2021 Positional Previews

In 2019, the Minnesota Vikings ranked second among all teams in running back carries, just behind the San Francisco 49ers. Last year, they finished second once again, this time to the Tennessee Titans. They were the only team with at least 400 running back carries in both years. In total touches over those two years, they rank second (to the Los Angeles Chargers).

To put it simply, the Vikings run their offense through their running backs more than almost any other team. That’s not just a product of giving touches to a running back while milking a lead, either, as the Vikings spent substantial time behind in games last year.

Let’s break down the entire group:

Dalvin Cook

The lynchpin of the Vikings offense, Cook is both readily acknowledged as a high-level back and as someone who is somewhat underrated across the NFL. He has the second-highest PFF rushing grade over the last two years, with the third-highest yards after contact and the fourth-highest number of total missed tackles. He led all backs last year in yards from scrimmage per game after ranking second in 2019, finishing first over the course of those two years combined. He’s a capable threat, and the Vikings expect another big year from him.

Strengths: Cook stands out among NFL running backs in his ability to maintain balance after contact, doing an excellent job of keeping his knees off the ground when hit from nearly any angle. Can angle his body so that arriving contact hits with less force, resulting in defenders sliding off of him. Remarkable zone runner; his first-step explosiveness and vision combine to create a great foundation. Good at small-area footwork and can navigate tight creases without taking on much contact or losing forward momentum. Demonstrates good patience, especially in outside zone, and makes smart and timely decisions about when to pursue cutbacks. Good at judging whether it’s worth eating a small loss or making an attempt at a risky freelance play. Improved as a decision-maker on gap plays. Good home-run ability; makes big gains when he sees the open field. Route-running ability is better than average for a running back. Knowledgeable and assignment-sound in pass protection without making too many whiffs as a blocker.

Weaknesses: Had availability problems his first two years in the NFL and still hasn’t had a 16-game season. Has issues with ball security, both as a runner and as a receiver. Fumble rate was seventh-highest among running backs last year and 12th-highest in 2019. Drop rate among receiving backs is similarly high, though it improved in 2020. Though he sometimes seems to showcase fantastic power, it is overall an issue against bigger linebackers and direct tackles from defensive linemen. Won’t be brought down on first contact but doesn’t power through contact against direct hits. Despite knowing assignments, doesn’t block all that well in pass protection and can’t sustain on extended plays. Can be overwhelmed by power or beaten by technique. Despite improvement in vision on power/gap-style plays, still occasionally makes poor decisions. Despite home-run capability, doesn’t have extra gear of speed many other runners do and can be run down from behind by faster linebackers.

Alexander Mattison

A third-round pick shortly after they had drafted Cook, Mattison was always destined to play a backup role despite his relatively high draft value at his position. He has paid back the Vikings’ faith in him relatively well, though Cook hit a run of good health just as Mattison was drafted so they haven’t had to use him completely in the insurance role. There’s a perception that he performed better as a rookie than in his second year, but that isn’t completely supported by the data or the film. He has improved as a runner and pass catcher, and that improvement will be a big help in case they really need to lean on him.

Strengths: Mattison has great acceleration despite speed concerns. Lower-body strength translates into first-step ability (and hurdling capability) and power against contact. Drives through defenders for extra yards and tends to fall forward. Good balance against contact and can stay upright even against hits coming from awkward angles. Good vision in both zone and gap schemes and great at navigating trash in tight spaces. Smart decision-maker, especially when balancing risk/reward; willing to eat small losses instead of risking it for bigger gains. Willingly takes cutback lanes when open, even if they are dramatic. Can freelance well on gap-style plays for gains.

Weaknesses: Not an explosive runner with an enormous amount of speed. Will get to the second level and gas off, with slower linebackers catching up to him and bringing him down before he gets to the 15- or 20-yard mark. Can be a big-play threat, but not because of his speed; his upside there is limited. Chooses to power over defenders or hurdle them instead of cutting to open space when the option is there. Limited change-of-direction; can make smaller movements to shift angles or make explosive jump-cuts but can’t dramatically alter angle with running. Only took six pass-blocking reps in 2019 and 13 in 2020, and has struggled in limited opportunities as a pass protector, both in terms of capacity to block players and assignment recognition.

Ameer Abdullah

Once a well-regarded draft prospect who was eventually taken in the second round by the Lions, Abdullah has gone from a primary back to a special-teams ace. For the Vikings, he has operated as an all-around special-teamer, playing in nearly every phase, often taking over kick-return duties. He’s also part of their backup plan at running back should Cook go down, and he offers some third-down capability to boot.

