VikingLord wrote:Regarding Rodgers, in retrospect, it sure would have been nice if they had drafted him. They would have had a talented young QB to step in and take over when Culpepper went down with that horrible injury the same year. On the other hand, it's wholly understandable that a team with a 28 year old former first round pick starting at QB, and coming off a near-MVP season, would pass on another first rou But that's exactly my point. If the Vikings had taken Rodgers even though they had Culpepper, they were covered in the event that Culpepper went down for some reason. By going into the draft with the thinking that this position or that position is already covered, and allowing that to then override drafting a more talented player in favor of a less talented player who happens to fill a position of more immediate need, they effectively whack their depth and, if things go south with a player's health, they can find themselves in even more desperate straights at the position in the following draft, and who knows if the same opportunity will be there the next year?
I get it but you have to admit, there's some hindsight at work there. Would there even be precedent for a move like that? Culpepper was the #11 pick in the '99 draft, 28 years old, coming off an absolutely fantastic season. What team with a former first round pick in his prime, whose career appears to be reaching an MVP-like peak, drafts a QB in the first round when they have serious needs elsewhere? Making that move would have almost been like the Colts drafting Rodgers that year. I realize a team can't anticipate when a need will arrive but at that point, there was no rookie salary cap, the Vikings thought they had their QB of the future and they still had a lot of work to do in other areas. In hindsight, drafting Rodgers there clearly would have been a good move and perhaps there's something to be learned from that but in an alternate timeline, where the Vikings make that move and Culpepper doesn't get injured, it's possible the Vikings would have spent that first round pick on a QB who spent his entire rookie contract on the bench as a backup and then moved on to another team when he became a free agent.
Spielman should put together his objective board based on all the input he has, ranking players as their talent, college production, and pro projections warrant. Then, if he doesn't feel he can do it, he should turn his board over to someone who is instructed to take players at the top of that board as the picks come up. In the event of a tie, he will send in the position he wants at the given slot, but at that point he's emotionally out of the process and he's trusting all the work his scouting department did.
Under that type of scenario, it's possible the Vikes don't even take a QB in this year's draft.
Under that scenario, they could come away with 5 guards, three RBs and a long snapper because there were no ties and those players were the best value when the picks came up
That might be seen by some as impossible, but if the picks fall a certain way it's possible no QB would be ranked above other prospects as the picks come up. And I would say under that scenario, even if it means Ponder is the de facto starting QB heading into next season, the Vikings would be better off for it than if they spend one of their first 4 picks on a QB who is elevated above other prospects they could have based solely on the perceived need at that position.
I understand your point but I think you're taking the idea of drafting for talent, and the degree of accuracy with which players at different positions can be ranked, to an unnecessary extreme. Sometimes exceptional talents fall but generally speaking. I'd say it's almost impossible to determine which player among a handful of similarly-rated players at very different positions will ultimately be the better pro player. That's why need always enters the equation, for every team, and it should. It just shouldn't be taken to extremes as a factor either.
