Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

YikesVikes
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:04 am
x 205

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by YikesVikes » Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:01 am

Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 8:49 am
YikesVikes wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 3:06 pm


"Man-coverage grade: 79.6
The Ravens traded Kenny Young and a fifth-round draft pick to the Los Angeles Rams for one of the best cornerbacks in the NFL. Let that sink in. Sure, Peters’ aggressiveness ─ a big contributor to his league-high 27 interceptions since being drafted in 2015 ─ has led to him getting burnt on occasion. Peters is right enough when he does gamble and talented enough to where you are more than happy to live with those occasional miscues, though. Looking strictly at his time with the Ravens in 2019, Peters put up an even higher man coverage grade (86.9) than Gilmore from Week 7 through the postseason. It’s safe to say Baltimore is happy with their transaction."

Listen for all of his faults (tackling being the biggest) Peters has plenty that I don't love about him. However, you need to stop looking at the business side of the NFL (contracts, trades, cuts) and assuming that it only happens when an organization is unhappy with a player. Sometimes, the business side of things affects the football side of things.
You also neglect to point out that his tenure in KC came to an end and netted KC a 2nd and a 4th in return. You analogy about Peters being hot or cold isn't true. He like a lot of CBs have bad and good games. When it is all said and done, he is a better player then Waynes. None of this explains why Waynes is worthy of being the 11th pick in a draft BTW. :confused:
:lol: :lol: :lol: Who wrote that?? Burnt on occasion?? Like I said he's given up more yards and TDs than ANY CB in that time span. That is an actual fact, I've posted that on here before more than once. So I can tell you that whoever wrote that, did not once look into how often he was really burned.

Yeah he got KC a 2nd and 4th because of the picks. Teams are going to take a chance on that hoping he improves in other areas. But do you not realize that he netted KC a 2nd and 4th and then netted the Rams Kenny Young and a 5th?? Just to let you know there is a drastic difference in the value of those two trades.

In regards to Waynes, I mean I explained not just Waynes but any player being drafted and how it applies to this logic you're coming up with. You literally called Trae Waynes and Anthony Barr busts because you claim they dont warrant #9 and #11. Sorry dude, but just because they werent the 9th best player or 11th best player doesnt mean they were a bust. Like I said, that's just silly.

You're also failing to factor in that 5 of the top 10 players taken in Barr's class were flops. So really there were only 4 guys taken ahead of Barr that I would say are "better players" than Barr. Actually, I would say only 3 players because I'd take Barr over Clowney any day right now. So the only ones ahead of Barr I would currently take are Khalil Mack, Mike Evans and Jake Matthews. So from there, when you take those 3 players and then add any top players that were drafted after Barr that are better than he is...how far is he really away from #9 best player? I sure can tell you it's not that far which makes you call him a "bust" sound that much more ridiculous.

Then go look at the 2015 class, the top 10 before Waynes was not much better than the top 8 taken ahead of Barr.

Winston- terrible
Mariota- terrible
Fowler- I'd say about even with Waynes
Cooper- good
Scherff- good (even though he's never healthy)
Williams- good
White- terrible
Beasley- fell of the face of the earth
Flowers- not good
Gurley- good for a couple years but too banged up to have any sort of longevity

....then there was Waynes. So same thing as Barr's year. Was Waynes really that far away from being the 11th best player in the draft? No.

So you can pull up your personal draft rubric all you want, in the end both players were "in the range" talent wise as where they were picked. Especially when you factor in the flops taken in front of them.
Bro, Why would you look at those drafted before him as an assessment of Wayne's talent? :confused: :confused:
You have got to stop posting responses like this. It is getting hard to take them seriously. You are basically saying that because other teams drafted busts ahead of Waynes and Barr....that it makes our reach for them ok. WTF!?! He's not the 11th best player in the draft. That's what I asked you. Not only is he not worthy of the 11th pick... He was the 3rd best player we drafted that year. What are you really trying to stretch to here? Waynes is not a great player. He is solid. No team aims to draft a solid player with the 11th pick. He is a disappointment. If the Vikings could do it over again... they would not select him with the 11th pick. Case close.

As for Barr, the following guys have outplayed him consistently and were drafted after him.

