Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Kevin Williams having a late career surge?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Purple Faithful


Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 2777
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kevin Williams has 2 sacks this year. I doubt anyone thinks that gets it done. The guy I touted - believe I mocked trading down for Fletcher Cox and taking a rd 2 tackle - lots of good ones were there in rd 2 - has 6 sacks and a presence that requires constant double teams, if you watched the game thursday. He's a beast. Other people's inability to identify a DT that would make MN great on the interior, does not lessen the position's importance. Cox mandates a double team ever since he destroyed all-pro guard Yanda week 2. I imagine Cinci will never forget to double Cox again, as well. It would hardly be bad to have that next to Jared Allen.

If you want to talk about a position of limited value, I suggest you look at left tackle. Particularly on a team where the running back has a better average per attempt than the QB. Can you believe there are actually people who think drafting a left tackle in the top 5 somehow makes your pathetic QB better? Hilarious. About as funny as the people who believe giving a premium WR to a pathetic QB will fix him (Gabbert). So, can you really think this team is better with Kalil than it would be with Cox and Cordy Glenn (a rd 2 tackle that works for a run first team). Ponder was ranked 31st last year as a passer, this year he is worse. Teams have tape on him now, lol.

Spielman has spent most picks on offense, but the defense is what is close to elite. You cannot have an elite defense without the middle, though. DT and MLB are these teams weakest positions. I also can't understand how the Vikings felt Burfict wasn't worth a late rd pick. Can't coach talent and he was a beast last night as well. I think we are lacking a GM that knows how to build a team, not a collection of good players.
_________________
Would Wilf please fire Spielman already?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kellerman


Joined: 16 May 2010
Posts: 3624
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Purple Faithful wrote:


Spielman has spent most picks on offense


Since Childress is gone we have picked:

Offense - 9
Defense - 10

So that's just 100% not true. The only argument that could be made is that the offense had more 'value' picks, but when it comes to 'quantity', it's almost split in the middle, with the slight advantage going to defense.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Purple Faithful


Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 2777
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kellerman wrote:
Purple Faithful wrote:


Spielman has spent most picks on offense


Since Childress is gone we have picked:

Offense - 9
Defense - 10

So that's just 100% not true. The only argument that could be made is that the offense had more 'value' picks, but when it comes to 'quantity', it's almost split in the middle, with the slight advantage going to defense.
Sorry, was editing that part and forgot to put in 1st rounders. Cole/ Kalil picks are not equal.

1st rounders:
Harvin, Ponder, AD, Kalil - offense
Smith - defense 4 to 1
(4-2 if you wish to count the Allen trade, but that is a trade for a proven player)

Hard to claim the spielman focus is not on offense. Who is not a Spielman guy on offense? Not sure there is one. So he's "fixed" the offense.
_________________
Would Wilf please fire Spielman already?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kellerman


Joined: 16 May 2010
Posts: 3624
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Purple Faithful wrote:
Kellerman wrote:
Purple Faithful wrote:


Spielman has spent most picks on offense


Since Childress is gone we have picked:

Offense - 9
Defense - 10

So that's just 100% not true. The only argument that could be made is that the offense had more 'value' picks, but when it comes to 'quantity', it's almost split in the middle, with the slight advantage going to defense.
Sorry, was editing that part and forgot to put in 1st rounders. Cole/ Kalil picks are not equal.

1st rounders:
Harvin, Ponder, AD, Kalil - offense
Smith - defense 4 to 1
(4-2 if you wish to count the Allen trade, but that is a trade for a proven player)

Hard to claim the spielman focus is not on offense. Who is not a Spielman guy on offense? Not sure there is one. So he's "fixed" the offense.


First of all, that's not what you claimed:

Purple Faithful wrote:
Spielman has spent most picks on offense


That's plainly not true.

Secondly, I don't wish to include the Allen trade, first of all it's a lifetime ago in football terms, and Spielman wasn't exactly 'in charge' at the time.

As for the relative value of those picks, I already alluded to the fact that offense got more value. Now that's obviously not the end of it, because there are alterior reasons beyond just 'defense vs. offense' that go into these picks.

In other words, I don't think Spielman looks at the #4 overall pick and thinks 'hmmm, am I going to pick a defensive or an offensive player'. If I'm just looking at the past two years, were Spielman's role has been more defined, you have the Kalil and the Rudolph picks being BPA by a solid margin. We traded up to get Harrison Smith. And we picked a QB in the 1st, but that's a QB, a whole different ball game altogether.

Considering the defense, save for the extreme injury wave last year, has mostly been as good or better than the offense, and taking into account the fact that there are other motives that go into a specific pick, I don't get the picture that Spielman 'doesn't pay any attention to' the defense.

PS: I do think the offense has been more of a priority the past two years, but not to the extent where we are essentially not paying any attention to it. I'm thinking maybe a 60/40 split in favor of the offense, and rightfully so. A balance that was redressed a bit by adding 2 impact starters on defense the last draft.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Purple Faithful


Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 2777
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 5:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oh, you got me! score for you! I did type out the wrong thing, thinking i would go look up second round picks as well and never did! wow, i guess i should say that i meant first round picks again, but that would be repeating myself.

Well, professor, i think if you use the trade value chart as an impartial way to value the offense v. defense picks, you will find your 60-40 split in favor of offense to be a really poor claim not based in any reality.

