2026 draft stuff

Mike Sixel · December 30, 2025

4 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

Downs is head and shoulders above the rest but there are some guys like Thienemann and Ramsay that are well thought of. There is a chance one of those guys is there in the mid 2nd. It's also possible the league learned their lesson with the miss on letting Emmanwori fall.

Which QBs you think will rise? It's Mendoza, maybe Moore, and maybe Simpson. After that it's a lot of guys I don't expect to be taken early.

I get the exact opposite sense on the OL. Many of the guys currently listed at tackle can't stay there in the NFL. They'll have to move inside. The guard class is weak. Center class is pretty weak too. It's a year I'm glad we aren't looking for much there.

With our 5 picks in the first four rounds I'm sorta hoping to see something like this:

1 - CB Avion Terrell

2 - S Dillon Thienemann

3 - C Parker Brailsford

3 - LB Jacob Rodriguez (Bring him home. Absolute fan fave Day 1)

5th - Best RB on the board

Trading down to add some more ammo in the 3/4 to get a NT would be ideal too.

I think Moore goes first among the QBs.

I'd be down with your draft !

gunnarthor · December 31, 2025

This mock has us taking a corner, safety, than a center.

https://atozsports.com/nfl-draft/2026-3-round-nfl-mock-draft-browns-quarterback-raiders-dolphins-dante-moore-fernando-mendoza-carnell-tate/

DocBauer · December 31, 2025

The problem with the draft at this point is the salary cap. Does Harry retire? Does Kelly retire? Did we see enough from Allen and Hargrave to keep them around? And despite flashes, and a great teammate, is Jones done?

And what $ is in play for cuts that hold over. That's important for keeping someone like Nailor as the 3rd WR.

There has to be some "play" in extensions in order to keep the best players maintained on the roster. The good news is we have one of the best cap administrators on hand. The bad news is we're hard against the cap, TODAY.

I lost faith in Kwesi when he traded for Thielen. It just didn't make sense for so many reasons. And I don't have trust in him for the next draft. But if you asked me my DREAM DRAFT for 2026:

The Vikings should draft about 14-16. Ideally, there would be a WR or OT, for example, where someone would be desperate to move ahead before a competitor team could nab said player. The Vikings drop down only 2 or 3 spots and pick up an additional 3rd round selection.

IMO, this is the ultimate idea draft scenario. KEEP what you have, but trade down ONE TIME because your board is still intact.

So now you have a #1, a #2, and 3 round picks. BPA always applies, but in no order you draft a CB, S, RB, ILB, EDGE and then wait for day 3 where you might add another CB and S, and maybe another OL prospect or two.

But we can only hope for a good class, and a GM that has learned from previous mistakes and doesn't blow the 2026 draft.

If he does, he should be GONE and OKC shouldn't be held responsible, IMO.

gunnarthor · December 31, 2025

33 minutes ago, DocBauer said:

The problem with the draft at this point is the salary cap. Does Harry retire? Does Kelly retire? Did we see enough from Allen and Hargrave to keep them around? And despite flashes, and a great teammate, is Jones done?

And what $ is in play for cuts that hold over. That's important for keeping someone like Nailor as the 3rd WR.

There has to be some "play" in extensions in order to keep the best players maintained on the roster. The good news is we have one of the best cap administrators on hand. The bad news is we're hard against the cap, TODAY.

I lost faith in Kwesi when he traded for Thielen. It just didn't make sense for so many reasons. And I don't have trust in him for the next draft. But if you asked me my DREAM DRAFT for 2026:

The Vikings should draft about 14-16. Ideally, there would be a WR or OT, for example, where someone would be desperate to move ahead before a competitor team could nab said player. The Vikings drop down only 2 or 3 spots and pick up an additional 3rd round selection.

IMO, this is the ultimate idea draft scenario. KEEP what you have, but trade down ONE TIME because your board is still intact.

So now you have a #1, a #2, and 3 round picks. BPA always applies, but in no order you draft a CB, S, RB, ILB, EDGE and then wait for day 3 where you might add another CB and S, and maybe another OL prospect or two.

But we can only hope for a good class, and a GM that has learned from previous mistakes and doesn't blow the 2026 draft.

If he does, he should be GONE and OKC shouldn't be held responsible, IMO.

I've posted it a few times so I won't again but the Vikings cap space isn't as dire as people think. They'll be fine. I imagine Smith and Kelly retire. I think Allen is gone but Hargrave could stick around/extension/something. The Vikings only have two real free agents - Nailor and Wilson - and Redmond who is in a different category that makes him easier to keep. I think Wilson walks, Nailor stays and we might very well trade Addison but I think it would be a player for player trade, not a pick. The Vikes have a first, second, and two thirds in this draft so they'll likely have four picks in the top 100.

Vanimal46 · December 31, 2025

30 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

I've posted it a few times so I won't again but the Vikings cap space isn't as dire as people think. They'll be fine. I imagine Smith and Kelly retire. I think Allen is gone but Hargrave could stick around/extension/something. The Vikings only have two real free agents - Nailor and Wilson - and Redmond who is in a different category that makes him easier to keep. I think Wilson walks, Nailor stays and we might very well trade Addison but I think it would be a player for player trade, not a pick. The Vikes have a first, second, and two thirds in this draft so they'll likely have four picks in the top 100.

Correct. We can restructure several players to open up a bunch of cap space so I’m not worried about that. My main concern is hitting on these draft picks.

TheLeviathan · December 31, 2025

9 hours ago, DocBauer said:

The problem with the draft at this point is the salary cap. Does Harry retire? Does Kelly retire? Did we see enough from Allen and Hargrave to keep them around? And despite flashes, and a great teammate, is Jones done?

And what $ is in play for cuts that hold over. That's important for keeping someone like Nailor as the 3rd WR.

There has to be some "play" in extensions in order to keep the best players maintained on the roster. The good news is we have one of the best cap administrators on hand. The bad news is we're hard against the cap, TODAY.

I lost faith in Kwesi when he traded for Thielen. It just didn't make sense for so many reasons. And I don't have trust in him for the next draft. But if you asked me my DREAM DRAFT for 2026:

The Vikings should draft about 14-16. Ideally, there would be a WR or OT, for example, where someone would be desperate to move ahead before a competitor team could nab said player. The Vikings drop down only 2 or 3 spots and pick up an additional 3rd round selection.

IMO, this is the ultimate idea draft scenario. KEEP what you have, but trade down ONE TIME because your board is still intact.

So now you have a #1, a #2, and 3 round picks. BPA always applies, but in no order you draft a CB, S, RB, ILB, EDGE and then wait for day 3 where you might add another CB and S, and maybe another OL prospect or two.

But we can only hope for a good class, and a GM that has learned from previous mistakes and doesn't blow the 2026 draft.

If he does, he should be GONE and OKC shouldn't be held responsible, IMO.

You're certainly right that the Thielen trade was an abject disaster.

As @gunnarthorand @Vanimal46said....you can get down below the cap and have room. But I think your concerns have validity - cutting Allen is really, really not ideal. The ramifications would be rough. The others not so much and restructures can give you some room. However, they handed out a bunch of cash to win 9 games. The talent acquisition department whiffed badly on those cap allocations and we will pay for it next year and in the years ahead. So while yes, it is doable, it was made much more difficult by what can only be described as a really poor offseason. (I liked the general plan for the record, but I'm not the one in the building)

If KAM isn't fired, this should be the last stand this FO gets. This draft class needs to have an immediate impact or heads ought to roll given how we've squandered so many assets in the last few years.

gunnarthor · December 31, 2025

3 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

The talent acquisition department whiffed badly on those cap allocations and we will pay for it next year and in the years ahead. So while yes, it is doable, it was made much more difficult by what can only be described as a really poor offseason. (I liked the general plan for the record, but I'm not the one in the building)

If KAM isn't fired, this should be the last stand this FO gets. This draft class needs to have an immediate impact or heads ought to roll given how we've squandered so many assets in the last few years.

Most of this is wrong but this should stay a draft stuff thread. So here's a new mock draft today that had Styles falling to the Vikings!

https://www.draftcountdown.com/nfl-mock-draft/2026-nfl-mock-draft-brads-1st-round-version-3/

TheLeviathan · December 31, 2025

3 hours ago, gunnarthor said:

Most of this is wrong but this should stay a draft stuff thread. So here's a new mock draft today that had Styles falling to the Vikings!

https://www.draftcountdown.com/nfl-mock-draft/2026-nfl-mock-draft-brads-1st-round-version-3/

You don't have to like it, but Kwesi's draft failures are going to continue to be part of a draft thread for 2026. Trade failures that cost us picks are also a part of that conversation.

You're welcome to sit those parts out, you've informed us all that you have not accepted that reality. That's fine, but the rest of us will continue the discourse with reality well in hand.

He's got some work to do to get this team better and younger. He needs at least three impact talents out of this draft.

gunnarthor · January 1

15 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

The talent acquisition department whiffed badly on those cap allocations and we will pay for it next year and in the years ahead. So while yes, it is doable, it was made much more difficult by what can only be described as a really poor offseason. (I liked the general plan for the record, but I'm not the one in the building)

If KAM isn't fired, this should be the last stand this FO gets. This draft class needs to have an immediate impact or heads ought to roll given how we've squandered so many assets in the last few years.

The talent acquisition department (TM) did fine. I'm not really sure what you expect but Allen is fifth on the team in tackles, his stats are pretty much in line with his career numbers, and he has been pretty healthy, starting all 16 games so far. Hargrave has missed one. The idea of the two was that they would help create less double teams for the other rushers, and the Vikings are sixth in the NFL in sacks, so that seemed to work. (And the defense is very good overall and Flores seems to lean on both, but Allen moreso). And the reason this was a nine win team had nothing to do with the free agent haul, it was completely because of QB play. Darnold probably made this team the #1 seed but that's the risk of playing McCarthy. He needed to grow.

As for yet another cheap shot on Kwesi, he has consistently shown he knows how to create winning football teams. Ownership correctly gave him an extension, he will be around for several more years, which is good for the football, less so for people who dislike him for "reasons".

TheLeviathan · January 1

8 hours ago, gunnarthor said:

The talent acquisition department (TM) did fine. I'm not really sure what you expect but Allen is fifth on the team in tackles, his stats are pretty much in line with his career numbers, and he has been pretty healthy, starting all 16 games so far. Hargrave has missed one. The idea of the two was that they would help create less double teams for the other rushers, and the Vikings are sixth in the NFL in sacks, so that seemed to work. (And the defense is very good overall and Flores seems to lean on both, but Allen moreso). And the reason this was a nine win team had nothing to do with the free agent haul, it was completely because of QB play. Darnold probably made this team the #1 seed but that's the risk of playing McCarthy. He needed to grow.

As for yet another cheap shot on Kwesi, he has consistently shown he knows how to create winning football teams. Ownership correctly gave him an extension, he will be around for several more years, which is good for the football, less so for people who dislike him for "reasons".

Jonathan Allen is one of the league's worst run defenders and is a major reason for the defense struggling to find its footing for so long this season. They outlayed more cash than anyone else last year and won 9 games. (And were rather lucky to do that)

You really need to stop with attacking others with the insinuation that they only have "reasons". The reasons have been listed for you at length. Your persistent decision to ignore them is on you. I wont' be sucked into this battle again, but no one else should be forced by you to ignore the shortcomings of this front office while we prepare for another draft.

