Jump to content

JamAll-Pro


Barry McCockinner
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Mahomes threw for 50 TDs last season and is in the SB next week.

 

Jamal averages less than 1 INT per season, has led his team to 16 wins over 3 seasons, and is busy going full self-promotion at a meaningless Pro Bowl that a lot of players skip.

 

But sure, those 2 situations are exactly the same.

 

KC wouldn’t accept a decade’s worth of first rounders for Mahomes. We just want a 1st & 3rd.

 

WE cannot control the draft pick that was made. 

Sure MOST  of us wanted Patrick Mahomes but NOT all. 

Whats done is done stop crying. 

STOP the HATE. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

 

Mahomes threw for 50 TDs last season and is in the SB next week.

 

Jamal averages less than 1 INT per season, has led his team to 16 wins over 3 seasons, and is busy going full self-promotion at a meaningless Pro Bowl that a lot of players skip.

 

But sure, those 2 situations are exactly the same.

 

KC wouldn’t accept a decade’s worth of first rounders for Mahomes. We just want a 1st & 3rd.

 

First of all...sarcasm.

Second....YOU want a 1st and a 3rd.  For me, it depends on what those picks are and if they're not top-half, I don't want 'em.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/26/2020 at 12:38 AM, Jet Nut said:

This is the way of thinking for anyone with any sense. 

Todays stupid list of positions that don't help you win list.  

C

DT

G

S

FS

ILB

6 out of 22 positions aren't really needed to win? 

Who did I miss?  

Almost as ridiculous of stating that the reason the Jets aren't winners is because of Jamal, Leo and Quinnen.  Sure, that's it in a nutshell.  

Remember though, all teams have two Guards, and between DT and ILB you have three of these whether 3-4 or 4-3.

So that's 6 positions, but 8 players, out of 22.

A team with JAGs at DT, ILB / MLB and S will get run on again and again. And again. It may be a passing league, but as SF showed against GB, if the opponent knows you're running it and can't stop it, why bother passing?

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, jamesr said:

Remember though, all teams have two Guards, and between DT and ILB you have three of these whether 3-4 or 4-3.

So that's 6 positions, but 8 players, out of 22.

A team with JAGs at DT, ILB / MLB and S will get run on again and again. And again. It may be a passing league, but as SF showed against GB, if the opponent knows you're running it and can't stop it, why bother passing?

 

Thanks, Im slipping.

Its so ridiculous.  Look at the teams that have won, look at the players who've played at the positions.  Mike Simngletary didnt help the Bears?  Ray Lewis?  Palomala?  Ed Reed?  I can go on and on. 

Jamal Adams does nothing to help us win.  Thats all I hear.  If he were off the team, no change.  He goes down in the 1st series against the Bengals and the D plays like shlt.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

When do you guys think that the All Pro Best Safety in the league, gets his 1st career, non-garbage time interception?  Will it be Year 4?

You guys?  

By that you mean those of us who know he makes the Jets D a better unit?  

Who know he makes the Jets a better team?

Who don't trash a Jets player universally praised for his play?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

You guys?  

By that you mean those of us who know he makes the Jets D a better unit?  

Who know he makes the Jets a better team?

 Who don't trash a Jets player universally praised for his play?

I mean, anyone reading.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Jet Nut said:

You guys?  

By that you mean those of us who know he makes the Jets D a better unit?  

Who know he makes the Jets a better team?

Who don't trash a Jets player universally praised for his play?

And no one is denying that the Jets are improved with the presence of Jamal Adams.  That's not really the question.  The question is, are the Jets improved enough to justify his forthcoming expense, or are the better enough not to try and trade him to improve in areas that might make the team more meaningfully better, as 3-years of "THE BEST SAFETY IN ALL THE LAND" has not produced a good team or a good defense or, very many wins.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

And no one is denying that the Jets are improved with the presence of Jamal Adams.  That's not really the question.  The question is, are the Jets improved enough to justify his forthcoming expense, or are the better enough not to try and trade him to improve in areas that might make the team more meaningfully better, as 3-years of "THE BEST SAFETY IN ALL THE LAND" has not produced a good team or a good defense or, very many wins.

This has to be the most pointless question ever.  

The team hasn't won, he's on the team, therefore he's not needed.  

Wouldn't it make a difference if I could somehow prove that they would have won even fewer games without him?  But you want to question how much he'd add in the way of wins on a better roster?  

The idea that any one player, outside of QB would make the teams he's played on better in the way of wins and losses better is wrong.   

And he actually was a part of a pretty good defense.  Without a star, an all pro player other than Adams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jet Nut said:

This has to be the most pointless question ever.  

The team hasn't won, he's on the team, therefore he's not needed.  

Wouldn't it make a difference if I could somehow prove that they would have won even fewer games without him?  But you want to question how much he'd add in the way of wins on a better roster?  

 The idea that any one player, outside of QB would make the teams he's played on better in the way of wins and losses better is wrong. 

I saw an earlier post of yours dismissing positional value entirely.  As such, I completely understand your take.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, TeddEY said:

I saw an earlier post of yours dismissing positional value entirely.  As such, I completely understand your take.

No, I question the idea that those positions are meaningless in the grand scheme of things and those positions don't add to the quality and efficiency of a roster.  

There no denying that some positions influence games more than others,  The idea that it means those positions/players aren't important or cant be assets to a team actually pretty funny and a lot of BS

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jet Nut said:

No, I question the idea that those positions are meaningless in the grand scheme of things and those positions don't add to the quality and efficiency of a roster.  

 There no denying that some positions influence games more than others,  The idea that it means those positions/players aren't important or cant be assets to a team actually pretty funny and a lot of BS

If you want to use words like "meaningless," then sure, it's again, easy to dismiss.  No one is saying any position is "meaningless," or if they are, they're doing so in the same hyperbolic way.  However, the question remains, is it worth devoting a significant percentage of your resources, in this case, salary cap dollars, to someone who brings what Jamal Adams does to a team.  To me, the answer is unequivocally no.  Now, factor in that we may be able to get another resource for him today, that could be at one of those "positions [that] influence games more than others," and I'd be on board to do that.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TeddEY said:

If you want to use words like "meaningless," then sure, it's again, easy to dismiss.  No one is saying any position is "meaningless," or if they are, they're doing so in the same hyperbolic way.  However, the question remains, is it worth devoting a significant percentage of your resources, in this case, salary cap dollars, to someone who brings what Jamal Adams does to a team.  To me, the answer is unequivocally no.  Now, factor in that we may be able to get another resource for him today, that could be at one of those "positions [that] influence games more than others," and I'd be on board to do that.

Now we’re onto finances.  To me yes, he’d be worthwhile investment.  I’ve heard over and over the position isn’t highly comped. I’m crazy, don’t cringe at the thought of paying good players what they’re worth.  I cringe at paying players who aren’t worth what they’re asking.  The top pay for a top player already here, who we know and have seen him play at the level that he has?  Yeah, I pay him.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jet Nut said:

Now we’re onto finances.  To me yes, he’d be worthwhile investment.  I’ve heard over and over the position isn’t highly comped. I’m crazy, don’t cringe at the thought of paying good players what they’re worth.  I cringe at paying players who aren’t worth what they’re asking.  The top pay for a top player already here, who we know and have seen him play at the level that he has?  Yeah, I pay him.  

It’s always been finances.  It’s a salary cap league.  If it weren’t, there’d be no talk outside of the colossal mistake that was drafting him over Mahommes/Watson.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...