Klomp Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 4 minutes ago, vikingsrule said: What a disaster that trade was. Didn't get to the playoffs. Having Hill in there probably would have made little difference in the end. I disagree. I would've made that trade again if I had to do it over again. It's easy to look at the end result and say it was a disaster. But we're talking about worst-case scenario around him and he still got the team to 8-8. I'm saying best-case scenario under Hill would've been 7-9. With a repeat of all the injuries, it probably would've been closer to 3-13/4-12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingsrule Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 Just now, Klomp said: I disagree. I would've made that trade again if I had to do it over again. It's easy to look at the end result and say it was a disaster. But we're talking about worst-case scenario around him and he still got the team to 8-8. I'm saying best-case scenario under Hill would've been 7-9. With a repeat of all the injuries, it probably would've been closer to 3-13/4-12. It made sense at the time, I'll give you that. In hindsight, it was bad, which is how the trade will ultimately be evaluated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klomp Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 On 11/26/2017 at 11:11 AM, JDBrocks said: Disagree about Bradford not being willing to take the hits. There were games last year where he was throwing darts and getting smacked. Also scheme and personnel change will also have an effect on offensive efficiency/bulk stats. Let's not pretend that a healthy Bradford isn't a better option than Keenum. He sliced up an apparently Super Bowl caliber defense week 1 this year in this brand new offense. A healthy Bradford is likely the best QB on the roster, but that's not reality at this point. I believe, in the end, they are going to ride this season out with Keenum, but let him walk for big money in 2018 and re-sign Teddy. While I believe Case has pleasantly surprised them, I'm not sure investing in a 29-yr old QB with 1 spurt of success to his name is a wise investment. They will wish him well in the market, but keep their door open for him to come in as a well-paid backup, if he so chooses...because he'd only be 1 snap away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
perrynoid Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 Welcome back doc! Your "patients" missed you! (As your patients had very little patience lol). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milanb Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 27 minutes ago, disaacs said: A healthy Bradford is likely the best QB on the roster, but that's not reality at this point. I believe, in the end, they are going to ride this season out with Keenum, but let him walk for big money in 2018 and re-sign Teddy. While I believe Case has pleasantly surprised them, I'm not sure investing in a 29-yr old QB with 1 spurt of success to his name is a wise investment. They will wish him well in the market, but keep their door open for him to come in as a well-paid backup, if he so chooses...because he'd only be 1 snap away. It's sad to say, but none of the three looks like a long term solution at the position. Keenum has a bit of the Kurt Warner in him — a journeyman backup QB who stepped into the right situation and played great when the starter got hurt — but Warner himself was only ever productive when surrounded by HOF talent at St. Louis, and again at Arizona. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Worm Guts Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 15 minutes ago, milanb said: It's sad to say, but none of the three looks like a long term solution at the position. Keenum has a bit of the Kurt Warner in him — a journeyman backup QB who stepped into the right situation and played great when the starter got hurt — but Warner himself was only ever productive when surrounded by HOF talent at St. Louis, and again at Arizona. Warner won 2 MVP's and played in 3 Super Bowls in 12 seasons, its weird how you're dismissive of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swede700 Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 Even Warner was 2 years younger than Keenum is at this point. And Warner wasn't even a journeyman backup QB as he hadn't even been in the NFL at all for 4 years when he signed with the Rams. The best comparison for Keenum is Jake Delhomme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milanb Posted November 27, 2017 Share Posted November 27, 2017 4 minutes ago, Worm Guts said: Warner won an MVP and played in 3 Super Bowls in 12 seasons, its weird how you're dismissive of that. I wasn't being dismissive. Kurt Warner was one of the all-time great Cinderella stories in the history of sport. However, Warner went undrafted and had to work his way up to the NFL via the Arena League and NFL Europe. The Rams took a chance on him in 1998 but left him unprotected in the 1999 expansion draft (the Browns could have had Warner at essentially no cost but used the #1 overall pick on Tim Couch). Warner also had some very lean years in between his Super Bowl seasons in St. Louis and Arizona. The Rams benched and eventually cut Warner due to his poor play. The Giants signed Warner for the sole purpose of grooming Eli Manning into the starter's job. The Cardinals signed him as a backup to Matt Leinart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikesfan89 Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 If the Vikings win the Super Bowl with Keenum, they can sign him for whatever he wants. Otherwise I think they should let him sign for big money else where as long as they can bring Teddy back at a reasonable price. The Vikings will have an advantage with signing since they can see how he's progressing in practice. The other teams have very little to go off of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klomp Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 29 minutes ago, vikesfan89 said: If the Vikings win the Super Bowl with Keenum, they can sign him for whatever he wants. That's a scary proposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cearbhall Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 1 hour ago, Klomp said: That's a scary proposition. Not so much. It involved the Vikings winning the Super Bowl. Given what Vikings fans have lived through in the SB era, it is a very small price to pay. I would happily pay it twice (if I had the cash flow that the organization has). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klomp Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 I'm at the point right now where I don't see a huge difference between Keenum and Bridgewater. -In the season, that means riding out the hot hand. Keenum could very easily play every snap for the rest of the season, and I'm fine with it. -In the offseason, that likely means I'm not willing to pay one a lot more than the other. If Bridgewater's at a discount and Keenum's not, I'll take the cheaper option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klomp Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 Keenum is essentially two games away from becoming the third different Vikings QB to throw for 3,000 yards in the last three seasons. Maybe doesn't seem like an amazing accomplishment, but it had only been done once here from 2005-2014. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Worm Guts Posted November 28, 2017 Share Posted November 28, 2017 20 hours ago, Klomp said: I disagree. I would've made that trade again if I had to do it over again. It's easy to look at the end result and say it was a disaster. But we're talking about worst-case scenario around him and he still got the team to 8-8. I'm saying best-case scenario under Hill would've been 7-9. With a repeat of all the injuries, it probably would've been closer to 3-13/4-12. That makes no sense. In hindsight the trade got us nothing. We gave up a first round pick to not make the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.