Souhan: Aging, inept defense has few salvageable parts

[Mothman]

The title of the column says it all.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikin ... 69081.html

[Eli]

How much do you think Souhan gets paid to state the obvious? He could have written that column eight weeks ago.

[losperros]

Okay, the article "states the obvious" but I agree with Souhan. The offense needs help but a couple of players could really improve it. But the defense may need a major overhaul. In fact, I seriously doubt it can be fixed in one more draft and free agency period. It's getting to the point that the Vikings D is the best weapon opposing offenses have.

[mondry]

Okay, the article "states the obvious" but I agree with Souhan. The offense needs help but a couple of players could really improve it. But the defense may need a major overhaul. In fact, I seriously doubt it can be fixed in one more draft and free agency period. It's getting to the point that the Vikings D is the best weapon opposing offenses have.

It just depends on what you mean by fixed, if that means #1 defense in the league, than probably not. But I don't see a reason we can't go from near dead last in everything to say 20th. A new scheme will help a lot and that happens the second we get a new D-coordinator. Same thing with getting healthy. We lost a lot of games in the final minute so maybe that much improvement would be enough to make the difference.

[losperros]

It just depends on what you mean by fixed, if that means #1 defense in the league, than probably not. But I don't see a reason we can't go from near dead last in everything to say 20th. A new scheme will help a lot and that happens the second we get a new D-coordinator. Same thing with getting healthy. We lost a lot of games in the final minute so maybe that much improvement would be enough to make the difference.

Yeah, I hear you, Mondry. Good points.

I guess I was naive enough earlier in the season to believe the Vikings needed a fix here and there to get in the playoffs next year. Maybe they still can. But as you said, it's more reasonable to assume the team can maybe rise from the bottom of the barrel to the middle next year. I sure hope so. Nobody enjoys seeing their team lose so many games.

[Demi]

But I don't see a reason we can't go from near dead last in everything to say 20th.

2 starter caliber players in the secondary (Smith, Rhodes).
One (barely) starter caliber player at linebacker (Greenway)
And A few solid 43 dlinemen, two of which have never really been full timers for any length of time. And the two that have likely won't be here. Even Griffen is a question mark at this point. Which leaves Floyd and Robison.

I see a pretty big reason why...a lack of talent.

[CbusVikesFan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8U04Jr0mqI

[mansquatch]

IMO, the Defensive stats that get my attention are Points Allowed and Takeaways/ Sacls. The former is obvious to the W/L column, and the latter are the "big plays" by your defense.

Going back to 2009 (he was DC in 2009, want to show winning year too), here are Frasiers's Stats in Both Categories

Scoring Defense
2013 (YTD) 467 PA, 31.1 Pts/G, 16th in NFC (worst in NFL)
2012 348 PA, 21.8 Pts/G, 8th in NFC
2011 449 PA, 28.1 Pts/G, 15th in NFC
2010 348 PA, 21.8 Pts/G, 9th in NFC
2009 312 PA, 19.5 Pts/G, 5th in NFC

Take Aways (INT and Fumbled Recovered)

2013 (YTD) 12 INT, 8 FMBL, 1.33 TO/G, 36 sack, 2.4/G
2012 10 INT, 12 FMBL, 1.375 TO/G, 44 sack, 2.75/G
2011 8 INT, 15 FMBL, 1.437 TO/G, 50 sack, 3.125/G
2010 15 INT, 10 FMBL, 1.562 TO/G, 31 sack, 1.937/G
2009 11 INT, 13 FMBL, 1.5 TO/G, 48 sack, 3/G

FMBL are only Fumbles recovered. Causing them is great, but if you do not reocver it isn't as big of a momentum swing. The NFL Stat site didn't rank teams by total Takeaways, or at least I couldn't figure out how to pull it.

So what do I take from this?

Well the big thing is that even with a vaunted 50 sack season in 2011, that still only equals a little more than 3 big plays a game in the sack department. Also, on Sacks, yes they cost the offense a down and negative yardage, but if they are not on 3rd down, then if your secondary cannot hold the line they net you nothing. We've seen this a lot over the years. Also, it is interesting how much swing we see in that number. This year the defense is not benefiting from a record challenging campaign from Jared Allen and you can see the big play difference.

The takeaways would have more punch if you could see the overall stats and notice that the Vikings were always in teh bottom 5 of the NFC every season I pulled for INT. (they are average of the fumbles.) It should also be noted that the best takeaway teams average closer to 2 a game vs. our 1. So we are about 10 takeaways a season (on average) short of being elite in this category. I'm sure some of that is luck, but it is consistently bad luck which begs other questions...

IMO, the real cat's meow is the scoring defense. OUr best years here were average and our worst teams averages 4TD or more... Quite simply, if our offense isn't capable of 25+ pts/G in an average season we are going to lose and lose a lot. This basically vindicates the whole QB thing. However, it also shows how much pressure our defense is adding to that position. Elite defenses in this category were allowing 15-18 points per game, ie one less TD on average per week.

The stats show an obvious decline over the seasons. I'm sure this isn't a shock to anyone.

The one thing I'd like to talk about is the value of the Cover 2. These stats show that even with several elite players in their prime, the scheme plus this coaching staff can at best expect to average allowing 21-22 Pts/G. I know that isn' the only thing we run, but it is the majority and these stats cover five years with various personnel groups amidst the core group of players. One could argue that if we get them more pieces it would be better. That might be true, but how many elite players will that take? IMO, at this point it would take a lot. To me lends strength to the position that if the team were to switch schemse it would hurt relatively less to do so now vs. later given we need a big talent infusion regardless. Of course there is no guarrantee that a new scheme would get us "there" sooner, but neither is there a guarrantee it wouldn't be slower? Another big question is whether or not we thing we've seen the peak of what this coaching staff can offer. IMO, the data swatch would seem to say yes and that peak is 21 Pts/G. Is that acceptable? (it might be with 2 TO/G)

Lots of questions, not many answers. IMO the 21 Pts/G needs ot drop to 18 and they should work to get the To/G closer to 1.8 or 2. I do not think the latter happens in a predmoninantly zone coverae defense.

[Mothman]

Vikings' porous defense just 18 points from infamy

If the Vikings allow 33 points to Detroit in Sunday's finale, they will have given up 500 points in a season for the first time in the franchise's 53-year history.

Even if the Vikings can avoid that ugly number, it seems unlikely they will be able to stave off finishing the season with their worst defense ever. The 1984 team, which gave up 30.3 points per game, currently holds that dubious distinction.

[NextQuestion]

I wonder why people want Frazier around next year. His scheme is TERRIBLE

[Purple Rage]

Greenway, Rhodes, Smith, Robison are the 4 parts that I'd build around.....Mauti, Cole, Sandejo, Hodges are players I'd keep on the roster as far as utility and potential. To me EVERYONE else is expendable. Floyd just doesn't have the spark we hope for, Tho Kevin an Jared have some more in the tank I just think it's time to move tho I love what they have done for us. Just my thoughts. Now with that said who's knows with a better scheme an better coaching we might have some stars on the roster that we don't know about. Put Josh Robinson on SF, Everson Griffin in Pitt, Floyd in NE, Cook in Chi.....would they thrive?