Tackle or Receiver in round 1?

[Integrity28]

8 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

I do pay attention to the facts and it would have been stupid for him to come back and play a game or two last year when we were already out of the playoffs. The only reason for him to come back at all was if we were in the playoffs and that didn't happen. Also if it was all bullsh*t why were reporters and people covering the team saying it ? Did Woody Slip them a few c notes to report Aaron was doing well in practice ?

“It would have been stupid” isn’t a fact. It’s an opinion. The facts us he himself said he couldn’t come back even if he wanted to. I don’t know how you are rationalizing that this is a debatable thing. He said it. Not me. It’s not my opinion. It’s an actual thing that happened.

[Integrity28]

@Maynard13

Looks like the Vikings believe they can get into the top 3. You’re good at making bad assumptions. I just keep winning.

[Smashmouth]

5 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

“It would have been stupid” isn’t a fact. It’s an opinion. The facts us he himself said he couldn’t come back even if he wanted to. I don’t know how you are rationalizing that this is a debatable thing. He said it. Not me. It’s not my opinion. It’s an actual thing that happened.

I dont remember him ever sayig that 

[Warfish]

20 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

I have zero confidence that draft experts are correct in saying the top 3 picks will be QB

Now that is a hot take "surprising draft" opinion.

It'll be somewhat amazing if one of those top three teams skip on QB despite all of them being in absolute desperate need for one.  Especially if they're wagering on one being available later, it's quite possible the top 6 (Caleb, Maye, Daniels, McCarthy, Penix, Nix) could all be off the board by the early 2nd.  Not likely, per se, but possible.  Risky to hope one drops to you later, and even then, you're taking a clear second tier/big risk guy in that case.

But this is why the draft is fun, you really never do know what's going to happen, there is always a surprise or two.

[Maynard13]

23 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

@Maynard13

Looks like the Vikings believe they can get into the top 3. You’re good at making bad assumptions. I just keep winning.

Yea like spending $100 on scratch tickets and scoring a $3 win.

[Maynard13]

1 hour ago, Integrity28 said:

 

 

Ape works.

If you think I’m trolling you by defining a double-standard and pointing out facts vs. fantasy, then I’m sorry you both have to work this hard to get out of your own way in a basic conversation.

Both of you seem to have looked right past considering what I’m saying, instead trying to make it an argument I’m not even trying to have, and then losing that one too.

Hard to have a converstation with someone who constantly argues they are not arguing. 

[Integrity28]

11 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Now that is a hot take "surprising draft" opinion.

It'll be somewhat amazing if one of those top three teams skip on QB despite all of them being in absolute desperate need for one.  Especially if they're wagering on one being available later, it's quite possible the top 6 (Caleb, Maye, Daniels, McCarthy, Penix, Nix) could all be off the board by the early 2nd.  Not likely, per se, but possible.  Risky to hope one drops to you later, and even then, you're taking a clear second tier/big risk guy in that case.

But this is why the draft is fun, you really never do know what's going to happen, there is always a surprise or two.

It’s not bold if it doesn’t very what everyone thinks is a given. ❤️

[Maynard13]

On 4/14/2024 at 10:03 PM, Integrity28 said:

So, you insure the two tackles who have had past injuries with the 10 pick, but are not literally in the middle of injury recovery, but not the 40-year old who tore his Achilles and is still rehabbing? (Like I said he would be when you goobers were talking about him playing in December.)

Let me be clear, I’m good with an OT, but I find it incredibly dense and biased that the argument is “he will be insurance this year and a starter in the future”, but the same people saying this say “no QB, we are win now”.

I mean, lol.

 

By the time you finished writing this one of them suffered an injury.

[Integrity28]

2 minutes ago, Maynard13 said:

Hard to have a converstation with someone who constantly argues they are not arguing. 

I’ve consistently demonstrated patience trying to point you towards what I’m actually saying. You’ve consistently ignored it and dug in on something else.

I mean, sure, if you say so.

I’m dancing around laughing at you guys at this point because you’ve left me nothing else to do or say. 

[Integrity28]

28 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

I dont remember him ever sayig that 

He did. He said it’s taking longer, more in line with typical recovery. He wasn’t going to say it loud. It proved him wrong.

[Integrity28]

5 minutes ago, Maynard13 said:

By the time you finsisfed writing this one of them suffered an injury.

And you have the audacity to call me a troll. 

[bicketybam]

33 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

I’ve consistently demonstrated patience trying to point you towards what I’m actually saying. You’ve consistently ignored it and dug in on something else.

I mean, sure, if you say so.

I’m dancing around laughing at you guys at this point because you’ve left me nothing else to do or say. 

Dancing around and laughing at internet arguments 😅

 

[Smashmouth]

49 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

He did. He said it’s taking longer, more in line with typical recovery. He wasn’t going to say it loud. It proved him wrong.

Im going to say this before we go further. I think it would have been stupid for Rodgers to attempt the 4 month comeback. From what Doc's said at the very least it takes 4 1/2 months for the achilles to actully heal so Rodgers would have been comeing back 2 weeks prematurely . After the Achillies actually heals its all about reconditioning the muscles and in that case I could see him being ahead of schedule or behind based on how hard he worked or didnt work.

Below is what Rodgers actully said, and you could make the point he knew there was no way the Jets were making the playoffs and that would be a valid argument but there is no way to know exactly what he was thinking some of these hard headed athletes think they can be superman so his statement could be genuine and he's his own worst enemy but I don't fault him for that like some do that immeadiately go on the attack.  Thats my take on the situation.

 

At the Jets’ practice facility Thursday, Rodgers told reporters he would return only if the Jets’ playoff chances — which have dwindled to nearly zero — remain alive. But he didn’t rule out trying to play next weekend, either. He said he understood the risk of retearing his Achilles’ and that he would accept another, slower rehabilitation over the offseason if it happens.

[Smashmouth]

57 minutes ago, Integrity28 said:

And you have the audacity to call me a troll. 

Nah I called you the troll but as you know I was actully trolling you with that statement 😛 Troll !!!

[Mr. Rogers]

On 4/15/2024 at 7:15 AM, Integrity28 said:

But, but he would be the back up this year, and he’d be the starter in the future.

Given that zero draft picks have been made, I basically stopped reading after the question in bold. This is the sort of logic that makes a team pass on Mahomes for a safety.

Again, I love the idea of taking a tackle. I simply think you guys are making a horrible argument. I’m attacking the debate, not the choice.

Look, in the post you made that I replied to, part of your argument is that a backup QB could potentially play for us this year, like a backup OT might. And yet here you dismiss the real contents of my argument when I treated the situation the way you wanted - as if a backup QB might help us WIN NOW just like a backup OT might. At least stay consistent dude! And read the rest of my post because it's way more nuanced than just "passing up a mahomes".

Also - again - do you think there will be a Mahomes level player available for us at 10? I'll admit it's not like Mahomes was widely regarded as a future superstar, far from. But you also must admit the large majority of drafted QBs are failures, AND we already have a backup QB on a 2 year contract. I'm no NFL talent evaluator but Penix is the only QB outside Daniels and Williams that I like as much as I liked Mahomes on the way in. One of my main points is that, especially at QB, it's not just about the position, it's about the player! Your argument is pointless if there isn't a QB at 10 who will actually BE the future starter. So who do you think that is? Or will you just admit you're arguing a theoretical scenario that just isn't very applicable to the current Jets team?

I'd love a future qb at 10 just like you'd love a tackle. Like I said, I just don't see that QB being there. 

[Mr. Rogers]

2 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

 

Looks like the Vikings believe they can get into the top 3. You’re good at making bad assumptions. I just keep winning.

