Grade our draft

AsylumGuido · 05-01-2023, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by MatthewT

As far as drafting quality players and players of need, cannot really say anything negative about this draft. With that said, can make a pretty good case that maybe some of the picks were reaches, of course if they pan out who cares. One thing I do like is the Saints did not pull the trigger early in the draft for a QB, to me that shows they are really on board with Derek Carr and will give him every opportunity he needs to be successful.

I'm curious, Matthew, how do you define a "reach"? I hear this term a lot. Does a "reach" have to have a negative connotation? If you see something you really want and are fearful of it not being there when you get to its location you "reach" out and grab it. The Saints are known to identify players that they want and are not afraid or too skittish to go get them in the draft. Both Loomis and Harley have said this verbatim several times. "When we see someone we want, we go get them."

In every case that the Saints moved up in this draft there was a very real likelihood that the player they drafted would not have been there when their next slot arose.

Recently there was posted here a study that showed the Saints had the highest success rate (players still in the league) from the first half of the draft since, I believe, 2009 of all teams in the league. This has to be related to their willingness to go and get the players they want instead of waiting to select from what is left. In other words, to reach out and get what they want.

I actually gave the Saints an "A" because they did "reach" out and get the players that they wanted and felt would fill a vital need.

MatthewT · 05-01-2023, 12:42 PM

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido

I'm curious, Matthew, how do you define a "reach"? I hear this term a lot. Does a "reach" have to have a negative connotation? If you see something you really want and are fearful of it not being there when you get to its location you "reach" out and grab it. The Saints are known to identify players that they want and are not afraid or too skittish to go get them in the draft. Both Loomis and Harley have said this verbatim several times. "When we see someone we want, we go get them."

In every case that the Saints moved up in this draft there was a very real likelihood that the player they drafted would not have been there when their next slot arose.

Recently there was posted here a study that showed the Saints had the highest success rate (players still in the league) from the first half of the draft since, I believe, 2009 of all teams in the league. This has to be related to their willingness to go and get the players they want instead of waiting to select from what is left. In other words, to reach out and get what they want.

I actually gave the Saints an "A" because they did "reach" out and get the players that they wanted and felt would fill a vital need.

Reach is generally a negative term, but it doesn't always need to be. In the Saints case, a few guys were taken earlier than expected per published scouting reports and draft projections. With the Saints having very specific area's that needed to be addressed, some slight reaches were expected. This always going to be an issue when a team has to draft for need instead of best player available, which is where the Saints are at right now.

AsylumGuido · 05-02-2023, 08:42 AM

Originally Posted by MatthewT

Reach is generally a negative term, but it doesn't always need to be. In the Saints case, a few guys were taken earlier than expected per published scouting reports and draft projections. With the Saints having very specific area's that needed to be addressed, some slight reaches were expected. This always going to be an issue when a team has to draft for need instead of best player available, which is where the Saints are at right now.

I get what you are saying to a degree, but weren't there players of the same position that would have been available later at the Saints previous slot before trading up? It just appears to me that they had the players they moved up to get ranked higher on their board that what they felt would be remaining if they sat still. I believe while need was absolutely a factor it was the desire for those specific players that drove the trade ups.

One thing I hear repeatedly every year around draft time is that every team's board will be dramatically different outside of the first ten to fifteen players. What appears to be a reach (negative version) by one team's standard may be a steal as seen from other team's reckonings.

View Poll Results: How did we do?
A	9	37.50%
B	12	50.00%
C	1	4.17%
D	1	4.17%
F	1	4.17%
Voters: 24. You may not vote on this poll

05-01-2023, 08:42 AM	#1
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 26,622	Re: Grade our draft Originally Posted by MatthewT As far as drafting quality players and players of need, cannot really say anything negative about this draft. With that said, can make a pretty good case that maybe some of the picks were reaches, of course if they pan out who cares. One thing I do like is the Saints did not pull the trigger early in the draft for a QB, to me that shows they are really on board with Derek Carr and will give him every opportunity he needs to be successful. I'm curious, Matthew, how do you define a "reach"? I hear this term a lot. Does a "reach" have to have a negative connotation? If you see something you really want and are fearful of it not being there when you get to its location you "reach" out and grab it. The Saints are known to identify players that they want and are not afraid or too skittish to go get them in the draft. Both Loomis and Harley have said this verbatim several times. "When we see someone we want, we go get them." In every case that the Saints moved up in this draft there was a very real likelihood that the player they drafted would not have been there when their next slot arose. Recently there was posted here a study that showed the Saints had the highest success rate (players still in the league) from the first half of the draft since, I believe, 2009 of all teams in the league. This has to be related to their willingness to go and get the players they want instead of waiting to select from what is left. In other words, to reach out and get what they want. I actually gave the Saints an "A" because they did "reach" out and get the players that they wanted and felt would fill a vital need.
	“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” — Winston Churchill

05-01-2023, 12:42 PM	#2
MatthewT 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Mississippi Posts: 2,729	Re: Grade our draft Originally Posted by AsylumGuido I'm curious, Matthew, how do you define a "reach"? I hear this term a lot. Does a "reach" have to have a negative connotation? If you see something you really want and are fearful of it not being there when you get to its location you "reach" out and grab it. The Saints are known to identify players that they want and are not afraid or too skittish to go get them in the draft. Both Loomis and Harley have said this verbatim several times. "When we see someone we want, we go get them." In every case that the Saints moved up in this draft there was a very real likelihood that the player they drafted would not have been there when their next slot arose. Recently there was posted here a study that showed the Saints had the highest success rate (players still in the league) from the first half of the draft since, I believe, 2009 of all teams in the league. This has to be related to their willingness to go and get the players they want instead of waiting to select from what is left. In other words, to reach out and get what they want. I actually gave the Saints an "A" because they did "reach" out and get the players that they wanted and felt would fill a vital need. Reach is generally a negative term, but it doesn't always need to be. In the Saints case, a few guys were taken earlier than expected per published scouting reports and draft projections. With the Saints having very specific area's that needed to be addressed, some slight reaches were expected. This always going to be an issue when a team has to draft for need instead of best player available, which is where the Saints are at right now. iceshack149, SmashMouth, Rugby Saint II and 1 others like this.

05-02-2023, 08:42 AM	#3
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 26,622	Re: Grade our draft Originally Posted by MatthewT Reach is generally a negative term, but it doesn't always need to be. In the Saints case, a few guys were taken earlier than expected per published scouting reports and draft projections. With the Saints having very specific area's that needed to be addressed, some slight reaches were expected. This always going to be an issue when a team has to draft for need instead of best player available, which is where the Saints are at right now. I get what you are saying to a degree, but weren't there players of the same position that would have been available later at the Saints previous slot before trading up? It just appears to me that they had the players they moved up to get ranked higher on their board that what they felt would be remaining if they sat still. I believe while need was absolutely a factor it was the desire for those specific players that drove the trade ups. One thing I hear repeatedly every year around draft time is that every team's board will be dramatically different outside of the first ten to fifteen players. What appears to be a reach (negative version) by one team's standard may be a steal as seen from other team's reckonings.
	“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” — Winston Churchill