Which Position Should the Team Avoid at #9?

[dutar76]

Back up punter

 

[StudioSaint]

Why isn't juxta an option?

 

[Saint1977]

I voted guard because that can be filled later in the draft. Same with center. If Sanders falls to 9 I’m not sure you can pass on that. We need a franchise qb this year or next .

 

[livefromDC]

My favorite part is where you criticize the process and then immediately undercut your own sanctimony by trashing a specific position group. Impressive.

People are allowed to have preferences, as evidenced by your second paragraph where you state an obvious preference.

Your reading comprehension is failing you. My second paragraph demonstrates the importance of paying attention to the players available rather than the position itself. THIS year, the top Offensive lineman would have only been 5th or 6th if he came out last year.

2025 NFL Draft Position Review: Offensive Tackles – WalterFootball

walterfootball.com

I didn't trash the position. I'll try to be more clear. We all know the importance of offensive line. Yet if there's not a great one available, blindly stating you're drafting a tackle at #9 doesn't make sense. Last year the concern was that many of the teams ahead of the Saints could take tackles leaving the Saints with possibly the 4th or 5th best one in that draft. Luckily, only 2 OL went before the Saints drafted. But the fact remains, last year you definitely wouldn't rule out OT at #9, this year you probably can because there's no PLAYER with a top 10 grade. Which only emphasizes my point, it depends on the players available not just simply trying to address or avoid a position.

And this is a fan forum. That each post is a person's opinion is obvious. I think you look silly when you tuck your jersey into your jeans, CPG. Everyone who read that knows it's my opinion and preference to go untucked. It's implied.

 

[livefromDC]

None. Unless you consider Carter an LB who's technically an EDGE who can play DE in a 4-3 or LB in a 3-4

Exactly. Which is what I was addressing. With Carter most likely gone, I don't know that there's a DL or LB that I like more than the CB, Johnson at #9. So the Saints would be hard pressed to address the front 7 even if they wanted to do it unless they reach. Now if they moved up or back, that's different.

 

[BELOWSEALEVEL]

I'd say DE/£dge....because we stink at picking them

 

[texasjefe]

The question was asked, and the poll answered it.

The poll's responders do not want a QB taken with the first pick.

Live look-in on Derek Carr's offseason training.

 

[3ParStillDriver]

Exactly. Which is what I was addressing. With Carter most likely gone, I don't know that there's a DL or LB that I like more than the CB, Johnson at #9. So the Saints would be hard pressed to address the front 7 even if they wanted to do it unless they reach. Now if they moved up or back, that's different.

For me there is. First, I think Barron is a better CB then Johnson. Johnson was covering men and successfully, but he also had two hulking monsters pushing the pocket from the front, preventing a pocket from ever forming. Kenneth Grant and Mason Graham? Heck, those two together would've made Fred "Two Toes" Thomas look all-american. But just watching games, Barron passes the eye test more then Johnson for me.

But defensively, I would take Mason Graham and Kenneth Grant before I take Johnson. But I would also give consideration to Barron after Graham but before Grant. On the flip side of that, I'm super past the point of building defenses via Dennis Allen philosophy which was building a stout secondary and relying on coverage sacks, rather then building the front 7 and forcing pressure to assist and make an average secondary look good.

 

[TenTwo]

My vote is corner, not because we couldn’t use a starting corner, but because there are no corners worthy of the 9th overall pick, and I think we could reach for one because we didn’t land Charvarius Ward in free agency. I’m hopeful they view Isaac Yiadom as a starting option on the outside.

I see QB is leading the survey, but I’m totally good with them reaching for a QB if this staff sees something special and has a vision for the player. So for example if they loved Dart or Ewers or Sanders or whoever and they thought he was a Starter, just draft him. So I think BPA with the partial exception to QB. I think this team needs to be hunting for the long term solution at QB. I’m also ok with giving Rattler a fair shot at the job.

 

[cpg]

Your reading comprehension is failing you. My second paragraph demonstrates the importance of paying attention to the players available rather than the position itself. THIS year, the top Offensive lineman would have only been 5th or 6th if he came out last year.

2025 NFL Draft Position Review: Offensive Tackles – WalterFootball

walterfootball.com

I didn't trash the position. I'll try to be more clear. We all know the importance of offensive line. Yet if there's not a great one available, blindly stating you're drafting a tackle at #9 doesn't make sense. Last year the concern was that many of the teams ahead of the Saints could take tackles leaving the Saints with possibly the 4th or 5th best one in that draft. Luckily, only 2 OL went before the Saints drafted. But the fact remains, last year you definitely wouldn't rule out OT at #9, this year you probably can because there's no PLAYER with a top 10 grade. Which only emphasizes my point, it depends on the players available not just simply trying to address or avoid a position.

And this is a fan forum. That each post is a person's opinion is obvious. I think you look silly when you tuck your jersey into your jeans, CPG. Everyone who read that knows it's my opinion and preference to go untucked. It's implied.

My reading comprehension is fine, but the point of the entire thread is exactly what you stated in the second paragraph. What position group do you feel is weakest or one you'd prefer to avoid? I can admit that I framed it a bit clumsily, asking the same question three different ways.

If "I can safely say there's no offensive lineman worth one of the top 9 picks" is not a trashing of a position group, then I don't think it's my comprehension that needs work.

Yes, opinions. Except that you are holding yours up as gospel and trying to use WalterFootball as some sort of receipt/proof. We both agree it’s about players, you just tripped over your own sanctimony proving it.

