Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email
Photo

2017 NFL Draft Chat

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#41 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,848 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 02 May 2017 - 07:50 PM

I still consider the Bradford trade to be an overpay. The Eagles didn't want him at all but the Vikings need drove them to accept the offer. The Vikings lucked into getting a 1st rd talent in the 2nd rd so the damage was minimized.

 

I liked the first two picks but was a little concerned about not having enough 3rd-5th picks to fill holes. The first two trade downs were great but the final trade downs amassing 7th's were pointless and kind of negated the extra value they picked up with the initial trading down. Those holes won't be filled with 7th rounders.

 

B+ draft - A lot of early talent that can contribute and then several ???? picks/trades to end the draft.

Looks like an 8-8 team at best unless they overperform and get some lucky breaks. And they are a Bradford injury away from being a 4 or 5 win team. Meh

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#42 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Members
  • 15,194 posts

Posted 02 May 2017 - 07:59 PM

I can't fault them for overpaying for Bradford.  They thought they were a contender and they played that way until the OL got decimated.

 

Plus, how can you do anything to fix your QB spot a week before the season when you get a freak injury like Teddy's?  The team was in a no-win situation there brought on by nothing more than catastrophically bad luck.

  • Vanimal46 likes this

#43 kab21

kab21

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 4,848 posts
  • LocationTaiwan

Posted 02 May 2017 - 10:45 PM

 

I can't fault them for overpaying for Bradford.  They thought they were a contender and they played that way until the OL got decimated.

 

Plus, how can you do anything to fix your QB spot a week before the season when you get a freak injury like Teddy's?  The team was in a no-win situation there brought on by nothing more than catastrophically bad luck.

At the time the Eagles were eager to dump him. The Vikings really needed a QB and the Eagles knew it but the Vikings bid against themselves.

Is 2016 2017 2018 the year that a good pitching prospect is truly blocked by 5 good pitchers in the starting rotation? 

Offseason (noun) - a time to propose trades assuming opposing GM's can't do the same basic analysis


#44 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Members
  • 15,194 posts

Posted 02 May 2017 - 10:57 PM

 

At the time the Eagles were eager to dump him. The Vikings really needed a QB and the Eagles knew it but the Vikings bid against themselves.

 

I'm not sure I'd characterize them as "eager".  They didn't have to deal him, a viable starting QB always has value.  They caught good fortune in what happened to the Vikings.

 

The Vikings were always going to be bidding against themselves.  There was no way around that unless they wanted to literally give up on the season before it started.  Because Shaun Hill - NFL Starting QB - was exactly that.  Giving up.  

 

And if they had picked up the phone and tried another team, they weren't going to find any more sympathy.  The Vikings gigantic stroke of bad luck put them in a no win situation and everyone knew it.  


#45 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 27,000 posts

Posted 03 May 2017 - 08:08 AM

They paid less for a good, not great, NFL ready QB, than teams paid for guys that most feel are less than good, and not ready.

 

They were/are built to win now.

 

What, exactly, was an overpay?

  • TheLeviathan and Vanimal46 like this

There's always next year, or the next, or maybe by the time I'm Chief's age, I guess....


#46 Vanimal46

Vanimal46

    Opener Poster

  • Members
  • 10,497 posts
  • LocationAustin, TX

Posted 03 May 2017 - 09:38 AM

Yeah, I don't agree that it was an overpay for Bradford. It would have been a disaster relying on Shaun Hill starting 16 games last year. Your opinion may vary about how good Bradford is. At the very least, he's a proven starter, and the Vikings felt they were a playoff contending team. 

As Mike pointed out, teams over pay for QB's during the draft every year.. Comparing the Bradford trade to the Bears trade up to get Trubisky, for example, looks like a steal. 

  • TheLeviathan likes this

#47 DaveW

DaveW

    Aaron Hicks update (5/17): .326 BA .464 OBP .616 SLG 1.080 OPS

  • Banned
  • 13,014 posts
  • LocationNYC aka Aaron Hicks Ville

Posted 03 May 2017 - 05:40 PM

It was a disaster starting Bradford for 15 games last year. He was terrible.

Should have traded for Glennon. Or should have drafted Dak in the 3rd round like I wanted them/was very vocal about doing.

Oh well, Dave is right, the stupid Vikings are wrong. Such goes life.

<p>Aaron Hicks 2017 stats so far (5/17/17): .326 BA .464 OBP .616 SLG 1.080 OPS 7 HR 19 RBI 6 SB 22 BBs 1.8WAR

#48 Mike Sixel

Mike Sixel

    Now living in Oregon

  • Members
  • 27,000 posts

Posted 04 May 2017 - 09:16 AM

 

It was a disaster starting Bradford for 15 games last year. He was terrible.

Should have traded for Glennon. Or should have drafted Dak in the 3rd round like I wanted them/was very vocal about doing.

Oh well, Dave is right, the stupid Vikings are wrong. Such goes life.

 

We agree on a lot. Not this.

 

And no one thought Dak would be that good. If they had, he'd have gone 1:1.

There's always next year, or the next, or maybe by the time I'm Chief's age, I guess....