Longgone

16 minutes ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

I don't hate the player by any means, just as I don't hate Cam Sutton either. I just don't know if we acquire our CB1 that will be our primary corner going up against other teams WR1. In Tampa I believe Jamel Dean was their CB1 and received a lot of the top matchups.

Davis is very talented, he can cover anybody, he's just been inconsistent the last couple of years, likely due to injuries, he plays hard.

1 hour ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Grant Newsome had a 69.7 PFF grade, 49 tackles, 2INTs in 13 games started last year. While I think Newsome is a nice player, he seems like yet another CB2 type of guy. We have two CB2s on our roster already, we don't need to add another one IMO.

They were playing him at nickel because of who else they had, he's better outside.

12 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

So are you against making trades for anyone other than a QB?  

 I also don’t think parting with one of the 3rds is a big deal as far as draft capital.   The late 2nd is something but it’s still not as valuable as a 1st. If we keep seeing these massive increases in the cap every year, it will end up mattering less and less, to the point it will become a virtual non-factor for many teams.

Pretty much, I like the "Holmes" strategy. I'd hoard draft picks and keep pumping young blood into the system. No problem splurging on a free agent who really fits, but give up premium draft capital and pay a premium salary for one player, no.

45 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

We will see what the market is for Sneed.  I don’t envision him costing a first.  Our late second would be ok by me for him.   If they could flip one of the 3rd’s,  then draft compensation is no big deal in a trade.   That is probably wishful thinking if he does end up with a market.  

One given in the NFL is that players get hurt, especially older, skilled players. So, unless it's a quarterback, investing draft capital AND a huge percentage of your payroll to one player, seems like a poor strategy.

26 minutes ago, GoBlue23 said:

It's even more difficult to argue with people who are here actually trying to say that Baez isn't a bad player.  

So state your case with other than vacuous ********, and then double down with more ********, that would be fine.

5 hours ago, GoBlue23 said:

Maybe 20 years ago players would be dinged for making a great play just to get to a ball only to bobble it or not get the throw there in time but the scorers have become pretty good about looking at the difficulty of the play and determining whether or not an error should be awarded.  Baez didn't have a bunch of errors last year because he was getting a glove on balls that most other shortstops wouldn't have.

Looking at the stats, the top shortstops have had a "range factor" of over 5 per 9 innings.  Baez is in 120th place with a range factor of 4.289.   To put that into perspective, Jhonny Peralta is ranked #102 at 4.422.   

You know, It's difficult to argue with a guy who's too stubborn to admit he's full of ****. Baez actually led the AL in range factor in '22, and led the NL in '21, and he was 5th in all of baseball last year.

2 hours ago, GoBlue23 said:

Calling fielding percentage and errors committed "out of date" and an attempt to make him look worse is absolutely hilarious.  

They are out of date and they are a poor measure of defensive ability. If you are going to state a case, at least use factors with some validity. 

1 hour ago, GoBlue23 said:

Baez had the second worst fielding percentage of all eligible players at the position last year so the talking point that he's still good with the glove doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.  

The sixties wants to make a point.

1 hour ago, 1984Echoes said:

You just regurgitated everything that I said... exactly.

Tater said, "they're always going to take the talent that grades out higher. "

You said, nope, wrong, he was confused. He was exactly correct.

On 3/3/2024 at 1:08 PM, 1984Echoes said:

The first bolded part is not correct.

You guys are confused.

The second bolded part is what these guys keep saying, over and over and over...

It's not the highest talent, or RAS, or "graded" player.

It is exactly correct. You are confused. The Lions will take the highest graded player, their grades having factored in all values, including positional value (to them), character, work ethic, etc.

1 minute ago, Sports_Freak said:

Serviceable players but I want someone who eats opposing quarterbacks for lunch. 

Probably want a faster, more explosive, athletic bender, then.

On 2/28/2024 at 1:07 PM, Sports_Freak said:

https://x.com/AtoZ_Payton/status/1762856838595318221?s=09

What does everyone think of this guy?

Sort of similar, in attributes and role, to Cominsky and Paschal

18 hours ago, casimir said:

Good question.  That’s why I’d have been fine with a shorter term higher per season deal.  Heck, give him the chance to opt out after one season if he wanted it.

I wouldn't want to give up the draft pick for a one year rental at this stage for the Tigers. Sure, draft picks are lottery tickets, but that makes more sense at this point.

2 hours ago, chasfh said:

We do know what held up in court.

https://www.foxla.com/news/trevor-bauer-and-his-accuser-lindsey-hill-settle-legal-battle

Reread that and underline the parts "Bauer said", as I stated previously, her basic problem was degree of consent and no corroborating witnesses. The basic facts of Bauer's behavior are beyond dispute, whether or not the woman was motivated by financial gain, or provided misleading testimony.

15 minutes ago, holygoat said:

We do know all of those thing, though. The texts -- and the dates they were sent -- came to light as a result of discovery, and are not in dispute. Same with the videos. She was explicit about her intentions to extort money from Bauer. Bauer's an A-hole, and if that's a deal-breaker for Harris and Hinch, cool. But I'm not sure how anyone can read those texts and watch those videos and not conclude that the accuser wasn't lying.

You are falling for a very carefully biased and incomplete narrative promulgated by the Bauer camp. 

40 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said:

The fact that no plaintiffs attorney is taking the case against Bauer - and I believe this woman settled for nothing from Bauer - which could be a career making case even if you lose - is telling

it certainly appears she was hoping for a big payday after asking to be choked out.

no prosecutor is taking a case when the accuser laid out before hand what she hoped would happen 

that doesn’t mean Bauer isn’t garbage through and through 

The fact of her injuries is not in dispute. Who caused the injuries is not in dispute. The fact that Bauer gets off on violent acts towards women is not in dispute. The fact that she had some degree of consent made it difficult for her to win in a situation where there were no other witnesses. She did win a fairly large settlement.

11 hours ago, holygoat said:

Dan needs to read up on the Bauer issue. During discovery they got texts from his accuser's phone that she sent to her friend explicitly laying out her plan to extort him. Videos of her next to him while he slept laughing about it. Bauer is a known world-class D-bag, and if that's a deal breaker, cool. But seeing Dan do MLB PR like this is really disappointing.

To be fair, those were claims made by Bauer’s side. You don’t know the provenance, timing or context of the texts or video.

1 hour ago, Tiger337 said:

Hopkins with some impressive AAA numbers, but he's 27.  

Sort of a right handed Badoo, hits lefties, can handle center.

17 minutes ago, Shinzaki said:

When they were shopping pre injury Boyd a few...several? years back, Hiura was high on my list of guys they should target.  Had a nice AAA season.  Might be a 3B hopeful?

He’s got a lot of swing and miss, probably too much.

3 hours ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

If the Lions have another offseason as they did last year and don't come out with any of the marquee free agents, would you be disappointed? Would you be happy if they signed a B-tier free agent that might still be a starter, but isn't exactly going to be your 1A guy at either CB or Edge/DE/pass rusher?

If they sign a group the caliber of last year, but with better health, I’d be happy; Montgomery, Glasgow, Duce, Sutton, Moseley.

1 hour ago, Jason_R said:

Disagree. We see these kinds of plays all the time in the NFL. These guys are good. Beyond their natural talent, they have been practicing tip drills for years by the time they reach the pros. Maybe they can’t make that catch 100% of the time but just because we would make it 0% of the time doesn’t make it luck. But again, if Detroit has the better roster why didn’t our guy make the easy play when their guy made the hard play?

No one said Detroit had the better roster. Does the team with the better roster always win? What is said is it took a series of improbable events and uncharacteristic play by Detroit for San Fran to win and that is the essence of luck. If you replay the Aiyuk scenario 100 times, Vildor makes the interception about 50 times and it falls incomplete about 49. That, sir, is luck.

5 hours ago, Jason_R said:

Who had the skill on that play, Aiyuk or Vildor? Vildor could have made a relatively easy play but blew it. Aiyuk had to make a relatively hard play and made it. That play really distilled the skill disparity between the teams that showed up throughout the game. 

Luck doesn’t explain anything but the inability to understand how talented and practiced a person has to be to make the play Aiyuk made. 

Pure, unmitigated, flukey luck. 90% of the league's receivers could make that catch after it bounced right back to him. Vildor deflects it even slightly, or it misses or deflects obliquely off the helmet, and there's no chance.

58 minutes ago, Jason_R said:

You can’t chalk up their second half domination to luck. Yes, Detroit missed some plays but SF made them. 

Sure you can, sports are a measure of skill, a measure of luck and a measure of randomness. Not everything that happens can be attributed to skill. If you call an errant pass that goes though a defenders hands, hits him in the helmet and ricochets perfectly into the receivers arms while in midair, skill, you're nuts. If you call being gifted a fumble in the red zone, Detroit receivers dropping passes they catch in their sleep, desperation scrambles on 3rd and long by Purdy, who's slower than Goff, if you call that skill, you're nuts. Are they a talented team? Sure, but they got lucky.

1 hour ago, RandyMarsh said:

I think the Ragmow retirement talk stems from him talking about always being in pain and overall just how beat up he is.

Then mentioned something along the lines of going to the Pro Bowl to "get away from things"(or something of that nature) gave people the thought that maybe he was doing some soul searching or something that may lead him to the conclusion that he is just tired of always being beat up and maybe it's time to hang things up.

 

NO, he was asked if he was going to need any surgery for any of his injuries, he said he was going to take some time and have them thoroughly evaluated. He said NOTHING about contemplating retirement.

1 hour ago, Jason_R said:

 The first half made it seem like it really might happen. But the second half was more what might have been expected. 

The second half, San Fran got lucky, very, very lucky.