CJ Mosley - At his position
Zack Martin - Yikes
ODJ -
Shazier - Huge miss. The injury might not happen in Min.
Donald - Hall of Famer
Cooks - Productive at his position no matter where he is.
Verrett - One of the best CBs in the league before the injury
Lawrence -
Adams - Top 5 WR
Robinson top 15 WR
Landry - Productive
Ford -

I stopped in the 2nd round to keep things reasonable. These guys were all available and we took Barr. The 2 LBs drafted after him are better than him and more impactful. Again. Based on play, he's at best a 2nd rounder. If the Vikings had the 9th pick and could do the draft all over, Barr doesn't get selected 9th. Disappointment.
Last edited by YikesVikes on Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:22 am, edited 3 times in total.
0 x

StumpHunter
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2428
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 396

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by StumpHunter » Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:10 am

Mothman wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:21 am
VikingLord wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 4:00 pm


You ever seen those optical illusions where they show you two lines and ask you which one is longer?

The answer appears obvious because without measurement your brain is tricked by what it perceives as depth perception caused by surrounding colors to believe one line is in fact longer than the other.

The effect is achieved because without objective measurement and with simple existing biases we see what we expect is true instead of what is actually true.

And in this case, as well as in the coaching discussions and, to a lesser extent the discussions about Kirk Cousins, this is the sort of thing that happens on this message board all the time. Heck, even I'm probably guilty of it at times.

There is a real temptation to just look at something and jump to conclusions about what caused it and what therefore should be done to fix it. But if you just leap to a conclusion and think you know what caused a result and you proceed to fix the situation based on faulty or incomplete understanding, there is a very good chance that the situation won't improve and an equal chance (if not more, depending on how far from the actual mark you are), it will get worse.

The performance of a given GM, head coach, or player, has to be taken in context with their peers to be fairly assessed.

And when it comes to 1st round draft choices, all we're really talking about is improved odds at hitting on more productive players. That's it. The odds are higher because those players have displayed something, be in in their college careers, during the Combine, pro workouts, interviews, etc, that indicates they are more likely to be successful as pros. Throw in human biases to that mix (basically, teams falling in love with particular players based on particular things like a fast 40 time at the Combine) or "feeling" a particular need at a position outweighs acquiring the best talent available regardless of position, and the 1st round of any given draft is still more likely to produce "busts" and average players than great players. It's just slightly less likely to produce less successful players than those found in later rounds, and this is true regardless of the team doing the picking and regardless of the particular talent coming out in a given draft.

It really is a box of chocolates. If some teams do better managing this risk and those unknowns than others, they probably are better at putting aside those biases and focusing on the talent available to them, then leveraging that assessment in trades or player development to get the most out of the talent they drafted.

I think if there were a fair, objective assessment of Spielman and Zimmer in terms of players they've drafted, they'd end up about average to slightly above average overall, especially when all rounds of the draft are included. If their drafted players were broken down by position groups, then they might be below average in some areas (like OL), while they come out above average in others (WR and DL).

To bring this back to the analogy, it might "feel" like they're shorter than their peers, but a measurement would indicate otherwise.
An exhaustive analysis of other NFL GMs to provide context/analysis for a pro- or anti-Spielman argument would require a massive, time-consuming effort and it would almost certainly be inconclusive because there's an undeniably subjective nature to all of this. Nobody (pro or con) does it because we all know it's not worth the time to confirm the obvious.

That level of analysis isn't necessary. Spielman is already compared to his peers. I've said many times, the results speak for themselves and at it's core, his job is not about drafting, it's about team-building. Drafting is just one component of the job. As a builder of teams, Spielman clearly falls short of some of his peers and stands above others. He's a middle-of-the-pack GM, which is essentially what you concluded above ("average to slightly above average overall"). That's precisely the problem and the source of most of the criticism. Those of us most critical of Spielman recognize that he's far from the worst GM in the NFL but we want to see a Vikings team that rises above the middle of the pack, wins a championship and becomes a perennial Super Bowl contender for a while, not just a team that has a shot at a wild card spot every 2 years and might, if the cards fall just right, advance to be blown out in the next round.
To add to this, comparing Spielman to ALL of his peers isn't what you should be doing. Being better than the Lions' GM doesn't make you a good GM. Being as good as the GMs who regularly put teams that compete for SBs is what makes you a good GM.

Spielman's teams have 2 playoff wins in almost a decade and both of those playoff wins were followed up by just getting destroyed by two clearly superior teams. That is better than Lions have done over that time, but is also the same number of playoff wins as the Jags and only one more playoff win than the Browns.
3 x

YikesVikes
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:04 am
x 205

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by YikesVikes » Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:25 am

StumpHunter wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:10 am
Mothman wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:21 am


An exhaustive analysis of other NFL GMs to provide context/analysis for a pro- or anti-Spielman argument would require a massive, time-consuming effort and it would almost certainly be inconclusive because there's an undeniably subjective nature to all of this. Nobody (pro or con) does it because we all know it's not worth the time to confirm the obvious.

