Another serious question.....

Smart people putting football through the analytics prism. Making optimal plays and or selecting players in a draft via historical data/algos/models. 

"What Is Sports Analytics? Sports analytics is the process of plugging statistics into a mathematical model to predict the outcome of a given play or game. Coaches rely on analytics to scout opponents and optimize play calls in game, while front offices use it to prioritize player development."

You can debate whether you believe this concept moves the needle or not. But to answer your serious question, KAM is a very smart guy who believes in analytics as a tool to create success in the NFL, along with some other teams. So the model doesn't care in whom the teams are that you trade with to get the end result. There are no factors in the equation that you are trading with division rivals. The ends justify the means in this model regardless, in theory. My explanation doesn't mean I believe or don't believe in this process....it remains to be seen for the Minnesota Vikings.

Just some additional thoughts on this topic:

• Analytics is only as good as the data you put into it.   Analytics also doesn't take into account the poker aspect of the draft process.  It looks at the hole cards and the community cards and does not take into account the other participant's mindset.  So, basically, once the odds are in your favor, you accept the trade even though with a little bluffing, etc. you could get better value.  
• From a pure fan engagement perspective, this draft was a mess.  Starting with the first round trade that saw lots of our favorite picks slide out of reach, to trading with two divisional rivals, to drafting a reach guard with a very questionable background and now the questions in the press whether the Vikings drafted in this manner to save money.  This draft was really a PR disaster.
• My biggest complaint is that with a top 15 pick you hope to draft someone that is not only an immediate starter but someone that the other teams need to scheme for -- a real difference maker.  If you fall out of the top half of the first round the chance to get such a player diminishes tremendously.  If that calculation is not in Kwesi's model, well, the old adage applies -- garbage in, garbage out.
• I may be incorrect about this, but I believe Kwesi has not yet put his people in place in the scouting department.  I think, with a new GM, this happens after the draft because you can't really start from scratch evaluating college players just a couple months before the draft -- it is a year long (+) proposition.  If that is true, then the draft board is probably reliant very heavily on Kwesi's evaluation of players -- something Vanguard points out it is probably not his forte.
• If we all believe Kwesi will suffer from growing pains and willing to accept that in his first draft, well, then it is a sin to trade a '23 pick when he should do a better job in '23 than in did in '22.  It is throwing good money after bad.  

OK, let me process this answer. (I only have a Masters from CSUSB)
Not saying Im right, but this is just my “old school” football argument....

So, using “measurables” in the case of the COMBINE...height, weight, 40 time, 3 cone agility, wingspan, 5-10-5 time, catch radius,  etc. Personally, I think I would rely on game film more (and I know scouts do). Theres too much love for the COMBINE / PRO DAYS IMO......Seriously, How often does a player run 40 yards straight in a game?

IMO, there are so many other aspects to a player that arent seen “statistically”
an INT for example....a ball can be tipped at LOS, an errant pass, a broken route, WR stumbles OR. a great play by the D Back...The difference here is four picks “statistically”.
Maybe they dont throw to a players side, less opportunities for stats...where does that measure against a player that is being targeted frequently. 

An effective D end isnt just about sacks.....not losing contain, gap discipline, running in the trench, do they funnel the play inside where theres help. A TRULY effective DE you will often see reflected in the LB stats (tackles, TFLs)

Now we use “analytics” to predict a plays outcome...OK....Thats if “everything goes right”
(How often does “everything go right” on each play) Also, youve got every guy on the field hurting, playing through injury, great (or lacking) individual effort, execution, timing, not to mention the inexplicable...situational football, coaching, on and on.

wonder what analytics would say about guys like a John Randle. 

How are the “intangibles” measured? Motor, Moxie, Heart, Endurance, etc.

Thanks guys, trying to “wrap my head” around this type of thinking.  
Im old, and almost cold

@"Vanguard83" said:

Thanks guys, trying to “wrap my head” around this type of thinking.  
Im old, and almost cold

interesting answers guys - Thanks.  I’m learning

”Ends justifies the means” was a great analogy - lets hope Machiavelli was right.

@"Vanguard83" said: interesting answers guys - Thanks.  I’m learning

”Ends justifies the means” was a great analogy - lets hope Machiavelli was right.

These are the same questions I was asking when we hired him and one of the reasons I wasn't on board with the hiring. It's almost the equivilant of hiring Jordan Belfort to run our organization. Super smart guy, super minimal football experience. I think you have to be more than a stats/analytics/numbers guy at the end of the day and have an actual feel for the game. Career analytics guy and ONE YEAR as the VP of football operations in Cleveland. It was a huge roll of the dice for the Wilfs to hand over the organization to some whiz kid who in many cases has less overall football experience then a lot of us on this board. 

You know what I found most interesting the last day or 2?

How KAM responded to questions on the draft...

I dont think he gives a s hit what we think lol! And he was quite convicted and calm vs defensive in any way. 

I sure hope they drag the franchise out of mediocrity. I'm rooting for them all to succeed. 

