trade L BOOKER, then draft 2 rb | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

trade L BOOKER, then draft 2 rb

V

vere76

Rookie
Joined
Apr 28, 2007
Messages
658
Reaction score
44
should have kept booker, these guys will not be as big of a playmaker as booker
with our line getting better booker would of had a great year.
But i love our first 2 picks
 
You can't compare Booker to these two picks. First off, these guys are sixth-rounders. Secondly, they are completely different types of players that fit completely different types of systems.

I loved Booker's style of play and look forward to watching his highlights in the future, but if he wasn't going to fit into our new system, then the best thing to do was to move him for a mid-round draft pick.
 
vere76 said:
should have kept booker, these guys will not be as big of a playmaker as booker
with our line getting better booker would of had a great year.
But i love our first 2 picks
Click to expand...

Ridiculous.. Booker is a very limited player.. He's weak, he can't block, he can't run inside the tackles worth a damn. He may see 4 plays a game tops when everyone is healthy.

Meanwhile paremele is alot stronger, bigger, scouts say he is an "excellent inside runner" (while Booker can't run inside if his life depended on it). Parmele is a good blocker (which is vital to protect our QB's)..

Booker is useless on a Bill Parcells team

Parmele >>> Booker
 
Greyboy said:
Ridiculous.. Booker is a very limited player.. He's weak, he can't block, he can't run inside the tackles worth a damn. He may see 4 plays a game tops when everyone is healthy.

Meanwhile paremele is alot stronger, bigger, scouts say he is an "excellent inside runner" (while Booker can't run inside if his life depended on it). Parmele is a good blocker (which is vital to protect our QB's)..

Booker is useless on a Bill Parcells team

Parmele >>> Booker
Click to expand...

agreed
 
Awesome, another "Why did we trade LoBo" thread.

So long as Parcells is here, our players are going to be BIG. Get used to it.
 
vere76 said:
should have kept booker, these guys will not be as big of a playmaker as booker
with our line getting better booker would of had a great year.
But i love our first 2 picks
Click to expand...

Tell me why. Seriously. I want to know.

I'm beyond sick of people like you coming on here and saying this player won't be good, and that player won't be good.

Newsflash buddy, you know absolutely nothing about these prospects, so don't go prancing your opinion around like it's actually valid, because you have absolutely zero knowledge of these guys.
 
ShaBam said:
Tell me why. Seriously. I want to know.

I'm beyond sick of people like you coming on here and saying this player won't be good, and that player won't be good.

Newsflash buddy, you know absolutely nothing about these prospects, so don't go prancing your opinion around like it's actually valid, because you have absolutely zero knowledge of these guys.
Click to expand...


OH ITS VALID CAUSE I SAY SO !!!!!!
LOL
 
Greyboy said:
Ridiculous.. Booker is a very limited player.. He's weak, he can't block, he can't run inside the tackles worth a damn. He may see 4 plays a game tops when everyone is healthy.

Meanwhile paremele is alot stronger, bigger, scouts say he is an "excellent inside runner" (while Booker can't run inside if his life depended on it). Parmele is a good blocker (which is vital to protect our QB's)..

Booker is useless on a Bill Parcells team

Parmele >>> Booker
Click to expand...

I agree. I cant understand the fasination around here for Booker, he was so bad he couldnt even get intyo the game for the worst team in the NFL for 2/3 of the season last year.
 
canesfins13 said:
I agree. I cant understand the fasination around here for Booker, he was so bad he couldnt even get intyo the game for the worst team in the NFL for 2/3 of the season last year.
Click to expand...

A lot of people didn't want to see him go because after Ronnie went on IR, and while we waited for Ginn to develop as a WR, he was our best skill position player. The fact that he sat on the bench for 12 games is an indictment of Cameron, not Booker.

If the new regime didn't think he fit their system, so be it. He'll be good in Philly. To slam him on his way out the door because he's not an inside runner is ridiculous. He is what he is. Used correctly, he tore up Penn State in their bowl game and he tore up everyone he played against last December. But he's a specialist, not a starter. Can't compare apples and oranges.
 
Booker was a good player, he was quick but if that is not our philosophy so be it, then you make a good trade which benefits both sides (Philly got a good player for a 4th rounder that we used on a player we wanted). Ireland and Soprano wanted more bruising backs not the quick ones. Really I think the issue is, this is insurance in case Ronnie isn't at least 90% by September.
 
Myles Fynch said:
A lot of people didn't want to see him go because after Ronnie went on IR, and while we waited for Ginn to develop as a WR, he was our best skill position player. The fact that he sat on the bench for 12 games is an indictment of Cameron, not Booker.

If the new regime didn't think he fit their system, so be it. He'll be good in Philly. To slam him on his way out the door because he's not an inside runner is ridiculous. He is what he is. Used correctly, he tore up Penn State in their bowl game and he tore up everyone he played against last December. But he's a specialist, not a starter. Can't compare apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

How would you know that it was on Cameron instead of Booker??

I like Booker but for some reason our coaches feel like he's lacking something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom