Lol. There's a big difference between differing opinions and non-stop bitching on one topic. And polluting every fucking thread with it.
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@ MaroonBells said:
@ Kentis said:
And with the trade of Carson Wentz, there will now not be a single QB drafted in the first round from 2009-2016 that is still with his original team.
0 out of 22 total.
This. All day, this. This should be posted in every draft room and at the top of every message board to remind people what a crapshoot the draft is, every time they assume Lawrence, Wilson, Fields, Lance or Jones is going to be the answer to all their prayers.
And if you think it improved after 2016, OK, it did...a little. But those years also gave us Trubisky, Darnold, Rosen, Daniel Jones, Haskins, and Tua...
I think this fact is why more and more teams are choosing to go the veteran trade or free agent route rather than take a seat at the craps table. It's also why teams who already have a top 10 QB aren't very eager to cash that in for this year's Jameis Mariota or Carson Goff or Johnny Bortles.
This is such a stupid incomplete cherry picked stat. Here is the list of QBs in that list ...
Stafford - Just got traded for a starting QB and two 1st round picksSanchez - Bust out of the league and went to a bad situationFreeman - Bust never should have been drafted in the 1st roundBradford - Oft injured bust but there was one GM stupid enough to give up a 1st and a 4th for himTebow - Bust out of the league and never given the first team reps during offseasonNewton - Started last yearLocker - Bust out of the leagueGabbert - Bust and now a backupPonder - Bust never should have been drafted in the 1st roundLuck - RetiredTannehill - Busted with Dolphins and now a solid starterWeeden - Bust never should have been drafted in the 1st roundManuel - Bust never should have been drafted in the 1st roundBortles - Bust and now a backupManziel - Bust out of the league and never given the first team reps during offseasonBridgewater - Injured but now a starterWinston - Bust in Tampa, backup that could become a starterMariota - Bust in Tennessee, backup that could become a starterGoff - Rams gave up but Detroit wanted himWentz - Just traded to start for the ColtsLynch - Bust never should have been drafted in the 1st round
I'm confused. You can't possibly be using this list to argue FOR the quality of 1st round QBs in those years...can you?
Think about it. 2009-2016. That means QBs in years 5 thru 12--the heart of what should be their primes. And yet none of them has won a Super Bowl, none are with their original teams, and a good portion are out of the league. And if you think this is restricted to just 2009-2016, go ahead and look up any other 7 year stretch.
When you use a 1st round pick on a QB, it's kind of a big deal. Most teams will do it only once or twice in 30, 40 years. It sort of represents starting over. Teams who do it expect that QB to become their long-term starter. But reality tells a different story.
Based on who won the Super Bowl, stats like 0-22 above, it's no wonder that more and more teams are looking for veterans instead of a seat at the craps table. Actually, we should probably stopping using "craps" as a metaphor for the draft. Your odds of hitting at a craps table are clearly much higher than they are for hitting on a QB in the draft.
Not all of these QBs are busts. Stafford wasn't. Luck wasn't. But there are 22 QBs here. Do the math. Take it out of context if you have to. How many times do you typically bang your head against the wall before looking for a way around? 23 times?
Vikings have a top 10 QB, top 5 in several categories. He's 32, loves Minnesota, and he's never hurt. He's not perfect, but instead of continuing to develop his offensive line, you want to dump him for a seat at the 0 fer 22 table? No. Fuck no.
I don't think Mark is using the stat to argue for the quality of 1st-round QBs; I took it that he said there were a lot of really bad QBs picked, some of which should not have been.
That stat is definitely cherry-picked, but I also look at it and think it shows a period when college QBs were changing. The number in that list that came from a pro-set offense was extremely low. The college game was changing and producing a lot of QBs who did not fit the mold of under-center pocket passer - but the NFL kept drafting them, and more significantly, kept trying to CONVERT them to that style. In the past few years, pro coaches are putting more of those QBs into situations which are much more familiar and comfortable to them.
The lack of college QBs that fit the NFL's expected mold also pushed some marginal ones into round 1. Mark Sanchez? Classic case of a team (Jets) thinking, "We really need a QB, but we missed on the great one in this draft (Stafford), so let's pretend this guy is almost as good." (I think history is about to repeat in NY..) Tim Tebow, EJ Manuel...Christian Effing Ponder?? Why were these guys picked in round 1? Because QBs always get pushed up the board. Mac Jones, even Kyle Trask are being suggested for round 1?? TBH I think even Trey Lance would be a 3rd-round developmental prospect in a sane world. But teams will force QB picks more than any other position.
Lesson I take from this isn't "Don't draft a QB in round 1", it's "Don't pick a QB just because he's a QB." If he's truly BPA, fine. But I'll ask anyone, even the biggest Spielman believers on this board: do you truly believe Ponder was the highest-rated PLAYER overall on his board at #12 in 2011?
