24 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Whatever the hell this take is 

If that dude’s mom could redo his conception night after reading this, she would have just swallowed. 

12 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

The Phillies died for this. 

12 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

I don't know who really makes sense.  I've mentioned Josey Jewell who is an upgrade on Cunningham.  Not a huge needle mover but an improvement

18 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

Howie got this!

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Nope. 
 

49ers traded Trey Lance because he sucked. Eagles traded Jalen Reagor because he sucked. Surtain doesn’t suck. Sunk cost fallacy is irrelevant when it comes to Surtain because there literally is not a sunk cost. He is good and because they spent a premium on him, they will demand compensation that will make sense for them. They are not going to burn that pick, have him be a stud, just to trade him at a discount. 

When they are in trade negotiations they will absolutely use it as leverage and say "look, we spent a premium asset on him and he’s lived up to expectations. Make an offer that makes sense.” And if the offer is a lowball they laugh and hang up the phone. The whole point of sunk cost fallacy is abandonment is a better option than holding onto an asset. That couldn’t be further from the truth for Denver and Surtain. 

Sorry, but you’re just wrong, and frankly you helped to prove my point.

All the players you mentioned were valued based on how they played. It had nothing to do with their draft position.

THE SAME HOLDS TRUE FOR SURTAIN.

His draft position is MEANINGLESS. He will be valued based on his NFL ability, not his draft position. This holds true for good players as well as bad ones.

44 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

 

 

28 minutes ago, TEW said:

Sorry, but you’re just wrong, and frankly you helped to prove my point.

All the players you mentioned were valued based on how they played. It had nothing to do with their draft position.

THE SAME HOLDS TRUE FOR SURTAIN.

His draft position is MEANINGLESS. He will be valued based on his NFL ability, not his draft position. This holds true for good players as well as bad ones.

You don’t even know what you are arguing. 

You think that’s his value. So do 31 other NFL teams. So do I. Cool. 

The Denver Broncos won’t. They spent something very good to get him, he’s been very good for them, therefore, they will want something very good for him. They aren’t going to burn a top 10 pick two years later for a 3rd when he’s been great. 

3 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

You don’t even know what you are arguing. 

You think that’s his value. So do 31 other NFL teams. So do I. Cool. 

The Denver Broncos won’t. They spent something very good to get him, he’s been very good for them, therefore, they will want something very good for him. They aren’t going to burn a top 10 pick two years later for a 3rd when he’s been great. 

The Broncos will literally value him based on things that have NOTHING to do with his draft position.

They will consider his level of play, contract situation and age.

Where he was drafted will literally not enter the conversation either internally or in trade negotiations unless they are uneducated and incompetent.

11 minutes ago, TEW said:

The Broncos will literally value him based on things that have NOTHING to do with his draft position.

They will consider his level of play, contract situation and age.

Where he was drafted will literally not enter the conversation either internally or in trade negotiations unless they are uneducated and incompetent.

You started by saying to trade a 2025 3rd for him. Then said nobody but QBs gets traded for multiple 1sts. Now you’re talking in circles about draft value as if the previous two points suggest you are some expert.

Just let it go.

1 hour ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

He may be my least favorite eagle ever. Couldn’t stand his "morally superior” aura 

He did more off the field for the community than 99% of athletes that come through here ever do and helped us win a superbowl.  Awful take.  

5 minutes ago, TEW said:

The Broncos will literally value him based on things that have NOTHING to do with his draft position.

They will consider his level of play, contract situation and age.

Where he was drafted will literally not enter the conversation either internally or in trade negotiations unless they are uneducated and incompetent.

Yea. Sure. Whatever you say boss. Totally normal for someone to trade something and not consider the cost of getting him to begin with 

57 minutes ago, pgcd3 said:

I don't know who really makes sense.  I've mentioned Josey Jewell who is an upgrade on Cunningham.  Not a huge needle mover but an improvement

Maybe LaVonte David 1 yr rental. 
 

plenty of possible edge rushers since we’re kind of thin there. Nolan doesn’t get much play, Barnett stinks, that leaves us 3 solid rotation guys. BG, Sweat, Reddick. A lot of good rushers on a contract year might be able to be had for cheap-ish. 
 

otherwise OT depth might be possible based on what happened when Lane was out. Or maybe sometime like Laviska Shenault or Cordarrell Patterson for an offensive joker type. Idk we’re pretty stacked. 

The Sunk Fallacy Cost of Patrick Surtain II

1 hour ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

He may be my least favorite eagle ever. Couldn’t stand his "morally superior” aura 

That’s a take. What did he do to give off a "morally superior aura”?

1 minute ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

That’s a take. What did he do to give off a "morally superior aura”?

He spoke intelligently. 

15 minutes ago, BDawk_ASamuel said:

That’s a take. What did he do to give off a "morally superior aura”?