Now all eyes will be on this dude the rest of the year;

appreciate ALL perspecrives gang, thank you.  Maybe the game that I have decoted my life to understanding has passed me by.

and again although “time will tell”, Im afraid I may not get there with you my friends

First-time GM learning on the job alongside a first-time head coach installing new schemes on both sides of the ball. I was against the hiring of Kwesi when the Wilfs made that decision and after one full offseason cycle...I'm even less confident in him now and that he actually knows what the hell he is doing. There's been zero he has done so far to give me any confidence in that regard. Uninspiring in free agency and the draft on optics was a complete shit show. There will be a lot to second and third guessing involved on almost every move and selection made. Kwesi set himself up for additional criticism because of the trades made with division rivals and allowing those teams to move way up in the draft and get the players they wanted. If Cine and Booth aren't at least the equivalent of what Williams and Watson are in three years, and can cover those guys, this is going to be an all-time punch in the gut disaster. Like somebody else mentioned, Cine's career will always be compared against that of Kyle Hamilton (who we could have taken) and Jameson Williams, who the Lions selected with our pick in the move up. I would bet that either or both of those players have more impactful careers then Cine. 

Hoping O'Connell shows me more as a head coach then Kwesi has shown me as a GM 

I think it was painfully obvious that he is not qualified for the job and while some thought it was great that he owned up to having to learn from his mistakes, at the NFL level you should not have a GM who needs on the job training.  The question I have is why was he hired over so many other GM candidates who were so much better qualified?  Our final two candidates were Poles and Kwesi, at least Poles has experience, but there were still better qualified candidates than both.  

“on the job training”.   ^^^^^ agree.

A little birdie told me that some are giving ole Charley Walters thoughts too much weight…  ;) :p  

@"JR44" said: I think it was painfully obvious that he is not qualified for the job and while some thought it was great that he owned up to having to learn from his mistakes, at the NFL level you should not have a GM who needs on the job training.  The question I have is why was he hired over so many other GM candidates who were so much better qualified?  Our final two candidates were Poles and Kwesi, at least Poles has experience, but there were still better qualified candidates than both.  

I hate to point out the elephant in the room and I said this when he was hired, but what's the one common element there between he and Poles? Why would the Wilf's hire Kwesi over some of the other more qualified and more experienced candidates who were interviewed? I think in a liberal city like Minneapolis on the heels of George Floyd and with this narrative the NFL is pushing currently by awarding "bonus" draft picks for teams hiring coaches of color and mandating certain coaching positions be awarded to people of color or females...it's not hard to figure out. There's no way after hiring and firing two white guys (Spielman and Zim) that at least one of those positions weren't going to be filled by a person of color. I'm not sure what ever happened to just hiring the best person for the job, but with the way this is all going the NFL is going to start mandating certain coaching and front office positions go strictly to people of color or females. Kwesi is a smart, well spoken guy obviously, but his lack of overall football experience was so glaring that all I could think of when he was hired was that it was a political hire and the Wilf's wanted the kudos from Goodell, the city, and league in general. If they would have hired another white guy with the league practically screaming for the hiring of people of color in coaching and front office positions...it would have looked bad and I think the Wilf's wanted to get out in front of things, even if that meant not hiring the best or most experienced candidate for the job. There is zero coincidence that the candidates who got the most traction through the GM interview process were Kwesi, Poles, and Catherine Raiche. Poles was the preference since he was a former player and personnel guy. He took the Bears job and we hired our fallback option in Kwesi, who's biggest star on his resume was ONE YEAR as the Browns VP of football operations which could have meant his main job was booking team travel or making sure there were enough hot dogs in the stadium for game day. He's never been a scout or personnel guy in his relatively short tenure in the league and this is the guy we handed the keys to the kingdom to. His inexperience showed on draft weekend and count me as highly skeptical going forward with him calling the shots. 

@"StickyBun" said: Smart people putting football through the analytics prism. Making optimal plays and or selecting players in a draft via historical data/algos/models. 

"What Is Sports Analytics? Sports analytics is the process of plugging statistics into a mathematical model to predict the outcome of a given play or game. Coaches rely on analytics to scout opponents and optimize play calls in game, while front offices use it to prioritize player development."

You can debate whether you believe this concept moves the needle or not. But to answer your serious question, KAM is a very smart guy who believes in analytics as a tool to create success in the NFL, along with some other teams. So the model doesn't care in whom the teams are that you trade with to get the end result. There are no factors in the equation that you are trading with division rivals. The ends justify the means in this model regardless, in theory. My explanation doesn't mean I believe or don't believe in this process....it remains to be seen for the Minnesota Vikings.

I recall an interview with KAM after his hire.

He was also talking about the process overlay to the analytics, how you need to blend them with the people input from scouting and coaching too.

Inevitably the various parts have to work together and its people who work together to overcome situations where one view/piece of data may conflict with another. 

That is (in theory anyways) how you overcome blind spots in measurables alone and can find that next John Randle down in poe-dunk, TX.

