|
Post by 1angryviking on Apr 18, 2024 14:26:32 GMT -6
I think BPA is an overused platitude that only works in a vacuum. If the Vikings ignored positional need; in this draft they would end up drafting their 3rd WR, their 3rd OT or a 2nd TE
Also, it's an extremely rare occurrence where a player like Randy Moss, Warren Sapp or Adrian Peterson slips well past their "slotted position". Typically, at any given draft spot you can make an argument for several different players at several positions. I don't think any well run team is going to draft their 3rd OT over a position of need simply because they had them rated as 98 overall prospect versus a 97
|
|
|
Post by mountvike on Apr 18, 2024 14:42:39 GMT -6
Oh, and for those who say weβve done best player available and itβs gotten us nowhere, our worst drafts have been when we drafted for versus actually taking best player available. We drafted Randy Moss when we already had Chris Carter, we drafted Adrian Peterson when we already had Chester coming off of a major year. On the other hand, some of our worst drafts have been when we drafted for Need. Ponder, Treadwell, whoever that guy was we drafted to replace Randy Moss. Taking best player available has rarely cost us. Not knowing who the best player available is has cost us as well. Troy Williamson. Fastest player in the draft....hands of stone. I said it in another thread. This draft will define this GM/Coaching regime. This will be a sink for swim draft for 2 first timers in KAM and KOC.....JMO.
|
|
|
Post by burntpackerdbs84 on Apr 18, 2024 14:57:14 GMT -6
Oh, and for those who say weβve done best player available and itβs gotten us nowhere, our worst drafts have been when we drafted for versus actually taking best player available. We drafted Randy Moss when we already had Chris Carter, we drafted Adrian Peterson when we already had Chester coming off of a major year. On the other hand, some of our worst drafts have been when we drafted for Need. Ponder, Treadwell, whoever that guy was we drafted to replace Randy Moss. Taking best player available has rarely cost us. Not knowing who the best player available is has cost us as well. Troy Williamson. Fastest player in the draft....hands of stone. I said it in another thread. This draft will define this GM/Coaching regime. This will be a sink for swim draft for 2 first timers in KAM and KOC.....JMO. I agree 100%
|
|
skolvike
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by skolvike on Apr 18, 2024 15:13:37 GMT -6
Oh,Goodie! Sloppy seconds again! Didn't yourmama tell you to stay away from girls like that? Oh right, I forgot draft position determines success...it's been proven time and time again. How foolish of me. In any case, yourmama told me she IS a girl like that. My mama has been dead for 25 years, so I kind of doubt that. How old are you? Most guys give up mama jokes for being too juvinile in the midle teens, for God's sake.
|
|
avguy
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 930
|
Post by avguy on Apr 18, 2024 15:36:39 GMT -6
What do Trent Dilfer, Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Brad Johnson and Nick Foles have that Dan Marino, Jim Kelley, Fran Tarkenton, Dan Fouts and Warren Moon donβt? Super Bowl Wins. It is not a required piece - super high drafted/rated QB - to get one. But, those are all mostly years ago in an evolving, Defense not as big deal game.
|
|
|
Post by smoot4208 on Apr 18, 2024 15:42:21 GMT -6
Nobody is debating that we don't need to take a chance on a potential franchise QB. But you don't have to give up 3 first round picks and or even trade up inside the top 10 to take a chance on a franchise QB! 2/3rds of all QB's that led their teams to Super Bowls were NOT considered or drafted as top 9 talents! Most weren't even the highest rated QB's in their class. If I put this another way, every year QB's are in high demand. And while sometimes its simply a bad QB year & none fit the bill, more often than not highly touted QB's go early year in, year out. Yet, 2/3rds of all QB's who've played in a Super Bowl in the last 25 years weren't considered top 10 talents or even the top QB's in their class! What makes you suddenly think all the scouts have it right in 2024? We have every bit as much a shot to find the right QB at 11 as at 3 or 5. And for all of you who are in the camp that Kwesi and KOC are somehow so much smarter than all the scouts over the last 30 years who've sucked at correctly predicting QB success, these are the same 2 that thought Mullins would materialize as a good backup and also went out and thought Dobbs was the best guy to get at the deadline for an offense his skill set isn't fit to run! Don't get me wrong, I think KOC is a very good head coach and teacher and I'd much rather have his input into the selection process than Zimmer, and I think his background will be supportive to the success of any of the QB's realizing their potential, but that is zero guarantee they get it right. All the love analysts and big boards have for Daniels, McCarthy, Maye, etc....the analysts said the same stuff or better about Darnald! Stay at 11 or maybe trade up 1-3 spots if the guy you really like is still there and you want to make sure you don't get jumped, but don't try to trade up into the top 5 if the cost is 3 1st! Stay at 11, see what falls to you and take the BPA! I hear your theory but what if KOC's view is that only 3 QBs in this year's draft have the potential to be long term playoff caliber starters. and the only way to get one of three is to trade up. What do you do? Stay at 11 and draft a QB that your coach doesn't think has the potential to be a long term starter? Pray that the guys falls which isn't likely. Draft BPA at 11 and 23 and then punt the qB pick to next year? The dunbest thing to do would be to sit at 11 and take a guy that is considered a reach just to keep picks and still get a QB. If KOC only think there are 3 QBS in this draft that can be long term starters, then we're screwed. We're not getting into the top 3 spots because all top 3 teams are taking a QB. To me, it's a game of chicken with Denver. We almost have to move up to around spt 7 to ensure Denver doesn't try and leapfrog us. If it gets to pick 9 or 10, and the Vikings are standing pat, Denver is likely making a phone call to leap frog us
|
|
|
Post by purpletrouble on Apr 18, 2024 15:49:49 GMT -6
Viking's need to take their chances on a potential franchise QB. It always a gamble, but they can't keep kicking the can down the road. Nobody is debating that we don't need to take a chance on a potential franchise QB.Β But you don't have to give up 3 first round picks and or even trade up inside the top 10 to take a chance on a franchise QB!Β Β 2/3rds of all QB's that led their teams to Super Bowls were NOT considered or drafted as top 9 talents!Β Most weren't even the highest rated QB's in their class.Β Β Β If I put this another way, every year QB's are in high demand.Β And while sometimes its simply a bad QB year & none fit the bill, more often than not highly touted QB's go early year in, year out.Β Yet, 2/3rds of all QB's who've played in a Super Bowl in the last 25 years weren't considered top 10 talents or even the top QB's in their class!Β What makes you suddenly think all the scouts have it right in 2024?Β We have every bit as much a shot to find the right QB at 11 as at 3 or 5. And for all of you who are in the camp that Kwesi and KOC are somehow so much smarter than all the scouts over the last 30 years who've sucked at correctly predicting QB success, these are the same 2 that thought Mullins would materialize as a good backup and also went out and thought Dobbs was the best guy to get at the deadline for an offense his skill set isn't fit to run!Β Don't get me wrong, I think KOC is a very good head coach and teacher and I'd much rather have his input into the selection process than Zimmer, and I think his background will be supportive to the success of any of the QB's realizing their potential, but that is zero guarantee they get it right.Β Β All the love analysts and big boards have for Daniels, McCarthy, Maye, etc....the analysts said the same stuff or better about Darnald!Β Stay at 11 orΒ maybe trade up 1-3 spots if the guy you really like is still there and you want to make sure you don't get jumped, but don't try to trade up into the top 5 if the cost is 3 1st!Β Stay at 11, see what falls to you and take the BPA!Β Β I agree. Trading this years 2 first rounders and maybe next years 3rd, would be all of the draft capital I would consider for any QB in this draft. 3 first rounders is just way too much IMO.
