Shop for Minnesota Vikings gear at

Draft Day Open Discussion: Round 1

Hello my fellow Vikings fans, today has finally come and tonight we will finally find out who our beloved Vikings will take with our 1st round pick. As we have discussed over and over, Spielman has pretty much narrowed his choices to Matt Kalil, Morris Claiborne, Justin Blackmon, and a possible trade down.

Here is my Mock Draft I did awhile back for you to chew on

Here are the Vikings pre-draft visits and workouts

Here are a bunch of 1st round possibilities

So below i’ll open this thread and let everyone throw out any questions they have, any concerns, any rumors, any guesses or really we can talk about whatever you want.

Happy Draft Day and have at it in the comment section.

Enjoyed this post?
Subscribe to Vikings Gab via RSS Feed or E-mail and receive daily news updates from us!

Submit to Digg  Stumble This Story  Share on Twitter  Post on Facebook  Post on MySpace  Add to  Bark It Up  Submit to Reddit  Fave on Technorati

22 Responses to “Draft Day Open Discussion: Round 1”

  1. Mike says:

    Trade down. Focus more on picking up 2013/2014 high picks than 2012 picks, buy 2012 picks still okay.
    The reason is
    1)if you trade down you STILL could get your guy
    2) if you trade down you get drafts picks
    3) if you trade down you have a chance of someone falling to you that you don’t expect to
    4) trading down adds a lot of value
    5) there are a lot of players that are very high quality in the top 10
    6) after trading down if all 3 players you want are still available you can trade down again and still get one of them
    7)the guy you take could potentially be a bust, hold us, or get injured anyways trading down is insurance!

    It’s not about need it’s about extracting maximum value.

    • Randy Perrin says:

      I’m open to trading down for all the reasons you listed

    • Erik H says:

      I agree with most of your list. The only one I’d question is #4, value depends on reaching for or under-valuing a player not simply trading down.

      • j says:

        Trading for future draft picks ALWAYS adds value. Why? consider this. Lets give a player a 6 year life span which is double average in NFL. Not to mention he probably isn’t going to be on your team for all of those 6 years on average…

        Premiums are attached to 2013 picks vs 2012. i.e. a 2nd rounder in 2012 is worth a 1st in 2013.
        It is a GUARENTEE that if you obtain a draft pick you will have more value where it is a only a possibility that any given draft pick pans out.

        Lets simplify the following into an equation….
        Every pick equals a higher pick in the future by one. i.e. you trade a 7th round pick for a 6th round pick
        Over a 6 year period, how much value can you gain by trading away your picks?
        7th=6th in 2013, 5th in 2014, 4th in 2015, 3rd in 2016, 2nd in 2017, 1st in 2018
        6th=1st by 2017 and 1st and 3rd in 2018
        5th=1st by 2016, 1st and 3rd in 2017, 1st, 2nd, 3rd in 2018…
        What will you have in 2018?
        17 1st rounders, 8 2nd rounders, 12 3rd rounders. That’s ONLY with trading whatever you accumulated from your original 2012 trades. i.e. you keep all of the VIKINGS draft positions in 2013-2018 drafts in addition to these picks. You give up 1 draft and use the subsequent picks you collect from that trade to trade into the future and move up a round.

        In that same time all of your 2012 draft picks will have on average retired or gotten a season ending injury, or at least will have sometime soon. In other words your team is virtually the same in 2018 except that by trading all of your picks for future picks you add 17 1st rounders, 8 2nd rounders, and 12 3rd rounders! How is that not adding value?

        No, I am not suggesting we take things to this extreme but to say trading down provided you get a 2013 pick is not adding value is just plain false… THAT is why the Patriots are consistently contenders.

        • j says:

          p.s. forgot to mention that once you hit a 1st rounder, your trade it for the following year’s 1st rounder AND the following year’s 3rd rounder.

          • Erik says:

            Well, if they gave out Lombardi trophies for acquiring the most draft picks you must have a shelf full…and here I thought the reason the Patriots were consistantly contenders was because they have is a HOF Coach/HOF QB combo…silly me.

