Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Draft X they said!!


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
67 replies to this topic

#61 Darth Urious

Darth Urious

    Banned

  • Joined: 16-November 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 3,437
  • Reputation: 0
Banned

Posted 03 January 2011 - 08:15 PM

Want to know something that should REALLY piss you off...

New England had two ROOKIE TEs with better numbers than both LaFell and Gettis, and they have our second round pick this year so that we could get a WR project that we didn't even use...

lmao... smh... fml...

#62 DaCityKats

DaCityKats

    feed KB 2014

  • Joined: 11-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 9,145
  • Reputation: 1,166
HUDDLER

Posted 03 January 2011 - 08:18 PM

lmao im pissed but its still funny.

#63 Future Of The Franchise

Future Of The Franchise

    The Ambassador of Booty

  • Joined: 16-January 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 5,980
  • Reputation: 799
HUDDLER

Posted 03 January 2011 - 08:21 PM

Screw X... We should have drafted Y.

#64 Sam Mills Fan

Sam Mills Fan

    The Truth Sometimes Hurts

  • Joined: 27-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,669
  • Reputation: 2,386
HUDDLER

Posted 03 January 2011 - 08:23 PM

Wtf? Do you think it's a bad thing when an organization drafts players that work in the system that can fulfill the roles they are drafted for? Or is it, on the other hand, a sign of success when none of your draft picks work out and you have to load your team with free agents?

Also, I like how you ignored all the other reasons I gave that are all very legitimate and tried to take one and somehow argue that I'm contradicting myself. I'm not. Regardless of how successful you are in the draft, you will always have needs that you have to address in free agency. We didn't do that. The ideal team is made up mainly of your own draft picks and you fill it in with quality free agents as necessary.


Did our draft picks "work out" when we have a team made of virtually nothing but draft picks and we went 2-14?

#65 Baschski

Baschski

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 04-January 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,837
  • Reputation: 0
HUDDLER

Posted 03 January 2011 - 08:27 PM

Also, how about this stat? No team in the league was composed of a team's draft picks more than the Panthers were this season. And that team filled with nothing but Hurney draft picks went 2-14, worst record in football.


Let's check out this logical progression.

1. No team in the league was more composed of their own drafts picks than the Panthers.

2. The Panthers went 2-14.

3. Therefore, the Panthers went 2-14 because no team in the league was more composed of their own draft picks than the Panthers.

The conclusion does not follow the premises. How do you get 3 from 1 and 2? There were a myriad of other factors contributing to our terrible season, not the least of which being our lameduck coaching staff and our owner's penny-pinching mentality. How can you ignore all of those other factors and make it exclusively Hurney's fault?

#66 Sam Mills Fan

Sam Mills Fan

    The Truth Sometimes Hurts

  • Joined: 27-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,669
  • Reputation: 2,386
HUDDLER

Posted 03 January 2011 - 08:33 PM

Makes a lot more sense than your cockamamie contrarian alternative.

#67 Sam Mills Fan

Sam Mills Fan

    The Truth Sometimes Hurts

  • Joined: 27-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,669
  • Reputation: 2,386
HUDDLER

Posted 03 January 2011 - 08:35 PM

And this: 1. No team in the league was more composed of their own drafts picks than the Panthers.

2. The Panthers went 2-14.

3. Therefore, the Panthers went 2-14 because no team in the league was more composed of their own draft picks than the Panthers.

makes a lot more sense than

1. No team in the league was more composed of their own drafts picks than the Panthers.

2. The Panthers went 2-14.

3. There is absolutely no correlation between these two points and having a team composed of your own picks is actually a sign of great success!

#68 Baschski

Baschski

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 04-January 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,837
  • Reputation: 0
HUDDLER

Posted 03 January 2011 - 08:41 PM

And this: 1. No team in the league was more composed of their own drafts picks than the Panthers.

2. The Panthers went 2-14.

3. Therefore, the Panthers went 2-14 because no team in the league was more composed of their own draft picks than the Panthers.

makes a lot more sense than

1. No team in the league was more composed of their own drafts picks than the Panthers.

2. The Panthers went 2-14.

3. There is absolutely no correlation between these two points and having a team composed of your own picks is actually a sign of great success!


So teams like the Steelers and the Pats who prefer to build through the draft aren't doing it better than teams like the Skins who build through FA?

And...it's better when a team doesn't draft well so they have to sign a bunch of FA's rather than building their core through the draft and developing their own players from the start of their careers?

Oh, and, the lameduck coaching staff, no-spending ownership, pathetic offensive coordination, purging of veteran players, regression by Matt Moore, and underachievement by veterans (e.g. O-line) had nothing to do with our 2-14 record, right? It was all the fact that we have a bunch of draft picks on the roster instead of free agents?