February 27, 2018 08:24AM | Registered: 14 years ago Posts: 7,313 |
Quote
laram
Quote
dzrams
Quote
laram
Quote
We are only a long way from knowing if the move will produce positive results.
So IF it produces negative results it was the right move? Strange rationale there IMO.
But let's peel something back a bit.
"Looks like" is essentially a perspective from the outside looking in.
From all appearances on the periphery...things look a certain way.
That does not infer any definitive conclusions.
But let's be real here, neither one of us are without the ability to put two and two together.
You have a 25 yr old All-pro player at a prime position available in trade.
Across the hall from me are agents, well they were for 13 years. They talk.
Every NFL team knew that Peters was available, why wouldn't they have interest?
Well one thing that we know is Peters was removed from several teams draft boards, so there were concerns from the start.
His behavior in the NFL has only increased those concerns.
Therefore it would not be a leap to believe that teams had removed him from trade considerations.
Not for a rationale thinker that is.
But rationalization is generally known as "excuse making"
It's not strange rationale at all. It's called making the right play by the numbers. If you've ever played poker, blackjack, or done any betting then you understand the rationale. Let's not pretend that you haven't heard of it.
I'm assuming you're smart enough to make the right play no matter what card turns up. IOW, the results don't justify the process as I stated.
We know that other teams weren't interested and removed him from trade considerations for the same reasons he was an inexpensive pickup.
The concerns are real. But the risk is low.
There's many teams that have removed great players from draft and trade considerstion that lived to regret it.
My position is, when the risk is low enough while the potential reward is super high, it's the smart money play.
Some people may be more conservative, I prefer the aggressive move right now.
This has nothing to do with excuses. That's just wayyyy off base. It's like me labeling the opposite position as one that lacks balls.
But those types of labels don't help. The reality is, different teams and people have different risk tolerance levels.
My rationalization/excuse making assertion had nothing to do with a persons tolerance to risk.
I'm not risk adverse at all. IF you're not taking risks you're not trying.
That comment which I assumed you would follow was in reference to my assertion of a lack of interest from other teams and your response that we would never know.
IMO that line of thinking was shrouded in excuse making.
All good though as usual things always usually bubble to the surface.
But I sincerely hope that you are right for a change!