Originally Posted by SNR (Post 9921335)

I don't know anything about horse racing because I was born in the 20th Century.

I think milkman falls into the same category.

Originally Posted by SNR (Post 9921335)

I don't know anything about horse racing because I was born in the 20th Century.

I think milkman falls into the same category.

Originally Posted by mlyonsd (Post 9921331)

Poor analogy. The better comparison is the price you pay for a race horse, not a car.

And if your point about paying too much for Smith is true, the same could be said for what the redskins gave up for RGIII.

Originally Posted by mlyonsd (Post 9921350)

You don't gamble on a car. You might overpay for a car but you can always make it perform to expectations.

The NFL is much closer to horse racing. You are gambling on every horse in the stable and whether or not a transaction is successful is based on the return, not the cost.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 9921284)

That is straight up bullshit.
An NFL veteran has established his value, and Alex Smith was in no way worth a 2nd and 3rd round pick.

If I go to buy a used car and pay used Mercedes price for a used Toyota just because someone else wanted that same used Toyota, I ****ed myself.

No matter how you spin it, the cost can not be justified.

I don't give a rat's ass if Alex goes on to win the next 10 SBs, his value at the time of the trade was no ****y near the price paid.

Originally Posted by mlyonsd (Post 9921350)

You don't gamble on a car. You might overpay for a car but you can always make it perform to expectations.

The NFL is much closer to horse racing. You are gambling on every horse in the stable and whether or not a transaction is successful is based on the return, not the cost.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 9921351)

Value for veteran players is based on previous NFL production.
Value for draft picks is based on potential.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 9921351)

Value for veteran players is based on previous NFL production.
Value for draft picks is based on potential.

Originally Posted by Sweet Daddy Hate (Post 9921390)

Let's start a horse-racing crew. Who here is short enough to ride? Anyone care to guess what the name of our first stallion will be?:D

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 9921368)

I don't know anything about horse racing, but you wouldn't pay premium price for an established horse that has a mediocre record, would you?

On the flip side, you would probably have paid premium price for the pick of any horse of the Seattle Slew litter.

Originally Posted by mlyonsd (Post 9921374)

Value of a vet also is based partially on potential. Production and potential are what you gamble on.

I'm not going to get into a pissing match about it, I just don't think you can judge the transaction until you see the results.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 9921403)

I'll be short enough in a couple of years.

Originally Posted by milkman (Post 9921422)

Yes, some weight has to be given to potential, but most weight, by far, has to be previous production.

And Smith's previous production, even with consideration of potential within your system, in no way matches the cost.

Originally Posted by mlyonsd (Post 9921448)

Fair enough, you don't see eye to eye with Reid on potential.

I'm curious to know if you think the redskins paid too much for rgiii.