In Flores We Trust - How Good Can This Defense Be?

[SteelKing728]

Just now, wcblack34 said:

In my opinion, you either take a swing or you sell. Doing nothing at this point doesn't help the team now, or in the future.

Yeah, I mean unless you just don't have much draft capital, not buying for the sake of continuity ("we believe in our current squad!") may not be the best idea if a player who fits your scheme is available for trade.

I don't get why teams aren't more aggressive this time of year. You're likely not going to find any game changers in free agency at this point, and if you're going for a run, you might as well go all in. The Rams did this and while they look bad now, did pay off with a Lombardi Trophy.

[Dolmonite26]

31 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

Well then I say sit and stay, to trade away your future and get rid of multiple 1st round picks, fact is they are not that damn close to winning a Super Bowl.  San Francisco, Philadelphia, Dallas, Detroit and Seattle have all way better rosters than the Vikings right now, especially the first two it is not even really close.  One or two players is not going to correct years of drafting possibly the wrong guy when those first two teams draft the right guy almost every time.  And the Eagles GM, well they just got Byard at safety and got rid of Edmunds and a few picks, Byard is a stud safety and that was the one weakness on the roster so yeah Vikings are not close enough to those organizations to make some crazy moves in my opinion.  

We don't seem to be on the same page.

There is a lot of room to operate between "giving up multiple first round picks" and staying pat.

Everyone is focused on the fact that this is probably Cousin's last year and they need to sell everything to get his replacement.

I have another view on this. This is potentially the last year where they have stable quarterback play and JJ is on a rookie contract and is also entering his prime. I don't want to waste that. His impact on games is not something that should be taken lightly and anytime that you have him playing with a above average QB is a game you can win as long as the coaching and surrounding talent isn't garbage (i.e. this exact team).

So from my perspective, this could be just as much the last time for a few years where they have a chance to make a playoff push. The NFC is very weak and this team has played better then their record. The have an immensely talented defense coordinator who seems to be rounding the defense into form. But how long can they punch above their weight?

I wouldn't like to see them trade away a first for anyone except for maaaaybe Surtain (and that is assuming he's a good fit, which I do not know), but I think other options are on the table and they should consider them. With the goal being that said player is a part of the long term picture, such as Hockenson 

Edited October 27, 2023 by Dolmonite26

[Dolmonite26]

If my memory is serving me right, which it might not be, players traded away on expiring contacts mid season, tend to not cost as much. This is because the team doesn't have as much leverage. It's obvious they're trying to recoup assets for a player who is either disgruntled or not a part of the long term plan.

So idk, what if Brian Burns cost a 2nd and some change instead of a 1st?

Yes now you have two edge rushers on expiring contacts and you need to have some assurances that you can keep at least one of them, but your team likely benefits short term and long term this way. 

[swede700]

It's highly unlikely that the Panthers trade Brian Burns, despite him probably wanting out.  The Vikings could always run a five safety set by trading for Jeremy Chinn.  🤣

 

[Dolmonite26]

Why is it unlikely?

[swede700]

2 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said:

Why is it unlikely?

They've been telling teams he's not available.

[Dolmonite26]

From what I could gather in a quick Google search- this trade rumor, like most of trade rumors, reporting is all over the place.

The Steelers are allegedly front runners for Burns as of 3 hours ago. And only one report that I saw (which does not mean there aren't more) suggested he was off the table.

So... Who knows?

[Ozzy]

33 minutes ago, wcblack34 said:

You're acting like they HAVE to give up first round picks. Yet you used examples where the Eagles did NOT give up first round picks. 

And if you're worried about "drafting possibly the wrong guy," then what better way to guard against that than to use those picks to trade for players who have already proven they were "the right guy?" 

Last I checked, we beat San Francisco without JJ, gave Philly all they could handle, and are in the same division as Detroit where two head to head wins would very likely mean we'd win the division. 

If you're not going to do anything to improve the team and see if you can be a contender, then why not just sell off everything? 