          • j says:

            6 years ago we drafted

            1 17 Chad Greenway LB Iowa
            2 48 Cedric Griffin CB Texas
            2 51 Ryan Cook C New Mexico
            2 64 Tarvaris Jackson QB Alabama State
            4 127 Ray Edwards DE Purdue
            5 149 Greg Blue DB Georgia

            Only Greenway remains on our team. What would you rather have
            17 1st rounders, 8 2nd rounders, 12 3rd rounders, or Chad Greenway?
            Greenway is a great player, but not worth 5 first rounders.
            ell considering Bellichek didn’t do much for Cleveland and Tom Brady was a 6th rounder, There’s clearly more to it than that. They will remain contenders after Brady is gone and Matt Cassel looked like a champ when Brady was on the sidelines and they traded him away fro draft picks. They ALWAYS have more picks in the first 3 rounds than anyone. They always trade away players for more than they paid to get them, it seems.
            And what about the Saints. They trade Ricky Williams and get a first rounder and then they trade Duece Staley and get a first rounder.

            1 7 Troy Williamson WR South Carolina
            1 18 Erasmus James DE Wisconsin
            2 49 Marcus Johnson G Mississippi
            3 80 Dustin Fox DB Ohio State
            4 112 Ciatrick Fason RB Florida
            6 191 C.J. Mosley DT Missouri
            7 219 Adrian Ward — Texas-El Paso
            Would you rather have that or 17 first rounders?
            You could just about look at any other draft from 2005 and odds are they aren’t even on the team, they played out their rookie contract and they want more money negating what they are worth anyways.
            There is absolutely NO dispute that trading down while acquiring FUTURE draft picks is better LONG TERM value, end of discussion.

            Bellichek did NOTHING in Cleveland and Brady was a 6th rounder who had a ton of tools around him and yeah a great coaching staff, but ultimately Drew Bledsoe yielded a first round pick when he was out ofthe league the next year, and the Patriots have been leveraging those picks into future draft picks ever since. Peyton Manning was great for the Colts for awhile, but where are they now? If you want a dynasty, you trade you older players for draft picks, you use draftpicks to trade for the guys you want that fit the system and/or you use them or better yet you trade down some more and acquire future draft picks.

            Salery cap restricts you, unless you are trading away older, proven players and showing a guarenteed positive return by trading current draft picks for future draft picks, you have no chance at building a dynasty and having a showat winning the title MULTIPLE years. That’s just reality. Look at the Cowboys dynasty after the Hershall Walker Trade. Mortgaging the future for the present is what a LOT of people do because coaches want to win now, and as a result you can gain a LOT more by selling the present for the future. If we had mortgage anyone of our draft picks in previous years we would be better off. At least start with the 7th rounders that don’t make the team and you probably won’t use anyways and let them accumulate and mature into first rounders.

          • j says:

            Look at the Patriots in the 90s and on how they built through the draft. Then they got Drew Bledsoe after having the young pieces around him. (Ty Law, Terry Glenn, Teddy Brewski, Lawyer Milloy, Curtis Martin, etc.)
            They had a lot of draft picks that did not an out but multiple times they had more draft picks than most. 2 first rounders in 98 and 99. Then they saw a lot of success with Tom Brady. A few years later key players start getting older. Rather than panic, they start rolling draft picks over to the future, and being smart.
            The last 3 years especially.
            If you really look at all the draft picks, the Patriots have not drafted significantly better than everyone else, they just have had more picks and they hit on a few key players and continued to leverage their situation to keep building for the future, even if it meant trading away key players at the latter half of their careers like Randy Moss, Ty Law,etc.

        • Erik says:

          Looks like the NE dynasty is over. They didn’t trade for a 2013 pick.

          • J says:

            Why would pats dynasty be over? They hadmore picks in 2012 because of smart trades ofprevious draft picks and future players. They already built it and as I said draft pick will maybe get you 6 years if you’re lucky. But 6 years from now if they do not accumulate more draft picks they will be in jeopardy of regressing. That doesn’t mean they aren’t good enough to still be competitive if they regress.

  2. Mike says:

    Instinct is that Claiborne sounds like the pick… Otherwise why wouldn’t we have gotten Asante Samuel in trade. Vikes CANT be content with talent level at DB. I get he isn’t best fit for system but talent is enough.

