Tavon Austin is a must for Minn...

[Funkytown]

And the Vikings did that all by themselves. They created an extra hole, but that doesn't mean WR should be pushed back in need. WR and LB round one. Isn't that what most people expect anyway? Sounds good to me--just as long as WR is in there.

I'm saying WR is our biggest need--okay tied for number one with LB--and I'd like to address it as soon as possible.

So everyone is saying WR is "so deep." Must be deep with mediocre talent. Awesome. Just what I want at the WR position. Woooo baby. Touchdown! lol. Isn't DT deep? Isn't CB deep? Not even deep enough to get a potential starter or role player? Hard to believe. It's hard to believe it's smarter to push back our immediate need (WR) to address another, less immediate need (DT, CB). I think we go LB and WR round one and DT or CB round two. Maybe even trade up a little (in round one OR two) to get someone awesome. I still don't want to wait on a WR. No one is going to convince me that is smart--UNLESS, we trade up in the second and get someone good. With that being said, it would make more sense to get our WR round one--and trade up a tad to get a DT or CB we feel confident about.

With WR being such a big need, I just don't want the 5,6, or 7th one in the draft. No thank you. I want the best available with one of our first-round picks. Is that too much to ask? lol.

[Funkytown]

Of course, I was just mentioning because I think alot of people have this idea in their head that you need a Calvin Johnson/Brandon Marshall like WR to have an elite WR corps, while that is just simply the farthest thing from the truth.

True story. Those guys are rare. I just think we stand a better chance of getting a better WR picking 23rd (or 25th) in the FIRST round than we do 23rd in the SECOND round. I just want the best available at our pick, unless we are really crazy about a guy and don't have to move up too much to get him. If we wait, more than likely we'll see a few more WRs come off the board. So, instead of getting the 2nd or 3rd best receiver, we'll get the 6th or 7th. Oooh baby. The WRs that everyone is saying aren't that good. Let's take the 7th best instead of the 3rd best! Smart! That's what I had planned for *upgrading* at the receiver position. I'm not saying the guy couldn't or wouldn't be good; I just don't want to settle. If we can have better, then I want better.

[Cliff]

So everyone is saying WR is "so deep." Must be deep with mediocre talent. Awesome. Just what I want at the WR position. Woooo baby. Touchdown! lol. Isn't DT deep? Isn't CB deep? Not even deep enough to get a potential starter or role player? Hard to believe. It's hard to believe it's smarter to push back our immediate need (WR) to address another, less immediate need (DT, CB). I think we go LB and WR round one and DT or CB round two. Maybe even trade up a little (in round one OR two) to get someone awesome. I still don't want to wait on a WR. No one is going to convince me that is smart--UNLESS, we trade up in the second and get someone good. With that being said, it would make more sense to get our WR round one--and trade up a tad to get a DT or CB we feel confident about.

With WR being such a big need, I just don't want the 5,6, or 7th one in the draft. No thank you. I want the best available with one of our first-round picks. Is that too much to ask? lol.

Why does it matter if you draft the 3rd best WR in the draft if his skills are comparable to the 7th or 8th? When you draft a position high just for the sake of drafting that position high - that is how teams end up with Troy Williamson type players in the first round.

If you get top tier talent at another position of need (which the Vikings have a lot of) it makes sense to pull the trigger on the better player ... not your more needy position.

Just because your team is technically set with Chester Taylor doesn't mean you don't draft Adrian Peterson.

[Mothman]

And the Vikings did that all by themselves. They created an extra hole, but that doesn't mean WR should be pushed back in need. WR and LB round one. Isn't that what most people expect anyway? Sounds good to me--just as long as WR is in there.

Thats' what most expect and it's probably what will happen.

I'm saying WR is our biggest need--okay tied for number one with LB--and I'd like to address it as soon as possible.

So everyone is saying WR is "so deep." Must be deep with mediocre talent.

I wouldn't say that. This draft lacks clear-cut, top 10 talents like Julio Jones and A.J. Green but that doesn't mean the WR talent is mediocre or that a few stud WRs couldn't emerge out of the pack. The trick is to identify who will excel as a pro. In this draft, the WRs just come with enough questions marks to push them down boards but that should work to the Vikings advantage.

Isn't DT deep? Isn't CB deep? Not even deep enough to get a potential starter or role player? Hard to believe. It's hard to believe it's smarter to push back our immediate need (WR) to address another, less immediate need (DT, CB).

