Rick and Zimmer both gone

[StumpHunter]

We weren't dead last in D in 2020 and weren't close in 2021. Scoring, the thing that impacts winning they were 28th in 2020, and tied for 21st with the #1 seed in the NFC in 2021. When the Vikings were 8th in scoring while Hunter and Griffen were still healthy, the Vikings were 3-4.

OK, is “not dead last” really the metric we’re after? The Vikings were in the bottom quarter in almost every meaningful defensive metric. You’re into advanced metrics, so you know this.

Defensively, I think the blame goes to both Spielman and Zimmer. If you look at the 22 defensive players drafted since 2018, only three — DJ Wonnum, Cameron Dantzler and Armon Watts — have played 1,000 or more total snaps. Only Wonnum has averaged more than 700 per season, the equivalent of 10 games.

That’s a combination of poor drafting (Spielman with help from Zimmer) and asking rookies to play in a complex system that requires you to read The Ilyad fluently in Greek when young players don’t even know the alphabet (Zimmer). Throw in tons of injuries to guys like Hunter, Barr, Pierce, and Kendricks, with no depth behind them in spite of drafting 15 players last year, and it’s not hard to see why both Zimmer and Spielman lost their jobs — and that’s only looking at the defense.

This is in response to the team being on an expansion team level, which the Vikings were not close to. It wasn't so horrible that a better offense couldn't have won more games, something the Packer proved when they won a lot more games with a near identical statistically defense.
Other metrics
DVOA: 16th

EPA: 15th

That being said, I think you are right about the D not being good enough and the fact Wonnum, who is arguably the worst starting pass rushing DE in the NFL, needed to play so many snaps is telling. The Vikings have just not invested enough on D in recent drafts, spending 2 1st, 2nd and 3rds on an offensive player for every 1 defensive player. I expect that to change in this coming draft and new GM, with the majority of the picks going to the defense, including a 1st or 2nd on a Dlineman for the first time since we drafted Floyd in round 1 in 2013.

[CharVike]

It's no length they were dead last in D we had that one in 2020. 2021 wepact will be minimal.

We weren't dead last in D in 2020 and weren't close in 2021. Scoring, the thing that impacts winning they were 28th in 2020, and tied for 21st with the #1 seed in the NFC in 2021. When the Vikings were 8th in scoring while Hunter and Griffen were still healthy, the Vikings were 3-4.

Regardless of what you want to call it our defense wasn't good enough. People have said it was worse then when we were an expansion team in 2020. I won't argue that. I saw it. Of course you can pull out a thousand different made up stats to switch it. It's not an argument worth having. Bottom line how will it be much better now. Barr has a big CAP hit and is he that great? PP has a big CAP hit. Smith has a huge hit. Pierce another big time FA signing is paid big. Are they playing at the hit level? I don't think so or we would be much better. Forget Griffen that was a FA signing that was a whiff. Hunter who could be called the best player from Rick and Zim is a big question. He is a player we need. He makes the entire unit better. That's what great players do. But how long do you put up with not playing? Injuries have killed many careers. IMO we need to give it another year. Pass rushers are key and are hard to get. Our new GM could deal him. Of course we have the CAP killer in Cousins. I blame this Brez guy and somehow he is still here. But they will do something. Some feel he's worthless in a trade which I think is way off. He's no Rodgers but nobody is in the NFC. He'll be MVP again. The NFL is starving for QBs. That's why Stafford was worth a huge haul. He's not taking that Ram team to the show. He makes too many mistakes. They were lucky against us with no D or OL. That contract will be redone with an extension and brought back in line or the guy will be out of the game. Once it's redone the hit will be anything the team wants. Back load the entire thing. Shanahan could be in the mix. He tried to get him from the Skins before Jimmy but idiot Snyder wouldn't talk. That's another GM/Owner. Maybe we can get the 49ers top two for our top two if they feel Cousins fits there O better and makes less mistakes. That don't make us better at the starter level but it does at the backup level. Use DVOA to see if it fits. Forget TDs and Ints and Comp pct and YPA they're old and have no meaning. Bottom line don't worry about the CAP that can change in the blink of the eye. When we start losing our top guys then it's a problem. Right now some of our top guys need the boot anyway. It would be easier if they walked away. Less work.

