Jump to content

Thaiphoon

Moderators
  • Content Count

    24,776
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3,536 All-Pro

About Thaiphoon

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Tough call right now. And I reserve the right to change my mind frequently, but if Sewell is there, I gotta go with him. Outside consideration to Wilson. But I think Sewell is the can't miss prospect and can lock that position down, and dominate, for a decade. I'd love to lock down the QB position, but the others after Lawrence are more of a question mark than him.
  2. http://www.tankathon.com/nfl Cowgirls .472 WFT .475 We pick 5th right now.
  3. He most likely won't be. This is worse than Griffin's injury. He MIGHT be ready by Week 9 or 10 next year, but that isn't a good spot to have your QB test things out. So yeah, they might just keep him on IR.
  4. Hence why I don't like short term fixes. I'm not okay with thanking Snyder for crumbs. Sorry.
  5. No one is asking them to take a knee and punt every down. I'm looking for the team to improve as a team and as players but ultimately lose games so that they can be in a better position to stock the team next year. This way you've developed your young guys and they are buying in and you can add fresh talent to the mix. That is a recipe for long term success. Nope. Correct me if I'm wrong but your (and others') position is that our front office is going to select a great player no matter where we select in the 1st so why worry about where we select, right? You can evaluate a player all you want. But if he's gone in the pick right before you, that evaluation and all the brainpower of the scouting department means bupkiss. Sure. And we've done the living in the now for 20 years. Time to actually try inserting some long-term planning into the mix. You can turn it around quickly. But it takes very few things needing to be changed to do it. OR...it takes you scuttling your team ahead of time and building up draft capital and going hard in FA to stock up on talent. Miami is a recent example of this. You're correct about the roster. My earlier assessment had us almost completely turning it over in year 3. It also had us perennially in the playoffs in 3 years and in 5 years winning a SB (or at least NFCC). Yes. I'm amenable to keeping Allen. And amenable to your risk/reward analysis. The Patriots the last twenty years have been pretty good about trading away good/great players and getting good picks/players out of it. I wouldn't get rid of him for just a 2nd though if I were going to go that route. If that was all that was offered, I'd keep him. First. Remember that they also traded Minkah to the Steelers. But to your general point, you are correct. It doesn't. But it DOES come around. GMs still do big trades. They are not common, but they do happen. My point is that they were in the position to let some other crazy GM want to make that trade. If someone comes to me and offers the deal that Miami got for Tunsil and Stills for someone like Allen and one of our #2 receivers? I'm pulling the trigger on that trade (provided that we have Ioannidas back and Settle keeps improving).
  6. See my post above. The position of the "we need to win the division this season" crowd is that a few spots (or even ONE spot) are not going to make a difference. 1998 shows it can. There are quite a few other years where it shows it can. And in that particular case, it was the difference between long term success while locking down the most important position on the team and not. Drafting higher gives you more players to choose from. Gives you more of a chance to get the players that will transform your poor/mediocre team. Going to the playoffs at 5-11 or 6-10 is not gonna help this team very much long-term. Getting a top 10 or top 5 pick and either using it to select a great talent or trading it away and getting a boatload of picks to stock the cupboard will.
  7. The point is that for the people saying "hey, losing that game isn't gonna help us long-term." Yeah. It actually can. Chargers were 4-12 Colts were 3-13. One game was the difference between being able to draft Manning and watching another team draft him. Hence the point that the higher you go, the more options (re: players) that are available to you.
  8. Honest question. I've asked it elsewhere but no one seems to be brave enough to answer. It's 1998. You're headed into the draft. Would you rather be: The Colts? or The Chargers?
  9. Agreed. @lavar703Miami traded away a few players last year and have used those trades to restock the cupboard. There's no reason we can't do the same. This next FA, we do need to be players and get the guys we're shooting for (even if overpaying). This would track with my prediction of how the transformation should go in Year 1 and Year 2 (although benching Haskins threw a monkey wrench into the timeline but that still can be overcome if the general strategy is followed). We need to load up through the draft AND Free Agency AND develop our young players.
  10. Yes. The whole thing is hypothetical. One side is arguing that late season success by our mediocre team will result in success going forward. The last twenty years have shown that to not be the case. Meanwhile, I can point to multiple times a team has coveted a top 10 pick and traded a boatload of picks to jump up to get the player. The Saints (Ditka) once traded their entire draft to us. We turned it into Champ Bailey and Arrington. The team was on its way to continued success until Snyder got here and started monkeying with "short term fixes". More recently another trade happened in 2011 (there are others but I wanted to point out what can happen if a team desires a player and is willing to move up). Falcons traded up from #27 to #6 and gave up the following picks: 2011 1st 2nd 4th 2012 1st 4th Since everyone wanting to "win now" is convinced that our scouting department can find good players regardless of pick in the draft, then they should be amenable to that trade and agree that it would transform our team for the better, no? This is my point.
  11. Draft slots are important. Falcons had to give up a boatload of picks to move up to get their WR they coveted in Julio Jones. Just as one example. Same can be said in other draft trades. As for even one position on the draft board, would you rather be the Colts in 1998 or the Chargers? How many times have we won the division under the Snyder short term strategy of "win now, we don't have to fix too many things" ? Did we follow it up with a playoff run the following year? Yes or No?
  12. So if top picks don't change anything, then let's trade them all away for 7th rounders. You're looking at the short term fix. Chase locks the position down for a decade-plus. Burrow's injury was unfortunate, but until then he was locking down the position there for a long time as well. Nope. I'm a person who has transformed multiple organizations successfully. Each time I did I came on the heels of someone who tried to "live in the now" and do things short term. Each time they had convinced the client that they were almost there and only needed to do a few tweaks around the edges instead of peeling the onion all the way back and getting to the core of the problem. Sound familiar? Because THAT is what Snyder has done and allowed coaches to do for the last twenty years. And you're just fine with it. So if anyone has been "Snydered", it's you my friend. I've never said winning during the season wasn't important. What I've said was that with a team this talent-poor, winning a division title this year is not as important as drafting 10-12 spots higher consistently in 2021. That can transform the team. Winning a division title in a year with THIS roster and the rest of the division not looking like they could be a little league team is not what I consider to be a long term success. That is more of the Dan Snyder "I want to win so I can get butts in the seats and market the hell out of the team so I get more $$ and screw the long term health of the organization." And people fall for it because they want to "see a playoff game". Which is what has been consistently done for twenty years. Which you're apparently fine with. I'm not.
  13. Don't forget the First Place schedule that comes with winning the division!
  14. Okay. So suppose we end up picking 3rd or 4th. And we're on the clock and a team wants a player at our pick so badly that they are dangling their 2021 first and second and a 2022 first rounder. Think that can't change our franchise? It's not always about the player available that WE can pick. Sometimes it's the player available that another team covets.
×
×
  • Create New...