Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ StickyBun said:
@ MaroonBells said:
That's the market. You either pay it or you take another seat at the world's worst-luck craps table. What's hard to believe isn't the contract; it's that they almost didn't pay it. It's like you actually WIN at the craps table and instead of banking your winnings, you put it all in on another throw.
This. Its how the QB game is played in the NFL. Fans react in horror over the contract but what was Dallas SUPPOSED to do? They could much more easily be stuck with a worse QB than Prescott than the odds of finding a better one. Look at Miami now: ready to give up on Tua already because they must see something. Could easily happen to Dallas if they moved on from Prescott.
But at least they would have had the cap to build a team around a not elite QB, now they have a not elite QB and no cap space to put a team around him to make up for his short comings, and with that much guaranteed they are likely stuck with thus decisions for 3 to 4 years.
I made the argument when the team went after Kirk, that his deal was to high for his production and would limit the teams ability to improve areas of need through FA, and here we are. Even the great and powerful Brez is stumbling with the weight of a real QB contract.. Now Dallas gets to try and figure out how to do the same and will likely meet the same fate.
Yes, you did make this argument, and you're still wrong.
What good is cap space if you don't have a QB capable of winning the Super Bowl? You don't need an "elite" QB to win a Super Bowl, but you do need one capable of winning in the NFL. And that's Dak Prescott. It's also KIrk Cousins. Good Christ, it's not like the Cowboys have Dak and nothing else. It's not like the Vikings have Cousins and nothing else. It's not like they don't also have Thielen, Jefferson, Cook, Hunter, Kendricks, Harry....
If the Vikings listened to you, we wouldn't have Hunter, or Cook, or Cousins. Oh but we'd have cap space!!! LOL.
once again pretty full of yourself,
who are these slightly above average QBs winning superbowls that are carrying top of market contracts. Go ahead, list them, I see a list of future HOFers ( at least one of which played with a below average contract and it looks like it worked out pretty good for him) a rookie contract or two, and a smattering of lower tier guys on cheap deals.
A team can get away with it for the first year, but once they have to start adding new contracts on top of that bad QB investment they start losing ground. and if they listened to me they would have Hunter and Cook, and likely several other positions improved over current skill levels, just not Cousins.
Nope, you didn't want to give Cook a market-value contract. You said it over and over. You either pay these guys their worth on the market, or you lose them. It's really not that complicated.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
@ StickyBun said:
@ MaroonBells said:
That's the market. You either pay it or you take another seat at the world's worst-luck craps table. What's hard to believe isn't the contract; it's that they almost didn't pay it. It's like you actually WIN at the craps table and instead of banking your winnings, you put it all in on another throw.
This. Its how the QB game is played in the NFL. Fans react in horror over the contract but what was Dallas SUPPOSED to do? They could much more easily be stuck with a worse QB than Prescott than the odds of finding a better one. Look at Miami now: ready to give up on Tua already because they must see something. Could easily happen to Dallas if they moved on from Prescott.
But at least they would have had the cap to build a team around a not elite QB, now they have a not elite QB and no cap space to put a team around him to make up for his short comings, and with that much guaranteed they are likely stuck with thus decisions for 3 to 4 years.
I made the argument when the team went after Kirk, that his deal was to high for his production and would limit the teams ability to improve areas of need through FA, and here we are. Even the great and powerful Brez is stumbling with the weight of a real QB contract.. Now Dallas gets to try and figure out how to do the same and will likely meet the same fate.
Yes, you did make this argument, and you're still wrong.
What good is cap space if you don't have a QB capable of winning the Super Bowl? You don't need an "elite" QB to win a Super Bowl, but you do need one capable of winning in the NFL. And that's Dak Prescott. It's also KIrk Cousins. Good Christ, it's not like the Cowboys have Dak and nothing else. It's not like the Vikings have Cousins and nothing else. It's not like they don't also have Thielen, Jefferson, Cook, Hunter, Kendricks, Harry....
If the Vikings listened to you, we wouldn't have Hunter, or Cook, or Cousins. Oh but we'd have cap space!!! LOL.
once again pretty full of yourself,
who are these slightly above average QBs winning superbowls that are carrying top of market contracts. Go ahead, list them, I see a list of future HOFers ( at least one of which played with a below average contract and it looks like it worked out pretty good for him) a rookie contract or two, and a smattering of lower tier guys on cheap deals.
A team can get away with it for the first year, but once they have to start adding new contracts on top of that bad QB investment they start losing ground. and if they listened to me they would have Hunter and Cook, and likely several other positions improved over current skill levels, just not Cousins.
Nope, you didn't want to give Cook a market-value contract. You said it over and over. You either pay these guys their worth on the market, or you lose them. It's really not that complicated.
i didnt want to give him the 15-16 million that was being bantered about, I said 10-11, but didnt have a problem with the 12.5 he ended up getting. so he didnt get a top of the market deal as some were saying he would and I was opposed to.
Sounds like the NFL’s upcoming TV contract is about to double in value after 2022, for the following 10 years! The salary cap will be taking off like a rocket— this contract is based on that...!
Quote: @MarkSP18 said:
The sad part is that the Vikings could have easily drafted Dak in 2016.
They were soooo confident in their roster that Spielman traded #86 to the Dolphins for #186 and their 2017 3rd and 4th rounders.
He used #121 on Willie Beavers. Dak went #135.
He did turn #186 into David Morgan & Stephen Weatherly.
He used the 2017 4th from Miami to move up for Cook but could have stayed put for Kamara or Mixon
The rest of 2017 is too convoluted to detail but he traded down so much (past Kittle) it is not even worth mentioning.
Why do this review which some will call hindsight?
It shines a light on the current regimes disdain for using mid-round picks on QB depth no matter who is the starter.
I fear that they are "fat and happy" with Kork, Mannion, Browning, and Stanley.
I have doubts that they are truly interested in any of the top QBs although they have visited with Maj Jones, Ehlinger, & Book.
I know folks will say that they have Teddy and should not invest in the backup QB but I think that is a mistake.
The Patriots spent a 2nd on Jimmy G and a 3rd on Brissett even though they had the GOAT.
I'm just hoping the Vikings invest in a better backup QB and using mid-round picks to try and hit the lottery is not a bad idea.
It cant be worse than Clemmings, Beavers, Yankey, Samia, etc.
You're not shinning a light on anything. There have been studies done on draft pick conversion rates (don't know where to find them now) and the Vikings were far from the worst at it. They did quite well on draft pick conversion. I think they used "on the team 5 years from now" as a judge and factored in probowls/all pro ect.
The draft is a crapshoot for everyone, not just the Vikings. While doing hindsight might be fun it accomplishes nothing. You can take everyone in the NFC North. I'd take our picks over all 3 teams with the exception of GB getting lucky on Erin. Past him, we've blown everyone out of the water on picks turning into good/great players.
Quote: @AGRforever said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
The sad part is that the Vikings could have easily drafted Dak in 2016.
They were soooo confident in their roster that Spielman traded #86 to the Dolphins for #186 and their 2017 3rd and 4th rounders.
He used #121 on Willie Beavers. Dak went #135.
He did turn #186 into David Morgan & Stephen Weatherly.
He used the 2017 4th from Miami to move up for Cook but could have stayed put for Kamara or Mixon
The rest of 2017 is too convoluted to detail but he traded down so much (past Kittle) it is not even worth mentioning.
Why do this review which some will call hindsight?
It shines a light on the current regimes disdain for using mid-round picks on QB depth no matter who is the starter.
I fear that they are "fat and happy" with Kork, Mannion, Browning, and Stanley.
I have doubts that they are truly interested in any of the top QBs although they have visited with Maj Jones, Ehlinger, & Book.
I know folks will say that they have Teddy and should not invest in the backup QB but I think that is a mistake.
The Patriots spent a 2nd on Jimmy G and a 3rd on Brissett even though they had the GOAT.