That level of analysis isn't necessary. Spielman is already compared to his peers. I've said many times, the results speak for themselves and at it's core, his job is not about drafting, it's about team-building. Drafting is just one component of the job. As a builder of teams, Spielman clearly falls short of some of his peers and stands above others. He's a middle-of-the-pack GM, which is essentially what you concluded above ("average to slightly above average overall"). That's precisely the problem and the source of most of the criticism. Those of us most critical of Spielman recognize that he's far from the worst GM in the NFL but we want to see a Vikings team that rises above the middle of the pack, wins a championship and becomes a perennial Super Bowl contender for a while, not just a team that has a shot at a wild card spot every 2 years and might, if the cards fall just right, advance to be blown out in the next round.
To add to this, comparing Spielman to ALL of his peers isn't what you should be doing. Being better than the Lions' GM doesn't make you a good GM. Being as good as the GMs who regularly put teams that compete for SBs is what makes you a good GM.

Spielman's teams have 2 playoff wins in almost a decade and both of those playoff wins were followed up by just getting destroyed by two clearly superior teams. That is better than Lions have done over that time, but is also the same number of playoff wins as the Jags and only one more playoff win than the Browns.
I've come to realize that people will die on a sword for any current member of this organization but the moment they leave, they talk about how awful that player/executive was. When Speilman eventually leave, people will then be able to point to how average of a GM he is and the draft capital he wasted.

I mean, the guy gave Kirk Cousins 2 contracts that left the Franchise with no way out. Even if you think Kirk is Brady, you have to leave the organization a way out should everything crumble. He gave him 2 uncuttable contracts. He should be fired for that alone. Dont blame Brzez.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38251
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 369

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by Mothman » Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:58 am

YikesVikes wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:45 am
You just won both showcase showdowns.
:lol:
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38251
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 369

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by Mothman » Tue Jan 12, 2021 12:08 pm

Regarding Waynes: I think the fact that he didn't get a second contract with the Vikings is clear evidence they found his performance disappointing. When a team invests the 11th pick and years of development into a young cornerback, they're looking for a cornerstone player who is worthy of retaining after his rookie deal. I know there were cap issues but the team's calculation was clearly that Waynes wasn't worth the money.

He was a solid player on some good defenses for a few years so he's no bust but clearly, he didn't live up to expectations with the Vikings.

A disappointing percentage of Spielman's first round picks don't make it to a second deal with the team (I include Bradford in that mix since he spent a first on a 2 season rental).
0 x

Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8288
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY
x 796

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by Pondering Her Percy » Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:08 pm

Mothman wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:21 am
VikingLord wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 4:00 pm


You ever seen those optical illusions where they show you two lines and ask you which one is longer?

The answer appears obvious because without measurement your brain is tricked by what it perceives as depth perception caused by surrounding colors to believe one line is in fact longer than the other.

The effect is achieved because without objective measurement and with simple existing biases we see what we expect is true instead of what is actually true.

And in this case, as well as in the coaching discussions and, to a lesser extent the discussions about Kirk Cousins, this is the sort of thing that happens on this message board all the time. Heck, even I'm probably guilty of it at times.

There is a real temptation to just look at something and jump to conclusions about what caused it and what therefore should be done to fix it. But if you just leap to a conclusion and think you know what caused a result and you proceed to fix the situation based on faulty or incomplete understanding, there is a very good chance that the situation won't improve and an equal chance (if not more, depending on how far from the actual mark you are), it will get worse.

The performance of a given GM, head coach, or player, has to be taken in context with their peers to be fairly assessed.

And when it comes to 1st round draft choices, all we're really talking about is improved odds at hitting on more productive players. That's it. The odds are higher because those players have displayed something, be in in their college careers, during the Combine, pro workouts, interviews, etc, that indicates they are more likely to be successful as pros. Throw in human biases to that mix (basically, teams falling in love with particular players based on particular things like a fast 40 time at the Combine) or "feeling" a particular need at a position outweighs acquiring the best talent available regardless of position, and the 1st round of any given draft is still more likely to produce "busts" and average players than great players. It's just slightly less likely to produce less successful players than those found in later rounds, and this is true regardless of the team doing the picking and regardless of the particular talent coming out in a given draft.

It really is a box of chocolates. If some teams do better managing this risk and those unknowns than others, they probably are better at putting aside those biases and focusing on the talent available to them, then leveraging that assessment in trades or player development to get the most out of the talent they drafted.

I think if there were a fair, objective assessment of Spielman and Zimmer in terms of players they've drafted, they'd end up about average to slightly above average overall, especially when all rounds of the draft are included. If their drafted players were broken down by position groups, then they might be below average in some areas (like OL), while they come out above average in others (WR and DL).