Is CB a less immediate need? Believe it or not, that's debatable. It's not a very stable or established position for the Vikes. Chris Cook has yet to play a full season. Josh Robinson is entering his second year. A.J. Jefferson may or may not be back but isn't an ideal starter anyway and Winfield is gone. The situation at CB isn't any more stable than the situation at WR but keep in mind, drafting isn't just about addressing immediate needs, it's about team-building. If a DT that can anchor the middle of the line for the next decade or one of the two stud guards in this draft fall into the Vikings lap, taking one of them to address a less urgent need might be the wiser long term move, even if it's a less immediately satisfying choice.

I think we go LB and WR round one and DT or CB round two. Maybe even trade up a little (in round one OR two) to get someone awesome. I still don't want to wait on a WR. No one is going to convince me that is smart--UNLESS, we trade up in the second and get someone good. With that being said, it would make more sense to get our WR round one--and trade up a tad to get a DT or CB we feel confident about.

With WR being such a big need, I just don't want the 5,6, or 7th one in the draft. No thank you. I want the best available with one of our first-round picks. Is that too much to ask? lol.

No, but I think it's a mistake to assume the order in which players come off the board automatically equates to the quality of the player. Drafting the 5th or 6th WR selected doesn't necessarily mean you're getting the 5th or 6th best WR.

[Funkytown]

Why does it matter if you draft the 3rd best WR in the draft if his skills are comparable to the 7th or 8th? When you draft a position high just for the sake of drafting that position high - that is how teams end up with Troy Williamson type players in the first round.

If you get top tier talent at another position of need (which the Vikings have a lot of) it makes sense to pull the trigger on the better player ... not your more needy position.

Just because your team is technically set with Chester Taylor doesn't mean you don't draft Adrian Peterson.

Not the Troy Williamson comparison. Really?

Is there an Adrian Peterson-type impact player at the DT or CB available at 23 or 25? Guys who would be immediate starters day one in positions we already have depth at? They'd have a better chance at starting day one than a WR picked in the same spot? They'd have more immediate impact?

I would argue that a WR picked round one has a better chance starting day one, than a CB or DT does--simply because we are "okay" there and have depth.

All this talk about waiting on a WR (our biggest need) but not much talk about the depth at CB or DT in the draft, why not? Why not more arguments about addressing our top two needs with our first two picks--and then addressing "needs" and "depth" round two and beyond?

I'm all about getting immediate starters round one. I'm not convinced a CB or DT would start day one on this team. A second-round receiver might start day one, but that's not saying much. I just like our odds better drafting a guy higher. I'm not talking about reaching or anything crazy, but simply taking the best WR available with our pick, which just so happens to be a huge, huge need.

[Funkytown]

Is CB a less immediate need? Believe it or not, that's debatable. It's not a very stable or established position for the Vikes. Chris Cook has yet to play a full season. Josh Robinson is entering his second year. A.J. Jefferson may or may not be back but isn't an ideal starter anyway and Winfield is gone. The situation at CB isn't any more stable than the situation at WR but keep in mind, drafting isn't just about addressing immediate needs, it's about team-building. If a DT that can anchor the middle of the line for the next decade or one of the two stud guards in this draft fall into the Vikings lap, taking one of them to address a less urgent need might be the wiser long term move, even if it's a less immediately satisfying choice.

I believe the Vikings believe WR is a more immediate need than CB. How else would you explain letting Winfield go as they did, all while not bothering to pick someone up via free agency? DT and CB are both needs, just not at the level of WR.

I understand long-term moves and such. That's why I want a WR. We are invested in Ponder, and putting guys around him to help him make plays is the best choice. I'm all about a great defense, but Ponder freakin' needs help. This is do or die for him. I think it's an obligation to put weapons around him to give him a fair chance at succeeding. All this building and such is great, but it's not going to be very sexy if we start out with a rookie QB again in a year or two. I believe we should build around our young QB, and I believe that is the top priority.

No, but I think it's a mistake to assume the order in which players come off the board automatically equates to the quality of the player. Drafting the 5th or 6th WR selected doesn't necessarily mean you're getting the 5th or 6th best WR.

That might be true. There are always going to be those "gems" or "over-acheivers" out there, but it doesn't change the fact that first-round talents are what people want. "Hey. Do you want to address your number one need round one or round two?" Round one.