 

[livefromDC]

My reading comprehension is fine, but the point of the entire thread is exactly what you stated in the second paragraph. What position group do you feel is weakest or one you'd prefer to avoid? I can admit that I framed it a bit clumsily, asking the same question three different ways.

If "I can safely say there's no offensive lineman worth one of the top 9 picks" is not a trashing of a position group, then I don't think it's my comprehension that needs work.

Yes, opinions. Except that you are holding yours up as gospel and trying to use WalterFootball as some sort of receipt/proof. We both agree it’s about playerswould just tripped over your own sanctimony proving it.

Nah, you didn't like the response. I stated why avoiding a position group is not a good idea. Then I said if I was forced why I'd avoid OL. I dont see one being ranked in the top 9 players. That's not avoiding the position, that's not wasting the value of the pick on a player I don't see as being one of the best 9 in the draft assuming the Saints pick 9th. If the Saints trade down to 15, I don't think avoiding OL is still a good idea. See how that works? Hence my belief that avoiding a position group with the Saints first pick isn't sound. It isn't sanctimonious to say that. On the contrary, I'm showing exactly why that logic is faulty. I could have stopped at my first paragraph but the 2nd paragraph illustrates the problem with avoiding a position. No draftable OL in the the top 9 doesn't mean there's not one in the top 15.

And yes your comprehension needs help if you think saying there's not a OL in the top 9 players this year is trashing the position, LOL. There's not a punter in the top 9, is that trashing too? If I said, "all the OL suck!", that's trashing the position group. Me saying that I safely don't see one OL rated in the top 9 is just my opinion on the top 4% of players (9 out of 257 players) who will be drafted this year. If saying that there's no tackle in the best 4% of players (not the the top 10% or 25% mind you...4%) is trashing the whole position group, then YES your reading comprehension is lacking. I guess I'm trashing Archie Manning if I say he's not the best Saints QB of all time too. No, he's just not Drew Brees.

 

[cpg]

Nah, you didn't like the response. I stated why avoiding a position group is not a good idea. Then I said if I was forced why I'd avoid OL. I dont see one being ranked in the top 9 players. That's not avoiding the position, that's not wasting the value of the pick on a player I don't see as being one of the best 9 in the draft assuming the Saints pick 9th. If the Saints trade down to 15, I don't think avoiding OL is still a good idea. See how that works? Hence my belief that avoiding a position group with the Saints first pick isn't sound. It isn't sanctimonious to say that. On the contrary, I'm showing exactly why that logic is faulty. I could have stopped at my first paragraph but the 2nd paragraph illustrates the problem with avoiding a position. No draftable OL in the the top 9 doesn't mean there's not one in the top 15.

And yes your comprehension needs help if you think saying there's not a OL in the top 9 players this year is trashing the position, LOL. There's not a punter in the top 9, is that trashing too? If I said, "all the OL suck!", that's trashing the position group. Me saying that I safely don't see one OL rated in the top 9 is just my opinion on the top 4% of players (9 out of 257 players) who will be drafted this year. If saying that there's no tackle in the best 4% of players (not the the top 10% or 25% mind you...4%) is trashing the whole position group, then YES your reading comprehension is lacking. I guess I'm trashing Archie Manning if I say he's not the best Saints QB of all time too. No, he's just not Drew Brees.

It's not that I didn't like the response, you're entitled to your opinion and I encouraged it from the outset. What I didn't care for was the sanctimony (undeserving, I might add) in attempting to make the premise look silly. And instead of just owning that you came off as a total Richard, you've doubled down to try and justify your buffoonery.

Well my reading comprehension managed to catch a red herring, false equivalence, ad hominem and a strawman all in one single, blitheringly illogical paragraph. So congratulations on that front. I'll work on my comprehension, but perhaps you can work on your logic.

 

[DerrickB]

None

 

[livefromDC]

It's not that I didn't like the response, you're entitled to your opinion and I encouraged it from the outset. What I didn't care for was the sanctimony (undeserving, I might add) in attempting to make the premise look silly. And instead of just owning that you came off as a total Richard, you've doubled down to try and justify your buffoonery.

Well my reading comprehension managed to catch a red herring, false equivalence, ad hominem and a strawman all in one single, blitheringly illogical paragraph. So congratulations on that front. I'll work on my comprehension, but perhaps you can work on your logic.

Sigh. There you go again. I didnt call your premise silly. I said it's counterproductive. It's counterproductive because you specifically said...

What position would you be least happy with the team selecting at #9, irrespective of the player?

THIS is illogical sense the specific player being drafted is the most important part of drafting equation. You didn't like my answer and now here we are with you throwing a tantrum because I suggested the premise was misguided. But then even though I thought the premise was misguided, after I stated why I thought it was the wrong way to look at it, I did my best to respond to your question. Because after all, you did create a thread to ask that specific question.

So when I said...

If I were pressed, I can safely say there's no offensive lineman worth one of the top 9 picks. Will Campbell would rank behind the top 5 OL in last year's draft and he's the best of this year's crop.

That means I'm only doing it because you asked. It means I'd rather not, but since you did....I will and you called me sanctimonious for answering the question you asked, although I wholly reject the premise of it.

Damn me for trying to give you an honest answer and explaining why. When most posters haven't left a response explaining their choice, I at least tried and you called me names for it. I gave you my opinion and you called me sanctimonious. I explained why I picked the position (in a thread where you asked us to pick a position) and you said I'm trashing the position. Smh...this is pointless.

 

[livefromDC]

None

Lord help me, this is what I should have said before moving on to another thread. None. Because the team shouldn't look to avoid a position. But stupid me, I tried to give the OP an answer to something the team should never do, and he threw a fit, LOL.