|
Post by redbird87 on Feb 26, 2024 14:54:19 GMT -6
I'm not saying that we shouldn't draft a QB in Rd 1....I'm saying the cost to trade up for a top 5 pick is too much. I'd rather see us stay put or trade back and take one between 11-25.
|
|
drhoades
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 1,221
|
Post by drhoades on Feb 26, 2024 15:51:51 GMT -6
I'm not sure what your point is with the "look at last 5 years part"? I'm not sure in what world QB's taken in Rd 1 wouldn't be starting more than other rounds combined in the first 5 years. 1) Teams taking a QB in round 1 are looking for change at the QB position. Most teams taking a QB's in Rd's 3-7 aren't looking for immediate starters and typically already have an entrenched starter. Furthermore, just because a Rd 1 QB is getting playing time doesn't mean that was a successful pick. Most 1st Rd QB's are given every opportunity to prove they aren't the guy where as 3rd-4th Rounders typically have to earn it. Set your parimeters of what you consider is a successful QB and tell me how many years you want to go back and I will still be right. The fact is, no matter what you may think, 1st round QB's have a higher success rate percentage wise than all other rounds combined. ok, so lets trade our best players and a bunch of picks so we can get a QB in round one, that'll do it for sure. LOL the 34 teams that have drafted a qb in round one since 2010 havent been very successful, except one.
|
|
tavike
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,097
|
Post by tavike on Feb 26, 2024 16:22:23 GMT -6
Set your parimeters of what you consider is a successful QB and tell me how many years you want to go back and I will still be right. The fact is, no matter what you may think, 1st round QB's have a higher success rate percentage wise than all other rounds combined. ok, so lets trade our best players and a bunch of picks so we can get a QB in round one, that'll do it for sure. LOL the 34 teams that have drafted a qb in round one since 2010 havent been very successful, except one. I didn't say to trade our best players. I am however willing to trade draft picks and taking chance. Vikings have plenty of money to sign free agents to make up for losing those draft picks.
|
|
|
Post by burntpackerdbs84 on Feb 26, 2024 16:26:11 GMT -6
Better not be penix, jj mcarthy or nix. It is daniels or maybe maye.
Daniels with JJ, TJ, and Addison is real scary. We pick up one of these stud backs like Jacobs or Barkley, and it's on like Donkey Kong. Of course our offensive line can't be trash either.
|
|
taz24
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 2,699
|
Post by taz24 on Feb 26, 2024 16:46:39 GMT -6
If athleticism isn't needed in todays NFL and we need a guy who can stand in the pocket and beat you with his arm, knowledge, quick decisions and durability then we probably should get Kirk resigned.
Kirk is tough enough, great arm, quick decisions and until this years freak injury he always answered the bell. Of course since he has no mobility strong teams with great athletic defenders have always relied on pressure to beat him.
So hard to block everyone up in todays NFL with the emphasis on pass rushers. Guys that can move some like this years superbowl QBs Mahomes and Purdy are the present and the future.
|
|
purpleberserker
β ββ ββ ββ
From the fury of the Northmen deliver us, O Lord.
(A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine.)
Posts: 548
|
Post by purpleberserker on Feb 26, 2024 17:25:15 GMT -6
If athleticism isn't needed in todays NFL and we need a guy who can stand in the pocket and beat you with his arm, knowledge, quick decisions and durability then we probably should get Kirk resigned. Kirk is tough enough, great arm, quick decisions and until this years freak injury he always answered the bell. Of course since he has no mobility strong teams with great athletic defenders have always relied on pressure to beat him. So hard to block everyone up in todays NFL with the emphasis on pass rushers. Guys that can move some like this years superbowl QBs Mahomes and Purdy are the present and the future. It's a fallacy to suggest that Kirk has no athleticism or mobility (at least before his injury). He is generally very effective rolling out for example. His biggest issue IMO is a below-average pocket presence and holding the ball too long at times. By the time he tries to escape, it's generally too late. And nobody, certainly not me, suggested that some level of "athleticism isn't needed". I merely stated that it shouldn't be the first priority. If athleticism is your top attribute, then we probably should go after Justin Fields. For the record, if the Vikings could find a younger, much less expensive Kirk-clone QB who could put up numbers like Kirk, I'd be happy. With all of the savings in salary, they could put a better team around the young guy.
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,194
|
Post by Vikeroo on Feb 26, 2024 19:09:35 GMT -6
Better not be penix, jj mcarthy or nix. It is daniels or maybe maye. Daniels with JJ, TJ, and Addison is real scary. We pick up one of these stud backs like Jacobs or Barkley, and it's on like Donkey Kong. Of course our offensive line can't be trash either. Look I will get behind any guy they do select until they prove not to be worthy on the field, but JJ and Maye are the 2 fits for what KOC wants. I do not believe KOC will make the changes needed to change his system to fit Daniels and Nix has never played in a system like this. Maye and JJ did not just read half of the field and make quick 2 route read decisions. They also happen to be the 2 youngest prospects after Williams. It is not hard to find some break downs of JJ's play and watch how he would make reads 3 or 4 options in regularly in passing situations. You are not going to find that with Nix or Daniels. Not really their faults because their offenses did not ask them to do that. Remember when Nix and Daniels were 20 they were not even considered potential day 2 prospects. I would take a shot on the raw skills of Daniels, but I do not think KOC would model a system to fit him.
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,194
|
Post by Vikeroo on Feb 26, 2024 19:26:43 GMT -6
It's been proven the other way. I have no idea what numbers you are looking at. Look at all current starting QB's in the league and the number of them that are first rounders compared to every other round. Than look at the number of QB's drafted in the first round for the last 5 years vs the number of all Qb's taken in other rounds and the percentage rate of starters drafted in the first round is higher than all the other rounds combined. I'm not sure what your point is with the "look at last 5 years part"? I'm not sure in what world QB's taken in Rd 1 wouldn't be starting more than other rounds combined in the first 5 years. 1) Teams taking a QB in round 1 are looking for change at the QB position. Most teams taking QB's in Rd's 3-7 aren't looking for immediate starters and typically already have an entrenched starter ( See Mond and Cousins). Furthermore, just because a Rd 1 QB is getting playing time doesn't mean that was a successful pick. Most 1st Rd QB's are given every opportunity to prove they aren't the guy where as 3rd-th Rounders typically have to earn it or have injury or bad play force their hand. I think the point people are trying to make is that moving up in the draft to pick a QB in the top 5 doesn't necessarily increase the odds of success. If you are sitting there like the Bears and it doesn't cost you anything to take one....by all means do. But if it is going to cost you multiple 1st and maybe a 2nd rd pick to do so, the cost is simply too high because it's still a low probability and the best help you can provide a young talent is to surround them with better players. If you give up multiple high picks that is less talent to surround them with. It's hard to get to a SB without good QB play, but it takes more than a great QB to get there. Those picks you are giving up....those are likely the extra pieces you need to get it done. Playoff teams with 1st rd pick starters this past season stands at 11. Watson was injured and obviously Purdy and Dak are the non 1st rounders. Obviously Tom Brady was not a former 1st, but only 2 other non 1st rd QB's have won a SB in the last 20 years and in the Eagles case the non 1st rounder was an injury replacement. So in last 20 years you have Wilson and Brady as SB winners who were day 1 starters for their teams those seasons. Then you have Brad. If anything a highly drafted QB is becoming more important then ever for playoffs or a deep playoff run as time moves on. Oops forgot Hurts was a 2nd rounder so make that 10 vs 4.
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,194
|
Post by Vikeroo on Feb 26, 2024 19:32:30 GMT -6
Absolutely! We have a whole different investment and set of expectations if they are selected day 2.
|
|
shawn3458
β ββ ββ ββ
Enter your message here...
Posts: 3,050
|
Post by shawn3458 on Feb 26, 2024 20:06:55 GMT -6
Said it before - I think Penix will go much later than most are predicting. His injury history is cringe worthy.
Nix looks like Sean Paytonβs wet dream.
|
|
|
Post by purplevein on Feb 26, 2024 20:10:35 GMT -6
Ninth round draft pick wins the Super Bowl!
|
|
|
Post by redbird87 on Feb 26, 2024 20:52:22 GMT -6
I'm not sure what your point is with the "look at last 5 years part"? I'm not sure in what world QB's taken in Rd 1 wouldn't be starting more than other rounds combined in the first 5 years. 1) Teams taking a QB in round 1 are looking for change at the QB position. Most teams taking QB's in Rd's 3-7 aren't looking for immediate starters and typically already have an entrenched starter ( See Mond and Cousins). Furthermore, just because a Rd 1 QB is getting playing time doesn't mean that was a successful pick. Most 1st Rd QB's are given every opportunity to prove they aren't the guy where as 3rd-th Rounders typically have to earn it or have injury or bad play force their hand. I think the point people are trying to make is that moving up in the draft to pick a QB in the top 5 doesn't necessarily increase the odds of success. If you are sitting there like the Bears and it doesn't cost you anything to take one....by all means do. But if it is going to cost you multiple 1st and maybe a 2nd rd pick to do so, the cost is simply too high because it's still a low probability and the best help you can provide a young talent is to surround them with better players. If you give up multiple high picks that is less talent to surround them with. It's hard to get to a SB without good QB play, but it takes more than a great QB to get there. Those picks you are giving up....those are likely the extra pieces you need to get it done. Playoff teams with 1st rd pick starters this past season stands at 11. Watson was injured and obviously Purdy and Dak are the non 1st rounders. Obviously Tom Brady was not a former 1st, but only 2 other non 1st rd QB's have won a SB in the last 20 years and in the Eagles case the non 1st rounder was an injury replacement. So in last 20 years you have Wilson and Brady as SB winners who were day 1 starters for their teams those seasons. Then you have Brad. If anything a highly drafted QB is becoming more important then ever for playoffs or a deep playoff run as time moves on Here are the 33 QB's Drafted in the first Round of Each Draft the last 11 years # of the 33 that have made it to a AFC/NFC Champ game: 4 # that have made it to SB: 3 # that won a SB: 1 23: Bryce Young - CJ Stroud - Anthony Richardson 22: Kenny Picket 21: Trev Laurence - Zac Wilson - Trey Lance - Justin Fields - Mac Jones 20: Joe Burrow - Tua Tag - Justin Herbert - Jordan Love 19: Kyler Murray - Daniel Jones - Dwayne Haskins 18: Baker Mayfield - Sam Darnald - Josh Allen - Josh Rosen - Lamar Jackson 17: Mitch Trubisky - Pat Mahomes - Deshaun Watson 16: Jared Goff - Carson Wentz - Paxton Lynch 15: Jameis Winston - Marcus Mariotta 14: Blake Bortles - Johnny Manziel - Teddy Bridgewater 13: EJ ManualOf those 33 Players 18 taken Top 5 Pics # of the 18 top 5 pics that have made it to a AFC/NFC Champ game: 2 # that have made it to SB: 2 # that won a SB: 0
