Quote:Do you even know what a straw man argument is?
Point is you can draft and develop and let a guy get traded, or even walk away and keep winning.
Getting Shorts on a long term deal here won't be what determines the success of the Jaguars.
Yeah, I do actually. And Pittsburgh has nothing to do with Jacksonville. But, if you want to argue the point, where have the steelers seen their offensive rankings land the past couple of years? 20th? 21st? They haven't cracked .500 since 2011, so it's working out splendidly for them.
Your point isn't rocket science. But, you can also draft and develop a guy, then when he comes up for contract time, extend him. Oddly enough, a lot of teams do that with a pretty high rate of success. Every team is different.
Nobody is saying getting an extension for Shorts is the lynchpin for success. But, the team is not better off if we're trading him for some mid to late round pick.
I'd be for a Shorts trade, it's just that their isn't much to be proud of offensively. Shorts is our best offensive skill player until proven otherwise, and trading him isn't worth it.
I know we're in a day and age where we LOVE accumulating draft picks, but let's face it, a third round pick is best case scenario for Shorts, and that's just moving backwards.
Quote:Shorts for Mack.
Done. 
Sounds fair.
Quote:I'd be for a Shorts trade, it's just that their isn't much to be proud of offensively. Shorts is our best offensive skill player until proven otherwise, and trading him isn't worth it.
I know we're in a day and age where we LOVE accumulating draft picks, but let's face it, a third round pick is best case scenario for Shorts, and that's just moving backwards.
That's my point. The value in trade wouldn't be worth it. If we had a Blackmon on the roster right now, then things would be different, but he's not here.
shorts hasn't reached his potential yet.. the guy has been on three mediocre offenses and 2/3 of those years he was nothing to brag about, but he flashed what he is capable of in his second year and i liked what i saw... if that guy was in a good system he would be dangerous... i think this year will be telling of what that guy is made of... he will have two top wr porspects coming out of the draft that should allow us to gauge him a lot better than when it was just him and Blackmon... i think he is like garcon with a better head on his shoulders...imo if the guy can stay healthy, he is a #1 despite people thinking he is nothing more than a #3... if he plays 16 games this year i would be willing to bet he is the guy people are talking about over lee and robinson.... not sayin lee isn't capable of becoming something big, i just don't think its gonna happen right off the bat with him.... trading CS3 would be a mistake.
Quote:Yeah, I do actually. And Pittsburgh has nothing to do with Jacksonville. But, if you want to argue the point, where have the steelers seen their offensive rankings land the past couple of years? 20th? 21st? They haven't cracked .500 since 2011, so it's working out splendidly for them.
Your point isn't rocket science. But, you can also draft and develop a guy, then when he comes up for contract time, extend him. Oddly enough, a lot of teams do that with a pretty high rate of success. Every team is different.
Nobody is saying getting an extension for Shorts is the lynchpin for success. But, the team is not better off if we're trading him for some mid to late round pick.
Pittsburgh is part of the NFL, the Jaguars are part of the NFL. Success in the NFL isn't dependent on keeping around middle of the road talents at all costs.
Like I said, if a team were willing to give up a good haul of picks for Shorts I have to believe Caldwell would be willing to listen.
Quote:But, the team is not better off if we're trading him for some mid to late round pick.
This is where I believe the topic idea has spiraled.
I haven't read this whole thread, so I'm not sure if people have advocated this. But, trading Shorts for a "mid to late round pick," or "4th rd pick" is pretty silly. It would definitely be better to extend/keep him.
Now, if there's a team that offered much better value, then it should be considered.
For instance:
1. an earlier round pick (2-3)
2. an okay player (any position) + mid round pick
3. A stud player (Mack,,etc) for giving up Shorts + a mid-late pick
Not likely to be offered, but something along those lines is better.
There's no sense in trading Shorts for just a mid-late pick, IMO.
Quote:Pittsburgh is part of the NFL, the Jaguars are part of the NFL. Success in the NFL isn't dependent on keeping around middle of the road talents at all costs.