[StumpHunter]

We weren't dead last in D in 2020 and weren't close in 2021. Scoring, the thing that impacts winning they were 28th in 2020, and tied for 21st with the #1 seed in the NFC in 2021. When the Vikings were 8th in scoring while Hunter and Griffen were still healthy, the Vikings were 3-4.

Regardless of what you want to call it our defense wasn't good enough. People have said it was worse then when we were an expansion team in 2020. I won't argue that. I saw it. Of course you can pull out a thousand different made up stats to switch it. It's not an argument worth having.

It isn't close, the stat I "made up" was scoring, and the argument is about how good the team is, which is definitely worth having.

The Vikings were a very average team that a better QB would have had in the playoffs. This year, and last.

[J. Kapp 11]

OK, is “not dead last” really the metric we’re after? The Vikings were in the bottom quarter in almost every meaningful defensive metric. You’re into advanced metrics, so you know this.

Defensively, I think the blame goes to both Spielman and Zimmer. If you look at the 22 defensive players drafted since 2018, only three — DJ Wonnum, Cameron Dantzler and Armon Watts — have played 1,000 or more total snaps. Only Wonnum has averaged more than 700 per season, the equivalent of 10 games.

That’s a combination of poor drafting (Spielman with help from Zimmer) and asking rookies to play in a complex system that requires you to read The Ilyad fluently in Greek when young players don’t even know the alphabet (Zimmer). Throw in tons of injuries to guys like Hunter, Barr, Pierce, and Kendricks, with no depth behind them in spite of drafting 15 players last year, and it’s not hard to see why both Zimmer and Spielman lost their jobs — and that’s only looking at the defense.

This is in response to the team being on an expansion team level, which the Vikings were not close to. It wasn't so horrible that a better offense couldn't have won more games, something the Packer proved when they won a lot more games with a near identical statistically defense.
Other metrics
DVOA: 16th

EPA: 15th

That being said, I think you are right about the D not being good enough and the fact Wonnum, who is arguably the worst starting pass rushing DE in the NFL, needed to play so many snaps is telling. The Vikings have just not invested enough on D in recent drafts, spending 2 1st, 2nd and 3rds on an offensive player for every 1 defensive player. I expect that to change in this coming draft and new GM, with the majority of the picks going to the defense, including a 1st or 2nd on a Dlineman for the first time since we drafted Floyd in round 1 in 2013.

Got it. Didn't realize that was the context.

But dude, there is no way you can spin this defense into being anything other than what it was ... among the worst in the NFL. This is especially true over the last several games, when we had almost no pass rush. The defense, especially the run defense, absolutely blew chunks against SF, and they most definitely cost us the Lions debacle. We almost blew the Pittsburgh game because of defense. The offense won the Green Bay game at home, while we got embarrassed in every phase at Lambeau, including on defense. And while the offense stunk against Dallas, the defense couldn't stop Cooper Rush when it mattered.

First half the season, when we were playing teams like the Lions and Panthers, the defense was above average. It's the only reason they finished where they did in the stats you named. But the last 8-10 games, they flat-out stunk. And the 2-minute defense was historically bad, which probably cost us 3 wins. It simply can't be denied.

I don't think Zimmer lost anything schematically. He's still an innovator, especially when it comes to pass defense. But the guy apparently lost his touch developing players. As I mentioned, the 22 defensive players drafted since 2018 — an incredibly high number — have ALL pretty much failed. And the oh-so-coveted veterans he acquired, with the possible exception of Pat Pete, crapped the bed.

