Can a Case be made for Keenum...?

[marshpit23]

17 hours ago, SemperFeist said:

I still think teams would view Alex Smith as a better player than Keenum. 

I wonder how good Alex Smith would look with the Vikings supporting cast?

[Guest]

1 hour ago, NorthCountryEvo said:

For better or worse, as lazy as it is to use wins and loses as a "QB stat", many will continue to use this in arguments. With that in mind, I think it is still relevant to discuss to some extent because of just how much of a role a QB does play in the wins and losses.

How is using wins and losses as a statistic lazy?  In the grand scheme of things it's the only statistic that matters! No??

[swede700]

57 minutes ago, marshpit23 said:

I wonder how good Alex Smith would look with the Vikings supporting cast?

I think they're awfully similar, but then you're talking about a guy who's a 4-yr older version of Case Keenum.  I'd rather keep Keenum then.  

[Worm Guts]

5 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

How is using wins and losses as a statistic lazy?  In the grand scheme of things it's the only statistic that matters! No??

 

I don't know if I would use the word lazy, but using a team statistic to judge an individual player definitely isn't always fair.

[vikingsrule]

15 minutes ago, disaacs said:

I think they're awfully similar, but then you're talking about a guy who's a 4-yr older version of Case Keenum.  I'd rather keep Keenum then.  

I don't think Keenum and Smith are much alike. Keenum actually challenges defenses vertically and relies heavily on his WRs. Smith has never been that kind of player. Physically I can see the comparison, but Keenum is rather aggressive almost reckless. Smith is way too safe. Though he looked great earlier in the year.

[swede700]

3 minutes ago, vikingsrule said:

I don't think Keenum and Smith are much alike. Keenum actually challenges defenses vertically and relies heavily on his WRs. Smith has never been that kind of player. Physically I can see the comparison, but Keenum is rather aggressive almost reckless. Smith is way too safe. Though he looked great earlier in the year.

The reason I make that comparison is that the player that Alex Smith is most similar to (according to pro-football-reference.com) is Jake Delhomme...who is exactly the player I compare Case Keenum to.  

[NorthCountryEvo]

42 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

How is using wins and losses as a statistic lazy?  In the grand scheme of things it's the only statistic that matters! No??

Yea, maybe lazy is too harsh of a term. Wins and losses are the only thing that matters for a team, but when evaluating and debating talent of a player on an individual level, the wins and losses doesn't give any contextual feedback on that player's actual performance. For some players, like Aaron Rodgers, it is probably a lot more relevant. This season really has shown just how much he, as an individual, can carry his team and make them competitive. He truly is the difference between wins and losses. On the other hand, you have someone like Blake Bortles, who is probably a below average starting QB in the NFL, and if you only look at this season, his W/L record is being padded because the team overall is performing in a great fashion. This is why I did acknowledge that wins and losses are still a relevant discussion when evaluating a QB, but when it comes to someone like Keenum, it takes a lot more work to truly decipher what caliber of a QB he is than looking at just the W/L record. To go further on that, it takes a lot more than any basic statistics can truly reveal, because as many have posed, he might be having talented receivers bailing him out. It takes a mix of his raw stats and the eye test to really try and garner a good feeling of Case's current capability and his projections into the future.

[vike daddy]

QB Case Keenum has completed 15 consecutive passes entering Week 14, 2 shy of passing Tommy Kramer's team record of 16 set at Green Bay on November 11, 1979.

Keenum enters Week 14 with a streak of 4 games with at least a 100 passer rating, tied with Brett Favre (11/1/09-11/29/09) and Daunte Culpepper (9/26/04-10/24/04) for the most in Vikings history.

http://www.vikings.com/news/article-1/Game-Preview-Vikings-at-Panthers/272cd0b1-3d3d-4b73-bcb7-67ad6c505890

[Guest]

16 hours ago, NorthCountryEvo said:

Yea, maybe lazy is too harsh of a term. Wins and losses are the only thing that matters for a team, but when evaluating and debating talent of a player on an individual level, the wins and losses doesn't give any contextual feedback on that player's actual performance. For some players, like Aaron Rodgers, it is probably a lot more relevant. This season really has shown just how much he, as an individual, can carry his team and make them competitive. He truly is the difference between wins and losses. On the other hand, you have someone like Blake Bortles, who is probably a below average starting QB in the NFL, and if you only look at this season, his W/L record is being padded because the team overall is performing in a great fashion. This is why I did acknowledge that wins and losses are still a relevant discussion when evaluating a QB, but when it comes to someone like Keenum, it takes a lot more work to truly decipher what caliber of a QB he is than looking at just the W/L record. To go further on that, it takes a lot more than any basic statistics can truly reveal, because as many have posed, he might be having talented receivers bailing him out. It takes a mix of his raw stats and the eye test to really try and garner a good feeling of Case's current capability and his projections into the future.

I don't know...I guess I think that individual statistics are only good if they wind up getting your team into the playoffs with a chance to win.  I think that what counts is if a certain player fits the scheme and vision of the team.  I don't think it's accidental that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have Super Bowl rings and Dan Marino does not.  If individual statistics counted, then Marino has to be in consideration for greatest quarterback of all time.  Dilfer and Johnson, statistically, don't belong in conversation with Marino...but, at least for a season...they were the quarterbacks that their teams needed.

I guess the older I get...and I'm rivaling the age of dirt...the less impressed I am with individual statistics or achievements.  Especially when it comes to team sports.  I only care that the team I pull for beats the other team that they are playing.  I really don't care how it gets done as long as my team has more points then your team.

[Worm Guts]

2 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

I don't know...I guess I think that individual statistics are only good if they wind up getting your team into the playoffs with a chance to win.  I think that what counts is if a certain player fits the scheme and vision of the team.  I don't think it's accidental that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have Super Bowl rings and Dan Marino does not.  If individual statistics counted, then Marino has to be in consideration for greatest quarterback of all time.  Dilfer and Johnson, statistically, don't belong in conversation with Marino...but, at least for a season...they were the quarterbacks that their teams needed.

I guess the older I get...and I'm rivaling the age of dirt...the less impressed I am with individual statistics or achievements.  Especially when it comes to team sports.  I only care that the team I pull for beats the other team that they are playing.  I really don't care how it gets done as long as my team has more points then your team.

Of course it only matters if the team wins, but that also isn't necessarily the best indicator of an individual players ability.  Trent Dilfer may have won a Super Bowl, but there were probably at least 20 other QB's that season who would have done the same thing on that team.  There are 22 positions on a football team, but just because you won the Super Bowl doesn't mean your team has the best players at all 22 positions.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Worm Guts said:

Of course it only matters if the team wins, but that also isn't necessarily the best indicator of an individual players ability.  Trent Dilfer may have won a Super Bowl, but there were probably at least 20 other QB's that season who would have done the same thing on that team.  There are 22 positions on a football team, but just because you won the Super Bowl doesn't mean your team has the best players at all 22 positions.

Yes...but, if you won the super bowl, who cares if you have the 22 best individual players??  Seriously, who cares?  The super bowl victory means you have the best team for that year.  Belichick never has the 22 best individual players at their position on the field.  He is always looking for the players that best fit the Patriots scheme...and the judged on how they play their role in the scheme.  Yes, he has a great quarterback and great tight end...but are any of the other 20 starters the "best" to play their positions?  The Patriots consistently have the best team. 

[Worm Guts]

1 minute ago, Virginia Viking said:

Yes...but, if you won the super bowl, who cares if you have the 22 best individual players??  Seriously, who cares?  The super bowl victory means you have the best team for that year.  Belichick never has the 22 best individual players at their position on the field.  He is always looking for the players that best fit the Patriots scheme...and the judged on how they play their role in the scheme.  Yes, he has a great quarterback and great tight end...but are any of the other 20 starters the "best" to play their positions?  The Patriots consistently have the best team. 

It's just a different discussion.  And the ability to evaluate players on their own merit, not their teams, helps those who are trying to build their own Super Bowl teams.

[Heimdallr]

GMs gather the best players

Coaches build the team

[JDBrocks]

46 minutes ago, Virginia Viking said:

I don't know...I guess I think that individual statistics are only good if they wind up getting your team into the playoffs with a chance to win.  I think that what counts is if a certain player fits the scheme and vision of the team.  I don't think it's accidental that Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have Super Bowl rings and Dan Marino does not.  If individual statistics counted, then Marino has to be in consideration for greatest quarterback of all time.  Dilfer and Johnson, statistically, don't belong in conversation with Marino...but, at least for a season...they were the quarterbacks that their teams needed.

I guess the older I get...and I'm rivaling the age of dirt...the less impressed I am with individual statistics or achievements.  Especially when it comes to team sports.  I only care that the team I pull for beats the other team that they are playing.  I really don't care how it gets done as long as my team has more points then your team.

A couple of things here:

1. - It does matter how it gets done. If team A scores points off of splash plays and special teams while team B is playing balanced, well executed, and sustainable football, I think you would rather have team B's formula. Saying that we shouldn't care as fans how the team wins as long as they win is a rather basic view of the game. I think we should want our team to win in a way that breeds a winning culture.

2 - The conversation about W/L statistics is actually a terrible way to evaluate Quarterback play, which is where this "lazy analysis" discussion started. I do think that lazy was the right term. Do you want Joe Flacco or Drew Brees as your starting QB? Flacco has a better career Win%, and the same number of Super Bowl rings. On field performance and supporting cast matters. A lot.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, JDBrocks said:

A couple of things here:

1. - It does matter how it gets done. If team A scores points off of splash plays and special teams while team B is playing balanced, well executed, and sustainable football, I think you would rather have team B's formula. Saying that we shouldn't care as fans how the team wins as long as they win is a rather basic view of the game. I think we should want our team to win in a way that breeds a winning culture.

2 - The conversation about W/L statistics is actually a terrible way to evaluate Quarterback play, which is where this "lazy analysis" discussion started. I do think that lazy was the right term. Do you want Joe Flacco or Drew Brees as your starting QB? Flacco has a better career Win%, and the same number of Super Bowl rings. On field performance and supporting cast matters. A lot.

Well...I will leave this alone now...I am disagreeing with the basic premise...but, I am not dogmatic about my position.