If you choose not to accept the lengthy, truthful set of evidence for why people are skeptical and critical - fine. But for the love of god stop arguing with everyone about your pet delusion.

gunnarthor · January 1

2 hours ago, TheLeviathan said:

Jonathan Allen is one of the league's worst run defenders and is a major reason for the defense struggling to find its footing for so long this season. They outlayed more cash than anyone else last year and won 9 games. (And were rather lucky to do that)

You really need to stop with attacking others with the insinuation that they only have "reasons". The reasons have been listed for you at length. Your persistent decision to ignore them is on you. I wont' be sucked into this battle again, but no one else should be forced by you to ignore the shortcomings of this front office while we prepare for another draft.

If you choose not to accept the lengthy, truthful set of evidence for why people are skeptical and critical - fine. But for the love of god stop arguing with everyone about your pet delusion.

It's absolutely wrong to say grandiose things like "they handed out a bunch of cash to win 9 games. The talent acquisition department whiffed badly on those cap allocations and we will pay for it next year and in the years ahead" and not expect to be called out on it. That was just wrong, and instead of admitting it, you double down and say Allen was a horrible run defender. Yeah, he is. We knew that when we signed him. He performed just in line with his career norms. What did you think the Vikings expected? He, Hargrave, Rodgers, Wilson were all expected to be parts of a strong defense and, surprise, they were. Again, this team was likely the #1 seed with Darnold. This is a well constructed team.

But this is the big problem you have. Everything has to be huge. You make mountains out of molehills and you end up losing the forest for the trees. You hate it when I point out that Kwesi and KOC have won at a .620+ clip for four years because that shows they know how to construct a football team, from coaches, to players, to culture.

As for "reasons", you constantly ignore reality and want us to live in a world where you know best, despite evidence to the contrary. You've ignored studies that discuss draft expectations and results and want us to live in your version of what should be. It gets annoying constantly reading the same BS.

TheLeviathan · January 1

2 hours ago, gunnarthor said:

It's absolutely wrong to say grandiose things like "they handed out a bunch of cash to win 9 games. The talent acquisition department whiffed badly on those cap allocations and we will pay for it next year and in the years ahead" and not expect to be called out on it. That was just wrong, and instead of admitting it, you double down and say Allen was a horrible run defender. Yeah, he is. We knew that when we signed him. He performed just in line with his career norms. What did you think the Vikings expected? He, Hargrave, Rodgers, Wilson were all expected to be parts of a strong defense and, surprise, they were. Again, this team was likely the #1 seed with Darnold. This is a well constructed team.

But this is the big problem you have. Everything has to be huge. You make mountains out of molehills and you end up losing the forest for the trees. You hate it when I point out that Kwesi and KOC have won at a .620+ clip for four years because that shows they know how to construct a football team, from coaches, to players, to culture.

As for "reasons", you constantly ignore reality and want us to live in a world where you know best, despite evidence to the contrary. You've ignored studies that discuss draft expectations and results and want us to live in your version of what should be. It gets annoying constantly reading the same BS.

Right, how dare I state these things called "Facts"! How wrong I was! The Vikings apparently are not going to win 8 or 9 games. They also apparently didn't spend a **** ton of money on older players for those 8 or 9 wins. Who knew! They apparently, (knowingly!) according to you (which may or not be a fact. I can't tell any more what actual reality is for you) - gave a horrid run defender a huge bag with tons of guarantees and then....played him on run downs and traded their high end run defender. Which is, of course, what a smart front office does. Cuz...reasons.

Everything I stated was a fact (though I was slightly off - 2nd most cash. Well above most teams) They're a non-playoff team that capped out at 9 wins because they have gone on a bit of a lucky bender at the end of the year. That 9 win season, with no playoffs and a middling draft picks, was bought with an enormous FA investment into old players to mask the deficiencies caused by a host of discarded, failed draft picks. These are facts. Here in Universe 616 at least. Please let me know which end of the multiverse you're visiting us from. I'll study up on that alternate reality so we can have discourse. Until then, I'm here in 616 waiting for you to join me.

I'll say this one more time - purposely with a **** ton of sarcasm because even when I've nicely tried to point out the flaws you've still ignored it and accused me of bad form. So bad form it is! Why try! - We've already been over your studies and their over-reliance on your personal decision to label players draft hits that were cut or traded for 7th round picks. You know, what teams typically do with their draft hits. Customary even. The Vikings should start shopping their 7th round picks right now! I'm sure the Seahawks will be dumping their draft hit of JSN for nothing soon! Ya think Gibbs is going to get cut ala Blackmon and we can scoop him up? That's what teams do with draft hits afterall! Even better....please bring your vast alt-reality foresight: will our draft hit of Jordan Addison be expected to be cut or summarily dumped to the Titans for a 6th rounder after his third season? Your thoughts?

gunnarthor · January 1

18 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Right, how dare I state these things called "Facts"! How wrong I was! The Vikings apparently are not going to win 8 or 9 games. They also apparently didn't spend a **** ton of money on older players for those 8 or 9 wins. Who knew! They apparently, (knowingly!) according to you (which may or not be a fact. I can't tell any more what actual reality is for you) - gave a horrid run defender a huge bag with tons of guarantees and then....played him on run downs and traded their high end run defender. Which is, of course, what a smart front office does. Cuz...reasons.

