In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks

05-09-2014, 12:32 AM

Originally Posted by Jack Vegas

The thing that just kind of blows my mind is that we got Stills in the 5th round last year, but we had to trade up this year to get Cooks in the 1st round of a draft that was supposedly stacked with receivers. And they are very similar players. Is Cooks really THAT much better than Stills? And with Brees' accuracy issues last year especially on the deep ball, will we be able to take advantage of all this speed?

Like the player from what I've read, but I just can't stop thinking that we could've had Verrett, which would've really shored up our corner position, then still been able to snag a WR like Landry or Jordan Matthews in the 2nd.

Stills was "good" in college. Cooks was an absolute stud.

Stills' last year at OK: 82 receptions, 959 yards, 11.7 ypc, 11 TDs.

Cooks last season: 128 receptions (pac 10 record), 1730 yards (most in football last season), 13.5 ypc, 16 TDs, and more 20+ yard plays than any skill player in college football last season.

His only knock is height. Like someone else said, had he been a few inches taller, we wouldn't be having this conversation, because he would've been long gone in the top 10.

Bruce Ellington is probably a little closer to a Stills counterpart in this draft.... Cooks is a notch or two above.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

jnormand · 05-09-2014, 12:40 AM

Originally Posted by ProMallNinja

Stills was "good" in college. Cooks was an absolute stud.

Stills' last year at OK: 82 receptions, 959 yards, 11.7 ypc, 11 TDs.

Cooks last season: 128 receptions (pac 10 record), 1730 yards (most in football last season), 13.5 ypc, 16 TDs, and more 20+ yard plays than any skill player in college football last season.

His only knock is height. Like someone else said, had he been a few inches taller, we wouldn't be having this conversation, because he would've been long gone in the top 10.

Bruce Ellington is probably a little closer to a Stills counterpart in this draft.... Cooks is a notch or two above.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

Not to mention he's an experienced return man.

MarchingOn · 05-09-2014, 12:48 AM

Originally Posted by Jack Vegas

The thing that just kind of blows my mind is that we got Stills in the 5th round last year, but we had to trade up this year to get Cooks in the 1st round of a draft that was supposedly stacked with receivers. And they are very similar players. Is Cooks really THAT much better than Stills? And with Brees' accuracy issues last year especially on the deep ball, will we be able to take advantage of all this speed?

Like the player from what I've read, but I just can't stop thinking that we could've had Verrett, which would've really shored up our corner position, then still been able to snag a WR like Landry or Jordan Matthews in the 2nd.

Agree....unless we got a shot at Cook (or ILB Mosely).

Jack Vegas · 05-09-2014, 12:51 AM

Originally Posted by ProMallNinja

Stills was "good" in college. Cooks was an absolute stud.

Stills' last year at OK: 82 receptions, 959 yards, 11.7 ypc, 11 TDs.

Cooks last season: 128 receptions (pac 10 record), 1730 yards (most in football last season), 13.5 ypc, 16 TDs, and more 20+ yard plays than any skill player in college football last season.

His only knock is height. Like someone else said, had he been a few inches taller, we wouldn't be having this conversation, because he would've been long gone in the top 10.

Bruce Ellington is probably a little closer to a Stills counterpart in this draft.... Cooks is a notch or two above.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

Here's the deal: I'm not saying Stills is better than Cooks, or even that they're equals. I'm saying we have a tendency to turn 5th-6th-7th round picks and even UDFA's into offensive stars. Cooks is going to have to be pretty darn special to justify the cost. It cost us a ton to move up to get Ingram, who supposedly was also a can't-miss player, and he's not established himself to be any better than Pierre Thomas who was undrafted. Know what I'm saying? I just think we would've been better off using that pick on defense.

Don't get me wrong, I hope the guy is a beast. I don't root against Saints players and 90% of the time I know the front office makes the right decision.

ProMallNinja · 05-09-2014, 01:30 AM

Originally Posted by Jack Vegas

Here's the deal: I'm not saying Stills is better than Cooks, or even that they're equals. I'm saying we have a tendency to turn 5th-6th-7th round picks and even UDFA's into offensive stars. Cooks is going to have to be pretty darn special to justify the cost. It cost us a ton to move up to get Ingram, who supposedly was also a can't-miss player, and he's not established himself to be any better than Pierre Thomas who was undrafted. Know what I'm saying? I just think we would've been better off using that pick on defense.

Don't get me wrong, I hope the guy is a beast. I don't root against Saints players and 90% of the time I know the front office makes the right decision.