I actually agree, at the least the Vikings hope this is possible. But the Giants also met with Daniels, and it seems like most reporters agree they aren't willing to sell the farm to move above #4.

This move serves 2 purposes - it's their "due diligence" in case Daniels falls unexpectedly and is available later than everyone thinks, and it also helps create a bit of a smokescreen toward their true intentions. Same, I think, for the Giants. I think we can agree either team ACTUALLY getting Daniels is very unlikely, but this will help keep other teams on their toes and keep the market for trade ups high so the Vikings/Giants don't miss out if they move up. I think the Vikings would love to move into the top 3, but if you're the commanders or pats who desperately need QB and can't guarantee you'll get another chance at a top pick soon, why would you move back? It would take an offer almost beyond comprehension - it happens, but teams know that chances at top QBs don't just grow on trees. Most teams trading out of the top 3 historically have a long term qb already. 

I'm sure the Vikings would love to draft Daniels, but I hope we can agree their meeting is likely more of a formality than an indicator the Vikings are likely to take him. Either that, or perhaps the Vikings are seeing signs that Williams/Maye/Mccarthy go top 3 and Daniels can be had in the 4-6 pick area?

[Maynard13]

2 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

And you have the audacity to call me a troll. 

I didnt call you a troll. You got the wrong guy.  I called you a trolley.

[Maynard13]

2 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

I’ve consistently demonstrated patience trying to point you towards what I’m actually saying. You’ve consistently ignored it and dug in on something else.

I mean, sure, if you say so.

I’m dancing around laughing at you guys at this point because you’ve left me nothing else to do or say. 

I'd take dancing lessons if I were you.

[Bronx]

On 4/14/2024 at 3:54 PM, bicketybam said:

Perfect. Bak and Rodgers can finish their careers together in 3 snaps.

Fixed.

[Maynard13]

3 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

@Maynard13

Looks like the Vikings believe they can get into the top 3. You’re good at making bad assumptions. I just keep winning.

At one time people believed the world was flat. They must have been on the Vikings staff.

[The Crusher]

Hello Vikings, you so crazy!!

[Integrity28]

7 minutes ago, Maynard13 said:

At one time people believed the world was flat. They must have been on the Vikings staff.

Wait, did you change the original reply to make it less funny? Holy sh*t.

[Integrity28]

3 hours ago, Maynard13 said:

Yea like spending $100 on scratch tickets and scoring a $3 win.

Oh wait, no, you actually responded twice so that everyone could see you go from bad to worse. Holy sh*t x2.

[OtherwiseHappyinLife]

[Tony The Wiz]

On 4/14/2024 at 7:42 AM, Jetfuel66 said:

• I think seven offensive tackles go in the first round. Maybe more. And it’s because of the scarcity of the position. If you, say, have a tackle need and a receiver need this year—or really any year in this era—it’s fair to say it’ll be a lot easier to address receiver later in the draft than it will be tackle. Which, I think, will have these guys flying off the board.

 

This quote was taken from Albert Breer's article in SI.

Although I would love another weapon or two I agree that receivers are easier to find in the later rounds than tackles. I can see JD locking down one of the top 3 tackles in round 1 and then addressing receiver in round 3. It is definitely harder to find quality OL talent, especially tackles in the later rounds than it is to find receivers. The most recent drafts prove this to be true.

I have 5 but if you count Barton as a tackle than its 6. Barton is my number one guard. 

[jamesr]

Exactly my point in all of this. I've never said "no OT", I'm simply saying if you cannot admit that the argument some are using to rationalize an OT with pick 10 isn't identical to the argument for a QB, then it's steeped in bias and not logic.

I think the difference is - if we had to start a rookie LT who we pick at #10, because of an injury, we could / should still expect a successful season (I.e. playoffs).

But if we had to start a rookie QB who we pick at #10, because of an injury, we're more likely to see the #1 overall pick in next year's draft than we are to see any playoff success.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[Rolloffjet]

8 minutes ago, jamesr said:

I think the difference is - if we had to start a rookie LT who we pick at #10, because of an injury, we could / should still expect a successful season (I.e. playoffs).

