Loomis on trading down interest

BrooksMustGo · 03-26-2006, 12:00 PM

Saints | Loomis says no one has called him so far
Sun, 26 Mar 2006 05:17:25 -0800

Gary Myers, of the New York Daily News, reports New Orleans Saints general manager Mickey Loomis said he's not been approached by any team about trading with the Saints for their No. 2 NFL Draft pick. "It's way too early for that," he said. "I know we will get some calls. We've never been a team that has shied away from trading up, trading down or taking the pick. We're interested in listening and hearing from everyone involved. I know we'll hear from teams."

Hey Mickey, you might not hear from anyone if they're pretty sure you have to draft O-linemen early and often.

GoldRush26 · 03-26-2006, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by BrooksMustGo

Saints | Loomis says no one has called him so far
Sun, 26 Mar 2006 05:17:25 -0800

Gary Myers, of the New York Daily News, reports New Orleans Saints general manager Mickey Loomis said he's not been approached by any team about trading with the Saints for their No. 2 NFL Draft pick. "It's way too early for that," he said. "I know we will get some calls. We've never been a team that has shied away from trading up, trading down or taking the pick. We're interested in listening and hearing from everyone involved. I know we'll hear from teams."

Hey Mickey, you might not hear from anyone if they're pretty sure you have to draft O-linemen early and often.

I don't know if i even believe this. Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets. If they don't trade up, they can kiss Leinart goodbye because Tennessee will take him at 3. I heard on ESPN we can get the Jets #4 and #29(aquired from ATL I think) for them to trade up....which gives us perfect value. It makes sense to both parties. D'Brick, Mangold, then a LB or DT with our second rounder. Besides nothing would even happen before draft day so I wouldn't put too much into what loomis says.

gandhi1007 · 03-26-2006, 12:30 PM

Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets.

True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding.

GoldRush26 · 03-26-2006, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by gandhi1007

Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets.

True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding.

Well ok it doesn't matter. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know who we will take if no trade takes place. We don't trade with them and we still get D'Brick. It's the Jets that will lose out on the guy they want. I can live with that. Either way we come out winners. Loomis is playing this perfectly.

gandhi1007 · 03-26-2006, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by GoldRush26

Originally Posted by gandhi1007

Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets.

True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding.

Well ok it doesn't matter. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know who we will take if no trade takes place. We don't trade with them and we still get D'Brick. It's the Jets that will lose out on the guy they want. I can live with that.

If we don't make the trade, we have 1 first rounder & 1 second rounder (no 3rd). If we make this deal, we still get our guy & pick up an extra pick or two in the first two-three rounds. How does having extra picks in the 1st two-three rounds of this draft not matter?

GoldRush26 · 03-26-2006, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by gandhi1007

Originally Posted by GoldRush26

Originally Posted by gandhi1007

Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets.

True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding.

Well ok it doesn't matter. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know who we will take if no trade takes place. We don't trade with them and we still get D'Brick. It's the Jets that will lose out on the guy they want. I can live with that.

If we don't make the trade, we have 1 first rounder & 1 second rounder (no 3rd). If we make this deal, we still get our guy & pick up an extra pick or two in the first two-three rounds. How does having extra picks in the 1st two-three rounds of this draft not matter?

I didn't mean it didnt't matter. My point is if teams don't want to trade with us then that's their loss. We will still get the guy that we want either way. They are the ones that are losing out. Everyone knows we will not take a QB, so that's not even an issue. You think that if the Jets decide not to make the trade that they will still get Leinart??? No way...he'll go to Tenneessee. Teams trading up stand to gain much more by trading with us than we do by trading with them. A team like Arizona can get a franchise QB for years to come.

Besides, what else could Loomis do besides what he's doing?? I think he's handling it perfectly.

gandhi1007 · 03-26-2006, 01:13 PM

I said:

True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding.

You said:

Well ok it doesn't matter.

Then you said:

I didn't mean it didnt't matter.

Huh?

LOL

gandhi1007 · 03-26-2006, 01:16 PM

Besides, what else could Loomis do besides what he's doing??

He can attack free agency the way our division rivals are doing.

We have alot of needs to address. More so than what the draft can provide us with.

GoldRush26 · 03-26-2006, 01:36 PM

Originally Posted by gandhi1007

Besides, what else could Loomis do besides what he's doing??

He can attack free agency the way our division rivals are doing.

We have alot of needs to address. More so than what the draft can provide us with.