Actually being morally superior. He was our Walter Payton nominee in 2017 and 2019.

RTK and ESP have had better takes than that.

7 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Actually being morally superior. He was our Walter Payton nominee in 2017 and 2019.

RTK and ESP have had better takes than that.

Sounds like the same problem Mother Teresa had. Her and her damn moral superiority. 

12 hours ago, DEagle7 said:

 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cy02fq4upZc/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

It won't embed but it's a cute video 

Went to my first (season opener in Boston) and second (the Vikings home opener) ever Eagles game this year....When I was in Boston, ran into some Eagles fans at a restaurant whilst wearing some merch day before game. Got talking, told them I was over from New Zealand attending my first set of games having been a fan for over 20 years. They loved that I had had flown ~16+ hours for the Eagles.

Turns out one of them worked for the team, and hooked me up with some of these sideline passes for the Vikes game. What a treat to see the players and coaches and Howie up close pre-game. Vinny Curry was there with his kid getting autographs from the current group, and so was Mike Vick. Even got to have a chat to the Commish and got a pic with Goodell. Won't be forgetting that experience anytime soon.

I think if Howie makes another trade it's more likely to be CB than LB but the cost of getting a playable LB is probably cheaper.

Damn...

14 hours ago, Sack that QB said:

Listening and talking to people today and it seems like everyone is way more disappointed in this hear’s Phillies team than last year and I don’t get that at all. Last year’s team was way more magical and they were up 2-1 in the World Series. This year you saw cracks in the armor all season that you knew if you were being honest would bite them at some point.

Just look at the difference in how both teams played in the NLCS. Last year’s team was so much better. They crushed a far superior Padres team to this Dbacks team. This team struggled mightily to and lost to a Dbacks team that wasn’t that great. People I’ve been listening to are acting like the Phillies are some juggernaut that just played way down to the competition. I think people are getting caught up in all the vibes stuff and talked themselves into this being some team of destiny.

If they got knocked out by the Braves last series, everybody would be like yeah that's about right, or if it was the Dodgers in Championship. The reason people are disappointed is exactly what you stated they got knocked out by a Dbacks team that wasn't that great at all....and blew multiple chances to close it out. That's what everyone is struggling with

This is a cool graphic but...Mailata is the #1 LT? But Kelce is the #4 C?

47 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

You started by saying to trade a 2025 3rd for him. Then said nobody but QBs gets traded for multiple 1sts. Now you’re talking in circles about draft value as if the previous two points suggest you are some expert.

Just let it go.

No, I ASKED who the last non-QB was who went for more than 1 first. I then looked it up myself and it was Ramsey for 2 firsts and a fourth to the rams.

Bottom line is you are just wrong that anyone gives a crap about where someone is selected in the draft when they’re in their third year. It’s totally irrelevant. You yourself proved the point by listing a bunch of busts. The same goes for great players. KC took Mahomes in the middle of the first round, but would demand a decades worth of draft picks not because he was a first rounder but because he’s the best player in the NFL.

Yet again, there is literally an economic term for this that every NFL GM understands, and it’s called the sunk cost fallacy. No one gives a crap where you were drafted. All that matters is how good you are, your age, your contract, and maybe your injury history.

1 minute ago, TEW said:

No, I ASKED who the last non-QB was who went for more than 1 first. I then looked it up myself and it was Ramsey for 2 firsts and a fourth to the rams.

Bottom line is you are just wrong that anyone gives a crap about where someone is selected in the draft when they’re in their third year. It’s totally irrelevant. You yourself proved the point by listing a bunch of busts. The same goes for great players. KC took Mahomes in the middle of the first round, but would demand a decades worth of draft picks not because he was a first rounder but because he’s the best player in the NFL.

Yet again, there is literally an economic term for this that every NFL GM understands, and it’s called the sunk cost fallacy. No one gives a crap where you were drafted. All that matters is how good you are, your age, your contract, and maybe your injury history.

What are you talking about? I didn’t say anything about where people were drafted or list any busts….are you okay? Do you have me confused? Blink twice if you’re in danger

9 minutes ago, Texas Eagle said:

What are you talking about? I didn’t say anything about where people were drafted or list any busts….are you okay? Do you have me confused? Blink twice if you’re in danger

Sorry, confused you with someone else.

 

1 hour ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Yea. Sure. Whatever you say boss. Totally normal for someone to trade something and not consider the cost of getting him to begin with 

YES! It is literally totally normal and literally taught in every business school in the world to not consider what you paid for something when selling it.

What you should consider is "opportunity cost.”

In this case, Surtain on the remainder of his rookie deal vs whatever you could get in return for him.

Here is an example:

You paid a million cash for a house. Someone offers you $750K cash for the house. You then find a better house than you own for $750K.

Do you take the deal? Do you want to trade up to the better house even though you paid 1M for your original house and will only receive 750K for it?