Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:


That draft class was objectively NOT a disaster.  We have at minimum, THREE solid starters from the draft, including one of the best CB in the NFL.

 

Yes, we didn't get Mahomes, but if you're going to tell me you saw that season coming from him coming out of college, I'm calling bull####.

 

 

How do you evaluate a draft? do you consider if other teams got 3 starters also?

Posted
19 minutes ago, Chemical said:

 

Evaluating a trade based on what your team gave up vs. what your team received is part of sports.


And yes, you are saying Mahomes wouldn't have been good here. That's exactly what you're implying, then you say you're not but you already said it. I can understand that rationale if he was just a good QB in his first season with around 25TDs and 3400 yards, but he had one of the best seasons of ALL TIME. That doesn't happen only because you have a good coach and skill players, you also have to be amazing, watch the tape.

 

Yes I can say that and it still be obvious. I'm pointing out the obvious and trying to convey that I'm not nitpicking every draft pick, just one of the worst trades ever.

I never said Mahomes wouldn't have been good here, I'm saying that I don't believe he would have played to the level that he is in KC. There's a big difference there. We didn't have the offense good enough for him to be that good in 2017 or 2018. He may still have been good but not KC level. You're still not getting the fact that he has a coach with a good QB system which plays a big part in it

Posted
Just now, Chemical said:

 

How do you evaluate a draft? do you consider if other teams got 3 starters also?

By how the guys you draft perform. Try to follow along.

Posted
Just now, Chemical said:

 

It doesn't matter if I did or didn't predict it, and I've never claimed that.

 

You're acting as if it does. You, and every other Mahomes-hindsight guy, are obnoxious about it.

 

Posted
Just now, oldmanfan said:

You see how your guys did.  I can nitpick every team’s drafts and make a case they did terribly because they took one guy over another.  And comparing a first round pick to a fifth with Mahomes vs. Peterman is absurd.  They didn’t draft Peterman to be a franchise guy.

 

Yet he was the opening day starter less than one year ago and taking valuable first team reps from Allen

Posted
1 minute ago, Chemical said:

 

How do you evaluate a draft? do you consider if other teams got 3 starters also?

 

Yeah, man. In today's NFL, you HAVE to draft well because of the salary structure for rookies. If you don't, you're dead in the water.

 

3 QUALITY starters in a draft is a VERY successful draft, regardless of whether or not your 20/20 thinks it is.

 

Posted
Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

You're acting as if it does. You, and every other Mahomes-hindsight guy, are obnoxious about it.

 

 

No I'm not. I've clearly stated I didn't have an opinion about Mahomes and even if I did it wouldn't matter.

Posted
Just now, Chemical said:

 

Yet he was the opening day starter less than one year ago and taking valuable first team reps from Allen

Which has absolutely nothing to do with anything.  Smith took valuable first team reps away from Mahomes in his rookie year too by your logic.

Posted
Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Yeah, man. In today's NFL, you HAVE to draft well because of the salary structure for rookies. If you don't, you're dead in the water.

 

3 QUALITY starters in a draft is a VERY successful draft, regardless of whether or not your 20/20 thinks it is.

 

 

I'm saying other teams also got 3 starters, probably most teams

Posted
Just now, Chemical said:

 

No I'm not. I've clearly stated I didn't have an opinion about Mahomes and even if I did it wouldn't matter.

 

In the context of this conversation, you're claiming that not taking Mahomes was a disaster. But if you're being honest, you say you didn't have an opinion on him. So, AT THE BLOODY TIME, you're willing to roll the dice on the guy that you admit having NO knowledge on? Yeah, man. Try and be honest with yourself before demanding it of others.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Which has absolutely nothing to do with anything.  Smith took valuable first team reps away from Mahomes in his rookie year too by your logic.

 

 

Yeah but it's Nathan Peterman we are talking about. Why does it seem like I'm not allowed to use the on the field results in my arguments with you people?

Posted
1 minute ago, Chemical said:

 

I'm saying other teams also got 3 starters, probably most teams

 

Did those other teams pick up their #1 LT and #1 CB out of the draft? ALSO two valuable positions?

 

Posted
Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

In the context of this conversation, you're claiming that not taking Mahomes was a disaster. But if you're being honest, you say you didn't have an opinion on him. So, AT THE BLOODY TIME, you're willing to roll the dice on the guy that you admit having NO knowledge on? Yeah, man. Try and be honest with yourself before demanding it of others.

 

Logic is sometimes a scarce commodity around here.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

In the context of this conversation, you're claiming that not taking Mahomes was a disaster. But if you're being honest, you say you didn't have an opinion on him. So, AT THE BLOODY TIME, you're willing to roll the dice on the guy that you admit having NO knowledge on? Yeah, man. Try and be honest with yourself before demanding it of others.

 

 

My pre-draft opinion has no value or affect on anything.

Posted
1 minute ago, Chemical said:

 

 

Yeah but it's Nathan Peterman we are talking about. Why does it seem like I'm not allowed to use the on the field results in my arguments with you people?

Peterman was a bad call and Beane admitted they should have brought in a vet when McCarron didn’t work out.  Peterman has nothing to do with any point you’re trying to make.

Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Chemical said:

 

My pre-draft opinion has no value or affect on anything.

 

:lol:

 

Ok, chief.

 

It's clear that this conversation is about one thing and one thing only: your desire to be "right" at all costs. Well guess what... you calling the 2017 draft a DISASTER is wrong.

 

Period. It's undebatable.

 

Edited by Joe in Winslow
Posted
Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

:lol:

 

Ok, chief.

 

It's clear that this conversation is about one thing and one thing only: your desire to be "right" at all costs. Well guess what: you calling the 2017 draft a DISASTER is wrong.

 

Period. It's undebatable.

 

 

I disagree, that's why I'm debating it.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Yeah, man. In today's NFL, you HAVE to draft well because of the salary structure for rookies. If you don't, you're dead in the water.

 

3 QUALITY starters in a draft is a VERY successful draft, regardless of whether or not your 20/20 thinks it is.

 

 

If we end up with one elite player (Tre), and two good long term starters (Milano and Dawkins). Then it is a very good draft. Even if Zay washes out. 

Posted
Just now, Chemical said:

 

I disagree, that's why I'm debating it.

 

Let's talk about what constitutes a disastrous draft:

 

Taking Eric Flowers or Aaron Maybin or trading two picks to take a WR, That's a disastrous draft.

 

What the Bills did in 2017 is not.

 

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

If we end up with one elite player (Tre), and two good long term starters (Milano and Dawkins). Then it is a very good draft. Even if Zay washes out. 


Exactly, it's ANYTHING BUT a "disaster," no matter how much Chemical wants to believe it is.

 

Posted
9 minutes ago, Chemical said:

 

My pre-draft opinion has no value or affect on anything.

 

On this we can agree! 

×
×
  • Create New...