Dak Prescott contract
Full terms on the Dak Prescott contract: 4 years, $160M, up to $164M. He gets a no-trade clause and no tag provision. The guarantee is $126M. Massive.
— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) March 8, 2021
You're only given a little spark of madness. You mustn't lose it. — Robin Williams
@"BarrNone55" said: That's a big contract with the cap number still up in the air.Cap hit this year and next is modest. Goes up when cap due to go up in 2023. I think all contracts we see this year will be written that way, including Hunter's.
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.
@"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.
I mentioned the same thing to a fried a few weeks back and we concluded that the NFLPA would likely not support. I think it does make sense though as it can potentially create more bargaining power between the players as these deals get renewed each year and the cap goes up. If you agree that your salary is 10% of the cap then it likely increases each year in your favor.
@"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.
@"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.
problem with that is you have teams that have better talent pools at different positions and they wouldnt be able to protect that talent. I am fine with the cap being the way it is, but GMs need to be smarter and be willing to let players walk that insist on contracts above their talent level. if other teams want to over pay let them, way more teams struggling because of bad contracts to QBs than winning despite those contracts.
I kinda like it, the cap is the constraint and what ever leadership does within those constraints can make or break a team or a season. Allows the ownership be a real variable, keeps things organic and not formulaic. Don't get me wrong, I believe players need to be taken care, careers are short and dangerous, but need to see the impact of good/poor management in the equation.
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.
@"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.
As a Vike fan, not sure what the downside is unless it's a good gamble and Jerry hit's again.
@"BigAl99" 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.
As a Vike fan, not sure what the downside is unless it's a good gamble and Jerry hit's again.
i dont give a shit either about other teams dumb decisions with their cap space (hell the best Vikings game I've ever been to was when Jerruhs box was straight across from my seats in 09 and I got to watch him go from party mode in the 1st quarter to sitting alone by the 4th) Dak is much like I view Cousins, with a top tier OL, and above average supporting cast he can help you win most games, but he is not in that tier of players that will get it done when the positions around him become cap casualties or other issues like injuries weaken his supporting cast IMO.
@"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.
@"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...!
@"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.
@"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.
@"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.
@"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.
@"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.
@"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.
@"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.
@"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.
Yes, Mark, it gets frustrating here because the gang mentality is to show each other stats about individual performances or ratings of drafting excellence or pictures of players flexing their muscles, and then for the group to tell each other how awesome it is and how it means the Vikings and their current GM and coach and owners and players are obviously the best.Fine, the cheerleaders here can do that with each other, but it's sad when they harass you for asking questions about whether the team is doing the right things. You know quite well that people start insulting you if you disagree or even question their conclusions. I've asked people to explain why they ripped on dissenters and received rude answers like "I don't suffer fools". Some posters who raised really interesting questions (like FSUVike) gave up on this board and others have been chased off completely.
We've drafted the most Pro Bowlers since 2010? Fantastic! We must have won a Super Bowl or two, right? Been in the playoffs at least half those seasons? Dominated our division?
Vikings draft "by FAR the best in the NFL", superior teams like the Broncos want to emulate us? Awesome!! Same questions as above. Show me the Trophies.
I just don't see how anyone feels this team has results so amazing that their way of operating (drafting, coaching, managing the roster) is absolutely beyond being questioned. But a big group of people here feel justified in mocking anyone who expresses doubt in the Vikings' management.
Mark, I don't agree with everything you say but I'm glad to see your opinion regardless and hope you keep sharing them. I'm glad to read everyone's opinions, just not when the attacks take over.
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.