3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

A forum for the hard core Minnesota Vikings fan. Discuss upcoming games, opponents, trades, draft or what ever is on the minds of Viking fans!

Moderator: Moderators

VikingHoard
Backup
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 1:26 pm

3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by VikingHoard »

This is just my own not well researched ideas on the matter, and they're probably wrong, but I thought I'd share them anyway. :D
The way I see it, when it comes to personnel there are generally three modes which can describe any NFL team. Usually, a team isn't precisely in one mode, but somewhere between 2 of them. Below I list the modes, followed by suggested approaches to the offseason for teams in that mode.

1. Rebuilding - This is the mode your team is in when the majority of your roster is filled with players who are ok at best. The few star players you have are mostly approaching retirement, and you lack depth pretty much everywhere. You're not likely to get a lot of wins and there won't be any talk of playoffs for you, (especially if Jim Mora is your coach!).
Offseason strategy - You need to get some star players, and a lot of just generally good starters. Most of your offseason moves should come from the draft. You're probably drafting high first rounders so make sure you get studs with those picks. The best player available approach makes sense for you and should probably be used all the way through the draft. When trading, trade to get more picks, not less. It's more important to get as many positions covered with NFL starting caliber players here than it is to try and get a superstar.
Ways to blow it - Sign aging vets to fill one or two holes while ignoring the rest. Try to get too many picks to rebuild with by giving away the store, (ie, trading all your good players and first round picks for a truckload of 5th-7th round selections).

2. Fine Tuning - You've got some talent on the field, but some holes as well. You lack depth at a number of positions and injuries can be devastating. You'll be able to generate wins with good coaching decisions, and may even make it to the playoffs. The luck of the game (injuries, bad/lucky calls, etc.) is going to impact your team's record most in this kind of personnel mode.
Offseason strategy - This is the hardest mode to strategically handle. You need to get your holes filled in order to move up to the next level so you generally can't just use a best player available approach since those players won't just happen to be at positions of need for you, (unless it's a couple of weeks ago and your name is Rick Speilman). Trading picks for veterans is often valid here, as is trading lower picks to move up in the draft since you don't need as many 'lucky crapshoot late round selections' as a rebuilding team would.
Ways to blow it - You need to have luck, patience, and a good sense of balance to keep from blowing an offseason in this mode. Going after too many aging vets or trading away a bunch of future early round picks are classic ways teams screw themselves up here. Everything that you need to do right in the other modes you need to do better here, (scouting, matching players to your scheme, etc.). The biggest key here is to avoid a "win now" mentality.

3. Dynasty - You did it! You've put together a team that has several star players, quality starters at every (or almost every) position, and good depth pretty much everywhere. Playoffs are all but guaranteed, provided your coaches aren't in the habit of making game-blowing decisions.
Offseason strategy - Keep your eye on the QB position. Always have a new QB in training behind your guy. Beyond that, you can almost do whatever you want and it'll work out okay for you. Of course, you'll want to fill the one or two holes that will pop up now and then, but beyond that you're free to do as you will. Best player available will usually work well here to get enough players to keep maintaining depth, and any players you bring in will have great veterans to learn from. At this point, since you've got all your bases covered, a win now mindset can be a good thing.
Ways to blow it - You'd almost have to blow it deliberately, or get really unlucky here. If you're going to screw up your dynasty, it will probably take more than some bad offseason moves to do it.
This signature predicted the great 2014 - 2025 Vikings dynasty!
Funkytown
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4044
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:26 pm
Location: Northeast, Iowa
Contact:

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by Funkytown »

Interesting thoughts and insight. Thanks for sharing. :)

I'm hoping we can be referred to as a dynasty soon. Real soon.
Image
King James
All Pro Elite Player
Posts: 1736
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 10:23 pm
Location: Alabama

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by King James »

Im guessing we are between 1 and 2. We fixed a lot of holes but we still have a few more to fill.
Funkytown
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4044
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:26 pm
Location: Northeast, Iowa
Contact:

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by Funkytown »

JEC334 wrote:Im guessing we are between 1 and 2. We fixed a lot of holes but we still have a few more to fill.
2ish, hopefully heading to 2.5-3ish :thumbsup:
Image
PacificNorseWest
Career Elite Player
Posts: 2936
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Seattle, Wa

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by PacificNorseWest »

I think the Vikings are a clear 2.
Eli
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7946
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:52 pm

