and again probably my fault.
What I'm saying, or trying to say, would better be explained as 'use'. I'm aware they do different things, and depending on the situation one or the other of their inherent talents can or will be called for. I'm trying to say that the Ram's are closer, (more comfortable, secure), and "at this time", with their ... lets call it "Kendricks Playbook" than they are with "Higbees Playbook". Obviously when both are in the game at the same time it changes the parameters somewhat.
Here may be a point of contention - I believe Fisher/Boras are far less likely to come out of their 'comfort zone' than I believe you do. So I think they will 'trend' calling on "Kendrick's Playbook" more often than they will "Higbee's Playobook", and that because, after all, while certain plays favor one or the other.. Kendricks/Higbee, they feel more secure with "Kendrick's Playbook".
Liken it to this - WR's differ from one another as much as Kendricks and Higbee, yet one will get more 'targets' based on past results, (and, point of contention, the Fisher/Boras comfort zone) than the other.
You, I believe, are differentiating the two on a level one might say is like 'run vs pass'... so you can't compare. Well, I don't think it comes to that much of a distinction. Pretty sure you and I both agree that Fisher/Boras don't favor to any significant degree run vs pass in any given situation, (some would use the word 'conservative" to describe this)... ... but with Kendricks and Higbee I see it more as a 'what type of run (or pass), than I do run vs pass. - JamesJM
