2017 draft thread

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by Pondering Her Percy » Thu Apr 13, 2017 10:52 am

fiestavike wrote: I'd be okay with that. I think I'd rather trade back and add another 3rd or 4th with all the talent in the first 3-4 rounds. Lamp seems like a great player though, so I wouldn't be upset if they move to get him.
Yeah a recent mock on NFL Network I saw had Lamp going 31 to Atlanta. That's definitely reaching distance for us.
Image

User avatar
PurpleMustReign
Starting Wide Receiver
Posts: 18386
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Crystal, MN
Contact:

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by PurpleMustReign » Thu Apr 13, 2017 11:08 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Yeah a recent mock on NFL Network I saw had Lamp going 31 to Atlanta. That's definitely reaching distance for us.
We are pick 48,does that mean the 16th pick in the 2nd?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." ‪#‎SKOL2017 #BringitHome‬

User avatar
Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5282
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by Pondering Her Percy » Thu Apr 13, 2017 11:48 am

PurpleMustReign wrote:
We are pick 48,does that mean the 16th pick in the 2nd?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

Yes
Image

User avatar
PurpleMustReign
Starting Wide Receiver
Posts: 18386
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:48 pm
Location: Crystal, MN
Contact:

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by PurpleMustReign » Thu Apr 13, 2017 7:44 pm

What would it take to move up to early 2nd or late 1st?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
The Devil whispered in the Viking's ear, "There's a storm coming." The Viking replied, "I am the storm." ‪#‎SKOL2017 #BringitHome‬

User avatar
S197
Fenrir
Posts: 11230
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Hawaii

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by S197 » Thu Apr 13, 2017 9:51 pm

PurpleMustReign wrote:What would it take to move up to early 2nd or late 1st?

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
These are the Vikings picks and corresponding points according to the "chart"

Code: Select all

 
Pick Points
48 420
79 195
86 160
121 52
129 43
160 27.4
199 11.8
232 0
Trading Pick #48 and #79 would get them up to about #30 or #31.

PurpleKoolaid
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8359
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 9:52 pm

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by PurpleKoolaid » Fri Apr 14, 2017 1:01 am

S197 wrote: These are the Vikings picks and corresponding points according to the "chart"

Code: Select all

 
Pick Points
48 420
79 195
86 160
121 52
129 43
160 27.4
199 11.8
232 0
Trading Pick #48 and #79 would get them up to about #30 or #31.
Might have to do this for Mixon. Im going to be pissed if they use their good picks on the D. We need Oline and RB. I dont think BPA is in play here. They scipped on good Olinemen last year and choked big time.

User avatar
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3472
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by fiestavike » Fri Apr 14, 2017 6:41 am

PurpleKoolaid wrote: Might have to do this for Mixon. Im going to be pissed if they use their good picks on the D. We need Oline and RB. I dont think BPA is in play here. They scipped on good Olinemen last year and choked big time.
I'm hoping they go D, or maybe TE early. They can get a good RB or interior OL in the 4th or 5th.

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37379
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by Mothman » Fri Apr 14, 2017 7:01 am

fiestavike wrote: I'm hoping they go D, or maybe TE early. They can get a good RB or interior OL in the 4th or 5th.
Just like they've been doing successfully for years now?

The heck with that. They need to stop stepping in the same holes year after year. I say draft OL early and maybe even often.

User avatar
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3472
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by fiestavike » Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:03 am

Mothman wrote: Just like they've been doing successfully for years now?

The heck with that. They need to stop stepping in the same holes year after year. I say draft OL early and maybe even often.
It would be a low return investment in Shurmur's system. They should have done that years ago. Too late now.

*edit
Drafting heavily OL now would be stepping into the same hole yet again, having a conflict between their system and their draft strategy. Still not having a unified organizational vision. We don't need any more of that.

User avatar
Texas Vike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 am

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by Texas Vike » Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:14 am

Mothman wrote: Just like they've been doing successfully for years now?

The heck with that. They need to stop stepping in the same holes year after year. I say draft OL early and maybe even often.

