|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,556 |
They have been drooling over Claiborne for some time and really have never shown Kalil a lot of love.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
Quote:
They have been drooling over Claiborne for some time and really have never shown Kalil a lot of love.
a DB at 3? yea.. thats gonna happen..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
I read the same thing that Mourg just said a couple of weeks ago.
The Vikes are looking long and hard at Claiborne.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 11,849 |
I'd be really surprised if the Vikings did that.. their offense needs a boost just like ours..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,070
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,070 |
All in his first start no doubt. Hard to think otherwise. 
"Every responsibility implies opportunity, and every opportunity implies responsibility." Otis Allen Glazebrook, 1880
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
So if the Vikings were to pass on Kalil, where would he end up? As Schefter noted, he could slide a few picks, as the next teams on the board — Browns at No. 4, Buccaneers at No. 5, Rams at No. 6 and Jaguars at No. 7 — all could conceivably pass on the draft’s top tackle.
Conceivably yes, but not probable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Quote:
Conceivably yes, but not probable.
The other thing to factor in here - is that the Vikings are thought to be actively trying to trade down.
If they don't want Kalil, but others do - then you would think they would trade down that pick.
If they actively pass on Kalil and take Claiborne, it means one of two things:
1.) They really really really like Claiborne - and the rumors of a tradedown were a lie
2.) Teams in the range 4-8 really aren't interested in trading up for Kalil.
In the second case, then Kalil might fall quite a bit.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 7,234 |
Leslie Frazier says left tackle may not be a game changerPosted by Mike Florio on April 22, 2012, 11:33 PM EDT As the Vikings continue to consider their options with the third overall pick in the draft, there are growing indications that they may not be taking left tackle Matt Kalil. Unless they’re trying to make someone picking lower in the top 10 believe that the Vikings may take a player that team covets, like receiver Justin Blackmon or cornerback Morris Claiborne. “You’ve got to really weigh your options,” coach Leslie Frazier told Dan Wiederer of the Minneapolis Star Tribune. “Because the philosophy [in the NFL] has always been to get the game-changer. And left tackle is not necessarily the game-changer. Usually game-changers are the guys who can score you points. Receivers. Quarterbacks. So what are we measuring that left tackle against? It’s a loaded debate.” But here’s the thing. It’s hard for the quarterback and thÜ receiver to change games if the left tackle isn’t stopping the right defensive end/outside linebacker from hitting the quarterback when the quarterback can’t see it coming. And it’s not as if competent left tackles readily can be found in the lower rounds of the draft. Last year, the Vikings dumped their competent left tackle, and they struggled without one. Because the Vikings used the 12th overall pick on quarterback Christian Ponder in 2011, Frazier’s quarterback/receiver/game-changer remarks arguably suggest that the Vikings are trying to decide between Matt Kalil and Blackmon. And while the two receivers taken among the top six picks in 2011 (A.J. Green and Julio Jones) could make it easier to justify using the third overall pick on Blackmon in 2012, the bust rate for first-round receivers traditionally has been higher than the bust rate for left tackles. That’s the most important factor for the Vikings as the 2012 draft approaches. Regardless of the position, they need someone who will suit up and play, and play well. If they can still get that someone by sliding down a few spots and also pick up an extra pick or two, that’s even better. That may be precisely what they are trying to do. If Vikings Pass, Matt Kalil might be Bucs' pickPosted by Michael David Smith on April 23, 2012, 7:57 AM EDT The Vikings are talking like a team that could pass on USC left tackle Matt Kalil with the third overall pick in the draft, and that has talk heating up that Kalil could slide. But if he does, he might not slide any further than the Buccaneers at No. 5. Stephen F. Holder of the Tampa Bay Times connects the dots and writes that Kalil would be a strong candidate as the Bucs’ first-round pick. Offensive tackle isn’t generally viewed as a major need for the Buccaneers, who have Donald Penn on the left and Jeremy Trueblood on the right. But Penn was overweight last year, while Trueblood is entering the last year of his contract. And new Bucs coach Greg Schiano believes strongly that the offensive line is an important part of building a team. So Kalil wouldn’t be out of place in Tampa Bay. Most draft projections have the Vikings taking Kalil third overall, the Browns taking either Alabama running back Trent Richardson or LSU cornerback Morris Claiborne fourth, and the Bucs taking Richardson or Claiborne (whoever the Browns don’t take) at No. 5. If the Vikings pass on Kalil to take Claiborne, that may shuffle those three only enough to have Kalil landing in Tampa Bay.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,193
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 16,193 |
First off he is not BPA. Not the way I see it.
Luck and Griffin are 1 and 2.
Richardson and Claiborne are 3 and 4.
There is no case for the Browns to take Kalil.
They have Thomas and you do not draft a RT that high and commit those dollars to that position.
The Browns clearly need players who can score.
The decision at four is really very simple:
Richardson or Blackmon.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
Quote:
The Browns clearly need players who can score.
The decision at four is really very simple:
Richardson or Blackmon.
That's pretty much how I see it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 65
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 65 |
Quote:
Warner was not mobile, but he was immediate with his decisions and throws.
It doesn't take 10 seconds for a receiver to get 20 yards down the field. Sometimes I think that people (not necessarily you) forget this. A receiver can get 20 yards downfield and make a break, set down in a zone, or so on in a matter of 2-2.5 seconds. Even then, many times the QB will have already thrown the ball. So how long does the line really have to block for great QBs?
Hell, when Manning was playing in Indy, they would throw together any crappy line because they knew that Manning would have the ball out of his hands in about 1-2 seconds on almost every play. he identified the single cover and attacked it. He threw to receivers before they made their breaks. He did everything imaginable to help his OL be successful.
OK, on this line of thinking. Great running backs can make a line look better also. A great running back needs a seam to bust it not always a giant hole. A great running back doesn't make the line block forever down the field to break off runs. A great running back can break tackles of guys the line can't block or missed. A great running back can just make people miss. I think TR can do all these things plus be able to caught the ball out of the backfield as an outlet and gain big yards doing it. My only worry is his pass blocking but I hope it will be solid. Sorry to use your post Ytown but it helped me in what I was thinking.
I think that drafting a RT at 4 doesn't make sense for the Browns and as to your thinking about moving over in a few years well, can you bank on this guy making it health wise that long or that he is not Jason Smith of the Rams. You have no gamebreakers at the skill positions and you want to take a Tackle to play the right side? Wow, no thank you. Get a playmaker and WR or RB or trade down to get your RT and more picks next year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,441
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,441 |
I think that Richardson would be a huge help for the OL. He has tremendous vision, and sees the hole and makes the appropriate cut very well. He plays off of his blocks extremely well.
I don't think that the OL can ever be good enough to look great with a QB who holds the ball forever. However, the line would be helped with a guy who can impact the running game and force teams to hold back from an all out attack of the OL because he might break one all the way if they do.
Hell, this is what happened to us frequently. (in reverse) We would get so desperate to get after the QB on defense that the RB would hit one crack in the defense and be gone for 60 yards. I'm not saying that it would happen all the time ..... but it would help pull teams out of all out blitzes if we could gash them a few times with the run.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Blackmon and Martin would help this offense more than Richardson and Hill or Wright. The only downfall would be that McCoy having Little and Blackmon with Martin might put up a solid season and prove that having weapon's and an off season was what the doctor ordered. I get that some would rather have the RB at 4 instead of the best WR and a RB that is not far behind Richardson at a draft spot that is more appropriate. Kalil makes no sense when we can get a starter for RT in the 3rd and his value to the team on the line will be marginal compared to a Schwartz or Massie to that of Richardson or Blackmon. The best case scenario for this offense to be better this year would be Blackmon/Martin Combo. Hill is being Projected as a #1 on upside, Wright is complimentary, Sanu and Randle are #2's that you hope can be a #1 but are not of the same caliber of Blackmon coming out. With the routes we run and the type of offense we have a Combo of Blackmon and Little make a ton of sense especially in YAC.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 65
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 65 |
Quote:
Blackmon and Martin would help this offense more than Richardson and Hill or Wright. The only downfall would be that McCoy having Little and Blackmon with Martin might put up a solid season and prove that having weapon's and an off season was what the doctor ordered. I get that some would rather have the RB at 4 instead of the best WR and a RB that is not far behind Richardson at a draft spot that is more appropriate. Kalil makes no sense when we can get a starter for RT in the 3rd and his value to the team on the line will be marginal compared to a Schwartz or Massie to that of Richardson or Blackmon. The best case scenario for this offense to be better this year would be Blackmon/Martin Combo. Hill is being Projected as a #1 on upside, Wright is complimentary, Sanu and Randle are #2's that you hope can be a #1 but are not of the same caliber of Blackmon coming out. With the routes we run and the type of offense we have a Combo of Blackmon and Little make a ton of sense especially in YAC.
What if Jacksonville came calling to trade, wanting Blackmon. Do you make that trade and what do you feel the Browns should get? I agree the Browns need a playmaker as I said WR or RB. I can live with either Blackmon or Richardson cause I know that is heading in the right direction for the Offense. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,358 |
not a chance do i trade down to JAX so they can Blackmon. Especially if Kalil goes #3. That leaves only Richardson and Claiborne and they both would have to make it through Tampa and STL. I'm not willing to take that risk.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
Quote:
Blackmon and Martin would help this offense more than Richardson and Hill or Wright. The only downfall would be that McCoy having Little and Blackmon with Martin might put up a solid season and prove that having weapon's and an off season was what the doctor ordered. I get that some would rather have the RB at 4 instead of the best WR and a RB that is not far behind Richardson at a draft spot that is more appropriate. Kalil makes no sense when we can get a starter for RT in the 3rd and his value to the team on the line will be marginal compared to a Schwartz or Massie to that of Richardson or Blackmon. The best case scenario for this offense to be better this year would be Blackmon/Martin Combo. Hill is being Projected as a #1 on upside, Wright is complimentary, Sanu and Randle are #2's that you hope can be a #1 but are not of the same caliber of Blackmon coming out. With the routes we run and the type of offense we have a Combo of Blackmon and Little make a ton of sense especially in YAC.
What if Jacksonville came calling to trade, wanting Blackmon. Do you make that trade and what do you feel the Browns should get? I agree the Browns need a playmaker as I said WR or RB. I can live with either Blackmon or Richardson cause I know that is heading in the right direction for the Offense.
Personally, I stay there and take Blackmon. We have enough lower round ammo to move up if they want an extra 2nd or 3rd. Don't get me wrong, I like Richardson and would not be upset about taking him but think the other combo will have more of an impact.
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,810
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,810 |
Quote:
not a chance do i trade down to JAX so they can Blackmon. Especially if Kalil goes #3. That leaves only Richardson and Claiborne and they both would have to make it through Tampa and STL. I'm not willing to take that risk.
I would make that trade if Jacksonville gave us their 1st next season. Would Jacksonville be willing to give that much up? Doubtful. So essentially no chance that I make this trade.
Now if the FO likes Tannehill (I don't) then that makes the trade down more palatable to them.
Am I perfect? No
Am I trying to be a better person?
Also no
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
...jc...
A couple of days ago, when the Vikings announced that Matt Kalil might not be a lock as their pick at 3, they were singling the rest of the NFL to give them a call and talk trade.
Just what the Vikings are looking for in trade for #3 is the unknown, but it is safe to say, the Vikings are serious about trading out of the #3 draft slot, IF the price is right.
Any team working out a deal with the Vikings, to move up to #3, would have Richardson, Kalil, Claiborne, Blackmon or any player they were targeting, available to them.
It is true, the Browns have no way of knowing who the Vikings may target for their pick if they stay at #3, but now we have the possibility that any one of the other 28 teams might be drafting from the #3 slot.
Could the Browns trade up to #3, to insure they get the guy at the top of their draft chart?...
I suppose they could if there is one player they covet more than the others.
The only sure thing for the Browns...one of the following will be taken at #3...Richardson, Kalil, Claiborne, Blackmon or Tannehill.
UPDATE...listening to ESPN this morning, Mike and Mike along with McShay pointed out the same concerns I brought above for the Browns, if the Vikings do trade out of #3 position.
They seemed to believe the Browns were looking to draft Richardson and that Richardson would be the likely target for a team trading into the #3 draft slot.
They named the Tampa Bay Bucs as a likely candidate to take Richardson at #3. They believed the Browns might revisit taking Tannehill at #4 but felt Blackmon would be the Browns likely pick, if Richardson is gone.
Everyone is guessing at this point, but an added level of uncertainty was added to the draft with the Vikings invite to talk trade.
Last edited by mac; 04/24/12 09:21 AM.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 28,180 |
I don't think you need to make a case FOR him. He's a good enough player, fills a need and offers insurance at the most important position on the OLine... for dirt cheap (thank you, new CBA!).
I may have a case of "coulda, shoulda" if we take him at #4, but I would be completely Ok with it.
The case you can make AGAINST him, however, is that the impact of taking him at #4 almost certainly isn't as great as the impact of taking one of the other premier players that will be there.
I think he'd be great and will firmly solidify our OLine across the board, but our offense is dying for skill position players far more than RT. We can get a very good RT in the 2nd (or at #22) that will still be a significant upgrade on Cousins, while getting us some premier talent ahead of that.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 198
2nd String
|
|
2nd String
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 198 |
I'm all for draft Kalil if he there at 4 and drafting Cordy Glenn at 22. How good could the OL be with the additions of both Kalil and Glenn? Would there be a better OL in the NFL? Doubtful.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
I'm all for draft Kalil if he there at 4 and drafting Cordy Glenn at 22. How good could the OL be with the additions of both Kalil and Glenn? Would there be a better OL in the NFL? Doubtful.
And just think how amazing they'll be when the passing game is garbage and the running game averages 4 yards a carry!
At some point you have to admit that your line is average and start picking up playmakers.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,441
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,441 |
Quote:
Quote:
I'm all for draft Kalil if he there at 4 and drafting Cordy Glenn at 22. How good could the OL be with the additions of both Kalil and Glenn? Would there be a better OL in the NFL? Doubtful.
And just think how amazing they'll be when the passing game is garbage and the running game averages 4 yards a carry!
At some point you have to admit that your line is average and start picking up playmakers.
That's exactly right.
Our line is average at this point, with the potential to get much better. Our skill positions, though, need help. We have no starter quality RB right now, and we absolutely need a QB and a WR.
A RG is certainly not a bigger need than those 3 spots.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Quote:
I think he'd be great and will firmly solidify our OLine across the board, but our offense is dying for skill position players far more than RT. We can get a very good RT in the 2nd (or at #22) that will still be a significant upgrade on Cousins, while getting us some premier talent ahead of that.
Similarly we can get a RB at 22 or 37 who would be a significant upgrade to Hardesty and Jackson.
I think when you pick #4 you have to think long term. I would be fine with Claiborne or Kalil, because they both solidify key positions in the long term. I would be a little sad with Richardson, even though he might be BPA, just because RBs don't last very long, and unless you have one of the greatest ever - they really aren't that helpful long term.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,441
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,441 |
Hell, we've had trouble finding guys good enough to even outlast their rookie deals ..... so a guy supposedly playing 4-6 years isn't some great deal breaker for me.
I look at guys like Tomlinson who had a great 8 years in San Diego, and who helped make sure that Rivers had a safety net when he first became the starter.
Jones-Drew has given the Jags 6 years so far.
Ray Rice 4 so far.
Michael Turner is in his 8th season, with no signs of slowing down.
Frank Gore has played 7 seasons.
Marshawn Lynch is going into his 8th year.
Steven Jackson is going into his 9th year.
That's 7 of the top 9 in rushing last year. There are plenty of guys who play well deep into their careers at the RB position. I really don't know how this whole "4 year average" bit came about other than so many teams buy up low level RBs and plug them in across the board, and those guys might last a year or 2 before being replaced. There are plenty of older Rbs playing in the league, just like there are players agt other positions. I don't know that I would throw huge money at a RB on the wrong side of 30, but if we draft Richardson we won't have to worry about that for some time to come. Richardson is only something like 20 ..... so 30 is quite a distance away.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
I'll give you Tomlinson, who is one of the 10 best RBs to ever play the game. Stephen Jackson has lead a bunch of terrible teams - probably because there is no other talent. I'll also give you Frank Gore, who's 7 seasons are about 6.5 longer than anybody expected from him. The 49ers even were good finally last year.
Jones-Drew has was a backup his first three years. Only has run for 1000+ yards in the last three years. In those years the Jags won 7, 5, and 8 games.
Ray Rice has been good for 3 years. He was a backup his rookie season.
Michael Turner was LTs backup his first four years so "going strong 8 seasons is kind of ridiculous" -- he only has 3 1k seasons.
Marshawn Lynch really has you reaching for "good RB who leads his team"
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
Just heard on ESPN...Vikings are not going to take OT Kalil...they are now expected to Claiborne.
Vikings still hoping someone wants to trade up.
Obviously, no bearing on the Browns taking Richardson.
Kalil is expected to fall to the Rams at #6 pick.