So many fans seem to go through this same cycle year after year. They expect so much before free agency begins, then complain that we "aren't doing enough". I've been looking on enough teams' message boards and I can tell u that 90% of football fans don't think their teams are doing enough. I think we are doing a lot better than in recent years. The problem is that people are expecting LaVar Arrington, Julian Peterson and John Abraham to be our targets when most often these high profile targets only go to strong teams or big markets, and we are far from either. It's a case of the rich getting richer. We JUST GOT DREW BREES for goodness sakes! What other year have we gotten a bona fide free agent QB like him!? The we got Michael Bennett, a great change of pace back and the fastest RB in the NFL. He'll be better than the Steckers and Smiths we've messed around with the past couple of years. We have a need at DT, LB, and C, all which can be addressed adequately in the draft, with or without a trade with our 1st rounder. If we trade it away, even better, but we aren't in a dire situation.

People want us to use our cap space all up but the fact is we arent the Washington Redskins and we never will be. If you are looking for our team to operate like other teams do then yes you will continuosly be disappointed. There is a profound difference in philosophy between Dan Snyder and Tom Benson. So instead of hoping Benson will all of a sudden change the way he approaches FA, we have to take this as what it is. Loomis just does what he is told, like any good employee who wants to keep his job does. To say that Benson is our owner, I think we've done a bang up job in FA, or have you already forgotten that AARON BROOKS WAS OUR QB LAST SEASON. Our biggest mistake was letting Bentley walk for nothing, but they can rectify that mistake.

wheelman · 03-26-2006, 01:36 PM

He can attack free agency the way our division rivals are doing.

And how often has that actually worked for teams in the era of free agents? Face it, the Patriots, Steelers, Colts, Jags, Bears, Seahawks, and Bengals are all teams that were built with the draft. They only use free agency as a supplement. And besides, I really don't think this team has as many glaring needs as other people like to believe.

03-26-2006, 12:00 PM	#1
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	Loomis on trading down interest Saints \| Loomis says no one has called him so far Sun, 26 Mar 2006 05:17:25 -0800 Gary Myers, of the New York Daily News, reports New Orleans Saints general manager Mickey Loomis said he's not been approached by any team about trading with the Saints for their No. 2 NFL Draft pick. "It's way too early for that," he said. "I know we will get some calls. We've never been a team that has shied away from trading up, trading down or taking the pick. We're interested in listening and hearing from everyone involved. I know we'll hear from teams." Hey Mickey, you might not hear from anyone if they're pretty sure you have to draft O-linemen early and often.

03-26-2006, 12:24 PM	#2
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594	Re: Loomis on trading down interest Originally Posted by BrooksMustGo Saints \| Loomis says no one has called him so far Sun, 26 Mar 2006 05:17:25 -0800 Gary Myers, of the New York Daily News, reports New Orleans Saints general manager Mickey Loomis said he's not been approached by any team about trading with the Saints for their No. 2 NFL Draft pick. "It's way too early for that," he said. "I know we will get some calls. We've never been a team that has shied away from trading up, trading down or taking the pick. We're interested in listening and hearing from everyone involved. I know we'll hear from teams." Hey Mickey, you might not hear from anyone if they're pretty sure you have to draft O-linemen early and often. I don't know if i even believe this. Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets. If they don't trade up, they can kiss Leinart goodbye because Tennessee will take him at 3. I heard on ESPN we can get the Jets #4 and #29(aquired from ATL I think) for them to trade up....which gives us perfect value. It makes sense to both parties. D'Brick, Mangold, then a LB or DT with our second rounder. Besides nothing would even happen before draft day so I wouldn't put too much into what loomis says.
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594

03-26-2006, 12:30 PM	#3
gandhi1007 Part Time Pimp Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,967	Re: Loomis on trading down interest Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets. True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding.

03-26-2006, 12:34 PM	#4
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594	Re: Loomis on trading down interest Originally Posted by gandhi1007 Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets. True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding. Well ok it doesn't matter. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know who we will take if no trade takes place. We don't trade with them and we still get D'Brick. It's the Jets that will lose out on the guy they want. I can live with that. Either way we come out winners. Loomis is playing this perfectly.
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594