Agreed. I hope they DON'T draft a TE at all. I agree that we could use another DT, but our top few picks should be OL, OL, RB, not necessarily in that order.

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37379
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by Mothman » Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:32 am

fiestavike wrote:It would be a low return investment in Shurmur's system. They should have done that years ago. Too late now.

*edit
Drafting heavily OL now would be stepping into the same hole yet again, having a conflict between their system and their draft strategy. Still not having a unified organizational vision. We don't need any more of that.
I don't see any conflict between drafting OL and a unified organizational vision. The offense is the weakest link on the team, the line is the weakest link on offense and Shurmur's offense will need good line play to be successful.

I'll even go a step further: any unified organizational vision that doesn't involve building a good OL is probably not a unified organizational vision worth having.

User avatar
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3472
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by fiestavike » Fri Apr 14, 2017 9:58 am

Mothman wrote:
I'll even go a step further: any unified organizational vision that doesn't involve building a good OL is probably not a unified organizational vision worth having.

That may be true, but it is the vision they established when they hired Shurmur, its a vision a lot of the NFL is using to compensate for a lack of OL talent and the imposition of rules favorable to the passing game. Its not my prefered vision, but they should either go with it or hire a new OC. The ball is going to come out quick and they aren't going to need a great pass blocking unit, just competent. They will spread teams out and run up the middle. RBs who fit that style are available all through this draft. It would be a real waste of resources to get an Anthony Munoz to play LT (or an Adrian Peterson to play RB) in such a system. Reilly Reiff should do the trick just fine.

If you don't make use of the benefit such a system provides (not needing elite Tackles, or line play) [being able to invest resources elsewhere] then it is certainly not the system to be running.

User avatar
fiestavike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3472
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 9:03 am

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by fiestavike » Fri Apr 14, 2017 10:24 am

The pieces this team is going to most need to improve the offensive production are players who can create mismatches. A big back to run against nickel and dime defenses, a TE with enough athleticism to command attention from a safety, a RB who can catch and run routes and has the quickness to pose problems to bigger defenders, a big WR who can win jump balls against smaller corners, super quick, shifty slot receivers, etc. More specialization, more adjustment to the other team, less just doing what you do so well that you impose your will.

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37379
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by Mothman » Fri Apr 14, 2017 10:24 am

fiestavike wrote:That may be true, but it is the vision they established when they hired Shurmur, its a vision a lot of the NFL is using to compensate for a lack of OL talent and the imposition of rules favorable to the passing game. Its not my prefered vision, but they should either go with it or hire a new OC. The ball is going to come out quick and they aren't going to need a great pass blocking unit, just competent. They will spread teams out and run up the middle. RBs who fit that style are available all through this draft. It would be a real waste of resources to get an Anthony Munoz to play LT in such a system. Reilly Reiff should do the trick just fine.

If you don't make use of the benefit such a system provides (not needing elite Tackles, or line play) then it is certainly not the system to be running.
I'm not suggesting they need a "great pass blocking unit" or elite tackles but they will need good line play and they still need better depth and more talent throughout that unit. Spreading teams out and running up the middle still necessitates actually winning battles on the interior of the line.

They still have a guard position wide open with Sirles most likely to man it if they don't draft someone else to do it. Remmers is more likely to be a band-aid than a reliable starter and a quality center/guard might be a very good idea.

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37379
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: 2017 draft thread

Post by Mothman » Fri Apr 14, 2017 10:27 am

fiestavike wrote:The pieces this team is going to most need to improve the offensive production are players who can create mismatches. A big back to run against nickel and dime defenses, a TE with enough athleticism to command attention from a safety, a RB who can catch and run routes and has the quickness to pose problems to bigger defenders, a big WR who can win jump balls against smaller corners, super quick, shifty slot receivers, etc. More specialization, more adjustment to the other team, less just doing what you do so well that you impose your will.
All of that still requires reliable blocking up front. There's just no getting around it. It's fundamental to the game.

Post Reply