The Trade - 8 Games Later

[Ring 6]

No I haven't. There are different levels of knowing. That is incontestable fact.

How can there be different levels of knowing what the playbook calls for you to do?
You either know it or you don't.
Is it your argument that Brady calls plays and Wright doesn't know what they mean he is supposed to do?

 

[shmessy]

Then why are you disagreeing with me when I am saying he should know the playbook by now?

There is a difference between KNOWING the playbook and playing it on the field without thinking and with precise timing with the QB.

Perhaps you should re-read Oswlek's post about the piano playing.

This is not a microwave dinner.

 

[Ring 6]

There is something called "timing". Getting down the timing between a QB and a receiver takes........time and repetition.

Also, players new to a system tend to talk about how they can get to know a new system, but it takes time to play it without having to THINK about it.

These are all pretty widely known and talked about subjects. Not a new concept.

And those things are not called 'he hasn't learned the playbook yet'

Its as if I tell you I certainly know how to get home from work, and you saying "BS explain the operation of the internal combustion engine to me"

 

[Ring 6]

There is a difference between KNOWING the playbook and playing it on the field without thinking and with precise timing with the QB.

Perhaps you should re-read Oswlek's post about the piano playing.

This is not a microwave dinner.

Yes there is. YOU are the one who seems to not understand that.

I said it is wrong to say he hasn't learned the playbook.

Please explain to me how citing a different issue proves that he hasn't learned the playbook.

Again, I say 2+2=4 and you say no 3+3=6

 

[Ring 6]

I gave you the link. It's a video.

And I am on a computer without sound.
If you would like me to respond, you will have to tell me what it says.
I'm pretty sure it doesn't say Tim Wright doesn't know the playbook though.

 

[Oswlek]

This has absolutely nothing to do with the claim that he doesn't know the playbook.

Which is great since I never made that claim.

 

[JMC00]

In order to get open, one has to know the route tree system.

Better question is how many snaps has he been playing to get that many receptions.

He's a work in progress.

104 Snaps
18 Targets

Gronk
317 Snaps
64 Targets


I know it's a small sample size but he's been targeted on similar average as Gronk when out there.

 

[Ring 6]

Which is great since I never made that claim.

Well in a way you did, because that was the claim I was responding to in the posts I made that you responded back to.
In other words the discussion was based on that statement. Perhaps I misunderstood that you were changing the subject.
Of course there are levels of understanding of what the offense is trying to accomplish on a play.
But the discussion was based on the claim he isn't playing because he doesn't know the plays, and all of my responses were clearly on that point.

 

[Oswlek]

In other words the discussion was based on that statement. Perhaps I misunderstood that you were changing the subject.

I never changed the subject at all. I simply said that there were reasons to believe that the team has higher aspirations for Tim and that some build up in use is to be expected. It was you who became pedantic about some trivial difference between book learning and repetitive learning.

 

[Ring 6]

I never changed the subject at all. I simply said that there were reasons to believe that the team has higher aspirations for Tim and that some build up in use is to be expected. It was you who became pedantic about some trivial difference between learning and repetition.

Not at all. I was having a discussion with 3 separate people, 2 of whom said he didn't know the playbook, and a 3rd who appeared to be agreeing with them.
As is often the case on this board we were talking about 2 different things.

I was not distinguishing between learning and repetition, I was clarifying that my points were in response to the claim that he did not know the plays.

 

[Oswlek]

Not at all. I was having a discussion with 3 separate people, 2 of whom said he didn't know the playbook, and a 3rd who appeared to be agreeing with them.

Ahhhhh.... that makes sense. Carry on, then.

 

[Ring 6]

Ahhhhh.... that makes sense. Carry on, then.

Nah, I'm done, lol.

 

[hwc]

I don't know nothin' about playbooks, but..

I have been very pleased with Wright's emerging role and early production with the Pats. Not really a big surprise. He had proven NFL-caliber production in his rookie season with the Bucs.

His production with the Pats will always be limited by his snaps. His PRIMARY role with the Pats is to provide a pass-catching TE when Gronk is not on the field -- something they desperately missed last year. His secondary role is the snaps when the Pats are in a tw0-tight end package, and really a subset of two-TE packages -- the pass oriented situations. The number of snaps in that package will be game-plan specific.

With regards to the trade, it's all gravy. Polian said the fourth round pick, by itself, was more than the Pats should have gotten for Mankins (and Mankin's contract). His analysis was that the draft pick alone made it a good trade for the Pats. Just a little perspective on how NFL GM-types view these sorts of things (and the importance of getting out from under big cap hits for fading vets).

 

[Rob0729]

I don't know nothin' about playbooks, but..

I have been very pleased with Wright's emerging role and early production with the Pats. Not really a big surprise. He had proven NFL-caliber production in his rookie season with the Bucs.

His production with the Pats will always be limited by his snaps. His PRIMARY role with the Pats is to provide a pass-catching TE when Gronk is not on the field -- something they desperately missed last year. His secondary role is the snaps when the Pats are in a tw0-tight end package, and really a subset of two-TE packages -- the pass oriented situations. The number of snaps in that package will be game-plan specific.

With regards to the trade, it's all gravy. Polian said the fourth round pick, by itself, was more than the Pats should have gotten for Mankins (and Mankin's contract). His analysis was that the draft pick alone made it a good trade for the Pats. Just a little perspective on how NFL GM-types view these sorts of things (and the importance of getting out from under big cap hits for fading vets).

That was the surprising thing. I heard Polian talk about this trade and I was shocked how much he gushed over the Pats winning this trade. I had to check to make sure I was correct that he was saying it and not another radio host. But Polian thinks the Pats absolutely made the right move by trading Mankins for a fourth and Wright.

 

[Oswlek]

That was the surprising thing. I heard Polian talk about this trade and I was shocked how much he gushed over the Pats winning this trade. I had to check to make sure I was correct that he was saying it and not another radio host. But Polian thinks the Pats absolutely made the right move by trading Mankins for a fourth and Wright.

This might be the first time a reference to Bill Polian didn't make me want to punch him in the face.




Wait a minute.... nope. I still do.

 

[BelizePats]

I would like to volunteer to hold him down while you do so. And not because I think you need the help, Oswlek, but simply because it would make me feel good to participate in the beat down of that self serving scum bag.

 

[resdubwhite]

and I thought my wife was argumentative.

 

[Bruins29]

Look, the trade was fine.

/thread

 

[Marinlik]

Another fun quote from the Tampa Bay fan forum:


"Which was my point, you drooling imbecile. Smart teams (like the Patriots) give up little but ask a lot. Earlier this year they unloaded a fading vet OG on us and took a young TE who has 3 TDs in the last 4 games. The laughter is still echoing in Foxboro. Were you too busy stroking your Licht doll to notice? Watch what Casillas does in NE."


http://www.bucschat.com/forum/4-tampa-bay-buccaneers-forum/



I can just feel the love for the Mankins trade on their side.

I didn't really love the trade at first because I thought that it was a bit too close to the season and shaked up the lineup on OL a lot. I liked what we got for him. But didn't love the timing. But I never understood why the Bucs would trade for him. He's old and they didn't look like a super bowl bound team when they traded for him. I would have hated that trade if I was a bucs fan. Not because Mankins suck. But because he's an average pass blocker and he's old in football age. For that they gave up a young promising TE and a pick that could help them build for the future. Just plain stupid.

I projected us to release Mankins in the off season because he was too expensive for what he was: a very good runblocker but average pass blocker. In this passing league he wasn't really worth his pay.

 

[Bruins29]

I was actually going to mention release. I thought they could have just as easily released him given the situation. If they had I am sure people would have understood it. I am not sure why people have a problem with them fleecing the Bucks here.