Page 2 of 3

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 3:44 pm
by losperros
mansquatch wrote:Los Perros you are of course correct on inujuries. However, my challenge to you is to say how is the situation at WR any better than the one at CB? What happens if/when Cook and/or Robinson get hurt? I would say that the WR apocalypse injury wise was the same as the plague of injuries that hit the secondary in 2011. IMO, the 2011 bunch takes the cake for total fail, ergo, we need depth back there.

Likewise, after KWill, then who at DT?

I agree that they could very easily justify a WR pick. My point is just to say that likewise, they could also go the other direction I outlined and be equally justified. My argument on the Jennings signing is that it shored up this position group to some extent. How much it did that is in the eye of the beholder. This isn’t to say it isn’t a need, it is, but with GJ on the roster you are now in a situation where you can let BPA rule the day between the 4 positions.

I think that without Winfield on the roster the situation at CB is scary. If one of those guys go down, our pass defense could be significantly compromised if the next man up is Scherels against 3 WR sets.
I understand what you're saying and don't really disagree. What I'm saying is that the Vikings have needs that should be addressed in the draft and they are MLB, DT, CB, and WR. In my view, the Vikings have enough picks to address all of them. I have no problem with the Vikings drafting for defense in R1 and R2 if they also pick a decent WR or two in the next couple rounds. I like the WRs that Jim mentioned, especially Dobson, and I believe they could be beneficial right away.

What would really bother me and make me seriously wonder what the Vikings are doing is if they absolutely ignore the WR need in the draft. That would be madness, IMHO. If Spielman and Frazier are both sold on Ponder, then they sure as heck better surround him with better overall talent at WR. I see that as being a no-brainer for any responsible GM and HC.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 4:19 pm
by losperros
Mothman wrote:I may be wrong but I think mansquatch meant we might not see the Vikes draft a WR in the first 2 rounds because of the GJ signing, not that they wouldn't draft a WR at all.
That works for me, Jim. As I said in my other post, I just don't want the Vikings to overlook the need at WR.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 6:17 pm
by PurpleKoolaid
Re-signing Carlson (which they put themselves in position that made this a must) and getting Jennings makes me think WR is less of a draft need, maybe even under guard now. They are going to shore up that D. Now, not next year.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 7:43 pm
by PurpleKoolaid
mrc44 wrote: Carlson means nothing. It was cheaper to keep him than it was to drop him and sign someone else. Wr will be picked at the latest in the second round. I think we might trade down and grab another 2nd and 3rd the. Draft wr early second.

Most likely we will grab Te'o and a wr or cb in the first.
No way Spielman makes a bonehead move like signing Carlson, unless he was doing it for 2 years. You dont sign a contract like that unless you meant it for 2 years, so thats one of his receivers for this year.

Teo will be gone and no way we go WR till the 3rd.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Thu Apr 18, 2013 8:11 pm
by Demi
The "it's a passing league now" is especially over rated and unless Hopkins is there in the first round all of the WR's are overrated because of this mentality, take the defensive studs that fall to us and laugh all the way to the bank!

Then with the 3rd and 2 4th's you could go WR, WR, OG, like we did last year with Wright and Childs, one of um is bound to pan out.
Agree completely. And if there's an elite or higher ranked guard or safety, I'd even go that way with one or both of our firsts. We're not going to fix any position just spending a pick on it. You have to be smart about it. Especially building a team. There's next year. The year after. Taking the 5th best WR just because right now this year we need a WR is short sighted and not going to help in the long run. If you're looking at a good WR prospect, or a potential elite safety, guard, defensive tackle, cornerback, or heck depending how they plan on working out the defensive end position it might even be worth taking a DE.

You've got plenty of picks, and years, to try and build a team. Do it right!!!

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 12:02 am
by King James
I think the Vikings will go WR in the first regardless. Greg Jennings is not enough and it will be wise to get a future star WR so he can learn from a veteran like Jennings. The real question is what will they do with the other 1st round. MLB, DT, CB, or trade up or down?

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2013 7:06 am
by Mothman
Pelissero on the LB position:

http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Viki ... ason041913

... and on the d-line:

http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Viki ... 041913?t=2
Teams routinely plan to avoid significant turnover in one position group at the same time. That's why it's so remarkable arguably the Vikings' top five defensive linemen -- Allen, Robison, Griffen, Williams and Evans -- all are unsigned beyond this season. This group is headed for a makeover and in need of an influx of young depth. That could start as early as Round 1, with viable options at defensive tackle (North Carolina's Sylvester Williams, Alabama's Jesse Williams) and end (Florida State's Bjoern Werner, Texas A&M's Damontre Moore) potentially available when the Vikings' picks roll around at Nos. 23 and 25. They don't necessarily need to address it on Day 1. After all, in terms of 2013, the Vikings can play with the defensive linemen they have -- which can't be said at other positions. Plus, the defensive tackle group is regarded as deep enough they may get a quality player in Rounds 2 or 3. It would be a shock if the Vikings don't fortify this spot at some point, though, particularly along a once-dominant interior that has become a weak spot.
I don't know what Spielman's plan is but at this point, I'm thinking the Vikes will draft a DT in R1 or R2 at the latest and may come away from this draft with at least 2 new defensive linemen. Pelissero mentioned the likelihood of the Vikes adding quite a few LBs as undrafted free agents and they may add more d-line players that way too. My guess is Williams is gone next season or back on a relatively inexpensive short-term contract. As I've said before, I believe they'll try to extend Griffen's deal and I suspect either Robison or Allen will be gone in 2014. I'm not sure about Evans but the effort to get younger on the DL probably starts with this draft.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 8:28 am
by dead_poet
Offensive Line
http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Viki ... cern042113
Draft outlook