But if we had to start a rookie QB who we pick at #10, because of an injury, we're more likely to see the #1 overall pick in next year's draft than we are to see any playoff success.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

Yea because arod  would go down not like we didnt sign a back up name taylor. Go a step further now if that back up ot pulls hamstring and the other back up ot got cramps we be doomed. Draft ever pick ot in draft im down now

[Jet_Engine1]

On 4/14/2024 at 7:42 AM, Jetfuel66 said:

• I think seven offensive tackles go in the first round. Maybe more. And it’s because of the scarcity of the position. If you, say, have a tackle need and a receiver need this year—or really any year in this era—it’s fair to say it’ll be a lot easier to address receiver later in the draft than it will be tackle. Which, I think, will have these guys flying off the board.

 

This quote was taken from Albert Breer's article in SI.

Although I would love another weapon or two I agree that receivers are easier to find in the later rounds than tackles. I can see JD locking down one of the top 3 tackles in round 1 and then addressing receiver in round 3. It is definitely harder to find quality OL talent, especially tackles in the later rounds than it is to find receivers. The most recent drafts prove this to be true.

Yes. But... No. LOL

 

I'm good with ANY of the top prospects on O as long as they actually contribute... Odunze, Fuaga, Fashanu, Nabers, Bowers.. whatever. As long as the player is worth a sh*t. 

[Integrity28]

2 hours ago, jamesr said:

I think the difference is - if we had to start a rookie LT who we pick at #10, because of an injury, we could / should still expect a successful season (I.e. playoffs).

But if we had to start a rookie QB who we pick at #10, because of an injury, we're more likely to see the #1 overall pick in next year's draft than we are to see any playoff success.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

Finally, someone that makes a good point. Well done, Jamesr.

[Smashmouth]

7 hours ago, Maynard13 said:

At one time people believed the world was flat. They must have been on the Vikings staff.

Those people are still alive to this day 

[TuscanyTile2]

3 hours ago, jamesr said:

I think the difference is - if we had to start a rookie LT who we pick at #10, because of an injury, we could / should still expect a successful season (I.e. playoffs).

But if we had to start a rookie QB who we pick at #10, because of an injury, we're more likely to see the #1 overall pick in next year's draft than we are to see any playoff success.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
 

Fwiw, if GW goes down, we're in deep trouble.

[Mr. Rogers]

1 hour ago, Integrity28 said:

Finally, someone that makes a good point. Well done, Jamesr.

I effectively said this and you ignored it?

[Maynard13]

12 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

@Maynard13

Looks like the Vikings believe they can get into the top 3. You’re good at making bad assumptions. I just keep winning.

You gotta admit, Vikes moving up to 3 would cost a virtual fortune and would be as dumb as the majority of your posts in this thread. 

[Maynard13]

8 hours ago, The Crusher said:

Hello Vikings, you so crazy!!

They wouldnt be able to do it. Isnt there a limit on how many #1 draft picks you can offer in a trade. They got 2 to offer right now, 11 & 23 in 2024.   They'd have to give up #1 in 2025 and #1 IN 2026.  Too much? Nope.

The Trey Lance trade was 

2021: round 1, Pick 12

2022: Round 1, Pick 29

2022: Round 3, Pick 102

2023: Round 1, Pick 29

Notice that two of those 1st rounders were way back in round 1 (29 in '22 & 29 in '23)

They'd have to pony up two more 1st's.  Not even sure they are even allowed to do that.   Theyd definately have to give up another #1 and a couple 2's and a couple 3's.  Totally absurd.  

[Swampfox]

IF we don't trade (up or down) and don't sign FA OT, then FUAGA as I think he is the best at both run & pass blocking. Yes I know he is supposed to be RT but MAYBE can make the switch to LT like AVT did.