Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

I’m a big fan of late draft picks/UDFA to fill out WR corps. Colston and Shaheed come to mind.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

I was really hoping Nick Toon (4th rd) would become the truth.

Never panned out :(.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

While I am confident Thomas will be ready to go and as effective as ever, I agree that even more help at WR would be welcome. Also, while Tre'Quan is a competent #4 or #5 WR I'd rather we had at least five better options going into the season. As it stands right now we have three in Thomas, Olave, and Shaheed. Maybe Edwards is the fourth better option. We shall see. One or two more could make Tre'Quan, Kirkwood, Merritt, and/or Baker expendable.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

New Orleans Saints receiver Michael Thomas making progress in recovery

From the article:

"I don't want to get into specifics on that, but yet, he's making progress in the recovery," Allen said. "He's not 100 percent, and we're going to be cautious with it and take our time. We don't want to put him out there until he's 100 percent."

"I think the acquisition of Derek was big in that thought process (of Thomas wanting to remain a Saint)," Allen said. "I don't want to speak for Mike, but I honestly just think that Mike knows, and a lot of players know, that they work for one of the better organizations in our league and we're going to have a chance to do some good things this year.

"I expect him to be fully healthy and ready to go. When that point is, I don't want to get into those speculations. But we feel good about where he's at."

He also mentioned that he expects both Penning and Ruiz to be ready to go, as well, after recovering from their own foot injuries.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

For any of you wondering I hope this puts Thomas' recovery timeline into perspective. Nobody should reasonably believe he'd be at 100% at this point. Likewise, nobody should reasonably believe he wouldn't be at 100% by the time for training camp in July.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

It appears Mr. Reliable is making progress. Not 100% yet and DA says he won't put him out there until he is. The longest recovery in the history of recoveries...saga continues. :rolleyes:

According to AG we are asking too much of the guy to expect 100%. S_hit in one hand and wish in the other and see which one fills up quicker.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

If we get 50% of his production from 2016-2019, Michael Thomas will be worth the money.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

Healthy or not, draft another dawg next month.

Olave and Shaheed are promising but you'll need a lot more.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

Yeah, I hear you there.

At this point, all you can do is HOPE for his health. A 30-year-old who has missed the last 40 of 50 games & still isn't 100. Toe & ankle injuries ... as we see, can & will linger.

If he contributes in 2023, great. It's lagniappe :bng:.

Hopefully, Bryan Edwards shows up at camp and subsequent games on Sundays.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

Longest recovery in the history of recoveries? He was fully recovered from the ankle injury when he took the field at the beginning of last season and scored three times in two games. Then he had the totally unrelated injury. He was then misdiagnosed by Saints doctors and later told he needed surgery. That was in November, so he's only been recovering for a little over four months for a procedure that takes up to six months of recovery.

And where did I say anyone was asking too much of the guy to expect 100%? I said at this point nobody should expect 100%. However, I do expect 100% before it's time to go.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

I think we would all be happy if MT can play this year and ball out for the Saints (maybe not map). Odds aren’t that great right now, however.

I will say that without him, we only win 6 games last year. He pulled that Atl game out of his….well, you know where. So, he was healthy going into last year. This toe is a different, new injury.

The front office apparently worked things out for one more try. If he doesn’t perform the contract seems to be set up to release him. I don’t see his contract as an anchor for a decade. Peat’s re-work is similar. If they don’t perform this year, they will be gone. Same way guys like Armstead left in the past.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

I'm curious, what do you believe the odds are that he's ready to play week one?

It might make for a good poll. Percentage chance Michael Thomas is ready to start week one.

0%
1% to 25%
26% to 50%
51% to 75%
76% to 99%
100%

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

Mainly because if they were good then Allen would have had a more optimistic response. That and past history and father time.

Edit: Sorry, thought you said Why, not What.

I’d give him 33% chance to start opening day.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

I thought this response from Allen when asked about Thomas was pretty optimistic, "I expect him to be fully healthy and ready to go." Perhaps it's just me.

That was from this article this week.

