Vikings Message Board.Com

Pondering Her Percy wrote:But where are you getting the whole average thing from?? I am willing to bet that you, me and anyone else on here don't watch enough Ravens games to truly evaluate him ourselves. He wouldnt have a very good pass blocking grade if he was average.

I get it from watching games, reading reports, etc. and I consider run blocking, not just pass blocking. I give them equal weight and his run blocking needs work. He's an above average pass blocker but his job isn't just pass blocking. To me, his skill set balances out enough to consider him an average tackle. He's certainly not elite.

He's been one of the more consistent tackles over the past few years when it comes to play and durability.

Even PFF, which seems to be the primary source of your assessment, appears to disagree with your description of consistency. Here's what they wrote about him just a year ago, during the 2015 season:

RT Ricky Wagner, Baltimore Ravens
2014 grade: +18.2
2015 grade: -14.6
After essentially redshirting as a rookie, Wagner broke out in his second season in Baltimore. The fifth round pick invested in him started to look like an absolute steal, as Wagner finished as our 11th overall tackle and first overall amongst RTs. The three knockdowns he gave up in 2014 was bested only by perennial all-pro Andrew Whitworth. What a difference a year makes. Wagner is now ranked 51st out of 60 qualifying tackles, having already allowed more combined knockdowns than he did in the entirety of 2014. Overall he’s allowed almost as many combined pressures in seven games (22) as he did in 16 games in 2015 (23). Couple the regression in pass protection with a run blocking grade that’s fallen from +2.4 to -10.9 and Wagner has gone from a strength to a real issue for Baltimore.

That's hardly a description of consistency.

Like I said, I feel like you're just plucking the average tag out of the air because he isn't a household name and you don't hear of him as much.

Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt. Now you know that's not what I'm doing.

Look, average isn't bad. It's just average and average performance would be a big upgrade for the Vikings. I just don't think they should pay elite prices for a non-elite player. If they can get him for less, I have no problem with it at all but there are quite a few teams who will be looking for tackle help so the market for his services could be competitive and drive the price up.

I think that at some point we all have to accept that you cant always take the route you want to the goal you want. I think, in a perfect world, we would all want to develop a Patriots-esque evergreen superbowl contender that builds exclusively via the draft and imbalanced trades in our favor. We have to set aside the extreme future for the near future. Do you want to win a Superbowl? Well for the first time in a long time we appear to have a defense capable of it and our offense shows the briefest of flashes. The universal consensus is we need to improve at Offensive line. So before you get into any other details the choice you have to make is; do you take advantage of your good defense and actual "consistency" at QB right away or do you hope that both of those things maintain some longevity while you sort out other issues.

Bottom line to me is nothing lasts as long as you expect in the NFL (sole exception being Brady). You go with what you have while you have it. I think in order to support your team you HAVE to overpay for OL talent. Does it suck? yeah. But so does wasting the remaining peak years of the other 40 players on the team. Its not even an "all in" situation 10 mil for someone in a perfect world you would only pay 6-7 isn't Franchise wrecking, we aren't going to become the Browns if we spend 5-8 million more per year on the Olineline then we would if everything broke our way. If you bail on AP, in 2 years we will probably be ahead cap wise even if we are overpaying for OL pieces.


To me. You HAVE to invest in the Oline, it cant be about "whats the going rate league wise for that talent level" It needs to be "Is this piece and upgrade and how much value does it add to our chances to win the Superbowl?"

Mothman wrote:
I get it from watching games, reading reports, etc. and I consider run blocking, not just pass blocking. I give them equal weight and his run blocking needs work. He's an above average pass blocker but his job isn't just pass blocking. To me, his skill set balances out enough to consider him an average tackle. He's certainly not elite.

Lets be honest, 1.) how many Baltimore Ravens games have you watched? 2.) If any, how many did you actually sit and focus on their RT. I'll admit it's been zero for me. I've watched a few games but havent shifted my focus to Wagner. I would imagine everyone on this board has done pretty much the same.

But this is what I've consistently been reading:

Wagner is a notch below the best right tackles in the league, but he is definitely above average at the position. Wagner has earned a B grade or above in ten of the 13 games he evaluated this season. Wagner has proven himself to be durable as well, only missing one game to injury in 2016, and two total regular season games over the last three seasons combined. Equally adept at run and pass blocking, Wagner would create a formidable bookend offensive tackle pairing with Ronnie Stanley if the Ravens are able to resign him.

Even PFF, which seems to be the primary source of your assessment, appears to disagree with your description of consistency. Here's what they wrote about him just a year ago, during the 2015 season:
I'll be honest I never came across that write-up. But it is interesting. Either way, I would take a guy that had two top-tier years to one bad year any day at 6-7 million

I dont see him getting 10 mill on the open market but like I said, who knows. It's so hard to ever predict what these guys are going to get. I would go up to as high as 8-8.5 to get him but that's just my personal opinion

IrishViking wrote:I think that at some point we all have to accept that you cant always take the route you want to the goal you want. I think, in a perfect world, we would all want to develop a Patriots-esque evergreen superbowl contender that builds exclusively via the draft and imbalanced trades in our favor. We have to set aside the extreme future for the near future. Do you want to win a Superbowl? Well for the first time in a long time we appear to have a defense capable of it and our offense shows the briefest of flashes. The universal consensus is we need to improve at Offensive line. So before you get into any other details the choice you have to make is; do you take advantage of your good defense and actual "consistency" at QB right away or do you hope that both of those things maintain some longevity while you sort out other issues.

Bottom line to me is nothing lasts as long as you expect in the NFL (sole exception being Brady). You go with what you have while you have it. I think in order to support your team you HAVE to overpay for OL talent. Does it suck? yeah. But so does wasting the remaining peak years of the other 40 players on the team. Its not even an "all in" situation 10 mil for someone in a perfect world you would only pay 6-7 isn't Franchise wrecking, we aren't going to become the Browns if we spend 5-8 million more per year on the Olineline then we would if everything broke our way. If you bail on AP, in 2 years we will probably be ahead cap wise even if we are overpaying for OL pieces.

To me. You HAVE to invest in the Oline, it cant be about "whats the going rate league wise for that talent level" It needs to be "Is this piece and upgrade and how much value does it add to our chances to win the Superbowl?"

They need to consider more than that. It would be foolish for the team to disregard long term consequences for short term gains unless they are really close to winning a Super Bowl and there's little to suggest that's the case. Indulging in such disregard is what leads to a crash like the Vikes experienced in 2011 and then to a long rebuilding process. Paying $10 million a year for an average tackle isn't going to be "franchise-wrecking" but the eager pursuit of short term goals with a disregard for long-term consequences can do lasting damage. Mistakes add up.

The idea that this Vikings team is close to winning a Super Bowl rests heavily on hope and faith. That's fine for fans who want to believe a championship is just around the next corner and maybe it is but an awful lot of people seem to be living in early January of 2015 and refusing to face the reality that the Vikings crashed and burned on their way to a .500 record last year. Their consistent QB has never won a playoff game. Their "elite" defense was brutal in meaningful games late in the season and struggled at least as much as they excelled after the bye week. They sure didn't look capable of winning a Super Bowl when they were allowing the Colts and Packers to score 72 points in 2 weeks while their remaining playoff hopes went bye-bye. The defense really sucked it up and played like an impending champion then, eh?

The Vikes aren't coming off a narrow loss in the conference championship. They're coming off a 3-8 finish. They had the league's worst running game. They haven't won a playoff game in 7 years. There's very little to suggest they're on the cusp of their first Super Bowl win.

I'm not asking for an "extreme future", just writing about what I consider smart management. I doubt anybody on the board has been a bigger advocate for investing in the offensive line than I have over the past 4 or 5 years. I'm not going to freak out about the team overpaying for Wagner if they do so but I hardly think it's unfair to question the wisdom of a hypothetical choice like that. I assume there's a limit on what price you'd consider wise for a player of his caliber so just how far does the philosophy you've suggested above extend?