To bring this back to the analogy, it might "feel" like they're shorter than their peers, but a measurement would indicate otherwise.
An exhaustive analysis of other NFL GMs to provide context/analysis for a pro- or anti-Spielman argument would require a massive, time-consuming effort and it would almost certainly be inconclusive because there's an undeniably subjective nature to all of this. Nobody (pro or con) does it because we all know it's not worth the time to confirm the obvious.

That level of analysis isn't necessary. Spielman is already compared to his peers. I've said many times, the results speak for themselves and at it's core, his job is not about drafting, it's about team-building. Drafting is just one component of the job. As a builder of teams, Spielman clearly falls short of some of his peers and stands above others. He's a middle-of-the-pack GM, which is essentially what you concluded above ("average to slightly above average overall"). That's precisely the problem and the source of most of the criticism. Those of us most critical of Spielman recognize that he's far from the worst GM in the NFL but we want to see a Vikings team that rises above the middle of the pack, wins a championship and becomes a perennial Super Bowl contender for a while, not just a team that has a shot at a wild card spot every 2 years and might, if the cards fall just right, advance to be blown out in the next round.
I have to disagree with that last piece. How consistent have "perennial SB contenders" been across the league? I'm having a hard time believing that what fans are striving for (the perennial SB contenders for a while part) just isnt all that realistic. Dynasty's and consistency in this league are extremely hard to come by. I dont think fans realize just how hard it is to pull off. The only one that has been consistent as of late was New England and I would say KC is on their way. New England had arguably the best QB and coach of all time. KC has the best young QB the league has seen possibly ever. Look at all the other teams that have been to the SB recently....

SF- a flash in the pan with QB issues
Rams- looked like the next greatest show on turf, missed the playoffs last year, let Gurley walk and their QB is now seeing ghosts
Eagles- went from good to bad so fast their coach gets fired after winning a SB 3 years ago.
Falcons- turned into the biggest choke artists in NFL history
Panthers- do I even need to explain?
Broncos- 2014, because of Peyton. 2016 due to an elite defense. Since then they've been a dumpster fire.

And I know you're going to say, well look at teams like the Packers, Steelers, Seahawks, etc. Yeah what about them? As of right now, how are they any different than the Vikings? What have they accomplished in the last 5 years? Or more with some of them? Aaron Rodgers is considered "the best in the game" by many. He's gotten the Packers to 1 SB in 16 years. Russell Wilson and the Seahawks have shown flashes of regression especially defensively. Mike Tomlin is starting to turn into Marvin Lewis.

I mean you can consider them all "super bowl contenders" I guess but have any of them really accomplished anything in the last 5 years or more? None of those 3 teams have been to or won a SB in the last 5 years. If you eliminate Seattle, the other two havent been since they played eachother in 2011. This year 2 of the 3 are already eliminated.

So is it about being a contender or actually winning one? Philly went with the all in approach, won one and is now in massive amounts of trouble personnel wise, financially they make our cap situation look like a breeze, they're coachless, etc.

So if you're the Packers or the Vikings in the last 8 years, what's the difference? If you're making the playoffs every other year or every year, does it really matter if you arent winning it all either way? Look at the saints, they missed the playoffs 3 years in a row with a HOF QB and then they've had 4 straight appearances....in that time frame what have they done....nothing. Yet, they've kept the same people around for the most part. Hell if anything, they have been worse off than we have given they lost to us twice in the playoffs in that time span.

The Vikings arent a dumpster fire front office and organization thats consistently bottom of the barrel every year like the Jets or Jags. They are competing and by looking at all the teams I mentioned above, that's what you need to do, you need to compete, stay healthy and hope to catch fire at the right time. Like I said, there is ZERO consistency right now when it comes to SB teams. Especially in the NFC. The NFL in general is a giant crap shoot. Unless you pull off a dynasty like the Patriots, the up and down seasons are going to happen more often than not.
0 x
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38251
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL
x 369

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by Mothman » Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:48 pm

Pondering Her Percy wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:08 pm
I have to disagree with that last piece. How consistent have "perennial SB contenders" been across the league? I'm having a hard time believing that what fans are striving for (the perennial SB contenders for a while part) just isnt all that realistic. Dynasty's and consistency in this league are extremely hard to come by. I dont think fans realize just how hard it is to pull off.
Nobody is saying it's easy but it's not unrealistic because it happens every decade.
And I know you're going to say, well look at teams like the Packers, Steelers, Seahawks, etc. Yeah what about them? As of right now, how are they any different than the Vikings? What have they accomplished in the last 5 years? Or more with some of them? Aaron Rodgers is considered "the best in the game" by many. He's gotten the Packers to 1 SB in 16 years. Russell Wilson and the Seahawks have shown flashes of regression especially defensively. Mike Tomlin is starting to turn into Marvin Lewis.
How are they any different than the Vikings? Well, they've all won the Super Bowl for starters.

