

kab21
04-27-2013, 01:03 AM
There are really two things at work here and I am not against the trade. The first is that they gave up a lot of value to move up. I'm not sure that should even be debated. The second is that draft pick value is not equal to player value. It's likely that Patterson is ranked significantly higher than 29th on their draft board. I think it's pretty likely that the Vikings would have picked Patterson earlier if Floyd and Rhodes hadn't slid in the draft.

A third factor is that it was pretty risky that a starting WR would have been available at #52 and that was a critical need for the Vikings to do anything this year.

diehardtwinsfan
04-27-2013, 07:09 AM
I tend to think they gave up a bit too much for this pick, but I'm not crying too much over it given that there was some question that they weren't going to use all their picks anyways due to cap issues... Getting rid of a few picks to get the guy you want, even if you are overpaying a bit isn't necessarily bad in this situation... What we don't know also plays into this:

1) How much value did the Vikings place on this supposed mid round depth in this draft? It's possible that they had given first rounds grades to all 3 of those guys and weren't terribly high on everyone else.

2) Could they have gotten better value by not trading up? They could have picked up Honey Badger in the second round and traded back into the second round for much less to get another a WR. How much more valuable was Patterson than who they could have picked up? Doing this would have let them play far more nickel defense, which would have minimized their need for a MLB.

That said, Spielman likes to make his splash.. It certainly grabs headlines and I have to admit that getting 3 guys that will start and likely be impact players isn't bad. I'm not going to cry too much about it. We'll know for sure how this turns out in a few years.

TheLeviathan
04-27-2013, 08:35 AM
To me, we are going to look back and consider this:

Would we have been better off with Cordarelle Patterson or Arthur Brown, Stedman Bailey, and someone like Barret Jones/Alex Okafor/Nassib. All of those guys would've been available at the picks we traded.

I have to say, I'm unsure it was worth it - but I hope I'm wrong.

biggentleben
04-27-2013, 11:29 AM
I would ask whether they could have afforded to have each of Brown, Bailey, and Jones/Okafor/Nassib along with Floyd and Rhodes this year without severely hampering their ability to pursue linebacking help in free agency.

SpiritofVodkaDave
04-27-2013, 11:29 AM
seeing a lot of steam now on honey badger going in the back end of the first round!
derp

TheLeviathan
04-27-2013, 01:11 PM
I would ask whether they could have afforded to have each of Brown, Bailey, and Jones/Okafor/Nassib along with Floyd and Rhodes this year without severely hampering their ability to pursue linebacking help in free agency.

They wouldn't need to pursue much more help at LB if they drafted Brown. You can't tell me those three guys are going to be THAT much more expensive than Urlacher or some other FA veteran that would need to be signed and be as good or better than Brown.

Plus, Patterson's 2013 Cap hit is only 400,000 less than it would be for all three of the other slots combined - I think that whole line of argument is silly. (Estimates I've seen are 680k, 570k, 450k for the three slots we traded)

biggentleben
04-27-2013, 10:27 PM
They wouldn't need to pursue much more help at LB if they drafted Brown. You can't tell me those three guys are going to be THAT much more expensive than Urlacher or some other FA veteran that would need to be signed and be as good or better than Brown.

Plus, Patterson's 2013 Cap hit is only 400,000 less than it would be for all three of the other slots combined - I think that whole line of argument is silly. (Estimates I've seen are 680k, 570k, 450k for the three slots we traded)

Your last paragraph is the center of the contract discussion, though. The main argument is giving up too many picks for that one pick. They really exchanged the salary cap hit for this year and avoided giving up anything for next year. None of the contract arguments I've heard is that Patterson would be cheaper, it's that the amount of picks given up had to do with salary cap balancing.

kab21
04-27-2013, 11:01 PM
The trade was all about locking in a player that they desperately needed instead of waiting and hoping that a solid WR that was rated lower on their draft board would still be there at #52. They will figure out what to do at MLB but getting a 2nd good WR was absolutely necessary for the offense.

Dave's mistake wasn't spinning it as a good trade but rather that the Vikings didn't give up a lot of value.

TheLeviathan
04-27-2013, 11:02 PM
Your last paragraph is the center of the contract discussion, though. The main argument is giving up too many picks for that one pick. They really exchanged the salary cap hit for this year and avoided giving up anything for next year. None of the contract arguments I've heard is that Patterson would be cheaper, it's that the amount of picks given up had to do with salary cap balancing.

