what a bad draft pick
 

with the forum having been down im not sure if this has been posted or not. but that wide out we got from cal has hurt his knee already. man shouldnt we just let the guy go

RE: what a bad draft pick
 

No! We need to keep him around for a year or two and have Haz and LoomBoom tell the fans that "he's making a heckofalot of progress, but after the amputation he can't run quite as fast as he used to." Some stupidity like that. One of the problems is that we don't have a Front Office.

I can't fault Haz on this. He has his own faults, but this draft smells like Mickey (Mouse, that is).

RE: what a bad draft pick
 

No! We need to keep him around for a year or two and have Haz and LoomBoom tell the fans that "he's making a heckofalot of progress, but after the amputation he can't run quite as fast as he used to." Some stupidity like that. One of the problems is that we don't have a Front Office.

I can't fault Haz on this. He has his own faults, but this draft smells like Mickey (Mouse, that is).

thats funny bro

There have been a few injuries to Rookies already from other teams... does that mean those are bad picks as well, please. Injuries happen.

I think that point here Euph is that it was WIDELY known that Lyman was injury prone, about as injury prone as a player could be in college. Yes there are injuries to other rookies, but Lyman has been nothing but injured throughout his college career, while these other players weren't.

What did lyman play in while in college? 9 games in 3 years?

I have to agree that we wasted our 4th round pick on this patient, er player.
No way we should have picked this guy - If we needed a player with injury problems we could have gone to one we already have on the roster. Why not just convert Grant for LB to WR and save the pick.

i have to agree with spkb25......it was a wasted pick...we could have picked another CB, DT or LB to compete for a roster spot.

I think I read where this guy had like 6 surgeries in college. Also what happened to no more projects...we need people that can step right in and play. I can understand taking a chance on someone but drafting someone who has had almost as many surguries as games played? In the 4th round at that. Wow! Why not take that chance in the 6th or later.

Good point Euph... I guess the Browns should just release Kellen Winslow as well. It was a 4th round pick, it's not like he was going to make a major contribution to this team. Given his history, he was drafted earlier than expected... but based on talent alone, I don't think we should be so quick to judge him. The same can be said about Sullivan... wasted pick at that point in the draft, but it's not time to give up on them. Young players need time.

I think I read where this guy had like 6 surgeries in college. Also what happened to no more projects...we need people that can step right in and play. I can understand taking a chance on someone but drafting someone who has had almost as many surguries as games played? In the 4th round at that. Wow! Why not take that chance in the 6th or later.

Good point Euph... I guess the Browns should just release Kellen Winslow as well. It was a 4th round pick, it's not like he was going to make a major contribution to this team. Given his history, he was drafted earlier than expected... but based on talent alone, I don't think we should be so quick to judge him. The same can be said about Sullivan... wasted pick at that point in the draft, but it's not time to give up on them. Young players need time.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Kellen Winslow did not have injury problems in college correct? If he had played in as few games as Lyman, he would not have been a first round pick. The fact is, this was a blown pick. I would rather we had taken weedhead Hawthorne or Roydell Williams than take a guy who seems to get hurt if he sneezes. Chase Lyman = Mr. Glass from Unbreakable. Comparing him to Kellen Winslow is an unfathomable stretch IMO.

So quick to judge... I hope Lyman and Sullivan will proves you guys wrong down the road. Some of you all have no faith. :|

I hope our 5th, 6th, and 7th round picks all make the team and make solid contributions to our team this year. If not they would all be busted picks considering the were all drafted on the SECOND day of the draft. *cough*

i hope they prove us wrong also.......especially Sullivan ...cause if he comes through for and help B. Young then we might be able to stop the run.

Chase Lyman was a risk. But he was a 4th round risk.

The player that the Saints really took a chance on, IMO, is Adrian McPhearson. I think character is one of the most important things a player can have. And McPhearson has proven more than once that his character is very questionable.

You've got young guys playing for the Saints who could be influenced by McPherson. That's risky business.

Maybe McPhearson has cleaned his act up. But it's a big risk nevertheless. Which is why all the other teams passed him by. This is one pick we shouldn't have made. Guys like him usually live a life full of mitakes. If it's not one thing it's another.

I think papzy you are a little biased in that you tried to sell us on Lyman when he was drafted. You like the guy, and are cutting the team slack for taking him. Which is cool. But when we drafted him, and his injury history came out, the majority immediately questioned his durability. Montrae Holland was a 4th round pick so 4th rounders can contribute. Now how interesting is it the very FIRST practice, the guy is done for the year. Seems like that was something that could have been seen in advance due to the fact he was never healthy for any decent stretch in college. It's all good man, this was a bad pick. The guy's injury history should have been a red flag, but it wasn't, and we let talented players slip by. We have already waited two years for Sully to do anything, so his window to prove anyone wrong is closing. Should we hold out hope for Cie Grant too? I hear he is walking now.

You've got to weigh the risk of the pick against the potential value and factor in the price. McPherson as a 5th round pick is not that expensive. He has issues in his past, but hasn't done anything wrong in a while (low risk). His value on the other hand can be huge. I think he's well worth it.

Lyman is similar, but much more risky. He was only a 4th round pick - not terribly expensive. However, he had injury problems his entire college career - that's high risk. His potential value is hard to ascertain. Would ha have been anything more than a backup? As injury prone as he is it seems unlikely that he could have, but who knows?

True true... I am being biased because I do like the guy. But I also agreed with everyone that we did in fact take him too soon. I was all for taking Boley or Hawthorne before this guy. He would have made a better 6th round pick with all the injury concerns. I'm just pointing out that we are giving up on him too soon. Give him a little slack. Wasted 4th round pick... yes I do agree because I was not in favor of taking him so soon. But I do not regret us drafting him one bit. I'm all for high risk high reward young players...

VooDoo you make a good point with McPhearson.

It seems that the majority of the teams in the NFL didn't agree with your assessment, Scotty. What round was McPhearson drafted in?

Why? Because any team that drafted him was taking a HUGE risk. You've got young kids coming into the NFL who have never had much money. You put a guy like McPhearson around vulnerable guys and it's risky.

It's not only McPhearson you have to worry about. Just the same, I don't care how much upside he has, I would have passed on the guy. Character is more important to me than some of you, I suppose.

Picks 1, 2, and 3 for us this year were safe. 4 and 5 were gambles. 6 and 7 were for need. One of our gambles didn't pay off. That sucks, but at least we've still got 6 other guys who may make significant contributions.

I don't see how you can be down on Lyman and high on McPhereson AS A DRAFT PICK. Lyman was known for injuries. He got injured. Yup, I agree, that didn't work out the way we would have liked. Would I have picked him? Hell no. McPherson is known for off the field troubles. He has not faltered yet. Good so far. Was Lyman a bad pick because he was a gamble? No (unless you the McPherson was a bad pick). Was he a bad pick because he got hurt? No (unless you think that Winslow was a bad pick). Was he a bad pick because he was known for injuries? Yes (unless you think that any gambling on a player with a big upside is a bad idea).

Good post J. I couldn't have put it any better... except I would have pick him... (later though instead of at all) :)

Thought I'd help ya out papz. The sharks were circling! :wink:

He's more like a puppy :wink: at sw. :P

True enough! :P

What? When did this become communist Russia? :P So becuase you like the McPherson pick you HAVE to like the Lyman pick? Where is that BS flag when you need it? Lyman had an INJURY history. there is no therapy for an INJURY history. There is therapy fro CHARACTER issues, which McPherson had. If he gambles his paycheck away at Harrah's, Houston we have a problem. As far as I know, he has been clean since the incident happened. Is that correct or no? Lyman on the other hand has ALWAYS been inured. ALWAYS. Every year, every season. ALWAYS. Anyone see any reports of McPherson gambling last year? Year before? Or was it ONLY at FSU, and is it still not proven to be TRUE? He never admitted to it, although he readily admitted he stole a check. Is it TRUE that LYman has been hurt EVERY YEAR, and was hurt LAST YEAR? You do not HAVE to like the Lyman pick cause you liked McPherson. And can anyone dig me up an injury history on Winslow at Miami? Not even the same thing. He broke a leg on special teams(fluke) and got hurt on a motorcycle. How in the world does that compare to getting hurt every season in college? Just a bad comparison.

I agree that Lyman was a bad pick because of the injuries.

However, as a gamble pick I don't see the difference from McPherson. Certainly, the gamble taken was different (one was on injuries, the other was on character). However, I don't see how you can take a gamble to be bad on injuries to be bad and not a gamble on character?

Whodi, your idea appears to be that McPherson was not a gamble at all. If that is true, then the analogy fails. If he was a gamble, my point stands - either you think it is ok to gamble or you don't. I suggested that McPherson was a gamble, as was Lyman. The Lyman gamble didn't payoff, so you can criticize that. However, it cannot be criticized on the grounds that it was a gamble alone, without criticizing the McPherson pick (unless you are right and he wasn't a gamble).

1. I'm glad the BS flag is gone, it was just annoying. The dancing broccoli on the other hand was a work of genius.
2. According to some new posters, this has always been Communist Russia... :wink:

The difference Kool is Lyman was a gamble in ANY round. With that many injuries, he should've been undrafted. McPherson on the other hand, were it not for those character issues, would have been a first or second round pick. One is a smart gamble, the other was a dumb gamble. Especially, like papz said, when we could have taken Hawthorne or Boley, or if we had to get a receiver, Roydell Williams. In the 5th round, McPherson was the most talented player available, good gamble. In the 4th, Lyman was not, bad gamble. So there are different types of gambles. If I know a horse comes from a good line of winners, is fed right and well taken care of, and that horse just lost his last race, I might still take a bet on him to do well in the current race at 5-2 odds. That's a good gamble. On the other hand, if another horse was one race from the glue factory, has never won a race, has questionable breeding, and repeatedly has to have his knee repaired, it is safe to you would not bet on that horse. That would be a bad gamble. Well, Lyman ain't no Giacomo(although I don't know if he was close to the glue factory or such, but Lyman should have been). :P

I'm not sure one can tell the difference between a good gamble and a bad gamble before the gamble is made. It is easy to say that Lyman was a bad gamble now that he has been injured.

I suppose, I agree that one could use the BPA argument (which I believe you are suggesting) to determine which are good or bad gambles. I'm a bit unclear on how that would work. You are correct though, there must be degrees of gamble. Perhaps Lyman's degree of risk was higher and that is what made him a bad gamble. I guess, I'm just a bit wary of such an analysis so far. Good suggestion though.

Papz - You can not be serious. A lack of fatih from a Saints Fan - All we have is faith.
But some of us are able to call a bust pick when we see it - And you could see this one a mile away. I thought it was a dumb pick on draft day - The injury has just confirmed what I thought.