Hooray!

Wow, I seriously can't believe this one. Seriously, This is a shocker. I guess the Vikings did give up their first, so I guess the Chiefs will draft a DE. Any chance they get Gholston at 5 or do they use #17 for the DE?

Meanwhile, at the Favre residence...

Favre: "Boy did I pick the right time to retire or what?" *opens can of beer, looks at picture of Aaron Rodgers* "Good luck kid, you're gonna need it".

Big move for the Vikes.

I will say, though, "a quarterback away" is still a big statement.

Do you guys realize what this means? Tavaris Jackson is going to start a playoff game next year! That's going to be hilarious.

Btw, whoever's hypnotizing Brad Childress and convincing him to not bother acquiring a QB better than Tavaris Jackson, the rest of the NFC thanks you. If not for you, nobody would have any hope of stopping the Vikings from reaching the Super Bowl.

According to PFT, the Chiefs get the Vikes 2008 1st rounder (#17 overall) and two 3rd rounders this year.

I figure they take either Gholston or Long at #5, and then take an OT at #17. Taking a OT at #5 would be a reach, and all of the top DE's -- including Harvey -- will be gone at #17. It'd be dumb to do it the other way around. You would end up taking huge reaches on both a DE and an OT.

I don't know, I still think the defense has some major flaws. Plus they are relying on some old players at key positions.

This has to be one of the craziest days for sports that I can remember: A former MVP is cut, a Number One Pick is signed, two NHL game 7s, NBA playoffs, and someone joining the 3000 K club.

Two words: Good. Gravy.

A first rounder and two third rounders for a guy who's had two good years?!?!

Rick Spielman is a maroon!

Re: #5

Well, that and their complete lack of anyone for the quarterback they don't have to throw the ball to (though picking up Berrian at least gives them someone who can bring in the deep ball and stretch the field, making reasonably competent filler material like Sidney Rice able to function). But Vikings fans should take heart--after all, Childress shook off the hypnosis that was convincing him Troy Williamson could be an NFL WR!

Too bad Smoot is no longer in MN. Think of the parties he and Allen would have had...

#5 - Exactly which QB on the market should they have gotten? Leftwich? Harrington?

You can fault Childress for not picking up a QB before this year, but nobody knew where they'd be in the rebuilding process at this point.

I'm convinced that finding a good starting QB is as much about luck as it is scouting. I like Bill Walsh strategy of drafting a QB on day 1 every year; somebody's bound to stick.

PFT is now reporting that the Vikings have given Allen a six-year, 74 million dollar deal, with 31 million in guaranteed money.

That is bigger than what the Colts gave Freeney.

re #6
I agree wholeheartly that it makes more sense to take Gholston/Long at 5 and best OL remaining at 17. From the KC perspective it is a good result as a lot of mocks have had them taken an OL at 5 which would have been a reach so now they are in a position to get an OL at better value.

9:

What's your definition of a "good year?" According to pro-football-reference, Jared Allen has 43 sacks in 4 seasons (distributed 9, 11.0, 7.5, 15.5) and is only 26. I don't know about you, but to me that's one really impressive year, and three very good ones. This should be a good move for the Vikings assuming that the character concerns about Allen don't come back to bite them.

12:
I was thinking the same thing. Who is really available who is a meaningful upgrade over Tavaris Jackson? At least with Jackson, there's the possibility that he'll improve a bit.

As a Green Bay fan I like this move. Minn giving up a 1st + 2 3rds AND alot of money is a huge price to pay. I'd rather have the 1st and 2 3rds than Allen

Great move by both teams. The Chiefs have too many holes to worry about a guy like Allen who said he would leave if he did not get a contract now. Now they can work on getting corners, WRs, and an OL.

For the Vikings-their biggest need was DE. Now they got one of the best young DEs in the game, playing at least 9 games a year on turf, with the Williams duo having to be blocked as well (Allen's DT last year-Alfonso Boone and Ron Edwards). Its a smart move, yes they lose 3 picks-but a 26 year old All-Pro at DE is not something I would pass up on.

Plus Kordell Stewart went to the playoffs, I am sure Tarvaris going is not the end of the world.

5-6 yrs. 30 mil. guaranteed, it is basically what Jake Long got once you subtract the renegotiated last years.

Trading really aint a bad way to go.

I know many of us on this site respect Dr. Z, and he's had Allen on his All-Pro team the last two seasons. I find that encouraging: Z watches and charts game film, and in Allen's lowest sack total season (7.5), Z still had him as one of the top two DEs in the game.

Draft picks are only meaningful because they can be turned into starting players. The Vikings just turned draft picks into an excellent pass rushing DE. They've consistently failed to turn draft picks into a good pass rushing DE when they've actually used the picks; I'm pleased they are now turning them into one via trade.

Rocky hits it on the head. Would you rather make that sort of guarantee to a guy who has never played in the league, or a 26 year old guy who has been dominant for a couple of seasons? Also, evaluating de quality with sack totals is not very perceptive. I guarantee the Vikings have graded every snap of Allen's, for his whole career, and they have a much better idea of his relative dominance than would be obtained by counting sacks.

Look, with Udeze likely out for the year (and good luck to him!) the Vikings were desperate in regards to defensive ends, and they are seeking stadium subsidies. They needed to make this move, and given their track record of handling the cap, it's a good bet the contract won't greatly inhibit future roster flexibility. Just guessing, but I'd say they probably can write off about 2/3 of the guaranteed cash to Allen and Berrian this year, if not more, which means their contracts in future years won't pinch much at all.

The real questionmark is Allen's commitment to sobriety, and I don't have any insight there. They got burned with Koren Robinson, but I think Koren's previous benders were more severe than Allen's. Eh, a guy can be perfecly committed, and shred his knee one day in a walk through and be gone. There are no sure things.

I revise my win estimate from 6 to 9.5, which means 11 wouldn't be shocking. If Allen can consistently force a double team, or get real pressure, that plays perfectly into what the Vikings want to do with their offense, and makes just giving up on running against the Vikings, as a lot teams do, a real dilemma. If Jared Allen plays like he has, falling behind the Viings becomes a much more difficult prospect. Their young corners made big strides in the 2nd half of the year, and this should only help them.

If Tavaris Jackson completely falls apart, of course, all bets are off, and if they lose McKinney for half a year, Jackson falling apart is not a crazy prediction. We'll see.

As a Bears fan I have this to say

"Fuck my life"

FYI, check to the left and you will see an updated cover for PFP 2008. You can zoom in close enough to read what it says about the individual players when you view it on B&N's website.

I'll save you the time, here is what it says...

Leigh Bodden: Anchors an underrated defense

Pat Williams: The impenetrable wall

Hines Ward: Past his prime

Vince Young: His time is now

Marion Barber: The Cowboys should use him more

Dwayne Bowe: The next breakout receiver

For the record, all of that sounds about right to me, and I'm glad to see some talk about PFP 2008.

#5 - Exactly which QB on the market should they have gotten? Leftwich? Harrington?

Either one would represent a significant upgrade over what they have now. Harrington's about an average QB, and Leftwich can play very well when he's got a decent supporting cast. Tavaris Jackson is replacement level.

You can fault Childress for not picking up a QB before this year

And that's what I was doing.

nobody knew where they’d be in the rebuilding process at this point.

I think most people did know that QB would still be a position of need for them. Tavaris Jackson had a Lewin projection of about replacement level, so he was a very high risk pick. You don't rely on that kind of draft pick becoming a viable starter. You hope that they turn out to be decent. If you're smart, you draft a QB with a good projection to become your starter. Then, if your earlier pick turns out to be really good, too, you're in the enviable position of having a backup that's good enough to start should the starting QB suffer a major injury (Eagles 2006, Patriots 2001) or if the starting QB leaves in free agency (San Diego 2006).

I’m convinced that finding a good starting QB is as much about luck as it is scouting.

Obviously, there's some luck, but I don't think it's that much luck. Lewin's projection system can give you a pretty good idea of whether a QB will be good or not, so as long as you take a guy with a good projection, you should be ok. Taking a QB with a bad projection, that's where luck comes in. They can still turn out to be good QBs, but the chances are much lower.

I was thinking the same thing. Who is really available who is a meaningful upgrade over Tavaris Jackson? At least with Jackson, there’s the possibility that he’ll improve a bit.

To be honest, I was really just joking around. But I had assumed that Childress wouldn't take a QB early in the upcoming draft. If he does take a QB in the first day, I'll gladly admit I was wrong. I mean, there are plenty of better prospects than Tavaris Jackson in the draft.

Well, that and their complete lack of anyone for the quarterback they don’t have to throw the ball to

True, but I figured that a decent QB + Berrian + Sidney Rice + random guys would be enough to get a half decent passing game going. And a half decent passing game, combined with their running game, and a very good defense, would practically make them shoo-ins for the Super Bowl.

The Lions defense is underrated? Or is this when Bodden was still with the Browns...

#23

I thought Lewin's projection was basically limited to 1st or maybe 2nd round QBs-at least projected-which Jackson was not.

And can we stop Leftwich being a decent QB...

12: "I’m convinced that finding a good starting QB is as much about luck as it is scouting. I like Bill Walsh strategy of drafting a QB on day 1 every year; somebody’s bound to stick.

:: Independent George — 4/22/2008 @ 11:00 pm "

Agreed. There's a story - possibly apocryphal, though I believe there's a kernel of truth in it - about the 2000 Patriots draft; the Pats' QB coach at the time was equally impressed with Tom Brady and Tim Rattay, to the point that he couldn't decide between them on draft day. So they flipped a coin and went with Brady.

Best team in the NFC?

C'mon now, thats too far. They obviously have some real strengths but they have big holes at QB, receiver, and secondary. As a Cowboy fan I would take any position on our team over the Vikes except RB and D-Line, and many of the positions aren't even close. They'll be good enough to compete, but they still aren't a top team IMO.

Trying to work Leftwich into a West Coast system would be a disaster. Yeah, there are a few hypotheticals where Leftwich might shine, but the days of the completely immobile qb with a huge wind-up being a star in the NFL are really gone for the most part; it's just too easy for opposing defensive coordinators to attack them. I was surprised there was such controversey regarding going with Garrard over Leftwich.

this is a fairly serious win-now move... i think this makes the vikes the team to beat in the nfc- even more them they were before. and, yes, i understand that the tavaris experiment is still going on, but gus frerotte's presence means tarvaris may quickly see the bench. i think frerotte provides a steady hand that the vikes haven't seen since days of brad johnson (and even at 36 gus may have a better arm than brad did back then). of course, if mckinney is out that changes things, but if he's ok then i think the vikes are loaded. what's the latest on mckinney? will- any updates?

indy george-
totally agree...gus frerotte is as good as one can hope to find among veteran free agent QBs, and provides a big upgrade from brooks bollinger and kelly holcomb. i think he's emerged from two horrific situations- the rams with a decimated O-line, and before that the dolphins, where he seemed to play fairly well for a sinking franchise and took way more blame than he deserved. the vikes are fortunate to have signed him..and it's, potentially, a great situation for him, too.

i just re-read my posts and did not mention the possibilty that if the vikes were willing to fling around all these picks that they might have been able to pry chad pennington loose from the jets. i know, many may scoff at that idea, but with a great running game and a great defense pennington would have been an interesting option. but frerotte came more inexpensively ( i presume) and should be a solid player for them.

Jin,

Where exactly does Favre have this picture of Rodgers hanging? His fridge? The wall of his special "beer drinking and Football watching" room? Night stand? Maybe it's next to his autographed photo of Peter King. Do active teammates get a different wall than retired players? Is Mark Chmura's picture hanging out by the hot tub?

And finally, when he talks to the pictures, do they ever talk back?

Back to the Jared Allen signing, I'm just glad he's out of the AFC, though if KC has a good draft, this could make them formidable in a few seasons (but if the players ARE productive, good luck re-signing them to second contracts all at once). It's one thing to accumulate draft picks, but to have five all on the first day, wow.

Regarding the Vikes issues at QB, I noticed that they were able to hang onto their 2008 second round pick while doing the Allen deal. They were involved in earlier discussions about Rosenfelds where the Texans were insisting on a second round pick. The potential is still there for that deal to happen.

Concerning Allen directly, I'm guessing fans in Green Bay, Chicago, and Detroit are already making arrangements to send Allen bottles of fine liquor to aid in the celebration of his new contract.

#33

You beat me to it, a nice bottle of malt and the keys to a car. "Oh is that not where you live, well you better get in and drive it home."

I remember reading about Allen and his interviews at the combine, which apparently were epically stupid and the only real reason that he wasn't a first round pick. When asked why he had gotten into so much trouble at college instead of coming over all contrite and trying to explain away his problems he just said, "Well I like fighting." I suppose you could give him kudos for telling the truth, but how dumb do you have to be to think that is the correct response.

Non Viking NFC North fans will just have to hope that McKinnie did smack that fella with an iron bar.

Re: 25

Jackson was a 2nd round pick. (End of the second round, but second round nonetheless)

Wow. As a vikes fan this makes me leap for joy. The vikes have always got gobs of cap room and we finally spent it. Blocking 3 pro bowlers will be a nightmare for oposing teams and our young corners will no longer have to cover recievers for 5 or 6 seconds. Allen will also help on run support, his 68 tackles say he makes some plays in that regard as well. This off season move improves the other moves this team has already made in FA. Berrian may not be a legit #1 reciever, but he's obviously an improvment over Williamson as a deep threat and Sidney Rice should see the single team most of the year. Rice is a servicable player who is young but has high potential with good size and hands.

I was looking forward to seeing what my vikes would do with the #17 pick, I was hoping to see Brohm's name read, but in the 2nd round Either brohm, flacco or henne could fall to them and I would pull the trigger on either. Also another DE might not be a bad idea as the other DE will see single blocks every play all year. A less pollished pass rusher would mae sense in the 2nd round, or one of the aforementioned QB's. However, if no value is available at those positions, I think the vikes bite the bullet, and as mawbrew points out, send that 2nd rounder to Houston for Rosey. Rosey led an injured houston offense pretty well, and he would be the prefect, mistake free game manager to ballance out the vikes offense. With rosey the vikes have a legitimate shot at making a deep run into the playoffs.

A couple of points that I haven't seen mentioned here. According to the "draft value" chart (regardless of your personal feelings for it) the Vikings moved up to #9 to take Jared. Is #9 worth it for arguably the best DE last year? Also not mentioned is that, barring any more trades, the Vikes will come out of next weekend with 6 picks + Jared. And to say that any #17 pick (their first rounder) is worth more than Allan is specious at best.

All in all, you have to give credit to the Vikes for their aggressiveness. Since Wilf and Childress took over, they have added a franchise player each year: Hutchinson, Peterson, Allen.

Nice work boys...

This is a little more than I would have wanted to pay (I would have tried for a conditional 3rd/4th round next year to keep a 3rd this year), but I still think it was a good move for both teams:

KC can now start rebuilding: Gholston/Long, followed by 2 OL picks in the first three rounds (and maybe a WR/TE or some DB or LB help).
Minnesota still has some needs to be the top threat in the NFC. The biggest of these is QB, which is not likely to be found in the draft (unless you are thinking 2-3 years down the road). Also, most coaches do not want to admit they made a mistake in their support, so I think they surround Tavaris with weapons and hope he can become a servicable QB (Think Trent Green not losing games in Baltimore SB). Obviously, Tavaris will make some bad choices, including picks, but he may scramble enough to keep drives going. (a 4-yard scramble on 3rd and 3 should be considered a success) Minnesota also could use help in the secondary and maybe a little help receiving: WR/TE/DB in the 2nd round? It would have been much easier with another 3rd round pick this year, however.

"Think Trent Green not losing games in Baltimore SB"

Considering that the Rams didn't play the Ravens in 2000, and that Green was the backup and only saw the field in 8 games anyway, I don't see that as much of an achievement.

Seriously, as I've said elsewhere, I think the Vikings should pull the trigger on the Rosenfels deal. Who knows what Frerotte has left at 36? We do know that there is very little chance of a second round rookie playing well this year or next, and that Rosenfels was well above average according to DVOA last year, despite playing many games without his all-pro receiver and no games with his starting running back. He has excellent pocket awareness and generally makes good decisions. This sort of win-now move makes other decisions on the same basis even more reasonable.

I thought Lewin’s projection was basically limited to 1st or maybe 2nd round QBs-at least projected-which Jackson was not.

It's limited to QBs picked in the first two rounds, and Jackson was picked in the second round. So he counts.

And can we stop Leftwich being a decent QB…

Sorry, but getting fired doesn't make someone bad, and playing poorly for the Falcons doesn't do it either. From 2004-2006, Leftwich threw 972 passes and had 77.4 DPAR (.08 DPAR/Pass), while David Garrard threw 495 passes and had 33.3 DPAR (.07 DPAR/Pass) on the same team. So he outperformed Garrard, and both had a large enough sample size of passes that we can be reasonably sure that Leftwich is, if not much better than Garrard, definitely not much worse. Now, it seems like most people think that Garrard is at least a decent QB, and Leftwich is about as good as Garrard, if not better.

I think the declining opinion of Leftwich is a bad case of "what have you done for me lately" syndrome.

Trying to work Leftwich into a West Coast system would be a disaster.

Ok, that's true, I'd forgotten that. So Childress gets a pass on that count. He should not have gone after Leftwich.

Yeah, there are a few hypotheticals where Leftwich might shine, but the days of the completely immobile qb with a huge wind-up being a star in the NFL are really gone for the most part; it’s just too easy for opposing defensive coordinators to attack them. I was surprised there was such controversey regarding going with Garrard over Leftwich.

If Leftwich is so easy for defensive coordinators to attack, then why'd he have a lower sack rate than Garrard? Everyone points to last season as proof that Garrard is better than Leftwich, but honestly, Leftwich might've done just as well or better if he had been starting for the Jaguars. During the time when Leftwich had the same supporting cast as Garrard, Leftwich was better (by DPAR/DVOA). I don't see why people assume that this wouldn't continue to be true if they had been on the same team last year.

Sure, Leftwich had never been top 5 in DPAR, but until this year, neither had Garrard.

"I revise my win estimate from 6 to 9.5"

I would be absolutely stunned if any single player, outside of possibly the very top tier quarterbacks, can be worth 3.5 wins by themselves over the course of a 16 game season.

Because sack rate doesn't tell you what you think it tells you, Alex.

#32 - I imagine its hanging in front of his dart board...

41 - Its definitely happened before, though I think quarterback is the place its far more likely to happen. When Tarkenton went to the Giants, he was pretty much single-handedly responsible for a six-game improvement (from 1-13 to 7-7), something he still considers his greatest achievement.

For whatever reason I thought it was only for QBs projected to be drafted in the first 2 rounds, not actually drafted in the first 2 rounds.

I think this is good trade for both teams.

KC gets something for their soon to be exiting player and Minn adds to an already very good d-line with a proven player that so far has shown he can keep his personal issues from affecting his performance.

Think now KC will take Ryan at #5 now that they have some extra picks to burn?

Gerry, in my opinion, a dominant defensive end is the 2nd most valuable player in football, in that he can control a game without a lot of input from his teammates. To be more accurate, however, my six win projection was based in part on my belief that they will miss McKinnie for half a season. If that indeed comes to pass, and absent any further quality additions, I'll probably revise my projection for the Vikings down to 8.5 or so.

If there is a Ugoh-type available for the Vikings, when their turn comes in the 2nd round, the Vikings need to go in that direction.

The Giants beat the Patriots in the Super Bowl largely behind a dominant pass rush. The Giants scored 17 points, and the Patriots gave up an average of 17.1 ppg during the season, so it wasn't a grand offensive performance. Brady averaged 8.3 ypa throughout the season, and averaged 5.5 ypa that game, mostly because he was being chased around and knocked around. If I wasn't convinced that great defensive ends could control a game before the Super Bowl, I am completely convinced now.

Draft Picks and Cap Room are the same thing: they're meaningless in and of themselves, and are only useful if they are turned into quality football players.

44-- Single handedly? I think that is unlikely.

In 1966, the Giants opponents (counting teams twice who played the Giants twice) had a combined record of 106-71-5 in games against teams other than the Giants.

In 1967, their opponents' record in such games was 78-89-15.

I think it is very likely that the difference between playing opponents who win 47% of their other games as compared to opponents who win 60% of their other games had a lot to do with the 5.5 game (the Giants were 1-12-1 in 1966, not 1-13) improvement.

Further, the Giants expected W-L given points allowed and scored in 1966 was 2.5, so they were likely a bit unlucky.

So I would say that it wasn't Tarkenton single-handedly doing it. It was Tark, plus regression to the mean and/or the plexiglass effect.

Further, the 66 GMen allowed 501 points, while the 67 squad allowed 379. While it seems reasonable to me to say that Tark had some impact here (as the Giants were better able to sustain drives) I doubt he accounts for all, or even most, of the defensive improvement. YMMV.

And another thing that likely contributed a ton to that improvement would be turnovers. In 1966, the Giants lost 44 turnovers while getting only 24. In 1967, they lost 33 (mostly attributable to Tark cutting down their interceptions) but also caused 32. Tarkenton did not cause the defense to get 8 more turnovers than the year before. Vince Costello, who was on the Browns the year before, contributed 4 picks alone. The additional turnovers gained by the D contributed to the improvement as well.

So take it all together-- the 66 squad being (approximately 1 game) unlucky, the 67 schedule being significantly easier, and the defense getting more turnovers (the last two obviously being interrelated), the addition of Vince Costello and likely others, then I think it becomes clear that Tarkenton alone wasn't responsible for a 5.5 game improvement.

I still would be shocked if a single player could be responsible for a 3.5 game improvement. Although I will point out that Tark would be an example of the caveat I had added-- that an elite QB might be the exception.

I'm not buying the Leftwich is as good as Garrard now because he was as good in 2004-2006 argument. What follows is based on the DPAR/DVOA stats of both.

The first problem is that Leftwich was clearly better than Garrard in 2004-2005 as a passer and clearly worse in 2006. Leftwich was regressing, Garrard was not - 2006 and 2007 are much better indicators of 2008 performance than 2004-2005 (or Trent Green would still have a starting job).

Second, Garrard was adding value to his team every year with his running, Leftwich was not.

Third, you can handicap Leftwich's 2008 performance all you want, but he was horrific, the worst DVOA in the league, while Harrington and Redman had positive DVOAs on the same team. I'm not buying that a guy who cannot outperform a couple of journeyman (at best) QBs has any value to any team. So far, it seems the GMs of the NFL agree with me.

Will Allen -

Congratulations dude; some real excitement for your team. However you better hope this prediction turns out better than your prediction towards the end of last season that the Giants would miss the playoffs in favor of the Vikes. Good luck to you.

I have to assume this means the Chiefs plan to draft Vernon Gholston with the #5 pick. Everyone's been assuming the Chiefs were going to draft an offensive lineman #5 because their offensive line is so horrible, but I've never been on board with the idea of Herm not lobbying for an elite defensive prospect with a pick that high. I've been figuring it would be Sedrick Ellis, but I think trading Allen pre-draft makes it more plausible they've tabbed Gholston.

elisha, I don't think I actually predicted that.

I think one the key things here is Allen is 26 - right in his prime. I suspect Kevin Williams sacks will sky rocket up this year as a result of having teams now focusing their attention on Allen. I don't chart games but it sure seemed to me that Kevin Williams was doubled just about every play last year.

Question - do the Vikings have the best Defensive line in football now?

Because sack rate doesn’t tell you what you think it tells you, Alex.

Look, if Leftwich were so easy to attack, then he would either have a higher sack rate, or he'd have to get rid of the ball sooner, and maybe have more interceptions/a lower completion%. Either way, if being "too easy to attack" is to be meaningful, then his performance would have to suffer in some way, and suffer enough to make him worse than Garrard. But it didn't, because he performed better than Garrard.

Look, I know Leftwich has the mobility of a lawn ornament, and he's got a wind-up throwing motion. But he's got great pocket awareness, and his arm strength lets him hit receivers who are fairly tightly covered. As a result, he can begin his throwing motion sooner than most other QBs, and mitigate the negative effects of his immobility.

Anyhow, congrats to the Vikes-- I think they are building a pretty damn good team, and I think there is a really good chance they will be able to pick up a QB significantly better than TJ in the 2nd round.

Since it hasn't been reported, I'll tell you the deal is actually a little sweeter for KC, as the Vikes and Chiefs also swap 6th round picks.

Many top DE's these days seem to come from outside the first round. If you look at the top ten from last year only 4 players were drafted in the 1st round and one was 30th (Ware, Williams, Ellis, Merriman). I think taking a known top DE who is just 26 for a 1 and two 3's is very likely a good swap.

Top Ten Sackers not drafted in 1st round 2007

Jason Taylor (3rd)
Strahan (2nd)
Jared Allen (4th)
Umenyiora (2nd)
Trent Cole (5th)
Dumervil (4th)
Kampman (5th)
Vanden Bosch (2nd)
Vrabel (3rd)

Missed Kerney - he was picked 30th

As a Chiefs fan, from a poor value standpoint, I hate the trade. I think a 1st, 2 3rds, and a few spots in the 6th are worth less than a top young DE even with some character risk. However, why blow the franchise player cap on a guy for one year when you clearly are not going to win and then you almost certainly will lose him? Given the spot they were in, the deal makes sense. The real blame on the Chiefs GM is getting them into this spot not what he did once they were there.

I think too that it looked like the best value pick at #5 was going to be Gholston or CLong after JLong signed, i.e. a DE. But with Allen and Hali, it would not make huge sense to draft a DE. (If Dorsey is still on the board, it seems likely they could trade down with the Saints.) So they would be in a position to take BPA and waste a year of cap money on a spare DE or reach with an OT. With Allen gone, the Chiefs can now take BPA at a position of need. Yes, I know it could be Ryan or Dorsey who is left on the board - but they should be able to trade down to the Ravens or the Saints repsectively in that case and if they don't think those players are worth it.

Re: 41/49

Yeah, I'm with you. Hard to imagine any non-QB would make a difference of 3.5 wins (which is what I thought he was originally suggesting as well). On the other hand, I think the more recent clarification (Allen - Jared not Will - responsible for 2.5 more wins) gets much closer. If he plays like the best DE in football again next year, I could see him being the difference in 2 wins. Maybe a bit optimistic but not unreasonably so.

"Yeah, I’m with you. Hard to imagine any non-QB would make a difference of 3.5 wins"

I have no problem seeing a non qb making that much of a difference.

2006 Patriots: 12-4
2007 Patriots: 16-0

I have no problem believing that Randy Moss was almost completely responsible for that change.

A few things:

1) I hate this trade for the Vikings. The Chiefs didn't have a lot of leverage, and the Vikings could have just drafted DE at 1st, 3rd, and 3rd again if they really wanted a really good DE, at least roll the dice that at least 2 of them will pan out or be useful.

2) Paying Jared Allen, who already has strikes against him, will have cost more than drafting the 3 players above.

3) About their QB situation, I really think the Vikings are going to grab a guy in the second round, or a guy whose a little artificially low right now (I think Dixon is the perfect pick for the Vikings. He's accurate, he's mobile, he won't cost a 1st rounder so they don't have to give up on Tavaris yet and can still see what he has in practice, and he can get a year or two to learn the Vikings O)

The first problem is that Leftwich was clearly better than Garrard in 2004-2005 as a passer and clearly worse in 2006. Leftwich was regressing, Garrard was not - 2006 and 2007 are much better indicators of 2008 performance than 2004-2005 (or Trent Green would still have a starting job).

He was playing injured in 2006. And he had improved from 2004 to 2005, so it wasn't really a regression, so much as a single down year. And note that Garrard also had a sharp decrease in his DVOA in 2006 compared to 2005. Seems to me that if two young QBs are both having significant declines in statistical production at the same time, it's probably due more to the team around them getting worse. To be more specific, both Leftwich and Garrard had increases in passing DVOA of more than 15% between 2004 and 2005, and both had decreases of more than 15% between 2005 and 2006. That seems to be more an effect of the varying performance of their supporting cast than anything else. Unless you think Leftwich and Garrard just happened to both suddenly get much worse at exactly the same time after improving significantly the year before.