I think you brought up an important point regarding the scouting department VikingOracle. Some of the people were working with Spielman because they were not going to overhaul scouting before the draft. I am really intrigued by the input from the various coaches as well. KAM is data driven, assets and values focused. Looking forward to seeing how the coaches develop the talent.

As my thoughts and observations on this draft have composted, Arthur Clarke's three laws came to mind.  Perhaps some corollary logic to what has just happened.
 "

1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is
   possible, they are almost certainly right. When they state that
   something is impossible, they are very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

@"supafreak84" said:

@"JR44" said: I think it was painfully obvious that he is not qualified for the job and while some thought it was great that he owned up to having to learn from his mistakes, at the NFL level you should not have a GM who needs on the job training.  The question I have is why was he hired over so many other GM candidates who were so much better qualified?  Our final two candidates were Poles and Kwesi, at least Poles has experience, but there were still better qualified candidates than both.  

I hate to point out the elephant in the room and I said this when he was hired, but what's the one common element there between he and Poles? Why would the Wilf's hire Kwesi over some of the other more qualified and more experienced candidates who were interviewed? I think in a liberal city like Minneapolis on the heels of George Floyd and with this narrative the NFL is pushing currently by awarding "bonus" draft picks for teams hiring coaches of color and mandating certain coaching positions be awarded to people of color or females...it's not hard to figure out. There's no way after hiring and firing two white guys (Spielman and Zim) that at least one of those positions weren't going to be filled by a person of color. I'm not sure what ever happened to just hiring the best person for the job, but with the way this is all going the NFL is going to start mandating certain coaching and front office positions go strictly to people of color or females. Kwesi is a smart, well spoken guy obviously, but his lack of overall football experience was so glaring that all I could think of when he was hired was that it was a political hire and the Wilf's wanted the kudos from Goodell, the city, and league in general. If they would have hired another white guy with the league practically screaming for the hiring of people of color in coaching and front office positions...it would have looked bad and I think the Wilf's wanted to get out in front of things, even if that meant not hiring the best or most experienced candidate for the job. There is zero coincidence that the candidates who got the most traction through the GM interview process were Kwesi, Poles, and Catherine Raiche. Poles was the preference since he was a former player and personnel guy. He took the Bears job and we hired our fallback option in Kwesi, who's biggest star on his resume was ONE YEAR as the Browns VP of football operations which could have meant his main job was booking team travel or making sure there were enough hot dogs in the stadium for game day. He's never been a scout or personnel guy in his relatively short tenure in the league and this is the guy we handed the keys to the kingdom to. His inexperience showed on draft weekend and count me as highly skeptical going forward with him calling the shots. 

@"AGRforever" said:

@"supafreak84" said:

@"JR44" said: I think it was painfully obvious that he is not qualified for the job and while some thought it was great that he owned up to having to learn from his mistakes, at the NFL level you should not have a GM who needs on the job training.  The question I have is why was he hired over so many other GM candidates who were so much better qualified?  Our final two candidates were Poles and Kwesi, at least Poles has experience, but there were still better qualified candidates than both.  

I hate to point out the elephant in the room and I said this when he was hired, but what's the one common element there between he and Poles? Why would the Wilf's hire Kwesi over some of the other more qualified and more experienced candidates who were interviewed? I think in a liberal city like Minneapolis on the heels of George Floyd and with this narrative the NFL is pushing currently by awarding "bonus" draft picks for teams hiring coaches of color and mandating certain coaching positions be awarded to people of color or females...it's not hard to figure out. There's no way after hiring and firing two white guys (Spielman and Zim) that at least one of those positions weren't going to be filled by a person of color. I'm not sure what ever happened to just hiring the best person for the job, but with the way this is all going the NFL is going to start mandating certain coaching and front office positions go strictly to people of color or females. Kwesi is a smart, well spoken guy obviously, but his lack of overall football experience was so glaring that all I could think of when he was hired was that it was a political hire and the Wilf's wanted the kudos from Goodell, the city, and league in general. If they would have hired another white guy with the league practically screaming for the hiring of people of color in coaching and front office positions...it would have looked bad and I think the Wilf's wanted to get out in front of things, even if that meant not hiring the best or most experienced candidate for the job. There is zero coincidence that the candidates who got the most traction through the GM interview process were Kwesi, Poles, and Catherine Raiche. Poles was the preference since he was a former player and personnel guy. He took the Bears job and we hired our fallback option in Kwesi, who's biggest star on his resume was ONE YEAR as the Browns VP of football operations which could have meant his main job was booking team travel or making sure there were enough hot dogs in the stadium for game day. He's never been a scout or personnel guy in his relatively short tenure in the league and this is the guy we handed the keys to the kingdom to. His inexperience showed on draft weekend and count me as highly skeptical going forward with him calling the shots. 

You're probably right.  Kwesi fucked up the Detroit trade because of his skin color.....

Dunno, everyone seemed to hate how Ricky drafted too, but then he worked many years in the business.  His downfall was not finding a QB.

So now everyone is smarter than the new GM and had a better plan.  Guess we won't be seeing any of the 'mea culpas' in 3 years like we usually do.