Pondering Her Percy wrote:Lets be honest, 1.) how many Baltimore Ravens games have you watched? 2.) If any, how many did you actually sit and focus on their RT. I'll admit it's been zero for me. I've watched a few games but havent shifted my focus to Wagner. I would imagine everyone on this board has done pretty much the same.

Over Wagner's career? Probably at least 8 or 9. I like the Ravens. They're one of my favorite AFC teams.

I'll be honest I never came across that write-up. But it is interesting. Either way, I would take a guy that had two top-tier years to one bad year any day at 6-7 million

Note that I'm not arguing against that.

I dont see him getting 10 mill on the open market but like I said, who knows. It's so hard to ever predict what these guys are going to get. I would go up to as high as 8-8.5 to get him but that's just my personal opinion

It will be interesting to see what he gets.

Jim, who should they sign then? It is easy to tear other's work down. What do you thin they should do?

mansquatch wrote:Jim, who should they sign then? It is easy to tear other's work down.

Whose work did I "tear down"? All I did was point out that it's been reported Wagner could sign a deal as lucrative as $10+ million a year and I questioned if signing him at that kind of price would actually be a wise investment for the Vikings. I also referred to Wagner as an average player. I didn't expect any of that to be perceived as controversial or particularly confrontational.

What do you thin they should do?

Whatever they can within reason to improve the line. They should definitely draft multiple linemen. Consider trading for a proven starter if that's possible. Sign a free agent tackle or guard (or both). Raid a practice squad if it'll help. I just think there should be a limit to how much they're willing to spend on any player. I didn't think it would be such an affront to suggest paying a non-elite player elite money might be a questionable choice.

I'm not arguing against signing Wagner, just questioning how much they should be willing to pay for him before it becomes too much. Is there an upper limit or should they just hand him a blank check?

The only way out of the spiral of failure Spielman has constructed by neglecting our O line is to draft young talent very well. There arent going to be great prospects as FA available in any meaningful numbers since the whole league is looking for OL help. Instead it will take a great scouting staff to find the good college talent and a few yrs to let them learn/mature. I am NOT convinced we have the scouting staff to do this or the GM with the vision for it. Their track record is just not there. I hope he proves me wrong.

chicagopurple wrote:The only way out of the spiral of failure Spielman has constructed by neglecting our O line is to draft young talent very well. There arent going to be great prospects as FA available in any meaningful numbers since the whole league is looking for OL help. Instead it will take a great scouting staff to find the good college talent and a few yrs to let them learn/mature. I am NOT convinced we have the scouting staff to do this or the GM with the vision for it. Their track record is just not there. I hope he proves me wrong.

Yeah we're aware. You've mentioned that you aren't convinced about 10 times already in the past few months. Thanks for making it 11 Who cares about the track record. It's a new year. I think some guys out there are still holding what he did in Miami over his head to. Let's just wait and see for gods sakes. Just because he didn't draft the OL some wanted before doesn't mean he's incapable of doing it this year. You live and learn. Move on

As for the "whole league" need OL help, I would say that's false. At least when it comes to bigger prospects like Zeitler and Wagner. Tennessee, Oakland, Dallas, GB, Pitt, Washington, NE as well as a few others won't be signing Zeitler or Wagner so that's far from the whole league. I guess I just don't get the whole philosophy of saying "yeah they won't get any good prospects in FA". Why not??? Are we broke or something? There are only a select few teams out there that need OL help as bad as us. That list would consist of:

Vikings
Rams
49ers
Dolphins
Chargers
Seahawks

Now tell me the teams that are appealing? I would say us and Seattle. Maybe Miami but I'm still not sold on them. Granted those other teams have more cap room but they also have a lot more wholes than we do. So when you actually take the time to break it down, it's nowhere near the "whole league" and we definitely have a legitimate shot to land one.

