Vikings to trade up

Post by **Mothman** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 7:18 am

mrc44 wrote:I am pretty sure I wasn't misreading the statement where he had said that Allen's muscles around the knee were only at 75%, which mean he still has a quarter of the way to go on muscle development.... that doesn't happen overnight, come on now. Lets not act like he is ready to step on the field against guys that are bigger, faster and stronger than what he has ever faced!

He doesn't have to step on a field and play in pads against bigger, faster, stronger players for 3 months. If the muscle is back to 75% now, it's not likely to keep him from playing when he needs to play and will almost certainly be at 100% by the time training camp begins. He can work out and practice now so he'd probably be able to participate in mini-camps and OTAs.

Texas Vike · Post by **Texas Vike** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:03 am

If there's anything to this rumor I'd place the probability on these two scenarios:

1. Move ahead of the Bears to take Te'o.
2. Move ahead of the Rams' first pick to take Austin.

PurpleJarl · Post by **PurpleJarl** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 10:43 am

I really don't know how I feel about these rumors. If Spielman is really so high on how deep this draft is, then giving up two picks for a higher one doesn't make any sense. Or if he going to trade up then he must not think there is much talent in this draft so all the other stuff is just blowing smoke. Pretty much what it comes down to is which one is Spielman fibbing on?

mondry · Post by **mondry** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 11:46 am

PurpleJarl wrote:I really don't know how I feel about these rumors. If Spielman is really so high on how deep this draft is, then giving up two picks for a higher one doesn't make any sense. Or if he going to trade up then he must not think there is much talent in this draft so all the other stuff is just blowing smoke. Pretty much what it comes down to is which one is Spielman fibbing on?

Well there is one other possibility. The draft is SO deep that he feels he can package a couple picks together to get a true difference maker AND still get solid players in the later rounds. Sure we have a lot of needs and lack of depth in a lot of places but even we probably don't need all 11 draft picks to make the team. (or whatever we have now) So if you went from 11 picks to say 8 picks, but substantially improve the quality of those 8 players in doing so, it's not a bad idea.

mansquatch · Post by **mansquatch** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 1:24 pm

I agree Mondry, if they have a guy whom they have scounted and think he'll be an immediate difference maker, then by all means, go get him.

An example might the Julio Jones deal Atlanta made a few years ago. They felt he was the missing ingredient on offense, and for the most part he has been. Of course one has to ask how their defense would be if they still had the picks to spend on Julio Jones, but I don't think anyone considers Jones a bad pick.

PurpleJarl · Post by **PurpleJarl** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 1:30 pm

That's a very good point. But it begs the questions, is there any "sure thing" stud in this draft that would warrant bailing on potentially TWO sure things since this draft is so apparently very deep? From what I have seen and read there really isn't someone so far beyond everyone else it would warrant giving up two first round picks to get. Or even a first and a second. I wouldn't even be upset if we didn't draft a WR until the second/early third.

Post by **Cliff** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 1:57 pm

PurpleJarl wrote:That's a very good point. But it begs the questions, is there any "sure thing" stud in this draft that would warrant bailing on potentially TWO sure things since this draft is so apparently very deep? From what I have seen and read there really isn't someone so far beyond everyone else it would warrant giving up two first round picks to get. Or even a first and a second. I wouldn't even be upset if we didn't draft a WR until the second/early third.

Who said anything about them trading both their firsts or a first and a second? They've got two 4th rounders too. I bet if they wanted to move up it would be a few spots by spending one of their lower picks ... not into the top 10.

PurpleJarl · Post by **PurpleJarl** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:17 pm

Okay, but who is in those 11 spots 11-22 that are better than anything else we could get without trade a pic? I am not against it at all, don't misunderstand, I just am not really sold on anyone out of the top 5 minus the inevitable QB reach actually being a sure thing enough to trade at all.

Eli · Post by **Eli** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:50 pm

PurpleJarl wrote:Okay, but who is in those 11 spots 11-22 that are better than anything else we could get without trade a pic? I am not against it at all, don't misunderstand, I just am not really sold on anyone out of the top 5 minus the inevitable QB reach actually being a sure thing enough to trade at all.

I'm not in favor of moving up, but the Vikings could get Dee Milliner, Xavier Rhodes or D.J. Hayden in that range. All three are likely off the board by #23. They might also be interested in jumping past the Bears, who have #20, to get the linebacker they want. Lots of possible strategies.

dkoby · Post by **dkoby** » Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:57 pm

I think that if anything, Speilman will trade down out of one of the first round slots with a team looking to move back into the first round. The Vikings are in a perfect position in that respect. Pick up another 2-3 picks later on or next year. I hope he gets an offer he just can't refuse.

OJVIKE · Post by **OJVIKE** » Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:52 pm

what is this about.....rd 1 pic 7..from arizona.......WHAT?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/min

Post by **dead_poet** » Wed Apr 24, 2013 1:57 pm

OJVIKE wrote:what is this about.....rd 1 pic 7..from arizona.......WHAT?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/min

No way we have three first-round picks without giving up any.

Funkytown · Post by **Funkytown** » Wed Apr 24, 2013 2:01 pm

OJVIKE wrote:what is this about.....rd 1 pic 7..from arizona.......WHAT?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/min

Very odd. Only way this would happen is if we gave up someone awesome. That someone awesome isn't going anywhere.

Yahoo is crazy.

PacificNorseWest · Post by **PacificNorseWest** » Wed Apr 24, 2013 2:05 pm

Typo?

VikingLord · Post by **VikingLord** » Wed Apr 24, 2013 3:06 pm

OJVIKE wrote:what is this about.....rd 1 pic 7..from arizona.......WHAT?
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/teams/min

That's the pick Minnesota got from that game against Arizona where the Cardinals threw it into the corner of the endzone from 4th-and-forever with no time left on the clock to win and knock the Vikings out of the playoffs. After reviewing that play, the league awarded the Vikings a future 1st rounder of the Cardinals to mitigate the extensive depression that fell over Vikingdom after that loss. However, the "catch" was that the Cardinals could choose the pick and year they would hand over their 1st rounder, and the Cardinals strategically chose a year when there is no tangible difference between the talent available at pick #7 and pick #32 in the 1st round.

* Disclaimer - the above is fictional. Any resemblance to real events, persons, pro football teams, or NFL drafts is unintentional. The author of this post is absolved of any responsibility for readers of this post to actually believe the Vikings somehow obtained a top-10 pick in any draft with zero compensation to the team that owns the pick.

Vikings Message Board.Com

Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up

Re: Vikings to trade up