Quote: @"AGRforever" said:
@"medaille" said:
@"pattersaur" said:
Going strictly off OP’s list- only one of those QBs (Purdy) was taken outside the top 10 I believe. So 83% of the top QBs went top 10.
The Vikings have NEVER drafted a top 10 QB.
So while I get OP’s point and agree with it, it seems like the Vikings are content to try and find a QB to live in that remaining 17% rather than shoot for the ones with much better odds of becoming top tier. If we assume the Vikings would like to have a top tier QB, does this seem like a good strategy to anyone? Bueller??
Is that a worthwhile stat? Do you really want to crown that small sample size of guys who failed to make or win the Super Bowl as top tier? Why are we not including guys like Lamar Jackson and/or Hurts in the mix of guys with some amount of success but not the ultimate success, especially when Jackson won the MVP this year and Hurts made it to the SB last season?
I think you could also say that of the QBs on that list not
drafted in the top 10, 100% of them have been to a Super Bowl, while of the QBs
drafted in the top 10 only 40% have been to a Super Bowl. Obviously Mahomes is the only one of that
group to win a SB.
Basically if your team wasn't QB'ed by Mahomes or Brady your team hasn't won shit in 20 years. We should swing early and often until we draft a QB that can become elite. I actually do not like the idea of giving up 3x 1sts for one of the top 3. Assuming we can draft McCarthy at 11 we should do so and keep our other draft capital. He has just as good of a chance to become the next Mahomes level QB as any of the QBs do in this draft. Unfortunately its nearly 0% but its better then 0.00%.
Or Foles...
The question KAM/KOC need to answer for the Wilfs is does it make any sense to trade up for a Daniels or Maye vs hope there is someone @ 11 who may give them just as good (or almost as good) odds of success?
I'm not sure if JJM, Penix or Nix are that guy?
Quote: @"medaille" said:
@"pattersaur" said:
Going strictly off OP’s list- only one of those QBs (Purdy) was taken outside the top 10 I believe. So 83% of the top QBs went top 10.
The Vikings have NEVER drafted a top 10 QB.
So while I get OP’s point and agree with it, it seems like the Vikings are content to try and find a QB to live in that remaining 17% rather than shoot for the ones with much better odds of becoming top tier. If we assume the Vikings would like to have a top tier QB, does this seem like a good strategy to anyone? Bueller??
Is that a worthwhile stat? Do you really want to crown that small sample size of guys who failed to make or win the Super Bowl as top tier? Why are we not including guys like Lamar Jackson and/or Hurts in the mix of guys with some amount of success but not the ultimate success, especially when Jackson won the MVP this year and Hurts made it to the SB last season?
I think you could also say that of the QBs on that list not
drafted in the top 10, 100% of them have been to a Super Bowl, while of the QBs
drafted in the top 10 only 40% have been to a Super Bowl. Obviously Mahomes is the only one of that
group to win a SB.
Lamar is in the group with the AFC with Tua, wins are tough there with all the QBs they got.
Lately Hurts looks like he slept with the wrong lady.
Just took a big step back at the end of last year.
Quote: @"purplefaithful" said:
@"AGRforever" said:
@"medaille" said:
@"pattersaur" said:
Going strictly off OP’s list- only one of those QBs (Purdy) was taken outside the top 10 I believe. So 83% of the top QBs went top 10.
The Vikings have NEVER drafted a top 10 QB.
So while I get OP’s point and agree with it, it seems like the Vikings are content to try and find a QB to live in that remaining 17% rather than shoot for the ones with much better odds of becoming top tier. If we assume the Vikings would like to have a top tier QB, does this seem like a good strategy to anyone? Bueller??
Is that a worthwhile stat? Do you really want to crown that small sample size of guys who failed to make or win the Super Bowl as top tier? Why are we not including guys like Lamar Jackson and/or Hurts in the mix of guys with some amount of success but not the ultimate success, especially when Jackson won the MVP this year and Hurts made it to the SB last season?
