possibilities
 

so, what if the saints move up to the 7th spot, and d. robertson is still on the board? at that spot the cost although still high for signing, would be a lot less then the 3 or 4. and, if the trade was right where we lost minimun picks, could he start? your thoughts gentlemen? smitty

possibilities
 

If they were to move up to #7, and still retain their second 1st rounder, then I would prefer them to wait and use their second 1st rounder on a DT, as there are plenty of good one\'s in this draft. Use that top 10 for an impact player at another position where there may not be as many alternatives.

possibilities
 

Interior linemen, on either side of the ball, in my opinion, have the greatest potential to make an impact in any given year. Yes, I think he could start. A DT drafted in any round has as much or more potential to affect this team next year that just about any other player we can draft on D... well, maybe that\'s going a little far, but I think a DT can help immediately, yes.

possibilities
 

i dont think we will move up to the top 10, i just think it will cost too much to jump that far in the draft, plus, if we stayed where we are at, we will get 2 solid players, potentially pro bowl caliber players, and not just 1 superstar, who might not pan out......

possibilities
 

i hafta agree with wd as far as dt. we did not have that push up the middle last year and although we can address this area later, i would still like to know how you guys feel. is this guy a blue chipper? an immediate impact player? could he be the holy ****! the saints have hit paydirt kinda player? as the draft draws closer, i will tend to lean,(some can say change my mind) to the saints picking a good dt (starter if possible) because with a good rush we can still have average corners and safetys and come away with more wins........just my opinion.........smitty

possibilities
 

That\'s the thing, there are 5-6 potential stars at DT in this draft. That\'s the reason why I would wait, as I would much rather have a shutdown corner than a powerhouse DT. You can\'t sack the QB on every play (Houston excluded), and eventually he will get passes off to his reciever\'s, where, the DT is not around to make the play.

possibilities
 

I don\'t know how much better our pass rush will be even with a good DT. Obviously, a tackle that\'s more than a big rock will help, but I doubt we\'ll see a whole lot of sacks from the Saints next year. Venturi, whose system already looked pretty poor, is going to dumb it down more for all of the guys who will still be wearing diapers on the field. Grant is likely to get better, Howard should be solid again, but that\'s it. Ruff isn\'t exaclt a pas rusher. Allen maybe, but let\'s worry about him do the other things like stopping the run and defending tight ends in pass coverage. Hodge, wasn\'t great last year, hopefully he get better. Still, don\'t hold your breath to see 5+ sacks a game out of this team.

possibilities
 

aaaahhhhhhhh, here is where we may see i to i.....do you agree when that qb feels pressure, and gets rushed,, does it make a difference in the way he handles himself? i for one see many looking over their shoulders when the heat is on.......where is the best place for the heat to come? smitty

possibilities
 

I know this topic is mainly about who we should pick, and I know I am just adding credibility to WhoDat and others that are upset with the fact we haven\'t been more aggrssive in Free Agency, but here\'s an interesting draft stat that does give argument to signing more impact free agents and not letting our hopes for this year\'s success hinge on the draft:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/story/6301644

Other interesting statistics to keep in mind as we draw closer to the 2003 draft:

1. 40 percent of the 2002 picks did not start one game in their first season.

2. 11.5 percent of the draft picks were cut by the team that drafted them.

3. 17 draft picks spent most of the season on injured reserve or quit, which accounts for another six percent.

Next, I took a look at draft picks as they relate to the success of the team they were on. There were 16 teams that had an 8-8 record or worse. Those 16 teams produced 488 rookie starts, or 30.5 starts per team. The 16 teams with a winning record only produced 209 rookie starts, or 13 per team. It stands to reason that it\'s harder for rookies to break into a lineup on good teams than on losing teams.
The truth is, these rookie-start numbers are actually tilted toward rookie contributions in 2002 because the expansion Texans were committed to playing a number of rookies in their first season. That will not be the case in 2003 since Houston is now a year old. It\'s quite possible this year\'s draft picks could have just five 16-game starters, and closer to 50 percent of the picks will not start one game.

possibilities
 

That\'s all you have to say Gator? No talk of \"THE PLAN\"??? ;)

possibilities
 

Hey man, just stating facts with that one, not opinion. My heart tells me Mel Mitchell is the second coming of Ronnie Lott, Orlando Ruff steadies the middle of the field against the run, the trio of Hodge, Allen & Boss Bailey (???) become the blitzing terror with memories of Swilling & Jackson, our front four somehow comes up with a magic season and generates an un-godly pass rush, and a tandem of Carter, Ambrose, Thomas and Trufant(??) becomes one of the more solid secondaries in the league. That\'s what my heart is saying will happen....but I don\'t trust that damn thing.

possibilities
 

Use the force Lumm0x.