I disagree with you on the basis that your comparison is not apples to apples... And a few other things. I wouldn't say that I trust our drafting, at all. I'd love to have proven commodities. But I have a couple of problems with Butler. He does not play a position of need for us. As I said earlier, I realize that we have to count on Williams and Breaux to stay healthy, but when they're out there, they are pretty good. They aren't perfect, but they are also young. Injuries can happen to anyone. It's not like they blew out their knees. Williams is coming off a significant concussion which becomes problematic if he has too many of those, but as of now he should be a full go.

Do we really need to shell out a high draft pick for another corner? Here's another problem I have with Butler: He comes from a system that is known to make players look better than they are. What makes us so sure that he is a "proven" commodity? And others have mentioned, accurately, that Butler also hasn't matched up very much with the other team's number 1, and plays in a weak division for QB's. Again, is he really THAT proven? Sure, the draft is a crap shoot. How much better have we fared with free agents and trades? Remember guys like Tebucky Jones and Dwight Smith? Those were "can't miss" guys, as was Jairus Byrd, whom most of us thought was a star at the time. Jason David? Aubrayo Franklin, Sean Rogers, David Hawthorne and on it goes.

I would certainly say that Loomis and company doesn't have the greatest track record in identifying "stars" but despite that, it is nevertheless necessary to take calculated risks from time to time. You mentioned the Vilma deal, and that was a great trade. For two reasons: One was that we didn't give up all that much. The other was that we desperately needed a middle linebacker and a leader for a defense that was just atrocious. And, thankfully, he was one who lived up to expectations.

Butler, in my opinion, is not worth that kind of risk. For one, we're not talking about a second rounder, we're talking about the number 11 pick. I'm all for commodities over unknowns, but if we're not getting a pass rusher as that "proven commodity" then I'd rather keep my pick and take my chances with that. Because, as I illustrated with the failed signings, you never really know 100% what you are going to get from any player, anyway. But in any instance you should not sell out for something that isn't of great need.

When we traded for Mike McKenzie all those years ago, that was a great deal. We needed a corner desperately, and he was a really good player. Unfortunately the rest of the defense sucked for a couple of years, but he was a huge upgrade. We are thin as crap at DE right now. Selling our top pick for a corner seems like a bad idea at the moment.

The Saints are talking about giving up a 1st for Butler.

I know. I just wrote an essay, basically, on why I don't like that.

And it isn't just talk. If the Saints actually want Butler, they have no choice. The Patriots are not going to match any offer we make, and we all know it. That means we give up our #11, automatically.

Not if he signs the tender and then they trade him. The Saints can then replace that tender with an agreed upon long-term deal. A 1st rounder doesn't come into play at all.

That is taking the assumption that the Patriots would be willing to trade him rather than make the Saints, or some other team, sign him and give up their first round pick. Even if they do trade him to us, what makes you think they wouldn't ask for one of our first rounders?

Simple, don't do the deal. This time the Saints have the leverage. It's Butler that wants out and the Patriots have to give or the Saints simply move on. I wouldn't be surprised if it was already agreed upon when making the Cooks deal. The Saints pony up first and the Patriots return the favor. Don't forget, Belichick and Payton are good friends and they are the ones pulling the triggers, not Loomis.

One would hope that they wouldn't do the deal, if that's the case. I'm not convinced of that, however. I realize that Payton and Belichick are friends, but I don't know that it means they will be returning any favors. If they were willing to do that, then why not just trade Cooks for Butler the other day?

Don't forget that there are other suitors for Butler if the Saints don't pony up.

That means we give up our #11, automatically.

Scott F

"it doesn't, because that's not how it works. Look at Lee's post.
We get a deal with him in principle, and then call NE and work the trade (That second part is probably already done). He signs the 3.9 tender with them, gets traded to us, and then signs his new deal.
Zero percent chance we are giving up #11 for him in any scenario"


Once again, what makes you think the Patriots are going to trade him on OUR terms? What I'm talking about is if the Saints sign him to an offer sheet, and the Patriots don't match. That would, in fact, mean that they automatically lose their 11th pick. You're saying you think he'll be traded. Fine. That's your opinion, and perhaps you're right, which is something I already said to Lee about his post.

But IF the Pats trade him to us, what makes anyone believe we'll get the better end of that deal? They will at the very least ask for the #32 pick, and possibly a late round pick thrown in, after seeing how the Cooks trade went down.

The worst thing, in my opinion, is that we don't need Butler. And I don't believe he is what the Saints think he is. And before someone comes in and says the ole one liner of "the Saints know better than you do", I'll remind them of Brandon Browner, Jason David, Stanley Jean-Baptiste and Patrick Robinson, to name a few. They are not immune to badly misjudging cornerbacks.

If they get him, I won't be real excited, but I'll obviously be wishing him the best.