Noah Brown, The steal of the Draft?

[CATCH17]

I don't see it as anything impossible to beat out Butler if he had to. While His size-speed combination is enticing, Butler still hasn't managed to put it all together after several years in the league. And he had an awful finish to 2016, so his last impressions weren't good.

I looked it up and it's only a $300,000 cap hit if they decided to cut him outright. And also, in looking at the roster, I can see the team going with only 3 tight ends this year (Witten, Swaim, Gathers) and that could free up a spot for a 6th receiver if it were warranted.

The thing about Butler is he knows the offense well and he made some plays when Dez was out.

Dak proved last year that he can win games without Dez Bryant on the field and I think the coaches will take that into consideration when it comes to Butler.

 

[Stash]

The thing about Butler is he knows the offense well and he made some plays when Dez was out.

Dak proved last year that he can win games without Dez Bryant on the field and I think the coaches will take that into consideration when it comes to Butler.

Good points as well. But it wouldn't shock me to see the team keep Brown as the 6th receiver, nor would it shock me if he replaced Butler on the roster if they kept only 5. And we still have to see if Andy Jones can become a factor.

 

[cmoney23]

Steal of the draft?
He'd have to have a Jerry Rice career to be the steal of the draft.

Yes, because if you're not the best EVER to play your position you are worthless... GREAT POINT.

 

[lkelly]

I don't know about all that, but I do know that that Mexican media member had the steal of the Super Bowl.

 

[tyke1doe]

Yes, because if you're not the best EVER to play your position you are worthless... GREAT POINT.

Never expose your lack of knowledge or understanding by inferring that the other person isn't making sense. I won't charge you for this free piece of advice.

Now to clarify. We're talking about the STEAL of the draft in one of the deepest drafts ever. The real STEAL of this draft is going to be a player who went lower than expected and had an All Pro or Hall of Fame career.

To even reach that level, Brown is going to have to approach Jerry Rice numbers in a draft with players who are likely to do some outstanding things on the gridiron.

Second, you don't have to be worthless just because you're not the steal of the draft. You can be a marginal player or even a good player. That doesn't mean you're the steal of the draft.

Please don't try to interpret for me what I meant and make erroneous conclusions. Just ask me to clarify next time.

 

[cmoney23]

Never expose your lack of knowledge or understanding by inferring that the other person isn't making sense. I won't charge you for this free piece of advice.
Now to clarify. We're talking about the STEAL of the draft in one of the deepest drafts ever. The real STEAL of this draft is going to be a player who went lower than expected and had an All Pro or Hall of Fame career.
To even reach that level, Brown is going to have to approach Jerry Rice numbers in a draft with players who are likely to do some outstanding things on the gridiron.
Second, you don't have to be worthless just because you're not the steal of the draft. You can be a marginal player or even a good player. That doesn't mean you're the steal of the draft.
Please don't try to interpret for me what I meant and make erroneous conclusions. Just ask me to clarify next time.

First off, I wasn't inferring you weren't making sense. I am absolutely sure you weren't.
Second, the burden to communicate effectively is on you, if you don't like my "conclusions" maybe you need to communicate more effectively.

But, alast, we do seem to have a major difference in our use of the word "steal". I deem a steal to be a player that: no one else sees value in, falls in the draft for one reason or another and/or gets drafted much lower than anticipate by the "experts" but proceeds to have a much longer and more celebrated career than anticipated by draft position. So, in closing. I'm just making the case that Noah Brown will be a steal because "no one else saw value in him" and "he got drafted much lower than anticipated" and in a few years he could be one of the best WR's in the class.

Hope that helps.

 

[Macnalty]

I will toss my hat in on Brown, he has something. He is a bully on the field.

 

[tyke1doe]

First off, I wasn't inferring you weren't making sense. I am absolutely sure you weren't.
Second, the burden to communicate effectively is on you, if you don't like my "conclusions" maybe you need to communicate more effectively.

Oh, my communication was effective. You just didn't understand it. But my explanation made perfectly good sense. I can't help if your reading and comprehension levels are merely past the third grade.

