Who can we least afford to lose?

[theogt]

The post he was responding to discussed Spencer's best time as 4.69, not 4.6 ....... (look at the full post he was responding to, not just the fragment he quoted).

And 4.69 is not 4.7 ....... and 4.7 is not 4.7000000002 ........ at what point does the discussion get ridiculous?

You said "ranting on and on and on" which implies you were referring to this entire thread. You can't just switch your meaning to a single post when it suits you.

 

[Stautner]

Your point is abundantly clear.

It is also abundantly incorrect.

You can call it "max potential" but statistically that will never be what he shows day in and day out.

You said "ranting on and on and on" which implies you were referring to this entire thread. You can't just switch your meaning to a single post when it suits you.

If by ranting, you mean that I have over and over said that "measurables" weren't even the pont of my post and that the difference between 4.69 and 4.7 is inconsequential, then I suppose you can believe that.

But I'm guessing that most would believe the rant is coming from the person insisting over and over and over and over again that the difference between 4.69 and and 4.7 is a huge deal, and who initiated and perpetuated a 3 day argument based on a small comment that was merely a sideline to the actual point of the post.

 

[theogt]

If by ranting, you mean that I have over and over said that "measurables" weren't even the pont of my post and that the difference between 4.69 and 4.7 is inconsequential, then I suppose you can believe that.

But I'm guessing that most would believe the rant is coming from the person insisting over and over and over and over again that the difference between 4.69 and and 4.7 is a huge deal, and who initiated and perpetuated a 3 day argument based on a small comment that was merely a sideline to the actual point of the post.

Do you really have this much trouble following the conversation? Why do you we have to spell every single thing out for you. Please, please, please, please take more time reading each post.

 

[AbeBeta]

Do you really have this much trouble following the conversation? Why do you we have to spell every single thing out for you. Please, please, please, please take more time reading each post.

True dat

 

[Stautner]

Do you really have this much trouble following the conversation? Why do you we have to spell every single thing out for you. Please, please, please, please take more time reading each post.

Another vague post that says nothing.

If you have a point, write it, but if you are just void of anything intelligent to say don't just post a complaint about some undescribed transgression.

Apparently you have a very low regard for all posters if you think that kinid of smokescreen works.

(Before you say it - I know your response is going to be that you only have low regard for me - your "I'm rubber you're glue" mentality is that easy to read).

 

[theogt]

If you have a point, write it, but if you are just void of anything intelligent to say don't just post a complaint about some undescribed transgression.

I had a point. It's abundantly clear in my post. Ironic that I'd have to explain it to you. Or is it?

 

[Stautner]

Do you really have this much trouble following the conversation? Why do you we have to spell every single thing out for you. Please, please, please, please take more time reading each post.

This is your point? Some mysterious, undescribed transgression?

You expect posters to praise your intelligence without so much as an explaination?

Just take your word for it that your comment applies to something somewhere in this thread?

Seems like you are calling the entire body of posters in this thread idiots if you expect them to fall for that.

 

[theogt]

You expect posters to praise your intelligence without so much as an explaination?

I feel confident abersonc was able to follow me. That's sufficient.

 

[AbeBeta]

I feel confident abersonc was able to follow me. That's sufficient.

Hell, even Sacamano could follow this one.

 

[dargonking999]

Hell, even Sacamano could follow this one.

Even i was able to follow it, and my brain stopped working months ago

 

[superpunk]

While Spencer does have outstanding measurables, I still hesitate to put too much credence in that - I'm still a guy that has to see it on the field before getting too hyped up - in my mind there have just been too many that haven't worked out to not remain at least a little reserved.

Spencer isn't a "measurables" guy.

 

[WoodysGirl]

Spencer isn't a "measurables" guy.

Run, Superpunk, Run!!!!

:eekmouse:

 

[Vintage]

Spencer isn't a "measurables" guy.

How is 4.6 speed not make him a measurables guy?

How does his squat/bench press not make him a measurables guy?

 

[superpunk]

I was just going back to where it all began, and poking.

I think the point is, if I followed this mess correctly, that Spencer did not get drafted where he did because he had amazing measurable's for a guy his size, certainly not like Ware and Merriman. Spencer got himself drafted because he can ball, and showed that outstandingly through his senior year in college. Hence, concerns expressed as though Spencer is some athletic freak drafted on that alone, and not to be trusted (a la a Matt Jones, or maybe Manny Lawson?) are somewhat irrelevent - since that's not Spencer's bag.

 

[Vintage]

I was just going back to where it all began, and poking.

I think the point is, if I followed this mess correctly, that Spencer did not get drafted where he did because he had amazing measurable's for a guy his size, certainly not like Ware and Merriman. Spencer got himself drafted because he can ball, and showed that outstandingly through his senior year in college. Hence, concerns expressed as though Spencer is some athletic freak drafted on that alone, and not to be trusted (a la a Matt Jones, or maybe Manny Lawson?) are somewhat irrelevent - since that's not Spencer's bag.

Please don't remind me of Manny Lawson.

We could've had him instead of Carpenter.

 

[theogt]

Please don't remind me of Manny Lawson.

We could've had him instead of Carpenter.

 

[Chocolate Lab]

Well said, SP.

Now can we close this thread? :

 

[Stautner]

I was just going back to where it all began, and poking.

I think the point is, if I followed this mess correctly, that Spencer did not get drafted where he did because he had amazing measurable's for a guy his size, certainly not like Ware and Merriman. Spencer got himself drafted because he can ball, and showed that outstandingly through his senior year in college. Hence, concerns expressed as though Spencer is some athletic freak drafted on that alone, and not to be trusted (a la a Matt Jones, or maybe Manny Lawson?) are somewhat irrelevent - since that's not Spencer's bag.

Actually the point I was making - the one that started this mess and you even quoted - was that I don't place any real value on measureables, only on what I see once the players get a chance to compete at an NFL level.

The "measurables" argument was not my point or what I intended to get into.

I will readily accept - and always would and have - that Spencer has "some" outstanding measurables, but that he may be lacking in some areas and that his status as a prospect is not based solely on "measurables".

That is and always was a sideline to my point that all that matters is how the fare against NFL level competition.

But for 3 days someone has insisted on going on about a 1/100 of a second difference in 40 times and other crap that are sidelines to a point that was a sideline from the begining.

 

[AbeBeta]

Well said, SP.

Now can we close this thread? :

Why bother. Stautner will just go on to ruin a few more threads if we close it. Let's leave try to isolate him here as long as possible.

 

[5Stars]

Actually the point I was making - the one that started this mess and you even quoted - was that I don't place any real value on measureables, only on what I see once the players get a chance to compete at an NFL level.

The "measurables" argument was not my point or what I intended to get into.

I will readily accept - and always would and have - that Spencer has "some" outstanding measurables, but that he may be lacking in some areas and that his status as a prospect is not based solely on "measurables".

That is and always was a sideline to my point that all that matters is how the fare against NFL level competition.

But for 3 days someone has insisted on going on about a 1/100 of a second difference in 40 times and other crap that are sidelines to a point that was a sideline from the begining.

Ryan Leaf supposedly had "measurables" as a QB and look how that turned out!

But, I think you will be quite surprised at how Spencer is going to work out...