Vikings Message Board.Com

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap300000 ... ps-in-2017

1) Minnesota Vikings
Top returning targets:

» Stefon Diggs (84 receptions, 903 yards, three touchdowns)
» Adam Thielen (69 receptions, 967 yards, five touchdowns)
» Laquon Treadwell* (1 reception, 15 yards)

Why are they underrated?

The Vikings led the league last year in cumulative catch percentage for a wide receiver. The intermediate air attack was definitely a contributing factor, but attributing that mark solely to the team's dink-and-dunk system doesn't fairly account for the fact that Diggs and Thielen (who caught 75 percent of the balls thrown their way) both adjusted to a new quarterback post-camp and a new offensive coordinator after just a few weeks.

More info can be found in the article.

Nice to see the Vikings get mentioned here.

There are reasons to think this offense could contribute a lot more than it did last year.

I for one am really interested to see what happens with Treadwell this pre-season. All by himself he'll provide good reason to watch those games. Ditto the nickel corner situation.

They have had a lot of talent at every offensive position except for OL for a while now. I am excited for their WRs but very skeptical of the OL.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

PurpleMustReign wrote:They have had a lot of talent at every offensive position except for OL for a while now. I am excited for their WRs but very skeptical of the OL.

I'm skeptical of both. I honestly think their WR corps is overrated, not underrated.

Mothman wrote: I'm skeptical of both. I honestly think their WR corps is overrated, not underrated.

I do too my point was they have had talent there. I like Diggs and Thielen, but Treadwell is a big mystery to me.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

PurpleMustReign wrote: I do too my point was they have had talent there. I like Diggs and Thielen, but Treadwell is a big mystery to me.

He's a mystery to all of us.

There's definitely some talent at the position.

Mothman wrote: He's a mystery to all of us.

There's definitely some talent at the position.

There is talent among the team's wide receivers, especially from Diggs and Thielen. I happen to think they both are underrated in some ways. Before last season they were hardly rated at all. That's particularly true of Thielen, who I always thought showed promise.

BTW, it's not the WR talent I question as it is the pass blocking and how the passing game is utilized.

Mothman wrote: I'm skeptical of both. I honestly think their WR corps is overrated, not underrated.

That's how I felt. And why I thought Floyd was worth signing. WRs will produce, when they're given enough snaps. Regardless of how talented they actually are.

The intermediate air attack was definitely a contributing factor, but attributing that mark solely to the team's dink-and-dunk system doesn't fairly account for the fact that Diggs and Thielen (who caught 75 percent of the balls thrown their way) both adjusted to a new quarterback post-camp and a new offensive coordinator after just a few weeks.

It does when you account for the offensive coordinator who forces this type of system regardless of how it affects the overall team and offense. As well as bringing in a veteran upgrade at QB!

Of course we have the article writer with this bit of nonsense: "As for the asterisk (*), I decided to include Treadwell based on a conversation I had with outgoing Vikings receiver Cordarrelle Patterson, who told me at the Pro Bowl that offensive coordinator Pat Shurmur planned on utilizing his weapons more effectively in 2017. With an entire offseason under his belt as OC, Shurmur should be able to make the most of Treadwell's first-round talent."

That gets into the whole who's fault was it thing between Turner/Shurmer/Zimmer etc.

CP's words to me, if taken as truth, would imply that Turner was an impediment. If you take What Zimmer has said about letting Turner run the offense that would add fuel to the fire.

My take is I don't know. All we can do is hope things are better than last year.

I figure this group deserves some benefit of the doubt. Last season there were probably entire braches of the route tree that were simply not feasible to run due to the state of the pass protection. I prefer to look at Diggs and Thielen and be happy with their productivity. Consider this: Last season, especially in the last 6-8 games every DC knew our pass protection was a disaster and so was our rushing attack. They KNEW we had to throw it short / intermediate. Despite that, Bradford/Diggs/Thielen were able to be as productive as they were. What happens if the DC has to respect the running game and the pass protection actually has downs where it resembles actual pass protection?

As far as Treadwell is concerned he continued to not see the field much even after Turner left the team. So in so far as his performance was concerned my guess is it was much more on him than it was on Norv. Can he turn it around and be better in 17? That is a big question.

I think it's safe to say we know what we have in Diggs and Thielen. Both are above average WR's in my book but not elite. If Treadwell can be above average too then I think it's a really good corps and they truly are underrated. Factor in Rudolph and Murray/Cook and you have a lot of guys that catch the ball well.

But Treadwell really needs to step up. Hopefully he's past the nagging injuries and some of the steep learning curve. Receivers usually hit their stride in their 3rd year but 15 yards or whatever clearly won't cut it. If he can be a 500 yard receiver and a red zone threat this year, then hit full potential next year, the Vikings should have some nice weapons.

Mothman wrote: I'm skeptical of both. I honestly think their WR corps is overrated, not underrated.

How are they overrated? I don't see many people at all that would call them anything more than a decent corp.

I don't even consider this a matter of underrated, overrated right now. I'd say they are one of the more unheralded groups as Diggs and Thielen provide a solid one-two punch, but to be anything more than that, they need #3 and 4 to be productive too. At least the very least your #3 guy.

I think this season will tell us exactly what kind of group they have.

PacificNorseWest wrote:How are they overrated? I don't see many people at all that would call them anything more than a decent corp.

I could be wrong but I get the impression a majority of Vikings fans see them as considerably better than "decent". However, whether they are overrated or underrated is obviously a matter of perspective since there is no universally agreed upon "rating" for them in the first place. Suffice to say, I've seen comments about them from both fans and the media that lead me to believe some people are overrating them.

I don't even consider this a matter of underrated, overrated right now. I'd say they are one of the more unheralded groups as Diggs and Thielen provide a solid one-two punch, but to be anything more than that, they need #3 and 4 to be productive too. At least the very least your #3 guy.

I think this season will tell us exactly what kind of group they have.[/quote]

I think last season did too. They're unheralded because they don't stand out from the crowd as a receiving corps. Perhaps that will change this year.

Uhh what? We were about 50 yards short of having 2 guys with over 1000 yard receiving. We haven't had that since Carter/Moss. How many teams in the league have TWO guys putting up those kinds of numbers? On top of that, how many did it on a team with the protection issues the Vikings had?

They may not be elite, alpha WR like Julio Jones, but I do not think it would be fair to call them average either.

mansquatch wrote:Uhh what? We were about 50 yards short of having 2 guys with over 1000 yard receiving.

It was more like 130. Diggs was almost 100 yards short of a 1000.

We haven't had that since Carter/Moss. How many teams in the league have TWO guys putting up those kinds of numbers?

Last year there were at least 8 other than the Vikings. New Orleans, Washington, Oakland and Denver all had more than one receiver actually go over 1000 yards. Detroit and Green Bay both had a pair of receivers who topped the 900 mark like Diggs and Thielen and in both cases, one of those receivers went over 1000 yards.

Seattle and Carolina both had 2 players (each) who fit that description too but in those cases, one of the receivers was a TE.

Anyway, it's not that unusual and there are obviously variables that impact it like how frequently players are targeted, whether the offense has an elite receiver who gets a disproportionate number of targets, etc.

They may not be elite, alpha WR like Julio Jones, but I do not think it would be fair to call them average either.

It's not only fair, it's accurate. Others may not see it this way but I don't think calling an NFL player average is an insult. A player who's in the middle of the pack at his starting position in the NFL is usually a good player.

Further explanation: in simple terms, there are 32 teams in the league which means there are basically 64 starting receivers. I realize some teams run a lot of 3 WR sets, some run 2 TE sets, etc., which is why I’m using the word “basically”. Statistically, Diggs and Thielen fall pretty squarely into the middle of that pack of 64 when it comes to receiving yardage (they were 34th and 27th respectively), which is one of the reasons I describe them as average. They are in the middle: not exceptional, not bad, just solid receivers. If one of them was a red zone scoring machine or something, that might change the equation a bit but neither player has been exceptional when it comes to scoring TDs. Last season, Diggs had 3 and Thielen had 5.

The frequently expressed opinion among Vikings fans that players like Thielen and Diggs are above average is one of the reasons I consider the receiving corps is overrated. They're a far cry from Carter and Moss. Thielen isn't another Jordy Nelson either, at least not yet. They were both good, solid starters last year.

Jim, you cited 10 teams out of 32 if i count the two with TEs. If they were average 16+ teams would have two. Since they do not, they are NOT average. 10 out 32 means they are in the top 1/3 of the league. If you exclude the teams with TE, they are in the 1/4.