Strengths: Great stop-start capability and trades on his inherent quickness. First-step acceleration and cornering ability both shine and can look like he’s shot out of a cannon at the handoff. Has an integrated running technique and does a great job combining upper- and lower-body moves to create space and earn extra yards. Good at stringing together multiple moves without breaking stride. Great open-field runner, and has excelled as a runner in space. Vision in open field translates as a returner. Better than average vision at handoff and in crowded spaces. Makes up for power issues with excellent leverage and knows to get low as a runner. Generally very good hands as a receiver; looks the ball in and catches outside of his frame. Understands body positioning on catches.

Weaknesses: Can’t seem to fill in completely as a primary back; averaged 3.8 yards per carry with Detroit. His biggest issue has been power; doesn’t have the upper body strength to stiff-arm or otherwise shed tackles or the lower-body explosion to churn out yards after contact. Has historically had a fumbling problem both in the NFL and in college, though he hasn’t had many touches with the Vikings to bear that out. Might be a permanent issue; he has smaller hands than a typical running back and that might be the reason he has struggled with ball security. Vikings use Abdullah as a bit of a scatback, but he is more of an open-field runner than a full-fledged receiving back; too deliberate as a route runner to really threaten as a receiver. Despite his quickness, he has issues breaking open against linebackers. Not many trump cards as a runner —doesn’t have elite power, speed, balance or explosiveness. Is a big risk taker as a runner and will often attempt to bounce back out instead of following his blocks.

Kene Nwangwu

One of a few candidates to take over the kick-return job, Nwangwu’s most likely path to making the squad runs through special teams, as he’s a fairly inexperienced running back. The running back he’s replacing, Mike Boone, was also relatively inexperienced coming out of college. It’s not difficult to see the comparisons between the two, and the Vikings likely saw some of the same things in Nwangwu that they saw in Boone.

Strengths: Remarkably fast; evident in the few carries he had as a running back and clear success as a kick returner that he might be the fastest player on the roster. Has speed throughout the process — great initial acceleration and gear up to top speed. Fantastic top speed, too. Only one fumble in his career. Good open-field vision with an instinct for finding grass. Surprising size for his skill set and can use it to generate some power. Complements that with a good understanding of contact leverage.

Weaknesses: Only had 143 career rushing attempts in college, so he’s remarkably inexperienced since he played behind David Montgomery and Breece Hall at Iowa State. Doesn’t have much experience as a receiver either; only ran 112 routes, was targeted 12 times and caught seven passes in his entire four-year college career. By comparison, Cook ran 312 routes, saw 43 targets and caught 33 passes in just his final year at Florida State. Plays he did run showcased poor vision and would sometimes run into closed gaps or abandon structure and bounce outside regardless of his read. Didn’t showcase the short-area quickness evident in his testing or for most players with his profile. Even positives have to be caveated with his limited sample size, like his low fumble rate and high rate of big plays. Troublesome hands; dropped four of his 11 catchable passes, meaning he had a drop rate of over 35 percent. Route running isn’t very well developed. Not much experience as a pass protector and limited experience wasn’t positive. Injury worries, including an Achilles injury that ended his 2017 season before it started and a shoulder injury in 2019.

Chad Beebe
Lurking in the background of the debate over the Vikings’ third wide receiver is the generally agreed-upon notion that players like Beebe aren’t enough to bring the skill corps over the top. But improvement is always possible, and Beebe has been someone that the Vikings have valued over the past few years, providing third-down capability to help the team move the chains. Whether or not that’s enough to warrant a spot on the roster is something else, but he has a leg up on the competition.

Strengths: Uncommonly quick and uses it to generate separation out of cuts. Has explosive steps out of cuts and makes it tough for defensive backs to follow when he runs a precise route. Happens to also be a good route runner, with solid integrated technique that incorporates head and shoulder fakes. Good at tracking the ball in the air. Great at finding holes in zones or reading the rules of the defense to adjust to the route. Smart when finding space in the scramble drill and knows how to work back to the ball. Good vision for return work or yards after catch.

Weaknesses: Primarily a slot player that mostly runs underneath routes. Shorter receivers typically either need game-breaking speed or remarkable hands to succeed and Beebe has neither. Can’t threaten deep because of speed limitations and doesn’t have the contested catch ability to make the most of his limited range. Had a remarkably high drop rate in college, and that has followed him into training camps. Limited catch radius. Doesn’t generate many yards after contact despite quickness because of strength and speed limitations. Strength problems also make it difficult for him to maintain route discipline or win against press coverage. Has timing issues on routes sometimes. Injuries have been a real problem; has suffered multiple injuries that have taken him out of games as well as injuries that have forced him to miss full college and NFL seasons.