If it wasn't for the worthless Saints picking before the Rams, I'd want to trade up ahead of them and get our guy. I just don't want to help the Saints out with any more picks. I'd rather have one of the top two guys--who most seem to actually believe in on some level. I'm okay with getting the "3rd best WR" though. I like his chances more than I do the 6th or 7th to come off the board. I have NO biases towards any WR in the draft really. I just want the best available at one of our picks round one. I don't understand why that's so hard to understand.

Y'all know those "under 100 yards passing" games that Ponder had last year? Yeah. Those. Those few games that everyone loves to bring up. I was at two of them--versus the Cards and Bears. They weren't pretty. I was satisfied with AP and the D, but our passing game was sad. I don't want to see any more of that. The D held it down. The D can STILL hold it down. The passing game is NO better. I want it addressed--sooner rather than later. That's all I'm trying to say.

[Cliff]

Not the Troy Williamson comparison. Really?

I don't see why it's not fair to compare Troy Williamson (a pick the Vikings made for need though it was clear he wasn't the best player) and what you're suggesting the Vikings do which sounds similar.

Is there an Adrian Peterson-type impact player at the DT or CB available at 23 or 25? Guys who would be immediate starters day one in positions we already have depth at? They'd have a better chance at starting day one than a WR picked in the same spot? They'd have more immediate impact?

I don't know ... and nobody will until the draftees start actually playing. The point isn't necessarily to have an immediate impact ... that's just a bonus. The point is to get the best player possible that can help the team. Worrying about immediate impact is a bad idea when approaching the draft in my opinion.

I would argue that a WR picked round one has a better chance starting day one, than a CB or DT does--simply because we are "okay" there and have depth.

They have a better chance of starting day one ... but is that necessarily better for the team? Just because your only option is the 1st rounder you picked up in the draft doesn't mean he's playing well. It could also ruin the players confidence or devlopment.

All this talk about waiting on a WR (our biggest need) but not much talk about the depth at CB or DT in the draft, why not? Why not more arguments about addressing our top two needs with our first two picks--and then addressing "needs" and "depth" round two and beyond?

I'm not against drafting a WR if the right guy is there ... I just don't think you draft a WR in the first round if the "1st round quality" WRs are off the board but they are still there for other positions. I don't see the point in forcing a pick for WR in the 1st if you can get similar talent in the 2nd. That won't necessarily be true when it comes time for them to pick, but if it is, forcing WR would be a mistake to me.

I'm all about getting immediate starters round one. I'm not convinced a CB or DT would start day one on this team. A second-round receiver might start day one, but that's not saying much. I just like our odds better drafting a guy higher. I'm not talking about reaching or anything crazy, but simply taking the best WR available with our pick, which just so happens to be a huge, huge need.

My main point is that the Vikings have enough needs to not force a position ... especially if 3-4 of the WRs are drafted before the Vikings pick. If the best WR avaliable with our pick is already the 5th best and there is the 2nd best player is on the board at other positions of need, that seems like a no-brainer.

They need LB just as badly or worse than WR. Without Winfield we're very thin at CB ... and even though they might not start right away, DT is going to look VERY weak in the next year or two if Kevin Williams retires or continues to decline.

[Funkytown]

I don't see why it's not fair to compare Troy Williamson (a pick the Vikings made for need though it was clear he wasn't the best player) and what you're suggesting the Vikings do which sounds similar.

No. The WRs I'm suggesting we take a look at can actually catch.

My main point is that the Vikings have enough needs to not force a position..

Picking a WR round one is not a force.

If the best WR avaliable with our pick is already the 5th best and there is the 2nd best player is on the board at other positions of need, that seems like a no-brainer.

This I can agree with.

They need LB just as badly or worse than WR. Without Winfield we're very thin at CB ... and even though they might not start right away, DT is going to look VERY weak in the next year or two if Kevin Williams retires or continues to decline.

That's why I want LB and WR round one. Or WR and CB or DT round one. Why can't we address LB round two if we can address WR round two? Because of the hole the Vikings willingly created? I would EVEN be okay with LB and DT or CB round one IF our LB isn't Catfish. I still want us to address WR almost immediately, though.

We were "okay" on defense until the Vikes let a couple guys go in free agency. We were NEVER okay at WR. We still aren't. I understand we have a giant hole in the middle of our defense, and some depth issues at CB and DT--but I still think WR ties for number one need. I just think it's smart to address our first two needs with our first two picks. I do understand the arguments, though.

I actually really like Wright--and for some odd reason I do somewhat believe in Simpson. And Jennings is Jennings. I won't CRY if we don't get a WR round one, but I'll be super upset. I'll be more upset if we get Catfish and miss out on WR. I suppose that is the whole truth. A WR with Catfish would ease my pain. A CB or DT and Catfish would only upset me. lol.