New Orleans Saints receiver Michael Thomas making progress in recovery

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

If he he fails the physical on April 21st I say 0% because he'll get released. If he passes the physical I'll say 100% because they would have to be fully confident he'd be ready to guarantee the bonus. But for right now, I'd put it in the 76% to 99% range.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

I think it depends on what you mean by without him. The Saints might actually have won more games last year if they had cut Michael Thomas before training camp and given more reps to replacement and planned their offense more around replacements. It's easy to point to the one game he won for us, but the effect on the 14 games he missed is more subtle. In the long run that would also have opened up money for new receivers and perhaps a draft pick if some sucker team bet on a comeback.

People said last year that if Peat and Thomas did not perform in 2022 they would be gone. They pointed to Peats contract and said this is his last year. I am sure in 2021 the contract looked like they would make that possible, but then the contracts were restructured to defer more money and they became more costly to cut than restructure so we took another chance. I forsee that happening again and again forever. The difference with players like Armstead and Onyemata is we have to get in bidding wars to keep them, so even if there is deferred money, the cost to keep them is still big. If our players succeed, we can only keep about half of them with our cap situation, but the ones who fail we can keep 100%, because once they get deferred money into future years (not just short term rentals) it is always cheaper to restructure and defer on a 1 year basis than to walk away, every offseason, forever. And there is no bidding war so its simple. Thomas and Peat for life.

If Michael Thomas passes his physical, I think there is a 70% chance he will play week 1 and a 10% chance he will play at least 14 games. I think he is like Rashaad Penny or JT Watt or post-rings Terrell Davis. It's easy enough to suit up for a few weeks but he isn't durable any more. I think that is actually worse than paying to cut him, because even if he wins us games when he plays, that just sets us up to get embarrassed in the wild card when he is not there, gives us a worse draft pick, loses us games when he is out because his backup didn't get the starting reps in camp, and wastes money on a formula that doesn't win rings. Romo has no rings. Watt has no rings. Because to lead a team to a ring, you need to be durable enough to take the field in the playoffs.

On that off 10% chance Thomas had a healthy season, it also puts us in a horrible position. If we keep him, we have to bet on him staying healthy with all those past injury skeletons in the closet, and he will demand a big time deal. If we let him walk, we will eat a bunch of dead cap and get nothing in return because his contract has a void clause that makes it like he was cut, not his contract expires, so no tags and no comp picks. But if we resign him to avoid the cap hit, then probably in 2024 training camp he breaks his pinky toe and refuses surgery and we pay him $120 million / 4 years for nothing, which we restructure over and over so that $80 million of it gets deferred to the last year of the deal in 2027, and in 2027 we need to get under the cap so we have to sign a player who has played 35 games in 8 years to a multi-year extension to spread out the pain. And then we start restructuring that contract, until Mickey Loomis swallows the worm and chokes.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

I think Allen has embraced/accepted the idea of not playing Thomas until he is fully healthy. I don’t expect that to happen by week 1. Hope I am wrong.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

Good question Guido. Like you said he has to pass the physical first. The odds of him starting in week one is probably 76% to 99% because if he can play he is our best option. The team will trout him out rather than wait if they follow the same medical protocol used in the past.

The chances of him playing all the games is 1% to 25%, but closer to 1%. The chance of him playing half the games is 26% to 50%. The chances of him playing four of the games is about 25%. And finally, if he plays the chances of him being dominant is 100%.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

You can go on metaphysical “what if’s” all you want. Fact is he won the Atl game with his 4th quarter performance.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

The fact is, and this is a fact not a meta-anything, when an injury prone player goes down very early in the season and you planned around that player, gave them reps, etc, your backup will play most of the season and your backup will be less prepared to play than if the starter had never been on the roster. I don't know what teacher my kid will get in school next grade, but I would rather they get a pretty good teacher than a teacher who is amazing the first week, goes on disability for the rest of the school year on October 1, and is replaced with an unprepared substitute.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

They also planned around Olave who got hurt. And Landry who got hurt. And Penning who got hurt and Trautman and Kamara and Winston and a lot of other guys on both sides of the ball who were part of the staggering number of injuries they had. You are choosing hindsight to ignore MT WAS healthy to start the year and was performing at his normal level. A new, different injury happened. Pat yourself on the back all you want if it makes you feel better. It was unlucky.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

Olave missed two games. That is normal.

