I'm not sure how this thread got derailed into maths, but I will try to clear it up. It's actually an algebra prpoblem. 3X = Y = Leonte Carroo Where X is a pick the dolphins traded away and Y is a pick the Dolphins acquired in trade.
I think we should coin a new phrase: "to go Carroo" over something haha! as in.. This thread has "gone Carroo" lol
Gee, I wonder who brought that up. It couldn't be the same person going on and on about the "turn it on" phrase... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Matt Ryan in 2012 led the league in completion percentage, 4700 yards, 99.1 rating, 5th. 7.7 ypa. If you don't consider that a breakout year you're doing that thing again
So he had 1 break out year in his first 8 years playing. I say that because in 2013 his passer rating was back under 90 (89.6) Up until last season only Falcons fans, and RT haters, were riding Matt Ryan's jock. In his first 8 seasons he had one better season than RT (2012-His 5th season) and one equal to RT's season last year. (2014-His 7th season) Anyhow, the point still stands, Matt Ryan, up until last year (his 9th) had played pretty similar to RT's first 5 seasons.
This would be true if we had traded 3X to Min for Caroo, but we traded 3X to Min for Y, then have to spend Y to acquire Caroo. 3X was used to acquire Y which in turn was used to acquire Caroo, so it's actually 3X = Y = Caroo = 3X + Y. Y was used to acquire Carroo, 3X was used to acquire Y, 3X + Y = Caroo. 3X + Y = former Dolphin draft picks = Caroo.
This math works ONLY if both X and Y are zero. But both X and Y represent ONE pick. As Pauly and others have said.. the math doesn't work out the way you're thinking about it.
That's why there is a 3 with the X. 3X + Y = former Dolphin draft picks = Caroo. Y was used to acquire Caroo, so pick gone, 3X was used to acquire Y, so 3 picks gone. 3 picks gone +1 pick gone = Caroo. Y is part of the price for Caroo, we spent Y on Caroo, Y cost 3X, hence 3X + Y = Caroo. Empirical data; Pick we used on Caroo, gone, 3 picks we traded for pick we used on Caroo, gone. 3 + 1 = 4. Picks used to acquire Caroo in 2016, 3rd and 6th. Picks used to acquire Caroo in 2017, 3rd and 4th. 2 + 2 = 4.
Finster.. you wrote an equation. Once you do that, there is a correct and incorrect answer, no ambiguity, so you shouldn't have ANY disagreement with my previous post or it's patently clear you can't do simple math. Let me show you the algebra behind my post #131. 3X = Y = Carroo = 3X+Y This means that 3X = 3X+Y. Subtract 3X from both sides and you can therefore prove Y=0 Similarly, Y = 3X+Y. Subtract Y from both sides and you can prove 3X = 0, which means X = 0 That's why the equation you agreed with ONLY works if both X and Y are zero. Now.. if you want to change your mind and write a new equation, so be it, but don't try to argue what you wrote works unless both X and Y are zero.
Again, Finster, if I trade 5 one dollar bills for 1 five dollar bill, and use that $5 bill to pay a debt, did i spend $5 or $10?
You are smart enough. Just answer my simple question about how much money was spent. I bet you can get the answer right.
You spent 6 bills. I'm sorry, I just had to add the ambiguity and see how many more pages of comedy I get to read.
So now you want to argue the value of X and Y? They represent draft picks, lets not lose sight of the issue. Show me where this empirical data is wrong; 2016 3rd and 6th. 2017 3rd and 4th. One we used to draft him, and three we used to acquire the pick that we USED to draft him, that = 4. In everyone else's equation, the pick we used to draft Caroo is not being counted, the math is ending at acquiring the pick, but the math doesn't actually end until the pick is SPENT. Example; we spent 1 pick on Grant when we used our 3rd round pick to draft him. The pick we used to draft Caroo has to be counted. It took 3 picks to acquire the 86th pick, but to actually get Caroo you have to now SPEND that pick, 3+1 = 4. Here is where you would need to make your argument, 3rd, 6th, 3rd and 4th, which one of these 4 picks is not attributed to acquiring Caroo? The answer is none, because all were used to acquire Caroo, the 3rd we used to draft him, and the 3 picks we traded to acquire the 3rd we used to draft him.
lol Finster you're hopeless! I think the only way you'll be convinced we're right and you're wrong is if you agree in writing to "give up" 3X AND Y to buy something that costs Y, but where you can trade 3X for Y. Put that in writing and see what happens lol.
That's a faulty analogy, so back to the bottom line, show me which pick was not used to acquire Caroo; 2016 3rd and 6th. 2017 3rd and 4th. You or anyone else, have to show me how that doesn't = 4, which pick doesn't count? It's a very simple question.
Sigh. I ****ing hate doing this..... But Caroo cost 4 picks. To draft Caroo, we had to spend 2016 3rd & 6th picks and 2017 3rd & 4th picks. If you want to buy something that costs $4 but you only have $1, so you borrow $3, the thing you wanted to buy doesn't all of a sudden cost $3....it still costs $4.