Like I said, if a team were willing to give up a good haul of picks for Shorts I have to believe Caldwell would be willing to listen.
but who in the nfl would be willing to give up that much for a guy who has only flashed one year... i went on a bit of a rant about how good i think shorts is but i also believe excitement like that is pretty much exclusive to jacksonville and people who have followed this team... i dont see any GM looking to risk DP's to get someone who hasnt really done a whole lot, at least not statistically, in the NFL.... i still think he can be something better than what alot of people on here give him credit for
Quote:but who in the nfl would be willing to give up that much for a guy who has only flashed one year... i went on a bit of a rant about how good i think shorts is but i also believe excitement like that is pretty much exclusive to jacksonville and people who have followed this team... i dont see any GM looking to risk DP's to get someone who hasnt really done a whole lot, at least not statistically, in the NFL.... i still think he can be something better than what alot of people on here give him credit for
I don't know. Whether something would happen isn't really relevant to what I'm talking about.
Quote:I don't know. Whether something would happen isn't really relevant to what I'm talking about.
you were sayin how DC would listen if a good haul of picks were offered... im saying i dont think that has a possibility of happening... if people offer anything at all it would be ridiculously low.
Quote:Pittsburgh is part of the NFL, the Jaguars are part of the NFL. Success in the NFL isn't dependent on keeping around middle of the road talents at all costs.
Like I said, if a team were willing to give up a good haul of picks for Shorts I have to believe Caldwell would be willing to listen.
Do you even recognize the fact that you're a contradiction here?
In one post you're trying to use Pittsburgh and their willingness to part ways with middling level talents, and then you're suggesting the guy you're basically calling a marginal player is going to bring in a "good haul of picks" in trade? Do you realize just how idiotic you're sounding here? NO team is going to offer multiple picks for a guy if your assessment is correct and he's just barely better than average.
When you run out of actual facts to support your argument, resort to hyperbole. Nobody on this board has even remotely suggested keeping Shorts around at all costs. Your argument is weak to begin with, and now you're contradicting yourself in a single post. Quit now and avoid confirming what most suspect about you already.
Quote:Do you even recognize the fact that you're a contradiction here?
In one post you're trying to use Pittsburgh and their willingness to part ways with middling level talents, and then you're suggesting the guy you're basically calling a marginal player is going to bring in a "good haul of picks" in trade? Do you realize just how idiotic you're sounding here? NO team is going to offer multiple picks for a guy if your assessment is correct and he's just barely better than average.
Gabbert netted the Jaguars a pick.
Your argument is now destroyed.
Quote:Gabbert netted the Jaguars a pick.
Your argument is now destroyed.
Gabbert got the team a 6th round pick. That's really blowing my argument up as you suggest we'll get a "good haul of picks" for Shorts. You really are clueless.
Quote:Do you even recognize the fact that you're a contradiction here?
In one post you're trying to use Pittsburgh and their willingness to part ways with middling level talents, and then you're suggesting the guy you're basically calling a marginal player is going to bring in a "good haul of picks" in trade? Do you realize just how idiotic you're sounding here? NO team is going to offer multiple picks for a guy if your assessment is correct and he's just barely better than average.
When you run out of actual facts to support your argument, resort to hyperbole. Nobody on this board has even remotely suggested keeping Shorts around at all costs. Your argument is weak to begin with, and now you're contradicting yourself in a single post. Quit now and avoid confirming what most suspect about you already.
But it works on my game console, so it should work in real life too!
Quote:But it works on my game console, so it should work in real life too!
Exactly. I'm just amazed this guy can actually turn on a computer at this point.
Quote:Gabbert got the team a 6th round pick. That's really blowing my argument up as you suggest we'll get a "good haul of picks" for Shorts. You really are clueless.
Our message board experts expected Gabbert to either play out his contract or be released. No on here thought the Jaguars could get anything for him.
Of course that's really rather immaterial, you're the one that's been constructing a straw man argument against me, as I never said a team would give a good haul of picks for Shorts. I said that if a team would give up a certain level of value I could see the point in trading him.
Quote:Pittsburgh is part of the NFL, the Jaguars are part of the NFL. Success in the NFL isn't dependent on keeping around middle of the road talents at all costs.
Like I said, if a team were willing to give up a good haul of picks for Shorts I have to believe Caldwell would be willing to listen.
Quote:Our message board experts expected Gabbert to either play out his contract or be released. No on here thought the Jaguars could get anything for him.
Of course that's really rather immaterial, you're the one that's been constructing a straw man argument against me, as I never said a team would give a good haul of picks for Shorts. I said that if a team would give up a certain level of value I could see the point in trading him.
So what exactly is a "certain level of value" to you?
You might as well stop, because you're making yourself look more and more foolish.
Quote:So what exactly is a "certain level of value" to you?
You might as well stop, because you're making yourself look more and more foolish.
You should go back and read the thread, you're only making yourself look more and more foolish.