[Cliff]

That's why I want LB and WR round one. Or WR and CB or DT round one. Why can't we address LB round two if we can address WR round two? Because of the hole the Vikings willingly created? I would EVEN be okay with LB and DT or CB round one IF our LB isn't Catfish. I still want us to address WR almost immediately, though.

I never said we couldn't address LB in round two

For me it's all about the board. The players on the board should decicde who the Vikings pick up ... not only their team needs.

We were "okay" on defense until the Vikes let a couple guys go in free agency. We were NEVER okay at WR. We still aren't. I understand we have a giant hole in the middle of our defense, and some depth issues at CB and DT--but I still think WR ties for number one need. I just think it's smart to address our first two needs with our first two picks. I do understand the arguments, though.

The reason why the roster is the way it is doesn't matter; it is the way it is.

I feel like we have more than depth issues at CB ... the players that are there aren't "proven" by any stretch. WR might actually be stronger than LB and CB at this point.

[Texas Vike]

Wow. This thread is dramatic. Some of the board's most intelligent, reasonable, and measured posters (Moth & Clff) are being really patient explaining the nuances of drafting not solely based on need... and others just don't want to hear it. Sounds like a conversation between wise, experienced parents and a naive, know-it-all(ready) teen.

Let's put the main point in concrete terms: guys like Keenan Allen, whom many think will be drafted in the 20 to 35 area, do not appear to be clearly better prospects than Hopkins, Woods, or others who are being projected to be drafted in the 35 to 55 area. In fact, there is a bevy of WR talent that projects to be available through rounds 2, 3 and 4.

[Funkytown]

I feel like we have more than depth issues at CB ... the players that are there aren't "proven" by any stretch. WR might actually be stronger than LB and CB at this point.

That's a scary thought, considering our WR corps hasn't improved a bit. Since the Seahawks decided to get in the mix for Winfield, things are looking scarier. But, I do believe in our CBs. If we somehow manage to reel in Winfield, then I'd feel much, much better. That would be extremely telling come draft time. I don't think CB would even be in the conversation as far as our number one pick then, but I could be wrong. Ya just never know. Time will tell.

[Funkytown]

Some combo of (doesn't matter which pick):

Allen/Patterson/Hopkins
and
Brown/Ogletree/S.Williams/Short/Hankins/Werner/Trufant

with our 1st two picks and I'll be happy. I do not want Te'overrated and I don't think guys like Austin or Rhodes will still be there when we pick.

So...you want a WR round one?

I don't want Te'o either. I hope the Bears get him, just so I can breathe a sigh of relief!

[Funkytown]

Wow. This thread is dramatic. Some of the board's most intelligent, reasonable, and measured posters (Moth & Clff) are being really patient explaining the nuances of drafting not solely based on need... and others just don't want to hear it. Sounds like a conversation between wise, experienced parents and a naive, know-it-all(ready) teen.

Let's put the main point in concrete terms: guys like Keenan Allen, whom many think will be drafted in the 20 to 35 area, do not appear to be clearly better prospects than Hopkins, Woods, or others who are being projected to be drafted in the 35 to 55 area. In fact, there is a bevy of WR talent that projects to be available through rounds 2, 3 and 4.

Nothing dramatic about it. It's just busy. Also, I don't need anything explained to me. Trust me, I get it. Does it mean I necessarily agree with it? No. Is it a law that I have to? No. My personal preference is to address the WR position over the CB and DT positions. With that being said, it has to be within reason. I'm not totally foolish. Still, for me, WR is priority. Unless of course, there is some STUD CB or DT available that is going to come in and start day one. If it's a choice between WR, DT, and CB and they are all just "potential starters" and not sure-things, then I want our pick to be a WR. We can address the other two a bit later. As far as me "not wanting to hear it"---that's odd. 75% of the "expert" mock drafts that I've seen have us picking a WR with one of our first two picks, too. I'm okay with being as foolish as them. lol.

[Mothman]

I believe the Vikings believe WR is a more immediate need than CB. How else would you explain letting Winfield go as they did, all while not bothering to pick someone up via free agency?

Age, money and the intent to draft a CB?

