Calls for an "immediate impact" at CB through the draft. Do they make sense? (1 Viewer)

BoNcHiE

Every team's Elixor
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Messages
57,503
Reaction score
72,057
Offline
How many times have we heard this? We need to get an "impact player" at CB in the 1st round. "We can't select so and so because he'd take longer to develop"....so on and so forth. But lets look at the current roster....

MM, Young, David, Gay, and Craft. Now lets assume said rookie CB, no matter who he is, can beat out Craft and make the 53 man roster. That would put him inactive on gamedays. Now lets say he beats out Young or David and is activated on gamedays and plays Dime back. Past that what rookie corner is going to come in and unseat Gay and MM as starters?

The point is, it sounds good to say "we need to get an immediate starter at CB"...but in reality regardless of who we pick, they will likely be the dime back or inactive their rookie year. So the moral is, pick the CB we think has the most potential and who is the best player available, not the CB whos most "NFL" ready but has a lower ceiling. Because that NFL readiness won't matter much anyway.

McKelvin or Cromartie have the most potential of all the CB's in this draft. The fact that they went to small schools and might need some coaching shouldn't be a factor b/c theres little chance any rookie corner is anything more then a dime back his rookie year anyway. Expecting any drafted corner to come in and start (on a team that has already signed a starter in FA no less) is unrealistic so don't base your grading of CB's on that.
 
Last edited:

CHI-TOWNSAINT

More than 15K posts served!
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Messages
16,626
Reaction score
5,593
Age
42
Location
Earth
Offline
How many times have we heard this? We need to get an "impact player" at CB in the 1st round. "We can't select so and so because he'd take longer to develop"....so on and so forth. But lets look at the current roster....

MM, Young, David, Gay, and Craft. Now lets assume said rookie CB, no matter who he is, can beat out Craft and make the 53 man roster. That would put him inactive on gamedays. Now lets say he beats out Young or David and is activated on gamedays and plays Dime back. Past that what rookie corner is going to come in and unseat Gay and MM as starters?

The point is, it sounds good to say "we need to get an immediate starter at CB"...but in reality regardless of who we pick, they will likely be the dime back or inactive their rookie year. So the moral is, pick the CB we think has the most potential and who is the best player available, not the CB whos most "NFL" ready but has a lower ceiling. Because that NFL readiness won't matter much anyway.

McKelvin or Cromartie have the most potential of all the CB's in this draft. The fact that they went to small schools and might need some coaching shouldn't be a factor b/c theres little chance any rookie corner is anything more then a dime back his rookie year anyway.
I completely agree with this school of thought....and it should be applied to every position. I can't think of one position, except S, that has a chance to come in and start from Day 1 on our entire roster if everyone we have now is healthy. This is the reason why I think BPA is always the way to go in the draft because normally you are looking at these players as making an impact in year 2 and after that.

If you look at it like this than DRC, Mckelvin and Porter, IMO, are 1, 2, 3. If you are looking for an immediate impact at CB, I still put Talib atop the list. To me he is the most NFL ready, but he looks to have a short ceiling.

If we go CB at 10, and you guys know I don't, it really should be DRC or Mckelvin in that order......IMO.
 

bergeaux

Building my own team!
Joined
Jan 30, 2007
Messages
15,733
Reaction score
3,275
Location
Washington DC
Offline
I think McKelvin or Jenkins could start in year 1. Not in week 1, but in year 1. DRC will not. I have my doubts about Talib, but he is a close second to those two in possibly starting in year 1.

I personally think it's all moot because we will have Craft and Gay/Young starting in week 1 and by the time MM gets healthy, it will probably be Young or Gay (whoever wins) on one side and MM and the rest will be nickel and dime. Therefore, it's unlikely that any CB we draft will start in year 1 simply because of the competition.

If we traded for a CB, they would probably start for Craft and then when MM is healthy it would be MM and traded for CB.
 

bobad

Son of Adam
VIP Contributor
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
25,109
Reaction score
17,926
Location
Saints Country
Offline
The point is, it sounds good to say "we need to get an immediate starter at CB"...but in reality regardless of who we pick, they will likely be the dime back or inactive their rookie year.
Realistically, rookie CB's start about as often as rookie QB's. While I would rather take a DT at 10, your reasoning is why I would rather pick DRC than McKelvin. He has more upside with the rare combination of speed, height, long arms, and leaping ability
 

Guitarzan

Banned
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 16, 2005
Messages
15,577
Reaction score
2,991
Age
58
Location
Appalachia
Offline
All makes sense but MM is a big question mark for me.
 

Jiva

All-Pro
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jan 7, 2002
Messages
1,020
Reaction score
235
Age
45
Offline
2006 - Tye Hill started 10 games for the Rams and Antonio Cromartie, in his 2nd year, is one of the top CB's in the league. Jonathan Joseph for the Bengals started 9 games as a rookie.
2007 - Revis for the Jets, Leon Hall for the Bengals, and Aaron Ross for the Giants all started and contributed last season to their teams.
I do agree that adding Gay, Young, and David in the last 2 off seasons has made a roster spot at that position hard to secure, but I don't think it's a lock to say a rookie could not contribute to our Defense.
 

st.randy

otis
Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
8,076
Reaction score
1,291
Age
54
Offline
How often does one draft a player simply for his rookie year? I doubt that many people outside of the fanbase would ever choose one player over another for thier first year contributions. Maybe it is an "all things being equal....go for the immediate impact" type of thing. But there is no reason for a team to choose one player over another for thier first year, and lose a chance at a player who will be better in the long run.

That said....i agree with the fans on here who are hoping for a DT in the first round, because the position upgrade alone will have a bigger impact on the team this year. A rookie corner will not.
 