Everything I stated was a fact (though I was slightly off - 2nd most cash. Well above most teams) They're a non-playoff team that capped out at 9 wins because they have gone on a bit of a lucky bender at the end of the year. That 9 win season, with no playoffs and a middling draft picks, was bought with an enormous FA investment into old players to mask the deficiencies caused by a host of discarded, failed draft picks. These are facts. Here in Universe 616 at least. Please let me know which end of the multiverse you're visiting us from. I'll study up on that alternate reality so we can have discourse. Until then, I'm here in 616 waiting for you to join me.

The reason the Vikings are going to win 8 or 9 wins is because JJ McCarthy was bad. That's it. That's the entire reason. It's the reality of growing pains with a top 10 QB pick. It's something I think had to happen, others can - and do - disagree. Had we kept Darnold, we'd be worried about how he'll hold up in the playoffs but we'd be in the playoffs. The rest of the roster - especially the defense - was pretty darn good. If you think this roster would have capped out at 9 wins with better QB play, we will just disagree.

As to the rest of you rant, it's a pretty good example of what I was saying earlier, you live in your own reality and demand that we live there. You spew a bunch of opinions and say those opinions "are facts". No, they aren't. You think we got on a lucky bender at the end of the year, fine. I think it's because we got healthier and our QB improved. Both are opinions, neither fact. The Vikings invest in FA like every team, we didn't spend a lot because of discarded failed draft picks, we invested in areas we were weak in because our GM got us out of the massive cap hell the prior regime put us in and then used the money to improve the team. Again, opinions. I also don't recall us drafting any can't miss DL/NT under Kwesi that Hargrave and Allen are covering for but perhaps I misremember a name.

In any event, we can continue this if you want but I truly hate it when these threads devolve into this kind of ****. For ease, I think it might be better if you want to criticize Kwesi, you might want to say things like "Kwesi seems to undervalue draft picks, he trades too many away for players where drafts are crap shoots and quantity is better, stand pat and take BPA or trade back a little for an extra pick rather than moving up or getting players." Or, "Kwesi's lack of a scouting background means he is too reliant on his coaching staff for players, which is how we get guys like Theilen or Ackers, rather than simply raiding a practice squad for a fourth running back."

TheLeviathan · January 1

22 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

The reason the Vikings are going to win 8 or 9 wins is because JJ McCarthy was bad. That's it. That's the entire reason. It's the reality of growing pains with a top 10 QB pick. It's something I think had to happen, others can - and do - disagree. Had we kept Darnold, we'd be worried about how he'll hold up in the playoffs but we'd be in the playoffs. The rest of the roster - especially the defense - was pretty darn good. If you think this roster would have capped out at 9 wins with better QB play, we will just disagree.

As to the rest of you rant, it's a pretty good example of what I was saying earlier, you live in your own reality and demand that we live there. You spew a bunch of opinions and say those opinions "are facts". No, they aren't. You think we got on a lucky bender at the end of the year, fine. I think it's because we got healthier and our QB improved. Both are opinions, neither fact. The Vikings invest in FA like every team, we didn't spend a lot because of discarded failed draft picks, we invested in areas we were weak in because our GM got us out of the massive cap hell the prior regime put us in and then used the money to improve the team. Again, opinions. I also don't recall us drafting any can't miss DL/NT under Kwesi that Hargrave and Allen are covering for but perhaps I misremember a name.

In any event, we can continue this if you want but I truly hate it when these threads devolve into this kind of ****. For ease, I think it might be better if you want to criticize Kwesi, you might want to say things like "Kwesi seems to undervalue draft picks, he trades too many away for players where drafts are crap shoots and quantity is better, stand pat and take BPA or trade back a little for an extra pick rather than moving up or getting players." Or, "Kwesi's lack of a scouting background means he is too reliant on his coaching staff for players, which is how we get guys like Theilen or Ackers, rather than simply raiding a practice squad for a fourth running back."

It is the front office's job to manage the money they spend on the roster and judge when is the right time to make major investments. If the failures of this team are strictly on the lack of readiness of the QB....then their decision to invest that much money into a team with an unready QB....IS A FAILURE OF ASSESSMENT. You dumping the weight of the season's failures on the QB does, in no way, shape, or form, absolve the front office of their mistakes. In fact, it makes it worse. Go ahead and look at what it will take to get this team cap compliant next year. They will cut many of the players they signed this past offseason and eat dead cap to do so. These are failures of assessment and allocations of cap resources for a team with a QB who isn't ready. Period. I'm not even sure that's an opinion at this point. It's one aided with so much hindsight it can only be described as close to a fact as an opinion can get.

Allen and Hargrave are both worse or equal to LDR, Redmond, and Harrison Phillips. Had the team signed neither of them they would have possibly been better off. Especially if they had invested that money in keeping Bynum. Or Darnold. Or signing another defensive back. They spent 40M on those two players. They'll have to eat 30M of that to get rid of them both. Hargrave has been a competent player. Allen has not. They were mediocre to bad signings. Worse when you consider alternative options and in-house players. You should know that since you counted the two guys they took snaps from as "hits" in your analysis.

I don't know exactly where the failure lies in the Vikings drafting and trading process. Nor do you. What I do know is that the team has gotten significantly less value from their draft picks than the teams in their division and the majority of the rest of the NFL. This has been demonstrated to you with facts. You have chosen to ignore it in favor of your own subjective analysis. That analysis is wrong. It will always be wrong no matter how many times you cite it. Your failure to even consider why Blackmon (cut) shouldn't get to count as a "hit" is mind-bogging. Meanwhile the Packers have just as many starters on their OL from drafts since Kwesi than we have starters from Kwesi. Read that again if you need to. Maybe again. And again. I'll say it one more time: 4 drafted OL on the Packers are starting....we have 4 starters taken by Kwesi. (And that's me counting Redmond as a drafted player!!!) Whatever it takes. Keeping reading and digesting that. I can give you examples from the Bears and Lions too. But I did that already. Twice. You ignored it. Please stop ignoring what is inconvenient to your carefully, subjectively biased analysis. No one can have a fair discussion with you when you start from a wildly unfair position.

