Originally Posted by
Nichols
I'm thinking you meant to reply to a different post that I made. Because what you're saying has nothing to do with my response to Pelicanidae.
I'll respond to what you're communicating here, even though I've already done this a few times now.
I'm not interested in making lateral moves. I'm not interested in making moves that insure mediocrity. I'm not interested in making moves that don't edge the team closer to championship contention. The moves you're advocating for take this team nowhere. They are inconsequential. I made it clear, you need all-star talent, at least 2, with a superstar to win a title. We are only missing one piece to that puzzle. You want to get rid of one of those pieces to get non all-star talent that "fits" better. What this will do is eventually accelerate the departure of your superstar talent.
You say Ingram isn't the answer. I say, Ingram doesn't have to be the answer, he's simply 1 of 3 answers on a championship squad.
With all that said, this exchange is somewhat pointless, considering what I've been told about ownership. They aren't going to pay for a 3rd guy. And they aren't going to pay what's needed for a championship roster. Given that dynamic, what are we even discussing really?