2014 Mock drafts/Big boards

[dead_poet]

Plugged-in @BobMcGinn has the 2nd-best Mock Draft accuracy on Huddle Report over last 5 years. His final 2014 mock: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/ ... 98211.html

[S197]

Plugged-in @BobMcGinn has the 2nd-best Mock Draft accuracy on Huddle Report over last 5 years. His final 2014 mock: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/ ... 98211.html

Vikings are the only team in the top 10 to take a QB. Mayock has no QB going in the top 10. Tomorrow will be very interesting!

[Mothman]

Do you seriously think that Spielman is going to pick the guy that he explicitly mentions in interviews leading up to the draft as being a great fit? It isn't like the reporter asked him point blank--What do think of Donald. The Ricker offered it up. I'll be very surprised if that's truly our pick at 8.

I will too but my point wasn't about Donald, who I've considered a very unlikely choice for the Vikings since Peter King brought him up the other day. Maybe I misunderstood your point and it was only about Donald? if so, I apologize. I was simply saying that overall, I don't think Spielman is getting easy to read because I think he's managed to thoroughly muddy the waters when it comes to who the Vikings will pick.

[dead_poet]

NFBP mock (Donald): http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Moc ... -6433.html

Ben Standig mock (3rd nationally in NFL Mock Draft Accuracy over the last 5 years): (Donald): http://www.csnwashington.com/redskinsbl ... ziel-mania

[Mothman]

NFBP mock (Donald): http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Moc ... -6433.html

Ben Standig mock (3rd nationally in NFL Mock Draft Accuracy over the last 5 years): (Donald): http://www.csnwashington.com/redskinsbl ... ziel-mania

So Ben Standig is trying to bump that accuracy ranking down a bit?

If Donald is the pick, I'll have to give Spielman serious credit for "hiding in plain sight" this week.

[dead_poet]

Rotoworld writers last mock: http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/cfb/4 ... t-qb-to-go

Two Donalds, a Fuller, Mosley and Bridgewater

[dead_poet]

Star Tribune's Mark Craig:

8 VIKINGS

Top need: Quarterback of the future.

Trade potential: Down. Trader Rick Spielman can get what he wants outside of the top 10.

The pick: Justin Gilbert, CB, Oklahoma State

Why? Reaching and missing on a QB? Been there, done that (See: 2011). So let’s step away from that pitfall and focus on that league-worst scoring defense. Hmmm. Let’s see. A year ago, the Vikings blew five leads in the final minute of regulation. Five! Why? Primarily because the only corner who could cover anyone was Xavier Rhodes. And often he was hurt. If last year’s team had more reliable corners, it could have won 10 games. Gilbert is a great playmaker with exceptional hands, instincts and timing. He’s everything Chris Cook wasn’t and more. Somewhere in Tampa, Leslie Frazier is shaking his head at the possibility of the Vikings putting Rhodes, Captain Munnerlyn and Gilbert on the field at the same time.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 94271.html

[Mothman]

Star Tribune's Mark Craig:

I have to confess, as the draft draws closer, the mentality Mark Craig expressed there is driving me nuts. After 3 years of near constant complaining and criticism of Ponder from many fans and members of the media, and with QB generally acknowledged as the Vikings biggest need, there's an oddly casual, almost complacent attitude being expressed toward the position going into this draft, as if the "sin" of reaching for a QB in the first round was the real problem and not the miss and the fact that the problem remains unsolved. I'm not suggesting the Vikings can't find a QB of the future in the second round, just that, despite 3 years of urgent cries to get a better QB, the sense of urgency seems to be all but gone now that the opportunity is at hand.

I hope that makes sense. I'm not quite sure I've expressed it well. Basically, I'm somewhat amazed at the "they can wait and get a guy" attitude over the need to get the best possible QB they can get if they're going to bother to get one at all. I suppose that stems from the idea that the best possible QB they can get may actually be available to them in R2 but after the past 3 years it still seems odd. It really does feel like people are more concerned with the possibility of a reach and a miss than with the actually solving the QB problem!

Maybe my issue is with the idea that drafting one of the QBs in this draft at #8 would be a reach in the first place? I don't know, but the idea that they should step away from the potential pitfall of "reaching" for a QB and missing seems fearful to me. If the player is a serious reach, don't draft him but if they think he can do the job, take a stab at solving a problem the team has faced for the better part of 3 decades and draft the best QB available. The only thing worse than failing is not trying.

Sorry, in my effort to articulate this, I'm babbling...

A year ago, the Vikings blew five leads in the final minute of regulation. Five! Why? Primarily because the only corner who could cover anyone was Xavier Rhodes. And often he was hurt. If last year’s team had more reliable corners, it could have won 10 games. Gilbert is a great playmaker with exceptional hands, instincts and timing. He’s everything Chris Cook wasn’t and more. Somewhere in Tampa, Leslie Frazier is shaking his head at the possibility of the Vikings putting Rhodes, Captain Munnerlyn and Gilbert on the field at the same time.

Having said all of the above in my little rant, I'll admit that drafting defense makes plenty of sense too. I'm certainly not opposed to it. I just don't like the idea of passing on a QB in R1 because they don't want another miss like Ponder, or the idea that somehow waiting until round 2 and then missing would be much better.

I'm eager to see what happens.

[dead_poet]

To me, it's all a matter of how you grade the player and if you think he has a good chance at being your "franchise" quarterback. I often wonder if teams assign number-values to players and compare them to players drafted in years prior (or compared to initial grading of the next draft class). For example, if I'm grading Teddy Bridgewater, Blake Bortles or Johnny Manziel, just because they're the "top qbs" in this draft class doesn't necessarily mean they have great potential to be franchise guys and guys you feel comfortable selecting in the top-10. If Andrew Luck is graded, say, 94 (out of 100) and Bridgewater, Bortles or Manziel are rated in the 80s, I can totally see selecting a guy like Donald or Robinson, who you might have graded higher (possibly significantly) and will be more "impactful." Especially if you have the QBs ranked closely together. If not much separates Manziel, Bridgewater, Bortles, Carr from guys like Mettenberger and Garoppolo, I can easily see why you'd wait.

I guess it also comes down to confidence, too, which is a poor metric to judge a QB, I realize. Frankly, Bortles and Carr scare me. I have more reservations about them succeeding and being long-term starters than I do Bridgewater and Manziel, which is why I'd draft the latter two at 8 and the former two at 40.

I understand the urgency at QB, but I also understand making the prudent selection of a guy that you have confidence will be a consistent, impact player. Put this way, they might think they have their choice at four Andy Daltons at 8 or a Patrick Willis. I'd have a hard time picking Dalton. And people are understandably gun-shy about repeating the mistakes of the past and picking another Ponder so soon after picking Ponder. So while I agree you have to keep swinging, you also have to have a good eye and pick your pitch.

This would all be much easier if we had one of these (that extended out another 50 years):

[Mothman]

To me, it's all a matter of how you grade the player and if you think he has a good chance at being your "franchise" quarterback. I often wonder if teams assign number-values to players and compare them to players drafted in years prior (or compared to initial grading of the next draft class). For example, if I'm grading Teddy Bridgewater, Blake Bortles or Johnny Manziel, just because they're the "top qbs" in this draft class doesn't necessarily mean they have great potential to be franchise guys and guys you feel comfortable selecting in the top-10. If Andrew Luck is graded, say, 94 (out of 100) and Bridgewater, Bortles or Manziel are rated in the 80s, I can totally see selecting a guy like Donald or Robinson, who you might have graded higher (possibly significantly) and will be more "impactful." Especially if you have the QBs ranked closely together. If not much separates Manziel, Bridgewater, Bortles, Carr from guys like Mettenberger and Garoppolo, I can easily see why you'd wait.

I guess it also comes down to confidence, too, which is a poor metric to judge a QB, I realize. Frankly, Bortles and Carr scare me. I have more reservations about them succeeding and being long-term starters than I do Bridgewater and Manziel, which is why I'd draft the latter two at 8 and the former two at 40.