It is not an overstatement to say that Kwesi and the FO have failed to utilize their draft picks to successfully add talent to this team. They have failed in trades (Hock, Thielen) and in use of those picks (Booth, Cine, Engram, Asamoah, Blackmon, Felton). It's why (and again...fact incoming) they have one of the oldest rosters in the NFL.   I'll stick to draft talks. If you don't like fair, accurate criticism of Kwesi....maybe you just need to give a rest on feeling the need to defend him. Rest assured - if he has a good draft...I'll be happy to compliment him. I hope that happens.

gunnarthor · January 1

15 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

And again. I'll say it one more time: 4 drafted OL on the Packers are starting....we have 4 starters taken by Kwesi. (And that's me counting Redmond as a drafted player!!!) Whatever it takes. Keeping reading and digesting that. I can give you examples from the Bears and Lions too. But I did that already. Twice. You ignored it. Please stop ignoring what is inconvenient to your carefully, subjectively biased analysis. No one can have a fair discussion with you when you start from a wildly unfair position.

sigh

I'm not ignoring inconvenient facts, what I've done was explain and given context to things you've said to explain why your fact - followed by an opinion - was usually wrong or don't go together. This quoted section is just another example.

You claim the Packers have 4 OL drafted by the Packers are starting to imply Kwesi drafts aren't good. (I guess). But you use different criteria for the Packers than you do for Kwesi. While I'm no expert on the Packers, pro-football reference indicates that the main five by snap count are Rhyan, Banks, Morgan, Jenkins and Belton. So the first problem is that you are allowing the Packers to use drafts prior to 2022, Kwesi's first, to show that they have more drafted players starting for them than Kwesi. Sure, makes sense. Under this criteria, O'Neil and Darrisaw would count. But you're limiting Kwesi to four drafts and giving GB more so you can count Banks and Jenkins. So it's not an apples to apples comparison and you knew it.

You also say that Kwesi has only four starters, counting Redmond (I count Addison, JJ, Turner, Jackson). Again, in a vacuum, sounds bad. But you omit a few things, like using picks to trade for starting players, former starting players, and, most importantly, the number of picks we've actually had and where those picks were. In the last three drafts, we've had 4 first round picks - all starting - and no other picks in the top 100. The Packers have had 12. So when I say the Viking draft results have been at or better than what should be expected by number and draft position, that's what I'm looking at. Yes, it's my opinion but I've shared a number of articles about that with you.

I think GB is actually a well run org. But the results have been that the Vikings are better since KOC/Kwesi came. 42-25 v. 37-29-1.

TheLeviathan · January 1

31 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

sigh

I'm not ignoring inconvenient facts, what I've done was explain and given context to things you've said to explain why your fact - followed by an opinion - was usually wrong or don't go together. This quoted section is just another example.

You claim the Packers have 4 OL drafted by the Packers are starting to imply Kwesi drafts aren't good. (I guess). But you use different criteria for the Packers than you do for Kwesi. While I'm no expert on the Packers, pro-football reference indicates that the main five by snap count are Rhyan, Banks, Morgan, Jenkins and Belton. So the first problem is that you are allowing the Packers to use drafts prior to 2022, Kwesi's first, to show that they have more drafted players starting for them than Kwesi. Sure, makes sense. Under this criteria, O'Neil and Darrisaw would count. But you're limiting Kwesi to four drafts and giving GB more so you can count Banks and Jenkins. So it's not an apples to apples comparison and you knew it.

Right here. This is where you purposely try to twist the argument. I did use the same criteria - Jenkins is hurt. Banks was acquired via free agency. Their current starting offensive line is Walker-Banks-Rhyan-Belton-Tom. Four of those players have been drafted since 2022. (Walker 2022 7th, Rhyan 2022 3rd, Belton 2nd round 2025, and Tom 2022 4th). Fun fact - that's three starters from a draft Kwesi blew terribly! But that's just their offensive line. So let's say you don't want to count Rhyan because Jenkins is the expected starter prior to injury. Cool...then they have 3 starters on their offensive line by draft vs. 4 on our entire team. And that's if I let you count Turner who has quite clearly not started when both Greenard and Gink have been healthy.

And yes! I was making a comparison that wasn't apples to apples! Because I freaking compared ONE POSITION GROUP to an ENTIRE TEAM. I was making an unfair argument that favored Kwesi. So you want apples to apples? Here we go: (For the second freaking time Mr. "Mekhi Blackmon who we cut is a great draft hit")

Their top three receivers all drafted since 2022.

Three starting offensive linemen (4 current starters)

Their top two TEs.

Both starting DTs. (And one usual starter that is on IR)

1 current edge rusher replacing Parsons, feel free not to count

2 starting linebackers

2 starting DBs (plus their nickelback if you want to count)

By all means add that list up....is it greater than 5? You know, if we count Redmond and Turner to favor Kwesi. My math says yes but I live in reality and I don't know how math works in yours. By my count, conservatively, that's 13 vs. 5. (I chose not to count the NB or the edge guy or Rhyan) Which I think 13 is more. It is here in reality at least.