Quote: @MarkSP18 said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
@"Geoff Nichols" said:
@ MarkSP18 said:
Vikings couldn't even get this package for Cousins.
No team is interested really. Only thing we hear is the usual banter about the 49ers.
Here is why.
Last year, he threw 10 interceptions in the first 6 games.
This is when the Vikings defense needed him the MOST. They had very young corners, no Pierce, Odenigbo trying to step into a starters spot, and no Hunter.
Most intelligent observers would have surmised that the defense would not start off too good.
What does the leader of the team (he should be) who is making the most money do to help take pressure off the young defense?
He craps the bed.
The Vikings end up missing the playoffs by one game.
Many of the Korkstans will point to how he finished the season as some sort of saving grace.
They rarely mention the first 6 games and absolute inexcusable horrid start by Kork.
Other teams are smart. They saw the start of the season. They know Cousins story.
When you need him the most, he comes up the least.
How do they know what package they can get if they aren't shopping him?
That tells you all you need to know.
The 49ers, in the last game of the 2019 season, thrashed the Vikings.
They ran the ball 47 times for 186 yards and held it for over 38 minutes.
They held the Vikings to 21 yards on 10 carries, sacked Cousins 6 times, and hit him 9 other times.
The people who run this team decided the way to fix that from happening again was going with Pat Elflein and Dakota Dozier at guard.
They decided the twice discarded Shamar Stephen would be fine at 3 technique.
Of course they are NOT shopping Cousins.
They probably are going to extend him AGAIN when he will be 35 years old.
Why do I not have much confidence in this regime?
Like selling a house, I sure dont want to drop-kick olde KC until I know I'm moving to something better.
Or counting on my front office to project one of those top 3 QB's to having a franchise ceiling and getting one of em.
Or having a strong belief that with a decent D and avg OL, KC might not just shine a lot more brightly.
KC cost this team dearly the first 6 games last season, I agree on that. But the D is even more problematic imo.
I wouldn't move KC unless I got a Plan B I really believe in. Something that wouldnt weaken the strength of the team - the offense.
I have no faith in this front office and I think they have over stayed their welcome.
I do no think they know what a good interior offensive lineman looks like.
I have no faith in their ability to find a QB outside of a trade.
We are stuck with Kork.
He proved last year in the first 6 games just what kind of leader he truly is.
Throwing 10 picks in the first 6 games right when the young defense needed his help the MOST.
That is who Cousins is.
When you need him the MOST, he delivers the LEAST.
There are a lot of Korkstans that will refute that but the proof is in the pudding.
Mark, I'm in agreement with most of your "bitchfest" (I'm outside the herd here, as well) - but want to ask about your remark above, "no faith in their ability to find a QB outside of a trade". Did Spielman obtain a winning QB via trade? I'm not trying to make a sarcastic remark, but wondering if I forgot someone. Spielman traded for Donovan McNabb and Sam Bradford. McNabb was totally done and Bradford was at the end of his physical health.
This is my biggest gripe with Spielman / current Vikings management: no proven ability to identify a quarterback. There have been multiple attempts by draft, trade, and free agent (Cousins and Cassell). One guy, Keenum, had a spark but our GM and head coach seemed in shock that he took the team as far as he did, and quickly rejected any idea of retaining him, opting for Cousins.
I don't really care how well Spielman drafts or manages the salary cap if he can't find a QB. Honestly, I don't argue for drafting a QB or trading for Watson (or anyone else) because Spielman cannot identify a great QB and Zimmer and his staff are not going to effectively develop or use one.
So, from where I stand, we just stick with Cousins rather than waste assets on a different mistake. Spielman is absolutely convinced Cousins can win (or will lose his job if he admits othewise), so that's what's going to happen. We either luck into winning via the Trent Dilfer route (the rest of the team is so outstanding that average QB wins in a year when the rest of the NFL doesn't excel), or we wait for this team management to finally be gone and maybe get someone who can identify good quarterbacks.
Mark is not wrong... it's a classic case of some fans going into "off-season mode" and dreaming that Kirk Cousins will lead us to a Super Bowl if we can just fill a few more holes. The problem with that is there will always be holes to fill and rosters turnover quite a bit in the salary cap driven NFL. When your QB is consuming the largest chunk of the cap, you need him to play good enough, consistently enough to cover up some holes in your roster. Kirk Cousins can't do that, his year end numbers typically show a top 12 QB, but he doesn't consistently play like one. Case in point, last season. He cost us wins against GB, Atlanta, and Indy in the first 6 games with his poor play. He also struggled against Chicago who we split with.
Maybe I'm just being jaded, but I've seen enough of Kirk to know that he probably won't get us where we need to be. It'd be different if we made the playoffs that last three years and have come up short. We haven't... we made the playoffs once in 3 years and Kirk's inability to show up when it matters certainly has played into that.
