What about.....
 

What about trading Charless Grant to Denver for their 1st first rd pick???? Im not in favor of gettin rid of Grant, but if we can ge Williams at #2 and then one of the better LB's with the #15 from them, like Ernie Sims or Bobby Carpenter or a CB like Jimmy Williams?????

RE: What about.....
 

Why give up a proven top 10 player, which this team has precious few, for an unknown? That scenario only makes this team worse, not better.

RE: What about.....
 

Then we should just trade all of our draft picks for proven veterans???? Lets just boycott the draft all together then....I think Williams isnt an unknown, yea, he hasnt done anything in the NFL yet, but hell neither has BUsh or Leinhart and everybody is all enamored with them 2. This scenario improves the DE posistion and improves the LB position, in just one round. Then get Mangold in the 2nd.....what other positions need immediate attention????

RE: What about.....
 

It doesn't get us an offensive tackle, it doesn't get us a healthy quarterback (see the free loser, I mean, agent list to refresh), it doesn't ensure we get better, it just makes the process less certain. And yes, if we could get a few healthy top 10 players in key positions instead of draft choices, we should do it, because 1 - less risk as they know how to play without a learning curve, and 2 - economically these players would have had signing bonuses which the Saints wouldn't have to amortize.

Make sure you get rid of all the talented leaders so that there will be stability.

RE: What about.....
 

what about donte for a third round pick, take moss in the second round and a db in the third, deep db class this year

Re: RE: What about.....
 

If you consider a full time defensive end who is known for pass rushing a top 10 player after he records an astonishing 2.5 sacks, then our team is full of top 10 players.

Re: RE: What about.....
 

full time as in a 3 man rotation and playing DT sometimes in passing downs? Full time as getting the majority of the double teams? Full time as in over 20.5 sacks the two years prior and being one of the tea leaders in tackles? Or fullt ime as STILL the 7th rated DE in the league on Scouts Inc's list. A guy has a down year on a 3-13 team and all of a sudden he's garbage? Please.

Where in my post did i say he was garbage. I lke Charles Grant, but face it, he is not a top 10 DE. Top 20, yeah I'll buy that. But if you want me to run off a list of 10 Defensive ends that are better than him, i can do it. But you cant honestly say that guys like Peppers, Simeon Rice, Strahan dont ever get double teamed. Thats part of his job...he is going to get double teamed and i would think that he should be able to manage more sacks to be a top 10 guy. Hell, he isnt even the best defensive end on our team.

SCOUTS INC has him as number 7 in the league. Feel free to disagree with them, I am sure they have an e-mail address. Second, Peppers. Rice, and Strahan ALL play with defensive players around them that are far better than what Grant plays with. From last year, would you prefer our D-line or the Panthers, Bucs, or Giants? Our LBs or the Panthers, Bucs, or Giants? Our secondary or the Panthers, Bucs or Giants? Our defensive coaches(from last year) or the Panthers bucs or Giants? ALL of those players play at a greater advantage than Grant, and NONE of them were asked to play DT at any point in addition to that. Grant and Will Smith were the only two players on our D near the line of scrimmage ANY team had to worry about, and for the first 3/4 of the season, they focused on Grant. Give the guy a break.

I most definitely disagree with them and i disagrree with you. I think that Charles Grants running mate was better than Rice's running mate (Spires) and on even keel with the other two (Umenyiora and Rucker). The thing is, those big three made everything easier for their running mates and STILL found the time to put up their numbers. Now, I know he was really good the two previous years, but what if the same old song and dance happens again this year? 3 sacks this year. Will you still point the finger at someone else? Will you still blame the supporting cast? Or could the supporting cast start to blame him? Was the Saints defense that much different last year than it was the year before? The SAME PLAYERS were on the field the majority of the time the last two years and his numbers dropped off significantly.

