Carolina Panthers vs Washington Redskins Gameday Thread

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by DynamiteRave

Or he could just be Devin Thomas. You like playing that risk/reward chance card. Most people don't come out and end up being like Cam Newton or Darelle Revis and just naturally being a beast, but you can at least get a good feel for how they're going to be by watching them play. I don't get good feelings from Hankerson. I didn't in college. I didn't in pre-season. I don't now.

Every move in football has risk, rewards and has a probability of success or failure. Folks then subjectively assign a probability to said players and then make their decisions based off that. Failures are UNAVOIDABLE in the NFL because the probability of players bombing is that high. But you can minimize that with scouting and the correct strategy to maximize returns on the players you acquire. And the best players are long-term players who provide returns for you.

You want T.O? You figure out what returns he'll give you and whether it's ****ing worth it over the other options you already. His short-term production is also going to be hindered because of his lack of practice in the offense. For the long-term here's T.O's ability to reach that "upper echelon" status and how many more years he's going to play. Well, he's never going to be what he was in his 20s anymore, so the chance of that is a big goose-egg. T.O is not likely to make it past 40; he might not even play this year.

Hankerson will probably provide less in the short-term, but at least he might become SOMETHING in the long-term. It's an absolute certainty that T.O will not be playing for long in the NFL and his injury. We're a rebuilding team and need all the LONG-TERM assets we can grab. That means we should look at as many guys as possible that might provide long-term value, Hankerson being one of them. This doesn't apply only to Hank, but every rookie we draft and pick up from UDFA. They ALL have a chance at providing more long-term upside than T.O.

Our strategy should about finding "franchise players", not quick fixes that don't stick for more than 3 years. If Hank bombs, fine, let's question the scouting. But I won't be scared of taking another potential WR in the 3rd round simply because Hank failed. It's a a strategy worth executing because "franchise" players are just that valuable.