Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"JR44" said:
The biggest regret is from this draft is more likely about not taking Mac Jones who was just sitting there than not trading up for a LT when we got a pretty good one and still traded down.
Let's give Mac Jones another year or two before we crown him the next Brady. Don't forget Mark Sanchez was being called "The Sanchize" in New York his rookie year. RGIII, Sam Bradford and Vince Young--all rookies of the year. Trubisky, Goff, Wentz, Winston, Mariota--all very promising rookie seasons.
The rookie QBs are doing exactly what they were expected to do. But they'll even out over time.
David Carr, remember the freaking out how the Vikings took the wrong QB when they took Teddy over Carr, after their first year or so? Average career, but definitely not worth the angst it caused some at the time.
I think you mean his brother Derek, but yeah. Funny, that draft. First two QB, Bortles and Manziel, out of the NFL. The next three, Teddy, Carr and Jimmy G, still starting.
yep my bad, David Carr is my go to argument as to why you fix the OL before worrying about a rookie QB.
Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"JR44" said:
The biggest regret is from this draft is more likely about not taking Mac Jones who was just sitting there than not trading up for a LT when we got a pretty good one and still traded down.
Let's give Mac Jones another year or two before we crown him the next Brady. Don't forget Mark Sanchez was being called "The Sanchize" in New York his rookie year. RGIII, Sam Bradford and Vince Young--all rookies of the year. Trubisky, Goff, Wentz, Winston, Mariota--all very promising rookie seasons.
The rookie QBs are doing exactly what they were expected to do. But they'll even out over time.
No body is crowning him the next Brady (at least not me). All I am saying is, we have had a hard time finding a long term answer at QB. Jones looked like a good one and is currently playing very well and we had the chance to pick him especially considering how hard it is to find such polished QBs at 15 and how hard it is to draft the position.
Lastly, first round picks are overrated in this day and age. Back in the day it would cost a lot to draft a QB at 15 and pay a lot of money for him not to pan out. That is not the case now as the cost is significantly less while the upside is very high (if you hit). First round picks are being cut left and right now because the investment is significantly less.
That is one of the reasons the Cardinals could draft two QBs in back to back years (Rosen at 10 and Murray at 1). Based on the "wait another year or two approach" I guess the Cardinals should have passed on Murray and see if Rosen was a good pick. Luckily for them they grabbed a once in a lifetime player (even if that view was just then). Missing on a first round pick is no longer a big deal.
You posted QBs that were ROY that did not pan out. Here are QBs that were ROY that went on to play many years at a high level.
- 2004:Ben Roethlisberger
- 2008:Matt Ryan
- 2011:Cam Newton
- 2016
 ak Prescott
- 2019:Kyler Murray
- 2020:Justin Herbert (jury is still out)
You are saying the only way we know if Jones is good is to wait a few years. How is that different from every player? Below are past non QB ROY candidates that did not have or are not having long stellar careers:
- 2009
 ercy Harvin
- 2013:Eddie Lacy
- 2014:Odell Beckham Jr
- 2015:Todd Gurley
- 2018:Saquon Barkley
So, if you have the chance to draft a QB that could be a good one you don't pass on that as that is one of the toughest positions to draft. We had one available to us and passed for whatever reason. You can sign a LT in free agency but getting a good QB in free agency is rare and when available would literally cost an arm and a leg (well, we know that all too well).
The decision to pass on Jones was very short sighted in my opinion especially looking at how much we have missed on first round picks.
There is no reason they could not have drafted Jones and let him sit behind Cousins. Heck the Chiefs took Mahomes at 10 and he sat behind Alex Smith for a year. That is what we should have done.
What did the Chiefs give up to get Mahomes? They gave the 27 overall pick, a third-round pick and their 2018 first-round selection to the Buffalo Bills to move up to No. 10 to select Mahomes
We did not have to give up ANYTHING. I am not saying Jones will be as good as Mahomes.
Here are the past first round picks for the Vikings
Year-Pick-Player2007:7:Adrian Peterson2008:No pick2009:22ercy Harvin2010:—:No pick2011:12:Christian Ponder2012:4:Matt Kalil29:Harrison Smith2013:23:Sharrif Floyd2013:25:Xavier Rhodes2013:29:Cordarrelle Patterson2014:9:Anthony Barr2014:32:Teddy Bridgewater2015:11:Trae Waynes2016:23:Laquon Treadwell2017: No pick2018:30:Mike Hughes2019:18:Garrett Bradbury2020:22:Justin Jefferson2020:31:Jeff Gladney:CB2021:23:Christian Darrisaw
Quote: @"mblack" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"JR44" said:
The biggest regret is from this draft is more likely about not taking Mac Jones who was just sitting there than not trading up for a LT when we got a pretty good one and still traded down.
Let's give Mac Jones another year or two before we crown him the next Brady. Don't forget Mark Sanchez was being called "The Sanchize" in New York his rookie year. RGIII, Sam Bradford and Vince Young--all rookies of the year. Trubisky, Goff, Wentz, Winston, Mariota--all very promising rookie seasons.
The rookie QBs are doing exactly what they were expected to do. But they'll even out over time.
No body is crowning him the next Brady (at least not me). All I am saying is, we have had a hard time finding a long term answer at QB. Jones looked like a good one and is currently playing very well and we had the chance to pick him especially considering how hard it is to find such polished QBs at 15 and how hard it is to draft the position.
Lastly, first round picks are overrated in this day and age. Back in the day it would cost a lot to draft a QB at 15 and pay a lot of money for him not to pan out. That is not the case now as the cost is significantly less while the upside is very high (if you hit). First round picks are being cut left and right now because the investment is significantly less.
That is one of the reasons the Cardinals could draft two QBs in back to back years (Rosen at 10 and Murray at 1). Based on the "wait another year or two approach" I guess the Cardinals should have passed on Murray and see if Rosen was a good pick. Luckily for them they grabbed a once in a lifetime player (even if that view was just then). Missing on a first round pick is no longer a big deal.
You posted QBs that were ROY that did not pan out. Here are QBs that were ROY that went on to play many years at a high level.
- 2004:Ben Roethlisberger
- 2008:Matt Ryan
- 2011:Cam Newton
- 2016ak Prescott
- 2019:Kyler Murray
- 2020:Justin Herbert (jury is still out)
You are saying the only way we know if Jones is good is to wait a few years. How is that different from every player? Below are past non QB ROY candidates that did not have or are not having long stellar careers:
- 2009ercy Harvin
- 2013:Eddie Lacy
- 2014:Odell Beckham Jr
- 2015:Todd Gurley
- 2018:Saquon Barkley
So, if you have the chance to draft a QB that could be a good one you don't pass on that as that is one of the toughest positions to draft. We had one available to us and passed for whatever reason. You can sign a LT in free agency but getting a good QB in free agency is rare and when available would literally cost an arm and a leg (well, we know that all too well).
The decision to pass on Jones was very short sighted in my opinion especially looking at how much we have missed on first round picks.
There is no reason they could not have drafted Jones and let him sit behind Cousins. Heck the Chiefs took Mahomes at 10 and he sat behind Alex Smith for a year. That is what we should have done.
What did the Chiefs give up to get Mahomes? They gave the 27 overall pick, a third-round pick and their 2018 first-round selection to the Buffalo Bills to move up to No. 10 to select Mahomes
We did not have to give up ANYTHING. I am not saying Jones will be as good as Mahomes.
Here are the past first round picks for the Vikings
Year-Pick-Player2007:7:Adrian Peterson2008:No pick2009:22 ercy Harvin2010:—:No pick2011:12:Christian Ponder2012:4:Matt Kalil29:Harrison Smith2013:23:Sharrif Floyd2013:25:Xavier Rhodes2013:29:Cordarrelle Patterson2014:9:Anthony Barr2014:32:Teddy Bridgewater2015:11:Trae Waynes2016:23:Laquon Treadwell2017: No pick2018:30:Mike Hughes2019:18:Garrett Bradbury2020:22:Justin Jefferson2020:31:Jeff Gladney:CB2021:23:Christian Darrisaw
I think you are hovering around my NFL draft strategy is that if a QB that you think has a realistic chance of being great drops to you, you should draft them. I wouldn't spend an arm and a leg to trade up for one, but every handful of years you have the option to draft a Brady, a Rodgers, a Wilson, etc. and you should be prepared to draft them if they're available. Even Mahomes was available to a 3rd of the league. You just don't really know who will be good. It's a volume game. I think the other thing is that you should focus on building an offense that a young QB can thrive in and develop properly. Nothing worse than drafting a QB into a shitty situation and breaking them. I think it's much easier to build a defense in a hurry than to fix an offense that is failing to help your young QB.
Quote: @"medaille" said:
I disagree with the idea that QB is not why we lost
games. I think that comes from a mindset
of needing to have (some)one to blame and the need to rank people. Football is a team game, and for many of our
close losses you could probably make the argument that if any handful of
players had made 1-2 plays a little better we would have won, and it’s really easy
to hone in on the guy who missed a kick or the guy who fumbled. It’s a lot harder to hone in on the guy who
threw the 6 yard pass short of the sticks rather than the 12 yard completion he
could have had that would have kept the drive going. I think it’s hard to argue that in a lot of
our losses Cousins goes missing for large chunks of the game. QB is the single biggest reason for winning
or losing any given football game.
which is exactly why stats are so often misleading. they dont account for the wrong read, wrong target, wrong completion, as long as they result in a net gain... they are considered a net win in the stat world despite the negatives that they may have had on the game. like an incompletion to kill the clock when a sack would have allowed more time to run off to help seal away a win, vs taking a loss early in the game vs throwing it away to avoid the loss of yards, how many negative plays into the flats have we seen this year when the best outcome would have been to fire it over the receivers head and save the yards?
Quote: @"JimmyinSD" said:
@"medaille" said  "medaille" said:I disagree with the idea that QB is not why we lost games. I think that comes from a mindset of needing to have (some)one to blame and the need to rank people. Football is a team game, and for many of our close losses you could probably make the argument that if any handful of players had made 1-2 plays a little better we would have won, and it’s really easy to hone in on the guy who missed a kick or the guy who fumbled. It’s a lot harder to hone in on the guy who threw the 6 yard pass short of the sticks rather than the 12 yard completion he could have had that would have kept the drive going. I think it’s hard to argue that in a lot of our losses Cousins goes missing for large chunks of the game. QB is the single biggest reason for winning or losing any given football game.
which is exactly why stats are so often misleading. they dont account for the wrong read, wrong target, wrong completion, as long as they result in a net gain... they are considered a net win in the stat world despite the negatives that they may have had on the game. like an incompletion to kill the clock when a sack would have allowed more time to run off to help seal away a win, vs taking a loss early in the game vs throwing it away to avoid the loss of yards, how many negative plays into the flats have we seen this year when the best outcome would have been to fire it over the receivers head and save the yards?
Could not agree more with these thoughts which is why despite stats Cousins doesn't have it for me. I really want to find a way to unload him next year with that contract and get a new Offensive minded HC. I have seen enough of Cousins and Zimmer to know the end of this story.
Quote: @"JimmyinSD" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"JR44" said:
The biggest regret is from this draft is more likely about not taking Mac Jones who was just sitting there than not trading up for a LT when we got a pretty good one and still traded down.
Let's give Mac Jones another year or two before we crown him the next Brady. Don't forget Mark Sanchez was being called "The Sanchize" in New York his rookie year. RGIII, Sam Bradford and Vince Young--all rookies of the year. Trubisky, Goff, Wentz, Winston, Mariota--all very promising rookie seasons.
The rookie QBs are doing exactly what they were expected to do. But they'll even out over time.
David Carr, remember the freaking out how the Vikings took the wrong QB when they took Teddy over Carr, after their first year or so? Average career, but definitely not worth the angst it caused some at the time.
I think you mean his brother Derek, but yeah. Funny, that draft. First two QB, Bortles and Manziel, out of the NFL. The next three, Teddy, Carr and Jimmy G, still starting.
yep my bad, David Carr is my go to argument as to why you fix the OL before worrying about a rookie QB.
The pats have been the most successful team in the NFL going on 2 decades now. One glaring difference between them and the Vikings is the protection afforded the QB. Brady seemed to have all day on passing downs compared to Vikings QB's, year in and year out. Brady is one of the best ever at pre snap reads and knowing where to go with the ball which helps the line out, but they don't need much help. Even Brady struggles in those games when teams find a way to pressure him, as does Rodgers, Mahomes, and all QB's.
Mahomes seemed unstoppable until the superbowl when both of his starting offensive tackles were out; and this year he has 5 new offensive linemen and he's a mess.
So while I agree, Jones would have been a good pick, I doubt he would have been as good with the Vikings.
A drafted QB's fate is dependent upon which team drafts them, as much as how talented they are in a lot of cases.
Spielman has failed to acquire a truly good offensive line ever. That's one reason I think he needs replaced.
The QB is the most important piece of the puzzle, but a great offensive and defensive line is a key element found in almost all top tier playoff and superbowl contenders. Right now, that's not the Vikings.
Jones stats so far this season scream game manager. Maybe he develops into an elite QB over his career, but maybe not. But, if you don't like KC because you think he's no more than a game manager, I don't know what you see in Jones that makes you think that he's any different.