Either way, the sample size in 2006 is too small to base much on. You're right that recent performance is better, but the difference between 1 year ago and 3 years ago isn't as important as the drastic difference in sample size between 1 season and 3, at least not for young players. Maybe if Leftwich were old like Trent Green, then it'd be more reasonable to interpret this as a sign of regression, but Leftwich is younger than Garrard.

Second, Garrard was adding value to his team every year with his running, Leftwich was not.

Yes, but I think most people consider Garrard a pretty good passer. Maybe when you factor in running ability, Garrard is a better QB than Leftwich, but even then, 8.4 DPAR/season isn't a huge difference when you're comparing QBs.

Third, you can handicap Leftwich’s 2008 performance all you want, but he was horrific, the worst DVOA in the league, while Harrington and Redman had positive DVOAs on the same team. I’m not buying that a guy who cannot outperform a couple of journeyman (at best) QBs has any value to any team.

Right, because no QB has ever been on the same team as Joey Harrington, played terribly (even worse than Harrington) in a system that didn't fit his talents, left the team, and then succeeded on two other teams when he got back to an offensive system that fit his talents. That's totally never, ever happened. Especially not to Jeff Garcia.

Well, Alex, I suppose it could be completely irrational for Leftwich to not have a job playing football right now, but I suspect it is because 32 NFL teams have some reason to think that his skill set is lacking.

63

Point on the Leftwich thing also: He was nearly destined to fail last year. He was cut in training camp and never got a chance to practice with the players he was playing with. It's hard for a player with a totally new supporting cast that he's unfamiliar with, an offense he's known for maybe 3 weeks, playing teams he doesn't usually play to have any sort of success.

Last year might have killed Leftwich's career, but I think he's still a good QB on a team where he has time to actually practice and learn the playbook.

My response to this one was along the lines of "WTF! WTF! WTF!!!!!"

If it had been a first-rounder and two thirds for a stud young DE, I'd say, "Hmmm, big price to pay, but hey, this guy's an impact player". It's not, though; it's a first and two thirds for a guy with a long history of making suspect decisions and who is one bad decision from a year-long vacation. Purely on a character standpoint, don't like the trade--Allen's not exactly been Mr. Reliable off the field, and I fail to see how moving to a new town is going to help that.

Crushinator, the difference betwen a de who can dominate a game, and one who is merely useful, is huge. What reason is there to think that the odds of one mid first rounder, and two third rounders producing one really good defensive end, are so high?

Regarding the money, unless one is trying to increase the size of Zygi Wilf's estate, who cares? The Vikings always manage the cap well, and this contract will not greatly inhibit future roster flexibility.

For whatever reason I thought it was only for QBs projected to be drafted in the first 2 rounds, not actually drafted in the first 2 rounds.

Clever backhand of the Jackson pick!

#66: Cris Carter.

#69
David Boston. Chris Henry (or feel free to spin the Wheel o' Badly Behaved Bengal for another appropriate choice). Lawrence Phillips. Pacman Jones. Charles Rogers. Dimitrius Underwood.
That's just off the top of my head, sure I could find plenty more with some hunting. It's a risk/reward situation, and the question is, is the potential reward higher than the potential risk? I say no, because Allen's been in trouble consistently. Three DUIs in four years? Um, between Koren Robinson and the Looooove Boat, I thought the Vikings were making character a big issue?
Maybe he cleans it up, stays on the wagon, and continues being a great DE, but, IMO, it's got way too much risk associated with it.

#63

Jeff Garcia played in a system that did not fit him in Detroit? Did Steve Mariucci change that much when he left San Fran to coach the Lions? Garcia was in the WCO with Detroit-but he was also rushing back from a broken leg and he was not able to get any sort of push to throw a football.

#70

yeah but Jared Allen is white, so its going to be OK (sarcasm....)

Milkman, you sound as if you think drafting people is without risk. Erasmus James was supposed to be a good pass rusher for the Vikings, and everybody thought it was a solid pick. He can't stay on the field. Udeze gets diagnosed with leukemia. Any player you add to the roster entails risk, and no team's record on on third rounders, or even first rounders, is so good that they could confidently say that they would do better with the picks than they would with a guy who has been dominant for a couple of years. Not making this trade, and going into the season with their current des, plus whomever they draft, is a bigger risk.

Right, because no QB has ever been on the same team as Joey Harrington, played terribly (even worse than Harrington) in a system that didn’t fit his talents, left the team, and then succeeded on two other teams when he got back to an offensive system that fit his talents. That’s totally never, ever happened. Especially not to Jeff Garcia.

Except Garcia went to DET when Mariucci's system was still the HC and Garcia had flourished in that system. Garcia's DVOA was then about 5 points less than Harrington's. Leftwich's was more 50 (five-zero) points worse. To grossly mangle the math, that's an order of magnitude worse. You can make a limited sample size argument, you can make Crushinator's point, which is a fair one, but Garcia's poor performance in DET was at All-Pro level compared to Leftwich's last year.

Seems to me that if two young QBs are both having significant declines in statistical production at the same time, it’s probably due more to the team around them getting worse.

Agreed but Leftwich went from being BETTER than Garrard to being WORSE. It's not like they declined at the same rate. My hypothesis is that Garrard's development was hidden by the decline of the team around him and Leftwich's regression was magnified.

It may be that Leftwich's 2006 problems were due to playing hurt. But it may be also that those injuries have permanently reduced his skills. He has now played for three coaches and two teams in the last 20 pre- and regular season games, and all three seem to have come to the conclusion that Garrard, Redman, and Harrington are better than he is as evidenced by their decisions on hwo to cut and who to re-sign to new contracts.

I have nothing against Leftwich. If he can find a team that will give him a chance in a system that better matches his skills, great. But at this point, I do not believe he is a viable NFL QB and is nowhere near as good as Garrard (and yes, that's accounting for Garrard's numbers to slip a little in 2008).

Oops, screwed up the italics on #74 - the 2nd para is mine, the first and 3rd are quotes.

Re: Aaron: Are the Vikings a quarterback away from being the best team in the NFC?

A decent pass-protecting offensive lineman other than McKinnie, an upgrade in the coverage talent in the back seven, and a heck of a lot more inspiration in the offensive design wouldn't hurt. Nevertheless, the Vikings definitely have pockets of talent, including a defensive line that now features a top 5 DE, top 5 UT, and the most dominant NT I've ever seen. Perhaps this, along with the Berrian acquisition, is a sign that the Vikings are finally starting to abandon the anachronistic "run the ball and stop the run" philosophy that has marred the Childress era. The Vikings may be overpaying for talent, but at least this off-season they're overpaying for talent at important positions.

67

It's not that I think the odds are huge, but if you're spending 3 picks at the position, unless the Vikings front office is completely incompetent, they should be able to hit on at least one player, with the added benefit of potentially getting multiple players, at much cheaper. Even if they don't get a dominant DE, I'd rather roll the dice and trust my scouts. (Unless they do just have an abysmal view of this years DE class)

It's also the fact that the player they're getting really is one infraction away from a huge suspension, and they're making him one of the highest paid players in the league. Anything less from Allen than repeated pro bowl performances is going to be a bust. I just think the risk is too high for the reward.

Eh, I disagree that it's more risk to go with the current roster. I'm a Bucs fan, but, being I live in the Twin Cities, the Vikes are my second team to root for, so I'm torn; there were discussions that the Bucs were interested in Allen, so I'm happy for team #1, not so for team #2.

It's the pattern of behavior that's the worry. The man has done a bunch of stupid things in recent years. One more stupid thing and he's not playing. The current disciplinary environment in the NFL is heavily slanted towards coming down hard on repeat offenders.

I'll say it again--heck of a player, fills a need beautifully, could have a huge, huge impact. If he's playing well, he's going to be a terror with the Williams twins in the middle eating up players. Helps cover that highly suspect secondary by disrupting the passing game, really good. The risk, though, is HUGE. Six years, $74 million, $31 million guaranteed. For a guy who is one drink away from a year suspension. Yeah, yeah, I'm a pessimist, but pessimism is often a good idea.

I like the Allen trade from the Vikings' standpoint, because I think we all just had demonstrated to us a couple months ago, in spectacular fashion, what a dominating defensive line can do. My criticism of the trade for the Vikings is that it's a win-now move, and without a good quarterback, they ain't winning anything now no matter how good their defensive line is.

By the way, Byron Leftwich may or may not actually suck, but there are two things I think are clearly true:

1. Byron Leftwich is better than Tarvaris Jackson.

2. Byron Leftwich needs strong pass protection to succeed. The Vikings have that.

Put another way, the Vikings have to roll the dice, because they're not winning anything with Tarvaris Jackson, and if Leftwich can't succeed in Minnesota in 2008, he can't succeed anywhere.

80. Justin - I watched all the Vikings games last year and I don't think they actually pass block particularly well. They had a huge amount of trouble dealing with the rush when teams knew they were passing. This was on a team that had a huge advantage in that team were so concerned about the running attack.

I'm in the minority here, but I think Jackson performed extremely well in the second half of the season when the offensive line gave him lots of time. His problem is his ability to deal with pressure is still poor because he makes some outlandishly bad decisions at times under duress.

People are putting way, way, too much emphasis on the risk represented by the guaranteed money going to Allen. Folks, a huge portion of the guaranteed money, and thus the risk in the contract, will be written off this year. That's how the Vikings have always managed the cap. After the first year, Allen's contract risk will be on par with other starting veterans in the league, which is to say it will be unremarkable.

Justin, there is no way Leftwich could effectively operate the Vikings playbook; he simply doesn't have the physical ability. For the Vikings to start Leftwich, they would have to commit to installing a whole new offense. There is nothing about Leftwich which would make such a move sensible.

Jimm, I think you underestimate the difficulty in operating a pass blocking scheme when the defense has zero fear of a qb's and receivers' ability to go downfield. Saying a qb performed extremely well when he had lots of time isn't saying much of anything; that's pretty much the default position of NFL qbs. NFL qbs earn their money when they dont have lots of time.

Question: a few years ago the Bears traded for a defensive end coming off of a 15 sack season (9.5 the season before that with other good stats) who was holding out. He cost the Bears Marty Booker and what turned out to be a 3rd rounder. Granted Ogunleye has slowed down, but what the Vikes just paid is a whole hell of a lot more than what the Bears gave up for Ogunleye, and even if Allen is a better player he's also one bender away from a long suspension and some jail time to boot, something that was not an issue with Ogunleye.

This could turn out great or it could really blow up in their face. If they want to go for the Bears Super Bowl plan they'll be drafting DeSean Jackson if possible, or some other return dynamo. Will be entertaining to see them try it with a better RB but somehow even worse QB.

To give this context, let's list the DEs the Vikings have drafted since they drafted Chris Doleman in 1985 (data from p-f-r).

Brian Robison
Ray Edwards
Erasmus James
Kenechi Udeze
Darrion Scott
Willie Howard
Michael Boireau
Duane Clemons
Derrick Alexander
Fernando Smith
Roy Barker
Reggie Johnson
Marion Hobby
Craig Schlichting
Benji Roland
Alex Stewart
Al Noga
Gerald Robinson

Before criticizing the Vikes for giving up too many picks to get Allen, you have to consider that list. Sure, you could blame poor scouting on the Vikes' side. But this is a long list of players that provided little to no productive pass rush for the Vikings.

So, do I think Jared Allen is worth a 1st, a 3rd, and a 3rd? If those three picks were going to be filled by players like those on this list, then abso-freaking-lutely I do.

I wouldn't say that about very many other positions, but DE is notoriously difficult to draft. Given the desperation of the team need, I don't care about the picks or Wilf's money.

Yinka, I was angry when the Vikings old regime didn't try to compete for Ogunleye, but I don't see how a first rounder and two thirds is all that much more than a starter and a third. People are acting as if drafting players is an exact science. Also, Ogunleye was clearly the 2nd best de on the Dolphins, which always makes likely future production more difficult to gauge.

That's what I don't get Pacifist; people are writing as if Zygi Wilf is their grandpa, and more money to Jared Allen means less money to them when the estate is distributed.

84. Interesting comparison but some I think Allen's body of work at the time of the transactions vs Ogunleye is quite a bit better.

Ogunleye was 27 at the time
Allen is 26

Ogunleye had 25 career sacks
Allen has 43

Ogunleye had 77 career tackles
Allen has 199

Oguleye played opposite end to Jason Taylor

Allen played opposite to Tamba Hali

I think most would agree that Oguleye was simply not the same level of player as Allen.

Yikes, this is a seriously long thread ...

I understand that this is a copycat league and that's what the Vikes are trying to do here, and I appreciate that (especially as a fan). I don't think that this team as constituted can bring it all down barring a miraculous run of health/QB competency, but at least they have an outside shot now.

That being said ... Kevin Williams is still great, but Pat Williams is in his mid -> upper 30's, right? And the other Viking defensive linemen are ... ? I can name them because I love the team, but they seriously suck. This team has little depth and an offense that will hardly be a juggernaut unless Purple Jesus puts up a Dickerson-in-1984 type of season.

And Sage Rosenfels? I liked that prospective deal at first, but the dude's 30. And a Cyclone. Not good.

All that said, this is the most excited I've been for a Viking season for a while, and given the way the FO manages the cap, I'd bet they didn't even mortgage the future to do it.

#78: You make it sound like Allen hangs out with Pacman. He hasn't had any incidents since Fall 2006 that I know of and hasn't touched a drop of alcohol in over 18 months according to published reports. Reading your summary one would think the Vikes are slinging $31 mill at a rehabilitation project. I prefer to think that they're getting a re-dedicated and matured version of a guy that's just entering his prime.
Sure, one arrest and he's out for a year. But what about the flip side? No arrest. Production consistent with what we saw last year. Or even better, considering the DT group. How could Vike fans not be eager for this?

For the record, I don't think Jared Allen is a bad player. I do think he's one of the premier DEs in the league, and that DE is one of the most important positions in football.

I also don't think Jared Allen is nearly as bad as Pacman.

However, the Goodell has been setting a precedent in punishing repeat offenders. Allen could be clean for a while (and I do think he will be clean for a while) but if he slips up one more time, there goes a season and there is a definate risk there.

I wasn't aware of how bad the Vikings past was with drafting DE. If Allen plays up to the way he's been playing, and he can hold down the position for 5-7 more years with top end play, then I do think it's a good pick up.

I just personally would prefer the 3 chances at DE than the 1 with Allen.

I'm not the biggest Tarvaris Jackson fan in the world, but it is possible he could be markedly improved next season. By all accounts, he is a hard worker, and he did have some good moments last year. He doesn't have to be great, just serviceable most of the time. Eli Manning basically sucked last season until the playoffs but the Giants wound up OK.

Normally, one player doesn't make a huge difference, but Allen might be an exception. The Vikings secondary is better than it looked last year because they were hung out to dry by the inadequate pass rush. Allen should have a significant synergistic impact on the entire defense... makes things easier on the Williams, and the other DEs, and guys blitzing from LB or the secondary, and makes pass coverage easier.

Oh, I think Allen could help their offense as well. Falling behind to the Vikings just got a lot more costly, which means if Berrian can really be the deep threat (Jackson does throw an o.k. deep ball) that Stone Hands Williamson could not be, crowding the box with nine guys to stop Peterson just became a more problematic approach.

Bill Walsh always said that next to qb play, the fourth quarter pass rush was the most important element to winning NFL games. This certainly seems to be a move in the right direction.

#86 - you left out Dimitrious Underwood and I agree with your point: the Vikings have thrown more than enough draft picks at DE and have come up empty. It was time to throw draft picks at a player you know is productive on an NFL level.

#89 - another distinction is Ogun was a LDE where Allen is a RDE. The value a team puts on RDE is higher than LDE.

Re: Allen's character/risk - The NFL shortened his suspension from 4 games to 2 this season. I can't think of a reason for the NFL to shorten a suspension unless they feel the player has successfully cleaned up his act.

I like the trade, I don't think the price was too steep in terms of picks, and so long as they manage the cap well, I don't care how much the contract is for.

Chiefs going to suck even worse now. Raiders will destroy them two times in 2008.

Will, my argument is that the Vikings are guaranteed to not win a championship with Tarvaris Jackson running their current offense, or any offense. Changing an offensive philosophy is a lot of work, but if the Vikings are serious about being a real contender, they need a better quarterback. If they have to change their offense for the sake of getting a real QB, well, yeah, it could go badly, but that's a risk they have to take.

I'm not saying they have to sign Leftwich; if they tab somebody else they think will work better, go for it. But they have to do something. Tarvaris Jackson ain't winning them no NFC championship.

Oh, also wanted to add that saying they would only be the best team in the NFC (if they were that good)? Thats just more FO bias. Why not just say the NFL? Who in the AFC is so much
better than anyone in the NFC? You can't possibly think the Pats still have a large gap compared to the other top teams, can you Aaron? Thats pretty ridiculous.

Neither would Brian Leftwich, Justin, and he has less room for improvement at this point

98

Which NFC teams are better than the Pats, Colts, or Chargers?

97. Justin - with all due respect - guaranteeing a team won't win an NFC championship is pointless. On the one hand you will most likely be right because only 1 of 16 teams will. On the other hand the Vikings weren't that far away last year with Jackson at QB. They missed the playoffs by one game and beat the Super Bowl champions 41-17 in NY. A game in which Jackson as the QB grossly outplayed Manning.

This year Jackson is a year older, the offensive line is in tact for a 2nd year (cross fingers on McKinnie) Rice and Peterson are now 2nd year players and they swapped Troy Williamson for Bernard Berrian.

On Defence out goes Dwight Smith and Udeze for Mideau Williams and Jared Allen.

The Vikings were a boarder line playoff contender last year with Jackson at QB. They clearly improved themselves this year so it stands to reason that they have at least a decent shot at winning the NFC even if Jackson only plays slightly better.

100 - According to DVOA, Dall,GB and TB ranked 3,5,7 - SD ranked 6th (Jacksonville was actually 4th).

NE and Indy clearly came back to the pack as the year went on. I don't remember the DVOA ratings with playoffs included, but it seems to me by playoff time the difference between the top 3-4 AFC and NFC teams was non-existent.

Remember the Giants played the Pats straight over 2 games. Not one. Dallas and GB were certainly as good as the Giants.

Well, Alex, I suppose it could be completely irrational for Leftwich to not have a job playing football right now

Or it could be because it's before the NFL draft, and teams don't know what they're really going to do with regards to the QB position. Leftwich will likely still be available after the draft.

It might not be completely irrational that Leftwich is not starting, but it's certainly irrational that he's not on a team. He's better than the vast majority of backups, that's for sure.

Jeff Garcia played in a system that did not fit him in Detroit? Did Steve Mariucci change that much when he left San Fran to coach the Lions? Garcia was in the WCO with Detroit-but he was also rushing back from a broken leg and he was not able to get any sort of push to throw a football.