So they did it to balance 400k? Is that your argument?

I appreciate getting that extra 5th year of control, I'm just saying that there were good players at positions of need at those subsequent picks, which is probably how this ultimately will be evaluated if Patterson never does quite grasp how to put all that talent to good use.

biggentleben
04-28-2013, 02:09 AM
So they did it to balance 400k? Is that your argument?

No, my argument is that typically to move back in on the Patriots, you need to give up a round earlier pick (or 1st to move into the first) in the next season's draft, which they avoided doing. Instead of giving up that valuable first next season, they gave up the amount of picks in this year's draft that essentially balanced out in salary cap hit, which is why it seems like a lot of picks.

Those could-have-been guys could have great value. There are a number of very intriguing undrafted free agents as well that could, in three years or so, end up being more valuable than any pick the Vikings gave up. Putting a player name on it is akin to going back in three years and saying that a certain undrafted guy ended up being amazing, and he should have been the Vikings pick in the 7th round instead of a guy they ended up cutting. It ends up being revisionist history. You have to judge the trade purely on the picks and financials, not the "what-if" scenarios.

Thor
04-28-2013, 08:32 AM
One thing nobody has mentioned, at least Spielman is trying to put some high end talent on the roster before AP gets old. The reality is AP probally has only 2 more elite years and a couple of years that may be just above league average.

TheLeviathan
04-28-2013, 08:58 AM
It ends up being revisionist history. You have to judge the trade purely on the picks and financials, not the "what-if" scenarios.

It's not revisionist - that's not the point. A lot of people are saying we dealt "depth" for a starter. No - we didn't. There were (and it didn't require a crystal ball to see it) going to be potential starters available at those picks. We dealt for upside, not "depth" for a starter.

Now, in hindsight, we can see that there was more talent at those picks than we probably could have even expected. But all moves, in review, look back and use hindsight. That's how we evaluate "good job vs. bad job". At some point we will look back and evaluate the move based on how this player performs relative to what we gave up to get them.

To further make that point - Troy Williamson sucked, but it hurt even more that he was all we had to show for dealing Randy Moss and he was the 7th overall pick (meaning there was basically an entire draft of other choices). Erasmus James sucked, hurts even more that A-Rodg was on the board. Like it or not, at some point we will look back with C-Pat and evaluate him in a similar way. Hopefully, it's all positive.

biggentleben
04-28-2013, 11:11 AM
I don't agree with the "depth for starter" line, and I'd agree completely that line of argument is hogwash. That said, there are those who say Patterson is a better body Percy Harvin, and the Vikings have seen what Harvin could do when he could stay on the field (missing plenty of snaps due to the pounding his smaller frame took). When you have an opportunity to get a talent like that, you do what you can to grab him. The Vikings knew (hopefully, though no one really "knows" what's going on in their draft room) that getting that talent would mean extra money that could mean they couldn't pay a 2nd-4th round pick this year that could provide them a possible starter while also picking up a veteran for competition sake, like they could do without Patterson. Now they're going to be more focused on getting a couple cheaper veteran options because of the way the draft worked out, but money-wise, that could be smarter because they can get a guy who is gone for 2014 and use an early pick on a long-term solution at LB.

biggentleben
04-28-2013, 11:29 AM
So, now to finishing off the offseason...

The long-term desirable guys are off the board, so the Vikings are probably looking more 1-2 year fix for anything, but there are still some solid names out there:

Linebackers:
Karlos Dansby
Nick Barnett
Daryl Smith
Brian Urlacher
Leroy Hill
Takeo Spikes
Bart Scott
Quincy Black
Rocky McIntosh
Chris Gocong
Bradie James
Will Witherspoon
Scott Fujita
Thomas Howard
Keith Brooking
Paris Lenon
Bryan Thomas
Demorrio Williams

Defensive Backs:
Chris Gamble
Quentin Jammer
Quintin Mikell
Charles Woodson
Sheldon Brown
Kerry Rhodes
Gerald Sensabaugh
Madieu Williams
Ronde Barber
Nate Clements
Sam Shields
Shawntae Spencer
Cedric Griffin
Jacob Lacey
Rashean Mathis
Terrence McGee
Abram Elam
Marcus Trufant
Jason Allen
Chris Crocker
Will Allen
Stanford Routt
Jordan Babineaux
Atari Bigby

Others of interest:
Brandon Lloyd
John Abraham
Austin Collie
Sedrick Ellis
Laurent Robinson
Richard Seymour
Randy Moss
Shaun Cody
Josh Cribbs
Kellen Winslow
Steve Breaston
Early Doucet
Amobi Okoye
Braylon Edwards
LaRod Stephens-Howling
Devery Henderson
Brandon Stokley
Deion Branch
Donte Stallworth
Stefan Logan

TheLeviathan
04-28-2013, 02:04 PM
When you have an opportunity to get a talent like that, you do what you can to grab him. .

