Post by williamtsherman on Apr 27, 2020 17:48:32 GMT -6
Well, right off the bat here, we have a thread that quickly tailspins into silliness when I don't make constant interventions.
You can say Pittman has "WR1 potential" while perhaps reflecting that the 199th pick once became the greatest QB of all time. But it's a poor bet to make. Particularly considering you were in position for a much, much better bet. Again I point out that you will need both a left tackle and a QB sooner rather than later, and it's incredibly unlikely you will get as good a shot at a WR1 in the foreseeable future.
Not only did you, in effect, give up Juedy for Buckner, but you also paid Buckner a shit ton of money more than you would a rookie. That's the whole reason SF didn't want him anymore. You could instead have had a young rookie-contract stud at a high impact, high cost position, AND FOR THE SAME PICK & MONEY used the Buckner contract money to get a good enough DT in free agency this year or next. POSITIONAL VALUE IS A REAL THING.
I don't give a mangy rat's ass what "grades" any "experts" give the colts draft, now or ever. For example, from 2017:
Overall grade: A -
The skinny: In the first round, the Colts got the rangiest safety prospect since Earl Thomas. They got very good value at No. 15 at a major position of need. It's a big win for the Colts' defense. Indianapolis had to be thrilled to get Quincy Wilson to help out Hooker in the secondary.
As I remember the name "Ed Reed" was being thrown around quite a bit. Hooker is probably closer to Donna Reed than Ed Reed.
My point is not so much that the "experts" "grades" are wrong on the 2020 colts so much as the "experts" "grades" are completely unreliable. When do you ever even see these "experts" "grades" evaluated later? Which experts are more often right than others? Nobody has any idea. The whole idea is just to provide content for draft info thirsty fans. Nobody pays any attention to eventual accuracy, and so there is no accountability and no authority. If you pay attention you'll notice these "experts" "grades" are usually heavily skewed towards the positive because that's the content people want to see about the teams they care about. Content and clicks are everything...expertise and accuracy are nothing.
If I'm the douche-canoe, you guys are the douche-Titanic.
You can say Pittman has "WR1 potential" while perhaps reflecting that the 199th pick once became the greatest QB of all time. But it's a poor bet to make. Particularly considering you were in position for a much, much better bet. Again I point out that you will need both a left tackle and a QB sooner rather than later, and it's incredibly unlikely you will get as good a shot at a WR1 in the foreseeable future.
Not only did you, in effect, give up Juedy for Buckner, but you also paid Buckner a shit ton of money more than you would a rookie. That's the whole reason SF didn't want him anymore. You could instead have had a young rookie-contract stud at a high impact, high cost position, AND FOR THE SAME PICK & MONEY used the Buckner contract money to get a good enough DT in free agency this year or next. POSITIONAL VALUE IS A REAL THING.
I don't give a mangy rat's ass what "grades" any "experts" give the colts draft, now or ever. For example, from 2017:
Overall grade: A -
The skinny: In the first round, the Colts got the rangiest safety prospect since Earl Thomas. They got very good value at No. 15 at a major position of need. It's a big win for the Colts' defense. Indianapolis had to be thrilled to get Quincy Wilson to help out Hooker in the secondary.
As I remember the name "Ed Reed" was being thrown around quite a bit. Hooker is probably closer to Donna Reed than Ed Reed.
My point is not so much that the "experts" "grades" are wrong on the 2020 colts so much as the "experts" "grades" are completely unreliable. When do you ever even see these "experts" "grades" evaluated later? Which experts are more often right than others? Nobody has any idea. The whole idea is just to provide content for draft info thirsty fans. Nobody pays any attention to eventual accuracy, and so there is no accountability and no authority. If you pay attention you'll notice these "experts" "grades" are usually heavily skewed towards the positive because that's the content people want to see about the teams they care about. Content and clicks are everything...expertise and accuracy are nothing.
If I'm the douche-canoe, you guys are the douche-Titanic.
