Rick Spielman, what should the Vikes do with him

[Mothman]

Also as I said before, not many GMs out there are willing to build through the draft and limit free agency spending. I don't want a GM that does the opposite.

Nobody is suggesting the Vikings should close their eyes, reach into a hat and randomly pull out the name of their next GM. Presumably, they would engage in a hiring process and hire a GM with the attributes they believe are important to doing the job well.

I see no reason Spielman should be fired and he won't be. This was a team a few years back that had holes EVERYWHERE. No QB, no WRs, no defense, no depth. Look at what we have now. But since our offense has struggled due to injuries and in turn, the offense isn't performing, this guy should go now??

No, that's not why he should go and since I can't even seem to get that one simple point across, I'm done trying to explain my position on this.

[IIsweet]

Here's another thought, maybe Spielman needs to revamp his scouting department?
Again, that's his responsibility.

I must add, I am very much intrigued and want to see Boone at LG, Easton at C, Sirles at RT the remainder of the season and going into next year. Finding a LT in FA would be a great idea. Is Jake Long coming back as a backup? RG, we may have someone already? Who? Definitely though in the draft there are some guys in the 2nd and 3rd rds.

I am curious as to how Spielman handles AD and his contract. Bradford too. What his take on the OL is. Resigning Newman. We can all speculate and have opinions, but what needs to happen is having a plan. I don't see the plan as proactive but always reactive ! This is my concern with Spielman as GM.
We seem to always draft need based. Ever notice how NE always drafts BPA and they seem to always win....

[Banquo]

Nobody is suggesting the Vikings should close their eyes, reach into a hat and randomly pull out the name of their next GM. Presumably, they would engage in a hiring process and hire a GM with the attributes they believe are important to doing the job well.
No, that's not why he should go and since I can't even seem to get that one simple point across, I'm done trying to explain my position on this.

Regardless of the process, that fact is that FO and coaching hires are a crapshoot most of the time. So if you have a guy who has come out of the draft with a pretty strong haul, has made a couple savvy FA moves, and has hired a really good head coach, I really can't see why you would move on.

[Mothman]

Regardless of the process, that fact is that FO and coaching hires are a crapshoot most of the time.

So you're saying they should just pull a name out of a hat!

I think there's less luck involved in such hires (or the draft, for that matter) than people think. There's an element of luck or good fortune involved but if it were truly a crapshoot, none of these decisions would matter at all. Clearly, they do matter.

So if you have a guy who has come out of the draft with a pretty strong haul, has made a couple savvy FA moves, and has hired a really good head coach, I really can't see why you would move on.

Because building a championship-caliber team takes more than that. What you just described strikes me as the basic competency level a team should be able to expect from a GM.

[Banquo]

So you're saying they should just pull a name out of a hat!

I think there's less luck involved in such hires (or the draft, for that matter) than people think. There's an element of luck or good fortune involved but if it were truly a crapshoot, none of these decisions would matter at all. Clearly, they do matter.
Because building a championship-caliber team takes more than that. What you just described strikes me as the basic competency level a team should be able to expect from a GM.

Drafting well, making savvy FA decisions, and hiring good coaches is exactly how teams become championship caliber in the long term. Spielman's work got them to the playoffs last year. No doubt this year would have been more of the same if it had not been for so much of the offense missing the season. And for all that, it's still technically in play. Bailing on the guy responsible for those strides because of the injury plagued off year is what lousy teams do. They get trigger happy and constantly turn things over. No continuity and no success.

EDIT: I do agree though that "crapshoot" was the wrong word. That word implies that it's purely random, and that's not what I am trying to say. What I really mean is that while a team process can make your chances better than 50/50, there's a high rate of failure at GM or HC in this league. Therefore, if you have a guy who's doing a good job you should give him plenty of time before you go for the unknown or unproven option.

[Jordysghost]

Drafting well, making savvy FA decisions, and hiring good coaches is exactly how teams become championship caliber in the long term. Spielman's work got them to the playoffs last year. No doubt this year would have been more of the same if it had not been for so much of the offense missing the season. And for all that, it's still technically in play. Bailing on the guy responsible for those strides because of the injury plagued off year is what lousy teams do. They get trigger happy and constantly turn things over. No continuity and no success.

Thats is an assumption, the Vikings O was terrible last year and I remain skeptical that all this is because of injury.

[Mothman]

Drafting well, making savvy FA decisions, and hiring good coaches is exactly how teams become championship caliber in the long term. Spielman's work got them to the playoffs last year. No doubt this year would have been more of the same if it had not been for so much of the offense missing the season. And for all that, it's still technically in play. Bailing on the guy responsible for those strides because of the injury plagued off year is what lousy teams do. They get trigger happy and constantly turn things over. No continuity and no success.

What getting lost is that Spielman's bears significant responsibility for the slides that lead to the strides. The Vikes made the playoffs last year. That's great. They also made the playoffs in 2012, 2009 and 2008, all with Spielman deeply involved at a high level of the organization. There hasn't been much continuity with head coaches under the Wilfs but there has been continuity wth Spielman. We've seen 10 years of it and by now it's pretty obvious where it leads: wildly unbalanced teams and occasional playoff appearances, usually followed by a drop back to mediocrity or worse the following year (2009 was the exception) because the foundation isn't there to sustain success.

For every good draft pick or savvy move Spielman makes, there tends to be a clunker in the same category.

I'm an advocate of continuity but it isn't beneficial without the right people in place.

[Banquo]

Thats is an assumption, the Vikings O was terrible last year and I remain skeptical that all this is because of injury.

Clearly all statements about what would or would not have happened in circumstances other than the ones that actually took place are assumptions.

But the Vikings' offense was not "terrible" last year. It was average. They were 16th in points per game with 22.8 (BTW, Green Bay was 15th with 23... so .2 more points per game). This season they are 24th with 19.8. That 3 point difference is an important swing when 4 of their 6 losses have been by less than a touchdown and 2 of them have been by less than a FG. And if you think that has nothing to do with losing your starting QB, RB, LT, RT, RG in addition to some of their backups once THEY became the starters then I really don't know what to say to you. It's a far greater leap to assume they would have taken this offensive step back even if healthy. But we're all free to make and defend our assumptions as we see fit.

[Banquo]

What getting lost is that Spielman's bears significant responsibility for the slides that lead to the strides. The Vikes made the playoffs last year. That's great. They also made the playoffs in 2012, 2009 and 2008, all with Spielman deeply involved at a high level of the organization. There hasn't been much continuity with head coaches under the Wilfs but there has been continuity wth Spielman. We've seen 10 years of it and by now it's pretty obvious where it leads: wildly unbalanced teams and occasional playoff appearances, usually followed by a drop back to mediocrity or worse the following year (2009 was the exception) because the foundation isn't there to sustain success.

For every good draft pick or savvy move Spielman makes, there tends to be a clunker in the same category.

I'm an advocate of continuity but it isn't beneficial without the right people in place.

You and I are going to have a different approach in that I'm not judging Spielman as a GM for what happened before Spielman was the GM. We know he calls the shots now. We don't know what level of influence he was having in the final decisions before 2012.

I also think it would be beneficial to take a cursory tour of the league's draft/fa/coaching moves since Spielman took over. It can really put his hits and misses in perspective.

[Jordysghost]

Clearly all statements about what would or would not have happened in circumstances other than the ones that actually took place are assumptions.

But the Vikings' offense was not "terrible" last year. It was average. They were 16th in points per game with 22.8 (BTW, Green Bay was 15th with 23... so .2 more points per game). This season they are 24th with 19.8. That 3 point difference is an important swing when 4 of their 6 losses have been by less than a touchdown and 2 of them have been by less than a FG. And if you think that has nothing to do with losing your starting QB, RB, LT, RT, RG in addition to some of their backups once THEY became the starters then I really don't know what to say to you. It's a far greater leap to assume they would have taken this offensive step back even if healthy. But we're all free to make and defend our assumptions as we see fit.