I agree, I really hope we got ourselves a bigger, more durable Percy. I have trouble believing Patterson will be more physical (hell, I'm not sure there is any skill player in the league other than maybe AP and Lynch as physical as Harvin was) but I am really encouraged by getting him.

My point was just that there were good players available at those picks at key positions of need. So the notion I've heard floating around that you agree with is what bothered me.

biggentleben
04-28-2013, 04:45 PM
I agree, I really hope we got ourselves a bigger, more durable Percy. I have trouble believing Patterson will be more physical (hell, I'm not sure there is any skill player in the league other than maybe AP and Lynch as physical as Harvin was) but I am really encouraged by getting him.

My point was just that there were good players available at those picks at key positions of need. So the notion I've heard floating around that you agree with is what bothered me.

My thoughts there may be different than others...to me, there were going to be good players available at each of those spots, that was a given. For all that was known, the Vikings could have traded just the 2nd and 4th and gotten Te'o and still had the 3rd to get Bailey or Quinton Patton and then use their 4th on Marcus Lattimore with their ILB and WR needs already covered to have possibly the best RB in the whole class on a redshirt year next season. There are just too many what-if statements to say just on that basis that the trade was bad.

What I agree with is that there's logic in trading the amount of picks they did in this year's draft in order to ensure there were still finances to fill the roster in free agency. I don't like the pure "depth player for a star" trade analysis as in the draft, it's pure fallacy. Heck, the most respected name in the business, Kiper, rated the Ravens as the best draft this year, and the AFC North blogger for the same employer as Kiper wrote that the Ravens had the worst draft in their own division. We simply don't know now, and we won't for a few years.

TheLeviathan
04-28-2013, 04:57 PM
There are just too many what-if statements to say just on that basis that the trade was bad.

That wasn't my intent. I was just speculating how we might ultimately evaluate this deal.


What I agree with is that there's logic in trading the amount of picks they did in this year's draft in order to ensure there were still finances to fill the roster in free agency.

Here's where we still have an issue - they are only saving 400k with this decision. You could argue about saving roster spots but money isn't the reason they did this, 400k isn't making or breaking any FA moves. Now drafting Locke to cut 2M in Kluwe? That I could grant you.

biggentleben
04-28-2013, 05:27 PM
Here's where we still have an issue - they are only saving 400k with this decision. You could argue about saving roster spots but money isn't the reason they did this, 400k isn't making or breaking any FA moves. Now drafting Locke to cut 2M in Kluwe? That I could grant you.

Okay, that's me not explaining my point well. You sign your 2nd round pick, and you have someone typically your organization is locked into for a number of years. You sign Keith Brooking or someone like that, it's understood it's a short-term answer, and no one expects you to keep him on the team for 2014. Money-wise for this year, it's similar, but then going into 2014, that spot (and money) is open again for possibly a better player to come on board and take over the position long-term.
When they moved those picks, they essentially were saying (to me, at least), we're planning to fill these spots with short-term fixes for now because we think we have a top-end long-term star that we could get.

TheLeviathan
04-28-2013, 06:55 PM
When they moved those picks, they essentially were saying (to me, at least), we're planning to fill these spots with short-term fixes for now because we think we have a top-end long-term star that we could get.

See, that doesn't make sense to me because guys who are 2-4 round picks aren't tying up your payroll. In fact, if they are playing and playing well they are a boon to your cap situation because they're dirt cheap. To me that deal had NOTHING to do with saving money and everything about going up to get a guy with high upside that you get locked up for 5 years of team control.

Kobs
05-01-2013, 06:18 PM
the most respected name in the business, Kiper

What business are you referring to, exactly?

SpiritofVodkaDave
05-02-2013, 08:37 AM
You could argue about saving roster spots but money isn't the reason they did this, 400k isn't making or breaking any FA moves. Now drafting Locke to cut 2M in Kluwe? That I could grant you.
this