— The Steelers went to 3 Super Bowls in 6 years, winning two.
— The Ravens had a 5 year window between 2008-12 in which they went to 3 conference championship games and won a Super Bowl.
— The Colts went to the playoffs in 12 of 13 years, won 2 Super Bowls and played in 4 conference championships.

— If I'm not mistaken, the Seahawks have reached the postseason in 14 of the last 17 years, played in 3 Super Bowls during that span and won 1 of them.

— Our team's arch-rivals, the Packers have dominated the division and have been perennial contenders for most of the past decade.

... and we all know what NE has accomplished.
I mean you can consider them all "super bowl contenders" I guess but have any of them really accomplished anything in the last 5 years or more? None of those 3 teams have been to or won a SB in the last 5 years.
I'm not talking about just the last 5 years. That's an arbitrary time period you chose to make a straw man argument. I'm talking about opening the kind of window each of those teams opened in which they were legitimate contenders for an extended period of time and actually won it all. All of your ranting and raving in defense of the Vikings mediocrity doesn't change the reality that quite a few teams in this century have created exactly the kind of window I'm talking about and won the Super Bowl. The closest the Vikings have come to that in this century was under Childress, when they actually made the playoffs 2 years in a row and played in a competitive conference championship game... and it all fell apart immediately after 2009.

It is not an unrealistic goal to build an NFL team capable of making the playoffs in say, 5 out of 6 years, or for that team to truly be capable of winning the Super Bowl. It happens. It will happen again. Is it too much to ask for the Vikings to be that kind of team? Fans have been waiting long enough.
1 x

StumpHunter
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2428
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 396

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by StumpHunter » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:14 pm

YikesVikes wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:25 am
StumpHunter wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:10 am

To add to this, comparing Spielman to ALL of his peers isn't what you should be doing. Being better than the Lions' GM doesn't make you a good GM. Being as good as the GMs who regularly put teams that compete for SBs is what makes you a good GM.

Spielman's teams have 2 playoff wins in almost a decade and both of those playoff wins were followed up by just getting destroyed by two clearly superior teams. That is better than Lions have done over that time, but is also the same number of playoff wins as the Jags and only one more playoff win than the Browns.
I've come to realize that people will die on a sword for any current member of this organization but the moment they leave, they talk about how awful that player/executive was. When Speilman eventually leave, people will then be able to point to how average of a GM he is and the draft capital he wasted.

I mean, the guy gave Kirk Cousins 2 contracts that left the Franchise with no way out. Even if you think Kirk is Brady, you have to leave the organization a way out should everything crumble. He gave him 2 uncuttable contracts. He should be fired for that alone. Dont blame Brzez.
For the longest time I couldn't figure out why people clung to their defense of the GM despite all the evidence pointing to him not being good enough. The Vikings can easily move on from him after all, just fire him and hire the next guy.

Then I realized that people aren't defending the GM the person when they go out of their way to excuse his poor performance. No, they see the GM as a representation of the team as a whole, and if he sucks, that means the team sucks. They need to believe Rick is a great GM, so they choose to ignore all the bad, and just focus on the good.
1 x

Pondering Her Percy
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8288
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:38 am
Location: Watertown, NY
x 796

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by Pondering Her Percy » Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:00 pm

YikesVikes wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:01 am


Bro, Why would you look at those drafted before him as an assessment of Wayne's talent? :confused: :confused:
You have got to stop posting responses like this. It is getting hard to take them seriously. You are basically saying that because other teams drafted busts ahead of Waynes and Barr....that it makes our reach for them ok. WTF!?!
lol coming from the guy that was calling Waynes and Barr "busts". I've never in my life heard of a guy thats top 3 across the league in many major categories pertaining to his position somehow called a bust. VL hit it on the head with the whole optical illusion explanation. You have this imaginary draft guide that has zero validity to it. "If a guy isnt the __th best player in the draft or better, he's a bust". That's literally what you were saying. How is anyone suppose to take that seriously? Like that literally doesnt even make any sense. Then you change your tone and say "disappointment". If a guy is picked at 9 but is the 14th best player in the draft, that means he's a disappointment? Again, what?

And now you're saying Barr and Waynes were reaches? Barr and Waynes were both projected early first rounders, not flash in the pan combine heroes. Waynes was consistently listed above Peters in just about any list you looked at. Barr was no different.

