If we drafted the best available LB or CB in the 1st round.... (1 Viewer)

[rsonza]

would they start for the team in '08?


Let's assume that neither Dorsey nor Ellis falls to #10, then it would appear we should draft our other needs in LB or CB. Which means, we either draft LB Rivers (best LB available) or draft CB Leodis McKelvin from Troy or CB Mike Jenkins from South Florida or even CB Rodgers-Cromartie.

So would any of these guys start for us next year?

Not sure where Rivers would play, would he take Shanle's place or would he back-up Fujita? If he can play OLB and replace Shanle, then I'd say, take him and start him for '08...then we can put to rest all of our offseason FA moves (see Lance Briggs).

If we don't grab LB and instead go for one of the CBs above, would any of these guys be our #2 corner? I say yes - all of them should be starting above Jason David. Besides, MM will probably be not back to speed.

So, if we can't get Dorsey or Ellis, and either pick would truly make our offseason a great one, then we need to go Defense and our BIG needs of LB or CB.

 

[rlemieux]

I think if either CB is taken (my preference is Cromartie, followed by McKelvin and then Jenkins) I think they have a great shot at starting some point in the season. Possibly not right away, but I think any of them can come in and be our nickle right away.

As for Rivers, I am not a big fan. I just don't know if he is going to be a productive NFL linebacker. I think he could possibly come in and push Shanle on the weak side, but then again I don't know if he is much better than Shanle (I admit he has more speed and range than him though).

Personally I am hoping for Cromartie. I think he has all the skills needed to be an impact player in the NFL. We desperately need a good, young CB and I think he is the best available.

 

[meily]

Whoever we take a #10 will start for us, that's the whole reason we picked them...same can be said about rounds 2-7...if the guy shows he can pick up and execute the playbook he will play.

 

[chrisandersen]

Its easier for a OLB to start than a CB, IMO

 

[LSSpam]

A linebacker would have a very good shot at starting. Rookie linebackers often do very well.

A CB is a stickier proposition.

 

[guillermo]

Dorsey, Ellis or Gholston are not available (and I don't think they will) I would love to get a corner with our first pick, I am now sure who right now, although Rogers-Cromartie seems to be the most attractive.

By our second round, there can be 4 or 5 players that can start from day 1 as weakside linebackers, I actually think that we may get a starter at the position if there is an attactive defensive tackle on round 2.

We are in a great drafting position, I just hope we keep our picks until draft day, and then decided to move or not.

I am just hoping not making a trade for an offensive player or even drafting offense with our first 3 picks.

 

[NOVASaint]

I made this post and never posted it, but it looks like it will fit here more or less, so here it is. These are my arguments for the Saints taking a particular position in the 1st round. Please add yours!

QB -- Drew Brees has an injury history and we have no real back up. THIS ARGUMENT FAILS! No first round QB for us.

RB -- Both Deuce and Bush are coming off injuries, Deuce may never be the same. THIS ARGUMENT FAILS. Anyone we put at starting RB last year, (except Bush, but we believe he was going through his sophomore slump) did fine. Obviously, it's great to have great talent, but we don't need a RB in the 1st round, even if Deuce is never the same again.

FB -- preemptive THIS ARGUMENT FAILS! Nobody drafts a FB at #10.

TE -- We could really use a TE but there's nobody there at 10 so the point is moot.

WR -- We don't have anyone to compliment Colston. Meachem is unproven. THIS ARGUMENT FAILS. We picked Meachem #1 last year and we have to see if he pans out. Unless the Saints already know Meachem is a total bust, we cannot pick a WR in the 1st.

OT -- Stinchcomb is terrible and Brown is one play away from the IR. Unfortunately, this argument fails to fail. Taking an OT in the first round is a possibility, even if it wouldn't be our favorite option. We do have some players who could step up if Brown were to get hurt, but there's no question losing him would impact our offense in a big way. Upgrading Stinchcomb would give Brees an extra second or two to find open receivers too. Stinch was constantly beaten last year.

OG -- see argument at FB

C -- We lost Faine and Goodwin is not a proven starter. THIS ARGUMENT FAILS. We saw that the offense ran better with Goodwin on the line. The coaches liked Faine because he was smart and made all the right line calls (probably one reason we didn't have many sacks), but when Goodwin was in there, we got a push up front that Faine was never able to create. I'll live with a couple more sacks and a lot more running yards. Take a C later in the draft, but not 1st round.

K-- LOL!

P -- LOL LOL!

DE -- We had a terrible pass rush, so we need better DEs. THIS ARGUMENT FAILS. We did have a terrible pass rush, but the DEs were not the problem. They gave consistent effort and did make some plays (especially in the running game, where I think they were asked to focus, since the year before we'd had a terrible run D).

DT -- We don't have any true starters at DT. This argument is sound. We absolutely must take a DT in the first round if one is available. However, it's very likely that a DT worth the 10th pick will not be available.

OLB -- We need to upgrade the WLB spot. This argument is sound. Linebackers are not as crucial to the success of your defense as DTs, but they do matter. If there is a good OLB worthy of the pick available at 10, take him.

MLB -- Vilma's knee may not heal properly. He may not be the player we think we are getting. THIS ARGUMENT FAILS. It's true that something could go wrong with Vilma's knee, but you can't pay two MLBs starter money. We have to go with what we have here.

CB -- We must take a CB at 10 since we simply don't have any behind MM, considering too that MM is out for half the season with a knee injury. This argument is sound. If a CB worthy of the pick is there at 10, we must take him.

S -- Bullocks is terrible and Harper regressed last year, we must take a S at 10. THIS ARGUMENT FAILS. It's true we could use an upgrade, but it is not critical enough to warrant a # 10 pick. Bullocks and Harper are probably better than they appeared last year. Consider the difference between 2006 - 2007. In 2006 you had an active DT in Hollis Thomas. In 2007, Thomas showed spurts, but he was not the same player. Possibly, the asthma medicine had something to do with that.. I'm just sayin'..

So, by my idiosyncratic measure, you've got four credible picks at 10:

OT
DT
OLB
CB

In terms of need, I'd probably order them like this, though there's one consideration that makes me want to switch number 2 and 3:

DT
CB
OLB
OT

We know our guys like to pick best player available, but they do have to consider need too. That being said, I doubt that a RB or WR would be taken, even if they were the highest rated players on the board when our pick comes along.

The DTs will be gone more than likely -- if they aren't, hallelujah! That will be the pick.

At OLB only Rivers is mentioned as a possible 10, but there are many who think Rivers is not rated highly enough to go at 10. His pass rush ability makes me value him almost as much as a DT. We must upgrade our pass rush.

Same with the CBs, though Cromartie running a 4.28 might have pushed him up just based on physical talent. Still he'd be raw and not likely to be an impact right away. The other CBs mentioned this high are possible, but none of them wow you like Cromartie does, and maybe they aren't good value this high.

There are several OTs who are considered to be worthy at 10, and several of them will still be available at 10. They will be sitting there like big bowls of ice-cream set up on a table in front of Payton, and all he has to do is choose what flavor he wants..

So what I'm saying, in this long winded way is, don't be surprised if an OT is taken #10.

What I want is for Dorsey or Ellis to fall to 10, or to trade up to get one of them if they won't. Failing that, I want Rivers because I believe his pass rush ability would help us immensely. But I am sorely tempted to take Cromartie, or any of the other CBs, because we obviously have a glaring need there. I'm persuaded by the example of the New York Giants, though, that the pass rush is more important than the corners, so I'm willing to go after a CB in later rounds. I don't want to take an OT in the 1st, but I'm afraid the front office will think that's the smartest overall move. Which it might well be, but that doesn't mean I have to like it..

 

[rsonza]

Great post NovaSaint (btw, I'm a Saints Fan in DC).

Total agree w/ the Saints' needs for DT, LB, CB and OL.

Some quick comments:

1. Would love to grab either Dorsey or Ellis at DT at #10, but unless they both fall (unlikely) or maybe we trade up (maybe?), we're probably not gonna get either. BUT, if we do, no doubt, either starts immediately!

2. If we select LB Rivers, who seems to be the best LB available, does he start in place of Shanle? Is he better than Shanle?

3. Are any of the top 3 CBs available (McKelvin, Jenkins or my favorite Cromartie) better than Jason David or Usama Young (assuming MM gets back healty)? I know we all say that CBs are hard to break into the starting line-up during the 1st year and often have alot of trouble (see Alex Molden), but would any of the picks start over any of the guys we have now?

That's the ultimate question: would Jenkins, McKelvin or Cromartie start in place of either Jason David, Usama Young or Craft?

 

[NOVASaint]

In RE; the CBs, historically, CBs take some time to get into the NFL groove, but there are always exceptions. So the real answer there is, we don't know. In two years, though, no doubt Cromartie is a starter and Craft, maybe even David, is no longer on the team.

Is Rivers better than Shanle -- are you kidding? He's waaaaaaaay better. Faster, stronger, can actually rush the passer. No contest.

 

[Dart]

Great post NOVA. Not just an interesting read but entertaining too - "this argument fails to fail".

Regarding OT, like you I truly hope it doesn't come to that. I can see us moving up to #7 and taking a DT there, although that would really require one or two moves in FA for that to make the most sense. All in all I'm remaining positive and encouraging all those in the Who Dat nation to do likewise... It's way too early in the year to have this much misery and despair on SR.com!

 

[SAINTSaddicted]

Everyone loves Cromartie, as do I. He absolutely showed out at the combine. Does the Saints FO see the same thing that we see in Cromartie? I hope so, he will not make it back to us in the 2nd. We will have to take him in the 1st, and I wouldnt' disapointed at all.