I'm just hoping the Vikings invest in a better backup QB and using mid-round picks to try and hit the lottery is not a bad idea.
It cant be worse than Clemmings, Beavers, Yankey, Samia, etc.
You're not shinning a light on anything. There have been studies done on draft pick conversion rates (don't know where to find them now) and the Vikings were far from the worst at it. They did quite well on draft pick conversion. I think they used "on the team 5 years from now" as a judge and factored in probowls/all pro ect.
The draft is a crapshoot for everyone, not just the Vikings. While doing hindsight might be fun it accomplishes nothing. You can take everyone in the NFC North. I'd take our picks over all 3 teams with the exception of GB getting lucky on Erin. Past him, we've blown everyone out of the water on picks turning into good/great players.
Yeah, draft studies based on starts are not worth the effort because some young players have a hard time NOT starting.
The point about my comment was specifically about obtaining quality QB depth.
Quote: @AGRforever said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
The sad part is that the Vikings could have easily drafted Dak in 2016.
They were soooo confident in their roster that Spielman traded #86 to the Dolphins for #186 and their 2017 3rd and 4th rounders.
He used #121 on Willie Beavers. Dak went #135.
He did turn #186 into David Morgan & Stephen Weatherly.
He used the 2017 4th from Miami to move up for Cook but could have stayed put for Kamara or Mixon
The rest of 2017 is too convoluted to detail but he traded down so much (past Kittle) it is not even worth mentioning.
Why do this review which some will call hindsight?
It shines a light on the current regimes disdain for using mid-round picks on QB depth no matter who is the starter.
I fear that they are "fat and happy" with Kork, Mannion, Browning, and Stanley.
I have doubts that they are truly interested in any of the top QBs although they have visited with Maj Jones, Ehlinger, & Book.
I know folks will say that they have Teddy and should not invest in the backup QB but I think that is a mistake.
The Patriots spent a 2nd on Jimmy G and a 3rd on Brissett even though they had the GOAT.
I'm just hoping the Vikings invest in a better backup QB and using mid-round picks to try and hit the lottery is not a bad idea.
It cant be worse than Clemmings, Beavers, Yankey, Samia, etc.
You're not shinning a light on anything. There have been studies done on draft pick conversion rates (don't know where to find them now) and the Vikings were far from the worst at it. They did quite well on draft pick conversion. I think they used "on the team 5 years from now" as a judge and factored in probowls/all pro ect.
The draft is a crapshoot for everyone, not just the Vikings. While doing hindsight might be fun it accomplishes nothing. You can take everyone in the NFC North. I'd take our picks over all 3 teams with the exception of GB getting lucky on Erin. Past him, we've blown everyone out of the water on picks turning into good/great players.
Mark does this. He'll mention Willie Beavers or David Yankey and say, "look what a terrible drafting team!" Not even aware that the Vikings have fewer of those than most teams. He'll complain about a 4th round pick like Jalyn Holmes, not realizing that Holmes has contributed more than most of the 37 players taken in the 4th round in 2018 (look it up). People who pay attention to only their team in the draft tend to have terrible perspective.
Fact: there isn't a team in the NFL who has drafted more pro bowlers since 2010 than the Vikings (two are tied). Fact: An analyst for the Cowboys did a study on draft pick "value over expectation." In other words, how the player performed measured against where he was taken. For example, you would expect a top 5 pick to perform well. You would not expect as much for a pick in the 20s, or in the 3rd or 4th round.
Now, I doubt this analysis was perfect, but nor was it done by a Viking fan. Still, by this metric Vikings finished in the top ten 5 out of the last 6 drafts and finished 1st in 3 of the 6. By FAR the best in the NFL. That isn't just good, it's ABSURD. It just rattles my brain that there are still people who think the Vikings don't draft well.
You want to know why George Paton has been such a hot commodity over the last several season? This is a big part of it. Hell, John Elway fired HIMSELF to get a piece of the Vikings draft room.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
The sad part is that the Vikings could have easily drafted Dak in 2016.
