[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by staylor26

This seems like a far cry from your Moore takes going back to the draft.

You said guys like Moore get drafted in the 3rd every year, and he was essentially a reach in the 2nd. You called him a WR3 at best, and you seemed to think it was more likely than not that he wouldn't even be that.

Seems like your opinion on him has changed significantly. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that's because of the flashes he shaped in TC and preseason?

I don't necessarily think that's a bad/harsh take at all, but it's clearly different from your takes before the draft.

Here - from the pre-draft Moore thread (spoilered so everyone else doesn't have to wade through our bullshit)

Spoiler!

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Would really hate Moore in the 1st round.

A lot.

With the late second? Sure.

But man, I just don't see what some of y'all are seeing. I don't see a guy who's big enough to be the X we want long-term, quick enough to be a dynamic player in the slot or large enough to be a red-zone threat.

I see a really REALLY fungible player here with no real standout skills. He's...fine. He's a low ceiling, relatively high floor, depth WR on a good team. I just don't really understand what I'm missing with him.

But ultimately I think that horse has been beaten to death so I guess we just let it play out.

Spoiler!

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Sounds like we're probably in each other's ballpark.

I think Lockett is what happens when this kind of player develops to the absolute peak of his ability. Locket is Moore's top 1% scenario. But it's not like there's a shortage of sub 6ft WRs who run a 4.4 and have okay agility scores.

So to put him on that sort of development arc is pretty damn aggressive. I don't think we can confidently say anything like that is going to happen. He's just as likely (in fact significantly more likely) to be Andy Isabella. Sure looks a LOT like Keke Coutee to me.

I just don't see the ceiling to justify that sort of capital. And ultimately I'd be shocked if he's my favorite guy at 50. Honestly, from your relatively tepid comments, I'd be surprised if that's the case for you as well.

You may be willing to 'consider' him at 50 - but dollars to donuts says that when that pick comes up there are at least 3 guys on the board you'll like more than him.

I just can't see it. I'd consider him a necessary evil at 62 and wouldn't consider him a real 'value' play until the back of the 3rd. And I'm guessing that's also how long it will take for me to look at my board and see him at the top of it.

This gets back to where I started - man, that's SUPER tepid 'criticism' of this kid. Saying I'd consider him a value play in the 3rd and a viable but not ideal pick in the late 2nd puts me like 15 spots off of where Veach had him valued. Afterall, Veach risked losing him outright for a 5th round pick. That's not someone he had a 1st round grade on and likely not someone he had a high 2nd on or he simply doesn't move for such a small return.

But as is your custom, you go WAY over the top when someone dares discuss one of 'your guys' in a less than glowing fashion. You wanna talk changing opinions - in that very thread YOU said you'd prefer Tolbert over him if they were both available at 62.

And now you're out here acting like you had this guy pegged for the HoF and I called him some piece of shit. Dude - you gotta stop doing that shit. Stop overplaying my position on guys. I didn't hammer this guy (apart from being aggressively anti-1st round pick on him). Nor did you scream about his greatness from the rafters.