Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Trading Down from #25 More Likely?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings
View previous topic :: View next topic  

What to do with #25?
Select BPA regardless of position
31%
 31%  [ 11 ]
Select Top WR
5%
 5%  [ 2 ]
Select Top CB
2%
 2%  [ 1 ]
Select Top DT
2%
 2%  [ 1 ]
Trade Up to get guy we want
2%
 2%  [ 1 ]
Trade Down and get more ammo
54%
 54%  [ 19 ]
Total Votes : 35

Author Message
Purplexing


Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 4443
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Klomp wrote:
jam8891 wrote:
Absolutely HATE the idea of trading down. I agree with the people that said stay put and get the BPA. Why trade one of the NFL's best players for such a steep price if your just going to trade it away? We traded him for that 1st rd pick. We wanted that 1st rd pick. Why wouldn't we use that 1st rd pick on a 1st rd talent. Makes no sense to trade back for a couple of lesser talents. Stay where we are and do what we can with the picks that we were fortunate enough to accumulate. Don't go messing with it. Every HUGE need that we might have can be filled with the selections already in our possession, 2 1st rounders a 2nd rounder and a 3rd rounder. Idk about many of you but I would rather have two 1st, than two 2nd or two 3rd rounders. DO NOT TRADE (hopefully)


The depth of this draft is deep. You can probably get someone at 48 as good as someone at 18. If you trade down a few spots, you can pick up additional assets while still drafting the same caliber of player.

I don't really want to trade down either, but I can see why others view it as a valid option.


I doubt that the quality of the talent 30 slots lower than 18 is nearly equal to that at 18 for a particular position.

You are correct that there is good talent at 48, but perhaps not for the particular positions that the Vikings need to upgrade; e.g. MLB, WR, DT.

I again ask my rhetorical question: why do the Vikings need more than 11 picks? There are 11 men on each side of the line of scrimmage. Eleven picks would conceivably enable the Vikings to replace an entire unit. But why? Their record was 10-6 last year. There are not that many starting roles that are in dire need of an upgrade or replacement.
_________________

When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
minnvikes22


Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 3179
Location: PA
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 9:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Purplexing wrote:
Klomp wrote:
jam8891 wrote:
Absolutely HATE the idea of trading down. I agree with the people that said stay put and get the BPA. Why trade one of the NFL's best players for such a steep price if your just going to trade it away? We traded him for that 1st rd pick. We wanted that 1st rd pick. Why wouldn't we use that 1st rd pick on a 1st rd talent. Makes no sense to trade back for a couple of lesser talents. Stay where we are and do what we can with the picks that we were fortunate enough to accumulate. Don't go messing with it. Every HUGE need that we might have can be filled with the selections already in our possession, 2 1st rounders a 2nd rounder and a 3rd rounder. Idk about many of you but I would rather have two 1st, than two 2nd or two 3rd rounders. DO NOT TRADE (hopefully)


The depth of this draft is deep. You can probably get someone at 48 as good as someone at 18. If you trade down a few spots, you can pick up additional assets while still drafting the same caliber of player.

I don't really want to trade down either, but I can see why others view it as a valid option.


I doubt that the quality of the talent 30 slots lower than 18 is nearly equal to that at 18 for a particular position.

You are correct that there is good talent at 48, but perhaps not for the particular positions that the Vikings need to upgrade; e.g. MLB, WR, DT.

I again ask my rhetorical question: why do the Vikings need more than 11 picks? There are 11 men on each side of the line of scrimmage. Eleven picks would conceivably enable the Vikings to replace an entire unit. But why? Their record was 10-6 last year. There are not that many starting roles that are in dire need of an upgrade or replacement.



You are right, we have 11 picks. Maybe, 4 of them might actually help this team.. We have 7 picks in the last 4 rounds. How often do teams hit on late round picks? I can think of 2 on our team. Walsh last year ( in the 6th round ) and Sullivan. ( 2008 6th round ) The rest usually don't even make the team.. I'm actually praying for the Vikings to move up in the 3rd ( by using there 2 4th round picks and maybe even a 6th ) and land a player that falls in the draft.