Pick 4, 1800 points, (kalil).
pick 7, 1500 pts (AD)
Pick 12, 1200 pts (Ponder)
pick 22, 780 pts (harvin)

Pick 29 640 points, (smith)

OK, now i will allow u to ignore all other offensive picks and you can look up all the point values for all defensive players taken rd 2 or later and see how it compares. Or, you can do it with just last year and the year before, if you like. but you see, a top of rd 3 pick is only gonna be worth 265 points because he's such a long shot to make an impact.

a rd 5? 43 points, tops. need a lot of those to equal Kalil!
_________________
Would Wilf please fire Spielman already?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kellerman


Joined: 16 May 2010
Posts: 3624
PostPosted: Fri Dec 14, 2012 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Purple Faithful wrote:
oh, you got me! score for you! I did type out the wrong thing, thinking i would go look up second round picks as well and never did! wow, i guess i should say that i meant first round picks again, but that would be repeating myself.


I can only respond to what you actually typed, not what you thought you typed.

Purple Faithful wrote:
Well, professor, i think if you use the trade value chart as an impartial way to value the offense v. defense picks, you will find your 60-40 split in favor of offense to be a really poor claim not based in any reality.

Pick 4, 1800 points, (kalil).
pick 7, 1500 pts (AD)
Pick 12, 1200 pts (Ponder)
pick 22, 780 pts (harvin)

Pick 29 640 points, (smith)


No need to be condescending. As for this list, it makes no sense. AP was picked 5!! years ago, when Major Brad was still very much part of the decision making proces. How can you know that it was Spielman that made those picks? We can't know, so why bring it up? All we know is that when Childress was gone Spielman's role increased greatly, and last year he was given actual GM powers, so looking at the past 2 years is much more accurate when it comes to assessing Spielman's role.

Additionally, both Harvin and Adrian Peterson were clear BPA picks at the time. Or should we have gone defense and not picked those to, just to spite the offense? Not sure this helps your point.


Purple Faithful wrote:
OK, now i will allow u to ignore all other offensive picks and you can look up all the point values for all defensive players taken rd 2 or later and see how it compares. Or, you can do it with just last year and the year before, if you like. but you see, a top of rd 3 pick is only gonna be worth 265 points because he's such a long shot to make an impact. a rd 5? 43 points, tops. need a lot of those to equal Kalil!


Why quote my last post if you aren't going to bother responding to it? Like I said, you have to look at ALL the reasons for picking a certain player. Just boiling it down to 'we went defense' vs. 'we went offense' is completely disregarding things like BPA and draft class.

In the case of Kalil, he was the BPA pick. Kalil has been proving this on the field by being an instant pro-bowl candidate. Not too mention the fact that there were several other good safeties and corners in the draft (Robinson and Smith for instance), while Kalil was the best tackle by a mile, none of the other guys were even close. The next best guy had mediocre measurables and has been pretty forgettable on the field.

To repeat myself, when it comes to the top 2 picks in the previous 2 drafts, I see 2 clear BPA picks (Rudolph, Kalil), something that trumps offense vs. defense, one offensive guy (Ponder, a QB no less), and us trading up to grab Harrison Smith. Throw in the overall pretty even distribution of the number of defensive vs. offense players picked, and I don't see a huge bias vs. the offense.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ArcticNorseman


Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2236
Location: Fairbanks, Alaska
PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Purple Faithful wrote:
Kevin Williams has 2 sacks this year. I doubt anyone thinks that gets it done. The guy I touted - believe I mocked trading down for Fletcher Cox and taking a rd 2 tackle - lots of good ones were there in rd 2 - has 6 sacks and a presence that requires constant double teams, if you watched the game thursday. He's a beast. Other people's inability to identify a DT that would make MN great on the interior, does not lessen the position's importance. Cox mandates a double team ever since he destroyed all-pro guard Yanda week 2. I imagine Cinci will never forget to double Cox again, as well. It would hardly be bad to have that next to Jared Allen.

If you want to talk about a position of limited value, I suggest you look at left tackle. Particularly on a team where the running back has a better average per attempt than the QB. Can you believe there are actually people who think drafting a left tackle in the top 5 somehow makes your pathetic QB better? Hilarious. About as funny as the people who believe giving a premium WR to a pathetic QB will fix him (Gabbert). So, can you really think this team is better with Kalil than it would be with Cox and Cordy Glenn (a rd 2 tackle that works for a run first team). Ponder was ranked 31st last year as a passer, this year he is worse. Teams have tape on him now, lol.

Spielman has spent most picks on offense, but the defense is what is close to elite. You cannot have an elite defense without the middle, though. DT and MLB are these teams weakest positions. I also can't understand how the Vikings felt Burfict wasn't worth a late rd pick. Can't coach talent and he was a beast last night as well. I think we are lacking a GM that knows how to build a team, not a collection of good players.


Geez PF . . . you're still butt-hurt over that pick? Laughing

Kalil has made the offense better, or are you somehow going to argue that? And the team still needs a WR or two and a stud guard, if I'm not mistaken.

Now back to DT, I whole-heartedly believe a huge, strong DT will help the D-line the question is, do you go with a Ted Washington/Vince Wilfork type, or a K-will type? Tice did a great job in selecting K-Will and I hope they keep him here two more years, and then he retires.

In the meantime, they do need a better answer than Evans or Guion or wearing Griffen out on the inside.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Moderator
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 48347
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Sat Dec 15, 2012 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why are we discussing Spielman in a thread about Kevin Williams. Let's keep the focus guys.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Minnesota Vikings All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group