Mothman wrote: They need to consider more than that. It would be foolish for the team to disregard long term consequences for short term gains unless they are really close to winning a Super Bowl and there's little to suggest that's the case. Indulging in such disregard is what leads to a crash like the Vikes experienced in 2011 and then to a long rebuilding process. Paying $10 million a year for an average tackle isn't going to be "franchise-wrecking" but the eager pursuit of short term goals with a disregard for long-term consequences can do lasting damage. Mistakes add up.

The idea that this Vikings team is close to winning a Super Bowl rests heavily on hope and faith. That's fine for fans who want to believe a championship is just around the next corner and maybe it is but an awful lot of people seem to be living in early January of 2015 and refusing to face the reality that the Vikings crashed and burned on their way to a .500 record last year. Their consistent QB has never won a playoff game. Their "elite" defense was brutal in meaningful games late in the season and struggled at least as much as they excelled after the bye week. They sure didn't look capable of winning a Super Bowl when they were allowing the Colts and Packers to score 72 points in 2 weeks while their remaining playoff hopes went bye-bye. The defense really sucked it up and played like an impending champion then, eh?

The Vikes aren't coming off a narrow loss in the conference championship. They're coming off a 3-8 finish. They had the league's worst running game. They haven't won a playoff game in 7 years. There's very little to suggest they're on the cusp of their first Super Bowl win.

I'm not asking for an "extreme future", just writing about what I consider smart management. I doubt anybody on the board has been a bigger advocate for investing in the offensive line than I have over the past 4 or 5 years. I'm not going to freak out about the team overpaying for Wagner if they do so but I hardly think it's unfair to question the wisdom of a hypothetical choice like that. I assume there's a limit on what price you'd consider wise for a player of his caliber so just how far does the philosophy you've suggested above extend?

There are definite limits. I feel like there is this growing sentiment that ANY time ANY team overpays for ANYONE they are "ALL IN" and Going "ALL IN" leads to

My point is that there is a middle ground in this case. We desperately need help at Oline in 3 spots. We all generally agree that even league average play is going to be a big step up. we have roughly 20 million in Cap space this year and 10% of our Cap is tied up in a 32 year old running back.

Lets say in our perfect world you have average OL fillers Mr. A Mr. B. Mr. C. They cost us an average total of 5 million each. In the real world they end up costing us a few million more each because we are desperate and everyone who follows football knows it. It ends up costing us 20 million a year for the 3 versus 15 million.

So. If we accept that those 3 or 2 or 1 player(s) are a dramatic improvement and you do consider the long term health of your organization and don't something INSANE, it would be fine. I don't believe that the best NFL franchise never overpay, I think they are careful so they can overpay when they have a need that NEEDS to be filled.

Now back to our Oline. I agree that they (The olinmen) may not be the only thing keeping us from a superbowl. But they are the biggest most obvious issue on the team. IF you don't fix them then they continue to overshadow and cover up any other potential issues we may have; DOES Bradford have a slow release? We cant tell, he keeps getting sacked. CAN AP still be viable in the run game? We cant tell, there is always a free runner every play. IS the defense up to the task? We cant tell, they are always on the field due to 3 and outs via the Oline.

To your question. I would say that in my Opinion, roughly 75% of our available Cap space after the adjust and renegotiate contracts could be tied up in any number of Olinemen (preferably 2) and it wouldn't be an overpay. Especially anticipating the rapid removal of APs 18,000,000 cap hit.

IrishViking wrote:There are definite limits. I feel like there is this growing sentiment that ANY time ANY team overpays for ANYONE they are "ALL IN" and Going "ALL IN" leads to

My point is that there is a middle ground in this case. We desperately need help at Oline in 3 spots. We all generally agree that even league average play is going to be a big step up. we have roughly 20 million in Cap space this year and 10% of our Cap is tied up in a 32 year old running back.

Lets say in our perfect world you have average OL fillers Mr. A Mr. B. Mr. C. They cost us an average total of 5 million each. In the real world they end up costing us a few million more each because we are desperate and everyone who follows football knows it. It ends up costing us 20 million a year for the 3 versus 15 million.