Your right, we went 10-6 last year. So, maybe getting 5 picks in the 1st 3 rounds might be the best way to go.. A better chance of landing a starter in those rounds..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wcblack34


Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 6112
Location: Anywhere but Wisconsin.
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 9:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Klomp wrote:
jam8891 wrote:
Absolutely HATE the idea of trading down. I agree with the people that said stay put and get the BPA. Why trade one of the NFL's best players for such a steep price if your just going to trade it away? We traded him for that 1st rd pick. We wanted that 1st rd pick. Why wouldn't we use that 1st rd pick on a 1st rd talent. Makes no sense to trade back for a couple of lesser talents. Stay where we are and do what we can with the picks that we were fortunate enough to accumulate. Don't go messing with it. Every HUGE need that we might have can be filled with the selections already in our possession, 2 1st rounders a 2nd rounder and a 3rd rounder. Idk about many of you but I would rather have two 1st, than two 2nd or two 3rd rounders. DO NOT TRADE (hopefully)


The depth of this draft is deep. You can probably get someone at 48 as good as someone at 18. If you trade down a few spots, you can pick up additional assets while still drafting the same caliber of player.

I don't really want to trade down either, but I can see why others view it as a valid option.


If you can get as good a player at 48 as at 18, then why would any team want to trade up to 25? Especially when if you're at 49 or 50 your could get a player that is hypothetically on par with a guy at 18 by just trading up 3 or 4 spots?

I think that the fact that this is a deep draft hurts our prospects of getting appropriate value for trading back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 74398
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 11:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks to dropping 20 spots on the draft chart with their 3-13 transformation into a 10-6 playoff team, the Vikings are currently slated to pick at Nos. 23 and 25 on April 25. Barring a trade upward, they’re going to be sitting and waiting for a long time as other teams take their slice out of the draft pie while the Vikings hope that a couple of players they covet remain.

It’s a much different scenario than the fan base witnessed a year ago, so the numbers crunchers have to come into play. While each draft class is different, the priorities teams put on players remains the same. What two positions typically dominate the first round of the draft? Defensive end and offensive tackle. Why? For the same reason: teams that don’t get many sacks look for a pass-rushing end and teams that allow too many sacks look to upgrade at tackle.

If things remain as they currently are, 22 picks will be gone when the Vikings are “on the clock.” From the looks of things, this year will continue the thematic trend of offensive and defensive linemen dominating the first round. From the Vikings’ perspective, the best news might be that the positions most dominant in the early stages of the draft – offensive tackle and defensive end – aren’t front-burner draft needs for the Vikings. The more of them that come off the board before Nos. 23 and 25, the better for the Vikings’ chances of filling their own most pressing needs.

http://min.scout.com/2/1281486.html
_________________


Webmaster wrote:
Can we knock off all the nonsense and stick to football?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
meixdaddy_10


Joined: 06 Jan 2007
Posts: 588
Location: Mankato, MN
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wcblack34 wrote:


If you can get as good a player at 48 as at 18, then why would any team want to trade up to 25? Especially when if you're at 49 or 50 your could get a player that is hypothetically on par with a guy at 18 by just trading up 3 or 4 spots?

I think that the fact that this is a deep draft hurts our prospects of getting appropriate value for trading back.


I think the topic of trading back into the 1st RD this year really only applies to the QB's. Teams arent going to trade up into RD1 for a WR or DT, etc. when they can get essentially the same guy at their pick and not have to give up any other resources.

But because of this years crop of QB's teams will be more inclined to select an elite player at a different position of need at the beginning of the round and then try to trade back into the round to get the guy they covet.

In normal years the thought wouldnt have even crossed my mind about trading back as it is so hard to do. But again it goes back to the point of that 5th year of control on players drafted in the 1st Round, because of the new CBA. In years past it wasnt a concern at all and most teams wouldnt try to trade up.

For teams looking for those WR's or DT's etc it would be more compelling to trade back and get extra compensation, while teams that want to get their guy will give up something to get it.
_________________
AD is hotter than Madonna in a pointy bra!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Klomp


Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Posts: 6978
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wcblack34 wrote:
If you can get as good a player at 48 as at 18, then why would any team want to trade up to 25?


If you are targeting one specific player you know won't be there when you pick.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Purplexing


Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 4443
Location: Outside Valhalla, looking in.
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Klomp wrote:
wcblack34 wrote:
If you can get as good a player at 48 as at 18, then why would any team want to trade up to 25?


If you are targeting one specific player you know won't be there when you pick.


Why is there a need to target one specific player when the talent is (assumed to be) fairly equal over 20 or 30 slots?

Alternately:
If a team desperately wanted to trade up from round 2 for a specific player in round 1, they should just take him with their 1st round pick.
_________________

When we stop to think about it, most folks behavior isn't perplexing after all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 48033
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Purplexing wrote:
Klomp wrote:
wcblack34 wrote:
If you can get as good a player at 48 as at 18, then why would any team want to trade up to 25?


If you are targeting one specific player you know won't be there when you pick.


Why is there a need to target one specific player when the talent is (assumed to be) fairly equal over 20 or 30 slots?

Alternately:
If a team desperately wanted to trade up from round 2 for a specific player in round 1, they should just take him with their 1st round pick.


Some team's may want more high picks, especially one who is in more of a win now position or the coach is motivated to move future picks for the present. John Fox was known for doing that in Carolina. I could see the Saints making a similar jump form the third to the first since they lack a 2nd and are transitioning to a 3-4 defense.

Also, the draft may be deep in several spots but a certain team may require a certain skill set for what they are looking for. When you break down the WRs for example, its easy to see a difference rather than grouping them together. If a team is looking for a big, tall, vertical threat, your options are much more limited. therefore, a team may go out of there way to add that player (say Justin Hunter for example, he is very different compared to some of the other receivers in this class).

Teams trade up all the time to target a specific player deemed an ideal fit. Whether or not they deal with the Vikings, remains to be seen.

Last year was considered a deep draft as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Klomp


Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Posts: 6978
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2013 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Purplexing wrote:
Alternately:
If a team desperately wanted to trade up from round 2 for a specific player in round 1, they should just take him with their 1st round pick.


First response:
Who said anything about a team trading up from round two?

I think it would be something more like the NE/CIN trade last year. Bengals traded down from 21 to 27, and picked up an additional (very late) 3rd. There were 3 DEs taken within the next 7 picks, but the Patriots wanted their guy so they traded up to get him.

If we trade down, it would likely be for a pick somewhere 28-32, or within the first couple picks in the 2nd.

Second response:
So you think if a team like KC wants to trade up for a specific player...Sylvester Williams, for example...that they should take him #1 overall instead?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CriminalMind


Joined: 25 Aug 2011
Posts: 4985
Location: Toronto, CA
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2013 9:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There will always be teams who are trying to trade up, (to the bottom of round 1), but the compensation they are offering might not be that enticing.

I rather just sit and pick our 2 1st round picks, and then try and move up in the 3rd round (with our 4th/5th).

My goal in this draft would be to get 4 starters (1st, 1st, 2nd, "high 3rd"), if not than 3 immediate starters, 2 future starting quality, and 3-4 roster depth additions.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
disaacs


Joined: 13 Dec 2005
Posts: 22900
Location: Brownbackistan
PostPosted: Tue Apr 09, 2013 10:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Purplexing wrote:
Why is there a need to target one specific player when the talent is (assumed to be) fairly equal over 20 or 30 slots?

Alternately:
If a team desperately wanted to trade up from round 2 for a specific player in round 1, they should just take him with their 1st round pick.