I think you could also say that of the QBs on that list not
drafted in the top 10, 100% of them have been to a Super Bowl, while of the QBs
drafted in the top 10 only 40% have been to a Super Bowl. Obviously Mahomes is the only one of that
group to win a SB.
Basically if your team wasn't QB'ed by Mahomes or Brady your team hasn't won shit in 20 years. We should swing early and often until we draft a QB that can become elite. I actually do not like the idea of giving up 3x 1sts for one of the top 3. Assuming we can draft McCarthy at 11 we should do so and keep our other draft capital. He has just as good of a chance to become the next Mahomes level QB as any of the QBs do in this draft. Unfortunately its nearly 0% but its better then 0.00%.
Or Foles...
The question KAM/KOC need to answer for the Wilfs is does it make any sense to trade up for a Daniels or Maye vs hope there is someone @ 11 who may give them just as good (or almost as good) odds of success?
I'm not sure if JJM, Penix or Nix are that guy?
I get it, but lets say we trade for a top 3. Is it more likely theyre the next Mahomes or would ypu rather take a stab and have firsts the next two years incase they are the next Wilson or Bryce Young?
I’ll take lucky rather then good.
Quote: @"purplefaithful" said:
@"AGRforever" said:
@"medaille" said:
@"pattersaur" said:
Going strictly off OP’s list- only one of those QBs (Purdy) was taken outside the top 10 I believe. So 83% of the top QBs went top 10.
The Vikings have NEVER drafted a top 10 QB.
So while I get OP’s point and agree with it, it seems like the Vikings are content to try and find a QB to live in that remaining 17% rather than shoot for the ones with much better odds of becoming top tier. If we assume the Vikings would like to have a top tier QB, does this seem like a good strategy to anyone? Bueller??
Is that a worthwhile stat? Do you really want to crown that small sample size of guys who failed to make or win the Super Bowl as top tier? Why are we not including guys like Lamar Jackson and/or Hurts in the mix of guys with some amount of success but not the ultimate success, especially when Jackson won the MVP this year and Hurts made it to the SB last season?
I think you could also say that of the QBs on that list not
drafted in the top 10, 100% of them have been to a Super Bowl, while of the QBs
drafted in the top 10 only 40% have been to a Super Bowl. Obviously Mahomes is the only one of that
group to win a SB.
Basically if your team wasn't QB'ed by Mahomes or Brady your team hasn't won shit in 20 years. We should swing early and often until we draft a QB that can become elite. I actually do not like the idea of giving up 3x 1sts for one of the top 3. Assuming we can draft McCarthy at 11 we should do so and keep our other draft capital. He has just as good of a chance to become the next Mahomes level QB as any of the QBs do in this draft. Unfortunately its nearly 0% but its better then 0.00%.
Or Foles...
The question KAM/KOC need to answer for the Wilfs is does it make any sense to trade up for a Daniels or Maye vs hope there is someone @ 11 who may give them just as good (or almost as good) odds of success?
I'm not sure if JJM, Penix or Nix are that guy?
hell, I would add Williams, Mayes, and Daniels to that list of QB to be unsure of. I wouldnt even say the 3 on your list would have even 5% lower odds of success given success is largely about the opportunities they are given and going top 5 often means a shit team that doesnt put those high draft picks in the best of situations. ( they are often historically shit teams for a reason, and thats typically bad player management and ownership )
Quote: @"purplefaithful" said:
Last time we drafted a QB with a #1 pick was Culpepper
Pick 11
Maybe history is about to repeat itself in 24 and hopefully we get lucky.
We picked Culpepper in the 1999 draft. I know we all try very hard to put the 2011 draft out of our memories and I really hate to be the one to call it back to our memories. We did pick a QB at number 12.
Quote: @"FLVike" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Last time we drafted a QB with a #1 pick was Culpepper
Pick 11
Maybe history is about to repeat itself in 24 and hopefully we get lucky.
We picked Culpepper in the 1999 draft. I know we all try very hard to put the 2011 draft out of our memories and I really hate to be the one to call it back to our memories. We did pick a QB at number 12.
Good catch!!
And you are correct, I totally erased that from the memory banks lol!
Quote: @"purplefaithful" said:
Last time we drafted a QB with a #1 pick was Culpepper
Pick 11
Maybe history is about to repeat itself in 24 and hopefully we get lucky.
Culpepper wasn't a great QB without Moss and Carter, as well as the great offensive line he had. He also had a gifted OC.
Some teams seem to believe they need to build a roster, then add a QB as the missing piece. Others believe they need to get the QB, then build around him. I believe in the latter, but you better at least have protection for him or you may ruin him. They all need time to learn. They all tend to hold the ball at first because it takes time to learn. The greatest seasons of many hall of fame QB's come later in their careers for a reason.
I think you pay Cousins because he is as good now as he has ever been.
Which also means taking a QB at 11 you believe in, to learn behind him could be a good strategy. But you have to go after the one QB you truly believe in and not accept leftovers. If you have to move up, you do it!
I think it really boils down to what the brain trust thinks about the QBs in the draft, they may not be interested in 5 of the 6 names being batted around, they may be locked onto one guy and one guy only and try and position for him or go a completely different route in the draft all together if that doesn't materialize.
Quote: @"jargomcfargo" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Last time we drafted a QB with a #1 pick was Culpepper
Pick 11
Maybe history is about to repeat itself in 24 and hopefully we get lucky.
Culpepper wasn't a great QB without Moss and Carter, as well as the great offensive line he had. He also had a gifted OC.
Some teams seem to believe they need to build a roster, then add a QB as the missing piece. Others believe they need to get the QB, then build around him. I believe in the latter, but you better at least have protection for him or you may ruin him. They all need time to learn. They all tend to hold the ball at first because it takes time to learn. The greatest seasons of many hall of fame QB's come later in their careers for a reason.
I think you pay Cousins because he is as good now as he has ever been.
Which also means taking a QB at 11 you believe in, to learn behind him could be a good strategy. But you have to go after the one QB you truly believe in and not accept leftovers. If you have to move up, you do it!
Agree about Cousins, but I will say that Culpepper's best season by far was 2004, when he was MVP runner up to Peyton Manning. Cris Carter wasn't on the team then and Moss was banged up all year. Culpepper spread the ball around to a dozen different receivers. Burleson was actually our leading receiver that year.
Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"jargomcfargo" said:
@"purplefaithful" said:
Last time we drafted a QB with a #1 pick was Culpepper
Pick 11
Maybe history is about to repeat itself in 24 and hopefully we get lucky.
Culpepper wasn't a great QB without Moss and Carter, as well as the great offensive line he had. He also had a gifted OC.
Some teams seem to believe they need to build a roster, then add a QB as the missing piece. Others believe they need to get the QB, then build around him. I believe in the latter, but you better at least have protection for him or you may ruin him. They all need time to learn. They all tend to hold the ball at first because it takes time to learn. The greatest seasons of many hall of fame QB's come later in their careers for a reason.
I think you pay Cousins because he is as good now as he has ever been.
Which also means taking a QB at 11 you believe in, to learn behind him could be a good strategy. But you have to go after the one QB you truly believe in and not accept leftovers. If you have to move up, you do it!
Agree about Cousins, but I will say that Culpepper's best season by far was 2004, when he was MVP runner up to Peyton Manning. Cris Carter wasn't on the team then and Moss was banged up all year. Culpepper spread the ball around to a dozen different receivers. Burleson was actually our leading receiver that year. Awesome playoff win in Lambeau too knocking out Favre and the Packers. That was the Moss "moon" game were the Pep led Vikings throttled GB 31-17.
|
