d_wag Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/stor..._len&id=1997579 and who said there would be no market for henry? other options are dwindling....... best back available.......period.......henry has plenty of value.......
VABills Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 First it was JP era with his 20 posts per day hating Drew. Now we get the constant Travis is the best back in the league from you.
plenzmd1 Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/stor..._len&id=1997579 and who said there would be no market for henry? other options are dwindling....... best back available.......period.......henry has plenty of value....... 249520[/snapback] Guess that means that Edge will not be back. Just gave his backup a $2M bonus, Lord , if they keep edge, where does all this money come from!!!
d_wag Posted February 23, 2005 Author Posted February 23, 2005 First it was JP era with his 20 posts per day hating Drew. Now we get the constant Travis is the best back in the league from you. 249521[/snapback] best back in the league? try to keep up........it's BEST BACK AVAILABLE.......
VABills Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 best back in the league? try to keep up........it's BEST BACK AVAILABLE....... 249526[/snapback] Any back is "AVAILABLE". If a team were to trade the next 5 #1's I am sure any team in the league would trade their running back.
d_wag Posted February 23, 2005 Author Posted February 23, 2005 Any back is "AVAILABLE". If a team were to trade the next 5 #1's I am sure any team in the league would trade their running back. 249527[/snapback] jeez, you really are slow........no wonder it took 10 posts to explain to you yesterday why rudi getting tagged benefited henry's trade value.........
VABills Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 jeez, you really are slow........no wonder it took 10 posts to explain to you yesterday why rudi getting tagged benefited henry's trade value......... 249530[/snapback] And you are still wrong about that. If cinci loved Perry so much as a starter why tag Rudi. Maybe because Perry is like Travis, he really is a terrible starting back and should be a 2nd stringer.
34-78-83 Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 I gotta go with d- wag here on this one VA. You're the one with a repetitive crusade here making sure to tell all who come here just how terrible TH is in an "over the top" manner. It's a shame because you've already proven some reasonable points about TH that many others (including myself) did not see before...
VABills Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 I gotta go with d- wag here on this one VA. You're the one with a repetitive crusade here making sure to tell all who come here just how terrible TH is in an "over the top" manner. It's a shame because you've already proven some reasonable points about TH that many others (including myself) did not see before... 249537[/snapback] My point is there are several guys "available" that are a lot better. If you want a short term solution Faulk could be had for probably a 3rd or 4th rounder, but he is only good for a year or two. Rudi, Alexander, James, etc... can all be signed as they are FA, just tagged. You have to give up 2 first rounder, but they are many times better and openly available. It is a price to value issue. My point is ANY running back is available for the right price. Right now for all intents Travis is not even available as he is under contract, even if given permission.
d_wag Posted February 23, 2005 Author Posted February 23, 2005 And you are still wrong about that. If cinci loved Perry so much as a starter why tag Rudi. Maybe because Perry is like Travis, he really is a terrible starting back and should be a 2nd stringer. 249535[/snapback] they drafted the guy in the first round for a reason -- they like him! if they didn't tag rudi, they would not have been in the market for travis, simple as that......... i'm with 34-78-83 -- the only one doing a crusade around here is you........face it, rhodes resigning and alexander being tagged help travis' trade value........it's the truth man, accept it........that is the point..........
VABills Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 they drafted the guy in the first round for a reason -- they like him! if they didn't tag rudi, they would not have been in the market for travis, simple as that......... i'm with 34-78-83 -- the only one doing a crusade around here is you........face it, rhodes resigning and alexander being tagged help travis' trade value........it's the truth man, accept it........that is the point.......... 249548[/snapback] Well in my opinion the "real available" backs that are better then Henry are Buckhalter, Jordan, and Anthony Thomas. These guys are as good or better and will not cost a team a draft pick.
34-78-83 Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 My point is there are several guys "available" that are a lot better. If you want a short term solution Faulk could be had for probably a 3rd or 4th rounder, but he is only good for a year or two. Rudi, Alexander, James, etc... can all be signed as they are FA, just tagged. You have to give up 2 first rounder, but they are many times better and openly available. It is a price to value issue. My point is ANY running back is available for the right price. Right now for all intents Travis is not even available as he is under contract, even if given permission. 249543[/snapback] Ok I understand (especially the point on Faulk), but I also think part of his "best available" point includes the idea of a reasonable price... ie. not 2 first round picks or 6mil + per year....
