WR Malcolm Mitchell on Injured Reserve

[BabeParilli]

A jag poster decided to hijack a thread with a 4 million word argument over a subjective topic that no one really cared about.

Basically a "what's your favorite color" type argument with stats and innuendos.

Oh and kontra decided to play a "chase the laser " game with the little kitty to offset his boredom while riding out hurricane Irma.

Hey, I responded to those who responded to

I've presented my case many, many times to you. You've yet to refute anything that's been said here. Further, again, by your OWN DEFINITION, neither guy is a JAG. You hung yourself, buddy. I just gave you the rope.

I refuted you're case quite handily, Walt. Then you chose to go on and on about the terminology. That's okay. If you get jollies out of arguing about the subjective nature of JAG, I won't deny you your fun.

 

[BabeParilli]

Another Patsfan who didn't watch last season and especially crunch time in the SB.

THREAD IGNORE ON!!!

OH NO, NOT THAT!!! LOL

 

[VJCPatriot]

It's too bad. I really liked Mitchell. He could have had a breakout season this year the way he was showing us his potential last year.

The importance of the Cooks trade grows larger and larger. Edelman out for the year, Mitchell to IR, and Amendola suffered a head injury.

If we didn't have at least a healthy Cooks right now, we'd be up the creek without the paddle.

 

[PatriotsNumero1Fan]

It's too bad. I really liked Mitchell. He could have had a breakout season this year the way he was showing us his potential last year.

The importance of the Cooks trade grows larger and larger. Edelman out for the year, Mitchell to IR, and Amendola suffered a head injury.

If we didn't have at least a healthy Cooks right now, we'd be up the creek without the paddle.

Mitchell will be back this season but it better be 100 percent back. They need a guy like Dorsett to pick up the offense and contribute.

 

[BradyFTW!]

You have been well shredded despite your self-delusion to the contrary.


You have made two points of argument that I am only repeating. I didn't make your argument into anything other than what it was.

You note that MM's rookie year was comparable to Branch and Edelman. In this you are somehow magically deducing that because he is comparable in that rookie year he will go on to achieve similar results to them. There is no valid reason to believe that whatsoever. Both DB and JE were not that special as rookies. Neither was MM.

You also compare a college QB to a college WR. It doesn't matter if MM played some DB or not. He was a receiver. JE wasn't. THERE IS NO COMPARISON (yet that doesn't stop you as part of your "handing me my ass", lol, pathetic.).

Somehow in your disheveled mind you see me as strawmanning what you have claimed. Bizarre. I'm stating your claims as you made them.

I know what a strawman is, and I didn't strawman anything; you're the one who should research it.


You ask what is the dishonesty? How about trying to compare a college QB to a college WR in order to desperately try to make a point? How about assuming what somebody does in their rookie year in necessarily indicative of what they may do in the future because somebody else did better in their future?

JAG is a relative term. In the big picture of the NFL, DB was pretty JAGgy. He certainly was JAGgy as a rookie.

Here, this might give you some insight as to what the NFL considers to be a JAG.

Titans Label Justin Hunter 'JAG' for 'Just Another Guy' After He Ran Wrong Route



Face reality. What have you really provided here other than comparing a college WR to a college QB along with supposing that similar rookie years somehow mean a similar future (and cherry picked examples at that.).

There is no substance.

You've provided a lot of nothing to the argument other than lots of "oh boy you got your ass handed to you" and "wow, you made a strawman". It's all smoke, mirrors and ********. It's a whole lot of nothing. It's sleazy.

Now you'll start harping on the "he said Branch was a JAG" angle. Try to discredit the opponent when you really don't have a legit argument, right.

The facts are MM will not start 75% of the games he could have since he was drafted. The facts are that he caught 32 balls last year. You like rookie comparisons to make a point? Here's one: Hart Lee Dykes had a better rookie year than MM, LMAO.


(And hey, I don't get "mad" over football talk. Saying that is a stupid, dishonest and sleazy tactic. It's what people who can't argue with facts use to try to pretend they are winning.)

JAG really isn't a relative term. A JAG is Just Another Guy, aka he's a replacement-level player. If you lose him, it doesn't matter because you can readily find another player of comparable quality without expending meaningful resources. There's another guy of the same basic quality on the waiver wire. Devin Lucien, for instance, is a JAG. DJ Foster is a JAG. You could maybe stretch the definition to suggest that someone like Kyle Van Noy is a JAG.

Malcolm Mitchell is objectively not a JAG. Failing to start as a rookie does not make you a JAG. ****, failing to start period does not make you a JAG, because there are lots of above-replacement-level WR3s in the NFL.

Also, Justin Hunter is a JAG. He's been in the league for 5 years, was given every opportunity along the way as a first round pick, and his best season was worse than Mitchell's rookie season. If you project any improvement whatsoever in Mitchell's career trajectory, it'll blow Justin Hunter out of the water pretty much by default.

 

[mgteich]

strongly disagree on Van Noy

Since he just received lots of guaranteed money, I think that Belichick agrees.