They were soooo confident in their roster that Spielman traded #86 to the Dolphins for #186 and their 2017 3rd and 4th rounders.
He used #121 on Willie Beavers. Dak went #135.
He did turn #186 into David Morgan & Stephen Weatherly.
He used the 2017 4th from Miami to move up for Cook but could have stayed put for Kamara or Mixon
The rest of 2017 is too convoluted to detail but he traded down so much (past Kittle) it is not even worth mentioning.
Why do this review which some will call hindsight?
It shines a light on the current regimes disdain for using mid-round picks on QB depth no matter who is the starter.
I fear that they are "fat and happy" with Kork, Mannion, Browning, and Stanley.
I have doubts that they are truly interested in any of the top QBs although they have visited with Maj Jones, Ehlinger, & Book.
I know folks will say that they have Teddy and should not invest in the backup QB but I think that is a mistake.
The Patriots spent a 2nd on Jimmy G and a 3rd on Brissett even though they had the GOAT.
I'm just hoping the Vikings invest in a better backup QB and using mid-round picks to try and hit the lottery is not a bad idea.
It cant be worse than Clemmings, Beavers, Yankey, Samia, etc.
You're not shinning a light on anything. There have been studies done on draft pick conversion rates (don't know where to find them now) and the Vikings were far from the worst at it. They did quite well on draft pick conversion. I think they used "on the team 5 years from now" as a judge and factored in probowls/all pro ect.
The draft is a crapshoot for everyone, not just the Vikings. While doing hindsight might be fun it accomplishes nothing. You can take everyone in the NFC North. I'd take our picks over all 3 teams with the exception of GB getting lucky on Erin. Past him, we've blown everyone out of the water on picks turning into good/great players.
Mark does this. He'll mention Willie Beavers or David Yankey and say, "look what a terrible drafting team!" Not even aware that the Vikings have fewer of those than most teams. He'll complain about a 4th round pick like Jalyn Holmes, not realizing that Holmes has contributed more than most of the 37 players taken in the 4th round in 2018 (look it up). People who pay attention to only their team in the draft tend to have terrible perspective.
Fact: there isn't a team in the NFL who has drafted more pro bowlers since 2010 than the Vikings (two are tied). Fact: An analyst for the Cowboys did a study on draft pick "value over expectation." In other words, how the player performed measured against where he was taken. For example, you would expect a top 5 pick to perform well. You would not expect as much for a pick in the 20s, or in the 3rd or 4th round.
Now, I doubt this analysis was perfect, but nor was it done by a Viking fan. Still, by this metric Vikings finished in the top ten 5 out of the last 6 drafts and finished 1st in 3 of the 6. By FAR the best in the NFL. That isn't just good, it's ABSURD. It just rattles my brain that there are still people who think the Vikings don't draft well.
You want to know why George Paton has been such a hot commodity over the last several season? This is a big part of it. Hell, John Elway fired HIMSELF to get a piece of the Vikings draft room.
It's like a gang here. LMAO.
In your comment you also say nothing about the main point of my comment was the Vikings failure to draft a QB in the middle rounds. Who was the last one? Booty?
The forest for the trees.
Quote: @Kentis said:
Sounds like the NFL’s upcoming TV contract is about to double in value after 2022, for the following 10 years! The salary cap will be taking off like a rocket— this contract is based on that...!
That's what I've been reading as well. The anticipation for a GIANT tv contract is in the air. And there are a lot of references to Amazon's deep pockets. I'm anti-Amazon but I'm sure, if the rumors are true, that much cash will make a lot of owners happy.
Quote: @Jor-El said:
I'm surprised owners have not tried to implement some kind of "positional cap allocation", kind of like what they did with the rookie salary scale. Before that, we had rookies who had never played a snap in the NFL holding out and dictating ever-growing salaries. Owners would love a defined allocation, something like 15% of the cap for QB (combine starters and backups), 10% for RBs, etc.
NFLPA would hate it, probably. They only approved the rookie scale because no rookies vote. OTOH, it might result in better distribution of the salary to other positions.
A more likely scenario would imo be a % of the cap but not tied to a position, because that is going to tend to cause division among the players themselves. But you're right, the NFLPA isn't likely to go for it.
Quote: @MarkSP18 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ AGRforever said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
The sad part is that the Vikings could have easily drafted Dak in 2016.
They were soooo confident in their roster that Spielman traded #86 to the Dolphins for #186 and their 2017 3rd and 4th rounders.
He used #121 on Willie Beavers. Dak went #135.
He did turn #186 into David Morgan & Stephen Weatherly.
He used the 2017 4th from Miami to move up for Cook but could have stayed put for Kamara or Mixon
The rest of 2017 is too convoluted to detail but he traded down so much (past Kittle) it is not even worth mentioning.
Why do this review which some will call hindsight?
It shines a light on the current regimes disdain for using mid-round picks on QB depth no matter who is the starter.
I fear that they are "fat and happy" with Kork, Mannion, Browning, and Stanley.
I have doubts that they are truly interested in any of the top QBs although they have visited with Maj Jones, Ehlinger, & Book.
I know folks will say that they have Teddy and should not invest in the backup QB but I think that is a mistake.
The Patriots spent a 2nd on Jimmy G and a 3rd on Brissett even though they had the GOAT.
I'm just hoping the Vikings invest in a better backup QB and using mid-round picks to try and hit the lottery is not a bad idea.
It cant be worse than Clemmings, Beavers, Yankey, Samia, etc.
You're not shinning a light on anything. There have been studies done on draft pick conversion rates (don't know where to find them now) and the Vikings were far from the worst at it. They did quite well on draft pick conversion. I think they used "on the team 5 years from now" as a judge and factored in probowls/all pro ect.
The draft is a crapshoot for everyone, not just the Vikings. While doing hindsight might be fun it accomplishes nothing. You can take everyone in the NFC North. I'd take our picks over all 3 teams with the exception of GB getting lucky on Erin. Past him, we've blown everyone out of the water on picks turning into good/great players.
Mark does this. He'll mention Willie Beavers or David Yankey and say, "look what a terrible drafting team!" Not even aware that the Vikings have fewer of those than most teams. He'll complain about a 4th round pick like Jalyn Holmes, not realizing that Holmes has contributed more than most of the 37 players taken in the 4th round in 2018 (look it up). People who pay attention to only their team in the draft tend to have terrible perspective.
Fact: there isn't a team in the NFL who has drafted more pro bowlers since 2010 than the Vikings (two are tied). Fact: An analyst for the Cowboys did a study on draft pick "value over expectation." In other words, how the player performed measured against where he was taken. For example, you would expect a top 5 pick to perform well. You would not expect as much for a pick in the 20s, or in the 3rd or 4th round.
Now, I doubt this analysis was perfect, but nor was it done by a Viking fan. Still, by this metric Vikings finished in the top ten 5 out of the last 6 drafts and finished 1st in 3 of the 6. By FAR the best in the NFL. That isn't just good, it's ABSURD. It just rattles my brain that there are still people who think the Vikings don't draft well.
You want to know why George Paton has been such a hot commodity over the last several season? This is a big part of it. Hell, John Elway fired HIMSELF to get a piece of the Vikings draft room.
It's like a gang here. LMAO.
In your comment you also say nothing about the main point of my comment was the Vikings failure to draft a QB in the middle rounds. Who was the last one? Booty?
The forest for the trees.
If you consider "middle rounds" to be rounds 3-5, there have been 89 QBs taken in those rounds since 2000. The only ones who amounted to anything were Josh McCown, Matt Schaub, Kirk Cousins, Russell Wilson and Dak Prescott. 5 of 89. That's about 5.6% chance of hitting.
Just don't like the odds. Your odds are probably just as good waiting until after the draft, where players like Moon, Romo, Warner, etc were taken. Especially when you can get players like Dantzler, Mattison, Griffen, Hunter, Diggs in the 3-5 range.
|