I had heard that the scheme had been significantly altered in Detroit, but I'll take your word for it that it wasn't. But for whatever reason, injury, system, etc, he was outplayed by Harrington, and released at the end of the season.

Agreed but Leftwich went from being BETTER than Garrard to being WORSE.

Sample size is way too small to make that conclusion. The margin of error is far greater than the separation between the two of them, so there's no way to tell whether it was really Leftwich regressing and Garrard improving or just statistical noise. Think about it this way: in 58 more passes, Garrard had 8.5 more DPAR. That's roughly 2 games worth of passes. If Leftwich had had one or two more good games (or if Garrard had had one or two fewer good games), his DPAR would've been higher than Garrard's. Sorry, but that's just not enough of a difference to rely on.

Garcia’s DVOA was then about 5 points less than Harrington’s. Leftwich’s was more 50 (five-zero) points worse. To grossly mangle the math, that’s an order of magnitude worse.

Leftwich had 64 passes last year. That's two games worth of terrible performance. All but the best QBs in the NFL have two terrible games a year. There's no way to know whether it was luck, injury, inexperience with the team/system, or any of a dozen other factors that hurt his performance. The last time he had more than 100 passes, he was about as good as David Garrard. Larger sample sizes are better.

DVOA varies significantly year to year for QBs with very few passes. For instance, Kerry Collins had a DVOA of -34.7% in 2006, while Vince Young had a DVOA of -8.1% on the same team. So Young was better by over 25%. In 2007, Collins had a DVOA of 28.3%, while Young had a DVOA of -6.7%. So both of them improved, but Collins was better by 35%, after being worse by 25% the year before. Somehow, that doesn't leave me convinced that Kerry Collins suddenly became a much better QB at the age of 35.

Well, Alex, I suppose it could be completely irrational for Leftwich to not have a job playing football right now, but I suspect it is because 32 NFL teams have some reason to think that his skill set is lacking.

Honestly, I think people greatly overestimate the ability of NFL teams to accurately evaluate players.

Was Warren Moon's skill set lacking while he spent all those years in Canada after going undrafted? How about Kurt Warner? And Trent Green?

And why did Jeff Garcia go undrafted, playing in the CFL for 5 years? Then, after 5 years and 3 Pro Bowls with the 49ers, why did they let him go, while keeping Tim Rattay and Ken Dorsey? Is it because Rattay and Dorsey were elite QBs? And how did the Eagles sign him as a backup before the 2006 season? Did no NFL team want him as a starter? He made a Pro Bowl in 2007, so he was still a good QB.

I think it's pretty clear that there are good QBs that are unable to get jobs in the NFL because they aren't evaluated correctly by NFL teams. Happens all the time. Player evaluation is not an exact science, even for the best teams.

Yes, Pat, he'll still be available because nobody is that enamored with his skill set. If they were, they would figure out what to do with their qbs. Yes, he's a decent backup, with the right team.

Alex, I never claimed perfect efficiency. The difference between many of the guys you mention and Leftwich is that Leftwich has played a lot already. There's no mystery left. Do teams sometimes miss on guys who have already logged significant time as a starter? Sure, but I don't recall Garcia being out of work too long, and he was much older than Leftwich.

Look, you obviously think that extremely immobile guys with big wind ups are easier to scheme around than I do, and reasonable people can disagree on that. I'm not saying it is impossible for him to find a situation in which he could shine, but I sure as heck wouldn't change my entire offensive scheme to fit his skill set, because his skill set is just too limited.

As a side note, regarding misevaluation, I remember the first time I saw Leftwich play, and being surprised that a guy with two major weaknesses physically would warrant such a high selection. I mean, I'm no QB guru, and maybe I do make too much of it, but it drives me NUTS to see a clubfooted guy in the pocket, engaging in a big wind up!

Give me a clubfoot with a great release, ala Marino, or a mobile guy with a big wind up, ala Randall Cunningham, and I know it 's a bit much to use the names of a HOFer and a multi-MVPer, but I just hate Leftwich's combination. Maybe it's the old offensive tackle in me, but the idea of holding a block while the qb gets his arm uncoiled, with concrete boots on, drives me crazy.

I guess I'd also disagree that he has above average pocket presence.

From Don Banks (click on my name for the link):

"One league source told SI.com on Wednesday that Allen's two strikes in the program get wiped off the books if he stays incident free through September, at which time his most recent DUI will be two years old. He would then be out from under the threat of a year-long league suspension if he incurred another DUI after September, the source said. But that scenario could not be confirmed by an NFL spokesman Wednesday, leaving it uncertain whether Allen is a high risk for a career-interrupting suspension."

Also PFT has the contract breakdown.

he’ll still be available because nobody is that enamored with his skill set. If they were, they would figure out what to do with their qbs.

Nobody was that enamored with Garcia's skill set after he was released by the Lions. If NFL teams knew then what they know now about Garcia, then someone would've offered him a starting QB salary and a long term deal (actually, several teams would've done so). Nobody did.

Sure, but I don’t recall Garcia being out of work too long, and he was much older than Leftwich.

Yes, but Garcia was willing to sign a one-year contract as a backup, for backup money. I think Leftwich is hoping for a two year deal. And it's not like Leftwich is losing much by being "unemployed" during the offseason. He's waiting for some team to offer him a decent deal, and if none of them do, he'll probably take whatever he can get after the draft.

I guess I’d also disagree that he has above average pocket presence.

Then how the h*ll does he have such a low sack rate?
We know he's immobile, and we know he has a slow release, so there are only so many other explanations.

He can't avoid pass rushers, and he's got a slow throwing motion, so the only way he could have a low sack rate is by knowing how long he has until the pass rushers reach him, and planning/reacting quickly. I mean, it's not like he's doing Jedi mind tricks, waving his hand at onrushing defenders, "This is not the quarterback you are looking for. Move along." He's got a good sense of how long he has until the pass rush closes in, and he makes sure he's got enough time to get through his wind-up before that happens.

Just because his throwing motion takes longer than other QBs doesn't mean that the time between the snap and the ball leaving his hand is any higher. You act like he's sitting there in the pocket for a million years, going through a long throwing motion after most other QBs would have gotten rid of the ball. But that's just not the case. He begins his throwing motion much sooner than most other QBs, and that compensates for the fact that his wind-up takes longer. So it's not like his offensive line has to hold blocks for a million years to wait for his wind-up. Leftwich has a lower sack rate than Garrard, who's mobile, because Garrard holds onto the ball longer.

Look, you obviously think that extremely immobile guys with big wind ups are easier to scheme around than I do

Only if they have good enough pocket presence to keep their sack rate low. Then they don't really need any special scheming. Yeah, if they hold onto the ball forever and get sacked all the time, then they aren't going to make it. But if they can stay upright as well as the next guy, what's the problem with immobility and a wind-up? It's not like he had to have spectacular pass blocking to keep from getting sacked a lot. Garrard had the same blockers, and got sacked more often.

2006 was the year where the Jags had that craaazy variance. Before the season, Garrard had been hospitalized with Crohn's disease, losing 25 pounds. Leftwich appeared to be developing somewhat, but he had been knocked out for the year pretty early with a leg injury that the team implied shouldn't be that serious. The Jags receivers led the league in drops, perhaps in part because of adjusting between the quarterbacks' throwing styles. Leftwhich had better loft on his throws whereas Garrard was better over the middle, throwing darts. FO did a mailbag about that just after the season, breaking down the contrast in their styles. It was something like, one led the league in overthrows while the other led in underthrows. Leftwich is probably one of the 32 best qb's out there, but you do have to scheme around his weaknesses, and the ceiling isn't great. His sack rate is low because, like Roethlisberger, he takes hits but won't go down. Like the curse of 370, I suspect this kind of qb hit does lasting damage, but time will tell. The Vikes don't need an all pro qb to get to the SB, so he'd be worth taking a flier on.

Pat Kerney was on the board when Denny Green drafted Demitrius Underwood. I always sighed every time I saw Kerney continue to be productive year after year.

"I have no problem seeing a non qb making that much of a difference.

2006 Patriots: 12-4
2007 Patriots: 16-0

I have no problem believing that Randy Moss was almost completely responsible for that change."

The four game improvement is spread among various reasons, and not just Randy Moss. Just a few quickly (although I am sure there are others):

1)Wes Welker

2)Schedule strength. 2006 opponents (counting teams played twice twice) won 48% of the games they played not counting the ones against the Pats. In 2007, similar opponents won 43% of such games.

3) Luck. The expected wins based on points allowed/points scored for the 2006 pats was 12. In 2007, it was 13.8.

Did Moss have a big impact? Yes. 4 games all on his lonesome? Half of that, tops.

Alex, you entirely underestimathe advantage in being able to wait until the last moment to throw the ball, because you can get rid of it quickly. It's rather like a major league hitter; the longer you can wait to pull the trigger, because of the quickness and efficiency of your motion, the greater advantage you have. If a qb has to make his thowing decision quicker, he has fewer options in reagrds to attacking the defense.

Alex - Leftwich's sack rate was 9.4% last year, a very high number. The question is, is that an anomaly due to small sample size or a reflection of his ture CURRENT level of ability?

It was a higher sack rate than Harrington or Redman had, but it's not opponent adjusted. Atlanta's o-line adj sack rate was 7.9%, so it was poor, but it ranked 23rd so their were several worse lines for pass blocking. Overall, the ATL offense was also poor, but it ranked 24th in DVOA, 21st in passing, so it was not just the context that Leftwich was in the resulted in his poor performance.