The Vikings have a lot of resources invested in the offensive line and greater needs elsewhere. Also, it's worth remembering Fusco is only two years removed from being a center at Division II Slippery Rock. He was always going to be a project. That said, the Vikings figure to target another guard -- maybe even as early as Round 1, depending on whether they believe an athlete such as Oregon's Kyle Long could be a difference-marker. More likely, they'll address that sometime between Rounds 2 and 5, unless they're convinced their relatively untested depth is sufficient insurance. That Johnson may be gone after the season only raises the urgency to accumulate options.
I wouldn't mind if we're able to get a second second-rounder and select Warford. Possibly Long, but his background makes me nervous.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:09 am
by Mothman
dead_poet wrote:Offensive Line
http://www.1500espn.com/sportswire/Viki ... cern042113
I wouldn't mind if we're able to get a second second-rounder and select Warford. Possibly Long, but his background makes me nervous.
Thanks for updating this thread.

Long seems a bit risky but could be worth it in the long run (no pun intended). I like Warford's game and with him blocking for Peterson, the Vikes running game could get even better. He can maul defenders.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:21 am
by PurpleJarl
The more I look at this, the more I think that my knee-jerk :rock: :rock: "DRAFT ALL THE WIDE RECEIVERS" :rock: :rock: may have been a bit premature. My best case draft in my mind would be a situation were we draft a combination of MLB, CB, DT, G in the first round and then trade our way back into the second and get a couple of Second/early third round receivers. Obviously Both Defense and WR are huge needs and no doubt we are going to lose games because of an anemic offense as well as a porous defense proving either camp right. I just think their is so much more "safe bet" talent on defense that we can't reasonably pass that up to make more of a reach at offense.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:30 am
by Purple Domination
PurpleJarl wrote:The more I look at this, the more I think that my knee-jerk :rock: :rock: "DRAFT ALL THE WIDE RECEIVERS" :rock: :rock: may have been a bit premature. My best case draft in my mind would be a situation were we draft a combination of MLB, CB, DT, G in the first round and then trade our way back into the second and get a couple of Second/early third round receivers.
I agree, I would be happy with a MLB and CB in the first round taking a WR in the second or third. I think Spielman has hinted at such, but the fact that he has probably means that he is thinking something totally different.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:33 am
by PurpleJarl
Purple Domination wrote: I agree, I would be happy with a MLB and CB in the first round taking a WR in the second or third. I think Spielman has hinted at such, but the fact that he has probably means that he is thinking something totally different.


Package our first first second and third to draft the entire fourth round? :wink:

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Tue Apr 23, 2013 11:55 am
by dead_poet
Would be interesting to learn if the Vikings view him similarly. He deserves a chance to lock down a starting spot.

Jarius Wright - WR - Vikings

ESPN 1500 Twin Cities considers Jarius Wright a situational No. 4 receiver.

Wright flashed some ability following Percy Harvin's ankle injury last season, recording 22 catches for 310 yards with two touchdowns in just seven games. He's a big-play threat, but is too raw to be counted on as an every-down wideout. The Vikings should be looking for another receiver in the draft to push current No. 2 man Jerome Simpson.
Source: ESPN 1500 Twin Cities Apr 23 - 12:09 PM

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Tue Apr 23, 2013 12:11 pm
by HardcoreVikesFan
dead_poet wrote:Would be interesting to learn if the Vikings view him similarly. He deserves a chance to lock down a starting spot.

Jarius Wright - WR - Vikings

ESPN 1500 Twin Cities considers Jarius Wright a situational No. 4 receiver.

Wright flashed some ability following Percy Harvin's ankle injury last season, recording 22 catches for 310 yards with two touchdowns in just seven games. He's a big-play threat, but is too raw to be counted on as an every-down wideout. The Vikings should be looking for another receiver in the draft to push current No. 2 man Jerome Simpson.
Source: ESPN 1500 Twin Cities Apr 23 - 12:09 PM
I don't know if I totally agree. He showed ability to play split end. I think he could excel in the slot. That being said, Jarius Wright should not prevent Minnesota from drafting the best receivers possible.

Re: Vikings by position

Posted: Tue Apr 23, 2013 2:44 pm
by dead_poet
Spielman says Erin Henderson has flexibility to play inside or outside depending what happens in the draft. #Vikings
Tom Pelissero on Twitter