Quote: @pattersaur said:
@ dadevike said:
I suspect that once Sauce, Stingley, and Wilson were gone, KAM needed to find a trade partner. He says he really liked Williams and was thinking of taking him, but that's probably not true. What's he going to say? There is nothing to be gained by saying he did not think Williams was worth a 12. So if he does not make the trade, he is left taking a player he does not want at 12 (Hamilton?) and the Lions make the same trade for 13 or 14 and still get Williams.
Same thing happened with the GB trade. GB wanted Watson. KAM did not. Either he makes the trade with GB or GB makes the same trade at the next spot.
In other words, the only way KAM could prevent the Lions or GB from getting Williams and Watson was to take them himself ad he did not want that.
I agree with you on the GB deal but I doubt the Lions could have gotten Williams if we didn't make that deal. Almost certainly not for the same package. The Texans were slated to pick at 13 but moved down 2 spots to 15. Eagles jumped up to take Jordan Davis at 13. Convincing the Texans to move all the way down to 32 would have been tricky. Baltimore took Hamilton at 14 and wasn't moving. Then WRs went at 16 and 18.
The point is they might have been able to get Williams but there were only a couple other teams who may have done it and I'm not sure any of them wanted to drop all the way back to 32. We'll never know.
I agree with whoever said it above-- hopefully KAM learns his lesson on this and tries to get better value for any trade downs in the future. He did a great job on that with the GB trade.
I really have no issues at all with the GB trade - even if it was with a division rival. I did not like the Detroit trade when he made it and I still don't, for the reasons you mentioned. I'm just trying to understand Kwesi's thought process. I just don't think he liked ANY of the remaining players at 12.
Kwesi is undoubtedly a smart guy. He knows the trade value charts better than anyone here. He probably knows how fans are going to react when he trades with a division rival and gets less than the popular charts say he should get. (He also knows the trade value charts are just rough guides.) I'm trying to figure a logical process by which he justifies that trade in his mind.
Quote: @minny65 said:
@ medaille said:
...
And can we all admit that it was not a "good" trade at least, right? Even without any chart. Just looking for a baseline but actually I think about 80% have already agreed to that. You can find anyone/chart indicating what you want.
I don’t feel a strong need to agree with you. I think a lot of Vikings fans look at Spielmans
drafts of continually trading down and just wanted something different and didn’t
really get it and that’s coloring their opinions. I think a lot of fans are getting exposed to
the “analytical” draft value charts for perhaps the first time and their heads
are filled more with the traditional draft charts values and that’s what they’ve
internalized and for them, they’re obviously disappointed because the values didn’t
work in our favor according to those charts.
For me, I’m still figuring out how I feel on this. I do think it would have been nice if we
would have gotten more value, but I’m not at the point of feeling bad about the
trade. I didn’t really pay attention
before the draft to players, so I wasn’t really attached to specific guys. I do feel confident that the more important
part of drafting is who you pick rather than when you pick, where a GM who is
slightly better at avoiding busts and coaches who consistently get slightly
more out of their players will outcompete the guys who are better at trades but
bust more.
Quote: @medaille said:
@ minny65 said:
@ medaille said:
...
And can we all admit that it was not a "good" trade at least, right? Even without any chart. Just looking for a baseline but actually I think about 80% have already agreed to that. You can find anyone/chart indicating what you want.
I don’t feel a strong need to agree with you. I think a lot of Vikings fans look at Spielmans
drafts of continually trading down and just wanted something different and didn’t
really get it and that’s coloring their opinions. I think a lot of fans are getting exposed to
the “analytical” draft value charts for perhaps the first time and their heads
are filled more with the traditional draft charts values and that’s what they’ve
internalized and for them, they’re obviously disappointed because the values didn’t
work in our favor according to those charts.
For me, I’m still figuring out how I feel on this. I do think it would have been nice if we
would have gotten more value, but I’m not at the point of feeling bad about the
trade. I didn’t really pay attention
before the draft to players, so I wasn’t really attached to specific guys. I do feel confident that the more important
part of drafting is who you pick rather than when you pick, where a GM who is
slightly better at avoiding busts and coaches who consistently get slightly
more out of their players will outcompete the guys who are better at trades but
bust more.
Yea, we agree it would have been nice to get more value. I also wasn't attached to one player either and I am no draft guru or heavy college football viewer.
Lastly, despite Spelly being let go I would rank him in the Top 10 GM's in the business. I have stated numerous times that Spelly was ahead of the curve on analytics about a decade ago and I do credit him with finding some real gems in 3rd round and beyond. Also, pre draft I said that this was the perfect draft to move down in so I had no problem with that at all...I just wish we got more value.