Ooh...I know! Let's add guys we traded picks for! 13 vs. 6. Is 13 still more? I think it is?

gunnarthor · January 1

31 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Right here. This is where you purposely try to twist the argument. I did use the same criteria - Jenkins is hurt. Banks was acquired via free agency. Their current starting offensive line is Walker-Banks-Rhyan-Belton-Tom. Four of those players have been drafted since 2022. (Walker 2022 7th, Rhyan 2022 3rd, Belton 2nd round 2025, and Tom 2022 4th). Fun fact - that's three starters from a draft Kwesi blew terribly! But that's just their offensive line. So let's say you don't want to count Rhyan because Jenkins is the expected starter prior to injury. Cool...then they have 3 starters on their offensive line by draft vs. 4 on our entire team. And that's if I let you count Turner who has quite clearly not started when both Greenard and Gink have been healthy.

I apologize for not knowing the Packers starting oline.* But at this point, I'm not even sure what you're trying to say but I'm sure it'll be annoying. I guess the Packers have more drafted players on their roster than the Vikings? But, as we've discussed before, that only means the Packers have had more picks. Your problem is that you want drafts to be apple to apple comparisons but they aren't. Results of drafts depend heavily on the number of picks and how high up those picks are. That the Packers turned 43 picks (16 in the top 100) into more players on their current roster compared to the Vikings 28 picks (8 in the top 100) doesn't really mean much, especially when you compare the age of those picks.** But that the Vikings have acquired average or above average expectations return on the picks they have had relative to draft position. I know that's hard for you to accept but that does seem to be the root of the problem. Do we need to keep fighting or are we done?

* Also, that Kwesi inherited guys like O'Neil, Darrisaw, Brandel and Bradbury meant that he didn't have to spend as much time on the o-line, although he's drafted a couple starters there already. Instead, it looked like he used picks to help fortify the roster in other ways, better than GB managed to do. But I guess there are extra points for drafted starters, right?

** Interesting, at least to me, side note. While the pick number is different, the overall percentage of the players drafted by both teams over those four drafts that are still in the NFL is about 75% for both.

TheLeviathan · January 2

28 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

I apologize for not knowing the Packers starting oline.* But at this point, I'm not even sure what you're trying to say but I'm sure it'll be annoying. I guess the Packers have more drafted players on their roster than the Vikings? But, as we've discussed before, that only means the Packers have had more picks. Your problem is that you want drafts to be apple to apple comparisons but they aren't. Results of drafts depend heavily on the number of picks and how high up those picks are. That the Packers turned 43 picks (16 in the top 100) into more players on their current roster compared to the Vikings 28 picks (8 in the top 100) doesn't really mean much, especially when you compare the age of those picks.** But that the Vikings have acquired average or above average expectations return on the picks they have had relative to draft position. I know that's hard for you to accept but that does seem to be the root of the problem. Do we need to keep fighting or are we done?

* Also, that Kwesi inherited guys like O'Neil, Darrisaw, Brandel and Bradbury meant that he didn't have to spend as much time on the o-line, although he's drafted a couple starters there already. Instead, it looked like he used picks to help fortify the roster in other ways, better than GB managed to do. But I guess there are extra points for drafted starters, right?

** Interesting, at least to me, side note. While the pick number is different, the overall percentage of the players drafted by both teams over those four drafts that are still in the NFL is about 75% for both.

The second star is incoherent. You seem to not be able to understand that I artificially limited the Packer draft success to one position group and they still tied Kwesi's entire team results. This isn't hard. The third star is a fallacy because you use "in the NFL" to help mask how many of Kwesi's picks were dumped/cut/traded.

For the rest: You keep thinking the ground you retreat to is safe, but because you're stuck on the idea that "well, Kwesi has been at a disadvantage, that must explain it!" you don't know the actual context of your arguments....yet make them anyway.

Kwesi's starting draft positions: 11, 23, 12, and 24

Packer starting draft positions: 22, 13, 25, 23

So safe to say "How high up the picks" have been has strongly been AGAINST the Packers. Yet they still have out-drafted the Vikings.

How many picks they have? Did I miss something where the NFL forcibly stripped the team of draft picks? The Vikings lack of picks is on Kwesi. He traded them. By my count, we have used that to add one starter (Hockenson), one quasi starter (Turner). One of those players is likely to be cut this season. Those decisions were on the GM. You don't get to hide behind a lack of picks when the lack of picks is the direct result of decisions by the FO in question.

13 vs. 6. I'm still waiting to see if math still works in your reality. I can give more fun facts! Crazy me thinking starters are more valuable than special teamers, but putting that aside: the team still has as many starters drafted by Rick Spielman as it does this FO. The Packers wide receiver room has almost as many starters as this FO in 4 drafts. Since the 2022 draft there have been 5 pro bowlers drafted by the NFC North: zero have been Vikings draft picks. Since 2022 there have 63 interceptions by players drafted in the NFC North....4 by the Vikings. Since 2022 there have been 156.6 sacks recorded by players drafted in the NFC North....only 16.5 by Vikings picks. There have been roughly 14,500 receiving yards posted by NFC North draftees....the Vikings have about 3,300 of that. (Arguably, the only position they actually drafted well in and they aren't even in the to two)

I can continue for tackles. Touchdowns. Rushing yards. Under no metric that has been ********-ed to oblivion are they anything but a distant fourth to their primary rivals.

So...no. The argument shouldn't be necessary. This is 41-donut except I got you arguing the donut was actually the winning score.

gunnarthor · January 2

48 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Kwesi's starting draft positions: 11, 23, 12, and 24

Packer starting draft positions: 22, 13, 25, 23

So safe to say "How high up the picks" have been has strongly been AGAINST the Packers. Yet they still have out-drafted the Vikings.

