Page 16 of 28 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 278
  1. #151
    Caine's Avatar
    Caine is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    5,135
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    How so? You based how good our trade was based on what other teams got for later picks after ours, but failed to compare it to what the the Rams got.

    Besides swapping first rounders, an additional 4th, 5th & 7th rounder this year pales in comparison to getting an additional 2nd round pick this year & two additional 1st round picks in the next two years.
    Singer, when are you going to learn that Marrdro doesn't deal in facts or logic, only conspiracy theories and convoluted BS....

    Of COURSE the Rams trade doesn't factor in here because if it did it would render moot everything Marr has previously stated on this topic. And we all know what great pains Marr will go to to pretend that his POV is valid...

    Examples:

    "Jackson is a quality QB"
    "Childress didn't want Favre back"
    "Wilf MADE Childress play Favre"
    "Moss didn't improve our offense"
    "Childress doesn't draft players"
    "Childress doesn't sign players"
    "Childress is a quality HC"
    "Spielman made a great trade"

    ....


    See a pattern?

    Caine

  2. #152
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by 12purplepride28 View Post
    Something pointed out by PF, Singer, and countless other people on the internet that I disagree with is the sentiment that the trade Spielman worked out involving our 1st rounder was only worth it if the players we received turn out to be contributors on our team. I disagree with this because I believe the trading process and the drafting process are separate.

    No matter who we got with those other picks that is 3 more players than we would have drafted from our previous position, in addition to Matt Kalil, the man we were going to take with our 3rd overall pick. The trade was successful because we did not lose the person we wanted and we garnered extra picks. The drafting may result in nothing, but that doesn't mean the trade was a fail. We got value for our 3rd while losing nothing. It can't be seen as anything but good. Whether it was the "obvious thing to do" or not is irrelevant. Spielman made the right call and GMs and teams ignore what is seen as the "obvious thing to do" year in and year out. Give him some credit for the trade.
    You are correct, but it is important that we find some other fault avenue that we can point out to make sure there isn't any positive swing towards Spielman. We all know this is misplaced.

  3. #153
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,198
    Quote Originally Posted by 12purplepride28 View Post
    Something pointed out by PF, Singer, and countless other people on the internet that I disagree with is the sentiment that the trade Spielman worked out involving our 1st rounder was only worth it if the players we received turn out to be contributors on our team. I disagree with this because I believe the trading process and the drafting process are separate.

    No matter who we got with those other picks that is 3 more players than we would have drafted from our previous position, in addition to Matt Kalil, the man we were going to take with our 3rd overall pick. The trade was successful because we did not lose the person we wanted and we garnered extra picks. The drafting may result in nothing, but that doesn't mean the trade was a fail. We got value for our 3rd while losing nothing. It can't be seen as anything but good. Whether it was the "obvious thing to do" or not is irrelevant. Spielman made the right call and GMs and teams ignore what is seen as the "obvious thing to do" year in and year out. Give him some credit for the trade.

    So your opinion is that it doesn't matter if the person we drafted as a result of a trade pans out or not?

    So it didn't matter to you that T.Williamson didn't pan out in the Moss trade?

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  4. #154
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by Caine View Post
    Singer, when are you going to learn that Marrdro doesn't deal in facts or logic, only conspiracy theories and convoluted BS....

    Of COURSE the Rams trade doesn't factor in here because if it did it would render moot everything Marr has previously stated on this topic. And we all know what great pains Marr will go to to pretend that his POV is valid...

    Examples:

    "Jackson is a quality QB"
    "Childress didn't want Favre back"
    "Wilf MADE Childress play Favre"
    "Moss didn't improve our offense"
    "Childress doesn't draft players"
    "Childress doesn't sign players"
    "Childress is a quality HC"
    "Spielman made a great trade"

    ....


    See a pattern?

    Caine
    Yes Marrdro is very exhausting in his relentless nature of defending his asinine assumptions. I think he half believes it and the other half just enjoys the "discussion".

