Originally posted by dtg_9er:
IdahoNiner--for clarification the "strawman argument" is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of someone's statement. So when people say you can't judge a draft the first year it is not such an argument. Nor is saying the team's strength is such that draft picks can't get on the field. You might think it wrong but it is not a fallacy.
The only time you should judge a draft early is if a team makes a knot-head move, like trading a bunch of picks for a player who is nearly washed up...but George Allen put together some pretty good teams using this method so even that criticism has to be tempered--did they reach the playoffs with that trade? Last years draft was tailored for depth and many picks were made in case vets were either injured or not up to par.
For instance, Boone at RG is a risk, leaving backup OT empty so they took some guys to cover an emergency. The same is true of Jenkins. They believe he will be a good receiver in a year or two but it takes vets like VD half a year to begin to understand the offense, so what is the likelihood of Jenkins catching on right away. James is lightening in a bottle but there is no way he replaces or takes reps away from Gore or Hunter...they are just too good.
So again i ask, Why draft for those positions #1 and #2 overall, if you know there are other depth issues, and you know these guys wont sniff the field for atleast a season?
And please save the definition of a strawman. I know what it is, thats why i stated it. People are useing a strawman argument against my points. They are misrepresenting my statments. Like i said i know why these guys are riding the pine. My arguement is not that they shouldnt be riding the pine based on depth, but that we highly overdrafted at those positions.
You bring up George Allen? guy hasnt been been around since 1990, and please show me one draft where his entire draft class made no contributions year 1.
[ Edited by IdahoNiner on Nov 16, 2012 at 9:12 AM ]