YOOOOOO Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 Well in my opinion the "real available" backs that are better then Henry are Buckhalter, Jordan, and Anthony Thomas. These guys are as good or better and will not cost a team a draft pick. 249552[/snapback] Ok maybe Jordan cause he does show great potential behind Martin(who knows if he can take the pounding of a starting NFL RB) but how are Buckhalter and Thomas better then Henry?? Thomas&Buckhalter are far to injury prone and dont possess the running skills Henry has.....how are they better?? Cause you say Henry sux and there good??
cåblelady Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 My point is there are several guys "available" that are a lot better. 249543[/snapback] Good for me.
d_wag Posted February 23, 2005 Author Posted February 23, 2005 Well in my opinion the "real available" backs that are better then Henry are Buckhalter, Jordan, and Anthony Thomas. These guys are as good or better and will not cost a team a draft pick. 249552[/snapback] i'm sure you would also include rhodes in that group as well, seeing how far fetched buckhalter and thomas are in comparison....... hence, the point of the post is with him off the market it increases henry's trade value.......accept it........
VABills Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 Ok maybe Jordan cause he does show great potential behind Martin(who knows if he can take the pounding of a starting NFL RB) but how are Buckhalter and Thomas better then Henry?? Thomas&Buckhalter are far to injury prone and dont possess the running skills Henry has.....how are they better?? Cause you say Henry sux and there good?? 249614[/snapback] Buckhalter when healthy is a far better back, and is probably a top 15 in the league when healthy. He catches, runs well, blocks. He is also bigger. All in all a much better back, just more injury prone. Thomas is a similar run straight ahead back. He has a slight attitude, but I don't believe is that injury prone. He has issues with catching and blocking just like Travis. But he is bigger and doesn't fumble. Hence better.
YOOOOOO Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 Buckhalter when healthy is a far better back, and is probably a top 15 in the league when healthy. He catches, runs well, blocks. He is also bigger. All in all a much better back, just more injury prone. Thomas is a similar run straight ahead back. He has a slight attitude, but I don't believe is that injury prone. He has issues with catching and blocking just like Travis. But he is bigger and doesn't fumble. Hence better. 249628[/snapback] Buckhalter TOP 15 back in the league....WTF?? what league are you talkin about?? CFL......In 4 seasons he has missed two entirely due to injury...In his other two seasons combined he has rushed for 1100 yards....He is a good back(#2 that is)....Better then Henry...NOPE!!! Thomas not injury prone?? He has missed multiple games in each season he has been in the NFL, except his rookie year(were he missed one)...Yes he's bigger and has been able to hold on to the ball....Does that makes him a better back....sry nope... Henry not the best overall back(running/blocking/recieveing)....better then the two above...YEP!!!
34-78-83 Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 Buckhalter when healthy is a far better back, and is probably a top 15 in the league when healthy. He catches, runs well, blocks. He is also bigger. All in all a much better back, just more injury prone. Thomas is a similar run straight ahead back. He has a slight attitude, but I don't believe is that injury prone. He has issues with catching and blocking just like Travis. But he is bigger and doesn't fumble. Hence better. 249628[/snapback] This would all be true, if refering to the 2002 version of TH. Given there are still fumbling issues (though much improved) and certainly still major blocking issues. -TH is a much better receiver now than in 2002 - He is certainly more than a "straight ahead" runner. He's got more lateral movement than Thomas for sure.
VABills Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 This would all be true, if refering to the 2002 version of TH. Given there are still fumbling issues (though much improved) and certainly still major blocking issues. -TH is a much better receiver now than in 2002 - He is certainly more than a "straight ahead" runner. He's got more lateral movement than Thomas for sure. 249658[/snapback] And we don't always have to agree. That is why some guys make more money in the NFL, different GM's value players differently. I would rather have a healthy Buckhalter, I would do a physical, or Jordan or Thomas before I would have Travis on my team. The other part of my equation was Travis you still have to give up draft picks for, the other three guys are free and clear. So not only could you pick up Buckhalter, but you could draft a RB in the 3rd who could back him up, when he is dinged.
JP-era Posted February 23, 2005 Posted February 23, 2005 First it was JP era with his 20 posts per day hating Drew. Now we get the constant Travis is the best back in the league from you. 249521[/snapback] Ya know, last time I checked you rname wasnt SDS. How about simply not reading what you dont like. DUHH! Give it a rest man, get a new gig, this one is old! How about giving some football talk a try rather than trying to be everyones mommy!
Recommended Posts