emoney_33
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2005
- Messages
- 5,218
- Reaction score
- 42
God sakes. If the arguement is fact-based, I win. If it's hypothetical, you win.
Are you even aware that your argument is he CANNOT, not that he HAS not. He HAS not is a fact, he CAN not is an appeal to ignorance.
You've seen the draft board? Good for you.
I thought this was common knowledge as I'm fairly certain I read/heard BB say that they were going to take him at their original position but felt they could trade down and still get him...
BB does it best he can to get appopriate value based based on projections for the player. At the time BB did not think he was reaching on Maroney.
BB does not have the concept of "reaching". Once again, if he wanted both CJack and Maroney, but he felt Maroney would get picked up next while CJack would last until round 2, it does NOT matter where he valued them both, he will 100% certainly take Maroney first and get CJack second. That's where your understanding of "value" seems to be lacking. What we know about their value of Maroney is that they valued him more than anyone they BELIEVED would get selected before their next pick. Anyway this is all moot considering you are attributing your expectations of the Maroney pick onto BB of which we'll never know what his real expectations/value were in 2006.
avoid avoid avoid
You are making the assumption that on the offseason prior to 07, BB intended to run Morris 150+ times even though he had only ran for over 100 times ONCE (2004). You can have an RB w/ 220 or so carries and a backup w/ 100 and another one with 60 (Faulk). BB wanted LoMo to emerge. Didn't happen.
I'm not making that assumption, I'm offering factual evidence to support an opinion. So sure, they could have signed him with the intent to pound Maroney. Once again though we can see the actions of how they have used their RBs ever since Maroney was drafted. You can go assume all you want about what the "want" to do, but they have not shown that to be true with any actions.
I'm still not seeing what facts you are using aside from his draft position to support your argument.
Hasn't been proven.
The sky is blue... Are we playing "let's state obvious facts"?
Once again, "hasn't been proven" does not PROVE anything. To suggest otherwise is an appeal to ignorance.