Bisi Johnson
With Beebe, Bisi Johnson is one of the two primary candidates to take on the third receiver role. His rookie year was impressive given where he was drafted, but he hasn’t demonstrated he’s anything more than a depth receiver at this point. Given the starting job at the beginning of 2020, he swiftly lost it to Jefferson. While that alone isn’t a huge knock, the fact that he couldn’t win the third receiver job after that is a little damning.

Strengths: Remarkably fluid receiver with easy movement and intuitive deceptive capabilities as a route runner. Good integrated technique as a route runner and can string together different types of route-running techniques for maximum effectiveness. Not just a fluid runner — can be sudden and explosive, too. Good route deception, tough to get a bead on. Agility extends to after-catch capability; can avoid tackles well with the ball in his hands. Good use of vertical lift to extend catch radius and good at winning contested catches.

Weaknesses: Difficulties at the catch point; has issues tracking the ball, especially on deep passes, and doesn’t always muscle out defenders for exclusive access to the ball. Doesn’t always showcase high-level catch technique. The result is a fairly high drop rate. Had issues in 2019 that showed up at times last year as a player who was still trying to figure out how to play at game speed; routes were run too deliberately and he didn’t take advantage of his natural agility, playing slower than he needed to play. Can be pushed off his route and sometimes will drift in routes. Doesn’t always adjust routes for holes in zone coverage or moving zones.

Ihmir Smith-Marsette
One of several return candidates drafted by the Vikings this year, Ihmir Smith-Marsette was one of the best kick returners in an unusually strong class of returners. He also has high-level speed that can be converted into third-receiver value as a deep threat, one who might alter the geometry of opposing defenses to help out other receivers and the run game. First, though, he has to get much better at the fundamentals of receiving. If he didn’t have technical issues to fix, he would have gone much earlier in the draft given his production and athletic skills.

Strengths: Was the leading receiver at Iowa for two consecutive years. His biggest strength — his ridiculous speed — is impossible to avoid and it’s immediately obvious on the field. It’s been useful for Iowa as both a deep receiver and a receiver who gains yards after the catch. Complements speed with good deep-ball tracking and good body control. Despite being a burner, has an instinct for varying speeds in route. Has great stop-start ability and very good agility. Uses both to be an excellent runner with the ball. Iowa gave him experience in a pro-style offense with timing concepts, play-action techniques and pro-style route combinations. Big-play magnet, scoring touchdowns as a receiver, rusher and kick returner.

Weaknesses: Raw as a route runner and was typically used as a vertical player without asking too much of him in other routes. When in other routes, he demonstrated flashes of advanced techniques but primarily had issues breaking down on sharp route angles and bursting out of them, often rounding out routes and giving away what he was doing. Doesn’t take advantage of natural agility or stop-start capability as a route runner. Skinny build gives rise to injury concerns. Also has issues with strength, and doesn’t assert his route path against physicality. Can be muscled out at the catch point. Despite good body control and ball tracking, he has issues reeling catches in, in part because of his strength against contact and in part because of his hands technique. Doesn’t hold onto the ball after the catch when taking a hit.

K.J. Osborn
They don’t just have 2021 draftees as kick return candidates; the Vikings drafted K.J. Osborn in 2020 hoping that he could earn a return job. Though he disappointed in that capacity and didn’t see the field as a receiver, his early showing in minicamp might make him a dark horse to make a real difference on offense.

Strengths: One of the nation’s top punt returners at Miami, he was the leading receiver at Miami, too. Good game speed and can get behind defenders. Speed translates directly into after-catch capability and return capability. Strong lower body allows him to shed tackles and generate a larger catch radius than one would expect. Demonstrated catch-point capability in minicamp, winning contested catches. Has a good understanding of the deep-ball game, with good ball tracking and receiver techniques fit for a deep threat.

Weaknesses: Despite being a “leading receiver,” he never produced particularly well in college. Didn’t display much in the way of nuanced wide receiver technique: gave away routes to defenders, rounded out routes, didn’t integrate fakes and had rough timing with the quarterback. Overall athletic profile doesn’t historically track well at receiver. Had drop issues in 2020 camp and in college.

Dan Chisena
A track athlete at Penn State who moonlighted at receiver, Chisena is a remarkable athlete without much experience. The Vikings, looking for a place for him on the roster so they could take advantage of his speed on special teams, briefly moved him from receiver to safety before switching him back after a few days.

Strengths: Chisena isn’t just a track athlete, he was one of the top track athletes in the Big Ten. His brief time on the field demonstrated that. Has size to pair with the speed and could become a classic “X” with the right development. Developed quickly at Penn State. Gets downfield quickly on special teams; often the first player to the ball or ball carrier.