I think people are giving Kwesi waaaay too much credit and chalking it up as "well the decision makers know more then we do" when that's not necessarily the case. That's like saying Biden knows what the hell he is doing just because he's the President, so he must, right? Blind squirrels. Kwesi had zero football experience up until 8 years ago. Dude has been in the game less then a decade and his experience had little to nothing to do with roster building. He shit the bed on the Lions trade. People can try to rationalize it all they want, but it was an awful trade and no amount of spin is going to change that and he's not beyond criticism. I know he's everybody's golden boy right now but the guy hasn't done anything and his first offseason has been pretty lackluster thusfar. If this is a sign of things to come in future offseasons then this is going to be a very long four years until his contract expires and he's gone. Proof will be on the field, but I was extremely skeptical when we hired this guy and his first offseason has done nothing to change that.
Quote: @supafreak84 said:
I think people are giving Kwesi waaaay too much credit and chalking it up as "well the decision makers know more then we do" when that's not necessarily the case. That's like saying Biden knows what the hell he is doing just because he's the President, so he must, right? Blind squirrels. Kwesi had zero football experience up until 8 years ago. Dude has been in the game less then a decade and his experience had little to nothing to do with roster building. He shit the bed on the Lions trade. People can try to rationalize it all they want, but it was an awful trade and no amount of spin is going to change that and he's not beyond criticism. I know he's everybody's golden boy right now but the guy hasn't done anything and his first offseason has been pretty lackluster thusfar. If this is a sign of things to come in future offseasons then this is going to be a very long four years until his contract expires and he's gone. Proof will be on the field, but I was extremely skeptical when we hired this guy and his first offseason has done nothing to change that.
Youre probably right. We should trust posters on an internet forum. Theyre the real geniuses.
Quote: @AGRforever said:
@ supafreak84 said:
I think people are giving Kwesi waaaay too much credit and chalking it up as "well the decision makers know more then we do" when that's not necessarily the case. That's like saying Biden knows what the hell he is doing just because he's the President, so he must, right? Blind squirrels. Kwesi had zero football experience up until 8 years ago. Dude has been in the game less then a decade and his experience had little to nothing to do with roster building. He shit the bed on the Lions trade. People can try to rationalize it all they want, but it was an awful trade and no amount of spin is going to change that and he's not beyond criticism. I know he's everybody's golden boy right now but the guy hasn't done anything and his first offseason has been pretty lackluster thusfar. If this is a sign of things to come in future offseasons then this is going to be a very long four years until his contract expires and he's gone. Proof will be on the field, but I was extremely skeptical when we hired this guy and his first offseason has done nothing to change that.
Youre probably right. We should trust posters on an internet forum. Theyre the real geniuses.
Trust whomever you want. Just because people hold high job positions or are the "decision makers" doesn't mean they know what the hell they are doing or "know more" then everybody else. Look no further then our President and the bang up job he's doing.
I love reading these posts, positive and negative, commenting on value of trades in the draft. None of these guys have played a down in the NFL. We have all seen high picks fail and lower picks excel. Time will tell how these trades pan out. Right now none of us really has a clue.
Quote: @1VikesFan said:
I love reading these posts, positive and negative, commenting on value of trades in the draft. None of these guys have played a down in the NFL. We have all seen high picks fail and lower picks excel. Time will tell how these trades pan out. Right now none of us really has a clue.
Yea we all know that prior to and after the draft. Anything else Viking related that we can discuss 
Oh, did you see Kirk's new ride - wowza! He is looking quit like the Dilf these daze!
Quote: @Wetlander said:
@ ap88ap28 said:
The value of a dollar changes constantly. Why would the value of draft picks be set in stone. There was one QB taken on the first round and the 2nd dropped to what 80 something, The pick only has value of what is available at the time. A team is not giving as much for an injured wide reciever as a promising QB.Detroit did not have to take a wr at that pick if they did not feel comfortable with the value. They could have moved on to someone else with their pick.Value is only what somene will give you. If the pick had so much value some team would have offered it
The Lions were in love with Jameson Williams and wanted to move up for him. Go read their GM's comments after they drafted him... they obviously valued him highly.
The problem was Kwesi undervalued our pick at 12 IMO. The Vikings didn't seem to hold Williams in the same regard as other players they liked. He forgot the other half of the trade and that is if someone really wants to move up, you better make sure to get a good deal.
By any charts out there, the Vikings received a "fair" deal (analytics chart, which I heard we won by 10%) or lost the deal if you are using recent draft precedent and older charts.
That's where I have my biggest gripe with the trade... Sure this draft may be "weaker" at the top than other drafts... but that was mainly because there were no top tier QB prospects. We were still picking top 12 and there were a couple blue chip guys (including Jameson) left at our pick. Kwesi undervalued our pick in the trade back, plain and simple. We could have gotten more value for trading out of the couple blue chip guys left.
I was suprised and disapointed with how little comensation we got, But in hindsisght i see it was just a different year, There was not that much different of value in the players on the board,But it was some what deep with players of the same value. 2 for 1 was good value in this draft, I dont thinl there was much bidding cometition. I dont think Pittsburg even had to move to get a QB,
|
