Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut
Long-strider, though.
Not a guy who you could look at and say "man, if he develops, he could be used very similar to Tyreek Hill..."
And I said this when we took Hardman and I wanted McLaurin - I HATED the idea of trying to do a like-kind exchange. If you lose Hill, pivot.
But if your approach is 'pivot' then you don't need a WR. You could just draft a DE and backfill at WR in free agency at that point. Which is why trying to make these conversations into need conversations just muddies the waters.
If you are going to make a 'need' argument, it necessarily follows that the 'need' should be a 1 for 1 replacement. And by that standard, Hardman fits better than Metcalf.
But need arguments make for really strained conclusions. So it makes a hell of a lot more sense to simply avoid them, IMO.
|
Im not a college football guy but what exactly made Hardman be looked at as being similar to Hill other than just being fast? Because I don't see those traits at all when I watch the two. Even a little bit. Toney is more like Hill than Hardman is IMO.