|
kgdabom -> RE: General Vikes Talk (5/7/2020 8:55:58 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: kgdabom
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: kgdabom
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: kgdabom
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: kgdabom
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: kgdabom
quote:
ORIGINAL: thebigo
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bruce Johnson
The Vikings last year featured a three wide receiver set only 21% of the time, which was the lowest in the NFL. That was partly because of the injury to Thielen, but what has to be pointed out is that we didn't have a slot receiver very much. Jefferson is going to have to get used to lining up wide with the Vikings.
Isn't that more indicative that we would be in the 3 wide receiver set more in 2020 (going forward) because we now have a slot receiver in Jefferson?
I don't think so. Both Thielen and Diggs are experienced Slot receivers. We picked Jefferson in spite of his slot experience not because of it.
You stated that we didn't have a slot receiver very much, as a big reason we were in a three wide receiver set only 21% of the time, lowest in the NFL. So it follows logically that drafting Jefferson who IS very much a slot receiver, that we would be in 3 receiver sets more often.
No it doesn't logically follow. I stated that we didn't USE a slot WR much. Not that we didn't have a slot wr. Bruce stated that, but I don't think that is what he meant. The Vikings had very qualified slot receivers last year and still didn't use it much. We only play 2 WRs most of the time so low use of slot could simply be the plan. Drafting Jefferson could be for no other reason than the Vikings seeing him as the best WR available. On the other hand you could be right. It could mean that we do intend to use the slot more this season, but it doesn't logically follow.
Why are you sticking your nose in this?
Why are you. You replied to me. OP Bruce, reply Bigo, reply KG, reply Bigo.
OK why DID you stick your nose in this? I figured I was replying to Bruce's reply to me, but noooo, you had stuck your nose in it. I guess I should have known it was you, because the reply was largely disconnected from the ongoing discussion. But you just couldn't help yourself.
My comment was very connected. As you know I take logic seriously and by the rules of logic it was possible, but it certainly did not follow.
We've already established that you do not know the rules of logic.
Now you're just embarrassing yourself. The actions of a desperate man. Here's a little help for you Bigo. Before you try to declare something being logical give it this test. Do you have two true premises? If you don't stop right there. You can't make any logical conclusion. If you do have two or more true premises then you can establish something that logically follows or can be concluded. However, make sure you are eliminating all other possibilities before declaring your conclusion logical. It really isn't all that difficult you just need to make sure you are following all the steps.
It's very nice that you can Google basic logical theory and copy paste as if it were your own thoughts. It would be nicer if you could actually apply that logical theory to the thought process.
No googling involved. Logic comes so easy to me I knew that before I even took any logic classes. I almost always apply logic to anything I declare to be logical. I have forgotten some of the more complex logic theorems that I learned in college 14 years ago, but the simple stuff like this I know and apply almost every time. I say almost always because I am human and make a mistake once in a long while and if I do I readily admit it.
|
|
|
|