Quote: @"JimmyinSD" said:
@"medaille" said:
I disagree with the idea that QB is not why we lost
games. I think that comes from a mindset
of needing to have (some)one to blame and the need to rank people. Football is a team game, and for many of our
close losses you could probably make the argument that if any handful of
players had made 1-2 plays a little better we would have won, and it’s really easy
to hone in on the guy who missed a kick or the guy who fumbled. It’s a lot harder to hone in on the guy who
threw the 6 yard pass short of the sticks rather than the 12 yard completion he
could have had that would have kept the drive going. I think it’s hard to argue that in a lot of
our losses Cousins goes missing for large chunks of the game. QB is the single biggest reason for winning
or losing any given football game.
which is exactly why stats are so often misleading. they dont account for the wrong read, wrong target, wrong completion, as long as they result in a net gain... they are considered a net win in the stat world despite the negatives that they may have had on the game. like an incompletion to kill the clock when a sack would have allowed more time to run off to help seal away a win, vs taking a loss early in the game vs throwing it away to avoid the loss of yards, how many negative plays into the flats have we seen this year when the best outcome would have been to fire it over the receivers head and save the yards?
There ARE stat organizations that do a lot of the above. DVOA and PFF. And more and more people are using them over the old-school yardage and rating stats. Especially on Twitter.
But I'd be careful. DVOA ranks the Vikings a top 10 team, ahead of Green Bay, and PFF's highest rated passer in the NFL is Kirk Cousins, so you may not want to use either of them in any kind of Cousins rant.
Quote: @"MaroonBells" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"medaille" said:
I disagree with the idea that QB is not why we lost
games. I think that comes from a mindset
of needing to have (some)one to blame and the need to rank people. Football is a team game, and for many of our
close losses you could probably make the argument that if any handful of
players had made 1-2 plays a little better we would have won, and it’s really easy
to hone in on the guy who missed a kick or the guy who fumbled. It’s a lot harder to hone in on the guy who
threw the 6 yard pass short of the sticks rather than the 12 yard completion he
could have had that would have kept the drive going. I think it’s hard to argue that in a lot of
our losses Cousins goes missing for large chunks of the game. QB is the single biggest reason for winning
or losing any given football game.
which is exactly why stats are so often misleading. they dont account for the wrong read, wrong target, wrong completion, as long as they result in a net gain... they are considered a net win in the stat world despite the negatives that they may have had on the game. like an incompletion to kill the clock when a sack would have allowed more time to run off to help seal away a win, vs taking a loss early in the game vs throwing it away to avoid the loss of yards, how many negative plays into the flats have we seen this year when the best outcome would have been to fire it over the receivers head and save the yards?
There ARE stat organizations that do a lot of the above. DVOA and PFF. And more and more people are using them over the old-school yardage and rating stats. Especially on Twitter.
But I'd be careful. DVOA ranks the Vikings a top 10 team, ahead of Green Bay, and PFF's highest rated passer in the NFL is Kirk Cousins, so you may not want to use either of them in any kind of Cousins rant.
I think my opinion of those next level stats like PFF are pretty well known. and Twitter.. oh please =)
Quote: @"JimmyinSD" said:
@"MaroonBells" said:
@"JimmyinSD" said:
@"medaille" said:
I disagree with the idea that QB is not why we lost
games. I think that comes from a mindset
of needing to have (some)one to blame and the need to rank people. Football is a team game, and for many of our
close losses you could probably make the argument that if any handful of
players had made 1-2 plays a little better we would have won, and it’s really easy
to hone in on the guy who missed a kick or the guy who fumbled. It’s a lot harder to hone in on the guy who
threw the 6 yard pass short of the sticks rather than the 12 yard completion he
could have had that would have kept the drive going. I think it’s hard to argue that in a lot of
our losses Cousins goes missing for large chunks of the game. QB is the single biggest reason for winning
or losing any given football game.
which is exactly why stats are so often misleading. they dont account for the wrong read, wrong target, wrong completion, as long as they result in a net gain... they are considered a net win in the stat world despite the negatives that they may have had on the game. like an incompletion to kill the clock when a sack would have allowed more time to run off to help seal away a win, vs taking a loss early in the game vs throwing it away to avoid the loss of yards, how many negative plays into the flats have we seen this year when the best outcome would have been to fire it over the receivers head and save the yards?
There ARE stat organizations that do a lot of the above. DVOA and PFF. And more and more people are using them over the old-school yardage and rating stats. Especially on Twitter.
But I'd be careful. DVOA ranks the Vikings a top 10 team, ahead of Green Bay, and PFF's highest rated passer in the NFL is Kirk Cousins, so you may not want to use either of them in any kind of Cousins rant.
I think my opinion of those next level stats like PFF are pretty well known. and Twitter.. oh please =)
I don't think Twitter is what you think it is. It doesn't have a point of view. Happy to hear you like the next level stats though. It sounded like you would since you hated the old ones.
|