But, alast, we do seem to have a major difference in our use of the word "steal". I deem a steal to be a player that: no one else sees value in, falls in the draft for one reason or another and/or gets drafted much lower than anticipate by the "experts" but proceeds to have a much longer and more celebrated career than anticipated by draft position. So, in closing. I'm just making the case that Noah Brown will be a steal because "no one else saw value in him" and "he got drafted much lower than anticipated" and in a few years he could be one of the best WR's in the class.

You pop off but don't understand words and their meaning.
The title of the thread is "Noah Brown, the Steal of the Draft"?
The title uses an article - "The". The article "the" is specific. It only has one designation. If it were to apply to a non-specific player, it would be "Noah Brown: 'A' steal of the draft."
Therefore, the original poster, if he is being precise with language, is saying that Noah Brown will be THE steal of the draft.
So how do you measure THE steal? It would have to be a player who was taken lower but made the greater contribution or had the greater accomplishments based on his draft position.
Last year, it was Dak. Why? Because Dak was taken in the fourth round, but he had as his accomplishments:
1. Starting Day 1.
2. Leading his team to a 13-3 record, tying Roethlisberger's record.
3. Breaking Tom Brady's record for passes without an interception.
4. Winning the Rookie of the Year award.

No other player drafted lower than Dak accomplished more. Therefore, he is THE steal of the draft - at this moment.
Your argument focuses on a general definition when the phrase "The Steal of the Draft" speaks about a specific player.

That's why I said Noah Brown would have to be Jerry Rice to be the steal of the draft, especially in a draft as deep as this one. His accomplishments would have to be more pronounced than any of the players taken below him. Jerry Rice stats would just about do that.

Now, before you go running your mouth - or pounding your fingers - about who doesn't make sense, you might want to go back to school and learn grammar, vocabulary, definitions and how to use words. Because if anyone doesn't understand, it's you.

Hope that helps.

 

[SilverStarCowboy]

The Steal of the Draft for the Cowboys? I'm in the Woods.

 

[Maxmadden]

Oh, my communication was effective. You just didn't understand it. But my explanation made perfectly good sense. I can't help if your reading and comprehension levels are merely past the third grade.



You pop off but don't understand words and their meaning.
The title of the thread is "Noah Brown, the Steal of the Draft"?
The title uses an article - "The". The article "the" is specific. It only has one designation. If it were to apply to a non-specific player, it would be "Noah Brown: 'A' steal of the draft."
Therefore, the original poster, if he is being precise with language, is saying that Noah Brown will be THE steal of the draft.
So how do you measure THE steal? It would have to be a player who was taken lower but made the greater contribution or had the greater accomplishments based on his draft position.
Last year, it was Dak. Why? Because Dak was taken in the fourth round, but he had as his accomplishments:
1. Starting Day 1.
2. Leading his team to a 13-3 record, tying Roethlisberger's record.
3. Breaking Tom Brady's record for passes without an interception.
4. Winning the Rookie of the Year award.

No other player drafted lower than Dak accomplished more. Therefore, he is THE steal of the draft - at this moment.
Your argument focuses on a general definition when the phrase "The Steal of the Draft" speaks about a specific player.

That's why I said Noah Brown would have to be Jerry Rice to be the steal of the draft, especially in a draft as deep as this one. His accomplishments would have to be more pronounced than any of the players taken below him. Jerry Rice stats would just about do that.

Now, before you go running your mouth - or pounding your fingers - about who doesn't make sense, you might want to go back to school and learn grammar, vocabulary, definitions and how to use words. Because if anyone doesn't understand, it's you.

Hope that helps.

Where would he be if he just had a Michael Irvin career?

You took his extreme in semantics but didn't like it when someone took yours.

 

[tyke1doe]

Where would he be if he just had a Michael Irvin career?

If he has a Irvin career and no one chosen lower does better, then he will be the steal of the draft.

You took his extreme in semantics but didn't like it when someone took yours.

Huh?
Is this going to turn into a "you did it too" argument?

 

[Doomsdayblitz]

That's quite a stretch. There were better receivers available at that spot, so no, I don't think he was a steal. He was chosen ahead of Isaiah Ford, Malachi Dupre, & Travis Rudolf- all much more accomplished receivers than Brown. All he is is big & strong. He had ONE great game vs Oklahoma in his entire career, & that's it. Could be because Ohio State's offense was in shambles last season, & the QB was lasered in on passing to running backs, since he lost all confidence in his deep passing ability. I doubt it, though.

 

[Maxmadden]

If he has a Irvin career and no one chosen lower does better, then he will be the steal of the draft.


Huh?
Is this going to turn into a "you did it too" argument?

Nope, I think I will just decline while you are still ahead.

 

[NotForLong]

Never expose your lack of knowledge or understanding by inferring that the other person isn't making sense. I won't charge you for this free piece of advice.

Now to clarify. We're talking about the STEAL of the draft in one of the deepest drafts ever. The real STEAL of this draft is going to be a player who went lower than expected and had an All Pro or Hall of Fame career.

To even reach that level, Brown is going to have to approach Jerry Rice numbers in a draft with players who are likely to do some outstanding things on the gridiron.

Second, you don't have to be worthless just because you're not the steal of the draft. You can be a marginal player or even a good player. That doesn't mean you're the steal of the draft.

Please don't try to interpret for me what I meant and make erroneous conclusions. Just ask me to clarify next time.

His sumerazation of your quote seems more accurate then this long winded explanation

 

[tyke1doe]

Nope, I think I will just decline while you are still ahead.

Thank you for your contribution to this discussion.

 

[tyke1doe]

His sumerazation of your quote seems more accurate then this long winded explanation

Well, Calculus is a bit more long winded than basic math. Thankfully, there are those who can comprehend and appreciate the former even if it is too complicated for others. But thank you too for your contribution to this thread.

 

[Verdict]

I don't see it as anything impossible to beat out Butler if he had to. While His size-speed combination is enticing, Butler still hasn't managed to put it all together after several years in the league. And he had an awful finish to 2016, so his last impressions weren't good.

I looked it up and it's only a $300,000 cap hit if they decided to cut him outright. And also, in looking at the roster, I can see the team going with only 3 tight ends this year (Witten, Swaim, Gathers) and that could free up a spot for a 6th receiver if it were warranted.

More importantly, if it is close Butler gets the axe because of salary number and inexperience giving the new guy more potential upside.

 

[Maxmadden]

Well, Calculus is a bit more long winded than basic math. Thankfully, there are those who can comprehend and appreciate the former even if it is too complicated for others. But thank you too for your contribution to this thread.

You can try and be condescending, but you are the only one talking Calculus. Everyone else wants to talk football.

 

[tyke1doe]

You can try and be condescending, but you are the only one talking Calculus. Everyone else wants to talk football.

Which explains why you entered this conversation with me - to talk football.
Go back to my first post. I WAS talking football.
Oh, and I'm not trying to be condescending.

 

[Maxmadden]

Which explains why you entered this conversation with me - to talk football.
Go back to my first post. I WAS talking football.
Oh, and I'm not trying to be condescending.

Your first post you said that the only way he could be the steal of the draft was if he had the same career as Jerry Rice. Which, is simply not true and honestly a stupid thing to say if you really believed it..

Besides that, everyone evidently knew what the OP meant except you. Someone defended the OP and you felt the need to post your calculus report (borrowed from a a latter poster). I used Michael Irvin as an example to try and illustrate that it was just semantics and we were still just trying to talk football. You asked if this was going to turn into an argument and I declined.
You seem to want to argue for no reason but nobody wants to argue. We aren't interested in semantics, calculus or even math for that matter. I could care less what you know that I don't know. I do know that he doesn't have to be as good as Jerry Rice to be the steal of the draft.

So if you are being condescending and you aren't even trying, that pretty much makes you a, well I'm sure you have heard it before.