I don't think that you can let the fact that we've hit on a few late round players change the way you draft in the early rounds. You can't say that, because of your history of hitting on some late picks, you're ok with passing on an opportunity to get one of this draft's studs in the present without even knowing how the rest of the draft will play out and if you'll even have a shot at some of the other players that you value later in the draft. That's why I like the way Loomis and Payton draft. They target a player or two early and go get them instead of crossing their fingers and hoping some guys fall in their laps.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

burningmetal · 05-09-2014, 02:55 AM

The very thing I didn't want to see happen, and it happened anyway. I suppose he'll do alright, but I am not thrilled about trading up for a little receiver. I said this draft was too deep at WR to need to trade up for one, and I still believe that. But the Saints thought otherwise, so all I can say is they better be right.

I think Cooks is just fine for the type of role he will likely play, but I'll say again that I don't think we needed that type of player in the first round. I'll pull for him to light it up and make it worth it, though.

lee909 · 05-09-2014, 03:05 AM

I cant wait to see them 3/8 plays when Cooks steps in Sproles shoes, Stills in the Moore role with Graham, Colston and possibly Morgan out wide. Can you say mis matches

Crusader · 05-09-2014, 03:05 AM

The more I read about the guy and how much SP wanted him the better the pick seems.

Exxcalibur · 05-09-2014, 03:06 AM

Originally Posted by Ashley

I'm on the other side. I don't like it

I am not adverse to it, but I LOVE your avatar!

Cruize · 05-09-2014, 03:35 AM

He's a Saint. He's a darn good player. I hope he makes plays. But, not my favorite. I would have preferred to stay at 27 and got a player like Matthews, Robinson, or Latimer. Not to mention Dennard, Moses, Jean-Baptiste, Swanson or even Nix. A third was justt oo high a price for Cooks in my opinion.

05-09-2014, 12:32 AM	#51
Threaded by ProMallNinja Site Donor 2014 Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: MS Gulf Coast Posts: 242 Rating: (0 votes - average) Originally Posted by Jack Vegas The thing that just kind of blows my mind is that we got Stills in the 5th round last year, but we had to trade up this year to get Cooks in the 1st round of a draft that was supposedly stacked with receivers. And they are very similar players. Is Cooks really THAT much better than Stills? And with Brees' accuracy issues last year especially on the deep ball, will we be able to take advantage of all this speed? Like the player from what I've read, but I just can't stop thinking that we could've had Verrett, which would've really shored up our corner position, then still been able to snag a WR like Landry or Jordan Matthews in the 2nd. Stills was "good" in college. Cooks was an absolute stud. Stills' last year at OK: 82 receptions, 959 yards, 11.7 ypc, 11 TDs. Cooks last season: 128 receptions (pac 10 record), 1730 yards (most in football last season), 13.5 ypc, 16 TDs, and more 20+ yard plays than any skill player in college football last season. His only knock is height. Like someone else said, had he been a few inches taller, we wouldn't be having this conversation, because he would've been long gone in the top 10. Bruce Ellington is probably a little closer to a Stills counterpart in this draft.... Cooks is a notch or two above. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk mleg1972 and frydaddy like this.
Views: 14485

05-09-2014, 12:40 AM	#52
jnormand 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Free State of Idaho Posts: 5,530	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by ProMallNinja Stills was "good" in college. Cooks was an absolute stud. Stills' last year at OK: 82 receptions, 959 yards, 11.7 ypc, 11 TDs. Cooks last season: 128 receptions (pac 10 record), 1730 yards (most in football last season), 13.5 ypc, 16 TDs, and more 20+ yard plays than any skill player in college football last season. His only knock is height. Like someone else said, had he been a few inches taller, we wouldn't be having this conversation, because he would've been long gone in the top 10. Bruce Ellington is probably a little closer to a Stills counterpart in this draft.... Cooks is a notch or two above. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk Not to mention he's an experienced return man.

05-09-2014, 12:48 AM	#53
MarchingOn 100th Post Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 387 Blog Entries: 1	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by Jack Vegas The thing that just kind of blows my mind is that we got Stills in the 5th round last year, but we had to trade up this year to get Cooks in the 1st round of a draft that was supposedly stacked with receivers. And they are very similar players. Is Cooks really THAT much better than Stills? And with Brees' accuracy issues last year especially on the deep ball, will we be able to take advantage of all this speed? Like the player from what I've read, but I just can't stop thinking that we could've had Verrett, which would've really shored up our corner position, then still been able to snag a WR like Landry or Jordan Matthews in the 2nd. Agree....unless we got a shot at Cook (or ILB Mosely).