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by Eli »

Overall, very oversimplified, but an interesting read. I think you really missed it with the last category, especially. There are no dynasties these days.
VikingHoard wrote:3. Dynasty - You did it! You've put together a team that has several star players, quality starters at every (or almost every) position, and good depth pretty much everywhere. Playoffs are all but guaranteed, provided your coaches aren't in the habit of making game-blowing decisions.
Offseason strategy - Keep your eye on the QB position. Always have a new QB in training behind your guy.
Poorly named. A team that perennially gets into the playoffs these days without winning a few Super Bowls can hardly be considered a "dynasty". "Consistently good", maybe. That was the Vikings for nearly a decade in the 90s, but they never even made it to a Super Bowl.

As to the QB... It just doesn't work like that. You get a franchise QB and you stick with him. Look at who the Patriots have drafted behind Tom Brady, or who the Colts drafted behind Peyton Manning. Virtually nobody. Matt Cassel was a 7th rounder. You draft someone when you see the inevitable end of your franchise QB's career (or it ends prematurely), as the Packers did and the Colts were forced to do. You don't use a high draft pick to select a backup QB who won't play for five or six years. It would be futile, because he'll be a free agent before he ever gets off the bench. If you're lucky, you'll score a mid to late round pick who looks good for a game or two in relief of the injured starter and you can trade him for a lot more than he's worth. See Matt Cassel and Matt Flynn for examples.
Beyond that, you can almost do whatever you want and it'll work out okay for you. Of course, you'll want to fill the one or two holes that will pop up now and then, but beyond that you're free to do as you will. Best player available will usually work well here to get enough players to keep maintaining depth, and any players you bring in will have great veterans to learn from. At this point, since you've got all your bases covered, a win now mindset can be a good thing.
Ways to blow it - You'd almost have to blow it deliberately, or get really unlucky here. If you're going to screw up your dynasty, it will probably take more than some bad offseason moves to do it.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Rosters just don't work like that, either. You have old guys, you have young guys, you have injuries, you have free agency. It's constantly changing. Nobody has such a good roster that they can afford to do whatever they want.
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by Mothman »

Eli wrote:Overall, very oversimplified, but an interesting read. I think you really missed it with the last category, especially. There are no dynasties these days.
I think the Patriots qualify. They fit the Merriam-Webster definition of a dynasty as "a powerful group or family that maintains its position for a considerable time". It obviously depends on how you choose to define a sports dynasty but the Pats have had 12 straight winning seasons and appeared in 5 Super Bowls in an 11 years span, winning 3.
Last edited by Mothman on Wed May 29, 2013 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by mansquatch »

There is one obvious common denominator with teams in the NFL that are consistent winners and that is having an elite player at QB.

Remember leading up to Free Agency where there was the news spat about the recorded phone call from the GM of Buffalo? He said something along the lines of "If you get a QB this job is easy. If not, it is really hard." If that kid they drafted out of FSU pans out he will be right. They'll immediately become competitive.

Look at the Packer Teams during Roger's time there (and Favre's). In 2009 they had a defense that was OK, but generated a ton of TO and they won the Superbowl. They went 15-1 in 2011 with a defense that was ultra porous. Their secondary was actually as bad as ours that year but nobody talked about it becaue the QB was Rogers having a record season.

One thing that really illustrates this to me is what happened to Bill Polian after Manning missed a season with an injury. The team got exposed for the patch work roster that it was. They had Manning for all those years but generally failed to build a balanced team around him. When Manning faltered, the house of cards tumbled.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by Mothman »

mansquatch wrote:There is one obvious common denominator with teams in the NFL that are consistent winners and that is having an elite player at QB.

Remember leading up to Free Agency where there was the news spat about the recorded phone call from the GM of Buffalo? He said something along the lines of "If you get a QB this job is easy. If not, it is really hard." If that kid they drafted out of FSU pans out he will be right. They'll immediately become competitive.

Look at the Packer Teams during Roger's time there (and Favre's). In 2009 they had a defense that was OK, but generated a ton of TO and they won the Superbowl. They went 15-1 in 2011 with a defense that was ultra porous. Their secondary was actually as bad as ours that year but nobody talked about it becaue the QB was Rogers having a record season.

