Alex P Keaton said:
Which is exactly what you've been doing in McFadden threads ever since he was drafted. I have no issues with your stance on Stewart - or McFadden - and generally enjoy reading your take on players. But it's brutal to see you continue to be a hypocrite. When it's your take on a player, you look for data to back up your position and assert that you were right. When someone disagrees with you, you pick apart nearly identical rationales. Why can't you just be clinical and impartial?
That's inevitable to some extent. I thought Trent Richardson was a great prospect. When he struggled in the NFL, I figured it was just a temporary blip and not a sign of his real quality. On the other hand, I thought Bishop Sankey was a suspect prospect before he was drafted. Now that he's struggling in the NFL, I take it as confirmation that he does indeed suck. When you develop an opinion on a player, you're going to tend to interpret new information in such a way that confirms what you already believed. Everyone does this. It's not a quality that's unique to me and it's hardly noteworthy.
As far as Jonathan Stewart goes, I don't see him as parallel with McFadden. McFadden has been given an extended run as a starter and most of the time he has sucked. That's an impartial reading of his career. Stewart has been stuck in a committee for almost his entire time in the NFL. He has been injured for the last few years. However, when healthy and given opportunities, he has been effective far more often than not. All I've really been saying in this thread all along is that if he gets healthy and gets an opportunity, he will produce. There is no real inconsistency or excuse-making involved with that. I actually consider it the most impartial reading of his career.
Any time you put your opinion out there, you are opening yourself up to the possibility of criticism. I've never shied away from it. It doesn't bother me. If anything, the predictable legion of trolls looking to deliver comeuppance makes this whole enterprise more entertaining. If they are going to pile it on every time Stew tweaks an ankle, of course it's only fair to do the same when he's putting up numbers. It's all part of the game. If someone that I've dogged like Kelvin Benjamin or Bishop Sankey lights it up, I know I'll take stick from his wounded fanboys. I would say Sankey is a waste of time and a bust and that it should be obvious by now, but many would disagree. I don't call that being biased. I call it having an opinion. That is not a crime. On the contrary, it's a large part of what FF is all about.