Weaknesses: Virtually no experience at his position, essentially new to football in a pro environment. Old for a developmental player. Didn’t generate much production in college despite athleticism advantage. Difficulties understanding the offense, not just the position, have held him back. Has difficulty reeling the ball in and doesn’t have natural hands. Has some significant injury history in college. On special teams, made a number of mistakes last year, some of which gave the opponent double-digit yards on individual plays.

Blake Proehl
Son of Ricky Proehl and brother of Austin Proehl, Blake might have a bit more buzz than typical of an undrafted free agent receiver. That said, there was a reason he didn’t get picked in one of the thinner draft classes in recent memory and there’s quite a bit left he has to improve upon before he can be considered a reliable candidate for the roster (or even the practice squad).

Strengths: Tested well as an athlete, with good speed and explosion scores. Showcased agility on the field, did a great job getting open underneath and generally runs routes well. Did a good job creating leverage against defensive backs and breaking sticky coverage with in-route handfighting. Showcases some nuance as a technical route runner and runs routes with precision and timing. Good approach to the ball, with solid tracking and good hands technique, typically reeling the ball in without many drops (two in 132 catchable passes). Won at all three levels of the field at East Carolina.

Weaknesses: No athletic trump card. Testing in agility scores concerning, which may mean more for his athletic output on the field than his quickness against non-Power 5 defenders. While his technical route running is good, his athletic limits make it difficult for him to break free of true man-coverage corners. Has reasonable height for a versatile receiver, but thin frame is a concern and plays small; not likely to make many contested catches. Has difficulty boxing out on contested catches and will likely be limited from sideline play; could be a slot-only receiver who primarily runs routes inside. Deep shots likely won’t be there at the NFL level. Size creates injury concerns and suffered several injuries in college.

Whop Philyor
The Vikings signed two well-regarded undrafted free agents in Proehl and Whop Philyor, who ranked 338th and 267th on the Consensus Big Board, respectively. Named “Whop” because of his fondness for Burger King’s Whopper, the ex-Indiana wideout could be a hidden gem for the Vikings after earning preseason hype in a crowded Big Ten receiver environment.

Strengths: A 1,000-yard receiver in 2019, Philyor led the Big Ten in receptions in 2020, essentially repeating his impressive breakout season. Classic spark-plug type with explosive stop-start capability and surprising strength. Demonstrated high-level agility on the field and did a good job avoiding tackles. Speed is a big asset. When he wasn’t shaking tackles, he was breaking them; strength for his size allows him to power through tackles, and he has good balance as a runner. Like Kene Nwangwu and Smith-Marsette, he’s a return candidate with some college experience there.

Weaknesses: Really alarming athletic testing, especially for a player of his size (5-foot-9, 184 pounds); slow dash times, poor agility scores and underwhelming explosion scores. All of these translate in some way into his style of play, so if he cannot be fast, agile or explosive, he’ll be a liability — especially at his size. Has a high drop rate and doesn’t demonstrate high-level catching technique, often allowing the ball to get into his body. Also has an issue with contested catches: one of the lowest win rates on contested catches among the rookie receivers. Size is an issue, too; limited catch radius. Despite speed, was rarely used downfield and was primarily an underneath receiver. Not a particularly nuanced route runner, relying more on natural athleticism to break free. Will round off routes or otherwise signal his destination to defenders.

Myron Mitchell
Mitchell was a softly recruited Alabama high schooler who preferred to go the community college route. He ended up as the premier skill player among a talented group at Alabama-Birmingham after his stint at Butler Community College. Like many of the other skill players the Vikings acquired this year, Mitchell has return experience on special teams to go with his big-play pedigree.

Strengths: Great at generating big plays. A full 25 percent of his targets were over 20 yards deep and did a good job getting behind defenders. Fluid mover, natural at changing direction and intuitive athletic movements. Good acceleration off the line of scrimmage and gets to top speed quickly. Good agility and suddenness as a route runner and can use those traits as a ball carrier. Generally great in space and good at keeping the ball inbounds on sideline catches.

Weaknesses: Might not have the speed to replicate his style of play at the college level. Significant drop problems, especially in 2019. Career drop rate of 13.9 percent is in the bottom 10 percent of rookie receivers in the class. Production on a per-route basis was mediocre as well (1.70 yards per route run). Slight build is a concern; might get pushed off of routes and didn’t demonstrate strength as a route runner or tackle breaker. Catch-point strength is a concern as well and likely won’t win contested catches in the NFL. Not a technical route runner and will likely have much more trouble getting open at the next level, with a limited route tree at UAB. When running other routes, signaled his destinations too readily. With poor route-running, plus concerns about his athleticism and poor hands, he doesn’t have a clear path to contributing.