|
|
|
Post by redbird87 on Apr 18, 2024 17:30:31 GMT -6
Nobody is debating that we don't need to take a chance on a potential franchise QB. But you don't have to give up 3 first round picks and or even trade up inside the top 10 to take a chance on a franchise QB! 2/3rds of all QB's that led their teams to Super Bowls were NOT considered or drafted as top 9 talents! Most weren't even the highest rated QB's in their class. If I put this another way, every year QB's are in high demand. And while sometimes its simply a bad QB year & none fit the bill, more often than not highly touted QB's go early year in, year out. Yet, 2/3rds of all QB's who've played in a Super Bowl in the last 25 years weren't considered top 10 talents or even the top QB's in their class! What makes you suddenly think all the scouts have it right in 2024? We have every bit as much a shot to find the right QB at 11 as at 3 or 5. And for all of you who are in the camp that Kwesi and KOC are somehow so much smarter than all the scouts over the last 30 years who've sucked at correctly predicting QB success, these are the same 2 that thought Mullins would materialize as a good backup and also went out and thought Dobbs was the best guy to get at the deadline for an offense his skill set isn't fit to run! Don't get me wrong, I think KOC is a very good head coach and teacher and I'd much rather have his input into the selection process than Zimmer, and I think his background will be supportive to the success of any of the QB's realizing their potential, but that is zero guarantee they get it right. All the love analysts and big boards have for Daniels, McCarthy, Maye, etc....the analysts said the same stuff or better about Darnald! Stay at 11 or maybe trade up 1-3 spots if the guy you really like is still there and you want to make sure you don't get jumped, but don't try to trade up into the top 5 if the cost is 3 1st! Stay at 11, see what falls to you and take the BPA! I hear your theory but what if KOC's view is that only 3 QBs in this year's draft have the potential to be long term playoff caliber starters. and the only way to get one of three is to trade up. What do you do? Stay at 11 and draft a QB that your coach doesn't think has the potential to be a long term starter? Pray that the guys falls which isn't likely. Draft BPA at 11 and 23 and then punt the qB pick to next year? The dunbest thing to do would be to sit at 11 and take a guy that is considered a reach just to keep picks and still get a QB. Since when have Head Coaches become the best scouts in the room? Do you want me to got through the litany of head coaches granted full control of personnel that were a complete failures...there are a lot? Let me put it this way. SF has been one of the best scouting teams in the business the last decade. They were 1 year removed from a Super Bowl when they traded the farm for Trey Lance. Do you think Shannahan (the guy most consider to be one of the best QB coaches in the league) didn't have a say in drafting Trey Lance...how did that turn out? I'm pretty certain, Lance was handpicked by Shannahan as they had a plethora of guys in for private workouts and he was "The Guy" they had to have. They traded the farm to get him instead of taking BPA and reached for a guy because they thought they "had" to have a better QB. After trading up they reached for a QB instead of taking BPA at 3 and passed on Kyle Pitts, JaMarr Chase, Jaylen Waddle, Penei Sewell, Pat Surtain and Devonta Smith. Even if they had stayed at 12 they could have had their pick of Micah Parsons, Rashawn Slater, Christion Darrisaw...all pro bowl caliber players....instead they got Lance because "he was the guy" the head coach wanted. So no, if I'm the GM I don't care if my HC says we need to trade up for "this" guy. Now, if we are at 11 already and Penix and McCarthy are on the board and we aren't talking about giving up picks to make a selection, of course I'm consulting my HC as to which QB he likes best and which he thinks is a better fit and unless my scouts are telling me they vehemently disagree, I'd honor his wishes. But I'm not giving up 3 1st round picks to move up in a draft to take a player who isn't worthy of the draft slot just because my Head Coach thinks "this" is the guy at a position that has an incredibly high fail rate. If I'm the GM and I think there is a generational talent on the board particularly at a position of need and I want to trade up to get them, that's one thing. But arguably, Williams is the only sure top 10 talent in the class of QB's (maybe Daniels). A Scouts job is to scout players and provide data that supports their ability to succeed at the next level. A Coaches Job is to develop the players he's given and find ways to fit them into his schemes and or adapt his schemes to maximize their talents. A GM's job is to build the best roster they can while marrying the skills needed to execute the Head Coaches philosophies and schemes with the talent evaluators ranking of talent and what they do well and don't do well. Collaboration is great and it's better than here is what you get, but if you are going to let the Head Coach make all the personnel decisions then you don't really need a GM.
|
|
taz24
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 2,727
|
Post by taz24 on Apr 18, 2024 18:58:23 GMT -6
Trade up if you want to and draft a QB. Say he was the best player available and problem is solved.
Numbers can be skewed a LOT of ways. Reds scenario cleverly used 'single digits'. Change that to Top Ten Picks and it includes Mahomes and the numbers are much different.
It is KAM and KOC who have to make the pick and it is their job on the line. They should go get someone who they 'believe in'. If it costs them an extra pick who gives a fk. Lot of ways to build a team and add talent. High picks are just one of them and there are no guarantee on that one.
Detroit selected Best Player Available when they added Charlie Rogers. Green Bay thought the same thing when they drafted Tony Mandarich. Sometimes you hit and sometimes you miss.
|
|
|
Post by purplevein on Apr 18, 2024 19:15:02 GMT -6
β¦..Detroit selected Best Player Available when they added Charlie Rogers. Green Bay thought the same thing when they drafted Tony Mandarich. Sometimes you hit and sometimes you miss. Lewis Cine agrees.