[QUOTE="BradyFTW!, post: 5085567, member: 10804" You could maybe stretch the definition to suggest that someone like Kyle Van Noy is a JAG. If you can't cut a guy because you're 100% certain he would not clear waivers, that's a clear indication that he's not a JAG.

Malcolm Mitchell is objectively not a JAG. Failing to start as a rookie does not make you a JAG. ****, failing to start period does not make you a JAG, because there are lots of above-replacement-level WR3s in the NFL.[/QUOTE]

 

[BradyFTW!]

strongly disagree on Van Noy

Since he just received lots of guaranteed money, I think that Belichick agrees.

[QUOTE="BradyFTW!, post: 5085567, member: 10804" You could maybe stretch the definition to suggest that someone like Kyle Van Noy is a JAG. If you can't cut a guy because you're 100% certain he would not clear waivers, that's a clear indication that he's not a JAG.

Malcolm Mitchell is objectively not a JAG. Failing to start as a rookie does not make you a JAG. ****, failing to start period does not make you a JAG, because there are lots of above-replacement-level WR3s in the NFL.

Would you agree that Jonathan Freeny is a JAG? Because Belichick gave him some guaranteed money too.

I classify Van Noy as marginally better than a JAG--better than Freeny--but not a huge step up. As I said in my first post, if someone wanted to expand the definition of JAG to outer limit of all plausibility, you could maybe find a way to encompass him in it. I wouldn't, but my point is that that's about as good as a player can be while even making this any kind of a conversation (which is why it's so dumb that this conversation is even being had about Mitchell).

As for why Belichick would give guaranteed money to a guy like Van Noy, it's the same reason why he gave guaranteed money to Freeny, and he gave more this time since Van Noy's a better player. Belichick has demonstrated a willingness to pay guys like that in the past in order to establish a baseline of performance so that he isn't constantly cycling through low-cost LBs trying to make one stick and killing continuity and communication in the middle of the defense in the process.

 

[IllegalContact]

Well at least he will be back but when?

my guess is when he's healed

 

[mgteich]

Yes, Freeny was/is a JAG linebacker. He is also a top Ster. He was given Slater type money in his two year extension.

On the other hand, Van Noy was given serious money. Everyone is talking about he $5.5M guaranteed. This doesn't count this year's slurry and bonuses of $1.2M.
$6.7M for two years is lots more than Freeny. Van Noy's 2019 salary gives him a bit of an increase to $4.2M salary, but of course, the team doesn't have to keep him if he isn't performing at a high level.

Would you agree that Jonathan Freeny is a JAG? Because Belichick gave him some guaranteed money too.

I classify Van Noy as marginally better than a JAG--better than Freeny--but not a huge step up. As I said in my first post, if someone wanted to expand the definition of JAG to outer limit of all plausibility, you could maybe find a way to encompass him in it. I wouldn't, but my point is that that's about as good as a player can be while even making this any kind of a conversation (which is why it's so dumb that this conversation is even being had about Mitchell).

As for why Belichick would give guaranteed money to a guy like Van Noy, it's the same reason why he gave guaranteed money to Freeny, and he gave more this time since Van Noy's a better player. Belichick has demonstrated a willingness to pay guys like that in the past in order to establish a baseline of performance so that he isn't constantly cycling through low-cost LBs trying to make one stick and killing continuity and communication in the middle of the defense in the process.

 

[BabeParilli]

JAG really isn't a relative term. A JAG is Just Another Guy, aka he's a replacement-level player. If you lose him, it doesn't matter because you can readily find another player of comparable quality without expending meaningful resources. There's another guy of the same basic quality on the waiver wire. Devin Lucien, for instance, is a JAG. DJ Foster is a JAG. You could maybe stretch the definition to suggest that someone like Kyle Van Noy is a JAG.

Malcolm Mitchell is objectively not a JAG. Failing to start as a rookie does not make you a JAG. ****, failing to start period does not make you a JAG, because there are lots of above-replacement-level WR3s in the NFL.

Also, Justin Hunter is a JAG. He's been in the league for 5 years, was given every opportunity along the way as a first round pick, and his best season was worse than Mitchell's rookie season. If you project any improvement whatsoever in Mitchell's career trajectory, it'll blow Justin Hunter out of the water pretty much by default.

Entirely too much has been said about my terming MM a JAG. I am at fault in this as much as any for not nipping that in the bud. Just a guy simply means "nothing special" in whatever context it is delivered. As Josh Norman commented about Dez Bryant - "That's a guy. Just a guy. Dez was Dez in 2012, '13, '14. Maybe '14. Now? He's a guy. He doesn't "wow" you. For me, he don't." He's saying DB isn't anything special. That's all there is to this term which is not specifically defined. It simply means "like a lot of other guys" = "not special" = "mediocre". If you're talking the great QBs of all-time, and then somebody brings up Drew Bledsoe, one might refer to him as a JAG in that context. This context was about a backup WR and JAG fits in this context (in my view).

My interest in this was my seeing some fans overrating MM based on what he has actually done and disagreeing with that. My interest was not in debating what a JAG is. That's not really debatable because it isn't defined. I've seen long debates about what a "bust" is along the same lines. Another of that type is what is an "MVP".

 

[Tony2046]

 

[Bruins29]

 

[luuked]