Um, The Bucs, Giants and Panthers ALL have DTs that take pressure off their ends. The Saints do not. So just picking a "running mate" is not a sufficient discussion of the lack of talent along our D-line. I think the DTs allowed for them to be able to still put up numbers, and especially the players that played alongside them. NOONE gave a crap about our DTs. And I still don't see where Peppers, Rice or Strahan were ever asked to play DT, do you? SO disagree all you like, the facts stand for themselves. Also, how many times did you see Grant play last year? Just curious.

As far as all the what ifs about this year, what if we still don't have a DT worth a damn? What if we don't draft a LB and this is the best we're gonna get? What if we don't draft a corner and that's the best we're gonna get? What if we draft Mario Williams and Grant is back in a rotation and asked to play DT again? Is that enough what ifs?

Ok, well lets try another angle since you are deadset on Charles Grant being your hero. Since you have seen him so extensively throughout his career, why did he have such a dropoff in production last year from his previous years? Dont you dare say its because the rest of the team sucked because it sucked the year before that too. He has played with the D line and the same LB's the last two years. So why did his sack total plummet to what it was? The fact of the matter is he is too inconsistent to be considered a top 10 DE which was my point from the beginning. So, since i cant use any other players in the NFL as a comparison, i will compare Charles Grant in 2004 to Charles Grant in 2005. Now, explain to me the reason for the fall off.

Since you have seen him so extensively throughout his career,

I take this to mean you haven't, and thus are making an NFL.com stats opinion of Grant's play. That's enough for me. Have a good day. If you wanna know more, there is already a thread discussing Charles Grant very extensively. Have a peek for it. But there is no way I am gonna try to convince a guy who hasn't even seen Grant play too often of anything. No point at all in doing so.

he never said he didnt see him play... im sure u can come up with a better excuse for not making an arguement then that....

Surprise surprise, the guy who said Charles Rogers is better than Stallworth. A person who has watched Grant play would not say "since YOU have seen him play so extensively." If I am making a cooment on a player, I am making personal observations from what I have SEEN, not from NFL.com. Nice try. I also pointed him to the previous discussion about Grant that covered the same ground. Don't you have a poor argument to make elsewhere? :shock:

Just think... if we trade away Grant, how many double teams will Will Smith see next year? I can see it now... Will Smith has less than 5 sacks and then we're going to talk about trading him away too. I'd like to see us try to win now, not draft and starting a team full of rookies. Grant is a solid player... and we don't NEED another DE. We have more important positions to address... why fix something that's not broke?

[quote="saintswhodi"]Since you have seen him so extensively throughout his career,

I take this to mean you haven't, and thus are making an NFL.com stats opinion of Grant's play. That's enough for me. Have a good day. quote]


I guess i will take this to mean as you know when to fold 'em. Look, I haven't missed a Saints game since the last year of the Ditka era. I have seen Grant play every game he has played on the proffesional level. I like Charles Grant, i said that before, but he isnt a top 10 DE and you know it. You lost this arguement...you backed out like a 12 year old girl...its ok. And dont accuse me of just pulling up stats when the only logical thing you have come up with is "Dont get mad at me, SCOUTS INC has him rated number 7. Get mad at them." B-O-O H-O-O. You lose. Its ok. Move on..but just admit it.

thank you sir... may i have another...

and yes... i said rogers is a better reciever then stallworth b/c i do believe that had he not broken his collarbone 2 years in a row then he would have the #s to prove it... but now they have roy n mike williams so there arent that many balls to go around... and lets face it... harrington wasnt that great of a qb during his lions tenure... and dont tell me you havent been watchin stallworth for the past 3 years... he has disappointed me and i would hope everyone else with his play... i mean... everyone knows joe horn is our #1 guy... so that means he is getting all the double teams... so stallworth is gettin the 2nd best corner every sunday.. and he hasnt put up hardly any descent stats... if he is that great then he should have at least 85-90 catches going up against a teams 2nd best corner every week....

