Jump to content

Longgone

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,014

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Longgone

  1. Longgone
    They will take their highest graded player, whether bat, arm, hs or college.
  2. Longgone
    I'd be happy with any of the top five. If they try to get cute and take someone from the second tier, I probably wouldn't be happy.
  3. Longgone
    There seems to be a clear top tier of five. Taking someone from the second tier, just because you'd prefer a college bat, seems irrational.
  4. Longgone
    I'd be more concerned about "He can't run or separate anymore."
  5. Longgone
    That he makes the team for x amount of time.
  6. Longgone
    Pay no heed, the whole discussion regarding low value positions is overdone. You don't draft positions, you draft individuals and what they can provide for your club compared to other options.
  7. Longgone
    It already is a reality. You can't direct the ball into the gaps, you can only hit it hard, the rest is up to randomness.
  8. Longgone
    Like everything else, it depends on the return.
  9. Longgone
    Time.
  10. Longgone
    No, he's already received a qualifying offer once. He's going to be tough to trade, as he's a rental if he opts out, but you'd be stuck with the contract if he gets hurt.
  11. Longgone
    You'd never draft or not draft by a category. You do factor risk into your grading of individuals, so pitchers and high schoolers have that in their grading. After factoring for risk, if that is the highest player on your board, take him. If you consistently miss, get better scouts.
  12. Longgone
    Not much to choose between Crews and Langford. Any of the top 5 are premium choices.
  13. Longgone
    It was a "groin" injury, he only missed 7 games, and seems to be playing very well without any issues.
  14. Longgone
    Langford is a solid defender, likely with the speed for center, he just hasn't played there much. Not drafting him for defense, though, premium bat, same with Crews. If you want defense, draft C!ark.
  15. Longgone
    I understand this thinking, but Detroit isn't that deep yet. Injuries are a reality and competition is the lifeblood of the NFL.
  16. Longgone
    He looks like someone you might take a 7th round flyer on, but Holmes likes him, really, really, likes him. Targeted him. Sees him at least as one of the top 70 players in the draft. It will be interesting to see how it plays out. Same with Sorsdal.
  17. Longgone
    It may be greedy, but I'd still like to see Williams at the y, and a big, long, fast x receiver acquired, someone exactly like Chark or Courtland Sutton.
  18. Longgone
    What they really need is a pocket collapsing defensive tackle and a big, fast x receiver.
  19. Longgone
    Nah, if he's good, he'll get opportunities. He just needs to focus on getting good.
  20. Longgone
    The fact that the next player they were hot for was an obscure, nearly 24 yo journeyman nose tackle speaks to that.
  21. Longgone
    They did address it, they traded three picks to move up and take one in the 3rd round. And i don't think they see Paschal as a dt, he's an end, like Cominsky who can shift inside on passing downs.
  22. Longgone
    Exactly, run stuffers need length, strength, balance and quick feet, that isn't going to show up on ras. However, this pick and Sorsdal will be interesting to follow regarding Holmes drafting acumen.
  23. Longgone
    He also mocked Josh Paschal to them last year, so maybe he's on to something.
  24. Longgone
    It's typical Charlie Campbell.
  25. Longgone
    They did not report that, they speculated.
×
×
  • Create New...