Minnesota moved down three spots in the second round of the…
Minnesota moved down three spots in the second round of the 1994 draft, sending the Raiders pick No. 52 and receiving Nos. 55 and 125. The Raiders selected James Folston; the Vikings chose Fernando Smith and Mike Wells. Smith became a useful defensive lineman, and the extra fourth-rounder gives Minnesota the better aggregate return.
Las Vegas Raiders Received
- pick 1994 2nd round pick (52nd overall, James Folston )
Minnesota Vikings Received
- pick 1994 2nd round pick (55th overall, Fernando Smith )
- pick 1994 4th round pick (125th overall, Mike Wells )
Trade Analysis
The Exchange
Minnesota moved from pick No. 52 to No. 55 in the 1994 second round and received pick No. 125 as compensation from the Raiders. Los Angeles used the higher selection on James Folston. Minnesota selected defensive lineman Fernando Smith at No. 55 and defensive tackle Mike Wells at No. 125. The Vikings sacrificed only three spots to add a fourth-round opportunity.
Minnesota Vikings Return
Smith became the stronger part of Minnesota’s return. He spent several seasons in the NFL and contributed as a rotational defensive lineman, giving the Vikings legitimate value from the pick they still retained in the second round. Wells provided a second defensive prospect from the added fourth-rounder. He did not become a star, but the extra chance cost Minnesota very little movement.
Las Vegas Raiders Return
Folston gave the Raiders an NFL linebacker, but his career did not develop enough to justify a large premium for the move up. The Raiders targeted their preferred player and avoided a total miss, yet they also gave Minnesota another selection while advancing only three positions. That is a difficult exchange to dominate unless the targeted player becomes clearly superior.
Value in Hindsight
Trade-down math favored Minnesota from the beginning, and the career results did not reverse it. The Vikings still found a useful player at No. 55 and received another prospect at No. 125. The Raiders got some value from Folston, so the trade should not be graded harshly, but the extra Minnesota asset created the better overall package.
Final Verdict
Minnesota holds the edge, with a B against the Raiders’ B-. The Vikings combined a small slide with two defensive selections and received enough contribution to validate the strategy. The Raiders’ return was respectable rather than damaging, which is why the grade gap remains narrow instead of becoming a decisive loss.