Argument against this?
 

If we package our second round pick with 13 we could move to 6, by still having 31 that effectively still gives us a second round selection with 2 third rounders to come. I don't think this is a bad scenario at all.

Re: Argument against this?
 

I do. Most of the talent is in rounds 2- the top of 5. We don't need to move it. Stay put and take BPA or move down and get more picks.

Re: Argument against this?
 

GOT YA, FROM WHAT I have read is there about 10 maybe 12 top guys and then a ton of guys with exactly the same talent level. So to me being outside that spot where the top talent is you trade up, and then you still have 2 3rds, and 31.

You end up with top 6 pick, and still have 3 more in first 3. No??

Re: Argument against this?
 

NO, NO, & NO!!!!!!!! Stay put.

Re: Argument against this?
 

I like the Idea.

There are two guys I really want, and I don't think either will be there at 13.

Beasley and Shelton.

If we move up and give up our 2nd rounder for one of those guys ill be happy about it.

Re: Argument against this?
 

We have too much talent in the first two rounds to trade a pick away.......but if I did it would be for Shelton.

Re: Argument against this?
 

I can legitimately see Loomis doing just that. Weren't they in talks with Washington about trading up? I don't think that would be a bad idea,but I would really like to see them trade our 13 and a player so we can keep our second....that would be nice.

Re: Argument against this?
 

I agree and not even for Shelton. We can find someone else. You said it. There's too much talent in the first two rounds to trade a pick away.

Re: Argument against this?
 

I've gone back and forth on this.

But have to say; only losing one of our 2nd round picks to grab a game-changer is tempting.

Re: Argument against this?
 

The Saints have been trading up and losing picks, but it really hasn't worked. Now they find themselves in a position where they need immediate help at several positions. With three picks in the first 44 they have the chance to fill a few of those needs with quality starters. If the Saints were one star player away from the Superbowl it would be different, but they are not. With 9 picks they are set up to make significant improvement with young players. Brees time is limited, the Saints can't afford to blow another draft.

Re: Argument against this?
 

Sure, but a roster is only 51 guys. Are you saying all 9 draft picks will make the roster/PS?

Look if we lose one pick to grab a difference maker and still have 4 picks in the top 78, I'm feeling pretty good.

Re: Argument against this?
 

I say stay put at 13 and if you wanna trade up I say ok do it with the 31st pick trade a 3rd and 5th to move up to the low 20's but besides that stay where we are for the first 3 rounds


But I also wanna use the first 3 picks on defense we still have enough offense that we will be alright but defense we need all the help we can get not impressed with the guys they have added too that side of the ball at all

Ideally i'd take a pass rusher and a corner in the first round

Re: Argument against this?
 

No, the 3rd through 7th is a real crap shot. However the more picks you have there the more likely you are to hit on one or two. The first 3 picks are where the odds are high and the Saints need to hit on all three. Like I said, they aren't one great player away they are several quality starters away.

Re: Argument against this?
 

Saints only have one second rounder. Saints have two third rounders.

Re: Argument against this?
 

Trading up for what???

I can see maybe moving up to 10 and getting the best CB in the draft but stay put and take our chances. We have to let the draft play out.

Re: Argument against this?
 

31 is all but a second, and then we have two 3's. so moving to six with 13 and 44, IMHO, makes sense. We still end up with 3 picks after that...

So basically we give up 1 pick to move 7 spots, not bad and you still end up with 4 picks in first 3

I am not saying we will, I am just saying it is good value if we do

Re: Argument against this?
 

Thank you for correcting me.

I could see our draft play out like this:

Trade a 2nd to get a higher 1st. Then draft at 31

Trade a 4th to get back into the 2nd.

Re: Argument against this?
 

I dont think we NEED to hit on any picks to have a shot at the title this year.

We have a ton of talent with very minimal holes. You could argue this team has more talent than last years, we just need them to play to their potential.

I say trade up with #31 and target Beasley, keep 13 and see who falls.

Re: Argument against this?
 

Still doesn't make sense to me. Rounds 1 & 2 can be a crap shoot too.

Quantity of picks doesn't equate to good drafting.

And maybe the coaches and players do feel like they're 2-3 impact players away from making a difference.

Re: Argument against this?
 

If you want to play with words knock yourself out, but 31st pick is a first round pick and comes with a 5th year option. A second round pick does not. As I said, the Saints have one 2nd round pick. As for moving up, they shouldn't. They should keep all of their picks and take BPA.

Re: Argument against this?
 

NO NO NO NO NO NO

just stay at 13 and 31, take BPA with both picks

Re: Argument against this?
 

Agree, or trade down for more picks.

Re: Argument against this?
 

It takes another team to trade down, it's not as easy as you think

Re: Argument against this?
 

play with words, okay it is a first that is two picks ahead of a second, who cares, it is as good as a second, so we are not losing anything there. Again, I am not saying we will, but if the guy we want requires it I say we pull the trigger

Re: Argument against this?
 

I understand your point, but that wasn't when we had 5 picks in the first 3 rounds

Re: Argument against this?
 

our 4rth went for Unger

Re: Argument against this?
 

There ya go, and if we're lucky we can trade everything and own the entire 7th round...

Why the hell would we need more than 9 pick...?

Re: Argument against this?
 

Didn't say it was easy. I simply meant if they have the opportunity they should trade down.

Re: Argument against this?
 

Under Loomis/Peyton the Saints seldom trade down, most times they trade up

Re: Argument against this?
 

You guys do know who our GM is right? Do you really think he's magically going to get conservative with the draft? Loomis trades up... Even when he doesn't have the extra draft picks to make easier. I don't think we trade up from 13... But we're using that extra 3rd round pick to help us move up from 31 or 44.

Re: Argument against this?
 

And that has been the problem, trading out of 13 statigically could net us another player in the mid 2nd to early 3rd where there will still be value players to be had. Each year it is like a feeding frensy at certain positions then another and so on. If we are in a position in the top 3 rounds with two 1st say 25 and 31 and now sitting on two 2nd and two thirds with multiple picks in the 5th thru 7th we will be able to manuever to whatever player we choose or set up multiple picks for next season, thats how the Patriots do each year to fill needs. Even at 44 a team wanting a player will give their 1st next year repeat the process next season and so on. The Patriots are smart and in contintion every year because of solid players using the draft to their advantage.

Re: Argument against this?
 

That's a good possibility too

Re: Argument against this?
 

As previously said, been there and tried that. None of them can you definitively say that it was a home run and the absolute right thing to do; in fact really the exact opposite, more of a disaster, the latest of which Ingram can't be characterized as that, but still not a home run. The more numbers we get, the better the chance to hit on a player or two. It's worked for the Patriots, Baltimore, and Seattle. And there is a compensatory picks side benefit, as well as a more cap friendly roster. FO obviously has to perform their due diligence prior to the draft.

So if anything in this draft, move down if our top 10 does not fall down to us, and pick up more picks, maybe even an extra second or third round pick.

Re: Argument against this?
 

If by some miracle we could move up for Williams without giving up a draft pick; say, by moving Cam Jordan; I'd be game for moving up. Cam is a good player, but he either isn't giving us the production he could, or he's not the best scheme fit imo.

Re: Argument against this?
 

How many times under SP have we moved up for a player in the first round?

Re: Argument against this?
 

In reverse order:
SP
Brandin Cooks - Promising but jury is still out
Mark Ingram - Did not get value, but not a bust
Sedrick Ellis - Total Bust
Hazbeen
Jammal Brown - Did not get value
Jonathan Sullivan - Total Bust
Charles Grant - Did not get value
Mike Ditka
Ricky Williams - Did not get value
Chris Naole - Did not get value



List of New Orleans Saints first-round draft picks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Plenty of head scratchers in that list...

Re: Argument against this?
 

How many times have we traded players under Payton ? Maybe he finally can see that the route they have taken and the outcome could have been avoided. Take Cooks for example(I like the guy but a 1st and 3rd) when we could have traded down and picked up Matthews and had another pick. Graham for Unger and the 31st were kind of out of character for Payton. 7-9 I feel lit a fire under Paytons butt what is better than that opened his eyes.

Re: Argument against this?
 

IIRC Brees and Cooks were the only two players that were NOT on the trading block when free agency started

Re: Argument against this?
 

Looking back, Ditkas was insane or just cashing a paycheck or both. WTH trading up for Naole, the Williams deal I can at least rationalize in my head but this deal makes no sense what so ever

Re: Argument against this?
 

I would rather have 2 first round picks and a second then only one first