I think Leftwich has gone from being a decent QB to a very bad one from 2005 to now. I would not want him on my team, even as a back-up because I don't think he can improve much and I don't think he's willing to be a career back-up, so he has no upside and would be disruptive.

You disagree and think that he could be a good backup or a decent - or better - starter. OK, we disagee.

The four game improvement is spread among various reasons, and not just Randy Moss. Just a few quickly (although I am sure there are others):

1)Wes Welker

Because he helped Miami win all those games the previous three years. Seriously you think it was the short, slow, white fan favourite that did it and not the 6'4" All Pro wide receiver who is probably the best deep threat in league history.

"Because he helped Miami win all those games the previous three years. Seriously you think it was the short, slow, white fan favourite that did it and not the 6′4″ All Pro wide receiver who is probably the best deep threat in league history."

Don't be obtuse. I did not say that Welker caused the Pats to improve all by his lonesome.

What I argued, and will continue to, is that Moss was not responsible for a 4 win improvement all on his own.

Was Moss the main reason? Among players, almost certainly. But how much of the 4 win gain can be attributed to him?

Well, seeing as 2.2 wins of the 4 win improvement could very easily be attributed to luck (based on estimated wins from points scored versus points allowed), I would say somewhere below 2 wins.

From that less than 2 win total, some portion was due to a somewhat weaker schedule. Some portion was due to Welker. (And again with the disclaimer that I believe as far as personnel go, Moss was the biggest contributor to the Pats' improvement, I will note that with Welker the Dolphins won 6 games in 2006 and won 1 game in 2007 without, and the Pats sure seemed to think he had value, having traded a 2nd round pick to get him and then throwing to him so often that he caught 112 passes). Welker's contributions to the Pats improvement was non-zero. Was it half of Moss'? A quarter? Dunno. I just know it was non-zero.

My assertion is that people overestimate the impact of a single player on a sport that has 22 starters (not counting special teams). No player, with the possible exception of a top-tier quarterback going to a team that had a black hole of suck there previously, will increase a team's wins by 3.5 or more games.

"Did Moss have a big impact? Yes. 4 games all on his lonesome? Half of that, tops."

The patriots offense went from 12.2% to 42.8%. Thats a 30% DVOA increase. Donte Stallworth is irrelevant. I really like Wes Welker, but I'd say hes worth 5-10% at absolute most.

I'd say Moss was single handedly responsible for atleast a 20% increase in offensive DVOA. If you don't think that sort of increase can be worth 3 games, then I seriously disagree with you.

20% offensive DVOA was the difference between Indy and Tampa last year (defense was the same).

Although I may want to say that on further reflection, I may need a further qualifier. I would imagine that it is easier for a stud player to have a great impact (as far as wins go) on a mediocre (think 7-9) team than a god-awful (think 1-15) or great (think 13-3) team. Not that I have any evidence for this qualifier-- it just 'feels' right.

If a qb has to make his thowing decision quicker, he has fewer options in reagrds to attacking the defense.

Yes, but Leftwich has an advantage that you ignore that allows him to compensate for that: arm strength. His superior arm strength (and accuracy) allows him to hit receivers that are much more tightly covered than other QBs could hit, so he can make his decision about who to throw to much sooner than other QBs and still have as many options on where to throw it. Having a quick release would allow him to wait for his receivers to get more separation, but he doesn't need them to get much separation.

For instance, if, 1.5 seconds after the snap, 2 receivers have a yard of separation from their defenders, but none have more than that, a QB with a quick release but a weak arm wouldn't be able to throw right then, because none of the receivers are open enough. He might wait another second, when one of his receivers has the necessary separation for him to hit them. He'll still get the ball out in time to avoid a sack because his throwing motion only takes, say, half a second (or whatever a fast throwing motion would be).

Say a QB with superior arm strength, but a slower release, is in the same situation. 1.5 seconds after the snap, he's got 2 receivers that have a yard of separation. Those receivers are open enough for him to hit, so he can start throwing right then, and even if his throwing motion takes a full second longer than the other guy's, the ball will leave his hand at the same time, 3 seconds after the snap (or whatever the real numbers are).

So Leftwich still has plenty of options to throw to, it's just that he has to make a decision sooner, which he generally does. Obviously, his slow release is something that he has to compensate for, but it doesn't prevent him from getting the job done right, because he does compensate for it.

Alex - Leftwich’s sack rate was 9.4% last year, a very high number. The question is, is that an anomaly due to small sample size or a reflection of his ture CURRENT level of ability?

Partly small sample size, but mostly, neither. It's a reflection of the Atlanta Falcons offensive line. I mean, Joey Harrington has one of the lowest career sack rates in NFL history, despite playing behind terrible offensive lines throughout his career, and he was still sacked over 8% of the time on the Falcons. Leftwich's sack rate was 1% higher than Harrington's, and that's with a very small sample size. I'd be happy to concede that Leftwich is not as good at avoiding sacks as Harrington. But that just means he's not the best in the NFL at avoiding sacks.

Atlanta’s o-line adj sack rate was 7.9%, so it was poor, but it ranked 23rd so their were several worse lines for pass blocking.

No, there weren't. It only looks that way because Harrington is extremely good at avoiding sacks. In his first two years in the NFL, Detroit had the lowest sack rate in the league, after being 29th the year before he arrived. Guess what they were the year Harrington left for the Dolphins, and Kitna was starting for them? 29th. Somehow, I don't think the Lions offensive line suddenly went from 29th best at pass blocking to 1st in one year, and then went back to 29th after Harrington left.

The Falcons took a QB with a career sack rate of 4.7% and he got sacked 8.4% behind their line. That's insanely bad pass blocking, and almost certainly the worst in the NFL, or very close.

The four game improvement is spread among various reasons, and not just Randy Moss. Just a few quickly (although I am sure there are others):

1)Wes Welker

"Because he helped Miami win all those games the previous three years."

As opposed to all the games that Randy Moss helped the Raiders win the previous two years?

Alex, it isn't just a matter of waiting for the receiver to get seperation, it's being able to have more time to go through progressions, and thus throw to the BEST possible option, and not to the one who might catch it (or not; catching balls in tight coverage is inherently more difficult), but have little yardage after the catch.

Having to make the throwing decisions sooner, as opposed to later, even by a split second, is an inherent disadvantage in attacking a defense as efficiently as possible, without regard to arm strength.

#116, Gerry

OK fair enough it was a bit of a sly dig, please have my apologies.

I would personally place a good deal of improvement in both record and DVOA on the Patriots uncanny run of every top team they played having several important players injured. The last (decent) healthy opponent they played until the Superbowl was the Chargers and that was the week they had just been accused of cheating. Don't get me wrong, the Pats are clearly a very good team, but some of the stats that were coming out last year were greatly aided by the timing of injuries to their opponents.

#121, Charlie

As opposed to all the games that Randy Moss helped the Raiders win the previous two years?

In a life previous to the one you refer to in which Al Davis hatched Moss out of an egg three years ago, Moss had been sort of good for another team (only like you know a perrenial All Pro). Before Moss got hurt in his first year in Oakland he was ripping the league to pieces. In his second year Moss and half of the rest of the locker room quit in the face of clearly inadequate cocahing.

Welker has no similar excuse.

As opposed to all the games that Randy Moss helped the Raiders win the previous two years?

Charlie, don't be obtuse. Even Raiderjoe knows that Moss took those two years off.

Gerry, I do think you are corect that the closer a team is to average, as opposed to a 13-3 or 3-13 team, the greater the chance for a single player to have a three game impact. By the way, the only position beside qb where I think there is a chance for something like that to happen is a dominant defensive end.

Will Allen

What about a dominant DT?

A healthy Tommie Harris next year is probably worth 3 games to the bears. Bryant Young was for years the only 49er on defense putting up any resistance whatsoever. OK those two may both end up in the Hall (albeit a little soon to be discussing HOF merit for Harris).

Also how many games has Devin Hester won for the Bears in the last two years?

Or for that matter Adrian Peterson (the younger)?

Jimmy, even the greatest defensive tackles are easier to handle in the passing game, simply by virtue of starting out closer to more blockers, and the NFL is dominated by passing. Hester really can be taken out as a factor by non-stupid special teams coaching. Adrian Peterson is highly dependent on his blockers, and as we saw in the last five games of the 2006 season, his qb and receivers. A truly dominant defensive end, however, can have a huge effect on a game, independent of what anybody else does.

Excepting a qb, there is no other player's career I'd like to start a franchise with than a great defensive end's, probably Reggie White's, and it isn't even close.

"OK fair enough it was a bit of a sly dig, please have my apologies."

No prob. More a dig at Welker, I assume, re-reading it?

"Also how many games has Devin Hester won for the Bears in the last two years?

Or for that matter Adrian Peterson (the younger)?"

I'll start off by saying that all I am about to say I don't know. It is all just things that I suspect.

Long before there was FO, I was a baseball stathead. Then came Bill James Baseball Abstract, each year. And I fell in love with Sabermetrics. I didn't do Sabermetrics, but I did read the stuff, and loved what it did to my understanding of the game of baseball.

One misperception that fell by the wayside with me quickly was that a single player could transform a team. I learned that even the best of players could not turn an average team into world beaters. Just ask A-Rod. Or Barry Bonds.

And that is in a sport that has fewer starting players, and where starters often play every single play in a game. It just seems natural to me to think that it is more likely that a single player can make a huge difference in basketball, with five players on the court (for both offense and defense) than in baseball (with 9 players), and that football with 11 on each of offense and defense, and with special teams, it is even more spread out.

3 wins in football is a difference in winning percentage of 18.75%. That is a HUGE percentage. It just seems difficult for me to believe that any single player can make that much of a difference.

#128

Yeah, I think people misunderstand what it is that Welker has really brought to NE and by extention what NE has given Welker.

I personally think Welker's massive boost in production last year is best compared to what Brandon Stokely was able to do when asked to play the slot for Indy when Peyton broke most of the records. While Stokely played well that year there weren't many people calling for him to be sent to the Pro Bowl. I think Welker is a better player due to his toughness and ability to create after the catch, but is overrated by most pundits and many fans.

Is the argument that the Pats would still have gone 16-0 without Wes Welker? Because that seems harsh to me.

Re 127:

A DT might be easier to take out of the game, but that just makes Tommie Harris's 2006 season that much more impressive, he was living in the backfield.

"And that is in a sport that has fewer starting players, and where starters often play every single play in a game. It just seems natural to me to think that it is more likely that a single player can make a huge difference in basketball, with five players on the court (for both offense and defense) than in baseball (with 9 players), and that football with 11 on each of offense and defense, and with special teams, it is even more spread out."

Jerry, the problem with that view is that Football is much closer to basketball than it is Baseball in the way that one player can affect another. If A-Rod hits .350, it doesn't make a damn difference to the guy who hits 7th.

If Randy Moss draws a double, it sure as hell does make a difference to Wes Welker, Lawrence Maroney, and Ben Watson.

its not an issue of amoutn of players, but an issue of the amount of interaction between the players.

As a basketball analogy, Kevin Garnett makes the Celtics better not just by his own skill, but because he limits who you can use to cover Ray Allen and Paul Pierce.

Re 120:

1. Redman got sacked 5.7% of the time last year, much better than either Leftwich or Harrington.

2. You've distorted the record of the Lions and their sack rates a bit. The rise in the Lions' sack rate began well before Joey left. They were #1 in 2002-2003, then average in 2004 and a little better than average in 2005, Harrington's last year. They were not the best in the league that year, they were 9th or 10th based on a quick count of the team sack rates at p-f-r - and Garcia got sacked at half the rate of Harrington so it they would probably have been average again if Harrington had QBed all year. The big drop to 2006, post-Joey, had at least as much to do with the departure of Mooch and the WCO and the aarrival of Martz more downfield/less pass protection oriented schemes.

3. Harrington's career sack rate is heavily based on his 1st two seasons, when he was throwing very short passes and getting rid of the ball fast, but inaccurately. His last four seasons, his sack rate has been 6.4%, right around the league average of 6.5% for that time frame. The correlation between his sack rate and Y/A is 0.98. The correlation between his sack rate and comp % is 0.72. He has gotten sacked more the last 4 years vs. the first 2 in large part because he's been asked/coached to throw deeper routes and be more accurate, at the cost of more sacks.

"Jerry, the problem with that view is that Football is much closer to basketball than it is Baseball in the way that one player can affect another. If A-Rod hits .350, it doesn’t make a damn difference to the guy who hits 7th.

If Randy Moss draws a double, it sure as hell does make a difference to Wes Welker, Lawrence Maroney, and Ben Watson."

I think you aren't correct here in your assertion. If a team has a crappy leadoff hitter, who doesn't draw walks, then that impacts each of the guys below him. They get fewer opportunities to bat with ducks on the pond. Meanwhile, a guy that does draw walks not only gets on base more but contributes to pitcher fatigue by working pitch counts.

Similarly, a pitcher who can chew up innings makes the bullpen better by decreasing the workload on them.

A good defensive shortstop makes the pitchers better and can compensate for a weak glove at third.

So you are vastly overstating it to say that baseball is so individual that one player cannot make another better (or worse). They do all the time.

Back to Moss. Great season, this year, without question. But still likely worth less than two wins to his team. The other 4 wins were attributable to luck, Welker (unless you really believe that Welker was completely a product of Moss; but if you believe that, maybe Moss was nothing but a product of Brady and the others on offense), schedule, and other variables. All IMO, but defensible I think by the numbers.

Having to make the throwing decisions sooner, as opposed to later, even by a split second, is an inherent disadvantage in attacking a defense as efficiently as possible

It's a weakness, but for crying out loud, every player has weaknesses! Some of them are more serious than others, and some players are able to compensate for them better than others, but all players have areas where they aren't great, areas that put them at an inherent disadvantage.

If Leftwich goes through his progressions quicker than other QBs (giving him an advantage in that area), then he could easily still be just as good at attacking a defense. Immobility and a slow release are not inherently any more problematic than any other weakness a player might have. It all depends on how well they can offset their weaknesses with strengths in other areas.

In 2005, Leftwich was immobile, and he had a wind-up, and he was 9th in DVOA and 13th in DPAR (Better than Garrard in both categories). So we know that he's able to compensate for those two weaknesses somehow, and do so well enough to play at a very high level. Maybe he's not your style of QB, and I totally understand that, but it's not like having those two main weaknesses automatically makes him a bad QB. You can't just say that since he's immobile and has a slow release, he's not great at attacking a defense. You have to consider his strengths along with his weaknesses.

Look at Joe Montana. He had a really weak arm, so all else being equal, he'd be less efficient at attacking a defense than most other QBs. But all else wasn't equal, which is why he's in the Hall of Fame.

Yeah, all else being equal, an immobile QB with a slow release would be worse at attacking a defense. But it doesn't follow from that that any immobile QB with a wind-up is bad.

1. Redman got sacked 5.7% of the time last year, much better than either Leftwich or Harrington.

Yeah, but honestly, I think that's partly small sample size and partly Doug Johnson Effect. I'd be willing to wager that if Redman is the starter at QB for the Falcons next year, his sack rate will go up significantly.

2. You’ve distorted the record of the Lions and their sack rates a bit. The rise in the Lions’ sack rate began well before Joey left.

Yes, but even in Harrington's third and fourth years, their sack rate was at least average. After he left, it went back to 29th. My point was just that the fluctuation in sack rate in Detroit had little to do with the talent (or lack thereof) of their offensive line. Detroit's line was still very bad at pass blocking from 2002 to 2005, in spite of their low sack rate in that period. Similarly, the Falcons' line was abysmal at pass blocking last year, even though their sack rate was only pretty bad. Evaluating pass blocking by sack rate is a very bad idea, because QBs have a far greater effect on sack rate than offensive lines.

The Packers faced the Chiefs in 2007 and Allen was a force not just in applying pressure but forcing GB into double teams which typically isn't required with Chad Clifton at left tackle. That caused the d-tackle Boone to have a field day as the guards weren't up to the task.

Football teams win with playmakers and Allen is just that.

But as a fact the Vikings have played good defense even with some obvious gaps and still accomplished squat. Childress has shown no signs of recognizing the gaping void that exists at quarterback.

While I acknowledge this to be a good acquisition for the Vikings, until such time as leadership demonstrates a basic understanding of the need for average quarterback play to be the minimal standard I will not agree with any notion that the Vikings are a "lock" for titles of any kind, divisional or otherwise.

They have lots of talent. Lots of teams have had lots of talent and done diddly.

As I wrote once and repeat again Brad Childress couldn't coach fecal matter to stink.

Montana did not have a notably weak arm. It wasn't a rocket, but it wasn't weak, and arm strength is about the least important quality for an effective qb. Sure, the qb has to be able to throw the deep out effectively, but once that minimum is met, it's trong enough.

I'm not saying Leftwich is a bad qb. I'm saying two significant physical drawbacks limits the number of situations in which he is likely to shine, compared to a qb with one significant physical drawback.

I'll say this much; with regard to Jackson, Childress will either have the right to tell the critics that they are a bunch of yammering dolts, or the critics will have the right to call Childress a yammering dolt. I'm not in the Tavaris fan club, and spent most of last year lamenting that Jeff Garcia was in Tampa, but watching this play out is sorta like being at a large stakes craps table in Las Vegas, and watching a guy push his entire net worth onto the felt.

"think you aren’t correct here in your assertion. If a team has a crappy leadoff hitter, who doesn’t draw walks, then that impacts each of the guys below him."

Actually, IIRC, a good hitter actually lowers the average of the guys behind him.

yes, the synergistic effect is there in baseball, but not nearly to the affect that it is in football. Having a good shortstop doesn't help your rightfielder at all. Having a stud WR helps everyone from your QB, to RB, to even your CBs.

At this point we will just have to disagree.

re134

Yes, Randy Moss took off those two years. He was total bum with Raiders. He suffered altimatum defeat in Superbowl when Pates lost to Giants. I laughed all night long and into the next week too. Randy Moss is a bum

All right, now I will be completely nuts, and propose that the Vikings use their 2nd round pick this year, along with maybe a 2nd day pick next year, to try to trade for Jason Taylor, assuming their cap can handle Taylor's salary for the next couple of years. Yes, this is a go for broke strategy, and Parcells may demand more, but the prospect of fielding perhaps the best front four since the '70s Steelers should not be dismissed lightly.

The DE rotation in particular would just be crushing on opposing offensive lines, because Edwards, and quite possibly Robison, are going to be better than average pass rushers, assuming Edwards' performance to date has not been too steroids related. Allen and Taylor would not get worn down, and enter the 4th quarter fresh, especially given the Williams tackles crushing opponents' running games. Vikings fans could be looking at a team like the '00 Ravens, where qb play is not significant to winning a championship.

I thought the reason FO underestimated the Giants throughout their playoff run was because a great defensive line is such a game-changing force. Furthermore, Jared Allen was actually even better than his stats, because teams had to be so concerned with stopping him, like Badger said. He was like Haynesworth for the Titans, just a monster.