Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Money talks. They've refused to spend and now the need is a glaring bulbous, throbbing sore that can no longer be ignored.

There WILL be players available and they WILL be expensive, but I'd rather overpay to shore up the position.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I hope they will be available. Fingers crossed that there will be some out there when the cuts occur that are truly upgrades.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

In my opinion if the coaching staff feels that they need to bring in a veteran to take Pennings spot then you cut him. It’s year 3 and he’s still not making the grade. Move on now and let another young guy handle the backup roll, if you do indeed find a suitable starter.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Pennings salary this year is fully guaranteed so in theory you would not cut him unless he was so bad he couldnt even be your last backup. Maybe he is that bad. Or maybe you could trade him, but doubtful. The other side to it is maybe if he gets benched you cut him anyway if you feel the situation is toxic and just forget about the money. Also I believe Jamal Williams and Foster Moreau also have guaranteed salaries this year.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

What would ever lead you to believe that anything would be toxic? That would never have even occurred to me.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I'm hoping a team is willing to trade a 6th or 7th ahead of releasing to waivers.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

So I will explain this. The Saints front office invested a 1st round pick in Trevor Penning, which came at great expense due to the trade with Philly. At this point if we put Penning up for trade, we can speculate, but I think its questionable whether the Saints could get a 6th or 7th rounder for Penning, or nothing. You can be optimistic and dream Pennings present value could be a 4th or 5th around pick but even then, it is like a 90% or more loss in present value. So team is family, sure, but Penning is like a family member who borrowed money to start a business that has now lost most of that money and left those who believed in him struggling. Such situations are frequently toxic. Maybe some believe Penning will 100% turn it around and be a star, but most recognize that is not where we are now, so there are going to be feelings of disappointment, guilt, blame, resentment, etc. Penning is likely disappointed too. Likely some in Pennings circles are whispering in his ear that he has not been developed properly, and some in the circles of the Saints front office are whispering that Penning is difficult to coach and wasn't who they thought he was. That people blame other people when things go wrong is human nature. And just because it is kept behind closed doors does not mean its not reasonable to speculate that human beings are doing human nature. It is like speculating that celebrities who have been dating for a 2.5 years have probably had sex. They may not have done it public. They may not have discussed it publicly, but its human nature. Likewise, the more Penning disappoints, the more it is human nature that the disappointment results in tensions where the Saints blame Penning and Penning blames the Saints. Small inklings of this can be seen in the narrative where Penning tried to spin a comeback story around seeking advice from former Saint Terron Armstead and not discussing coaches and shrugging off questions about advice from present teammates like Ram. Or the end of last season where the Saints refused to use Penning even as a fill in when injuries mounted. Meanwhile the front office fired all their offensive coaches who had anything to do with Penning last year, in hopes a new staff could fix Penning, but for the most part we have seen the same old inconsistent Penning, raving about offhand conversations with former Saints not the new staff. While everyone would prefer that Penning suddenly develop as a star, I expect that behind closed doors tensions are building, and if the Saints feel that Penning will never become a good starter, they might rather just move on than keep him around as a project backup surrounded by disappointments and resentment that could negatively impact the locker room. Sometimes a fresh start is best when expectations are not met.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

All for that if there's anyone out there that could truly be an upgrade. I don't see a shot in hell of a true starter quality player being available at tackle at either waivers or late round trade fodder. Other positions, yes. I can see it. But if we can at least improve depth at tackle it would be a plus and worth a late pick, I suppose.

Like I have mentioned before, there's probably not a team out there that wouldn't want to improve their o-line depth. It seems like it's more of a seller's market than a buyer's market for the position. Perhaps if the trade was sweet enough a team might let a decent backup go for a mid round pick like a 4th, or maybe even a 3rd. I think that would probably be our best bet of picking up someone that could actually contribute at the position.

:(

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Sorry, not going to waste my time reading that. Why do you always feel you have to write novellas? :D

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Realistically there are Michael Thomas's and Jarvis Landry's out there at tackle, players who would be a significant upgrade IF HEALTHY. But their age and injury history are major red flags, and due to their past earnings, they probably aren't taking calls for minimum salary. So the question is, do you make those calls?

If one of these limping vets pan out, you may get a bargain, win a couple extra games, and maybe prevent a catastrophic injury to Carr, but you don't solve anything long term and you end up in the same dilemma next year, with a hit to the salary cap as well.

But if they don't pan out you potentially lose MORE games, put Carr at MORE risk, etc because you have to shuffle the oline mid-season and throw in someone who has not been practicing with the ones and has lost confidence from being benched, and maybe you had to cut your next best option and they are with another team, plus you still get the salary cap hit. Or maybe the limping vet is in and out of the lineup with nagging injuries all year and the position never stabilizes.

In the end, I think gambling on the limping vet is not worth it unless you are so close to a ring that the upside could push you over the edge. I don't think we are a David Back-to-IR away from a ring. Then again, I will acknowledge that the argument could be made to 'protect Carr at all costs' due to the devastation an injury (which could guarantee his 2025 salary) or inability to evaluate his play could cause for the franchises future.

Beyond the limping vets, the sort of players we could bring in for a 6th or 7th or cheap contract are the kind of players who would provide competition, not a sure thing. But if our depth is not impressing, competition is the way to go. So I favor bringing in competition for cheap. Even if the players we bring in have exactly the same skill level as the players we cut, just the statement it will make could light a fire under someone to step up their game.