In my opinion, you either take a swing or you sell. Doing nothing at this point doesn't help the team now, or in the future.

True but Byard's contract is coming up and clearly he wants to win now considering he has been in the league 8 years and probably has a few years left.  And Titans might be at a point to wash the season totally.

 

If the Vikings can make a deal without losing a 1st or even 2nd round pick, sure I am all for that potentially depending on the player.

 

Still just because the Vikings were competitive against the Eagles and the 49ers does not mean their rosters are even close to the same level.  Could argue those are the two best teams in the NFL and the Vikings are not 3rd in line behind them is my point.  Vikings have clear issues on the OL especially the interior and have massive issue at CB and lack of depth on the DL.  Eagles and 49ers have basically none of those issues and even with the big Vikings win that was the 49ers without the best LT in football and a big time playmaker in Deebo Samuel.  So they are not that close come on.

 

Not sure the Vikings are just a piece or two away from a Super Bowl especially when big time injuries come down the pike and they will.  

 

Say Chase Young or Leonard Williams, I have no clue what those two guys would go for in a trade situation but no way it is just a 3rd and a 4th rounder....  If so yeah sure of course. 

 

The Z. Smith trade the Vikings did, that is a rare case with a dude who has a big injury history and is about to retire potentially.  Note he has 1 sack this year for Cleveland and Jadeveon Clowney is a dude on Baltimore with multiple sacks who was on Cleveland before but clearly did not get along with Garrett or the coaching staff well based on his role.  If it can be done sure but I still would not give up a 1st rounder for it because that is most likely the future QB of the team and if not then it would be in the 2nd round.  

 

 

[Ozzy]

34 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said:

We don't seem to be on the same page.

There is a lot of room to operate between "giving up multiple first round picks" and staying pat.

Everyone is focused on the fact that this is probably Cousin's last year and they need to sell everything to get his replacement.

I have another view on this. This is potentially the last year where they have stable quarterback play and JJ is on a rookie contract and is also entering his prime. I don't want to waste that. His impact on games is not something that should be taken lightly and anytime that you have him playing with a above average QB is a game you can win as long as the coaching and surrounding talent isn't garbage (i.e. this exact team).

So from my perspective, this could be just as much the last time for a few years where they have a chance to make a playoff push. The NFC is very weak and this team has played better then their record. The have an immensely talented defense coordinator who seems to be rounding the defense into form. But how long can they punch above their weight?

I wouldn't like to see them trade away a first for anyone except for maaaaybe Surtain (and that is assuming he's a good fit, which I do not know), but I think other options are on the table and they should consider them. With the goal being that said player is a part of the long term picture, such as Hockenson 

I would not call the NFC weak considering the Eagles and the 49ers have the best two rosters in football.  Getting through them to get to the Super Bowl is not exactly easy to do.

 

If they could get Surtain II for less than a 1st rounder and give away Lewis Cine in the process I would be all for it.  But how do you sign the guy?  You cannot and would be just renting him for one year which is ok I guess but not sure he puts them into Super Bowl contenders either.  And Brian Flores is most likely gone after this season also if the team succeeds more in the coming weeks, so maybe they should just say screw it and go all in and Denver does want more picks considering all the ones they lost recently.  

[swede700]

12 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said:

From what I could gather in a quick Google search- this trade rumor, like most of trade rumors, reporting is all over the place.

The Steelers are allegedly front runners for Burns as of 3 hours ago. And only one report that I saw (which does not mean there aren't more) suggested he was off the table.

So... Who knows?

The Athletic reporter for the Panthers pretty much concurred with the report from ESPN that he wasn't likely to be traded, as that was the sense he got from the team.   

[Dolmonite26]

21 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

I would not call the NFC weak considering the Eagles and the 49ers have the best two rosters in football.  Getting through them to get to the Super Bowl is not exactly easy to do.