03-26-2006, 12:39 PM	#5
gandhi1007 Part Time Pimp Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,967	Re: Loomis on trading down interest Originally Posted by GoldRush26 Originally Posted by gandhi1007 Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets. True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding. Well ok it doesn't matter. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know who we will take if no trade takes place. We don't trade with them and we still get D'Brick. It's the Jets that will lose out on the guy they want. I can live with that. If we don't make the trade, we have 1 first rounder & 1 second rounder (no 3rd). If we make this deal, we still get our guy & pick up an extra pick or two in the first two-three rounds. How does having extra picks in the 1st two-three rounds of this draft not matter?
	http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g2...gs/12-3006.jpg ______________________________ KNOWING IS HALF THE BATTLE! -G.I. Joe

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

03-26-2006, 12:49 PM	#6
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594	Re: Loomis on trading down interest Originally Posted by gandhi1007 Originally Posted by GoldRush26 Originally Posted by gandhi1007 Even if everyone knows we intend to draft D'Brick, I would figure we'd still have trade-up suitors, namely the Jets. True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding. Well ok it doesn't matter. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know who we will take if no trade takes place. We don't trade with them and we still get D'Brick. It's the Jets that will lose out on the guy they want. I can live with that. If we don't make the trade, we have 1 first rounder & 1 second rounder (no 3rd). If we make this deal, we still get our guy & pick up an extra pick or two in the first two-three rounds. How does having extra picks in the 1st two-three rounds of this draft not matter? I didn't mean it didnt't matter. My point is if teams don't want to trade with us then that's their loss. We will still get the guy that we want either way. They are the ones that are losing out. Everyone knows we will not take a QB, so that's not even an issue. You think that if the Jets decide not to make the trade that they will still get Leinart??? No way...he'll go to Tenneessee. Teams trading up stand to gain much more by trading with us than we do by trading with them. A team like Arizona can get a franchise QB for years to come. Besides, what else could Loomis do besides what he's doing?? I think he's handling it perfectly.
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594

03-26-2006, 01:13 PM	#7
gandhi1007 Part Time Pimp Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,967	Re: Loomis on trading down interest I said: True, but those suitors would not be willing to offer as much if they know the hand we're holding. You said: Well ok it doesn't matter. Then you said: I didn't mean it didnt't matter. Huh? LOL

03-26-2006, 01:16 PM	#8
gandhi1007 Part Time Pimp Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 1,967	Re: Loomis on trading down interest Besides, what else could Loomis do besides what he's doing?? He can attack free agency the way our division rivals are doing. We have alot of needs to address. More so than what the draft can provide us with.

03-26-2006, 01:36 PM	#9
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594	Re: Loomis on trading down interest Originally Posted by gandhi1007 Besides, what else could Loomis do besides what he's doing?? He can attack free agency the way our division rivals are doing. We have alot of needs to address. More so than what the draft can provide us with. So many fans seem to go through this same cycle year after year. They expect so much before free agency begins, then complain that we "aren't doing enough". I've been looking on enough teams' message boards and I can tell u that 90% of football fans don't think their teams are doing enough. I think we are doing a lot better than in recent years. The problem is that people are expecting LaVar Arrington, Julian Peterson and John Abraham to be our targets when most often these high profile targets only go to strong teams or big markets, and we are far from either. It's a case of the rich getting richer. We JUST GOT DREW BREES for goodness sakes! What other year have we gotten a bona fide free agent QB like him!? The we got Michael Bennett, a great change of pace back and the fastest RB in the NFL. He'll be better than the Steckers and Smiths we've messed around with the past couple of years. We have a need at DT, LB, and C, all which can be addressed adequately in the draft, with or without a trade with our 1st rounder. If we trade it away, even better, but we aren't in a dire situation. People want us to use our cap space all up but the fact is we arent the Washington Redskins and we never will be. If you are looking for our team to operate like other teams do then yes you will continuosly be disappointed. There is a profound difference in philosophy between Dan Snyder and Tom Benson. So instead of hoping Benson will all of a sudden change the way he approaches FA, we have to take this as what it is. Loomis just does what he is told, like any good employee who wants to keep his job does. To say that Benson is our owner, I think we've done a bang up job in FA, or have you already forgotten that AARON BROOKS WAS OUR QB LAST SEASON. Our biggest mistake was letting Bentley walk for nothing, but they can rectify that mistake.
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594

03-26-2006, 01:36 PM	#10
wheelman Sammich Lover Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 682	RE: Re: Loomis on trading down interest He can attack free agency the way our division rivals are doing. And how often has that actually worked for teams in the era of free agents? Face it, the Patriots, Steelers, Colts, Jags, Bears, Seahawks, and Bengals are all teams that were built with the draft. They only use free agency as a supplement. And besides, I really don't think this team has as many glaring needs as other people like to believe.
wheelman Sammich Lover Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 682