Chubb or Barkley at #3?

[Ryan43]

3 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

You made my point...But yeah, you only take a RB top 5 if he is Really Special...Usually I would be all for Chubb at 3 too...

 

I love Barkley btw, I haven't seen raw speed and elusiveness like his since Faulk.

[Gigc]

Hey man, without making an argument for either Barkley or Chubb, just because you can find a great player in later rounds does NOT mean you don't pick a rose when you find one in the first. 

 

C'MON. that's why they rank these guys, right?

[Dark Superman]

If it's up to Ballard it's gonna be Chubb.

[Robert Johnson]

Who gets signed in free agency could greatly affect our draft strategy.

[colt18]

On 1/22/2018 at 4:56 AM, Jaredfor3 said:

Speaking of the Eagles, CB Patrick Robinson did nothing when he played for the Colts. He goes to Philly, and is a fringe pro Bowler. 

 

As as far as the number three debate goes. Barkley, may not even last to pick number three. If that occurs, you know several nfl teams will be calling the Colts for Rosen or Darnold. As long as Luck is throwing a football by April, I hope Indy trades with a team like the Jets and we land a good player like G Quenton Nelson, ILB Roquan Smith, DE/LB Arden Key, or OT Orlando Brown. In addition we get the Jets high second selection and a future 2019 pick. 

 

We played Robinson out of position and he was also very injury prone during his time here. He's succeeding on the Eagles because he's being utilized correctly.

[colt18]

On 1/22/2018 at 10:47 AM, jshipp23 said:

We should have won 3 or 4...We choked against, Chargers, Steelers,  and Jets off top of my head. ..I love Manning he is top 3 all time, but he didn't play his best in the playoffs and that's the truth..

 

Peyton being a playoff choker is such an old fallacy....

 

Even Brady has had playoff games. The difference is that even when Peyton plays his best, many times his defense let the team down.

[Narcosys]

Let's reframe the question here. Most people seem to be approaching this as a an "either or" problem: either we get an excellent RB or an excellent pass rusher.

 

First, Let's assume CB knows what he's doing. If we assume that, we can conclude that he will address most positional problems with our cap space.

 

With that conclusion then we know that whatever position isn't drafted, will be addressed in FA.

 

So now the question should focus more on who is available in FA, and will determine who we will draft.

 

Are there mid to upper mid tier rushers available in FA that we can most likely get (whether you personally like them out not).  If so, then we should draft Barkley. 

 

The same can be asked of FA RBs. If so, we draft Chubb.

 

If there are both positions available in FA, which position has more available, and thus a less likelihood of bidding wars.

 

I think if we can look at it this way, the question of who we draft becomes self-evident.

 

I think people like @Superman, @21isSuperman, @Jared Cisneros, @chad72

 

Might have a better understanding on these questions than I would and defer to you guys for your thoughts.

[Yoshinator]

56 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

Let's reframe the question here. Most people seem to be approaching this as a an "either or" problem: either we get an excellent RB or an excellent pass rusher.

 

First, Let's assume CB knows what he's doing. If we assume that, we can conclude that he will address most positional problems with our cap space.

 

With that conclusion then we know that whatever position isn't drafted, will be addressed in FA.

 

So now the question should focus more on who is available in FA, and will determine who we will draft.

 

Are there mid to upper mid tier rushers available in FA that we can most likely get (whether you personally like them out not).  If so, then we should draft Barkley. 

 

The same can be asked of FA RBs. If so, we draft Chubb.

 

If there are both positions available in FA, which position has more available, and thus a less likelihood of bidding wars.

 

I think if we can look at it this way, the question of who we draft becomes self-evident.

 

I think people like @Superman, @21isSuperman, @Jared Cisneros, @chad72

 

Might have a better understanding on these questions than I would and defer to you guys for your thoughts.

Personally, there are a couple RBs I like in FA, along with a strong RB class that both make me want to take Chubb at 3, or as low as 6 should we trade down. Carlos Hyde is someone that comes to mind. He can carry the load, and also give Mack some solid opportunities as well in McDaniels offense. RB's that come to mind outside the first round that we could use are Nick Chubb and Royce Freeman. Akrum Wadley as a later pick is decent as well. Overall, I think signs point to someone like me to draft Chubb, and fill in the RB in FA or the draft. Just my opinion though and personal preference. We'll see what Ballard decides to do soon enough.

[Coltfreak]

3 hours ago, Narcosys said:

 

 

I think people like @Superman, @21isSuperman, @Jared Cisneros, @chad72

 

Might have a better understanding on these questions than I would and defer to you guys for your thoughts.

