Part of the reason that Keim bears the responsibility that many are placing on him is because that kind of result was likely based on the roster assembled.
Aging, injury-prone veterans are likely to produce early in the season and tail off or be injured late. Keim had failed to build a roster that can be resilient in the face of that probable but not inevitable outcome.
I don't really agree with the whole "Vets will get injured and draft picks won't" argument. Football outsiders did some data mining on this back in 2015 which showed very little difference.
It gets a bit lumpy in later years as there are not many players of those ages but you can see in absolute terms there is little difference.
A 21 year old has around 38% chance of missing a week. That dips to around 35-37% for ages 23 to 28. Then it goes up a little but tops out at 41% at age 31.
It's a similar picture for 4 weeks+ where a 25 year old has around 17% risk and a 32 year old just under 20%.
That's bigger in relative terms obviously but it's still only about 10% higher risk for an aging vet vs peak.
Many said Green was going to be an injury bust but he played all 17 games. Same with Conner but he played 15. Conversely Nuk has rarely missed time in his career but missed 7 games. Same with Hudson who has only missed more than 1 game once in 10 years but missed 4 this year. It's almost as if injuries are random.
You must be registered for see images attach