Welcome, Guest
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Star Lotulelei has heart condition « previous next »
Page: 1 2 3

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 12928
Offline
#30 : February 26, 2013, 08:34:41 PM

Way to ASSume. I just explained what my personal meaning of "definite pass" was.

You sir, jumped to a conclusion. Further evidence of your oversensitive, drama queen-like antics.


Hell, brees might not be as accurate as manziel.

Hayseed

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1899
Offline
#31 : February 26, 2013, 08:51:33 PM

Way to ASSume. I just explained what my personal meaning of "definite pass" was.

You sir, jumped to a conclusion. Further evidence of your oversensitive, drama queen-like antics.

Um...what?

So your meaning of "definite pass" was "we should really consider passing on this guy if the report was true"?


jerseybucsfan

*
Hall of Famer
******
Posts : 13530
Offline
#32 : February 26, 2013, 09:37:07 PM

Yes, I would not only like to look at his chart, but do a stress test, fond out if there is any cardiac history in his family, etc. But to be fair to the young man, this is all too hypothetical.

In Verner We Trust

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 12928
Offline
#33 : February 26, 2013, 09:42:52 PM

Way to ASSume. I just explained what my personal meaning of "definite pass" was.

You sir, jumped to a conclusion. Further evidence of your oversensitive, drama queen-like antics.

Um...what?

So your meaning of "definite pass" was "we should really consider passing on this guy if the report was true"?

Wow. Your density knows no bounds. See bold below. Don't strain yourself.

Definite pass.

Why is he a definite pass? One media report said that he would not be permitted to participate because of a heart condition discovered during the physical. Based on that one report, he's suddenly a "definite pass"? Why?

For me personally, the potential of him having a heart issue seals it. I don't think Star is a need. If we stay at #13, that pick needs to be spent on a DE, OT, or CB. So this story is really a secondary issue for me, and not the primary reason why I believe we should not select Star.

In case you still don't get it, I'll break this down for you. You asked me what I meant by my post "definite pass", then you incorrectly assumed what I meant when I posted "definite pass". 

So you can either keep digging yourself further into idiocy, or you can own it. It really makes no difference to me.


Hell, brees might not be as accurate as manziel.

Hayseed

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1899
Offline
#34 : February 26, 2013, 10:02:53 PM

Way to ASSume. I just explained what my personal meaning of "definite pass" was.

You sir, jumped to a conclusion. Further evidence of your oversensitive, drama queen-like antics.

Um...what?

So your meaning of "definite pass" was "we should really consider passing on this guy if the report was true"?

Wow. Your density knows no bounds. See bold below. Don't strain yourself.

Definite pass.

Why is he a definite pass? One media report said that he would not be permitted to participate because of a heart condition discovered during the physical. Based on that one report, he's suddenly a "definite pass"? Why?

For me personally, the potential of him having a heart issue seals it. I don't think Star is a need. If we stay at #13, that pick needs to be spent on a DE, OT, or CB. So this story is really a secondary issue for me, and not the primary reason why I believe we should not select Star.

In case you still don't get it, I'll break this down for you. You asked me what I meant by my post "definite pass", then you incorrectly assumed what I meant when I posted "definite pass". 

So you can either keep digging yourself further into idiocy, or you can own it. It really makes no difference to me.

I'll choose to not buy it and continue to put zero stock in any of your opinions seeing that you appear to put little thought into them yourself.

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 12928
Offline
#35 : February 26, 2013, 10:22:39 PM

Nice tap out.

Your response just shows how simple you are and how you can't handle conversing with people whom you disagree with.

If you aren't going to accept my answer to a question you pose, then don't even bother. If you put zero stock into my opinions, then don't quote me, and don't respond to me.

Hell, even after your BS post, I responded with a very civil explanation of my reasoning(shown below)....and it's seems to have overloaded your circuits.

Definite pass.

Why is he a definite pass? One media report said that he would not be permitted to participate because of a heart condition discovered during the physical. Based on that one report, he's suddenly a "definite pass"? Why?

For me personally, the potential of him having a heart issue seals it. I don't think Star is a need. If we stay at #13, that pick needs to be spent on a DE, OT, or CB. So this story is really a secondary issue for me, and not the primary reason why I believe we should not select Star.

Carry on, pissing yourself in discombobulation.


Hell, brees might not be as accurate as manziel.

Hayseed

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1899
Offline
#36 : February 26, 2013, 10:32:53 PM

Nice tap out.

Your response just shows how simple you are and how you can't handle conversing with people whom you disagree with.

If you aren't going to accept my answer to a question you pose, then don't even bother. If you put zero stock into my opinions, then don't quote me, and don't respond to me.

Hell, even after your BS post, I responded with a very civil explanation of my reasoning(shown below)....and it's seems to have overloaded your circuits.

Definite pass.

Why is he a definite pass? One media report said that he would not be permitted to participate because of a heart condition discovered during the physical. Based on that one report, he's suddenly a "definite pass"? Why?

For me personally, the potential of him having a heart issue seals it. I don't think Star is a need. If we stay at #13, that pick needs to be spent on a DE, OT, or CB. So this story is really a secondary issue for me, and not the primary reason why I believe we should not select Star.

Carry on, pissing yourself in discombobulation.

Again, not buying this. You saw "heart condition", you posted "definite pass". If not, then explain why a consensus top 5 player and upgrade to our pass rush .......which, oh by the way, significantly impacts our Pass D, is not a need? Is Roy Miller the answer? More so than Clayborn, Bowers, and possibly Bennett for the end position? Because you list DE as a need.....but not DT? How much depth do we have there again?

Wait..... maybe I'm giving you too much credit. Cause I'm betting those thoughts never even crossed that little mind of yours before spitting out that pathetic excuse, did it?

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 12928
Offline
#37 : February 26, 2013, 10:51:13 PM

Nice tap out.

Your response just shows how simple you are and how you can't handle conversing with people whom you disagree with.

If you aren't going to accept my answer to a question you pose, then don't even bother. If you put zero stock into my opinions, then don't quote me, and don't respond to me.

Hell, even after your BS post, I responded with a very civil explanation of my reasoning(shown below)....and it's seems to have overloaded your circuits.

Definite pass.

Why is he a definite pass? One media report said that he would not be permitted to participate because of a heart condition discovered during the physical. Based on that one report, he's suddenly a "definite pass"? Why?

For me personally, the potential of him having a heart issue seals it. I don't think Star is a need. If we stay at #13, that pick needs to be spent on a DE, OT, or CB. So this story is really a secondary issue for me, and not the primary reason why I believe we should not select Star.

Carry on, pissing yourself in discombobulation.

Again, not buying this. You saw "heart condition", you posted "definite pass". If not, then explain why a consensus top 5 player and upgrade to our pass rush .......which, oh by the way, significantly impacts our Pass D, is not a need? Is Roy Miller the answer? More so than Clayborn, Bowers, and possibly Bennett for the end position? Because you list DE as a need.....but not DT? How much depth do we have there again?

Wait..... maybe I'm giving you too much credit. Cause I'm betting those thoughts never even crossed that little mind of yours before spitting out that pathetic excuse, did it?

Pathetic. If you put zero stock in what I say, then why do you keep responding?

You continue to assume incorrectly.

Taking Star to play NT would be a waste. You don't need a dominant NT, just like you don't need a dominant SLB. Roy Miller should be resigned and do what he did this last year...eat up blocks. Depth? Yes, we need to add depth to the interior DL, but not with the #13 pick in the draft. My opinion that I posted falls in line with any of my recent opinions regarding who I want us to take in the draft. We do need pass rush...DE pass rush.

Anyway, it was an explanation that you asked for. You ignored it. I called you out on it. Proved you to be a fool. Then you got butt hurt. It's as simple as that.

Go to sleep now...and be sure to wear a fresh pair pampers. Would hate to see you develop a rash.
: February 26, 2013, 11:15:25 PM chace1986


Hell, brees might not be as accurate as manziel.

Hayseed

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1899
Offline
#38 : February 26, 2013, 11:36:36 PM

So, a NT in this defense is only good for stopping the run? A DT that can play the run and rush the passer does not carry value at 13? Miller "ate up blocks"? I thought that was McCoy....because that was the guy catching most of the double teams. Why would we want another guy in the middle that can stuff the run and rush the passer. Speaking of McCoy, how many more years is he under contract? How many full seasons has he played? How many more opportunities would we have to draft the top DT in the draft in the middle of the first round? Yeah, Star Lotulelei would be a "wasted pick" at 13.

Not following that logic, nor would any decently informed football fan familiar with this team.

So.

You are either dumb or lying, but definitely one of the two. Your spin is mildly entertaining though. BTW, you are the one who pulled my chain in this thread, not the other way around. So please, the "why do you keep responding" act is childish (but expected). You assumed certainty out of an early report which didn't (and still doesn't) contain all of the facts. Then when you got called on it, you pulled out the old "i never thought he was a need anyway" response to CYA. You're not fooling anyone with that crap. Or, if that is true, you're a moron. But yeah....you're winning this argument.

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 12928
Offline
#39 : February 27, 2013, 12:20:01 AM

To your first paragraph. You show your ignorance. Plenty of others here disagree with you in regards to the NT position, it's role, and it's importance.

I'm always game for upgrades, but Miller and Gibson played well enough that I would feel comfortable going into 2013 with them at NT again.

The D-line can determine  who gets the most doubles by how they line up . Most 4-3 defenses stagger the line to free up thier best pass rushers .

Take a look at this picture , and tell me how it's possible to double the RE and the 3 tech  (Undertackle). One has to be free by sheer numbers, and in order to double just one of them requires the center or guard to move out of position , making the line susceptible to blitzes.



You can see why the nose tackle always draws so many doubles , even though he is less of a threat as a pass rusher. He lines up right in the center's grill and engages him. The Bucs did this for years to free up Warren Sapp.

This is why I laugh whenever fans suggest drafting nose tackles or Sam LB'ers high in the draft. Those guys are like the fullbacks of the defense. All they do is eat blockers for your playmakers.

The thing is we, obviously, don't have an issue with run stuffing at DT. Any DT we add only adds value if he brings us pass rush. None of the DT's on the market or really even in the draft bring that to the game.

We clearly need depth at the spot but I'm not sure you spend big $$$$ or high picks on guys who are reserves.

They have to double even an average NT because of alignment, so while it isn't a position of great importance....if you can actually find a rare NT that not only eats blocks and stops the run, but can also pass rush, well then it opens a whole new realm of possibilities and makes everyone on the D-line look much better.

That player is more rare than finding a purple unicorn .

I don't know that the NT really needs to draw double teams in this defense so much as he just needs to beat his man more, get more penetration, and add to the disruption factor.  If he can collapse the pocket a little more, it will lead to more sacks/int opportunities for others.
It's absolutely essential either the NT or UT gets double teamed or else the center will take out the MLB on every play. The UT is a better pass rusher than NT so you want your NT to eat up two blocks so the UT only has to beat one blocker to get to the QB.

As for Raji and Nata , the Packers and Ravens run a 3-4 .Totally different .

 We'd be stupid to draft a NT in the 1st round with all our more important needs.

Correct.. In that 34 the NT is a  premier player. Ted Washington, Vince Wilfork, Casey Hampton, Ngata and Rajii  types are are all key cogs in those schemes. our NTs not so much.

again what do we want the DT we drafted to do? He's not gonna take the spot at UT from GMC so they won't be a pass rusher. Replacing a guy at NT does what? Makes our #1 run defense better?


Hope all of that doesn't overload you..again. There is plenty more out there.

I subscribe to something similar that has been echoed by several fans of this team.  Not a spin at all.

The thing that I initially pointed out in this thread, was your blatant hypocrisy. It's just amazing that you ask for an explanation, I give it to you, and you ignore I...then you play the "nah-uh, you are lying" game. Then why f*cking ask? You don't know what my full though process was with that initial post. It was poor evaluation on your part, which has already been pointed out. You called me out on nothing. You asked a question, the response proved that you foolishly overreacted, and you got butt-hurt.

Care to tap out again?


Hell, brees might not be as accurate as manziel.

Hayseed

*****
Pro Bowler

Posts : 1899
Offline
#40 : February 27, 2013, 01:19:12 AM

http://kffl.com/app-article.php/132896/nfl-draft/2013-NFL-Draft-Scouting-Report--Star-Lotulelei--DT--Utah

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/senior-bowl-scouting-report-star-230605476--nfl.html

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000097747/article/2013-nfl-draft-utah-dt-star-lotulelei-primed-to-go-no-1

Not pulling the trigger on a player like Star at 13 is highly questionable. You can go back and find all the threads on this site that you want, it doesn't change the fact that this kid give us more options for 2013 and beyond. Pigeonholing him as a 4-3 NT is extremely shortsighted. Even if he was used there, he and McCoy would be a nightmare for offenses.

Deny lying all you want. There is no way to prove it either way. At the very least, you haven't done your homework and made a rash statement and have shown why very little credence should be given to your takes. I'm willing to bet that Dom and Schiano would be as giddy as school girls to draft this guy. You'd probably want them fired.


chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 12928
Offline
#41 : February 27, 2013, 01:46:21 AM

http://kffl.com/app-article.php/132896/nfl-draft/2013-NFL-Draft-Scouting-Report--Star-Lotulelei--DT--Utah

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/senior-bowl-scouting-report-star-230605476--nfl.html

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000097747/article/2013-nfl-draft-utah-dt-star-lotulelei-primed-to-go-no-1

Not pulling the trigger on a player like Star at 13 is highly questionable. You can go back and find all the threads on this site that you want, it doesn't change the fact that this kid give us more options for 2013 and beyond. Pigeonholing him as a 4-3 NT is extremely shortsighted. Even if he was used there, he and McCoy would be a nightmare for offenses.

The bold is reasonable. I just happen to disagree and believe that drafting him or any DT that early is not the right move.


Deny lying all you want. There is no way to prove it either way. At the very least, you haven't done your homework and made a rash statement and have shown why very little credence should be given to your takes. I'm willing to bet that Dom and Schiano would be as giddy as school girls to draft this guy. You'd probably want them fired.

So, if there is no proof of me lying....then why keep going back to that? Saying that I was lying because you didn't like my answer...that is, as you said earlier, "childish". There was not a rash statement made by me...I was certainly not the one who claimed he was a bust.

Also your comment of, "Not following that logic, nor would any decently informed football fan familiar with this team." in regards to my opinion of the NT position/potential acquisition....well consider that completely debunked. The density may not allow you to see it, though...which is tragic.

Haven't done my homework? Glad you know me soooo well. Pure arrogance there on your part. There are several people here that I absolutely disagree with in terms of how they view the team and certain positions, etc....but it would be impossible for me to say that they haven't "done their homework"...most of the time it's just a simple situation where they have a different POV than I. As I have stated before, you don't know how to disagree, without being disagreeable. You continue to lump me in with the "rash" company, and it's pathetic. I'm perfectly fine with you not agreeing with my POV or opinion about this team, but don't be a do*che and pretend to know the amount of "homework" I have done on this team.

...and no.  If the team took Star, while I would disagree with the pick...I would not call for either of their heads.


Hell, brees might not be as accurate as manziel.

Benchwarmer#1

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 12221
Offline
#42 : February 27, 2013, 01:58:22 AM

....You two are married, aren't you?

chace1986

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 12928
Offline
#43 : February 27, 2013, 07:19:59 AM

Lol.

On occasion, she needs an escort back to the kitchen...There are words that are said en route, of course....but eventually the sound of the running water muffles the BS.


Hell, brees might not be as accurate as manziel.

Dolorous Jason

******
Hall of Famer

Posts : 15515
Offline
#44 : February 27, 2013, 07:49:49 AM

To your first paragraph. You show your ignorance. Plenty of others here disagree with you in regards to the NT position, it's role, and it's importance.

I'm always game for upgrades, but Miller and Gibson played well enough that I would feel comfortable going into 2013 with them at NT again.

The D-line can determine  who gets the most doubles by how they line up . Most 4-3 defenses stagger the line to free up thier best pass rushers .

Take a look at this picture , and tell me how it's possible to double the RE and the 3 tech  (Undertackle). One has to be free by sheer numbers, and in order to double just one of them requires the center or guard to move out of position , making the line susceptible to blitzes.



You can see why the nose tackle always draws so many doubles , even though he is less of a threat as a pass rusher. He lines up right in the center's grill and engages him. The Bucs did this for years to free up Warren Sapp.

This is why I laugh whenever fans suggest drafting nose tackles or Sam LB'ers high in the draft. Those guys are like the fullbacks of the defense. All they do is eat blockers for your playmakers.

The thing is we, obviously, don't have an issue with run stuffing at DT. Any DT we add only adds value if he brings us pass rush. None of the DT's on the market or really even in the draft bring that to the game.

We clearly need depth at the spot but I'm not sure you spend big $$$$ or high picks on guys who are reserves.

They have to double even an average NT because of alignment, so while it isn't a position of great importance....if you can actually find a rare NT that not only eats blocks and stops the run, but can also pass rush, well then it opens a whole new realm of possibilities and makes everyone on the D-line look much better.

That player is more rare than finding a purple unicorn .

I don't know that the NT really needs to draw double teams in this defense so much as he just needs to beat his man more, get more penetration, and add to the disruption factor.  If he can collapse the pocket a little more, it will lead to more sacks/int opportunities for others.
It's absolutely essential either the NT or UT gets double teamed or else the center will take out the MLB on every play. The UT is a better pass rusher than NT so you want your NT to eat up two blocks so the UT only has to beat one blocker to get to the QB.

As for Raji and Nata , the Packers and Ravens run a 3-4 .Totally different .

 We'd be stupid to draft a NT in the 1st round with all our more important needs.

Correct.. In that 34 the NT is a  premier player. Ted Washington, Vince Wilfork, Casey Hampton, Ngata and Rajii  types are are all key cogs in those schemes. our NTs not so much.

again what do we want the DT we drafted to do? He's not gonna take the spot at UT from GMC so they won't be a pass rusher. Replacing a guy at NT does what? Makes our #1 run defense better?



LOL @ Chace quoting MY points in order to try and make HIS points .....but I'm just a "troll" who never contributes to the football discussion .   

I could not have proven you a bigger liar if I had posted this my self a dozen times....  lol.

What is your point? I was wrong? Ok. You win. I was wrong.

           
Page: 1 2 3
Pewter Report  >>  Boards  >>  The Red Board (Moderators: 3rd String Kicker, PRPatrol)  >>  Topic: Star Lotulelei has heart condition « previous next »
:

Hide Tools Show Tools