Reasons for OPTIMISM

JKool · 07-07-2004, 08:11 PM

Nice post WhoDat. I\'m not sure whether to applaud or cry - probably, I\'ll just do both.

Either way, three things:

(1) Billy, why isn\'t Rogers (WLB) a proven player. He is solid, has good experience, and is by no means a rookie. I think I agree that Bellamy and Ambrose are question marks if they are asked to do too much, but I think both are solid role players if not starters.

(2) WhoDat, I always wonder about these \"historical\" arguments. It seems that there is trend x, where x usually has something to do with W/L; y usually follows from x (e.g. SB victors tend to come from teams that were middle of the pack the year before); given that trend x, we should expect y. It seems to me that these arguments very much depend on three things: (1) what x is, (2) how W/L has anything to do with x, and (3) the actual reasons that x is connected to y. While I agree with your optimism, do you think that the fact that we have a few features of SB victors from the past few years, we have reason to believe that we have a good shot? Knowing you, I suspect that there are several much better arguments underwriting this one; just curious.

(3) I have a good feeling about Craft, Watson, and Sully. I still also believe we will trade for another corner - offerring one of our WRs (we\'ll have to cut one or two of them anyway). I have a very bad feeling about Hodge and Allen - I don\'t think either will cut it. I hope that one of Watson or Cie will be able to play that last spot, but I think this will be one of our weaknesses.

07-07-2004, 08:11 PM	#11
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Reasons for OPTIMISM Nice post WhoDat. I\'m not sure whether to applaud or cry - probably, I\'ll just do both. Either way, three things: (1) Billy, why isn\'t Rogers (WLB) a proven player. He is solid, has good experience, and is by no means a rookie. I think I agree that Bellamy and Ambrose are question marks if they are asked to do too much, but I think both are solid role players if not starters. (2) WhoDat, I always wonder about these \"historical\" arguments. It seems that there is trend x, where x usually has something to do with W/L; y usually follows from x (e.g. SB victors tend to come from teams that were middle of the pack the year before); given that trend x, we should expect y. It seems to me that these arguments very much depend on three things: (1) what x is, (2) how W/L has anything to do with x, and (3) the actual reasons that x is connected to y. While I agree with your optimism, do you think that the fact that we have a few features of SB victors from the past few years, we have reason to believe that we have a good shot? Knowing you, I suspect that there are several much better arguments underwriting this one; just curious. (3) I have a good feeling about Craft, Watson, and Sully. I still also believe we will trade for another corner - offerring one of our WRs (we\'ll have to cut one or two of them anyway). I have a very bad feeling about Hodge and Allen - I don\'t think either will cut it. I hope that one of Watson or Cie will be able to play that last spot, but I think this will be one of our weaknesses.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks