Jump to content

top dawg

HUDDLER
  • Content Count

    21,725
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13,546 Fuggin Awesome

4 Followers

About top dawg

  • Rank
    THE WR Extremist
  • Birthday 07/08/1967

Recent Profile Visitors

23,670 profile views
  1. That's so true, but he was blown up because of the line, and that should be their priority. Cinci would be making a Jerry Jones move if they pick Chase!
  2. I don't think it's unrealistic to expect a starter in the second round in general, much less the top of the second or end of the first. When people say it's a "deep draft" at a particular position, they are talking about guys who have a good shot at turning into starters.
  3. I really think some teams put themselves in a position to get the BPA. That's ostensibly what we're doing (including why we acquired Incrediboy). I would love to see Sewell, Pitts, Fields and Chase on the board when we pick.
  4. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/2021-nfl-draft-how-trey-lance-compares-to-the-other-likely-first-round-qbs-in-his-class/
  5. As much as I like Pitts, if Chase is there (which is more likely if Sewell is gone), I'm taking Chase all day long, and not looking back!
  6. Well actually Buffalo took a swing and paid Diggs. I don't blame them. Diggs was on the upswing. He not only had solid production on his resumé, but he was also a legit scoring threat and had displayed absolutely superior route running. On the flipside of that, Minnesota did not pay him and drafted Justin Jefferson who had a great rookie year, and looks to be every bit of the route runner and playmaker that Diggs is, and may be legitimately better. Now, I could be wrong--because it's an opinion--but I'd say that Minnesota got the better value and probably better receiver in that equation. But,
  7. Saying that Lance played against "nobody" is disrespectful to the FCS (and it's also saying, in some sense, that he played with "nobody"), but saying he produced "little" is really akin to a lie. If "nothing" suggested that he was "even equal" to Fields as an athlete, then he wouldn't be receiving first round grades from some perennial evaluators and scouts, much less ranked ahead of Fields by some of them. I know that you must have seen people say this before, but I'll say it yet again: Evaluating QBs is all about trying to isolate traits and project how well these traits will tra
  8. First off, I'm about tired of some of you not getting the point. We're not kids here. The point is should we re-sign Moore at somewhere presumably near 18-20-ish mil per year (maybe more with market inflation). The Giants paid Kenny Golladay 18 mil a year. The next best offer for his services was reportedly between 11-12 million. The Giants overpaid when no one else was willing to even get close to that! It is my opinion that Moore is a good receiver. His production has been good (and, no, I'm not going to split hairs about QBs because most receivers have to play with imperfect QB
  9. Numbers are indicators, but they don't tell the entire story. I'll know if he's a franchise QB if I see him making the throws that it takes to win and playing within the offense when juxtaposed against what the defense is giving him. One of the more important things I will personally be looking at is ball security which speaks to his pocket awareness and field vision. If he isn't a fumble waiting to happen when pressured, or throwing to the interceptions to the opposition on a consistent basis, then his growth and development will become obvious, and that's the main thing I'll be looking for,
  10. If you can't understand the point, you certainly can't understand context. That's why you keep making poo up and using hyperbole, straw man fallacy, or outright lies to address a point that's not even the point of the thread. If the only thing that you can do is continue the bullsh¬°t, then I'm talking to you.
  11. I really want that to happen, but I would hate missing out on Sewell or Slater. I'm not sure if getting one of the big uglies would indicate that we're intellectually all-in on Darnold as much as it simply says we'd be taking the BPA. On an off note, If Pitts or Chase is there and we pick one of them over Sewell or Slater, I don't believe that's necessarily an indicator that we're all-in on Darnold either.
  12. Oh, I see. Your issue is that you believe that your dumbass, illogical context of comparing Moore to all the Panthers receivers in team history (when we've really only had one legit WR1) is better than comparing him to the best receivers in the game today, especially as it relates to whether or not he should be paid like one and how much. Got ya! You're the one interjecting your opinion into a conversation that you don't even know what the point is just to hear yourself speak because you don't like that I think that Moore (or any receiver) should play like a top 5 receiver in order to get paid
×
×
  • Create New...