Vikings Message Board.Com

Mothman wrote: Yeah! Don't you dare, Steve!

Joshua Garnett was sitting right there and went just a few picks later. Jason Spriggs and Cody Whitehair were available too. If they felt that pick was too high for one of them, perhaps they could have managed a trade down.

There are almost always other options. It's not like they were required to draft Treadwell, although he could turn out to be a very good player for them in the long run. Only time will tell.

Mothman wrote:
I understand. I was just trying to lighten the mood since it was getting a bit intense (after you posted, not in your post).

We're just using the word "project" differently. I don't attach a particularly negative connotation to the word myself. As I see it, project players can be as worthy of a draft pick as players who are further along in their development and they can pay big dividends down the road. To me, the main downside in such cases is the additional time it takes to develop the player but they don't necessarily have to be a "boom or bust" type with a significant downside.

Others may disagree with this take on the term but I think there's a spectrum along which a player can be considered a project. On that spectrum, there are short term projects and long term projects and I say that recognizing most rookies face some learning curve. I'm trying to differentiate between rookies who can step in and make an immediate impact with significant playing time and a rookie like Treadwell, who truly seems to need the development time before making much of an on-field contribution. All rookies face a learning curve but I think we can agree it's steeper for some than others. I think Treadwell is a short term project. Barring an unexpected explosion in playing time and productivity from him in December, it sure doesn't look to me like he's going to offer much return on investment in his first season.

Pondering Her Percy wrote:Garnett has been a healthy scratch most of the season however is pushing to start now because of Davis retiring again. Spriggs is an absolute mystery and hasn't seen the field in GB. Whitehair is a center that can play guard. Center isn't our problem since we have the #6 center according to PFF and have Easton who showed he's quite solid. He wasn't going to unseat Boone. So his only hope would've been Fusco. However how do any of those lineman help our current situation?

Interior isn't a problem outside of Fusco who was given another shot to come back to what he was before at RG but it didn't work out.

It's not as easy as many think. You named 3 guys. Two of which are mysteries and one that's at a position opposite of where our main struggles are and that's offensive tackle.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: My thing is Patterson was labeled a "project" which he definitely was. But him and Treadwell were completely different coming out and Treadwell was a much more polished WR than Patterson was. So that's why I don't understand how those two can both fall under that category

Mothman wrote:
They could help by infusing good, young talent into a line that needs it and moving the Vikes in the direction of building a younger, better offensive line. Garnett's playing well of late. He was a good prospect. Whitehair is not a "center who can play guard". He played inside and outside in college and projected as a guard in the NFL. He just has the versatility to play center as well. How could a player who was able to come in and start immediately and who has literally played both tackle positions, guard and center in his football career have helped the Vikings this season? Gee, I wonder...

Spriggs is no mystery. He's a 4 year college starter with excellent athleticism who needs to get stronger. Since the Vikes don't have a starting tackle signed for next season it shouldn't be hard to grasp how drafting someone who might be ready for that role in 2017 might have been beneficial. It certainly shouldn't be hard to imagine how he might have been an upgrade as a backup over T.J. Clemmings, who might be the worst tackle I've ever seen in a Vikings uniform.

Mothman wrote:
They could help by infusing good, young talent into a line that needs it and moving the Vikes in the direction of building a younger, better offensive line. Garnett's playing well of late. He was a good prospect. Whitehair is not a "center who can play guard". He played inside and outside in college and projected as a guard in the NFL. He just has the versatility to play center as well. How could a player who was able to come in and start immediately and who has literally played both tackle positions, guard and center in his football career have helped the Vikings this season? Gee, I wonder...


Spriggs is no mystery. He's a 4 year college starter with excellent athleticism who needs to get stronger. Since the Vikes don't have a starting tackle signed for next season it shouldn't be hard to grasp how drafting someone who might be ready for that role in 2017 might have been beneficial. It certainly shouldn't be hard to imagine how he might have been an upgrade as a backup over T.J. Clemmings, who might be the worst tackle I've ever seen in a Vikings uniform.

Of course it's a freakin' problem. You just acknowledged it.

For Pete's sake, stop saying "It's not as easy as many think" when I'm not saying it's easy.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Garnett has been a healthy scratch most of the season however is pushing to start now because of Davis retiring again. Spriggs is an absolute mystery and hasn't seen the field in GB. Whitehair is a center that can play guard. Center isn't our problem since we have the #6 center according to PFF and have Easton who showed he's quite solid. He wasn't going to unseat Boone. So his only hope would've been Fusco. However how do any of those lineman help our current situation? Interior isn't a problem outside of Fusco who was given another shot to come back to what he was before at RG but it didn't work out. Spriggs could be another Clemmings for all we know. And he was the only tackle taken from #23 all through round 2. So it was either him or nobody in the first two rounds.

It's not as easy as many think. You named 3 guys. Two of which are mysteries and one that's at a position opposite of where our main struggles are and that's offensive tackle.

Pondering Her Percy wrote:Whitehair is 6'4!!!! You think he could all of the sudden slide over to tackle in the NFL as a 6'4 offensive lineman?? No. Is there even an active NFL OT that is 6'4? So yeah, Whitehair is an interior lineman in the NFL

As for Spriggs, you could've said the same thing about the last however many first round OTs in the past 2 years. Yet 90% of them havent panned out, are getting benched, or playing average to below average. Spriggs is a mystery until he gets onto an NFL field. You can sit here and talk about all the good things TJ Clemmings or any other tackle did in college. However, it means nothing when they are on an NFL field. Just because Spriggs "was a 4 year starter with excellent athleticism" doesn't mean it translates. So yes, he's a mystery.

Did I say "Jim thinks it's easy"????? No. I was referring to people on the board. Not necessarily you. Pump the brakes

Jordysghost wrote:Spriggs was recently forced into action at G due to injury, and he played absolutely fantastically, both against Eagles Fletcher Cox and the Texans.

Pondering Her Percy wrote:@Jim

Of course they are all mysteries. But you've given me two inside options which wouldn't have fixed much this year and an outside option that was our only hope that we probably would've had to reach for. I'm looking for tackles. And there was one option for us and who knows what he would've done.

And I simply was saying that people act like drafting OL was some easy thing that Spielman missed on last year. All I hear is "shoulda drafted OL" but then don't back it up. That's what's tiring if you ask me.

Pondering Her Percy wrote: Whitehair is 6'4!!!! You think he could all of the sudden slide over to tackle in the NFL as a 6'4 offensive lineman?? No. Is there even an active NFL OT that is 6'4? So yeah, Whitehair is an interior lineman in the NFL.

As for Spriggs, you could've said the same thing about the last however many first round OTs in the past 2 years. Yet 90% of them havent panned out, are getting benched, or playing average to below average. Spriggs is a mystery until he gets onto an NFL field. You can sit here and talk about all the good things TJ Clemmings or any other tackle did in college. However, it means nothing when they are on an NFL field. Just because Spriggs "was a 4 year starter with excellent athleticism" doesn't mean it translates. So yes, he's a mystery.
I'm putting it in comparison to the OT problem. So relax. I can be ok with Fusco for another year. I cant be ok with no OTs worth a damn.
Did I say "Jim thinks it's easy"????? No. I was referring to people on the board. Not necessarily you. Pump the brakes

Mothman wrote: One option is an option. That's the point.

You're looking for tackles but I want to see them build a better offensive line across the board, not just this year but in the future. When you responded to Steve, you wrote "Don't dare say OL because there wasn't much of any sitting at 23", not "don't say tackle" so I gave you some OL options, all of whom were legitimate choices available to the Vikings.

I just backed it up. What do you think we're talking about? I gave you the names of o-linemen worth drafting, o-linemen they could have drafted, one of whom was selected just a few picks later. If you only want tackles, that's a criteria you've chosen to impose on things, not one the rest of us have agreed upon. You wanted options. You've been given options. If you don't like them, that's fine but they were available and let's not forget that "Trader Rick" could have potentially moved up or down in the draft to get someone too.

This has been true for a number of drafts. The line didn't end up in it's current state because it was impossible to do anything to prevent it's deterioration.

CbusVikesFan wrote:Hey Jim,
didn't you know that all of these players are PHP'S children? You would think so the way he defends them. But I do admire the passion though.