35 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Seems almost crazy to think all those options wouldn’t. So i feel that’s a safe assumption. I’m not getting specific about exactly one spot. Not even getting crazy trying to get tons in return. Just being mild with expectations. So not real sure what’s a stretch there.

See how you spin it.   A difference between a guaranteed thing and a possibility.   The possibility doesn't have to be a stretch to not be a guarantee. 

19 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Two stupid points...but again....I'll try to go slow...

One...uno ...1... player could be here for the future while he is a backup now.

But with the Saints trade you have multiple picks that can multiple into many future players.   I'd rather have more.

Plus again...known trade...vs a " possible " trade.   

I like the known.

Not two stupid points at all. It’s like you keep saying a draft pick this year goes away. He still helps the future. So why just wait a year?  I say advantage of guy this year versus next: Siri building a new young corps of a team. We contenders this year. Team could use the extra talent. 
   So with this team and situation. I want as many young guys growing together as possible. Just makes sense. So extra incentive and reasoning there from just random talking. I see us contending too. So want everything we can to go for it. I don’t know how the future will play out. But limiting this year’s team could be regretful to me. I think Hurts will win in the postseason.

29 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Like a guy pulling a double team and spreading out a D. Another guy gets an easy catch and run. Doubled guy doesn’t get a stat. So many give no credit to his part. But it very much all worked together.

Is that intangible?

I think it's tangible. It's why I like the true #1 WR.  The tangible ability that forces the defense to give that guy attention.... and gives his teammates the very tangible space to play.   Very tangible thing IMO.   

Was the defense giving that guy attention because of a speech in a mummers costume...or because he can run, catch real well?    Absolutely very tangible. 

24 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

I'm open to all possibilities.   Obviously you are guaranteeing we win...no possibilities that we don't....except it won't be due to the running QB not being able to run?  We already know you will be all over Siri and Gannon. Probably someone will drop a pass too.

I actually said I won’t guarantee they will stop Hurts from running. Teams have done that. Then the passing opens up. But they keep focusing on Hurts running already. These are the results. He’s still doing it. They keep a spy. Has it stopped him? So we’ll see. I’m fine if they overcommit to stoping his running. Think he’ll pass great to win. 

22 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I’ll argue both. Sometimes I think in theory. I observe and ponder. But also do fact mostly. I do think out loud about many ideas. Sometimes knowledgeable fans bring up great points to consider why it is….or isn’t a good idea. But I just don’t like the lemming thinking and approach. Prefer to look at everything and decide myself. Sometimes it can work. Sometimes maybe not. But at least it not always carbon copy. 

But you don't look at everything...you conveniently skip things to make your points.  Constantly. 

20 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Narcissism at its finest.

It’s my track record out loud here. Predicting these things. It is what it is. I feel like I know what I’m talking about a fair amount on this subject. Been doing this site since dial up. Didn’t say always right. But not sure if your challenging my track record or what? Think you’d at least acknowledge that I deserve that credit. I mean why you make fun of me saying I called it? Probably because it’s happened a bunch.

21 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Well...you don't want to hear the 3 big reasons. 

1.  The guarantee of Saints trade vs a " possibility " 

2. One player vs multiple players

3.  The rookie impacts 

All very reasonable points.  But nope... a 10-1 team...need that 4th S, 4th RB, 4th CB...etc.

So you didn’t like trading up for Davis. Or trading for AJ. Both multiple guys we gave up for one. Plus paid AJ big to elimate multiple options in FA.

16 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Not like I said I need all these picks in return. Not saying it had to be to pick 23. So tons of options. I never closed in this crazy great deal in our favor. Thought modestly. And was always being open. Never trading till one specific spot. Just back. Never got just one stud in hindsight. Just liked the strength of the class. Tons of guys and tons of options. So the thought we just couldn’t trade back seems really soft by you. You name calling and labeling over that is pretty overboard. Your making the weakest point possible. Your whole counter is I’m a narcissist in dream world because my idea was to trade back from 19? Im calling you out on that. Likely hood of us having sone trade partner is super super high.

I'm saying that you refuse to see the facts.   The Saints trade was weeks before the draft.   You are willing to pass that up because on draft night you know a team is willing to trade up to 19 for sure.  

This spin you don't see yourself doing.  Constantly...the subliminal stuff. " multiple studs in these late first round early 2nd" ...vs " some random pick next year "   " sacrificing the 2022 season for a 2nd round pick in 2024"

You don't see that as overboard?

Guaranteed...when the season is over...you will find a way to say where a specific rookie would have been the difference.   Pass all the blame away from Hurts. 

Think about it...you are saying a backup RB this year...would be better than getting the Saints pick next year and their 2024 2nd rounder?  

Come on now...you are better than that 

21 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

One player vs multiple.  

Do it all the time. You never approve of trading up? Always believe we should trade back every pick? 

21 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Yeah... never heard you say...." o expected the previous QB to be a savior"   that was someone else...lol.

Lower the bar for this guy...but regardless Saints trade will be better for him.

I didn’t lower anything. ****ed about Rosie alone then about what he was doing. But no lowering the bar for Hurts. Think he’s creating his own.

15 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Not two stupid points at all. It’s like you keep saying a draft pick this year goes away. He still helps the future. So why just wait a year?  I say advantage of guy this year versus next: Siri building a new young corps of a team. We contenders this year. Team could use the extra talent. 
   So with this team and situation. I want as many young guys growing together as possible. Just makes sense. So extra incentive and reasoning there from just random talking. I see us contending too. So want everything we can to go for it. I don’t know how the future will play out. But limiting this year’s team could be regretful to me. I think Hurts will win in the postseason.

Ok....a guy this year vs a guy next year 

Was this trade really a guy for a guy?  

Do you really think it will end up one for one? Or even 2 for 1?  

You don't see how you conveniently skip that HUGE part of the equation to spin it your way?

20 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

What did we lose?  Vs EVERYTHING that was gained.   Spin isn't going to work.  

So this April... you don't comment about the first pick...it doesn't exist.  

This postseason you don’t comment on if we lose. You felt we couldn’t use anything more.

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Do it all the time. You never approve of trading up? Always believe we should trade back every pick? 

Trade up to target a guy.  During draft do you guarantee someone had a target at 19 that they would have traded with us?

18 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

See how you spin it.   A difference between a guaranteed thing and a possibility.   The possibility doesn't have to be a stretch to not be a guarantee. 

Because I’m discussing what didn’t happen. You saying right here we’ll trade back a first rounder next year. Your idea to you is fine. Mine fantasy land. Same ideas diffeeent times.

You realize your doing that right. Calling me a narcissist for a trade back idea. Then coming right back and saying you expect us to trade back next year. You really that crazy on me here. Really that thin with your defense.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

This postseason you don’t comment on if we lose. You felt we couldn’t use anything more.

I don't need to comment... didn't I say that the next day my focus would be the offseason?   

I felt like you don't pass up the Saints trade ....ever.   If you need a piece for this year...then you go get CGJ Iike Howie did...or Suh and Joseph.   They obviously were high on Epps and Blankenship... I don't think you pass up the trade because you think only rookies can make an impact or that they are your only option in April to improve your team.  

21 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

See how you spin it.   A difference between a guaranteed thing and a possibility.   The possibility doesn't have to be a stretch to not be a guarantee. 

Exactly. I didn’t get crazy. Didn’t stretch anything. Kept the idea super modest. Didn’t say I’m making some trade where we get tons of picks to move back two spots. Just said pick up a third rounder moving back. Didn’t state for hindsight one key guy. Said loved all these guys there in the class. About as open as an idea gets. Modest thinking. Seems super plausible. You tell me why it couldn’t happened then? 

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

You realize your doing that right. Calling me a narcissist for a trade back idea. Then coming right back and saying you expect us to trade back next year. You really that crazy on me here. Really that thin with your defense.

Surely I expect a trade back next year.  I believe we could see it before the draft ...or maybe during.   

 

Narcissism...making everything about yourself.   Notice the conversation always where you make yourself a part of it...look how many times you mention I, me, my...etc compared to everyone else.   It's comical 

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Exactly. I didn’t get crazy. Didn’t stretch anything. Kept the idea super modest. Didn’t say I’m making some trade where we get tons of picks to move back two spots. Just said pick up a third rounder moving back. Didn’t state for hindsight one key guy. Said loved all these guys there in the class. About as open as an idea gets. Modest thinking. Seems super plausible. You tell me why it couldn’t happened then? 

So we picked up a 3rd rounder moving back in the Saints trade.   Plus the 1st and the 2nd.  

21 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

I think it's tangible. It's why I like the true #1 WR.  The tangible ability that forces the defense to give that guy attention.... and gives his teammates the very tangible space to play.   Very tangible thing IMO.   

Was the defense giving that guy attention because of a speech in a mummers costume...or because he can run, catch real well?    Absolutely very tangible. 

But afterwards FL yells that guy was worthless. He didn’t catch one pass. 

22 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

I think it's tangible. It's why I like the true #1 WR.  The tangible ability that forces the defense to give that guy attention.... and gives his teammates the very tangible space to play.   Very tangible thing IMO.   

Was the defense giving that guy attention because of a speech in a mummers costume...or because he can run, catch real well?    Absolutely very tangible. 

But I agree here. But not sure intangible is really the correct word I’ve wanted all along.

17 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

It’s my track record out loud here. Predicting these things. It is what it is. I feel like I know what I’m talking about a fair amount on this subject. Been doing this site since dial up. Didn’t say always right. But not sure if your challenging my track record or what? Think you’d at least acknowledge that I deserve that credit. I mean why you make fun of me saying I called it? Probably because it’s happened a bunch.

A lot of I and me here...follow?

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

But I agree here. But not sure intangible is really the correct word I’ve wanted all along.

I know... but it is a word you like to over use because of 2 things.

1. It makes you try to sound smart

2.  It's a word that is associated with Hurts..because other than running...his tangible skills are not really there for an NFL QB.

 

19 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

But you don't look at everything...you conveniently skip things to make your points.  Constantly. 

Well then point that out. Prove me wrong by showing this. Sometimes you do. Or at least make a good point against my point. I think the beauty of how I see things is I can consider all the points at once. Think I’ve been seeing all the points more than most here. I don’t just praise Hurts or blame Hurts. I see things occur. I said straight I thought Hurts  carried us last game. Thought playcalling was terrible against Colts. But acknowledged final TD was really great playcall.  Steichen got them following Kelce. Hurts ran it in….but that was more great playcall.

17 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

I'm saying that you refuse to see the facts.   The Saints trade was weeks before the draft.   You are willing to pass that up because on draft night you know a team is willing to trade up to 19 for sure.  

This spin you don't see yourself doing.  Constantly...the subliminal stuff. " multiple studs in these late first round early 2nd" ...vs " some random pick next year "   " sacrificing the 2022 season for a 2nd round pick in 2024"

You don't see that as overboard?

Guaranteed...when the season is over...you will find a way to say where a specific rookie would have been the difference.   Pass all the blame away from Hurts. 

Think about it...you are saying a backup RB this year...would be better than getting the Saints pick next year and their 2024 2nd rounder?  

Come on now...you are better than that 

Your whole argument really coming down to how fantastically unlikely my idea is now? Really really thin