Re: They Ain't Busts Yet
posted at 5/4/2010 5:36 PM EDT
In Response to Re: They Ain't Busts Yet
Bust what is the actual definition? Seems to me it's a pretty subjective and fluid determination. Again we are talking about symantics! Look because a player doesn't fit in a certain system or into a certain category of player doesn't make him a bust, but in each beholders eye he might be considered part of varying shades of the same word,bust. Look how can anyone call Wheatley or Crable a bust? Neither of them have been in uniform or on the field for any length of time,so determining whether either is a bust is not feasible. Like I always say about games it's not how you play in the beginning of the game it's the totallity of the game and it's outcome. To say someone underacheived is also a misnomer, because for someone too underacheived he would have first set a standard too acheive and in most of the cases we've talked about today have never established the aforementioned precedent. So in closing rather than rush to a judgement or a perceived notion,I think I'll wait for the final determination on the part of the Head Coach.
Posted by sportsbozo1
I can buy your argument about the "bust" label being pretty subjective and fluid, but to me, I think you look at a guy like Jamarcus Russell and you can call him a bust. He was drafted with the expectation of being a franchise-type quarterback and he was paid a lot of up front cash to be the guy to lead the Raiders for a decade. Instead, the Raiders are on the verge of cutting him and they had to trade another pick for Campbell to try and replace him.
Russell is the definition of a bust: a guy selected using a high draft pick (in his case, #1 overall), where there is a significant outlay of guaranteed dollars, and where he severely underachieves given the expectations of performance. Will he ever succeed somewhere else? Who knows, maybe he will salvage his career, but it's likely that he's not the second coming of Donovan McNabb or Dan Marino.
But getting back to Crable, Wheatley, Maroney, Watson et al. I think it's fair to say that the Pats were expecting Maroney to be a featured back and Watson to be a dual blocking and recieving threat, hence their selection as first rounders. Were/are either terrible? No, but both have been teases, and both have been serviceable, so hard to call them busts. How about Chad Jackson? First round talent, traded up to get him, glimpses of potential, but never put it together. Jackson = el busto.
Wheatley and Crable? If you're taking a chance to draft a guy in the 2nd and 3rd round, you probably think each will contribute in some aspect of the game, i.e. pass rush and nickel, plus special teams. Neither of these guys has. Are they busts? To date, yes, given where they were drafted. Will they ever transform into serviceable players? Why not? But if not here, where and when? So given where they were drafted and given their production to date, if neither produces this year then yes, they are busts.