WhoDat

I don\'t know. I find it hard to believe that experts and novices alike keep suggesting that the Saints would give up two first rounders to move up into the top 5. Is it possible? Sure. But consider:

A. The Saints still have way too many holes to fill on defense to be giving up first round picks. I don\'t care if that\'s the 2nd pick in the draft or the 32nd. A first round pick is a first round pick and two are always better than one.

B. Haslett has basically come out and said, we\'re not going to move up unless the deal is really good. He OBVIOUSLY likes to stock his team through the draft, as opposd to free agency, so the likelihood of them moving up becomes smaller.

C. The Saints are cheap. Again, Haslett talked about the cost of signing a top five pick versus two later first rounders. It makes more sense for them not to move up financially as well as talent-wise (b/c two players in the top five at their position is better than one player who is in the top two at his position).

I don\'t know. This type of speculation just seems uninformed to me. If you want to take guesses at trades the Saints might make on draft day, why not talk about Tebucky, or them moving up from 17 to 10 or 12, just high enough to take Trufant? I just really don\'t see them parting with two numbers ones to move up 12 spots. A first and a third to move up five or so spots to take Trufant - that I can understand. But two number ones to take Newman? Let\'s hope not, b/c that\'s flat dumb.

And I think Haslett knows it. I mean, would anyone on this boad give up Grant and Stallworth for Champ Bailey or Charles Woodson? I wouldn\'t... especially when you still might be able to grab a guy like both of them AND another talented rookie for the cost of a Craver (3rd rounder).

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"