Did we really have to give up that much to get the TE? (1 Viewer)

David Robbins

Ole Miss Rocks!
Joined
Mar 30, 2001
Messages
27,200
Reaction score
3,015
Age
58
Location
Jackson, MS
Offline
Alll those picks make no sense to me. Was this just something they decided to do to get theiir man, or what? Seems to me they could have given up a couple of picks to move up and get him, not 4 picks. Seems a little excessive to me.

I know that we have an extremely talented roster, though. They probably think not many guys could make our roster, so it was worth it giving up this much. I'm just wondering if this was a little excessive, especially since we still have a need at WR and QB.
 

gboudx

Not trusting a big butt and a smile since 1990.
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 8, 2001
Messages
26,930
Reaction score
16,125
Location
Rockwall, TX
Offline
Can't remember where I read this, but it sounded like the Saints wanted rookies who show an aptitude to be able to manage a workout/practice situation that may be very unlike the way things have been with OTAs and training camp. Apparently this TE checked that box.
 

football

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
8,207
Reaction score
16,748
Offline
Maybe but I look at value. It is very unlikely that a lot of the players that would be drafted after the 3rd or 4th would make the team anyway. In the pasts we had to cut so many players that were later picked up by other teams. Also have to look at the makeup of our rosters? Are there any holes in the roster or players on the brink of getting cut? I like the trade because we didn't have to give up our higher rounds for next year. I take losing our 5th to 7th any year if we can move up to get the best players within the mid rounds.
 

Outbackjack

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 10, 2011
Messages
6,540
Reaction score
17,889
Age
51
Offline
Alll those picks make no sense to me. Was this just something they decided to do to get theiir man, or what? Seems to me they could have given up a couple of picks to move up and get him, not 4 picks. Seems a little excessive to me.

I know that we have an extremely talented roster, though. They probably think not many guys could make our roster, so it was worth it giving up this much. I'm just wondering if this was a little excessive, especially since we still have a need at WR and QB.

Giving up all those picks to get AT made complete sense to Payton, Loomis and Ireland.

However, it made no sense to David Rollins.

And I’m OK with that.
 

Saint Floyd

Who Dat
Joined
May 12, 2002
Messages
1,657
Reaction score
3,518
Location
Buffalo, NY
Offline
Maybe but I look at value. It is very unlikely that a lot of the players that would be drafted after the 3rd or 4th would make the team anyway. In the pasts we had to cut so many players that were later picked up by other teams. Also have to look at the makeup of our rosters? Are there any holes in the roster or players on the brink of getting cut? I like the trade because we didn't have to give up our higher rounds for next year. I take losing our 5th to 7th any year if we can move up to get the best players within the mid rounds.
Yep. For this particular team, why draft 6 or 7 guys? Go get the 2 or 3 you know you love and sign UDFAs. Payton annually cuts picks from Rounds 4-7, so this move doesn’t irk me much. It’s the trading of future assets that rubs me the wrong way.
 

CDeuce26

Long-Time Lurker
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
182
Reaction score
486
Location
Mandeville, LA
Offline
Listen to CSP in his post-draft day 2 presser. Careful consideration was put into the fact that we already have a deep, talented roster with not a lot of openings. This is compounded by the state of the world with COVID limiting, or in our case, eliminating OTAs and offseason team workouts and mini-camps. We went for quality over quantity here and placed a premium on smart, motivated players that are scheme and cultural fits. These players need to be ready for camp in July, and I believe it will be very tough for late round projects to make the roster, given the circumstances from what CSP has said.
 

Piper Aydair

Very Banned
Joined
Mar 18, 2020
Messages
169
Reaction score
159
Location
Dover UK
Offline
Alll those picks make no sense to me. Was this just something they decided to do to get theiir man, or what? Seems to me they could have given up a couple of picks to move up and get him, not 4 picks. Seems a little excessive to me.

I know that we have an extremely talented roster, though. They probably think not many guys could make our roster, so it was worth it giving up this much. I'm just wondering if this was a little excessive, especially since we still have a need at WR and QB.

You sort of answered your own Question. Given our current team the chances a late round pick would claim a roster spot is slim.

They seemed to have opted for three players they hope will make an instant impact. And, Payton and Loomis don't seem to share the majority opinion that we are QB poor or that we need another WR.
 

Outbackjack

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Dec 10, 2011
Messages
6,540
Reaction score
17,889
Age
51
Offline
Look at it this way, the fourth round pick was our pick, in other words we swapped our 4th round pick for their third round pick, so it cost us our 5th 6th and 7th round to do so ,

Don’t start with draft trade logic.
There are still those convinced that we gave up 2 firsts to go get Davenport.
 
Joined
Apr 26, 2003
Messages
80
Reaction score
108
Age
46
Location
Uprooted from Baton Rouge to Cali
Offline
Hard to say if it was worth it today, if he pans out and becomes a great tight end for years to come then you will look back and say it was a great trade. I personally think it was not a bad trade, a lot of 6th and 7th round picks don't pan out or end up getting cut
 

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

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom