manichean, etc.
I know you know this, RFL, and you were trying to make a larger point. But one of the problems is that we tend to fence people in on one "side" or another, or make it an all or nothing opposition.
From my own observations about other voices, and my own internal discussions, I just don't see a setup here like optimists versus pessimists, or your doomsters versus hopesters.
I think it's mostly a mix. And that goes especially on draft analyses. The people being called "doom and gloomers" have a mixed view on the draft. Unless I missed it, no one is saying every pick sux, and I don't think the hopesters are saying every pick is awesome.
Speaking for myself -- and others would probably label me as doom and gloom -- I like the Cupp, Reynolds and the Prisoner of Azcaban picks, and would have liked Everett one round later. Until further review, IOW, I'm probably good with four out of the seven.
Hope all is well in Minnesota.
