|
ratoppenheimer -> RE: NFL Draft 2020 (4/26/2020 2:56:25 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: Pager
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: Pager
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: Pager
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: Pager
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: Pager
quote:
ORIGINAL: The Happy Norseman
quote:
ORIGINAL: Pager
Overall I give the Vikes a B+
Got some guys that can contribute right away at WR, CB, Big Nickel, and perhaps T/OG in Ezra.
Intriguing players like Wonnum, Dye, Hinton. And depth at S.
Not enough done in trenches. I wanted a legit DT like Gillimore and a IOL who could compete this year.
Would have liked another WR that could do something different like stretch the field.
Bullets in 2021.
Dennison and Peterson have a lot of work to do.
That should drop our grade to a B-/C+. CB, OG, and WR were our biggest needs by far, with DT and DE close behind, followed by OT to eventually replace Reiff. RS addressed 2 of the 3 in the first round, but that should be a given for any GM.
I can't argue this at all. For me, if this was last year, I would give them a D. I do trust Kubiak/Dennison much more than the organization two years ago. Kubiak has a long history of having functional olines with lower draft picks. Maybe I'm foolishly optimistic after last years draft. But the organization has been hinting they are pleased with Samia and Udoh's development. I'm a big fan of Collins.
The counterpoint is they aggressively tried to trade for Williams.
Not really. They could have had him for damn little draft capital, could have easily outbid SF.
I stated that the org must be pleased with the development of younger players and that they think they could step up. The fact they were aggressively trying to trade for Williams is the counterpoint for that assertion.
The fact they were aggressively trying to trade for Williams is not a fact, because they could have easily have got him for minimal draft capital. Did they stick their toes in the water, probably, but we practically could have got him for the extraneous draft picks we cached away for 2021.
They had a trade in place that Williams refused, links have been posted. The fact that it would have had to include a new contract makes it aggressive regardless of the picks.
Move on KGB.
#1 a trade was never in place, #2 no one seems clear as to when Williams said he would nix a trade to the Vikings, the news broke AFTER we drafted Cleveland, why did it all of a sudden surface? Whether you or I are correct, it's clear that the Vikings drafting Cleveland made them the initial nixers of any Williams deal. And once we drafted Cleveland, any counterpoint is moot, because Williams became irrelevant.
Arguing semantics is hilarious [&:] "Initial nixers of any deal" - I'm dying, you sound like KGB.
Regardless of timing, the Vikings had interested this offseason in Williams. Were in active negotiations WAS - one definition of aggressively pursued. Had come to terms with WAS - another definition of aggressively pursued. Interest, negotiations, terms are the facts and they are undisputed.
So now you're just making shit up.
So you've got nothing.
You beat me to it.
.
.
@Mark Craig NFL
Asked Spielman what prevented the Trent Williams trade: "I knew once we started seeing that Ezra Cleveland was going to fall to us, we got a young, talented offensive tackle that we're going to have under contract for the next four years."
|
|
|
|