 

   maybe it would be better if you just discussed this with the other 4 in private messages 

[Narcosys]

19 minutes ago, Coltfreak said:

 

   maybe it would be better if you just discussed this with the other 4 in private messages 

Why? I know for sure that those four have a solid grasp on who is available and we the first ones to choke to mind. My post fits in with the topic, I seek opinions from knowledgeable individuals, and leave it for others to think about as well and voice their opinion. My post is more to the general public and provide a way to assess this debate from a different approach, but also ensuring it is brought to the attention of people that I wish to get opinion from.

[aaron11]

7 hours ago, Narcosys said:

Let's reframe the question here. Most people seem to be approaching this as a an "either or" problem: either we get an excellent RB or an excellent pass rusher.

 

First, Let's assume CB knows what he's doing. If we assume that, we can conclude that he will address most positional problems with our cap space.

 

With that conclusion then we know that whatever position isn't drafted, will be addressed in FA.

 

So now the question should focus more on who is available in FA, and will determine who we will draft.

 

Are there mid to upper mid tier rushers available in FA that we can most likely get (whether you personally like them out not).  If so, then we should draft Barkley. 

 

The same can be asked of FA RBs. If so, we draft Chubb.

 

If there are both positions available in FA, which position has more available, and thus a less likelihood of bidding wars.

 

I think if we can look at it this way, the question of who we draft becomes self-evident.

 

I think people like @Superman, @21isSuperman, @Jared Cisneros, @chad72

 

Might have a better understanding on these questions than I would and defer to you guys for your thoughts.

no FA running back is going to be nearly as good as barkley

 

the argument is you can get by with less than stellar play at RB, but you cant at edge rusher

 

its hard to say which edge rushers will hit the market, and even harder to compare them to a rookie

[Narcosys]

3 hours ago, aaron11 said:

no FA running back is going to be nearly as good as barkley

 

the argument is you can get by with less than stellar play at RB, but you cant at edge rusher

 

its hard to say which edge rushers will hit the market, and even harder to compare them to a rookie

I know, but if between the best RB we can get, and the best pass rusher we can get is either or, then we fill the opposite in the draft

[21isSuperman]

11 hours ago, Narcosys said:

Let's reframe the question here. Most people seem to be approaching this as a an "either or" problem: either we get an excellent RB or an excellent pass rusher.

 

First, Let's assume CB knows what he's doing. If we assume that, we can conclude that he will address most positional problems with our cap space.

 

With that conclusion then we know that whatever position isn't drafted, will be addressed in FA.

 

So now the question should focus more on who is available in FA, and will determine who we will draft.

 

Are there mid to upper mid tier rushers available in FA that we can most likely get (whether you personally like them out not).  If so, then we should draft Barkley. 

 

The same can be asked of FA RBs. If so, we draft Chubb.

 

If there are both positions available in FA, which position has more available, and thus a less likelihood of bidding wars.

 

I think if we can look at it this way, the question of who we draft becomes self-evident.

 

I think people like @Superman, @21isSuperman, @Jared Cisneros, @chad72

 

Might have a better understanding on these questions than I would and defer to you guys for your thoughts.

I have nothing against Barkley.  My argument is against taking a RB with a high draft pick.  You can easily find good RBs in the later rounds or even as undrafted free agents.  Very good pass rushers are harder to find (if that's the direction Ballard decides to take...for all we know, he could take a OL or LB if he and the scouts believe that player is the best available prospect).  If you invest into your OL, for example, you can stick an average RB behind a very good OL and they can open up lanes for him and keep defenses honest.

[Coltfreak]

9 hours ago, Narcosys said:

Why? I know for sure that those four have a solid grasp on who is available and we the first ones to choke to mind. My post fits in with the topic, I seek opinions from knowledgeable individuals, and leave it for others to think about as well and voice their opinion. My post is more to the general public and provide a way to assess this debate from a different approach, but also ensuring it is brought to the attention of people that I wish to get opinion from.

So basically you are saying you value their opinions (the knowlegable ones) and you will skim through the rest of us us dumb * 

 

 

 

   

[Narcosys]

47 minutes ago, Coltfreak said:

So basically you are saying you value their opinions (the knowlegable ones) and you will skim through the rest of us us dumb * 

 

 

 

   

Not at all, I wanted to make sure they saw my post is all. Idk how you're jumping to conclusions on this, but your making yourself look dumb. How about you just provide an idea on it and stop assuming things that have nothing to do with the topic...or pm me.