I understand the urgency at QB, but I also understand making the prudent selection of a guy that you have confidence will be a consistent, impact player. Put this way, they might think they have their choice at four Andy Daltons at 8 or a Patrick Willis. I'd have a hard time picking Dalton. And people are understandably gun-shy about repeating the mistakes of the past and picking another Ponder so soon after picking Ponder. So while I agree you have to keep swinging, you also have to have a good eye and pick your pitch.

This would all be much easier if we had one of these (that extended out another 50 years)

yes, that would help!

Good post. I agree with what you're saying and that in the end, it all comes down to grades. I suppose that's what Mark Craig was implying as well, that this draft is essentially filled with Andy Daltons so why not draft a Willis at #8 instead. I can get behind that if that's how the Vikings feel about these QBs. Personally, I think think there are some better prospects than that but I don't want the Vikings to force a pick just because they need a QB. I just hate the idea of them passing on a good one out of fear of failure.

[dead_poet]

Good post. I agree with what you're saying and that in the end, it all comes down to grades. I suppose that's what Mark Craig was implying as well, that this draft is essentially filled with Andy Daltons so why not draft a Willis at #8 instead. I can get behind that if that's how the Vikings feel about these QBs. Personally, I think think there are some better prospects than that but I don't want the Vikings to force a pick just because they need a QB. I just hate the idea of them passing on a good one out of fear of failure.

I can't help but wonder how it would muddy the waters on this entire draft (for the Vikings in particular) if Mariota declared.

I also wonder what the prospect of Mariota, Winston and Petty (maybe toss Hundley in there) all declaring next year does to the Vikings plans, if anything. Could they really pass on a QB during the draft's first TWO rounds? I wouldn't be too broken-hearted if they got two studly defensive players or went defense, guard with the first two.

For whatever reason, in the last few weeks I've gotten PTSD thinking about Ponder & Tarvaris and the prospect of another three years of "missing" (and then passing on potential big-name guys mentioned above next year), making me gun-shy about picking any of these QBs in the first round.

[dead_poet]

https://twitter.com/TomFornelli/status/ ... 28/photo/1

[Texas Vike]

https://twitter.com/TomFornelli/status/ ... 28/photo/1

Some zingers in there. Joe Namath's fur coat is my favorite.

[Mothman]

I can't help but wonder how it would muddy the waters on this entire draft (for the Vikings in particular) if Mariota declared.

I also wonder what the prospect of Mariota, Winston and Petty (maybe toss Hundley in there) all declaring next year does to the Vikings plans, if anything.

It's hard to say, especially because once those QBs have played another season and are subjected to the kind of scrutiny this class has been subjected to, the proverbial bloom could be off the rose on all of them by this time next year.

Could they really pass on a QB during the draft's first TWO rounds? I wouldn't be too broken-hearted if they got two studly defensive players or went defense, guard with the first two.

Oh, it'd definitely possible, especially since they sound willing to let a new QB sit for a year. That opens things up for then to take a QB like Murray, who could be drafted after R2 and may end up as good as or better than many of the QBs projected to go higher.

For whatever reason, in the last few weeks I've gotten PTSD thinking about Ponder & Tarvaris and the prospect of another three years of "missing" (and then passing on potential big-name guys mentioned above next year), making me gun-shy about picking any of these QBs in the first round.

LOL!

To me, the idea that they might pass on the position this year to wait for one of those players and then draft that player, spend 3 years on him and end up with a bust is even scarier. I think they have to pull the trigger this year and even if they do that, the rookie salary cap means the investment doesn't preclude them from drafting one of those players next year if they don't like what they see from this year's pick.

The biggest nightmare scenario to me is years of journeyman stopgaps and veterans on their last legs. In don't want any more seasons where the likes of Frerotte and Cassel are the best starting options available at QB.

[Mothman]

Some zingers in there. Joe Namath's fur coat is my favorite.

Most of them were great but I liked the Browns picks: "Some poor bastard" and "Another poor bastard".