Not true. Carroo never cost $4. He only cost $3. And Cbrad already covered this. The Vikes had to spend the 2016 3rd round pick. The argument has always been, how many picks did the Dolphins use on Carroo. The answer is and always will be 3. And if you do the actual math, it cost 3 picks to acquire Carroo. Dolphins give 3 picks to the Vikes for 1 pick. 3=1 3= Carroo
Right, but the one pick you acquired was still spent. You'd have an argument if the 3rd picks were the same pick in the same year, but they aren't. The problem is that we aren't looking at the actual picks, we're just looking at them as the round they're from. Say we didn't trade and were able to get him with our original pick...we spent 1 pick on Carroo, right?
If you look at it this way then Carroo only cost 1 pick. Unless the Vikes spent the 3 picks on Carroo too. lol The Dolphins never had that 3rd round pick. They traded 3 picks for 1, so 3=1. Like in my car scenario. If I trade a VW(2016 6th rd pick), Toyota (2017 3rd round pick), and Chevy (2017 4th rd pick) for a Ford (2016 3rd rd pick) have I used 4 cars to get the Ford? No, I used 3 cars, right?
Your analogy is great but it isn't complete though. We weren't done when we got the Ford. We had to spend the Ford to get the Camper (Carroo).
Try it this way... I have 0 dollars, but I want to buy a Coke for $1. I tell my buddy, "Hey, I'll give you $3 next Friday when I get paid if you give me $1 today". I use that $1 on a Coke. Next Friday I get paid $50. I give $3 to my buddy. I have $47. When did I ever use $4?
gase brought competence which is really the only thing tannehills ever needed...im expecting a 100 plus qbr this year and every year forward from this qb
Ok, that makes sense....BUUUUUTTTTTTTTTTTT........back to your car analogy, for a second. You want a Camper (Caroo), but to get the Camper, you need to trade it for a Ford (2016 3rd rd pick). To get that Ford you have to trade a VW(2016 6th rd pick), Toyota (2017 3rd round pick), and Chevy (2017 4th rd pick). So you trade the VW, Toyota & Chevy for the Ford. Then you trade the Ford for the Camper. You gave up 4 cars for one Camper. I wonder if this is one of those the dress is blue or yellow things.....
The Ford = 3 cars, right? And I had to give up 3 cars to get the Ford, right? I never owned 4 cars at once so how can I spend 4 cars on something? VW, Toyota, Chevy = Ford Ford = Camper VW, Toyota, Chevy, Ford ≠ Camper
No, I never had 4 cars in total. At the most I had 3. I turned 3 cars into 1 car and turned one car into a camper. And just like the Vikes, they had 1 pick and turned it into 3 picks. Did they have 4 picks?
I think steadiness is the key. With Lazor Tannehill was very good or very bad across his game situation splits. Under Gase Tannehill has been steady.
You can't add the Caroo pick itself, as we were going to make at least one pick anyway. So, we traded three picks for one pick. I trade 20 quarters for five $1 bills, then trade those five ones for one $5 bill, then pay my buddy the $5 I owe him. How much did I spend? $5 or $15?
the only thing you should do with those lazor game splits is toss them in the trash...the nfl caught up with lazors o the same way it did chip kellys no huddle tempo one and worse Miami tried to run that crap allowing the opposition to match personnel and catch their breath on a every snap basis the end result was inevitable when you neuter a qb who one of his strengths is his pre snap reads and coverage ids and accounting for/verifying protections Sherman got tannehill more prepared for the protections side of things than anything else and also understood that this qb could take care of the ball make good decisions with the football and make proper pre to post snap coverage ids gase didn't hang his qb out to dry with situational play calls ie deep drops vs pinned their ears pass rushers when we were way behind the sticks instead he called draws and delays to get easy yards and limit the sticks exposure on 3rd down sub downs to more manageable and he also implemented formations and personnel as a play caller and game plan installer at the highest of levels...and it's why he's the best young head coach in football...Miami struck gold with this hire...not to mention he also got the qb to have more active feet something lazor not only didn't want with his offensive design but even coached tanny not to do... it's like we went from bottom of the barrel incompetence and utter stupidity to the polar opposite side of things...all I know is I'm glad it showed up before these clowns shipped out this qb cause they couldn't recognize what they had
The thing is, you aren't counting the actual pick, it took 3 picks to buy the pick, before they drafted Caroo they had already used 3 picks to get there, that's prior to drafting Caroo. We didn't trade 3 picks for Caroo, Caroo was not part of the deal with Min, we got a draft pick from them. Now you have to go ahead and use that pick to draft Caroo, the NFL will not give you that player unless you have a pick to give up. Just like I posed to Brad, show me which pick, no more analogies, just show me which pick didn't count; 2016 3rd and 6th. 2017 3rd and 4th. We no longer have any of those picks, and only 1 player to show for it.