This was the one that stood out to me. And Hughes.
No, I think your take is fair.
Moderator: Moderators
This was the one that stood out to me. And Hughes.
No, I think your take is fair.
The author's point, which I think is fairly taken, is that to the same point in the relative cycles (i.e. one year after the 2015 draft and one year after the 2019 draft), the trend is similar, if not notably better, for the 2019 class. The Vikings have gotten more immediate impact players and contributions at a similar point in the season from the 2019 class than they did from the 2015 class.StumpHunter wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 2:50 pm He said this draft compares favorably to the 2015 one, but outside of JJ, there isn't anyone who looks like a star in that draft. Maybe some decent depth or even a solid starter, but Kendricks, Hunter and Diggs could be considered the best at their individual positions. Even Waynes ended up being good.
Rookies playing a lot doesn't necessarily mean they are good rookies. Rookies playing a lot and playing well does.
I think you meant the 2020 class. 2015 we won 11 games and had close to a top 10 defense with Kendricks and to a lesser extent, Hunter playing significant roles.VikingLord wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:23 pmThe author's point, which I think is fairly taken, is that to the same point in the relative cycles (i.e. one year after the 2015 draft and one year after the 2019 draft), the trend is similar, if not notably better, for the 2019 class. The Vikings have gotten more immediate impact players and contributions at a similar point in the season from the 2019 class than they did from the 2015 class.StumpHunter wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 2:50 pm He said this draft compares favorably to the 2015 one, but outside of JJ, there isn't anyone who looks like a star in that draft. Maybe some decent depth or even a solid starter, but Kendricks, Hunter and Diggs could be considered the best at their individual positions. Even Waynes ended up being good.
Rookies playing a lot doesn't necessarily mean they are good rookies. Rookies playing a lot and playing well does.
I think the author is also placing Spielman's performance in some context. There seems to be a tendency for everyone who is down on Spielman to focus only on his misses, and then on those without any reference to what other GMs have done over that same period of time. Spielman is terrible because 4 out of his last 7 first round picks have been busts, for example.
But there isn't any context to those statements and little willingness to acknowledge his successes as well.
I won't cry if the Wilfs move on from Spielman and Zimmer, but neither will I jump for joy, and that will be true pretty much no matter who they hire as replacements because there are no sure things in this business. I've watched the Vikings (and other Minnesota pro sports franchises) for long enough to know that yes, it can be worse. Much worse.
Gotta love having 17 seventh rounders. You might hit on one but you will probably cut them all and then keep playing practice squad round robin.IIsweet wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:40 pm Our roster is full of late round guys. The rookies play because they are competing with average talent. When you load a roster with average late round guys, your rookies will always contribute. But you will always have a subpar defense.... we are seeing it play out now. Btw, there is another draft in 5 months....and we will add another 10+ players !!!
I think I'll do the ground work. I'm going to pick a random team whose GM has had some time on the clock and see if their record. My earlier point was that he has had more attempts at bat that anyone else and has fielded worst results.VikingLord wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:23 pmThe author's point, which I think is fairly taken, is that to the same point in the relative cycles (i.e. one year after the 2015 draft and one year after the 2019 draft), the trend is similar, if not notably better, for the 2019 class. The Vikings have gotten more immediate impact players and contributions at a similar point in the season from the 2019 class than they did from the 2015 class.StumpHunter wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 2:50 pm He said this draft compares favorably to the 2015 one, but outside of JJ, there isn't anyone who looks like a star in that draft. Maybe some decent depth or even a solid starter, but Kendricks, Hunter and Diggs could be considered the best at their individual positions. Even Waynes ended up being good.
Rookies playing a lot doesn't necessarily mean they are good rookies. Rookies playing a lot and playing well does.
I think the author is also placing Spielman's performance in some context. There seems to be a tendency for everyone who is down on Spielman to focus only on his misses, and then on those without any reference to what other GMs have done over that same period of time. Spielman is terrible because 4 out of his last 7 first round picks have been busts, for example.
But there isn't any context to those statements and little willingness to acknowledge his successes as well.
I won't cry if the Wilfs move on from Spielman and Zimmer, but neither will I jump for joy, and that will be true pretty much no matter who they hire as replacements because there are no sure things in this business. I've watched the Vikings (and other Minnesota pro sports franchises) for long enough to know that yes, it can be worse. Much worse.
If you are taking requests, I'd vote for Colbert/Steelers (traditionally better than us) and Telesco/Chargers (traditionally worse than us). By "traditionally" I mean last 7-10 years.YikesVikes wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 8:40 am I think I'll do the ground work. I'm going to pick a random team whose GM has had some time on the clock and see if their record. My earlier point was that he has had more attempts at bat that anyone else and has fielded worst results.
Don't disagree with anything you said, but the above is a little rough. Bridgewater (injury) and Bradford (reactionary trade then injury) certainly had mitigating circumstances. It's not like Spielman coveted Bradford and would have traded a #1 for him regardless of our QB situation at the time.
I think that makes it worse. He wasn't prepared to lose his starter to injury for any significant length of time (an indictment in itself) so when it happened, he panic-traded for Bradford. He mis-evaluated where the team was in its development and gave up a first round pick to put an injury-prone QB (who had never made the playoffs) behind one of the worst Vikings o-lines I've ever seen. Knowing the young QB they were banking on was going to miss at least a couple seasons, why not hang onto the pick and try to get a young QB of the future in 2017? Maybe Mahomes would be playing in MN now, wishing he could play for a coach like Andy Reid instead.psjordan wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 12:31 pmDon't disagree with anything you said, but the above is a little rough. Bridgewater (injury) and Bradford (reactionary trade then injury) certainly had mitigating circumstances. It's not like Spielman coveted Bradford and would have traded a #1 for him regardless of our QB situation at the time.
He was basically another desperate move borne out of a lack of preparation.Ponder remains one of the biggest WTF whiffs of all time in my book.
Exactly and despite my long-winded post, that's my main point. As you said, diving into the minutiae always shows different angles but when you step back and look at the bigger picture, it's clear this combo simply isn't working.Not making a case for him to stay or go, but diving into the minutiae always shows different angles.
However I am with you 100% on the "results are what matter" line of thinking. The combination of Zimmer+staff and Rick+staff clearly does not "work". Like, crystal clearly.
Thanks. I think you really make a good point about survivorship bias too. Spielman seems to benefit from that in a big way.S197 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 2:01 pm Well said Jim.
I think the other thing with Spielman is his strategy benefits greatly from survivorship bias. He brings in 10 shiny new toys that get people excited but are quickly forgotten when they don't pan out. You see this in all aspects from the draft, to UDFAs, to free agent pickups.
I just don't see this as the monumental indictment that you and a few others do, for Rick or any other GM. Not many teams in the NFL have a "win ready" backup QB, no matter the team's composition.