    The St. Louis trade was a much bigger value. Whether or not their GM was more ingenious than ours can be debated.

    IMO, both GM's deserve credit for utilizing their position to maximize their leverage. St. Louis received more value (although they kept trading and not sure they didn't get a little too clever). Spielman does deserve credit for taking advantage of his position while still getting the person the team was obviously targeting.

  5. #155
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    So your opinion is that it doesn't matter if the person we drafted as a result of a trade pans out or not?

    So it didn't matter to you that T.Williamson didn't pan out in the Moss trade?
    Criticize the pick, not the trade. That's all he is saying.

  6. #156
    12purplepride28's Avatar
    12purplepride28 is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    1,852
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    So your opinion is that it doesn't matter if the person we drafted as a result of a trade pans out or not?

    So it didn't matter to you that T.Williamson didn't pan out in the Moss trade?
    I don't think we got a good deal in that trade at all. It's also different when considering that we didn't lose a player in this trade. Some of you are saying it's only a good trade if the player's we got are going to be good. But worst case scenario they all bust and we ended up doing the exact same thing we would've done with the 3 spot.
    I am NOT here to provide good football insight or rational observations. I am an emotional 19 year old Viking fan and I expect you to adjust your expectations from my posts.

  7. #157
    12purplepride28's Avatar
    12purplepride28 is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    1,852
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by tastywaves View Post

    The St. Louis trade was a much bigger value. Whether or not their GM was more ingenious than ours can be debated.
    The difference in the two trades is that the Skins were trading up for a franchise QB and our partners would've been trading for a RB. Huge difference. If there was a 3rd "can't miss" QB prospect like Luck and RG3 then we would've gotten a big bounty too.
    I am NOT here to provide good football insight or rational observations. I am an emotional 19 year old Viking fan and I expect you to adjust your expectations from my posts.

  8. #158
    tastywaves's Avatar
    tastywaves is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by 12purplepride28 View Post
    The difference in the two trades is that the Skins were trading up for a franchise QB and our partners would've been trading for a RB. Huge difference. If there was a 3rd "can't miss" QB prospect like Luck and RG3 then we would've gotten a big bounty too.
    No argument, RGIII was perceived as a much higher prize. That's where you separate the value of the trade from the genius of the trade.

    The first is easy to grasp, the second is up to debate. Especially with limited knowledge at our disposal. My take is it's best to give them both credit for taking advantage of their respective situations. Don't need to glorify either GM, but they both do deserve some credit.

  9. #159
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,198
    Quote Originally Posted by 12purplepride28 View Post
    I don't think we got a good deal in that trade at all. It's also different when considering that we didn't lose a player in this trade. Some of you are saying it's only a good trade if the player's we got are going to be good. But worst case scenario they all bust and we ended up doing the exact same thing we would've done with the 3 spot.
    It was a decent trade but there was no genious-ness behind pulling the trigger on it. Only a team wanting the #3 pick bad enough & ponying up some later round picks for it.

    What if them wanting the RB had just been a ruse & they end up taking Kalil with our #3 pick? How good of a trade would it have been then?

    My guess is we would have then taken Blackmon or Claiborne and Spielman would have said that was the guy they were targeting.

    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  10. #160
    marshallvike's Avatar
    marshallvike is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Posts
    2,456
    Quote Originally Posted by singersp View Post
    So your opinion is that it doesn't matter if the person we drafted as a result of a trade pans out or not?

    So it didn't matter to you that T.Williamson didn't pan out in the Moss trade?
    Singer, that has absolutely nothing to do with his point and you know it. At that point the ownership and skeleton front office,(wrongly) felt they had to get rid of Randy. Then they felt a need to reach for a field stretcher. This year, we drafted the best non QB in the draft and picked up three extra picks for free.Not great extra picks(position/round wise), but maybe we luck out on one of them. In any case, the draft day trade and the player trade can not be compared.
    Why must you defend everything this FO does....to the point of making your self look like a yes man.

Page 16 of 28 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •