The truth about the NFL Draft (1 Viewer)

[Chairman_LMAO]

Look at last year. We traded up for Antonio Pittman in the 4th and look what happened?

And if the Saints had traded down and taken Pittman, would the result have been somehow better?

Should the Saints never again trade up in the 4th? Or never trade up in the 4th for a tailback? Or never trade up in the 4th for a tailback from Ohio State? Or never trade up in the 4th for a tailback from Ohio State named Antonio? Does his jersey number factor in at all?

 

[tjharris]

Ok. So really the scouts in the NFL aren't to good at their jobs.
And if they worked at a real company they'd be fired.
And U really don't know if a player is gonna be good, till he is good.
I get it just get more players and hope for the best.

I just think if your paying somebody to scout these players they should be able to tell the difference between a $ 2 million player and a $200,000 player.

But, I know what your saying.

 

[Richard]

Ontogeny does not recapitulate phylogeny. :rock:

I've been saying that for years.

As a team matures, front offices sometimes get the idea that they are "one (or two) player(s) away" from the Super Bowl. That can lead to trading up for that special player at a need position. Haslett obviously felt that his team was on the verge and adding a top DT could be the catalyst to push the team over the top. Instead it cost the Saints their extra first rounder, the pick itself was a poor one and the franchise has been paying for that mistake since. Had the Saints chosen well with the two picks they had (or even chosen well when they moved up), the gamble would have paid off. But I feel that the risks involved in trading up are too great and the potential benefits don't outweigh the potential cost of missing badly.

In the Saints current draft scenario, they should expect to get a good, if not great, player at #10. I suspect there will be at least one serious and fair offer to trade down when they get on the clock. So if the guys they like are not there anymore at #10, they should accept the offer and pick a player they do like further down.

 

[tjharris]

Do ya'll think the teams put the "one player away and the guy we drafted is it" word out to sell tickets every year. Even if they know they player isn't that good?

 

[bergeaux]

And if the Saints had traded down and taken Pittman, would the result have been somehow better?

Should the Saints never again trade up in the 4th? Or never trade up in the 4th for a tailback? Or never trade up in the 4th for a tailback from Ohio State? Or never trade up in the 4th for a tailback from Ohio State named Antonio? Does his jersey number factor in at all?

I get ya, but yes in theory it would have been better if we had traded back. Instead of losing a pick to get a throw away player, we would have gained a pick. That's a two pick swing. In theory, we could have had both Zak DeOssie and Fred Bennett with those two picks. Fred Bennett started at CB for the Texans in 8 games last year. Zak DeOssie has been a good ST addition to the Giants. But then again, who knows what we would have picked!

I do admit that I like Usama and Alleman both from the third round last year so...

Do ya'll think the teams put the "one player away and the guy we drafted is it" word out to sell tickets every year. Even if they know they player isn't that good?

Two thoughts. From your other post. I do agree that scouts are probably overpaid for the success rate they run.

Second, I think that once a player is picked he is automatically the best thing since sliced bread. It's always that way with any player on a team. How many times have you seen a coach "stick by his man" till the day he cuts him? We really don't know what we have until they either make big plays or give up big plays. And even then we don't have a good idea what he might do in a different scheme or team. It's all about fit and luck.