So, again, we do the dance where you purposefully misrepresent a fact - suggesting that Vikings drafted at a pick rather than trading - to suggest a point that doesn't really work. Again. I'm also not sure focusing on those first round picks is the big win you think it is - you omitted their other first rounder, Devonte Wyatt. As he and Van Ness have been such busts that they had to throw away two future first rounders for a guy on the IR. But, whatever. Let's see -

Wide receivers Addison v Golden - not close. Addison was an instant starter, Golden has started four games and has been hurt. Addison is the better receiver. Maybe that's not fair, maybe we're supposed to only compare to the draft class, not position, but whatever, I'm sure you can move the goal posts later.

Edge/D-lineman type guys Van Ness and Wyatt v. Turner - Turner doesn't have as many games because he was drafted years later but he's started nine in two seasons, those two have started 17 in a combined 7. In a per-season basis, Turner averages more sacks and tackles than both of them. I know you think Turner is a bust but, actually, I think he's outperformed both of those guys. Kind of the opposite of the Golden/Addison issue, but I think Turner is better.

O-line Jackson v. Morgan - Not a perfect comparison again because Morgan has played an extra year but Jackson has more starts in one season than Morgan in two. He also has played a much higher % of possible snaps. Jackson is the better o-lineman.

Linebacker Walker v. Safety Cine? Not really sure the best comparison is. Both drafted in 2022 and both defensive players but Walker is arguably the best player drafted of all 10 picks and Cine is the worst. Maybe Turner since both are linebackers but Walker is a MLB and Turner is Edge/OLB? I'm not sure.

QB McCarthy v ? Not sure what the best comparison here would be to their pick. Draft position (Van Ness), draft class (Morgan), experience (Golden)? But it doesn't really matter. What looking at those first round picks shows is that the Viking picks are arguably better than the Packer picks. You might want a different comparison, maybe just list them in order? Walker, Addison, Turner, Jackson, Morgan, Van Ness, McCarthy, Wyatt, Golden, Cine? I dunno. If only there was a better way to judge football teams results. But I think this shows that position and number of picks is pretty important but on a straight comparison of those ten players, even though the GB players generally have more years of playing time to back them, the Viking players hold their own or are better.

So, now that that stupid thought experiment is over, can we move on? Are we done? Or do you need to put out another post that the Vikings have less drafted players on their roster than someone else and claim it means anything other than that?

If you want to blame Kwesi for trading away too many picks, fine. Go for it. After 15 years of Speilman mediocrity, I was sick of the hoarding picks and trading down and crud. Maybe targeting McCarthy and Turner wasn't the right decision. Maybe they should have held pat and taken what the big board delivered. But I'm excited that we have a FO that is listening to the coaches and getting guys the staff wants and using other means to construct a competitive roster. And, so far, it has worked.

TheLeviathan · January 2

59 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

Wide receivers Addison v Golden - not close. Addison was an instant starter, Golden has started four games and has been hurt. Addison is the better receiver. Maybe that's not fair, maybe we're supposed to only compare to the draft class, not position, but whatever, I'm sure you can move the goal posts later.

Edge/D-lineman type guys Van Ness and Wyatt v. Turner - Turner doesn't have as many games because he was drafted years later but he's started nine in two seasons, those two have started 17 in a combined 7. In a per-season basis, Turner averages more sacks and tackles than both of them. I know you think Turner is a bust but, actually, I think he's outperformed both of those guys. Kind of the opposite of the Golden/Addison issue, but I think Turner is better.

O-line Jackson v. Morgan - Not a perfect comparison again because Morgan has played an extra year but Jackson has more starts in one season than Morgan in two. He also has played a much higher % of possible snaps. Jackson is the better o-lineman.

Linebacker Walker v. Safety Cine? Not really sure the best comparison is. Both drafted in 2022 and both defensive players but Walker is arguably the best player drafted of all 10 picks and Cine is the worst. Maybe Turner since both are linebackers but Walker is a MLB and Turner is Edge/OLB? I'm not sure.

QB McCarthy v ? Not sure what the best comparison here would be to their pick. Draft position (Van Ness), draft class (Morgan), experience (Golden)? But it doesn't really matter. What looking at those first round picks shows is that the Viking picks are arguably better than the Packer picks. You might want a different comparison, maybe just list them in order? Walker, Addison, Turner, Jackson, Morgan, Van Ness, McCarthy, Wyatt, Golden, Cine? I dunno. If only there was a better way to judge football teams results. But I think this shows that position and number of picks is pretty important but on a straight comparison of those ten players, even though the GB players generally have more years of playing time to back them, the Viking players hold their own or are better.

So, now that that stupid thought experiment is over, can we move on? Are we done? Or do you need to put out another post that the Vikings have less drafted players on their roster than someone else and claim it means anything other than that?

If you want to blame Kwesi for trading away too many picks, fine. Go for it. After 15 years of Speilman mediocrity, I was sick of the hoarding picks and trading down and crud. Maybe targeting McCarthy and Turner wasn't the right decision. Maybe they should have held pat and taken what the big board delivered. But I'm excited that we have a FO that is listening to the coaches and getting guys the staff wants and using other means to construct a competitive roster. And, so far, it has worked.

If the Vikings didn't pick at their designated spot.....the GM chose not to. I thought that was clear. It wasn't?

I wasn't the one arguing that he can't be judged fairly because he's had less picks. Kwesi is why Kwesi had less picks. It's in bold so that maye you read it! Try it! Yet somehow that's a "Get out of being a ****** drafter free" card for you. For...reasons.

And then I honestly, I've come to the conclusion you don't know what "analysis" is. It's all I have left. Unless your'e trolling me I guess. In which case....well done. Elite trolling. I mean...you have been lecturing on apples to apples and fair criteria and then proceeded to comparison Addison to Golden and omit that during Kwesi's time the Packers have also drafted Reed, Wicks, Watson, and Doubs. They've drafted nearly an entire starting offensive line. Two really good linebackers. And on what basis did you do this? Oh right...because you purposely reinterpreted what I said to mean first round picks! Except, I said "starting draft position" which impacts the positioning of every pick you make including picks in later rounds! So...no. I never made that argument. You strawmanned that. Again...elite troll work.