That's two straight years of not just being below-average, but among the very worst in the league.

[vikeinmontana]

I think many people would be well served to remember that football is the ultimate TEAM sport. Unless a team has the undisputed #1 offense while at the same time having the undisputed #32 defense, or vice versa, conversations like we've had all season are literally un-ending.

Our defense was not good. Several games they played well enough to win. Cousins and the offense were mediocre, but several times they did enough to win. The games that these two units did enough, we won. The games that one or both faltered, we lost. In the end, we lost more than we won, and missed the playoffs. Again.

Now we are in an exciting time where we are bringing in a new GM and Head Coach and I for one am very excited.

[psjordan]

The Vikings were a very average team that a better QB would have had in the playoffs. This year, and last.

I know these arguments are as old as the pyramids, but let's say we had a QB that got us 7 more points per game. Do you honestly think other teams would simply go about their business in the same way? Do you not think other teams would play differently if they were behind by 3 instead of up by 4?

At the end of the day, stats are ONLY good for generally stack ranking team units against other team units.

They are useless once you start playing with them to say "I'm going to change one variable and hold all other variables constant to prove my point about wins and losses". It's a fools game.

[CharVike]

Regardless of what you want to call it our defense wasn't good enough. People have said it was worse then when we were an expansion team in 2020. I won't argue that. I saw it. Of course you can pull out a thousand different made up stats to switch it. It's not an argument worth having.

It isn't close, the stat I "made up" was scoring, and the argument is about how good the team is, which is definitely worth having.

The Vikings were a very average team that a better QB would have had in the playoffs. This year, and last.

Last year 2020 the game that knocked us out our team gave up 52 points. We scored 33. Our expansion team had a max of 52. Both teams gave an avg of 29 per game. I didn't come up with this it was posted. I know we had problems on D both years. I don't like it anymore than any other fan. This isn't fun for anybody and that's why they cleaned house. You point everything back at one player. Football was never a one player game. You don't even need the best group of players. But to have a chance you better have a QB that can play at a good level. And you can't be a train wreck at any position group like we are on the OL. For years we have been very thin at WR. Jefferson/Diggs is great. AT is good but beyond them there hasn't been to much. Others have mentioned this in the past. Osbourne has shown signs. Our secondary isn't that good as a whole. Kendricks is a dam good player. Our D was screwed when we lost both DEs. They can hide a weaker secondary. Losing Hunter knocked the heart out. He's a great player. Complete package. I'm not being a homer but it could be argued that he is the best in the game. I'm certainly not going to say that about Cousins. But I think he's a good player. It's better than having a stiff that give us no chance at all. We saw that the second Packer game and it sucked. It sucked for the players. Jefferson and Cook both had a hard time. That goes back to nothing at QB. Those two are good players. We would have battled that team with Cousins. They are the top dog. I also like that kid Darisaw. He's a gamer. He has size which I like and is tough. The play that caught my eye was the guy beat him wide but he recovered and some how got the guy on the ground and then drilled him into the turf. Took him out of the play. It's hard to recover like that and takes instincts and talent. Plus he finished him off. That's playing ball. I'm not calling him the next Zimmerman but I think he has a chance to man that critical spot for a long time. That's key for our team. That LT position is a must have. when we played with the biggest stiff in the world it was terrible. Put the entire O in a hole. OL is key for the O.

[StumpHunter]

The Vikings were a very average team that a better QB would have had in the playoffs. This year, and last.

I know these arguments are as old as the pyramids, but let's say we had a QB that got us 7 more points per game. Do you honestly think other teams would simply go about their business in the same way? Do you not think other teams would play differently if they were behind by 3 instead of up by 4?

At the end of the day, stats are ONLY good for generally stack ranking team units against other team units.

They are useless once you start playing with them to say "I'm going to change one variable and hold all other variables constant to prove my point about wins and losses". It's a fools game.