Bryce Young - CJ Stroud - A Richardson Trev Laurence - Zac Wilson - Trey Lance Joe Burrow - Tua Tag Kyler Murray Baker Mayfield - Sam Darnald Mitch Trubisky Jared Goff - Carson Wentz Jameis Winston - Marcus Marriota Blake Bortles EJ ManuelNumber, in my opinion, worth trading up for: 3 (Stroud, Burrow, Goff). As I've said before it isn't necessarily that scouting of QB's is so bad, but rather so much depends on the environment that they go to. Which is why many of the QB's not taken in the top 5 picks often realize just as much if not more success than those taken at the top of round 1. In short high draft pics often go to crap teams and they don't have the coaching, the support systems or a winning culture to promote confidence and success. In our case, we have a lot of what a young QB will need to succeed eventually, so unless you are trading up for a generational talent...I just don't think the cost is worth the risk and you'd be better off just picking at 11. I do think Maye and Williams are two of the best QB prospects to come out in years and I would be tell you I'd be OK with trading up to for either of them but I don't see either slipping to 3 or lower where we might have a shot. I think between fit and probability if neither of those 2 fall the team would be better off either taking the best QB available at 11 or trading back and taking one between 12-30. The cost to trade up for any of the rest is just too much capital for a complete crap shoot. And for all of those in favor of trading up and doing whatever it takes to get one of these guys....that is what every team that drafted the 15 top 5 picks that haven't done shit thought! And if you go back to the original 33 here is how I see them: True Franchise QB: Mahomes, Allen, Burrow Maybe Franchise QB: Goff, Herbert, Jackson, Tua Too early to tell: Stroud, Love, Mayfield Not enough data to even gauge: Richardson, Young One last note, while the list is still pretty pathetic overall, the last 10 years has been unusually kind to rookie QB's success as the league turned over at QB. Guys like Brady, Manning, Manning, Brees, Big Ben, Rivers & Rodgers all retired or were/are in the twilight of their careers (well past their primes). It's made early success easier which has led to higher confidence and a higher success rate. If you look at rookie QB's that came into the league in the 10 years before when that group was playing in their primes, 1st round QB success was substantially lower as early success was harder to come by. Moving forward that turnover window is done and young QB's are likely to revert back to having a more challenging time having early success as guys like Mahomes, Allen, Burrow and some of the other guys teetering on Fran QB status will make it harder to win, win early and go deep in the playoffs.
|
|
budgrant1
β ββ ββ ββ
Competitive rebuild my ass...sell the team WILF
Posts: 2,657
|
Post by budgrant1 on Feb 26, 2024 22:01:46 GMT -6
Lets see if it can be repeated...oooops no 9th rd
|
|
vr46
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 957
|
Post by vr46 on Feb 27, 2024 11:37:22 GMT -6
Wahhh wahhh wahh Blah blah blah Trade up for a wing and a prayer. When does free agency start? God I hate this draft crap You can tilt at this windmill all you want, but these things are facts. 1. In today's NFL the QB position is by far the biggest key to a team's long term success in all of professional sports. 2. The only way you have a chance to get a game changer at QB at the beginning of their career is through the draft. Yes, it's a gamble that usually doesn't get you a true franchise altering player and it costs a fortune to move up to do it, but teams keep doing it. That isn't proof that you're smarter than everyone in the NFL.
|
|
drhoades
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 1,221
|
Post by drhoades on Feb 27, 2024 11:40:17 GMT -6
Wahhh wahhh wahh Blah blah blah Trade up for a wing and a prayer. When does free agency start? God I hate this draft crap You can tilt at this windmill all you want, but these things are facts. 1. In today's NFL the QB position is by far the biggest key to a team's long term success in all of professional sports. 2. The only way you have a chance to get a game changer at QB at the beginning of their career is through the draft. Yes, it's a gamble that usually doesn't get you a true franchise altering player and it costs a fortune to move up to do it, but teams keep doing it. That isn't proof that you're smarter than everyone in the NFL. I never claimed to be smarter than anyone, but a whole lot of you do. Teams keep doing it and failing at it. OK. thanks for your wisdom.
|
|