And go look at any draft do-over you can find....many analysts have the Vikings still picking Barr. Not one is calling him a bust or disappointment.
Like the Bucs, the Vikings are keeping their original pick. And why not? Anthony Barr has been an absolute stud for Mike Zimmer's defense. You'd be hard-pressed to find a better outside 'backer in a 4-3 system than this former UCLA standout.
Again, this is another pick I would not change. Anthony Barr has proven to be a perfect fit and invaluable asset for Mike Zimmer's defense. He's been to four straight Pro Bowls, so I don't think Minnesota would like a do-over here.
Original Pick: Anthony Barr

New Pick: Anthony Barr

The first pick on this NFL Draft list to go chalk, Barr was an excellent selection by the Vikings at No. 9. The former UCLA star has been an anchor for the Minnesota defense for the past half-decade

Barr has started 85 (regular-season) games for the Vikings over the past six seasons and has racked up 417 tackles, 36 tackles for a loss and four Pro Bowls.
^ that's the man you called a "bust"...... that's the top 3 draft do-overs on the search. I'm sure there are plenty more that show similar write ups.
He's not the 11th best player in the draft. That's what I asked you. Not only is he not worthy of the 11th pick... He was the 3rd best player we drafted that year. What are you really trying to stretch to here? Waynes is not a great player. He is solid. No team aims to draft a solid player with the 11th pick. He is a disappointment. If the Vikings could do it over again... they would not select him with the 11th pick. Case close.
lol the funny thing is....you have no case to close. You just went from saying he's a bust to saying he's solid. You literally dont have a clue what you're even saying right now.
As for Barr, the following guys have outplayed him consistently and were drafted after him.

CJ Mosley - At his position
Zack Martin - Yikes
ODJ -
Shazier - Huge miss. The injury might not happen in Min.
Donald - Hall of Famer
Cooks - Productive at his position no matter where he is.
Verrett - One of the best CBs in the league before the injury
Lawrence -
Adams - Top 5 WR
Robinson top 15 WR
Landry - Productive
Ford -

I stopped in the 2nd round to keep things reasonable. These guys were all available and we took Barr. The 2 LBs drafted after him are better than him and more impactful. Again. Based on play, he's at best a 2nd rounder. If the Vikings had the 9th pick and could do the draft all over, Barr doesn't get selected 9th. Disappointment.
Now this......this is quite comical. This is just such a "hindsight-y" argument by you and you're talking like you're an expert. My suggestion, be prepared to speak on these players before throwing names out there that you think (according to your draft scale) are better than Barr.

First of all, literally every analyst still picks Barr at 9th to the VIkings in any draft do over so you're wrong there.

Second, yeah good player but CJ Mosely is an inside LB, which is not at all the same position as Barr.

Third, Dee Ford is literally the complete opposite of consistent. And to add a cherry on top, the mental side of things arent quite there either. The guy literally lined up offside in the AFC championship game and single handedly cost his team a trip to the SB.

Fourth, Lawrence....ALSO the complete opposite of consistent. 2 years in a row of double digit sacks, the following two years he hasnt been able to surpass 6.5. Cowboys fans are not happy where I'm from.

Fifth, productive, sure but has been on 4 teams in that span....so what makes you think he'd still be on the Vikings roster? :confused:

Sixth, Shazier? Come on. Yeah the guy had a freak injury and is no longer playing football but you're trying to use him in this to somehow help your argument?

And finally, the best of them all.... you're literally using a guy that has played double digit games just ONCE in his career and then follow it up by saying he's a guy that consistently outplayed Anthony Barr :lol: Dude Verrett's career games are as follows:

6
14
4
1
1
13

....and that 13 game season was just this season. That alone, not even addressing any of the other players you mentioned above, shows me that I'm doing nothing but wasting my time with you. For you to go to that length and basically try and "project" that he would've been a better overall player than Barr just makes for a tremendously weak argument.

And you stopped at the 2nd?!!! So the point of your whole argument is you questioning Spielmans judgement but you're talking about players you think are better than Anthony Barr that were taken in the 2nd round? Dude whattt? So you're faulting Rick Spielman for not taking a projected 2nd round pick at #9 overall??!! And you want to talk about value??!!

Dude I cant with you anymore smh....this entire argument is closed. I'm ticked at myself for wasting that much time responding to you. Good luck trying to get someone to agree with your ridiculous logic.
0 x
The saddest thing in life is wasted talent and the choices you make will shape your life forever.
-Chazz Palminteri

YikesVikes
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 12:04 am
x 205

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by YikesVikes » Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:03 pm

StumpHunter wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:14 pm
YikesVikes wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:25 am


I've come to realize that people will die on a sword for any current member of this organization but the moment they leave, they talk about how awful that player/executive was. When Speilman eventually leave, people will then be able to point to how average of a GM he is and the draft capital he wasted.

I mean, the guy gave Kirk Cousins 2 contracts that left the Franchise with no way out. Even if you think Kirk is Brady, you have to leave the organization a way out should everything crumble. He gave him 2 uncuttable contracts. He should be fired for that alone. Dont blame Brzez.
For the longest time I couldn't figure out why people clung to their defense of the GM despite all the evidence pointing to him not being good enough. The Vikings can easily move on from him after all, just fire him and hire the next guy.

Then I realized that people aren't defending the GM the person when they go out of their way to excuse his poor performance. No, they see the GM as a representation of the team as a whole, and if he sucks, that means the team sucks. They need to believe Rick is a great GM, so they choose to ignore all the bad, and just focus on the good.
I believe something similar. I think some fans have to believe that we are as good as we can be all the time. If there are reasonable areas that can be major areas of improvement, then we arent a good team and they are cheering for a bad team. So when you say, this person should be removed, it is a personal attack against their fandom. When that person/player flames out... then and only then can the levy (usually more than needed) criticisms towards them.
0 x

User avatar
S197
Fenrir
Posts: 12570
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Hawaii
x 578

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by S197 » Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:57 pm

Maybe it's arrogance but I feel like it doesn't take a lot of talent to find players in the 1st and even into the 2nd round. I think there are many people on this board who could and would have made those picks.

A lot of us loved Jefferson pre-draft. I remember PHP mocking him to us and I said something akin to "I don't think he'll be around but what a gift if he is." A lot of people were ecstatic about Dalvin Cook falling as well. Kendricks was also in this category. It was a similar shock as when we drafted Shariff Floyd. I'd say Bradbury, Rhodes and Patterson were also very positive immediate reactions here.

Hughes, well, I personally hated the Hughes pick and I know I wasn't alone. But I wanted Wynn and he has had an up and down career (although mainly due to some freakish injuries). I also didn't care for the Treadwell pick but I know that one was a mixed bag.

What I'm saying is overall, if VMB was the GM for the Vikings, I don't think we would have done any better or worse than Spielman in early picks. And if that's the case, then it doesn't really make a point for a GM one way or the other unless he vastly over or under performs the average. Where a GM earns his paycheck is in those mid and late rounds. Especially a guy like Spielman who trades back a lot and collects picks.

And I think this is where I'm not seeing the results. Sure, he had a great 2015 draft but he really hasn't been able to repeat it. Maybe 2020 will be that draft class (or 2021) but it remains to be seen.
0 x

StumpHunter
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2428
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 396

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by StumpHunter » Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:09 pm

S197 wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 3:57 pm
Maybe it's arrogance but I feel like it doesn't take a lot of talent to find players in the 1st and even into the 2nd round. I think there are many people on this board who could and would have made those picks.

A lot of us loved Jefferson pre-draft. I remember PHP mocking him to us and I said something akin to "I don't think he'll be around but what a gift if he is." A lot of people were ecstatic about Dalvin Cook falling as well. Kendricks was also in this category. It was a similar shock as when we drafted Shariff Floyd. I'd say Bradbury, Rhodes and Patterson were also very positive immediate reactions here.

Hughes, well, I personally hated the Hughes pick and I know I wasn't alone. But I wanted Wynn and he has had an up and down career (although mainly due to some freakish injuries). I also didn't care for the Treadwell pick but I know that one was a mixed bag.

What I'm saying is overall, if VMB was the GM for the Vikings, I don't think we would have done any better or worse than Spielman in early picks. And if that's the case, then it doesn't really make a point for a GM one way or the other unless he vastly over or under performs the average. Where a GM earns his paycheck is in those mid and late rounds. Especially a guy like Spielman who trades back a lot and collects picks.

And I think this is where I'm not seeing the results. Sure, he had a great 2015 draft but he really hasn't been able to repeat it. Maybe 2020 will be that draft class (or 2021) but it remains to be seen.
He has gotten a lot of mileage out of that 2015 draft. That was made pretty clear that when Diggs was traded, Waynes walked, Hunter missed the season and Kendricks was injured how bad this team became. That is what happens when you fail to follow up on 2015 with hits in the draft at key positions. Virtually ignoring the Dline and failing to find quality players on the interior of the line for 5 straight drafts.
0 x

User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6956
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 436

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by VikingLord » Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:42 pm

Mothman wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 11:58 am
YikesVikes wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 10:45 am
You just won both showcase showdowns.
:lol:
Did I go over on my bid?????