Zimmer won the division in 2 out of his first 4 years year with 2nd year Teddy and Case Keenum. We've had Cousins for the last 3 years and haven't won the division and only made the playoffs once. We can say he turned a corner in the final 10 games... but more likely the pressure was off after a 1-5 start and he finally loosened up.
I get not wanting to move on from a veteran QB, but if the team feels strongly about a guy in this draft... they should take him if he's within striking distance.
Funny thing, no one mentioned the D giving up 32 points per game as we went 1-5. Guess that's Cousins' fault too.
Quote: @Wetlander said:
Mark is not wrong... it's a classic case of some fans going into "off-season mode" and dreaming that Kirk Cousins will lead us to a Super Bowl if we can just fill a few more holes. The problem with that is there will always be holes to fill and rosters turnover quite a bit in the salary cap driven NFL. When your QB is consuming the largest chunk of the cap, you need him to play good enough, consistently enough to cover up some holes in your roster. Kirk Cousins can't do that, his year end numbers typically show a top 12 QB, but he doesn't consistently play like one. Case in point, last season. He cost us wins against GB, Atlanta, and Indy in the first 6 games with his poor play. He also struggled against Chicago who we split with.
Maybe I'm just being jaded, but I've seen enough of Kirk to know that he probably won't get us where we need to be. It'd be different if we made the playoffs that last three years and have come up short. We haven't... we made the playoffs once in 3 years and Kirk's inability to show up when it matters certainly has played into that.
Zimmer won the division in 2 out of his first 4 years year with 2nd year Teddy and Case Keenum. We've had Cousins for the last 3 years and haven't won the division and only made the playoffs once. We can say he turned a corner in the final 10 games... but more likely the pressure was off after a 1-5 start and he finally loosened up.
I get not wanting to move on from a veteran QB, but if the team feels strongly about a guy in this draft... they should take him if he's within striking distance.
I don't have a big problem with the Vikings taking a young QB in the draft to develop behind Cousins...even in the 1st round. It's not what I would do, but I don't have a problem with it.
What WON'T happen is the Vikings trading Cousins for draft capital that nets them a rookie starter. No team would ever trade their top 10 QB for a roll of the dice and sit back and wait for the egg to hit them in the face. And with the exception of Watson, there isn't a veteran available who wouldn't be a downgrade. And by the way, I'm all in on a Cousins for Watson trade.
But I think you're wrong about Cousins, and the numbers bear that out. And if we moved on from him for anyone else but Watson, we'd probably regret it. I mean we don't know what's around that hypothetical corner, but it's not like we don't have a case study to follow....
Washington's passer rating...
'15 = 3rd
'16 = 7th
'17 = 11th
Kirk leaves
’18 = 29th
'19 = 25th
'20 = 25th
Kirk ain't perfect. Nothing's for certain. And this is not a slam dunk. But you have to think of it in probabilities, otherwise biases disguise the truth. The truth is that the Vikings are more likely to win a Super Bowl by keeping Cousins, and adding a few other pieces, than by moving on from him and starting over with a grab bag of God knows what. If you disagree with that go HERE for more info.
Quote: @"BarrNone55" said:
Funny thing, no one mentioned the D giving up 32 points per game as we went 1-5. Guess that's Cousins' fault too.
Beat me to it...
Its a tough situation though. As others have stated, you hope your QB play can cover some holes due to attrition and roster turn-over. But there are a precious, few elite who can do it.
I'm not sure even a Mahomes or GOAT could cover-up for the D the Vikings fielded this year.
Quote: @"BarrNone55" said:
Funny thing, no one mentioned the D giving up 32 points per game as we went 1-5. Guess that's Cousins' fault too.
Expand on that a bit. They gave up 32 points per game, AND he threw 10 INTs in 6 games. How are those related? Or are they unrelated?
It's possible he was trying too hard because they were behind and he threw more picks. OK, fair enough...but it suggests he wins only when things are going well around him.
Or it could be the INTs put extra pressure on the defense: put them back on the field with little rest, gave the opponents a shorter field.
Or they are just unrelated stats.
Did he just play the six games you whiners keep harping on? How about prior seasons? JFC. Think just a tiny fucking bit.
Quote: @"BarrNone55" said:
Did he just play the six games you whiners keep harping on? How about prior seasons? JFC. Think just a tiny fucking bit.
SMH...Barr, you bring a lot of interesting info to this board, you have good analysis...but if anyone disagrees with your perspective, you're intolerant, angry, profane, and personally insult people. Sometimes it's just out of nowhere, like last week when there was a thread about what to prioritize in the first round and a few people joked about how Spielman picks CBs no matter what, and you went off.
I know this will rile you up, and every comment from me makes you especially angry, so I guess this is pointless to even say. You really don't promote discussion.
|
