|
Bill Johanesen -> RE: General Vikes Talk (8/30/2023 3:37:23 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bill Johanesen
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes
quote:
ORIGINAL: Karl Juhnke
quote:
ORIGINAL: Tom Sykes
quote:
ORIGINAL: Karl Juhnke
There always seemed to be something slightly off about Reagor. He made some plays here or there, but some screw ups too. Could you really count of him?
That's why I was very relieved when we drafted a good receiver in round 1. I was astounded by those screaming for defense how they could not see WR as the desperate #1 need. You had JJ. Then what? KJ is just okay, Reagor is flaky. Anyone else is question mark at best. That's really what you wanted for a 3 receiver set? One star who will get all the attention, one serviceable guy, one flake and zero depth?
Yeah we got Hockenson too, and yes I know they'll go two TE sometimes, but to me an enhanced TE is great but that doesn't replace the need for WRs.
If the Vikings want to open the passing game up more with Cook gone, Addison was a vital pick. A lot is depending on him.
There's an argument for WR but desperate #1 need ain't it.
Not if you are weighing the offense against the defense or IOL against WR ...
Okay, what's your receiver set look like without Addison? Start flagging down people on 494 to play?
After QB WR has become the next most important position in football.
Yeah I know the defense was full of holes last year. Fine. But they went 13-4 with it. They did make a pickup or two, and most importantly they got a new coordinator who should be better at putting people in positions to succeed.
If the defense can even move up a few slots, while still maintaining a top notch, talented, innovative passing game, that's good for me.
IMO Osborn will improve on Thielen last year. He already did if you compare the number of targets. Not studly but solid better than ok #2-#3 wr.
AND wr is one of the deepest positions on the team with or without Addison. JJ and Osborn tower over any other two starters at any position ... does OT even have an argument? Not with JJ weighing in.
But you are making me argue against myself. I like Addison (on the field, not so much off it) ... WR is certainly a big need. I just don't think it was head and shoulders above other even weaker links on the team.
The WR corps w/o Addison was not deep, it was skewed top-heavy with just JJ. The problem is w/o a solid #2 WR, JJ gets taken out of the game. He has a lot of yards and some timely superhuman catches, but isn't a Moss.
If pre-draft you compared the two OTs and the top three WRs, it was Darrisaw and O'Neill by a mile.
As far as depth, pre-draft w/o Addison ...
Yes, you're right, I overstated it. Not deep.
However, not as deep as G, C, CB, DT, DE, ILB? IMO WR was in much better shape than those positions.
Forget JJ, outside of Murphy, I would consider #2 Osborn as good or better than the #1s at any those positions much less the #2s.
Again, WR was a big need as I stated above. 3 WR sets, etc. But desperate compared to every other need? Not in my opinion.
As far as JJ and Osborn vs Darrisaw and O'Neal?
OK, O'Neal is much better than Osborn. Is the distance there more than the distance between JJ and Darrisaw? I think it shrinks the overall comparison much closer ... as good as Darrisaw is, he's not in JJs league.
It's hard to quantify ... maybe I'm way over-valuing Osborn ...
Only thing I want to mention is today's NFL requires three decent WRs. So the three pre-Addison WRs are no match for the two OTs. Granted, it is comparing three players vs two. Sort of like comparing CBs to Safeties. Teams utilize three CBs over half the time.
Probably far enough for this.
Oh, and just adding a single good (hopefully) WR, makes the whole passing game stronger. Basically a synergistic effect. But of course debatable.
|
|
|
|