This isn't just about scoring 7 more points a game.

A better QB makes the team better. We have seen it all across the league where a team adds a good QB after years of mediocre to bad QB play, and they improve significantly.

A better QB improves TOP (we were 31st), has longer drives (20th) AND scores more points (16th). Things that help the D give up fewer points and increase the chances of winning football games. Non-stat things like leading by example and making his teammates want to play harder to not let him down are almost as important.

The current QB just isn't a difference maker in any sense of the words. His stats are empty, his leadership is non-existent and I just don't get why people still defend him after the past 4 years of failure.

[psjordan]

This isn't just about scoring 7 more points a game.

A better QB makes the team better. We have seen it all across the league where a team adds a good QB after years of mediocre to bad QB play, and they improve significantly.

A better QB improves TOP (we were 31st), has longer drives (20th) AND scores more points (16th). Things that help the D give up fewer points and increase the chances of winning football games. Non-stat things like leading by example and making his teammates want to play harder to not let him down are almost as important.

The current QB just isn't a difference maker in any sense of the words. His stats are empty, his leadership is non-existent and I just don't get why people still defend him after the past 4 years of failure.

Still, you cannot make "predictive analysis" work if you want to change one variable and assume no other variables will change as a result.

I'm about as non-committal on Cousins as I can be. I don't think he's great, I don't think he sucks. It's obvious to me that a "great" QB would allow our O to function better, sure. But that does not preclude other teams then taking even MORE advantage of our D this year than they already had.

The "if only Cousins were better" argument can be the same argument about our D; "if only we had Hunter all year then we would have made the playoffs". Sounds good as a snippet, but if Hunter's healthy that doesn't mean everyone else would have remained so. It also doesn't mean teams would not have adjusted game plans or screened us to death.

QB is the easiest position to cherry pick changed stats and try to come up with "predictive results". My point is that type of analysis doesn't hold water for any position, even though the snippets may sound good.

The stats show we were a mediocre team, and they show it definitively.

The stats can't pinpoint what singular thing would have made us a playoff team, much less a legitimate playoff team.

[CharVike]

I think many people would be well served to remember that football is the ultimate TEAM sport. Unless a team has the undisputed #1 offense while at the same time having the undisputed #32 defense, or vice versa, conversations like we've had all season are literally un-ending.

Our defense was not good. Several games they played well enough to win. Cousins and the offense were mediocre, but several times they did enough to win. The games that these two units did enough, we won. The games that one or both faltered, we lost. In the end, we lost more than we won, and missed the playoffs. Again.

Now we are in an exciting time where we are bringing in a new GM and Head Coach and I for one am very excited.

Thank you for a balanced post. Football is the ultimate team game. We would all like to see our team improve across the board. I don't think our team is one player away. But at least we are out of the same old story that has been going on forever it seems. With Zim we had one great run, If you can call getting totally destroyed in an embarrassment Champ game, as a great run. I just hope the Wilf's finally hit it big time. So far they have not shown that ability since day 1. Having Zigy as part of the triangle was a joke. I think they have some outside help giving them a hand and that's why Speilman was trashed. An outsider looked at our roster and said Yikes you don't have much. You will never compete with this pile. Rick has been pulling the wool over your eyes. The fans aren't happy. A new start at least gives new hope.

[vikeinmontana]

I think many people would be well served to remember that football is the ultimate TEAM sport. Unless a team has the undisputed #1 offense while at the same time having the undisputed #32 defense, or vice versa, conversations like we've had all season are literally un-ending.

Our defense was not good. Several games they played well enough to win. Cousins and the offense were mediocre, but several times they did enough to win. The games that these two units did enough, we won. The games that one or both faltered, we lost. In the end, we lost more than we won, and missed the playoffs. Again.

Now we are in an exciting time where we are bringing in a new GM and Head Coach and I for one am very excited.

