Jump to content

Matt_In_NH

Community Member
  • Posts

    7,779
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Matt_In_NH

  1. 4 hours ago, Sweats said:

     

     

     

     

    Recently, jurors have come out on record saying that the not guilty verdict in the OJ trial was a retaliation for the Rodney King incident.

     

    So what i'm saying, is that no matter whether the prosecution has satisfied it's "burden of proof", a jury (in any trial) will side with whatever agenda it perceives and anyone who doesn't see that or still believes in honest and fair trials are severely disillusioned.

    Honestly at the end of the day, jurors don't care about right or wrong, guilty or innocent......they know it's not them on trial and most just want to get the hell out of there as quick as possible knowing they are only earning $25 a day to do their civic duty.

     

    So, imagine putting your life in the hands of 12 people who don't know you, don't care about you, are only making $25 a day, have to sit in one spot for sometimes 8 hours a day and really don't care about whatever happens to you because they need to get that trial over quick to get back to their jobs to pay for their homes, their bills and they have to plan what they're going to make for dinner that evening for little Sally, etc.

     

    Being judged by a jury of our peers?.....a fair and honest legal system?.......no such thing.

    The system is definitely imperfect.  And I agree racial history with the LAPD played a role.

  2. On 4/13/2024 at 10:36 PM, WotAGuy said:


    “Not convicted” is probably most accurate in this case. 

    The phrase “not guilty” in a criminal trial is confusing and many don’t know what it actually means because those two words seems to indicate innocent.  It needs more context, specifically that you are required to assume the defendant is innocent unless the prosecution shows enough evidence to confirm they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.   In OJs case I think the jury decided reasonable doubt was that the police were raciat and could have planted the evidence.  The evidence was damning but they were able to show blood was missing or unaccounted for and it could have been used to plant evidence.  

  3. I would remove the word "total" in the title....its not just random events.  Draft picks are like lottery tickets, I think that is a good analogy.  But your chances of hitting on a 100 million dollar hit are way better based on the draft position, especially at the top of the first.   You can find a HOFer type anywhere, that is a fact but statistically they come from top 10 picks overwhelmingly more often than after that.    Why dont teams just collect picks all the time?

     

    1.  You might have a deep roster and you know some of those lottery tickets take time to develop. You dont have a spot on your roster to wait to see if the pick develops

    2.  Other teams have to want to give you more picks for your pick(s) or for players.  It's not just a grocery store you go buy stuff, it takes two.   There are a set finite number of draft picks in the market place

    3.  The work teams put into the draft does have meaning, some are better than others but you must have a grading system and when a guy stands out compared to the rest of the field, it can make sense to trade up.   So do teams over-estimate their skill?  Probably so, I think it is inherent in the process.   They have a lot of money and people and data to throw at the problem, of course they believe in what they are doing.

    • Like (+1) 2
    • Agree 2
  4. 18 hours ago, Logic said:

    I tend to think that with as expensive as WR contracts are getting, and as many good ones as are coming out in the draft each year, and as quickly as many of them seem to be able to hit the ground running...

    WR may become the next position where it's smart to "turn and burn". Draft a guy, pay him on a rookie wage scale for four years (or five if he's a first rounder), then trade him or let him walk and get a compensatory pick. Wash, rinse, repeat. Only the elite guys will merit those mega-extensions.

    If the supply of good, draftable WRs continues to go up, and the cost to re-sign them continues to climb, the wave will crest, and they'll eventually start going the way of RBs.

    Maybe. Just maybe.

    Supply and demand.    don’t think it will go the way or rbs any time soon but I think like rbs are maybe undervalued right now wrs are overvalued.   And that is part of what the gms are saying.  

  5. 9 hours ago, JMM said:

    Why not package Milano AND Josh for the number one overall...🙄🙄🙄🙄

    I think they could get number one overall for Josh and keep Milano.  Trading Milano and Josh for the number one overall would be a big fleecing.

    • Haha (+1) 1
  6. 10 minutes ago, boyst said:

    If he held this power of emotion over you I suggest you seek an opportunity to explore more beneficial meanings in your life.

    I pictured a guy with a tin foil hat behind a keyboard wrote this, am I right?

    • Haha (+1) 1
  7. 43 minutes ago, LeGOATski said:

    If they did, it would mean they're super confident in Bernard and Williams. 

    Super confident in Williams as far as what, they played like 4 other shmucks ahead of him last year.  The guy has talent and hopefully it all comes together for him but I think the team demonstrated a big lack of confidence in him last year.

  8. 1 hour ago, BarleyNY said:

    The only issue is that a team trading for him would take on his guaranteed contract. $4.7M total for 2024 & 2025. There have been recent trades where guaranteed money reverts back to the original team if the player is cut. I’m not interested but I’d want us to insist on that if we did acquire him. 

    Yeah, you have to be confident he can work out, you are kind of committing to having him on the roster....we dont need dead weight because once upon a time he was a high pick.

    • Agree 1
×
×
  • Create New...