Sorry, I was thinking of the Vikes 29th ranked yardage O. Your points per game is more important, i agree. Though you wont evoke any reaction fron me comparing then to the Packers 2015 O, that unit was as terrible as a 15th ranked point ls O could be.

You dont need to tell me how injuries affect teams, trust me, and I never meant to imply that injuries haven't played a part, but I am very hesitant to view that side of the ball complete by taking away the injuries. I think your 2015 ppg was largely a product of a good D that provides short fields and scores of their own.

The injury to Bridge was no doubt frustrating and i sad, but in hindsight it has only benefit your O.

[Banquo]

Sorry, I was thinking of the Vikes 29th ranked yardage O. Your points per game is more important, i agree. Though you wont evoke any reaction fron me comparing then to the Packers 2015 O, that unit was as terrible as a 15th ranked point ls O could be.

You dont need to tell me how injuries affect teams, trust me, and I never meant to imply that injuries haven't played a part, but I am very hesitant to view that side of the ball complete by taking away the injuries. I think your 2015 ppg was largely a product of a good D that provides short fields and scores of their own.

The injury to Bridge was no doubt frustrating and i sad, but in hindsight it has only benefit your O.

Hard to tell. You may well be right, as Bradford has played better than expected. But Bridgewater was looking his best to date in the preseason and was at the career point where you'd expect a leap if it was ever going to come at all.

To be clear, I am not saying that a healthy O would be any great shakes. But another year of average or perhaps a modest step forward would have been enough to get them back in the PO's in my opinion.

[Mothman]

You and I are going to have a different approach in that I'm not judging Spielman as a GM for what happened before Spielman was the GM.

I'm not judging him as a GM for the period of time he wasn't a GM either. I'm simply trying to hold him accountable for the significant role he played in the organization prior to becoming GM rather than giving him a 5 year pass.

I also think it would be beneficial to take a cursory tour of the league's draft/fa/coaching moves since Spielman took over. It can really put his hits and misses in perspective.

I've done that.

[Mothman]

Sorry, I was thinking of the Vikes 29th ranked yardage O. Your points per game is more important, i agree.

It's more important but it's also a team stat, not an offensive stat. The Vikings scored 6 TDs on defense and special teams last season.

[Banquo]

I'm not judging him as a GM for the period of time he wasn't a GM either. I'm simply trying to hold him accountable for the significant role he played in the organization prior to becoming GM rather than giving him a 5 year pass.
I've done that.

But in order to do that, you have to guess at what he was and wasn't responsible for prior to 2012. And it's so obvious that something changed drastically when that transition happened. Just look at the draft results.

2012-15, Good Players: Smith, Floyd, Rhodes, Barr, Waynes, Kendricks, Hunter, Diggs

2008-11, Good Players: Rudolph, Griffen, Loadholt, Sullivan

[Mothman]

But in order to do that, you have to guess at what he was and wasn't responsible for prior to 2012.

I disagree.

His role prior to 2012 is not mysterious. He ran the scouting department. He conducted the draft. As 1/3 of the "Triangle of Authority" he was supposed to work closely with the head coach to arrive at a consensus.

In other words, he was intimately involved in the decisions that led to how the team was built and managed.

And it's so obvious that something changed drastically when that transition happened. Just look at the draft results.

2012-15, Good Players: Smith, Floyd, Rhodes, Barr, Waynes, Kendricks, Hunter, Diggs

2008-11, Good Players: Rudolph, Griffen, Loadholt, Sullivan

Spielman joined the team after the 2006 draft so the second part of that list should begin in 2007 and include the best draft pick he ever made, Adrian Peterson. Brian Robison was also drafted during that time. Harvin and Rice were good players as well, although we could make a distinction between good players and good picks that worked out well for the team over time.

Frankly, when I look closely at how the Vikes drafted from 2007-2011 and how they've drafted since, I don't see any drastic change or dramatic improvement over the past 5 years.