    • Randy Perrin says:

      Agree, Claiborne seems to be front runner but I’m still holding strong that Kalil should be the puck but wouldn’t mind Claiborne either.

    • Zag says:

      Asante Samuel is old as hell. No reason or a rebuilding team to invest in a 30+ year old CB, no matter how good he might be.

  3. Mike says:

    Chad Clifton also is available.

    • Randy Perrin says:

      Clifton didn’t pass his physical, with Spielman going younger I would think he’s out of the mix and also another reason they wouldn’t look at Samuels….they want to continue to get younger.

  4. Mike says:

    Looks like Buffalo is the primary candidate here.
    Vikings should wait until there is about 2min left on clock then swap with Clevland and pick up a 3rd or 4th. THEN accept whatever they can get from Buffalo.
    Otherwise I think they are going to want more than just pick #10 and #41 from Buffalo.

    It is nice if they already have a deal in principal so they can try to find better offers in the meantime.

    • Randy Perrin says:

      Agree, going down to pick 10 might cost Buffalo more than just a 2nd rounder…Many options at 10 though if we were to trade there

  5. VikingJohn says:

    If you trade back to 10, we should get Buffalo’s 1st, 2nd, and 3rd.
    Go Vikes

    • j says:

      Trades according to the value chart or whatever are rare. Vikings clearly want out of 3 and if they can get a player that they rank similarly and think the value is around the same, they can only trade with a willing participant so they might have to accept a bit less. A lot of early first rounders do not live up to the hype.
      A good compromise would be to get 2013 or 2014 picks as the Bills don’t have to give up anything other than 10 and 41 NOW, and it will be a few years before what they give up is felt, but vikings still get a chance to get draft picks for the future.

    • jmike says:

      I agree that should be the aim 1st 2nd and 3rd… If not we will swap with Cleveland or tampa bay for a higher 3rd and maybe THEN some, and we still have possibility to trade down if neither of those 2 teams want to to get Buffalo 1st and 2nd and end up with essentially the same thing. A bit more of a gamble that way but in the meantime if Buffalo jumps us to take Kalil We have Claiborne, blackmon or Richardson fall intoour laps and potentially can still trade down another spot or two. and get another 3rd rounder maybe more and get a higher quality player than at 10 so I think the slightly optimistic end result will be something around the vikings picking up a 1st, 2nd and 3rd.

      • skoll says:

        The best scenario I can possibly envision which is a possibility but maybe not probable would be we swap with Bucs and pick up a 2nd rounder then Bucs get Richardson, Cleveland gets Blackmon and we are sitting with Kalil AND Claiborne… Then from 5 we Swap with Dolphins at 8 and Dolphins Get Tannehill and we pick up another 2nd. If 6 and 7 don’t go Claiborne AND Kalil (Buffalo WILL likely try to move ahead of us but we can potentially bid on the same pick for less than we acquire from trade-down) we still end up with one of them and 2 first rounders. By swapping with Bucs or Browns and THEN to Miami, we really can dictate the draft well as we know Miami will get Tannehill and we don’t need a QB.

        HOWEVER, I love that line if we can work it out anyways even if we don’t get Claiborne or Kalil. Michael Floyd going early to STL could really mix things up. Ingram, Cox, Barron and Kuechly are all DEFENSIVE players that potentially could go early along with Claiborne IF Buffalo doesn’t move up. Maybe Couples or Poe Otherwise, if 6 and 7 go Claiborne and Kalil, we may try moving down again although we would be pressed to really find someone with only minutes to make a deal with someone we probably haven’t really talked much with at this point.
        Also, if we trade down again from 8, the aforementioned players are a secondary possibility, but also an OLINEMAN such as Reiff (OT) or Decastro(OG) as well…

        What’s more. With all the draft picks we could accumulate from moving down, particularly 2nd rounders, we could move back into late first round and get CB Dre Kirkpatrick. If not there are plenty of CBs,S, and OL worth taking in the 2nd round, and possibly a WR like Kendell Wright. Potentially with these trades we can acquire 2013 picks too as bonus

  6. the horned norseman says:

    just heard on nfl network that vikes traded down to 4th overall in the draft….thats e.s.t. 7:30pm. heard it come outta rich eisen’s mouth just before commercial break. yup browns and vikes swapped spots

Leave a Reply