I understand long-term moves and such. That's why I want a WR. We are invested in Ponder, and putting guys around him to help him make plays is the best choice. I'm all about a great defense, but Ponder freakin' needs help. This is do or die for him. I think it's an obligation to put weapons around him to give him a fair chance at succeeding. All this building and such is great, but it's not going to be very sexy if we start out with a rookie QB again in a year or two. I believe we should build around our young QB, and I believe that is the top priority.

I wholeheartedly agree and I want them to draft a WR or two later this month. In fact, I think it's essential. They absolutely need to continue building at that position and giving Ponder help. We're almost on the same page, I just don't think they have to spend a first round pick on a WR. It's not a bad idea. I just don't believe they need to have the mindset that they're drafting a WR in R1 no matter what. It's best to consider both talent and need but the first takes priority over the second.

That might be true. There are always going to be those "gems" or "over-acheivers" out there, but it doesn't change the fact that first-round talents are what people want. "Hey. Do you want to address your number one need round one or round two?" Round one.

I think the point you may be missing here is that there are very few clear cut first round talents at WR in this draft. Evaluating talent is subjective and if you look around at draft sites, there's not exactly agreement on how the top 5-8 WRs in this draft should be ranked. Athleticism has bumped Patterson and Austin up boards and they're probably the two most unanimous choices as first round WRs but both come with big enough questions that they may not be better choices than several of the other receivers available. After them, you'll find Allen, Hopkins, Hunter, Woods and a few others all have their supporters and detractors and some consider a few of that group better options than Patterson or Austin. On top of all that, there's the fit with the team to consider. Different skill sets function more effectively in different offenses.

In other words, when I wrote that drafting the 5th or 6th WR selected doesn't necessarily mean you're getting the 5th or 6th best WR, I wasn't talking about hidden gems or overachievers. In this draft, I'm not sure anybody can really tell who is the 5th or 6th best WR and who is the best... and that doesn't even get into the question of pro readiness or immediate impact vs. great talent that may take time to develop.

There are probably 12+ WRs in this draft with the potential to have an immediate, positive impact on a team this season so while drafting the best one on their board at #23 might seem like a good move for the Vikings, depending on how the draft falls they may be better off addressing other positions in R1 because they'll still have an opportunity to get WRs in subsequent rounds who can help them (and Ponder).

If it wasn't for the worthless Saints picking before the Rams, I'd want to trade up ahead of them and get our guy. I just don't want to help the Saints out with any more picks. I'd rather have one of the top two guys--who most seem to actually believe in on some level. I'm okay with getting the "3rd best WR" though. I like his chances more than I do the 6th or 7th to come off the board. I have NO biases towards any WR in the draft really. I just want the best available at one of our picks round one. I don't understand why that's so hard to understand.

It's not hard to understand. What I'm saying is that "best available" isn't clear. Ask 5 people and you could easily get 5 different answers.

Y'all know those "under 100 yards passing" games that Ponder had last year? Yeah. Those. Those few games that everyone loves to bring up. I was at two of them--versus the Cards and Bears. They weren't pretty. I was satisfied with AP and the D, but our passing game was sad. I don't want to see any more of that. The D held it down. The D can STILL hold it down. The passing game is NO better. I want it addressed--sooner rather than later. That's all I'm trying to say.

I said the same thing for most of the season. Of course, if avoiding those sub-100 yard passing performances is their top priority, they might be better off drafting a guard in R1.

[Funkytown]

Age, money and the intent to draft a CB?

Yes. In round two--or after. lol

I wholeheartedly agree and I want them to draft a WR or two later this month. In fact, I think it's essential. They absolutely need to continue building at that position and giving Ponder help. We're almost on the same page, I just don't think they have to spend a first round pick on a WR. It's not a bad idea. I just don't believe they need to have the mindset that they're drafting a WR in R1 no matter what. It's best to consider both talent and need but the first takes priority over the second.

Fair enough.

It's not hard to understand. What I'm saying is that "best available" isn't clear. Ask 5 people and you could easily get 5 different answers.

I don't care about 5 people. I care about the Vikings and who they have as their top WRs. And realistically, we should be able to get at least their #3 guy as is--and probably their #2 with a little wheeling and dealing. I would like to do that.

Or, you never know, maybe we could get their #2 guy without moving either. Maybe they aren't sold on Austin? Most of us agree that's not the type of receiver we need; it's just hard not to want a weapon like...again. It just depends what they are thinking. Most drafts only have one or two WRs going before our pick. It's hard for me to imagine that the Vikes would pass on the #2 WR on their board if he dropped to them--unless they were in LOVE with a DT or CB that did just the same. I suppose, we'll see how it goes.