Meanwhile...I stacked the deck in favor of Kwesi - his WHOLE team vs. the Packers offensive line. He tied. His WHOLE team vs. the Packers reciever room? Eeked it out 4-3. (But they also have Wicks and Golden in that room. Jsut not starters) His WHOLE team vs. Rick Spielman who was fired 5 years ago.....eeked out a tie.

41-donut. You keep arguing donut > 41. Elite troll work. Hat tip on it. Ya got me...I tap out.

gunnarthor · January 3

ESPN has an article up on the 11 players they think are true "first round" grades. They say that most drafts average about 15 first round talents, which is supported by other sources as well. Only five guys on defense get 1st round grades, and no interior offensive linemen. Of the 11, I don't think any will fall to 17-18ish where we're likely to pick but maybe the TE?

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2026/story/_/id/47455728/2026-nfl-draft-board-prospects-first-round-grades-comps

gunnarthor · January 3

And here's Mel Kiper's big board and top 10 positional ranking, not behind a paywall.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2026/story/_/id/46573669/2026-nfl-draft-rankings-mel-kiper-big-board-top-prospects-players-positions

TheLeviathan · January 3

13 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

ESPN has an article up on the 11 players they think are true "first round" grades. They say that most drafts average about 15 first round talents, which is supported by other sources as well. Only five guys on defense get 1st round grades, and no interior offensive linemen. Of the 11, I don't think any will fall to 17-18ish where we're likely to pick but maybe the TE?

https://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2026/story/_/id/47455728/2026-nfl-draft-board-prospects-first-round-grades-comps

I do not believe any of those players will be there at 18.

Mike Sixel · January 3

Good thing they won all these meaningless games.

TheLeviathan · January 3

4 hours ago, Mike Sixel said:

Good thing they won all these meaningless games.

Even more than the 1st round talents, our spot in the 2nd round may cause us to miss out on the best safeties after Downs. Or linebackers if they slip.

Mike Sixel · January 3

2 minutes ago, TheLeviathan said:

Even more than the 1st round talents, our spot in the 2nd round may cause us to miss out on the best safeties after Downs. Or linebackers if they slip.

It's a big drop in round two and three.

gunnarthor · January 4

Looks like the Vikings are locked into the 18th pick, no matter what happens with Pitt/Balt.

DocBauer · January 4

While by no means close to a finished product yet, I've been fairly impressed by McCarthy the 2nd half of the season. Coaching and mental reps can only do so much. His missed field practice time really set him back. They will need a viable veteran backup for 2026, but they aren't drafting a QB this year.

There could be some surprise cuts or retirements that affect the team's 2026 cap and allow them to sign a decent option or two, but right now it's about keeping the best players on hand and using the draft to help add and build up.

In no particular order, the biggest needs are S, CB, LB, RB, and either a 2nd LB, or possibly and EDGE so that we can be 4 deep instead of 3.

I'd really, really like there to be a WR or OT sitting there when the Vikings' turn comes up and they can trade down just a couple spots for a 3rd 3rd rounder. That helps replace the 4th rounder we don't have this year. In an average draft, I'd be ecstatic to have 5 picks in the first 3 rounds and fill those spots, in whatever order.

While the dual 5th and 6th rounders and solitary 7th rounder should all by BPA, I could easily see another CB, and LB being focus points. And I'm always in favor of OL who slip to day 3 but have have potential if you can just get a season or two to stash and worth with them.

So that would be what I see draft wise as of today.

gunnarthor · January 5

2 hours ago, DocBauer said:

While by no means close to a finished product yet, I've been fairly impressed by McCarthy the 2nd half of the season. Coaching and mental reps can only do so much. His missed field practice time really set him back. They will need a viable veteran backup for 2026, but they aren't drafting a QB this year.

There could be some surprise cuts or retirements that affect the team's 2026 cap and allow them to sign a decent option or two, but right now it's about keeping the best players on hand and using the draft to help add and build up.

In no particular order, the biggest needs are S, CB, LB, RB, and either a 2nd LB, or possibly and EDGE so that we can be 4 deep instead of 3.

I'd really, really like there to be a WR or OT sitting there when the Vikings' turn comes up and they can trade down just a couple spots for a 3rd 3rd rounder. That helps replace the 4th rounder we don't have this year. In an average draft, I'd be ecstatic to have 5 picks in the first 3 rounds and fill those spots, in whatever order.

While the dual 5th and 6th rounders and solitary 7th rounder should all by BPA, I could easily see another CB, and LB being focus points. And I'm always in favor of OL who slip to day 3 but have have potential if you can just get a season or two to stash and worth with them.

So that would be what I see draft wise as of today.

I think I want either another Pat Williams to absolutely stuff the run (Kayden McDonald?) or make a LB to eventually replace Cashman (Allen or Styles?). They'll need to add to the secondary but somehow that group did ok this year.

Mike Sixel · January 5

6 minutes ago, gunnarthor said:

I think I want either another Pat Williams to absolutely stuff the run (Kayden McDonald?) or make a LB to eventually replace Cashman (Allen or Styles?). They'll need to add to the secondary but somehow that group did ok this year.

But Smith is gone. 100 percent need a safety.

Sign In

2026 draft stuff

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Mike Sixel

Vanimal46

Vanimal46

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Member Statistics

Prospect News & Highlights

Recent News

Notes & Rumors

Recent Blog Entries

Recent Status Updates