05-09-2014, 12:51 AM	#54
Jack Vegas 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,254	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by ProMallNinja Stills was "good" in college. Cooks was an absolute stud. Stills' last year at OK: 82 receptions, 959 yards, 11.7 ypc, 11 TDs. Cooks last season: 128 receptions (pac 10 record), 1730 yards (most in football last season), 13.5 ypc, 16 TDs, and more 20+ yard plays than any skill player in college football last season. His only knock is height. Like someone else said, had he been a few inches taller, we wouldn't be having this conversation, because he would've been long gone in the top 10. Bruce Ellington is probably a little closer to a Stills counterpart in this draft.... Cooks is a notch or two above. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk Here's the deal: I'm not saying Stills is better than Cooks, or even that they're equals. I'm saying we have a tendency to turn 5th-6th-7th round picks and even UDFA's into offensive stars. Cooks is going to have to be pretty darn special to justify the cost. It cost us a ton to move up to get Ingram, who supposedly was also a can't-miss player, and he's not established himself to be any better than Pierre Thomas who was undrafted. Know what I'm saying? I just think we would've been better off using that pick on defense. Don't get me wrong, I hope the guy is a beast. I don't root against Saints players and 90% of the time I know the front office makes the right decision.
Jack Vegas 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,254

05-09-2014, 01:30 AM	#55
ProMallNinja Site Donor 2014 Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: MS Gulf Coast Posts: 242	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by Jack Vegas Here's the deal: I'm not saying Stills is better than Cooks, or even that they're equals. I'm saying we have a tendency to turn 5th-6th-7th round picks and even UDFA's into offensive stars. Cooks is going to have to be pretty darn special to justify the cost. It cost us a ton to move up to get Ingram, who supposedly was also a can't-miss player, and he's not established himself to be any better than Pierre Thomas who was undrafted. Know what I'm saying? I just think we would've been better off using that pick on defense. Don't get me wrong, I hope the guy is a beast. I don't root against Saints players and 90% of the time I know the front office makes the right decision. I don't think that you can let the fact that we've hit on a few late round players change the way you draft in the early rounds. You can't say that, because of your history of hitting on some late picks, you're ok with passing on an opportunity to get one of this draft's studs in the present without even knowing how the rest of the draft will play out and if you'll even have a shot at some of the other players that you value later in the draft. That's why I like the way Loomis and Payton draft. They target a player or two early and go get them instead of crossing their fingers and hoping some guys fall in their laps. Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk mleg1972 likes this.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

05-09-2014, 02:55 AM	#56
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,905 Blog Entries: 3	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks The very thing I didn't want to see happen, and it happened anyway. I suppose he'll do alright, but I am not thrilled about trading up for a little receiver. I said this draft was too deep at WR to need to trade up for one, and I still believe that. But the Saints thought otherwise, so all I can say is they better be right. I think Cooks is just fine for the type of role he will likely play, but I'll say again that I don't think we needed that type of player in the first round. I'll pull for him to light it up and make it worth it, though.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

05-09-2014, 03:05 AM	#57
lee909 Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Watford England Posts: 8,758 Blog Entries: 1	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks I cant wait to see them 3/8 plays when Cooks steps in Sproles shoes, Stills in the Moore role with Graham, Colston and possibly Morgan out wide. Can you say mis matches

05-09-2014, 03:05 AM	#58
Crusader Resident Swede Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Märsta, Sweden Posts: 7,986	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks The more I read about the guy and how much SP wanted him the better the pick seems. Mr.Riaton likes this.

05-09-2014, 03:06 AM	#59
Exxcalibur Site Donor 2015 Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 1,389	Re: Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by Ashley I'm on the other side. I don't like it I am not adverse to it, but I LOVE your avatar!

05-09-2014, 03:35 AM	#60
Cruize 1000 Posts + Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,294	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks He's a Saint. He's a darn good player. I hope he makes plays. But, not my favorite. I would have preferred to stay at 27 and got a player like Matthews, Robinson, or Latimer. Not to mention Dennard, Moses, Jean-Baptiste, Swanson or even Nix. A third was justt oo high a price for Cooks in my opinion.
Cruize 1000 Posts + Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,294

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/65820-first-round-saints-pick-wide-reciever-brandin-cooks.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks	This thread	Refback	05-08-2014 09:59 PM	12