It would be great if the Browns drafted Kalil, but when you have Richardson on the board and your team needs a RB, you take the higher rated player, who is Trent Richardson.
The Browns RT needs, will be filled later...most likely at #37.
Last edited by mac; 04/25/12 06:32 AM.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,199
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,199 |
the real question is...
who is rated higher on the Heckerts board? Richardson or Kalil?
we might find out in a few days.
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
I would imagine Richardson.
When you draft in the top 5, you have to get a guy who scores touchdowns or prevents touchdowns. Kalil does not do either.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Quote:
I would imagine Richardson.
When you draft in the top 5, you have to get a guy who scores touchdowns or prevents touchdowns. Kalil does not do either.
Just like Joe Thomas was a wasted pick....
What do you think Offensive Linemen are -- pom-pom holders?
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 04/25/12 08:57 AM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Quote:
Just heard on ESPN...Vikings are not going to take OT Kalil...they are now expected to Claiborne.
Vikings still hoping someone wants to trade up.
Obviously, no bearing on the Browns taking Richardson.
Kalil is expected to fall to the Rams at #6 pick.
It would be great if the Browns drafted Kalil, but when you have Richardson on the board and your team needs a RB, you take the higher rated player, who is Trent Richardson.
The Browns RT needs, will be filled later...most likely at #37.
Makes no sense mac....IF the Vikings want Claiborne, WHY would they want to trade down as he will be picked at 4-6 anyway....if anything they have a similar or better grade on a guy (or 2) they think they can get further down...say they have Kalil and Reiff rated equally or are high on a Gilmore etc etc....this trade down talk only makes sense if they have somebody else...Claiborne's name is just being used for smoke imho
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
I agree, but Claiborne would also fill a big need for the Vikings, but then so to would Kalil.
When the smoke clears ... I think that they will be picking 3rd and will not be able to trade down, because who is left to trade up for? Tannehill? I don't think so. Richardson? Trade up for a RB? In the top 10/5? Talk about blunders of Biblical proportions.
Kalil perhaps, but if they are showing no interest, then why would a team be interested in trading up when they can let him slide?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,950 |
Quote:
Just heard on ESPN...Vikings are not going to take OT Kalil...they are now expected to Claiborne.
CAN YOU SAY B...S.....Smoke Screen all thier looking to do is send some other team into a panic and making a stupied mistake, and trading away the farm for a player they have no intension of drafting, maybe they will take Claiborne cant go wrong on either pick.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,828 |
Quote:
the real question is...
who is rated higher on the Heckerts board? Richardson or Kalil?
we might find out in a few days.
super...I agree with bigbaddawg, I would have to believe Richardson is rated higher than Kalil on Heckert board. But, none of us knows for sure...we are guessing.
Do I believe there are other teams that would love to draft Richardson...oh yea..Tampa Bay setting at #5 in the draft.
It seems that the Vikings are attempting to get the Browns or Bucs to give up something to move up to #3 to insure they get Richardson. It's as if the Vikings are saying to the Browns and Bucs...how bad do you want Richardson.
Now the Vikings are claiming they are going to take Claiborne, who happens to be the player listed as being the player the Bucs are hoping to pick at #5. Claiborne might be the second player listed on the Bucs draft board with Richardson being their first choice...but the Bucs are likely figuring the Browns will take Richardson.
If the Bucs do not trade up to #3, they will might not get a chance at the top two players on their draft board, assuming the Bucs board has their #1 choice being Richardson and the #2 choice being Claiborne.
The Vikings want to deal with either the Browns or Bucs because they can trade down with either team and still get the guy they want, who is likely Kalil or possibly Claiborne.
The Vikings are trying to squeeze a 2nd or 3rd round pick out of the Browns or Bucs...force either team to make a move to insure they get the player they want...in the Browns case, Richardson and in the Bucs case, Richardson or Claiborne.
I'm guessing that Heckert will not get pushed into making a deal with the Bucs to insure the Browns get the guy at the top of their draft board, knowing the Vikings could be bluffing, with Kalil being their choice and the rest nothing but smoke.
Not the easiest position to be in if you're Heckert...
Last edited by mac; 04/25/12 09:51 AM.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,199
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 10,199 |
I like your analysis.,...
who really knows the board but I do think minny is trying to pry draft picks from the browns. I think everyone is because everyone in the league knows we have the most picks
Hunter + Dart = This is the way.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
I would imagine Richardson.