 

If they could get Surtain II for less than a 1st rounder and give away Lewis Cine in the process I would be all for it.  But how do you sign the guy?  You cannot and would be just renting him for one year which is ok I guess but not sure he puts them into Super Bowl contenders either.  And Brian Flores is most likely gone after this season also if the team succeeds more in the coming weeks, so maybe they should just say screw it and go all in and Denver does want more picks considering all the ones they lost recently.  

This is Surtain's 3rd year so you would have him under contract for this year, next year and with 5th year option.

I'm quite certain they don't have a great chance at getting him, unless they say screw it and just want to ride with Kirk for next 2-3 years. Which would be.... a decision lol.

And again I think you're missing my point. Which is: can you improve your chances this year, and also make a solid long term investment?

I'd say that possible.

I believe you are also a little over fixated on the talent levels of these teams. No one is arguing that the Vikes are as talented as the teams you mentioned. I am suggesting that this team has a chance of making the playoffs and they shouldn't waste it.

These are all one game series, and NFL games are won on margins. Variance has a huge effect on outcomes, and, once again, this is probably the last year where you can be certain that a competent QB is holding the reins.

[Ozzy]

9 minutes ago, Dolmonite26 said:

This is Surtain's 3rd year so you would have him under contract for this year, next year and with 5th year option.

I'm quite certain they don't have a great chance at getting him, unless they say screw it and just want to ride with Kirk for next 2-3 years. Which would be.... a decision lol.

And again I think you're missing my point. Which is: can you improve your chances this year, and also make a solid long term investment?

I'd say that possible.

I believe you are also a little over fixated on the talent levels of these teams. No one is arguing that the Vikes are as talented as the teams you mentioned. I am suggesting that this team has a chance of making the playoffs and they shouldn't waste it.

These are all one game series, and NFL games are won on margins. Variance has a huge effect on outcomes, and, once again, this is probably the last year where you can be certain that a competent QB is holding the reins.

Variance?

The last four teams in the playoffs last year the Eagles, Chiefs, 49ers and Bengals all had arguably the best four rosters in the NFL at the time.  Just look at the Bengals and how different they are without Von Bell and Jessie Bates at safety, not to mention a slightly injured Joe Burrow.  

Sure if it is possible but there is a point to deep rosters can withstand injuries, thin rosters cannot.  That is why typically the best most complete rosters go the farthest in the playoffs.  One is not going to instantly make the Vikings roster deep just by adding one or two players.

 

The lacking in depth on the OL and DL is a huge issue along with CB obviously.  Eagles and the 49ers in the NFC alone can withstand a major OL or DL injury, Vikings cannot.  Hunter goes down they would be in deep crap, same with Darrisaw going down.  Again 49ers without Trent Williams their last game and they could have won that game with a few breaks going there way.  

 

Now if the Vikings play as complete as a team as they did against the 49ers without Justin Jefferson who knows, but the likelihood of that happening is well....  yeah expectations are not exactly easy to live up to.  They were a crappy roster last year and were 13-4, just because they had that record clearly did not mean they were some great complete roster and their lack of toughness really showed up big time in the playoffs getting pushed around on the OL and the DL. 

 

With Flores now on defense at least they have an bit of a tough and or aggressive part of the football team which is great.  Pretty sure not many teams are just waiting to get rid of elite level CBs or DL.

 

Who knows, is there many Isaiah Simmons type with a new coaching staff that dislikes the guy, he dislikes his role and he is traded to the Giants for a 7th rounder?  I doubt it.  No one comes to mind, and a LB is way different than a CB or edge rusher.  

[JDBrocks]

@Ozzy, I think you’re wrong about the Vikings’ OL depth… you might like players on other teams better, but the Vikings have one of the highest ranked OL in 2023 by multiple publications, added starter level talent in-season, and have withstood injuries at C, G, and T. That speaks to depth.

I realize that you are probably going to list a bunch of names of guys that you like on other teams, but perhaps this is an opportunity for you to re evaluate your perception of the Vikings’ OL talent overall.