Thank you for a balanced post. Football is the ultimate team game. We would all like to see our team improve across the board. I don't think our team is one player away. But at least we are out of the same old story that has been going on forever it seems. With Zim we had one great run, If you can call getting totally destroyed in an embarrassment Champ game, as a great run. I just hope the Wilf's finally hit it big time. So far they have not shown that ability since day 1. Having Zigy as part of the triangle was a joke. I think they have some outside help giving them a hand and that's why Speilman was trashed. An outsider looked at our roster and said Yikes you don't have much. You will never compete with this pile. Rick has been pulling the wool over your eyes. The fans aren't happy. A new start at least gives new hope.

I don't know enough about the ins and outs of running a franchise obviously, but I'd have to think the Vikings openings have to be probably the best available right? Incredible fanbase. Top notch facilities. A pretty talented roster. Always a pretty average team but never an awful team. And a pretty open division even with Rodgers playing. If he leaves I feel these openings are even better in regards to the potential of the franchise as a whole.

It sucks getting to this point because it means you've been losing, but I love the excitement and optimism that comes with a GM and coaching change. New life. Fresh air.

[CharVike]

Thank you for a balanced post. Football is the ultimate team game. We would all like to see our team improve across the board. I don't think our team is one player away. But at least we are out of the same old story that has been going on forever it seems. With Zim we had one great run, If you can call getting totally destroyed in an embarrassment Champ game, as a great run. I just hope the Wilf's finally hit it big time. So far they have not shown that ability since day 1. Having Zigy as part of the triangle was a joke. I think they have some outside help giving them a hand and that's why Speilman was trashed. An outsider looked at our roster and said Yikes you don't have much. You will never compete with this pile. Rick has been pulling the wool over your eyes. The fans aren't happy. A new start at least gives new hope.

I don't know enough about the ins and outs of running a franchise obviously, but I'd have to think the Vikings openings have to be probably the best available right? Incredible fanbase. Top notch facilities. A pretty talented roster. Always a pretty average team but never an awful team. And a pretty open division even with Rodgers playing. If he leaves I feel these openings are even better in regards to the potential of the franchise as a whole.

It sucks getting to this point because it means you've been losing, but I love the excitement and optimism that comes with a GM and coaching change. New life. Fresh air.

I do believe that the Wilf's would like to see us stay competitive. They want and need the fans to be excited so they continue to come to the stadium and buy stuff. That's in there best interest. Our team isn't a doormat and we have some good players in place. Things just didn't break right for us and that includes many different aspects including injuries. All that considered this is a very good open position. If we get a few new pieces and our young players improve like Wyatt Davis we can be a 10-12 win team. That will get us in the tournament with a club that can win games.

[StumpHunter]

This isn't just about scoring 7 more points a game.

A better QB makes the team better. We have seen it all across the league where a team adds a good QB after years of mediocre to bad QB play, and they improve significantly.

A better QB improves TOP (we were 31st), has longer drives (20th) AND scores more points (16th). Things that help the D give up fewer points and increase the chances of winning football games. Non-stat things like leading by example and making his teammates want to play harder to not let him down are almost as important.

The current QB just isn't a difference maker in any sense of the words. His stats are empty, his leadership is non-existent and I just don't get why people still defend him after the past 4 years of failure.

Still, you cannot make "predictive analysis" work if you want to change one variable and assume no other variables will change as a result.

I'm about as non-committal on Cousins as I can be. I don't think he's great, I don't think he sucks. It's obvious to me that a "great" QB would allow our O to function better, sure. But that does not preclude other teams then taking even MORE advantage of our D this year than they already had.

The "if only Cousins were better" argument can be the same argument about our D; "if only we had Hunter all year then we would have made the playoffs". Sounds good as a snippet, but if Hunter's healthy that doesn't mean everyone else would have remained so. It also doesn't mean teams would not have adjusted game plans or screened us to death.