[tweezy32]

Pick someone good orrrrr you pick someone amazing? Hmmmmmm a truck or a Lamborghini?

[Coltfreak]

49 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

Not at all, I wanted to make sure they saw my post is all. Idk how you're jumping to conclusions on this, but your making yourself look dumb. How about you just provide an idea on it and stop assuming things that have nothing to do with the topic...or pm me.

Nah....  I'm not smart enough to help you

[Mr.NotSoCreative]

I think what we are forgetting is that we should be sending a thank you letter to the Browns and Giants for wasting the first 2 picks on quarterbacks allowing us to have this never ending debate. "I just won the Super Bowl!" said no USC quarterback ever. And Rosen, well, dont care but probably busteriffic player as well. Leaving us so many viable options. 

[Superman]

@Narcosys I haven't posted in this thread because I've spent an abundance of words on this same discussion a couple dozen times already, and it's not even really draft season yet. I did vote just a couple days ago.

 

But I agree with your premise. If it were up to me, I would approach FA with the goal of being two-deep at every position before the draft, and that's without relying on anyone coming back from a serious injury. I don't need a bunch of supposed star level guys, but I at least want a reasonable starter and a decent backup, on paper. 

 

To me, the draft is not about filling needs. Yes, that can happen, but the draft was put into place so that there would be an orderly method for NFL teams to acquire talented college players. It's turned into a lot more than that, but at its core, the draft is about finding talent. You keep stacking good drafts, you'll have a good, deep roster. Supplement good drafting with smart FA moves, and you'll have a great roster. That all takes multiple years, which is why drafting for Day 1 without considering Year 5 and beyond is a mistake.

 

Historically, good pass rushers don't reach FA unless they have serious flaws. Great pass rushers never hit free agency. When average/good pass rushers do switch teams, they get out-sized contracts like Olivier Vernon ($17m/year). When average/good RBs hit free agency, they get $6-7m/year, at best (Lamar Miller, Doug Martin, Latavius Murray, etc.) Le'Veon Bell will presumably get a mega-deal from someone, but that's an outlier; he'll be the only RB since Adrian Peterson or Marshawn Lynch to get more than $10m/year, and Lynch was getting strategic increases to put him over $10m with no long term commitment.

 

The market shows clearly that pass rushers are more valuable than RBs. Even an average pass rusher gets paid more than an above average RB on a second contract, and the frequency with which teams discard RBs while hanging on to pass rushers results in a marketplace that has plenty of backs, and basically no pass rushers. A RB would have to be one of the three best backs in the league for several years in a row to have a market even close to that of an above average pass rusher.

 

There are other factors as well, but if you have two similarly graded players, one a back, the other a pass rusher, I can't understand not taking the pass rusher. That's even if you don't have a significant aversion to using a high pick on a RB. 

[crazycolt1]

We all have to keep in mind that not all if any free agents signed will be studs or super stars. Sup hit in on the head when he brought up being two deep at all positions. Our depth has suffered over the last few years. We have had a few good serviceable starters but when injury has hit the talent level between starters and the next guy up fell flat on it's face. We have so many depth needs there will be some signings that will have some scratching their heads. To win we don't need super stars, we just need players who do the job they are paid to do.

As much as I dislike the Patriots their system does work. It's a copy cat league and when a winner has as much success as the Patriots have had it's time to join their system. McDaniel's can bring some of that with him hopefully.

This high power offensive team we are so used to seeing needs to change in the sense of a more balanced team. The defense needs to be as good as the offense in the rankings to win in the playoffs.

We have to work big time on the defense. Just because we seen some improvement does not bring them up to where they need to be. The key is getting the best pass rusher or even a couple of them is the single most important issue to address anyway possible. Free agent pass rushers are few and far between so it has to come from the draft.

Just my take.

[Hoo-Hoo-Hoo-Hoosiers]

I voted Chubb for many of the reason already stated on here so I wont regurgitate them, but I have some food for thought.  Suppose Chubb is off the board when we are on the clock and the colts dont get an offer they can live with for #3. Is your preference Barkley by default or does another player enter into the equation?  I am really high on Fitzpatrick.  I know he projects at safety (not a position of high need for the Colts) but I think he is versatile enough (has the size and speed) to play at any DB position.  He is a player that I feel will, in very short time, develop into someone who can cover any #1 WR in the league.  Daniel Jeremiah describes him as a bigger Tyrann Mathieu.  Sign me up for some of that!!!  Just my opinion, feel free to pick it apart 

[ColtStrong]

I think both players would be awesome for us, but I would absolutely love if we took Barkley. I've seen him do things that are truly incredible. We haven't had a great back since James and Barkley might be even better, (think) Barry Sanders. A true, immediate difference maker. But I wouldn't cry if we took the Chubster.

[Four2itus]

All good posts in the last few hours. Less emotion and more realistic. First, injuries is the one thing that no one can predict. It can make a good plan go sour real quick. Just signing or drafting previously healthy players does not insure good health moving forward. Like most things, it can increase the odds, but that's it. 

 

So injuries aside, Mr. Ballard will stack his board according to his value. Obviously, if there are issues with Andrew, his top 3 may look different than what we are all hoping. But like the injuries, let's set that aside as well. So when the say the Colts are on the clock, the most obvious thing is they take the guy rated highest on the board. Personally, I hope to hell that Mr Ballard does not choose a player that he thinks can get us the most wins next year (I dont think he will), but rather a healthy, long term key piece in this puzzle that has a lot of holes. If that puzzle is completed to the level we all hope, it will likely be made up of players from every round. Think about that. First rounders dont always play better than second rounders,  second rounders better than third...etc, etc. I truly hope for the frustrated fan to be able to see the big picture, several years from now. Could we win sooner? Crap yes. But picks shouldn't be made with that as the only goal. It could be Barkley, or Chubb, or someone that many of you have in the top 15. 

 

But what if a team calls with an offer worth taking to move back down, Every pick you add brings more opportunity, but it doesn't always equate to a better value. The Jags are reaping the benefits of high picks, The Browns have not. Remember the crap load of picks that Mike Ditka traded to the Saints? How many SB's did that win them? It's about hitting on the pick, no matter the round, no matter the fan or writers ranking, and no matter the contract. 

 

I raise my glass in a toast to trusting this GM. I will applaud his pick, no matter the name. He is the pro, he has massive intelligent resources. I the guy just oozes confidence. I dont think its fake, either. Like Peyton said, "pressure is what you feel when you don't know what in the hell you are doing". I think Mr. Ballard knows exactly what he is doing. 

[Narcosys]

7 hours ago, Coltfreak said:

Nah....  I'm not smart enough to help you

So be it, but in order to be so offended as you are, you have to assume so many faulty positions that its laughable. In your statement you have to assume that everyone's opinions are equal, and they just aren't. Some people have more credibility than others. You also have to assume that I know everyone's opinion and knowledge base in order to come to the conclusion that I'm dismissing them. Lastly you assume that since I'm disregarding them, that they must be dumb as well. There's problems in that assumption as well because you can lack knowledge on a subject and still be smart. 

 

Again, I'm interested in all opinions, I just wanted to ensure people that I know have substantial knowledge on cap space, free agent market, skill levels, etc., saw my comment.

 

If you took it the wrong way and were offended, then that wasn't my intent, but it's clearly your problem and not mine based on your faulty reasoning.

[Narcosys]

4 hours ago, Hoo-Hoo-Hoo-Hoosiers said:

I voted Chubb for many of the reason already stated on here so I wont regurgitate them, but I have some food for thought.  Suppose Chubb is off the board when we are on the clock and the colts dont get an offer they can live with for #3. Is your preference Barkley by default or does another player enter into the equation?  I am really high on Fitzpatrick.  I know he projects at safety (not a position of high need for the Colts) but I think he is versatile enough (has the size and speed) to play at any DB position.  He is a player that I feel will, in very short time, develop into someone who can cover any #1 WR in the league.  Daniel Jeremiah describes him as a bigger Tyrann Mathieu.  Sign me up for some of that!!!  Just my opinion, feel free to pick it apart 

I would have to say an OL that we know won't reach the second round. We could still trade back in that event, and out would be preferable. But even if we take that out of the equation and there's no Barkley or Chubb, then it's OL.

[Coltfreak]

3 hours ago, Narcosys said:

So be it, but in order to be so offended as you are, you have to assume so many faulty positions that its laughable. In your statement you have to assume that everyone's opinions are equal, and they just aren't. Some people have more credibility than others. You also have to assume that I know everyone's opinion and knowledge base in order to come to the conclusion that I'm dismissing them. Lastly you assume that since I'm disregarding them, that they must be dumb as well. There's problems in that assumption as well because you can lack knowledge on a subject and still be smart. 

 

Again, I'm interested in all opinions, I just wanted to ensure people that I know have substantial knowledge on cap space, free agent market, skill levels, etc., saw my comment.

 

If you took it the wrong way and were offended, then that wasn't my intent, but it's clearly your problem and not mine based on your faulty reasoning.

Everyone's opinions are equal.  That's why they are opinions. 

 

opinion

[uh-pin-yuh n]

noun

a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

[Narcosys]

37 minutes ago, Coltfreak said:

Everyone's opinions are equal.  That's why they are opinions. 

 

opinion

[uh-pin-yuh n]

noun

a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.

a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.

So if you asked for an opinion on a new piece of tech, are you going to value the opinion of a tech expert more than someone who has no experience in the tech field? The answer is yes, because the tech expert has more credibility than someone who does not.

 

Or how about if you discuss a topic like space and quantum theory? Will you value the opinion of someone who believes the earth is flat and we never landed on the moon, or will you value the opinion of someone like Michio Kaku? The answer is Michio Kaku, because he has more credibility.

 

When it becomes certainty, it becomes fact, but you can still have sufficient knowledge to formulate an educated opinion when certainty of a fact is not possible.

 

This is why some people's opinions are less valuable than others. To consider otherwise is known as balance fallacy. This is when you believe two sides of an argument have equal value, regardless of their merit or experience.

Congratulations, your logical fallacy is...

[Coltfreak]

1 minute ago, Narcosys said:

So if you asked for an opinion on a new piece of tech, are you going to value the opinion of a tech expert more than someone who has no experience in the tech field? The answer is yes, because the tech expert has more credibility than someone who does not.

 

Or how about if you discuss a topic like space and quantum theory? Will you value the opinion of someone who believes the earth is flat and we never landed on the moon, or will you value the opinion of someone like Michio Kaku? The answer is Michio Kaku, because he has more credibility.

 

When it becomes certainty, it becomes fact, but you can still have sufficient knowledge to formulate an educated opinion when certainty of a fact is not possible.

 

This is why some people's opinions are less valuable than others. To consider otherwise is known as balance fallacy. This is when you believe two sides of an argument have equal value, regardless of their merit or experience.

Congratulations, your logical fallacy is...

Oh gotcha.  Now your calling these guys experts.   

 

Sorry didnt realize they were.  

[Narcosys]

31 minutes ago, Coltfreak said:

Oh gotcha.  Now your calling these guys experts.   

 

Sorry didnt realize they were.  

 

Wow, you're bad this aren't you? Do you intentionally misconstrue to be a troll, or is it natural for you not to comprehend and follow arguments?

 

Also, you're moving the goalposts in your statement.

[BOTT]

8 hours ago, Hoo-Hoo-Hoo-Hoosiers said:

I voted Chubb for many of the reason already stated on here so I wont regurgitate them, but I have some food for thought.  Suppose Chubb is off the board when we are on the clock and the colts dont get an offer they can live with for #3. Is your preference Barkley by default or does another player enter into the equation?  I am really high on Fitzpatrick.  I know he projects at safety (not a position of high need for the Colts) but I think he is versatile enough (has the size and speed) to play at any DB position.  He is a player that I feel will, in very short time, develop into someone who can cover any #1 WR in the league.  Daniel Jeremiah describes him as a bigger Tyrann Mathieu.  Sign me up for some of that!!!  Just my opinion, feel free to pick it apart 

Agree

[LJpalmbeacher2]

14 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

We all have to keep in mind that not all if any free agents signed will be studs or super stars. Sup hit in on the head when he brought up being two deep at all positions. Our depth has suffered over the last few years. We have had a few good serviceable starters but when injury has hit the talent level between starters and the next guy up fell flat on it's face. We have so many depth needs there will be some signings that will have some scratching their heads. To win we don't need super stars, we just need players who do the job they are paid to do.

As much as I dislike the Patriots their system does work. It's a copy cat league and when a winner has as much success as the Patriots have had it's time to join their system. McDaniel's can bring some of that with him hopefully.

This high power offensive team we are so used to seeing needs to change in the sense of a more balanced team. The defense needs to be as good as the offense in the rankings to win in the playoffs.

We have to work big time on the defense. Just because we seen some improvement does not bring them up to where they need to be. The key is getting the best pass rusher or even a couple of them is the single most important issue to address anyway possible. Free agent pass rushers are few and far between so it has to come from the draft.

Just my take.