In Stallworth's defense, everyone knows Aaron Brooks only looked for Joe Horn when he was on the field. And don't say he looked at them both, 'cause Brooks wasn't smart enough to look at more than one receiver per play. :D LOL

I must agree though that Stallworth showed falshes of stardom, but never really was that consistent. He did however face alot of team's #1 corners last year while Horn was out. :wink:

... and he had his best season to date. How old is he again? 8) Charles Rogers is a coulda, shoulda, woulda. Good point on Brooks gandhi. Stallworth isn't great, but he's on the right track unlike Rogers. So if you consider Stallworth a disappointment (which to a certain extent he is because of his draft slot), what do you consider Rogers?

i think both have disappointing but for different reasons... stallworth for not catchin the ball better against 2nd tier corners... rodgers for being injured... im not sayin rodgers has been great but i think he would have been a better reciever had he not been injured and played with a better qb...

Hey, drafting Stallworth could have been worse. I remember many, many Saints fans (myself included) screaming for the Saints to draft Philip Buchanon that year. :?

You could say the exact same thing for Stallworth, Pak. :lol:

i was screamin when the picked stallworth... he couldnt stay healthy or catch in college n he cant in the NFL....

I agree pak, but i am disappointed in the fact that you changed the subject enough for whodi to not have to admit his defeat.

[quote="JimBone"]this post removed for content

You also said Leinart would be a bust. Shall I continue?

removed for content

removed for content

Funny, how just the other day Mike D. was talking on 870 AM and talking about the possibility of draft Williams and how good of an addition that would be to our defense. Also, they talked about how Grant was not very good at run blocking. Maybe whodi should write them and explain why they are wrong since he is such an expert. I like Charles Grant as well as many of you. One thing about him, he has a good motor where he helps his tackle #'s. He is not a top 10 DE and he isn't the best DE on the team.

Grant's not very good at run blocking huh? And you even made it bold. Thanks. That's not even worth my time discussing. If you don't see what's wrong with that.......................

Second, go check Grant's tackle numbers, and tell me he isn't very good against the run. Do YOUR eyes tell you he isn't very good, or are you a talking head for Mike D.? I am sure though Payton and Co will work on Grant's run blocking, prob with Stinch and Jamaal's as well. :roll:

I guess your BS has me all screwed up. Exuse me, Grant is not good against the run. I was just making a point that I am not the only one who believes he is not a top 10 DE. That's it! He has a good motor and makes tackles down field after the back has done past him. I like that about him.

If you are so intelligent on football skills, name your top 10 with Grant in it if you dare.

And i'm not the only one who thinks he is, so what? If players are only judged on one year, then NOONE would be a top 10 anything for more than one year at a time. Believe whatever you want, why in the world would you think I care that you don't think Grant is top 10? You barely know if he is tackling or blocking. :shock:

Name your top 10, thats all I ask. And if you think Grant is worth top 10 money, then you are crazy.

IF players are only judged on one year? How many times has Kearse, Jason Taylor, Michael Strahan, Simeon Rice...hell, even Darren Howard...how many times have they followed a solid season with a magical disappearing act? It hasnt happened. Because all of the upper echelon players have one thing in common...CONSISTENCY. Year in and year out, you know what you are going to get from them...Charles Grant...not so much.

Uhmm... Using Kearse, Taylor, & Howard do not help your argument JB. They have all three had their share of down years as well. :shock:

Sssshhhh, he doesn't realize that. Mr. NFL.com forgot to check on the stats before he put his foot in his mouth again.

This is getting rediculis. Grant has been a solid polayer on D and our most consistant lineman Period. The fact of the matter is he is always around the ball. Period. The team as a whole had a down year, and I'm not willing to cast him aside yet. Realistically he is in the last year of his contract, so if there is an indication that there will be no negotion, then and only then would I look to unload him and not follow the path of Howard.

For what purpose? I don't think I can make it any clearer, but what you think couldn't possibly be any lower on my list things I should be concerned about. It doesn't even make the list. You don't think he is top 10, I do. Mike D doesn't, Scouts Inc does. SO WHAT? Is there anything else you could be crying about at this moment?