Gronk Watch

[RayClay]

No one knows what he has.

 

[JarOfMayo51]

I know I am kind of splitting hairs here, but can we just wait a moment before making Gronk "the greatest TE in history?" How about "one of the best?" Because if we have the GOAT QB, GOAT TE, GOAT head coach, GOAT owner, and some really great players then I'd really like to win a few more SBs with them...

Durability at the TE position matters. Tony Gonzalez played his career going over the middle for mediocre QB's while putting up great numbers. I don't think we should just discount that.

Players weren't going knee hunting like it's a sport in Gonzalez days.. now players are going low with regularity, especially on players like Gronk

 

[raduray]

I think the Pats will be at least 12-4 without Gronk, but that won't be enough to get a bye. The Broncos have the tie breaker. I think Cincy does too depending on their losses. I think the Pats beat Tennessee and Miami in their current state, but I don't know if they can beat Houston or the Jets.

Don't forget though, Cincy and Denver still have to play each other (hoping for an improbable tie), and they both also have to play the dangerous Steelers.

 

[mosslost]

Because in the last week you haven written nothing of substance but bitter posts.

Culminating now in your brilliant idea to trade away the best TE in the history of the game because he wants to make sure that his knee is healthy and he is under no additional danger of ligament damage due to a serious injury.

But who cares about our playoff and 2016+ chances. We need to win games against the ****ing Texans and Titans for that oh so important HFA.

It was not my idea.

 

[PatsFan2]

Don't forget though, Cincy and Denver still have to play each other (hoping for an improbable tie), and they both also have to play the dangerous Steelers.

The Bottom line is we have to win if we don't win we cannot benefit from their loss. With our injury history or state we NEED a Bye-week.

 

[mosslost]

Because in the last week you haven written nothing of substance but bitter posts.

Culminating now in your brilliant idea to trade away the best TE in the history of the game because he wants to make sure that his knee is healthy and he is under no additional danger of ligament damage due to a serious injury.

But who cares about our playoff and 2016+ chances. We need to win games against the ****ing Texans and Titans for that oh so important HFA.

So you would not take THREE first round draft choices for Gronk from a bad NFC team if the trade were on the table? Fourty Eight Super Bowls have been won by teams with no Rob Gronkowski, including three by the New England Patriots. The ****ing Baltimore Ravens won one a few years ago. If you think such a trade is impossible then I think you are following the wrong team.

 

[raduray]

So you would not take THREE first round draft choices for Gronk from a bad NFC team if the trade were on the table? Fourty Eight Super Bowls have been won by teams with no Rob Gronkowski, including three by the New England Patriots. The ****ing Baltimore Ravens won one a few years ago. If you think such a trade is impossible then I think you are following the wrong team.

Show me the offer of three first round choices from a bad NFL team and I'll be screaming for the Pats to do it. Absent that, your argument posits an unrealistic strawman.

 

[chasa]

Don't forget though, Cincy and Denver still have to play each other (hoping for an improbable tie), and they both also have to play the dangerous Steelers.

A tie would be good for both, unless the patriots win out.

 

[Haterproof]

Don't forget though, Cincy and Denver still have to play each other (hoping for an improbable tie), and they both also have to play the dangerous Steelers.

I see Cincy dropping at least 1 or 2 more games & Denver sure won't run the table with that schedule! I think New England & Cincinnati's schedules are more favorable than Denver's!

 

[mosslost]

Show me the offer of three first round choices from a bad NFL team and I'll be screaming for the Pats to do it. Absent that, your argument posits an unrealistic strawman.

Its not a straw man at all. And it's faulty logic to require the existence of an actual trade offer to call it a straw man. "A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent."

It has nothing to do with a straw man. In fact was simply a devised scenario to refute his idea that trading Gronk would be entirely ridiculous under any circumstance. Which you proved silly by your own response. Gronk is amazing, yet he ends seasons injured more often than not. It is simply naïve to act like it is not an issue, and even potentially somewhat Shakespearian what is happening with him.

One should not use the Straw Man so lightly when one does not know its meaning.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Don't forget though, Cincy and Denver still have to play each other (hoping for an improbable tie), and they both also have to play the dangerous Steelers.

we have to pretty much hope thst the steelers beat the bengals or broncos and for the bengals to beat denver.

 

[raduray]

Its not a straw man at all. And it's faulty logic to require the existence of an actual trade offer to call it a straw man. "A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent."

It has nothing to do with a straw man. In fact was simply a devised scenario to refute his idea that trading Gronk would be entirely ridiculous under any circumstance. Which you proved silly by your own response. Gronk is amazing, yet he ends seasons injured more often than not. It is simply naïve to act like it is not an issue, and even potentially somewhat Shakespearian what is happening with him.

One should not use the Straw Man so lightly when one does not know its meaning.

Not much difference between positing an unrealistic scenario and then arguing against it versus arguing in favor of that same scenario. Your example of the three top draft choices was such a sham scenario.

 

[varjao]

I want the Steelahs out of the playoffs, I think they present a bad match up for our defense, they are connecting 20/30 yards like it was a 5 yard pass, and racking up yards after the catch. Their defense is suspect but so is our offense without all the pieces, and Lewis is out of the season and I'm starting to think on life without Edelman for this year.

We can win in an ugly game on the road against the Bengals or Broncos. If the Steelers open a lead against us, even at Gillete, I dont know. Right now this Pats team is not like the team from last year in terms of coming back. We have to play with a lead and it's already been a difficult task to sustain a lead in the recent weeks.

 

[mosslost]

Not much difference between positing an unrealistic scenario and then arguing against it versus arguing in favor of that same scenario. Your example of the three top draft choices was such a sham scenario.

What you said about the Straw Man is simply incorrect and false.

OK, so you are saying that a team offering three first round draft choices for Gronk is very unrealistic in the favor of the position that no team in their right mind would trade us such draft picks for Gronk. My point is being proven quicker and quicker without my needing to do much work.

 

[mosslost]

I want the Steelahs out of the playoffs, I think they present a bad match up for our defense, they are connecting 20/30 yards like it was a 5 yard pass, and racking up yards after the catch. Their defense is suspect but so is our offense without all the pieces, and Lewis is out of the season and I'm starting to think on life without Edelman for this year.

We can win in an ugly game on the road against the Bengals or Broncos. If the Steelers open a lead against us, even at Gillete, I dont know. Right now this Pats team is not like the team from last year in terms of coming back. We have to play with a lead and it's already been a difficult task to sustain a lead in the recent weeks.

The thing is if the Steelers beat both Cinci and Denver, we have a much better shot of avoiding the Steelers in a Wild Card round, by getting the bye. True we could see them later but the hope would be we would be healthier by then and they; however unlikely might lose at Indy or Cinci/Denver themselves in the Wild Card. I would weigh it toward getting the 2 seed more important than keeping them out of the playoffs and ourselves being the 3rd seed.

 

[raduray]

What you said about the Straw Man is simply incorrect and false.

OK, so you are saying that a team offering three first round draft choices for Gronk is very unrealistic in the favor of the position that no team in their right mind would trade us such draft picks for Gronk. My point is being proven quicker and quicker without my needing to do much work.

Leaving aside the definition of a straw man, your position in favor of entertaining a trade for Gronk posited a deal where we would get three first round choices from a bad team in return. I'm merely stating that that this offer is totally unrealistic and was reinforcing my position by supporting such a trade in the unrealistic case that such an offer was on the table.

Maybe you forgot to put a smiley at the end or your post to signify it was in jest?

 

[FCB02062]

"Hey there, I'm Gronk's Dad. Can you show me your squat form?"

 

[mosslost]

Leaving aside the definition of a straw man, your position in favor of entertaining a trade for Gronk posited a deal where we would get three first round choices from a bad team in return. I'm merely stating that that this offer is totally unrealistic and was reinforcing my position by supporting such a trade in the unrealistic case that such an offer was on the table.

Maybe you forgot to put a smiley at the end or your post to signify it was in jest?

Fair enough. I was simply responding to other poster's suggestion to trade Gronk. (Was not my idea) Another poster replied to the first poster how that would never be considered under any scenario (He called it insane) and I simply stated that it is certainly not impossible if an insane offer was made and Gronk had been injury prone.

 

[raduray]

Fair enough. I was simply responding to other poster's suggestion to trade Gronk. (Was not my idea) Another poster replied to the first poster how that would never be considered under any scenario (He called it insane) and I simply stated that it is certainly not impossible if an insane offer was made and Gronk had been injury prone.

We're cool.

 

[PittPatriot]

Players weren't going knee hunting like it's a sport in Gonzalez days.. now players are going low with regularity, especially on players like Gronk

Rule changes have increased lower body hits...but Gonzalez still had to play in the era of less protection of the defenseless receiver, always the focal point of the opposing defense. It was harder to get open and more likely you were going to get crushed trying to catch a ball in traffic.
Again - all I am saying is that Gronk is a one of the best ever and if he continues, he will eclipse Tony Gonzalez.