Couldn't  disagree more in a way.  Yes Depth is very important, especially these days when the IR is filled with players. But you need Stars,  playmakers, Gamechanger to make a difference. I'd rather have one Le'Veon Bell than Gore & Turbin..... Rather have A. Brown than Moncreif & Chester Rogers etc... 

 

A roster of only average players will give you a team that will probably be only 'average' , if that. 

[Narcosys]

27 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Couldn't  disagree more in a way.  Yes Depth is very important, especially these days when the IR is filled with players. But you need Stars,  playmakers, Gamechanger to make a difference. I'd rather have one Le'Veon Bell than Gore & Turbin..... Rather have A. Brown than Moncreif & Chester Rogers etc... 

 

A roster of only average players will give you a team that will probably be only 'average' , if that. 

 

Patriots are always filled with average players. Are they an average team?

[Superman]

48 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

Couldn't  disagree more in a way.  Yes Depth is very important, especially these days when the IR is filled with players. But you need Stars,  playmakers, Gamechanger to make a difference. I'd rather have one Le'Veon Bell than Gore & Turbin..... Rather have A. Brown than Moncreif & Chester Rogers etc... 

 

A roster of only average players will give you a team that will probably be only 'average' , if that. 

 

No question we need difference makers. But we also have glaring holes at various spots on the roster, where if you added serviceable "do your job" guys, the roster would be considerably improved. 

 

We also have the cap standing to take a big swing or two this offseason, which might land us a couple difference makers. We'll still need to shore up other spots on the roster. I think we should be two-deep before the draft, either way. 

 

And the best way to add difference makers is to draft them, but it takes several years to build a strong roster through the draft. The hope is that, with Luck, smart coaching, and some specific improvements, the Colts can get back on track sooner than later, while the draft sets us up for sustained success. 

[LJpalmbeacher2]

56 minutes ago, Narcosys said:

 

Patriots are always filled with average players. Are they an average team?

They cheat and have opposing teams lay down for them PLUS the Refs like them lol. 

[Mr.NotSoCreative]

I think what we are forgetting is that we should be sending a thank you letter to the Browns and Giants for wasting the first 2 picks on quarterbacks allowing us to have this never ending debate. "I just won the Super Bowl!" said no USC quarterback ever. And Rosen, well, dont care but probably busteriffic player as well. Leaving us so many viable options. Thanks 

[Mr.NotSoCreative]

Lets say we do pick Chubb as an elite pass rusher. What kind of production would you like to see out of him? 30 tackles , 7 sacks? Would that be sufficient out of our #3 pick?

[2006Coltsbestever]

15 minutes ago, ND Irish said:

Lets say we do pick Chubb as an elite pass rusher. What kind of production would you like to see out of him? 30 tackles , 7 sacks? Would that be sufficient out of our #3 pick?

That's a great question because if we take him over Barkley I expect 10 Sacks. I say 10 which isn't a huge number but if he's a once in a lifetime DE then he should have around 10. I realize for a Rookie 10 is a lot but I believe Barkley will gain over 1200 Yards even if he plays for the Browns. 1200 for a Rookie is Great on a Bad team.

 

Dwight Freeney had 13 Sacks his Rookie season.

[Coltfreak]

13 hours ago, Narcosys said:

So if you asked for an opinion on a new piece of tech, are you going to value the opinion of a tech expert more than someone who has no experience in the tech field? The answer is yes, because the tech expert has more credibility than someone who does not.

 

Or how about if you discuss a topic like space and quantum theory? Will you value the opinion of someone who believes the earth is flat and we never landed on the moon, or will you value the opinion of someone like Michio Kaku? The answer is Michio Kaku, because he has more credibility.

 

When it becomes certainty, it becomes fact, but you can still have sufficient knowledge to formulate an educated opinion when certainty of a fact is not possible.

 

This is why some people's opinions are less valuable than others. To consider otherwise is known as balance fallacy. This is when you believe two sides of an argument have equal value, regardless of their merit or experience.

Congratulations, your logical fallacy is...

Sorry my opinion is that your opinion sucks. 

[Architects08]

Barkley or trade back is what I'd prefer.

[IinD]

2 hours ago, ND Irish said:

Lets say we do pick Chubb as an elite pass rusher. What kind of production would you like to see out of him? 30 tackles , 7 sacks? Would that be sufficient out of our #3 pick?

I wouldn't look at sack #'s on if he's a good pick in his first year. 

 

Even if he gets pressures it would be a huge improvement. QB's sometimes had time to tie their shoes while dropping back. The secondary can't cover forever.

 

We have to improve our rushing talent. 

 

McD can make an offense work without a stud rb.