QB is the easiest position to cherry pick changed stats and try to come up with "predictive results". My point is that type of analysis doesn't hold water for any position, even though the snippets may sound good.

The stats show we were a mediocre team, and they show it definitively.

The stats can't pinpoint what singular thing would have made us a playoff team, much less a legitimate playoff team.

I don't understand what point you are trying to make. I didn't point to one single stat, I pointed to an overall improvement of play from the QB who impacts the entire offense as well as the D.

Good QB play DOES lead to more wins.

Top 6 winningest teams since 2015
KC
NE
GB
NOR
Pit
Seattle

6 teams with future HOF QBs.

In general, over a long enough period of time, good QB play leads to more wins.

Good coaching does lead to more wins as well, just not as much as good QB play. The next 3 teams by wins:

STL/LAR
MN
Baltimore

Looking at Baltimore and MN in particular there. Since 2018 when both teams replaced their QBs, Baltimore improved to having the 5th most wins, while MN regressed to 15th. So again, more evidence that QB play more than anything leads to winning.

Only LAR is the outlier where you could argue coaching matters more than the QB, and even they felt the need to improve the QB spot. Whether they improved it enough is up for debate at this point.

[CharVike]

Still, you cannot make "predictive analysis" work if you want to change one variable and assume no other variables will change as a result.

I'm about as non-committal on Cousins as I can be. I don't think he's great, I don't think he sucks. It's obvious to me that a "great" QB would allow our O to function better, sure. But that does not preclude other teams then taking even MORE advantage of our D this year than they already had.

The "if only Cousins were better" argument can be the same argument about our D; "if only we had Hunter all year then we would have made the playoffs". Sounds good as a snippet, but if Hunter's healthy that doesn't mean everyone else would have remained so. It also doesn't mean teams would not have adjusted game plans or screened us to death.

QB is the easiest position to cherry pick changed stats and try to come up with "predictive results". My point is that type of analysis doesn't hold water for any position, even though the snippets may sound good.

The stats show we were a mediocre team, and they show it definitively.

The stats can't pinpoint what singular thing would have made us a playoff team, much less a legitimate playoff team.

I don't understand what point you are trying to make. I didn't point to one single stat, I pointed to an overall improvement of play from the QB who impacts the entire offense as well as the D.

Good QB play DOES lead to more wins.

Top 6 winningest teams since 2015
KC
NE
GB
NOR
Pit
Seattle

6 teams with future HOF QBs.

In general, over a long enough period of time, good QB play leads to more wins.

Good coaching does lead to more wins as well, just not as much as good QB play. The next 3 teams by wins:

STL/LAR
MN
Baltimore

Looking at Baltimore and MN in particular there. Since 2018 when both teams replaced their QBs, Baltimore improved to having the 5th most wins, while MN regressed to 15th. So again, more evidence that QB play more than anything leads to winning.

Only LAR is the outlier where you could argue coaching matters more than the QB, and even they felt the need to improve the QB spot. Whether they improved it enough is up for debate at this point.

Baltimore are playoff patsies and are 1-3. There guy seems to be going backwards. He was a nice gimmick for a few years but it didn't work so great this year 16 TDs 13 Int. They can have it. That's alot of turnovers. He needs to fix that. He's lucky they have a very good defense and a FG kicker that is spot on. Distant don't matter either. Remember it's a team game. I like Jimmy G he's a Super Bowl guy. It helped that his defense didn't allow teams to score. Poor Case went to Philly and our D couldn't stop Foles. He had no chance. See how that works. It takes a team effort. Better be good across all 3 levels. If one of those areas does nothing say bye bye. That happened to us in 2017. Defense didn't show up. Took us out of the game. If they played ball we had a chance with Case. Getting destroyed nobody was winning it.

[StumpHunter]

Baltimore are playoff patsies and are 1-3.

Being a playoff patsy would be a huge step up from where we are with Cousins the past couple of seasons.