When you draft in the top 5, you have to get a guy who scores touchdowns or prevents touchdowns. Kalil does not do either.
Just like Joe Thomas was a wasted pick....
What do you think Offensive Linemen are -- pom-pom holders?
We had playmakers when we drafted Thomas. Or guys we thought were playmakers.
We don't have guys who can score touchdowns. Offensive linemen cannot score touchdowns. And when you already have a average to above average offensive line, you do not WASTE a top 5 pick on an offensive linemen.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480
Hall of Famer
|
|
OP
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,480 |
Quote:
We don't have guys who can score touchdowns. Offensive linemen cannot score touchdowns. And when you already have a average to above average offensive line, you do not WASTE a top 5 pick on an offensive linemen.
We have a good offensive line -- with the 32nd best starting RT in the league right now. A line is only as good as it's weakest side, and our right side is weak right now.
You make it sound like putting Kalil in on the right side would not make McCoy or Hardesty look better - and that's crazy. Any QB can eat a defense alive with a solid pocket, and any RB in this league can run through open holes.
There are a lot of ways to boost your offense - a dominant line is one of them.
EDIT: It's also not like this is our only pick. We could still get an electric receiver in Wright/Hill at 22, and a top RB in Martin at 37.
Last edited by Lyuokdea; 04/25/12 01:04 PM.
~Lyuokdea
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
J/C, JM2C, but I don't think that we or most ever felt like Kalil would be an option at pick #4, so he certainly adds to the mix, but having said that. He probably has not figured into our scenario board either. Meaning we already probably had our choice nailed down to two or three players/prospects, so he might have muddied the water some. I agree that our right flank is week and worrisome and sometimes pressure in your face is worst then backside pressure when you are counting on first class protection (Thanks Joe  ). If you want to raddle a QB, then there's no better and quicker way then to put it in his face and with sudden furry. That need needs to be addressed, I am just not so sure we though about it at the top of the Draft. Certainly they did do their due diligence in evaluating him further. It will come down to whether they like him at RT or perhaps another choice at pick #4 and or another combination/option for the need.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,563 |
Quote:
Quote:
We don't have guys who can score touchdowns. Offensive linemen cannot score touchdowns. And when you already have a average to above average offensive line, you do not WASTE a top 5 pick on an offensive linemen.
We have a good offensive line -- with the 32nd best starting RT in the league right now. A line is only as good as it's weakest side, and our right side is weak right now.
You make it sound like putting Kalil in on the right side would not make McCoy or Hardesty look better - and that's crazy. Any QB can eat a defense alive with a solid pocket, and any RB in this league can run through open holes.
There are a lot of ways to boost your offense - a dominant line is one of them.
EDIT: It's also not like this is our only pick. We could still get an electric receiver in Wright/Hill at 22, and a top RB in Martin at 37.
The player at 22 is not nearly as good as the player you are likely to get at 4.
Look, right tackles are NOT a hard position to fill. Most teams can fill that position in the 2nd or 3rd round. Wasting, and yes it is wasting, a top 5 pick on a RT is about the dumbest thing you can do. It won't suddenly make Hardesty a powerful runner who can out run tacklers. It won't give McCoy the ability to attack an offense due to their threat. Maybe if we had an elite QB, or an elite RB, I'd agree with getting a RT, but this team needs SKILL.
I understand the need, but drafting based on need is stupid and would not make this team any better. A good right tackle doesn't suddenly make this an 7 or 8 or 9 win team, no matter what happens at 22 or 37.
I cannot make my point any more clear and it's quit frustrating to me that people think that offensive lines can make players better. They cannot. They can give players better opportunities, but they do not create good players out of bad player. It doesn't happen. It won't happen here, either.
you had a good run Hank.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 183
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 183 |
If the Vikes don't take Kalil it is because either
a) they took Claiborne
b) someone traded up to take Richardson
In scenario a), I still think we should take Richardson at 4.
In scenario b) we should definitely take Kalil.
If Richardson is gone, I think upgrading to Kalil would have a bigger impact on our offense than anyone else on the board. Also, under the new rookie cap structure, you are going to get Kalil cheaper than what you could sign a decent RT for anyways.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums The Archives 2013 NFL Season NFL Draft (2013) The Case for Kalil
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/6WV79RV/Browns-Coach-Sig.png)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif){kind=logo}
