Kyle thinks we should beat Miami first, then consider becoming buyers at the trade deadline

[slanidrac16]

Funny. You draft a guy with your #1 pick hoping he becomes a Parsons, Crosby, or Garrett.
The difference of giving up a 1st round pick to get one of these guys is one thing. Money.
Ironically, if Robinson turns out to be like one of these guys he will command more money than what these guys are getting today.
There comes a time when you add proven talent above future potential draft picks.

 

[juza76]

Kyle may think we should finish the season first then becoming a buyer after the second wave of free agency

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

i get why a team would want the player, but why would Denver in the middle of a playoff push get rid of a player at a premium position -- even if they have depth there?

This is why so many of these ideas don’t have legs.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I wouldn't expect anything soon, the trade deadline is next Tuesday. Unless someone is blowing you out of the water with a deal why do a trade already? It's in the seller's interest to let options dwindle and more parties show their interest. Plus there's another game this week which could lead to more injuries and more desperate teams. It's why most trades are done around the deadline.

The Uche trade was really dumb by the Patriots. Low return taken early, they could easily have got better had they waited. Chiefs bent them over.

There’s two sides to negotiating. You wait and there’s other sellers the market might dry up and leave you holding a wasting asset. The best traders recognize the market (buyers and competitor sellers), set a reasonable value they seek for their resource, and if they get offered it, they take it. It’s the old pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered philosophy.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I'd wager that Monti thinks the team is ahead of schedule and is looking at what happened when the Giants overextended themselves through a fluke playoff appearance. I also think he's very aware of what the Vikes have accomplished with a patient build.

4-4 is nice but it's probably a fluke result.

I don’t think it’s a fluke when you look at the records of who we beat and to whom we lost. Particularly considering how razor thin the W’s have been. I think it’s an accurate portrayal of a mediocre team. Which is a step up from last season.

But, I think you make a fair point regarding giants/Vikings. My lone caveat is that kyler is better than Danny dimes.

 

[oaken1]

I don’t think it’s a fluke when you look at the records of who we beat and to whom we lost. Particularly considering how razor thin the W’s have been. I think it’s an accurate portrayal of a mediocre team. Which is a step up from last season.

But, I think you make a fair point regarding giants/Vikings. My lone caveat is that kyler is better than Danny dimes.

Agree. But when you look at what's happening on the field... one has to think a legit big man(hopefully Darius) and a legit double digit pass rusher,...this defense likely rockets up to the 10-15 range...eèhh...12-18 ...
And that makes us a for real playoff contender... because with those two additions we would likely have had two more wins.

 

[Harry]

Rashid Shaheed? signed through 2025. Saints, as usual, are wayyyyyy over the cap next year and may not be in position to extend him

Olave would instantly vault the WR corp up the charts -- Olave from pure experience would push existing WRs down one slot. Also signed through 2025 (the fifth year option -- so i suspect you would need to extend him)

I love him but he’d be at least a second and a fourth. Too much!

 

[Harry]

Hopefully Darius Robinson in a few years will be as good as Zach Allen is right now.

Allen has grown impressively and better than I projected.

 

[Harry]

The exciting part to me is if they could get even a medium quality rusher and activate Robinson, the Cards might have a decent pass rush. That factor might be enough to make them a real playoff contender.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

From a gambling aspect, you do tend to look at teams records in one score games and bet against those that had outlier records. Anything outside of the 40%-60% tends to regress to the mean.

Hmm, that’s interesting. And I don’t think that’s logical. If one score games are essentially a coin flip, as you suggest, those that have more wins than losses aren’t any more or less likely to lose their next one score game than win. It’s just flipping a coin. Just because you flipped heads 10 times in a row doesn’t make tails more likely on the next flip. Now maybe on a multi-game basis the reversion is more likely, but not on a single game basis if it truly 50-50 as you suggest.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Agree. But when you look at what's happening on the field... one has to think a legit big man(hopefully Darius) and a legit double digit pass rusher,...this defense likely rockets up to the 10-15 range...eèhh...12-18 ...
And that makes us a for real playoff contender... because with those two additions we would likely have had two more wins.

While I would agree that adding two difference makers is impactful, I doubt “rocketing” up. Those two guys would have to be stars imo to get the effect.

 

[kerouac9]

Hmm, that’s interesting. And I don’t think that’s logical. If one score games are essentially a coin flip, as you suggest, those that have more wins than losses aren’t any more or less likely to lose their next one score game than win. It’s just flipping a coin. Just because you flipped heads 10 times in a row doesn’t make tails more likely on the next flip. Now maybe on a multi-game basis the reversion is more likely, but not on a single game basis if it truly 50-50 as you suggest.

It’s good when considering over/unders on wins the next year. I dunno about game-to-game unless you’re talking a 2022 Vikes situation.

 

[Chopper0080]

Hmm, that’s interesting. And I don’t think that’s logical. If one score games are essentially a coin flip, as you suggest, those that have more wins than losses aren’t any more or less likely to lose their next one score game than win. It’s just flipping a coin. Just because you flipped heads 10 times in a row doesn’t make tails more likely on the next flip. Now maybe on a multi-game basis the reversion is more likely, but not on a single game basis if it truly 50-50 as you suggest.

In this betting context it is regarding win total futures. If a team is 7-2 in one score games in 2022, they would be a regression candidate when projecting a 2023 win total.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

In this betting context it is regarding win total futures. If a team is 7-2 in one score games in 2022, they would be a regression candidate when projecting a 2023 win total.

Got it. Makes sense.

 

[cardsfanmd]

I would give both those guys a 1st in my sleep, but not 2 firsts

I have concerns about Garrett’s mental makeup but trust the team would clear doubt prior to any significant move.