Just because the talent overall is fairly equal overall doesn't mean the talent at a certain position is equal. It could be that a team is targeting an OT and the talent between Joeckel, Fisher and Johnson at the top and then Fluker is pretty big.
_________________


Thx to Uncle Buck!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
AP_ALL_DAY_28


Joined: 02 Dec 2009
Posts: 4978
Location: Central Coast, California
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I wanted to post in this topic all week, but I've been busy. Smile

For anybody saying that they Vikings shouldn't trade down because tey only have X amounts of needs I gotta disagree. Some of those positions of needs like CB & WR they need 2 of those.

There's no questions what our biggest needs are...

1. ILB
2. WR
3. DT
4. CB

But they also have other needs like...

5. OG
6. S
7. DE

Middle Linebacker
Huge need & one should be drafted in the 1st or 2nd.



Defensive Tackle
Everybody's aware that DT is one of Minnesota's biggest needs and should be addressed in the 1st, but no later than the 3rd round.


Wide Receiver
Even with the signing of Greg Jennings they still could use a WR and one should be drafted in the 1st or 2nd round & another later in the draft. Jennings will be 30 and he's had some injuries the past couple of seasons.


Cornerback
A corner should be drafted in the 2nd-4th round & another should be taken later 5th-7th round. They have to come away with 2 corners IMO. Winfield signed with Seattle, Chris Cook is a pretty damn good CB when healthy, but that's the problem with the guy. You can't expect him to play all 16 games, he's going to miss some games. Josh Robinson was a rookie last year and has yet to prove himself, but he can definitely improve in his second season though. And Jefferson is a t best a dime corner. In this division having many quality cornerbacks is a must.


Offensive Guard
Guard is a huge need for this team, Charlie Johnson & Brandon Fusco were terrible last season. Also AP was a couple yards short of a record breaking season & both guards were below average, imagine how much better Peterson would be if had a good guard, that's a very scary thought. They have to at least draft 1 guard, I think 2 should be drafted though.


Safety
Safety might not be as big of a need as some of their other needs, but safety should be addressed as well. Last year they traded up in the 1st to grab Harrison Smith & look at how one man made the entire secondary look so much better. Imagine if we paired another young safety with Smith. I definitely think a safety should be drafted anywhere from the 3rd or 6t round.


Defensive End
Although defensive end is not an immediate need for this upcoming season the postion should be addressed because at the end of 2014 Allen, Robison, & Griffin will all be free agents.

There's no question I think they should trade down, this draft classi is very deep at a lot of positions.
_________________
NBA: Lakers
NFL: Vikings
MLB: Indians
NCAA: Trojans
NHL: Kings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 48033
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

^ Good post.

But the reality with two of those needs above (DT and OG), any DT drafted will likely be on the field a quarter of the time given the heavy rotation that will be used. Additionally, Guard may be a need bu it is one that MN probably wont consider before round 4. MN needs developmental Guards, but Johnson and Fusco will be the starters and I doubt anything will change this. Warmack or Cooper wont be Vikings.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 74398
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Peter King of Sports Illustrated reports that the Falcons are trying to trade up from their current first-round pick, which is No. 30 overall. King said he doesn’t know which player or players the Falcons are targeting, but they apparently like someone whom they expect to be off the board before No. 30 overall.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/17/falcons-trying-to-trade-up-in-the-nfl-draft/
_________________


Webmaster wrote:
Can we knock off all the nonsense and stick to football?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Klomp


Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Posts: 6978
PostPosted: Wed Apr 17, 2013 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vike daddy wrote:
Peter King of Sports Illustrated reports that the Falcons are trying to trade up from their current first-round pick, which is No. 30 overall. King said he doesn’t know which player or players the Falcons are targeting, but they apparently like someone whom they expect to be off the board before No. 30 overall.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/17/falcons-trying-to-trade-up-in-the-nfl-draft/


Wait, I thought nobody was going to want to trade up?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 4 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group