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,217
|
Post by Vikeroo on Apr 18, 2024 19:15:48 GMT -6
I hear your theory but what if KOC's view is that only 3 QBs in this year's draft have the potential to be long term playoff caliber starters. and the only way to get one of three is to trade up. What do you do? Stay at 11 and draft a QB that your coach doesn't think has the potential to be a long term starter? Pray that the guys falls which isn't likely. Draft BPA at 11 and 23 and then punt the qB pick to next year? The dunbest thing to do would be to sit at 11 and take a guy that is considered a reach just to keep picks and still get a QB. Since when have Head Coaches become the best scouts in the room? Do you want me to got through the litany of head coaches granted full control of personnel that were a complete failures...there are a lot? Let me put it this way. SF has been one of the best scouting teams in the business the last decade. They were 1 year removed from a Super Bowl when they traded the farm for Trey Lance. Do you think Shannahan (the guy most consider to be one of the best QB coaches in the league) didn't have a say in drafting Trey Lance...how did that turn out? I'm pretty certain, Lance was handpicked by Shannahan as they had a plethora of guys in for private workouts and he was "The Guy" they had to have. They traded the farm to get him instead of taking BPA and reached for a guy because they thought they "had" to have a better QB. After trading up they reached for a QB instead of taking BPA at 3 and passed on Kyle Pitts, JaMarr Chase, Jaylen Waddle, Penei Sewell, Pat Surtain and Devonta Smith. Even if they had stayed at 12 they could have had their pick of Micah Parsons, Rashawn Slater, Christion Darrisaw...all pro bowl caliber players....instead they got Lance because "he was the guy" the head coach wanted. So no, if I'm the GM I don't care if my HC says we need to trade up for "this" guy. Now, if we are at 11 already and Penix and McCarthy are on the board and we aren't talking about giving up picks to make a selection, of course I'm consulting my HC as to which QB he likes best and which he thinks is a better fit and unless my scouts are telling me they vehemently disagree, I'd honor his wishes. But I'm not giving up 3 1st round picks to move up in a draft to take a player who isn't worthy of the draft slot just because my Head Coach thinks "this" is the guy at a position that has an incredibly high fail rate. If I'm the GM and I think there is a generational talent on the board particularly at a position of need and I want to trade up to get them, that's one thing. But arguably, Williams is the only sure top 10 talent in the class of QB's (maybe Daniels). A Scouts job is to scout players and provide data that supports their ability to succeed at the next level. A Coaches Job is to develop the players he's given and find ways to fit them into his schemes and or adapt his schemes to maximize their talents. A GM's job is to build the best roster they can while marrying the skills needed to execute the Head Coaches philosophies and schemes with the talent evaluators ranking of talent and what they do well and don't do well. Collaboration is great and it's better than here is what you get, but if you are going to let the Head Coach make all the personnel decisions then you don't really need a GM. Lance was not a reach though as he was projected as a top 5 pick...
|
|
Vikeroo
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 10,217
|
Post by Vikeroo on Apr 18, 2024 19:20:33 GMT -6
Viking's need to take their chances on a potential franchise QB. It always a gamble, but they can't keep kicking the can down the road. Nobody is debating that we don't need to take a chance on a potential franchise QB. But you don't have to give up 3 first round picks and or even trade up inside the top 10 to take a chance on a franchise QB! 2/3rds of all QB's that led their teams to Super Bowls were NOT considered or drafted as top 9 talents! Most weren't even the highest rated QB's in their class. If I put this another way, every year QB's are in high demand. And while sometimes its simply a bad QB year & none fit the bill, more often than not highly touted QB's go early year in, year out. Yet, 2/3rds of all QB's who've played in a Super Bowl in the last 25 years weren't considered top 10 talents or even the top QB's in their class! What makes you suddenly think all the scouts have it right in 2024? We have every bit as much a shot to find the right QB at 11 as at 3 or 5. And for all of you who are in the camp that Kwesi and KOC are somehow so much smarter than all the scouts over the last 30 years who've sucked at correctly predicting QB success, these are the same 2 that thought Mullins would materialize as a good backup and also went out and thought Dobbs was the best guy to get at the deadline for an offense his skill set isn't fit to run! Don't get me wrong, I think KOC is a very good head coach and teacher and I'd much rather have his input into the selection process than Zimmer, and I think his background will be supportive to the success of any of the QB's realizing their potential, but that is zero guarantee they get it right. All the love analysts and big boards have for Daniels, McCarthy, Maye, etc....the analysts said the same stuff or better about Darnald! Stay at 11 or maybe trade up 1-3 spots if the guy you really like is still there and you want to make sure you don't get jumped, but don't try to trade up into the top 5 if the cost is 3 1st! Stay at 11, see what falls to you and take the BPA! Because the success rate has been increasing lately. Teams seem to be scouting them better.
|
|
|
Post by redbird87 on Apr 18, 2024 23:24:06 GMT -6
My point on Lance wasnβt that he was a reach, but rather a HC, known for being a QB guru got it completely wrong! Several posters on here think KOC saying βthis is the guyβ means we should trade several picks to go get them no matter what and my point is coaches arenβt scouts and even the best get it wrong. If you are sitting on your pick by all means consult them, but just because KOC says I think this is the guy, doesnβt mean you give up 3 1st to move up to get him.
|
|
|
Post by frantheman10 on Apr 19, 2024 7:16:56 GMT -6
I hear your theory but what if KOC's view is that only 3 QBs in this year's draft have the potential to be long term playoff caliber starters. and the only way to get one of three is to trade up. What do you do? Stay at 11 and draft a QB that your coach doesn't think has the potential to be a long term starter? Pray that the guys falls which isn't likely. Draft BPA at 11 and 23 and then punt the qB pick to next year? The dunbest thing to do would be to sit at 11 and take a guy that is considered a reach just to keep picks and still get a QB. Since when have Head Coaches become the best scouts in the room? Do you want me to got through the litany of head coaches granted full control of personnel that were a complete failures...there are a lot? Let me put it this way. SF has been one of the best scouting teams in the business the last decade. They were 1 year removed from a Super Bowl when they traded the farm for Trey Lance. Do you think Shannahan (the guy most consider to be one of the best QB coaches in the league) didn't have a say in drafting Trey Lance...how did that turn out? I'm pretty certain, Lance was handpicked by Shannahan as they had a plethora of guys in for private workouts and he was "The Guy" they had to have. They traded the farm to get him instead of taking BPA and reached for a guy because they thought they "had" to have a better QB. After trading up they reached for a QB instead of taking BPA at 3 and passed on Kyle Pitts, JaMarr Chase, Jaylen Waddle, Penei Sewell, Pat Surtain and Devonta Smith. Even if they had stayed at 12 they could have had their pick of Micah Parsons, Rashawn Slater, Christion Darrisaw...all pro bowl caliber players....instead they got Lance because "he was the guy" the head coach wanted. So no, if I'm the GM I don't care if my HC says we need to trade up for "this" guy. Now, if we are at 11 already and Penix and McCarthy are on the board and we aren't talking about giving up picks to make a selection, of course I'm consulting my HC as to which QB he likes best and which he thinks is a better fit and unless my scouts are telling me they vehemently disagree, I'd honor his wishes. But I'm not giving up 3 1st round picks to move up in a draft to take a player who isn't worthy of the draft slot just because my Head Coach thinks "this" is the guy at a position that has an incredibly high fail rate. If I'm the GM and I think there is a generational talent on the board particularly at a position of need and I want to trade up to get them, that's one thing. But arguably, Williams is the only sure top 10 talent in the class of QB's (maybe Daniels). A Scouts job is to scout players and provide data that supports their ability to succeed at the next level. A Coaches Job is to develop the players he's given and find ways to fit them into his schemes and or adapt his schemes to maximize their talents. A GM's job is to build the best roster they can while marrying the skills needed to execute the Head Coaches philosophies and schemes with the talent evaluators ranking of talent and what they do well and don't do well. Collaboration is great and it's better than here is what you get, but if you are going to let the Head Coach make all the personnel decisions then you don't really need a GM. so you trust our scouting department more than KOC to evaluate and choose our next QB? I know we've turned the department over in the past two years but our drafts have been horsehit over two regimes since 2015. I couldn't name one huy in our scouting dept. Who do you have faith in to scout this year's QB class and tell KAM who to draft? And what's his back round that gives you so much faith?
|
|
mjollnir
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 2,206
|
Post by mjollnir on Apr 19, 2024 7:19:55 GMT -6
Trade up if you want to and draft a QB. Say he was the best player available and problem is solved. Numbers can be skewed a LOT of ways. Reds scenario cleverly used 'single digits'. Change that to Top Ten Picks and it includes Mahomes and the numbers are much different. It is KAM and KOC who have to make the pick and it is their job on the line. They should go get someone who they 'believe in'. If it costs them an extra pick who gives a fk. Lot of ways to build a team and add talent. High picks are just one of them and there are no guarantee on that one. Detroit selected Best Player Available when they added Charlie Rogers. Green Bay thought the same thing when they drafted Tony Mandarich. Sometimes you hit and sometimes you miss. Spot on if the value is there you move up considering the pre draft hype is exactly that and how players move around (remember Teddy Bridgewater was considered a lock to go top ten). Historically speaking do you think Kirk Cousins and Tom Brady would have been drafted higher?
|
|