On-topic: depth across the entire defense is a different story - which is why health is paramount to Flores sustaining this kind of success. He’s clearly making the defense greater than the sum of its parts through scheme. If they were to do anything, I’d ask for a 5T type to improve the rotation, and another boundary corner. The only place with good depth right now is at safety on Defense.

Edited October 27, 2023 by JDBrocks

[Dolmonite26]

Whew, what a great conversation @Ozzy!

It is very interesting how you respond to my comment about variance, as it reveals our polarized perspectives on this topic.

You approached the concept with a big picture, wide lens look; asserting that arguably the best rosters made it the furthest in the playoffs last year. Now I'm not sure if that is true or not and I'm not going to fine comb the validity of such a claim since it seem reasonable.

However

When I suggested that variance has a huge effect on outcomes, I mean that on play by play; game by game basis. Which can of course swing seasons.

The last season and a half of Vikings football is exact proof of this. All of the underlying metrics of the 2022 team and the 2023 team suggest that neither teams' talent or performance matches their record.

By most metrics the Vikings outplayed their opponents in each of the first three games, yet lost mostly due to ridiculous turnover luck. That's variance.

Even against the 9ers, the long TD to Addison happens because of high variance decisions, such as the zero blitz by the defense or an interceptable pass resulting in a 60 yard touchdown. Yet the whole of season may have turned on that play.

Idk if the Vikings should be buyers right now, but I don't think it's unreasonable.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Dolmonite26

[Ozzy]

10 minutes ago, JDBrocks said:

@Ozzy, I think you’re wrong about the Vikings’ OL depth… you might like players on other teams better, but the Vikings have one of the highest ranked OL in 2023 by multiple publications, added starter level talent in-season, and have withstood injuries at C, G, and T. That speaks to depth.

I realize that you are probably going to list a bunch of names of guys that you like on other teams, but perhaps this is an opportunity for you to re evaluate your perception of the Vikings’ OL talent overall.

On-topic: depth across the entire defense is a different story - which is why health is paramount to Flores sustaining this kind of success. He’s clearly making the defense greater than the sum of its parts through scheme. If they were to do anything, I’d ask for a 5T type to improve the rotation, and another boundary corner. The only place with good depth right now is at safety on Defense.

Vikings are the third worst team in the NFL in terms of rushing yards a game putting them at 30th.  18th in the NFL in points per game, like I said before they are 2nd to the dead worst in the league in terms of turning the ball over so 31st there but they are a solid 3rd in the NFL in passing yards per game.  Not sure that would rank them one of the best OLs in football in terms of depth, to me that means future starters down the road as backups, not sure the Vikings currently have any of those honestly.  Maybe one.  

 

But true Kirk Cousins has not been sacked as much as early in the season especially of lately.  Easy to say the Vikings OL is great after one of the best performances they have had in what 2-3 years against the 49ers in not allowing a sack. 

 

But the first two games of the year Kirk Cousins was hit 20 times and sacked 4 times in those two games, then 13 QB hits and 4 QB sacks against the Chargers and 12 QB hits and 3 sacks against the Chiefs.  That is a great OL one of the best in the league meaning what top 5 or top 10, in what world is that true?  A QB getting hit double digits in each of those four separate games, not a sign of a great OL to me.  

 

Having Bradbury back I sure hope helps considering they signed him to a $5+ mil contract per year for three years.  Risner in place of Cleveland seemed to have helped against the 49ers but again that is one game.  

 

I would agree the only place with depth on D is safety no question.  Offensively Vikings have good depth at TE, maybe WR but we will see over the next few games and maybe RB with Akers signed and assuming Nwangwu can come back at some point.  I would not say the Vikings OL has quality depth at any spot honestly, maybe center but that is about it.  If one is talking long term depth and deep talent pool safety is probably it on the roster for that, maybe edge but with so many up and coming free agents at that spot who knows.