GoldenEagle81 Posted October 11, 2015 Author Share Posted October 11, 2015 (edited) You were the one who mentioned dropping him. But I don't even see how that's relevant anyway, nothing I said really had anything to do with your fantasy team specifically. When did I mention dropping him? Tell me right now...go back and find where I said anything about dropping him... Again, the fact I that didn't draft him/don't own him guarantees me that I didn't mention "giving up on him" or "dropping him". I simply made the observation that there were suspicions that Graham's talent would be wasted in Seattle, and that it clearly looked like things were trending in that direction. No offense man, but your reading comprehension skills could use a little work before you go calling people out next time. Edited October 11, 2015 by GoldenEagle81 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rileyrott Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle81 Posted October 11, 2015 Author Share Posted October 11, 2015 I'm going to give you benefit of the doubt and assume you have something that resembles a sense of sarcasm. And that you are just doing everything you can to be a nuisance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle81 Posted October 11, 2015 Author Share Posted October 11, 2015 The sarcasm was that you would drop him, not that you didn't have him. Yes exactly. And the question was "when did I mention dropping him?" You seem confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 When did I mention dropping him? Tell me right now...go back and find where I said anything about dropping him... Again, the fact I that didn't draft him/don't own him guarantees me that I didn't mention "giving up on him" or "dropping him". I simply made the observation that there were suspicions that Graham's talent would be wasted in Seattle, and that it clearly looked like things were trending in that direction. No offense man, but your reading comprehension skills could use a little work before you go calling people out next time. "Tell me now..." You make fun of my reading comprehension and you can't even read your own posts, nor past the first sentence of mine for that matter. Again, nothing I said really had anything to do with your fantasy team, I had to do with you making comments on Graham's usage before the first half of the first game was even over. So even IF you didn't say anything about dropping him it would be completely irrelevant to the discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle81 Posted October 11, 2015 Author Share Posted October 11, 2015 The funny thing is your post makes no mention of you planning to bench or cut him, or even if he's on your fantasy team and these guys are reading into it that you're planning to cut him, have given up on him, etc. Your post sounded like nothing more than one of the hundreds of milk carton type posts. I do agree thought that Graham was overvalued going to SEA, he won't put up the numbers he did in NO and in general their offense doesn't put up those gawdy numbers and doesn't pass a lot to do that (yes in part because they don't have great receiving options but also because they are built around the run and great defense). This guy had no problem understanding..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gilthorp Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 24 for 234 after 5 games is a glaring problem. That's a TE2 at best. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 24 for 234 after 5 games is a glaring problem. That's a TE2 at best. I wouldn't even call it that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 This guy had no problem understanding..... You are two peas in a pod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle81 Posted October 11, 2015 Author Share Posted October 11, 2015 You are two peas in a pod. Kinda you and your return of the nerds squad (; Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Brown Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 I wouldn't even call it that. Well, based on stats it is a TE2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 Well, based on stats it is a TE2. Yeah, I know what you're saying. It's just that I wouldn't even hold on to him as a WR2. More of a personal opinion than based on stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Brown Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 Yeah, I know what you're saying. It's just that I wouldn't even hold on to him as a WR2. More of a personal opinion than based on stats. So, I should dump Travis Kelce for Vance McDonald then also? Because personal opinion instead of stats? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 Well, based on stats it is a TE2. Sucks for those that wasted a 3rd on a TE2... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Brown Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 Sucks for those that wasted a 3rd on a TE2... Yes it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 24 for 234 after 5 games is a glaring problem. That's a TE2 at best. I wouldn't even call it that. Well, based on stats it is a TE2. Yeah, I know what you're saying. It's just that I wouldn't even hold on to him as a WR2. More of a personal opinion than based on stats. The problem really isn't that he is performing like a TE2 ... the problem is that many expected him to be performing 2nd overall. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 So, I should dump Travis Kelce for Vance McDonald then also? Because personal opinion instead of stats? I have Kelce and I've actually been considering replacing him with somebody off waivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoldenEagle81 Posted October 11, 2015 Author Share Posted October 11, 2015 (edited) So, I should dump Travis Kelce for Vance McDonald then also? Because personal opinion instead of stats? Careful, don't try to make too much sense with rajn.... Edited October 11, 2015 by GoldenEagle81 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 You're right though Bobby. He has had two pretty decent games. I wouldn't cut bait with him, but the three duds he's had likely cost a few people a game or two.I agree, he'd probably fit as a TE2 and just hope you're lucky enough to get him in a week he actually hits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 .I agree, he'd probably fit as a TE2 and just hope you're lucky enough to get him in a week he actually hits.in theory..sure. Tough to bench him though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rotonator Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 Is Darren Bevell the root of the issue? Couldn't get plays to take advantage of Harvin's ability (only drew up gimmick plays with Harvin), and now he is struggling getting Graham involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Brown Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 (edited) Is Darren Bevell the root of the issue? Couldn't get plays to take advantage of Harvin's ability (only drew up gimmick plays with Harvin), and now he is struggling getting Graham involved. This is a very good post. Yea..Bevell might be the issue...but as far as a game today - the defense gave it up...the use of, Graham, or lack thereof, was not why the Hawks lost today. Edited October 11, 2015 by Bobby Brown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted October 12, 2015 Share Posted October 12, 2015 Is Darren Bevell the root of the issue? Couldn't get plays to take advantage of Harvin's ability (only drew up gimmick plays with Harvin), and now he is struggling getting Graham involved. I disagree. The winning formula in Seattle has been heavy doses of the running game and smothering defense. Not sure why Seattle would be changing what has been a very successful formula for them ... and if they didn't intend to change that winning formula you have to question why the GM would pay top dollar to bring in high profile talent that doesn't exactly fit into the existing formula. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stethant Posted October 12, 2015 Share Posted October 12, 2015 Trade was a lose-lose. O-line gets worse and TE position still sucks. You can blame the offensive coordinator but the coach doesn't seem too bright either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.