Not Smart
 

The Saints FO has outsmarted themselves, and the evidence piles up as scenarios play out. By signing Drew Brees, whom only one other team showed any interest (and even they balked at the concept early), the team has negotiated themselves into a situation where they cannot get full value for their #2 draft choice. While the team could have run the risk of not being able to sign Brees, all of the other teams who have signed free agent quarterbacks signed healthy replacements or backups in relatively short order. In addition, by essentially blasting the intention to sign Brees no matter what it took, the Saints took an enormous cap hit for the 2006 season to sign a damaged quarterback who may well not be able to start until later in the regular season, if at all. With so many holes to fill, including the risk at qb, a relatively light FA acquisition record and release of several starters, there is little margin for error for the upcoming draft.

Because of the Brees signing, the bluff of taking Young, Lienart or Cutler weakens their position to trade out of the pick, with the likely teams knowing that if they don't trade with the Saints, they will have at least a 50-50 shot at getting an extremely high quality QB while retaining their later round draft choices. If they don't get their target rookie QB, each of the teams in question, like the Saints, have multiple needs to fill and can do so. GM's may be in consensus that picking Fergueson or Hawk would be a low value pick for the #2 slot in the draft, further diminishing the Saints' negotiating position; teams picking after the Saints would essentially dare the Saints to either wound themselves with the pick or trade out for less than full value.

The Jets, for example, have 3 experienced QB's on the roster already, and need a DE, CB, and at least one more O-Lineman. With two first round picks, they can have one of the more succesfull drafts.

The Titans, given the uncertainty of their qb situation, picking 3rd rather than 2nd doesn't gain them anything as they have the systems in place to fold in any of the 3 QBs on the consensus 1st round board. They also have multiple needs, were relatively uneventful in FA and cannot afford to let a 2nd round pick go for essentially no value. Even if the Saints traded out of their position which pulled one of the three qb's from consideration, they'd still get "their man."

If conventional wisdom were NOT to pick a qb in the 1st round due to risk of a blow out, would the Saints be the only team to really heed that axiom? Each of the teams in the top 8 selections of the draft have multiple significant holes to fill, just like the Saints. By giving up additional selections to the Saints in exchange for moving up could be considered doubling down against the odds. Failure to succede by risking assets to move up has been shown to have dramatic effects on the tenure of the coaching staff and the FO, and in remarkably real time. There is very low tolerance for failure in taking such risks, some analysts and insiders quoting 8 years to recover from making such a profound losing wager.

None of this augurs well for the prospects of the Saints to get full value for their pick. And it all started by overplaying their hand and overpaying for Drew Brees.

..or, the Saints merely use their #2 pick and select a very good player. Imagine that!!
So what if they pick, say, AJ Hawk with the #2. "They paid too much!!! Hawk was a 5th, not a 2nd" So? If I have a 2nd instead of a 5th, do I have to pick the guy Mel Kiper says should go with the 2nd pick just so I can get the "full value" of the pick? This now popular value system for draft posistions really means nothing. The real value of any pick is what the player picked does while playing in your team. Period.

The idea of the draft order is that the teams that did the worst the previous season get the chance to grab the better players coming out of college. At #2, the Saints get to choose from all but one player. That's the real value of the pick.

well put Tobias.....I say as long as someone fills a need...then they are worth the value.....so if we dont get an extra pick.....big deal....as long as we get a great player that fills a need what does it matter where we pick them...2,3,4,5th??? who cares...gimme a baller, a shot caller....dats all we need....

..
Amen!!!!!

Very, VERY well said. Wow, we have a choice of any player in the draft besides one, what a terrible position to be in. Anybody prefer we would have been 8-8 AGAIN and be picking at 18-20? I damn sure well don't. And besides being in a position to take whomever we feel, ANY trade we get is gravy. If the Titans wanna move up one spot to make sure they get their guy, we get more. If the Jets wanna move up, we get more. Whatever the scenario, we get a great player, or we get more picks AND a great player. How do we come out the losers int hat scenario? Picking up Brees was very intelligent cause A) otherwise we would have been starting a rookie QB, and even as high as I am on Leinart, that's not likely to meet success next year and B) teams now have NO IDEA where we are going with out pick. Before we were pretty much pigeon-holed into taking Leinart, now the whole draft is available to us and any player that any other team targeted as falling to them high in the draft is now a question mark. By signing Brees, we actually opened the door for MORE trading partners, not closing it off. Xan I had noticed you have been anti-Brees since we got him, and I think this falls along those lines. We are in the catbird seat in the draft, don't piss on that dude. Unless you would rather we be at 18 again and not have any of these options, which I can't believe you do.

I guess you're right, getting less than full value is what I should expect. Negotiating ourselves into a corner, forced to overpay because we cut off options. Taking risks no one else in this league would take. It's all too familiar. I should just embrace the trademarks of the incompetent rather than fight for more.

I'm not anti-Brees. I'm anti jumping off a bridge before the bridge is built. I liked the pre-injury Brees and was hoping that the FO would trade for him. But he's not a $10 million quarterback today and he's certainly not one when we were the only team interested in signing him. Any quarterback who's mechanics have been severely compromised is a serious economic risk.

Signing Brees at all wasnt' the move that limits the teams' options, it was the contract. If he doesn't play at all in 2006, that's an utter waste of money and opportunity. If he's only slightly effective, it's a major overpayment. If he plays as well as AB, that would be $4 million too much (ok probably more). Brees' contract signals that the team is willing to overpay as well as take on significant risk simultaneously. With limited cap room and many holes to fill other than qb, the Saints' FO set the bar for how much the "backup" qb role would be worth. That fundamentally discounts the #2 pick with 2 qb's who are top 3 picks. Trading out for full value is not not possible, but would have been if we were "pigeon-holed" for Lienart.

You are right that the Saints would get all but 1 player with the #2 choice. I love the obvious, thank you. The question becomes what of that player's contract and how it will affect cap management. Taking a player who is not "worth" a #2 pick but a 5-8 pick sets the baseline too high for his contract. This will decrease the cap room necessary to add other quality FA's the team needs to fill holes. The bloated contract makes resigning the player, unless he's an all-pro (see Bentley) or Sullivan (can't miss him) much more difficult.

I'm still trying to see how this move opens up options? If anything, it decreases them because of the above. Knowing that the team doesn't need another overpaid backup qb, refusing to move up makes other teams getting their guy much easier. Even if the Saints do draft Lienart, once he's selected, his value drops due to Brees' contract, making getting full value in a trade after the draft less likely.

I really want to see Brees succeed - he's got a great attitude and his pre-injury skills were enviable. But my faith is tempered by the seriousness of the injury, the potential for re-injury and the enorimity of his contract. Trading out of the #2 pick is the logical and most important thing the club could do, regardless of the qb situation. I want a winner in the city next year, but the team has negotiated themselves into a corner and it will take luck plus some desperation by other clubs to bail them out. This was not a "player hater" post, this was an Front Office Hater post.

I see where your train has gone off the track. Where did you get the impression we were cap strained, cause we certainly aren't. When Howard and Bentley were allowed to go elsewhere with AB, we were at least 24 mil under the cap. So we gave Brees 10, so what? We still have $14 mil plus a rookie salary alotment less you forget. THEN we traded Gandy, freeing up more money. So if your whole position is "we can't do anything cause we are cash strapped" then that's a false position to be standing on. We aren't. And neither will we be since Brees is basically on a one year deal, and trust me THE WHOLE LEAGUE knows that. That's why the proposition of us taking Leinart is not met with ridicule, cause honestly we COULD. We have the money, and we have a QB who is injured. So the option is most definitely still there. So now that the whole money thing is not even a consideration, explain again how we don't have any options. That money argument is flawed.

And what were we gonna get for the pick before, when we released AB, and our only options were Leinart and Leinart? ZERO. Unless you think teams seriously would believe we were considering Bouman or A-Mac to start. I don't see how you can't see that. Had we not gotten Brees, Leinart was our only option, and the whole league knew that. Getting us Brees just opened up the rest of the top picks for us. That's why you see mock drafts with us taking Williams, Hawk, AND Ferguson now, cause WE opened those doors by signing Brees. Lordy man, how can you NOt see that? Take a deep breath and repeat, more options is good. More options is good. Right now, you're just hatin' and it ain't even justified hate. So money is no problem, and more options is good. What's left to hate on unjustifyably? :roll:

I'll tell you how it opens up other options for the Saints to trade. We're right in front of the Tennessee Titans in the draft order, who have all but commited themselves to drafting a quarterback, but have conviently been split over which one to take. Anyone who wants them will leapfrog with us because we don't need anyone who won't be down a few picks later.

But if that doesn't work, may I remind everybody that draft position is a good indicator of rookie contract, playing position a large role, as well. When Deuce held out, it was because the Saints offered him a contract comparable to CB Willie Middlebrooks. A linebacker/offensive tackle/whatever just doesn't command the same salary as a quarterback.

And even if it does, I'll be happy that the Saints have a playmaker in a position of need.

The only thing I don't want the FO to do is draft another DE.

The "Team salary includes the Rookie Minimum Active Salary as of the day of the draft for all drafted rookies. The salary for drafted rookies will stay at this amount until the player is signed, the team’s rights are relinquished through waivers, or until the Tuesday following the tenth week of the regular season if the player remains unsigned." This means that there is no additional cap room for rookies once the rookie is signed to a contract. This impacts the overall cap and negates your draft impact argument, and reinforces my argument that overpaying for draft choices is a mistake, which makes that $14 million look a lot smaller. I'm going to assume, with no information, that the total of FA deals other than Brees has had a net zero effect on the overall cap. Lots of holes, not a lot of money. Still hating the FO.

Oh yeah, making a baseless and uninformed observation is a great way to win an argument.

Just giving you the chance to provide the answer to that unknown. Then you might have something constructive to write. At least I will acknowlege my ignorance and am willing to adjust with new facts.

Hey whodi, am I on the Poo Choo train??

In what way does that negate my argument? The Saints have a salary cap alottment equivalent to the number two pick in the draft. Do you or do you not believe thay have accounted for that in signing Drew Brees and whoemever else they signed? AND, who the hell is left in FA that would take up such a need on our cap, that we are pursuing? Let me answer, NOONE. So I fail to see how your cap argument holds a thimble's worth of water. It doesn't.

So our rookie pool is already calculated into the 14 mil. So the "we broke can't sign anybody" argument is still without basis or merit. Next order of hate.........................

Whoops, double post.

You're the one making the observation. Therefore, the burden of proof falls on you. I'd like to ask you, where did you get the information about the rookie salaries? Do you have a link?

Naw bud. I just am really having the hardest time seeing where you are coming from with this. We're on a great position, and you're poo-pooing it. I simply can not understand.

i see this a touchy subject, i'll leave this one alone lol

xan,

worst case scenario... no one trades with us and we're stuck picking #2 and the FO doesn't want Leinart, Williams (those valued at #2). They CAN pass the pick & let Tenn draft #2. Then continue to a point where it's worth it for them to take who they want at the draft slot they want. The Vikings did it a couple years ago. Do they get anything for thier pick? no, but they don't "overpay" as you put it for their draft pick. remember, if you pass, you can walk up to the podium at ANY POINT to take your pick. That's why when the Vikes did it, there were teams LITERALLY running up to the podium to make their selections before Minnesota could change it's mind.

the allotment disappears with the signing of the contract. As of march 20, the Saints were $20 million under the cap.

http://www.theredzone.org/caproom.asp

This doesn't indicate whether the RAP is included.

According to the rules, the RAP is a cap within a cap. It limits how much a team can spend on its draft choices and undrafted rookies. Last year, the Saints had $3.6 million, while Tampa, picking #2, had just over $6million. Assuming inflation to $7 million, that's the maximum the Saints can spend on salaries and pro-rated bonuses this year.

If we are indeed $14 million under including the RAP, then we should have plenty of money to sign FA's. However, $7 million is not a lot of money for a "franchise qb" like Lienart or Young plus other selections. Either would demand a significant proportion of the total, and a large proportion for the qb position overall realtive to the total cap room. Still not the best negotiating position.

Less hate, thanks whodi.

Well....I still think the Saints have some leverage. Ok...lets say we called our bluff on the QB Chase....that does not mean that other teams will not want that spot to secure one of these Qb's. There are many teams in this league that need arm assistance......with us sitting at #2....I know we shouldn't trade toooo far down but.....I'm sure some team will give up quite a bit for that spot. Or we can go with plan b....pick a kick ass player.

Okay, this, I have to say, is a TERRIBLE idea. First, when the Vikes dropped a couple of slots in that draft, which they actually did two years in a row unbelievably enough, it wasn't intentional. They were slow making a decision, and got leap frogged. Second, in doing somethingl ike that, all you open yourself up to is an agent saying "Well, player A would have been the second pick in the draft had your FO not been incompetent, therefore we want 2nd pick money," and get in a contract battle. Of ALL the things I could see happening draft day, I hope this is the farthest thing from the Saints mind, AND we don't make the Minnesota blunder.

I'm with you. I don't understand why it's not ok to take Hawk at 2, but perfectly reasonable to take him at 5? A needs a need, and an impact player is an impact player, regardless of position. Unless I'm mistaken, Ray Lewis wasn't in the top 10. Would Ray Lewis be the 1st overall pick if you knew what his career would turn out to be (minus the murder)? Um, yes.

xan my man,

This was after we signed Brees right? Then hell, we are in a better position than we thought. Way better. We may have more like 16-18 mil in cap room instead of 14 mil. I likes the sounds of that.

Next, as much as you wanna knock the FO, we ALL know Loomis is a shrew cap guy. One of the best. So I know you have to feel he knows what he's doing with the cap room we have, and the alotted money for the #2 pick in the draft. I guarantee he does. AND, rookie contracts can be laced with performance and playing time incentives. So the first year cap hit may not even be that high, although the signing bonues will be announced at about 14-20 mil, depending on who we draft. Left we forget, a bonus can be split over the lifeof the contract, so even if player A got a 20 mil bonus on a 6 year contract, guess what, the bonus hit would only be 3.3 mil or so. Add salary, you are looking at maybe 5-7 mil in initial cap hit. OR, the Saints, having the cap room, could choose to pay a lot of the bonus against this year's cap, and free up money for next year. So buddy, trust me, your doom and gloom is unwarranted in relation to the cap and our #2 pick. We have more than enough money to accomplish whatever we need.

I'll try to stay top line rather than detail, so...

Teams behind the Saints, especially the Jets, Titans and Raiders, have qb issues. Other teams lower down may have the same issues, but they'd have to trade their entire draft this year and potentially all of next year to trade up based on value charts and no team will pull a Ditka again. These three teams have major holes on both sides of the ball besides qb. The Jets carry 3 qbs on their roster, and could pass on a qb without much worry, and the Raiders have AB (HA!) and could potentially wait for a lesser name. Only the Titans have a truly open issue, but picking third assures them of at least the choice of two of three qbs; resolving McNair before the draft would make their urgency disappear.

If the Saints chose other than a qb, then each team will probably get one of the three qbs.
If any or all of the teams negotiate with the Saints to move up, each of the teams would, most likely, get one of the three qbs.

If the Saints select a qb, two of the three could select a qb.
One could trade for the Saints qb selection. Once selected, only the most interested in that qb may be willing to give full value. Otherwise the value of the selection would diminish immediately. Ultimately, a team must have no other option in order to make that trade.
--- At #3, the titans have other options. Moving up one spot may not be worth sacrificing a much needed 35th pick. They could trade down and still get their man.
--- At #4 the Jets have many other options, including trading down themselves; full value would be 4/29/71 - a half Ditka.
--- At #7 the Raiders would have to sacrifice the most in order to move up. It is not clear that with the holes that team has that they'd be willing to give up their entire draft this year and some of next (full Ditka) for a qb that they might still get anyway. Kerry Collins got pummelled last year, and whomever they put in won't fare much better without help. They've got little cap room and haven't signed but a handful of FA's, including Brooks. Unlikely that this team will trade up for more risk.

If there were only one qb of this talent, I'd definitely say we're in the catbird seat. But with three legitimate qbs for top 7 selection, the threat to take any one of them is not great. My point about Brees is that signing him to such a huge contract signals too much ambivalence about drafting a qb, making it a less valuable chip to trade down.

If you were the Titans', Jets', or Raiders' GM and you knew that if the TRADE turns horribly wrong and would end your career next year, would you do it?

Why are you QB focused? Mario Williams has been called the best player in the draft. So has Ferguson. So has Hawk. Guess what, WE HAVE A NEED FOR ALL THREE(except maybe Williams, but we have at least thrown his name out there). So if any team, say GB, wanted say, Mario Williams, they'd have to trade with us, CAUSE WE MUDDIED THE WATER BY SIGNING BREES. For the life of me I can't understand why this is so difficult. I think you are sold on this point, and are gonna ride it out no matter what anyone says, so i'll leave you to that. But if you honestly believe that being pigeon holed into taking a QB is better than having ALL available top draft picks linked to us, and therefore having ALL teams interested in one of 4-5 players having to go through us, I really don't know what to tell you. Let the pessimism continue to roll I guess.

As far as getting value, Lord man, let it go already. If we get ANYTHING to trade down that still keeps us in the top 5, WE WIN. More picks and still get a bad as player we want. How in the world is that a losing deal? Who cares if we don;t get a Ditka draft worth of picks. NOONE is stupid enough to do anything like that again anyway. This draft is DEEP and any extra picks we get will be impact players. But whatever. I do not have the willpower to any longer battle such ingrained pessimism. If you are resigned to the fact we have horribly screwed ourselves beyond redemption, you have at that.

Look... the whole league can see that the contract we gave Brees may very well be a 1 year contract. So, I do not see how it lessens the threat of us selecting one of the 3 potential franchise quarterbacks inthe draft. I like the way we structured the contract and therefore I do not see how it lessens the trade value of our #2 pick.

:itsgood: Ding ding.

That pretty much covers it. :notworthy:

All right. No more. I'm clearly distressed about this and am unable to convey how much it pisses me off not to be economical and savvy given how confoundingly uneconomical and unsavvy this team has been in the past. I will concede that signing Brees was a good thing (but not his contract). I will concede that getting anything by trading down but remain within the top 5 would be beneficial. I will concede that we are going to be lucky to get any of the top 7 players in this draft without having to give up anything to get them. But I won't concede that we should be a lot further along with this team and that if anything we should be looking to extend value wherever possible and I don't think this FO has made good economic value choices. We'll just have to agree to disagree about how other GM's are viewing the Saints' offseason moves and how they will adjust to whatever options the Saints present. God I hope that I'm wrong and that there's a sucker out there.