https://twitter.com/nick_underhill/s...94800431378432

For the record I hope Davenport has a fantastic year and Exceeds what Trey gave us last year. Hope he leads the league in sacks and is DPOY. Of course that would make him impossible to sign to a long term deal and he would go the way of the T. rex. That would surely make him worthy of 2 first round picks.

If hoping he does so, but recognizing that up to this point he hasn’t even been able to outperform a player the team got for “what was essentially “ a high fourth round pick makes me a hater in some peoples opinions, then fine. That’s not a successful use of two picks in my opinion even if they had been two high 2nd round picks, much less the actual first rounders they were.

Nope. It was debunked. Methodically.

All you have shown is that the Saints have made some successful picks in the middle rounds of the draft recently. I would certainly hope so. But that in no way "debunks" the FACT that higher percentages of successes come from higher slotted picks consistently throughout the draft. Always have and always will.

I see your proof as "bunk" rather than any sort of "debunking".

Evidence, presented straightforward, logically, and you still ignore it...

Admitting you're wrong is beyond what your ego will allow...

What you presented in no way proves that mid round picks are just as likely to be a success as earlier round picks. All you listed were some successful mid round picks. No sh!t, Sherlock! There of course have to be successful picks made in the mid rounds or the historical success rate of those rounds would be zero percent. I have never said you cannot find success drafting in the middle or late rounds. What I have pointed out is that the success rate drops on a linear basis from the very earliest picks in the draft to the very last picks in the draft. Outlying successes are all part of that logical progression.

I really don't know why I even try when you continue to ignore the facts and logic involved.