So. If we accept that those 3 or 2 or 1 player(s) are a dramatic improvement and you do consider the long term health of your organization and don't something INSANE, it would be fine. I don't believe that the best NFL franchise never overpay, I think they are careful so they can overpay when they have a need that NEEDS to be filled.

Now back to our Oline. I agree that they (The olinmen) may not be the only thing keeping us from a superbowl. But they are the biggest most obvious issue on the team. IF you don't fix them then they continue to overshadow and cover up any other potential issues we may have; DOES Bradford have a slow release? We cant tell, he keeps getting sacked. CAN AP still be viable in the run game? We cant tell, there is always a free runner every play. IS the defense up to the task? We cant tell, they are always on the field due to 3 and outs via the Oline.

To your question. I would say that in my Opinion, roughly 75% of our available Cap space after the adjust and renegotiate contracts could be tied up in any number of Olinemen (preferably 2) and it wouldn't be an overpay. Especially anticipating the rapid removal of APs 18,000,000 cap hit.

I understand your argument and I agree there's a middle ground. ALL I was trying to do in the first place is ask how much is too much.

well, considering we are going exactly Nowhere without some good OL.....I think they are going to be worth more then market value....we are negotiation from a point of weakness and all the agents will know it. Ownership is just going to have to bite the bullet, IF they are truly committed to competing.

Pondering Her Percy wrote:As for the "whole league" need OL help, I would say that's false. At least when it comes to bigger prospects like Zeitler and Wagner. Tennessee, Oakland, Dallas, GB, Pitt, Washington, NE as well as a few others won't be signing Zeitler or Wagner so that's far from the whole league. I guess I just don't get the whole philosophy of saying "yeah they won't get any good prospects in FA". Why not??? Are we broke or something? There are only a select few teams out there that need OL help as bad as us. That list would consist of:

Vikings
Rams
49ers
Dolphins
Chargers
Seahawks

Now tell me the teams that are appealing? I would say us and Seattle. Maybe Miami but I'm still not sold on them. Granted those other teams have more cap room but they also have a lot more wholes than we do. So when you actually take the time to break it down, it's nowhere near the "whole league" and we definitely have a legitimate shot to land one.

The Panthers and Jets could also be interested in Wagner. As for the Dolphins, whether you're personally sold on them or not isn't really the point when considering their potential appeal to free agents. They were a 10-6 team last year, they play in a nice climate and, if I'm not mistaken, Florida has no personal income tax, which can increase it's appeal to players.

As we all know, money talks too. In the end, it's not a question of which teams need OL help the most but rather which teams will be seeking it at all and the reasons a team appeals to a free agent can vary. Anybody who wants to get in the competition for a player can do so. That includes the Vikings, of course, and they may be able to land a free agent lineman or too. However, I don't think any of us should doubt the market will be competitive for the top free agents available.

Mothman wrote: The Panthers and Jets could also be interested in Wagner. As for the Dolphins, whether you're personally sold on them or not isn't really the point when considering their potential appeal to free agents. They were a 10-6 team last year, they play in a nice climate and, if I'm not mistaken, Florida has no personal income tax, which can increase it's appeal to players.

As we all know, money talks too. In the end, it's not a question of which teams need OL help the most but rather which teams will be seeking it at all and the reasons a team appeals to a free agent can vary. Anybody who wants to get in the competition for a player can do so. That includes the Vikings, of course, and they may be able to land a free agent lineman or too. However, I don't think any of us should doubt the market will be competitive for the top free agents available.

Oh yeah there is no doubt it will be competitive. It's just when someone says the whole league needs OL help is an overreaction. Especially when it comes to higher priced ones.

Mothman wrote:Whatever they can within reason to improve the line. They should definitely draft multiple linemen. Consider trading for a proven starter if that's possible. Sign a free agent tackle or guard (or both). Raid a practice squad if it'll help.

Given the weak OL class and the lack of experience in a pro style systems in the college game, This could be the answer. Guys with the physical tools who come into the league raw and get a year or two on a practice squad might be the best value available to improve an OL in shambles.