You got me. :doh:

I don't think Grant was a bust, he had a good couple of seasons but got to fat and lazy. Smith has been to alone on the D-line to be really effective. i think Ellis catches way to much flak, he has been a really solid DT and IMHO is our best interior DL. He has produced better for us than Dorsey for KC. I'm not crazy about Meachem but I have no problem with that pick either. Bush was the right move. Robinson looks really good so far. He might be the best of them all once its said and done. Jenkins is turning out nicely and I still see him making strides, I think the big plays will start to come for him. Jordan have been everything I hoped for so far, especially good aginst the run. Ingram suffers like the rest of the RBs because of the OL.

Yep...that's why i think we should draft for need more than BPA .ala LB..DE DT ....we score as you say better in later rounds and no rounds at all....look at Ivory UDFA..lead the team in rushing...look at Junyah..he is dam near outplaying Smith this year..another UDFA.. makes you wonder..

No I said you should stop dwelling in the past and look forward to our bright future. These aren't the same bag head Saints that you're accustomed to. Times have changed, get up to speed.

I'm sorry Mr. Smarty Pants, please direct me to that post or somewhere that I even implied this. Try not talking out your backside and read what's posted before you actually respond. Then you'd make more sense.

LOL! The next stop... the big leagues. Loomis watch your back.

LOL...

Comparing picks to the surrounding "what could have been" is something I use to do but realize now it's flawed reasoning. Football is a team sport and success for a player is often the result of the skills of other players and the system. Just because he works on a team does not mean it would have worked out on another team. It's fun to look at what we passed on but there are many other factors that compliment why or why not a 1st rounder turned into gold.

You grade the overall draft, not the first round, not the second, not the third....

In 2006 we had - Bush, Harper, Evans, Colston, Strief
In 2007 - Meachem, Bushrod
In 2008 - Ellis, Porter, Nicks
You know the rest of the drafts.

You think that every team wishes it can go back and get Evans, Colston, Nicks, Graham in the first round of the draft. There all guys we got later.

Always grade the draft not the position a player was taken.

I think the problem is we've not gotten good value from our first round picks. We seem to get better value out of our later rounds. Given the money a first round player gets, and our history, we should probably trade the pick for multiple later slots, maximizing our return on investment.

Did I capture the essence of your complaint?

You grade a team's draft by looking at how many players are still with the club and in a starting role with the team. We have a high percentage of guys over all rounds that made the team and evolved into starting roles. I would say we draft above average, especially in later rounds. Many of our first rounders became starters, most turned into solid journeyman players and a couple of busts. We failed to hit the home run picks though in the first.

You also have to look at the success of the team as a whole. We've become a Super Bowl Champion and have been a consistent post season team over the past 5 years. I think our drafting has complemented things quite well. The only glaring disaster pick to me right now is Sullivan. I can accept every other pick as we saw respectable results. You can't look at drafts from 7 years ago and say we made the wrong pick on someone because a future pro bowler went in the 4th round. 32 people smarter than all of us didn't see it at that time. And people paid to be smarter than us have consistently graded our drafts no worse than average every year as they transpire with some being excellent grades.

I've been confident in Loomis and Payton over their tenure. They have shown no reason to make me lack confidence in their scouting. At the time I have been happy with each pick in the first round since 2006 without question. Sure in hindsight some could have been better spent, but at the time I was in agreement that the fit was right.

You still also have to take into account where the players are and are the contributing on other team. Just because they aren't in NO doesn't mean they were a bust either.

Also just depends our your criteria on how you grade them. You can have 100 of us with our own take on what is a fail and what isn't.