:wallbang: :wallbang:

:rofl:
1 x

User avatar
VikingLord
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6956
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 3:12 pm
Location: The Land of the Ice and Snow
x 436

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by VikingLord » Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:53 pm

StumpHunter wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:14 pm
For the longest time I couldn't figure out why people clung to their defense of the GM despite all the evidence pointing to him not being good enough. The Vikings can easily move on from him after all, just fire him and hire the next guy.

Then I realized that people aren't defending the GM the person when they go out of their way to excuse his poor performance. No, they see the GM as a representation of the team as a whole, and if he sucks, that means the team sucks. They need to believe Rick is a great GM, so they choose to ignore all the bad, and just focus on the good.
Curious statement.

Who on here is defending the GM or excusing his performance?

If you've gotten that from what I've written I think I have not communicated clearly, because all I'm saying is Spielman has put the team in position to win. He's added enough talent, but like many teams, they've failed to capitalize on it for different reasons. Maybe he could have done better, but he could also have done worse.

As I've stated, he's probably about average. Acknowledging that isn't defending him or even suggesting the Vikings can't do better at the GM position, nor is it expanding into a broader sense of fan identity.

I'm just afraid the Vikings make it worse. It can be worse than having Rick Spielman as GM.

My basic point is, identify and solve the problem. If the proposed course of action doesn't clearly solve the problem, then don't act.

Put another way - the team has a need at QB, or WR, or whatever. They head into the draft with that need front-and-center, and so when that early 1st round pick comes up they take the best player at that position they need, while they let other players at other positions of less need slide to other teams. That's the way you wind up with a Ponder as your starting QB or a Williamson as your replacement for Moss.

If you've got a problem at a position, even the GM position, then make sure you're actually *solving* that problem by the move(s) you make. Just making a move for the sake of "it can't be worse" is not smart and can actually move you away from the result you want.

And also, remember that even the very best of the best don't always win Superbowls. Max Winter was an amazing GM and Bud Grant a great head coach, and neither won it all. So respect the fact that there is a lot of good fortune involved in any Superbowl winner or draft pick at any level. All the skill in the world doesn't erase that fact.
0 x

StumpHunter
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2428
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 5:55 am
x 396

Re: Heading into the 2021 Offseason- FO/Coaching

Post by StumpHunter » Tue Jan 12, 2021 7:32 pm

VikingLord wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:53 pm

Curious statement.

Who on here is defending the GM or excusing his performance?
Is this a trick question?

From the OP:
GM Rick Spielman- I'm know some of you like him and some of you dont. You all know that I've always been a fan of his. IMO, he is not the problem by any means. This team is still loaded with talent and Spielman is the person bringing that talent in. He's also given us 27+ draft picks between 2020 and 2021. That's what most teams get in 4 years, we're doing it in 2. Granted, Spielman has had his misses but tell me a GM that hasnt? No less he just nailed this past draft class IMO with another 11-12 picks coming up in the 2021 draft.
This guy certainly seems to defend every move Rick makes no matter the outcome, and there are others who think this team 7 win team that beat one team with record over .500 is "loaded with talent".
VikingLord wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:53 pm
If you've gotten that from what I've written I think I have not communicated clearly, because all I'm saying is Spielman has put the team in position to win. He's added enough talent, but like many teams, they've failed to capitalize on it for different reasons. Maybe he could have done better, but he could also have done worse.
I have not gotten the impression you think Rick is a great GM, and my post was not directed at you.

VikingLord wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:53 pm

My basic point is, identify and solve the problem. If the proposed course of action doesn't clearly solve the problem, then don't act.
Then we would never act. There is never a clear solution to an open or soon to be open GM position. You have to take chances to get better or you will forever be average.
VikingLord wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:53 pm
Put another way - the team has a need at QB, or WR, or whatever. They head into the draft with that need front-and-center, and so when that early 1st round pick comes up they take the best player at that position they need, while they let other players at other positions of less need slide to other teams. That's the way you wind up with a Ponder as your starting QB or a Williamson as your replacement for Moss.
That would be a poor drafting philosophy that Rick has pretty much employed every year for the past 6 drafts. Hughes was the exception, but we had a huge need at CB, he drafted Waynes, huge need at WR (or at least a perceived huge need), drafted Treadwell, Hughes was drafted in 2018 when people felt we were the most complete team in the NFL and had no big needs(LOL!), huge need at center, Bradbury, huge need at WR and CB, Jefferson and Gladney.
VikingLord wrote:
Tue Jan 12, 2021 5:53 pm
If you've got a problem at a position, even the GM position, then make sure you're actually *solving* that problem by the move(s) you make. Just making a move for the sake of "it can't be worse" is not smart and can actually move you away from the result you want.
What are we risking by moving on?
0 x