Jarvis Landry was an aging player coming off an injury plagued year who the Saints got cheap because there was a broad lack of interest in his services across the league. His injury was not surprising, it was built into the price. He was always know as a possession receiver not a speed guy, with lots of receptions over the middle taking hits. And he is undersized. So he has aged more like a running back than a receiver. His departure is actually the greatest success of our offseason as we don't need players in that mold even if he is a great guy who was fun to watch at LSU before all the hits.

Penning is bad luck. Many rookies who don't hold up their first season in the NFL never do. Thats why you want lots of draft picks, not to trade up and lose them, because **** happens.

Trautman was never good so his injury does not matter. He was a Payton experiment that failed. No team has ever had to 'account' for Trautman in their defensive game plan.

Kamara is an aging running back. His missing some games is expected. It happens to all of them. Most teams draft young running backs so they can hand the keys to a Pollard type down the road, rather than rely on a backup they 'trust' who won the Heisman trophy in 2005 or whatever.

Winston was coming off an injury. I pointed out in my predictions for our 2022 record that we were going into the season with a lot of injury risk with a starting QB coming off injury, #1 WR coming off 2 years out, an aging Landry as #2 WR coming off injuries, etc. You can call the injuries staggering I guess, but staggering generally implies unforseeable, and I did basically forsee them.

Michael Thomas was not healthy going into 2022. He did not play at all in preseason. He had setbacks in camp. He managed to suit up and be effective week 1 but he was a guy coming off 2 years of injury. When a player has injuries, they often adjust their mechanics with less trust on the injured joints and the result can often be new injuries in other areas. The longer they are out the worse it is. To any sane person, Michael Thomas was a big question mark going into 2022, not a full go 100% sure thing. Thats why nobody drafted him in the 1st-2nd round in fantasy, even though he would surely be a 1st-2nd round pick if he was full go 100% back to 2019.

My overall point is that injuries are disruptive and hurt teams. Its not just missing those players, its forcing other players into roles they are less prepared for, and changing lots of other roles to compensate. If you know a player will miss most of the season, you are better off without them at all. No team can avoid all injuries. With some positions, missing a few games is almost inevitable. But teams that stack up too many high injury risk players into starting spots are setting themselves up for chaos.

Note the order of our receiver injuries: #1 receiver is highest injury risk, MT. He goes down. This shifts Landry to #1 and Olave to #2 with new roles and responsibilities in the game plan. Landry is fairly high injury risk too, and also goes down shortly after. Then Olave is thrust into the #1 role. He is young and healthy but still thrust into a different role than expected and attracting extra attention. So Olave misses a couple games during the adjustment. By avoiding a situation with Mr. Glass at the top of the depth chart, you might avoid this whole domino effect. Players are less likely to get injured when they can play the same role from camp through the end of the season, which usually never happens perfectly, but its a lot worse if it all blows up week 3.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

That’s where I believe your viewpoint is distorted by your anti-Loomis bias in that you view every Decision as a mistake. I believe I’m more objective. But hey, I could be wrong and I’m not gonna insult/fight about it. It doesn’t matter what I say or facts I present….Your anti-Loomis mind is set.

Edit: Case in point, Thomas and Landry were healthy for week one. They had 12 receptions for 150 yards and 2 TDs between them. Losing both those guys like they did is an anomaly.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

This is a good forum discussion and you make some very good points. Very informative Bako.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

I won’t read BS’s post Ruby because I have him blocked. When I see someone respond to one of BS’s “everything is Loomis Fault Hate” post I have been working on perfecting my Jedi powers to skip the quoted portion of the post and only take in the responders post.

“Don’t worry be happy.”

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

Yep I agree. We will see how it all turns out.

What I would argue is that it was not an anomaly, it was an almost exact repeat of the previous year. In 2021 Michael Thomas played 0 games and Jarvis Landry played 12 games. In 2022 Michael Thomas played 3 games and Jarvis Landry played 9 games. Neither player could stay healthy either season, and both seasons they combined to play 12 of 34 possible games.

Re: Can't Guard Mike
 

Likewise, WW.

https://media.tenor.com/on3emMEPuKsA...e-with-you.gif