OP
BoNcHiE

BoNcHiE

Every team's Elixor
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Messages
57,503
Reaction score
72,057
Offline
2006 - Tye Hill started 10 games for the Rams and Antonio Cromartie, in his 2nd year, is one of the top CB's in the league. Jonathan Joseph for the Bengals started 9 games as a rookie.
2007 - Revis for the Jets, Leon Hall for the Bengals, and Aaron Ross for the Giants all started and contributed last season to their teams.
I do agree that adding Gay, Young, and David in the last 2 off seasons has made a roster spot at that position hard to secure, but I don't think it's a lock to say a rookie could not contribute to our Defense.
Who said they couldn't contribute? I'm saying that we have the depth to take the CB with the most potential even if he is more raw then say Cason or Talib. Leon Hall was horrible for the Bengals and Aaron Ross was a nickelback. I'm not sure about Revis's situation. Antoine Cromartie is exactly what I'm saying. Freak athlete, great potential, didn't play his rookie year (was injured), but is a beast now. Do you think the Chargers care that he didn't play his rookie year now? Of course not.

No matter who we take if we go CB, its almost certain they will be a nickel or dime back at most, so take the CB with the highest ceiling, not the most immediate impact.
 

PurpleBlack&Gold

FOOTBALL PLEASE!
VIP Contributor
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
3,490
Reaction score
1,868
Age
43
Location
Hawi, Hawaii
Offline
I personally think it's all moot because we will have Craft and Gay/Young starting in week 1 and by the time MM gets healthy, it will probably be Young or Gay (whoever wins) on one side and MM and the rest will be nickel and dime. Therefore, it's unlikely that any CB we draft will start in year 1 simply because of the competition.
Why do you think Craft can beat out David when he could not do it last year? the starters will probably be Gay and David/Young but more likely an all out competition for who will be one, two and three. I am hoping Young really comes on this year.
 

Pickz

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
3,189
Reaction score
2,378
Location
New Orleans East
Offline
Realistically, rookie CB's start about as often as rookie QB's. While I would rather take a DT at 10, your reasoning is why I would rather pick DRC than McKelvin. He has more upside with the rare combination of speed, height, long arms, and leaping ability
And he has better hands than McLovin I also think he will shock people with his return ability on punts and kickoffs. But, I think DRC will have a chance to move up the depth chart during the season if he start making impact plays early and so would McLovin. I don't think Gay is a starting CB and I hope the FO don't feel satisfied with our DBs and MM and Craft is getting up there in age. Who knows if MM will be ready??? DRC or McKelvin can get a chance to play signifacant time if MM aint ready.
 

syracuse saint

Hall-of-Famer
VIP Contributor
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
3,542
Reaction score
2,803
Age
53
Offline
How many times have we heard this? We need to get an "impact player" at CB in the 1st round. "We can't select so and so because he'd take longer to develop"....so on and so forth. But lets look at the current roster....

MM, Young, David, Gay, and Craft. Now lets assume said rookie CB, no matter who he is, can beat out Craft and make the 53 man roster. That would put him inactive on gamedays. Now lets say he beats out Young or David and is activated on gamedays and plays Dime back. Past that what rookie corner is going to come in and unseat Gay and MM as starters?

The point is, it sounds good to say "we need to get an immediate starter at CB"...but in reality regardless of who we pick, they will likely be the dime back or inactive their rookie year. So the moral is, pick the CB we think has the most potential and who is the best player available, not the CB whos most "NFL" ready but has a lower ceiling. Because that NFL readiness won't matter much anyway.


McKelvin or Cromartie have the most potential of all the CB's in this draft. The fact that they went to small schools and might need some coaching shouldn't be a factor b/c theres little chance any rookie corner is anything more then a dime back his rookie year anyway. Expecting any drafted corner to come in and start (on a team that has already signed a starter in FA no less) is unrealistic so don't base your grading of CB's on that.
Agree 100%. I have always maintained if the Saints are looking for an immediate contributor at CB, they better go FA for this. It is very rare to see a rookie CB make it to the #1 or #2 CB without getting toasted.

Just wondering Bonchi, why the avatar change after all this time?
 
OP
BoNcHiE

BoNcHiE

Every team's Elixor
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Messages
57,503
Reaction score
72,057
Offline
Agree 100%. I have always maintained if the Saints are looking for an immediate contributor at CB, they better go FA for this. It is very rare to see a rookie CB make it to the #1 or #2 CB without getting toasted.

Just wondering Bonchi, why the avatar change after all this time?
Its for the Experts mock draft. I'm picking for the Vikings. Just temporary.
 

GermanSaint

Guest
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
1,263
Reaction score
5
Offline
i dont know what is the problem all about. revis , hall , ross all had a bunch of playing time and solid impact last year .... its not that these guys are complete bums their first 2-3 years . i always believe the best learning for a DB is to making mistakes on gameday sometimes.
 
OP
BoNcHiE

BoNcHiE

Every team's Elixor
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Messages
57,503
Reaction score
72,057
Offline
i dont know what is the problem all about. revis , hall , ross all had a bunch of playing time and solid impact last year .... its not that these guys are complete bums their first 2-3 years . i always believe the best learning for a DB is to making mistakes on gameday sometimes.
Noones saying they are complete bums and noones saying a CB we pick will be one either. But with our depth at CB currently, a rookie is going to struggle to win a starting job as a nickel or dime back, much less beating out David and Gay for the 2nd CB's spot in TC. The whole point was to swing for the fences if we pick a CB and get the guy with the highest ceiling. We aren't in desperate need for a CB to come in and start from day one so we can afford to go BPA if we pick CB (or any position for that matter).
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)



New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

Headlines

Top Bottom