One thing that really illustrates this to me is what happened to Bill Polian after Manning missed a season with an injury. The team got exposed for the patch work roster that it was. They had Manning for all those years but generally failed to build a balanced team around him. When Manning faltered, the house of cards tumbled.
An elite QB obviously helps a team win year after year (and makes a GM's job a little easier) but that's probably more indicative of a deeper common denominator. I suspect good management and stability lie at the heart of the NFL's most consistent winners. QBs tend to thrive and/or become elite when paired with the right coach and given the opportunity to play in a stable environment, surrounded by good players, for years. They make a good centerpiece for a GM to build around but I think team-building and stability are ultimately more important to consistent winning than having an elite QB.
mansquatch
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3836
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 2:44 pm
Location: Coon Rapids, MN

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by mansquatch »

I don't dissagree Moth, but the topic is about personnel with an eye on building a winning team.

IMO, while WINS are the ultimate stat in the NFL, for personnel I think they might distort GM performance to some degree. That is why I bring up the QB thing. A Team that gets an elite QB, by hook or crook, is going to a consistently better record than a team without. So the question is, how do you determine GM performance while accounting for Elite QB skew, so to speak?

Just as an example, I'd argue that despite all the hype that Ted Thompson gets, his recent packer drafts have been somewhat lackluster. The state of their OL and their overall Defense both speak to this. Fortunately he gets to hide behind picking Aaron Rogers and a very strong group of WR.

I could just be bantering as well. Such is the offseason.
Winning is not a sometime thing it is an all of the time thing - Vince Lombardi
mondry
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by mondry »

lol I think we've had this discussion before like a year ago. I remember we tried to give percentage based credit to team impact / success, something like

40% Elite QB
25% Talent over all
20% GM / management
15% coaching

Is how I would put it but it all depends on how you look at it. Otherwise you could make an argument that it's 100% for GM / Management as if you get the right guys in place there they can find the right coaches / talent / QB.
hibbingviking
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7157
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:53 pm
Location: bakersfield california

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by hibbingviking »

mondry wrote:lol I think we've had this discussion before like a year ago. I remember we tried to give percentage based credit to team impact / success, something like

40% Elite QB
25% Talent over all
20% GM / management
15% coaching

Is how I would put it but it all depends on how you look at it. Otherwise you could make an argument that it's 100% for GM / Management as if you get the right guys in place there they can find the right coaches / talent / QB.
like the breakdown. I would give the front office, coaching and ownership a bigger %. look at the patriots, giants, and steelers. models of consistency. :thumbsup:
Eli
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7946
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:52 pm

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by Eli »

Did you see Prisco's team rankings at CBS Sports? Vikings rated #27 (tied with the Bills). Ponder rated #29 of 32 starting QBs. He contends that the QB in today's game rates a full 70% of a team's success.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/2232 ... -contender
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by Mothman »

Eli wrote:Did you see Prisco's team rankings at CBS Sports? Vikings rated #27 (tied with the Bills). Ponder rated #29 of 32 starting QBs. He contends that the QB in today's game rates a full 70% of a team's success.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/2232 ... -contender
LOL! Then how does he account for last year's Vikes?

Edit: I just read his goofy criteria, glanced over his list and decided that last year's list might be more interesting. With his "four-proinged approach" he had Dallas at #1, SF at #19 (tied with Miami), Baltimore at #21, Minnesota at #27, Seattle at #30 and Washington at #32. It's time for a new approach, Pete! :lol:
User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 38292
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: 3 Modes for a Team's Personnel

Post by Mothman »

mansquatch wrote:I don't dissagree Moth, but the topic is about personnel with an eye on building a winning team.

IMO, while WINS are the ultimate stat in the NFL, for personnel I think they might distort GM performance to some degree. That is why I bring up the QB thing. A Team that gets an elite QB, by hook or crook, is going to a consistently better record than a team without. So the question is, how do you determine GM performance while accounting for Elite QB skew, so to speak?
I don't know. Is it really skewed? If the GM signed the QB and set up the stable, productive situation around him I think he simply gets credit for that. If not, it gets more complex. In the example you gave, I wouldn't say Thompson is hiding behind the pick of Aaron Rogers and the strong group of WRs they've developed but benefitting from the stable situation and continuity he's established at HC, QB and with the passing offense as a whole. It gives him more margin for error, although a few bad drafts could eventually be enough to ruin a good situation (and I'd love to see it happen).
I could just be bantering as well. Such is the offseason.
LOL! Ditto.
Post Reply