Re: Daryl Washington
 

We've been over this topic before in this forum. You don't take risks on guys with highly checkered pasts, with big money deals or high draft picks. Taking a flyer on a guy for likely a league minimum deal to see what he can do, isn't a risk. Our future isn't going to be mortgaged if he isn't any good, or fails a drug test.

All of this fear tied to who gets released at the bottom of a 90 man roster is a bit overly dramatic, in my opinion. I doubt the Saints will sign him, but since the question is about what we would do, I would rather give a guy a shot who has a chance to impact my team IF he's gotten himself right, than to save a spot for some guy who MIGHT make my practice squad, and perhaps contribute on special teams if everything goes right.

Re: Daryl Washington
 

We have talent on the roster that needs to be developed. We have coaches who are known for developing talent. We are stacked at LB'er if you ask me. If everyone stays healthy.......eight out of ten making it through the entire season we should be fine. I expect Ellerbe to miss a few games but Anzalone should step in and do a fine job. We have good competition at all three LB'er positions and the Sam is a rotational player at best. So........no thanks to bringing in a troubled player.

Re: Daryl Washington
 

He apparantly doesn't want his tires kicked for vet minimum.

Daryl Washington wouldn't take pay cut to play for Cardinals

https://twitter.com/mikejurecki/stat...r-cardinals%2F

Re: Daryl Washington
 

And you don't suppose that, after he has tested the free agent market, he will figure out that nobody wants to pay above the minimum for a guy that hasn't played in 3 years? Whoever signs him is not going to pay above that, if they have any clue about what they're doing. And if some team is that clueless, so be it. If, in fact, no one IS willing to pay him more than the minimum, then I'm saying why shouldn't the Saints give him a shot?

To me, it's a no brainer for the talent, at that price.

Re: Daryl Washington
 

So, you are saying that if 31 other teams don't want him that the Saints should pick him up? That would make the Saints either smarter, or stupider, than all the other teams. I just don't see a player that is one mistake away from a lifetime ban as being worth even a vet minimum.

Re: Daryl Washington
 

Forrest Hightower does NOT approve this message.

Re: Daryl Washington
 

No.

I am saying that it's doubtful any team will pay him more than the minimum, due to his three year absence, and the reasons for that absence. That doesn't mean teams won't want him. But he's going to make his way around the league trying to gauge the interest teams have, and what they are willing to pay, and he will find that teams will be reluctant to take a big financial risk. But at the right price, most teams in need of linebackers will be more than happy to bring him to camp, I am certain.

And, as I eluded to earlier, once Washington comes to the realization that he's not the one with leverage in any negotiation, it becomes a matter of who he wants to play for among the teams that offer him. And why shouldn't the Saints make an offer? So what if he gets banned? I hope for his sake that he has straightened himself out, but as far as our team is concerned it's not a big deal if he doesn't work out. That's toilet paper money in the NFL, and we all know it.

The potential reward is greater than that of paying basically anonymous camp bodies to almost inevitably get cut. You're taking the same financial "risk" with those guys, not because they might get banned, but because they aren't likely to contribute.

Re: Daryl Washington
 

So what if he gets banned? You would have gone through training camp and into the season expecting him to be part of the team. If he gets banned it is just like losing a player to injury. It creates a hole. We saw what effect that had on the Saints last season. It may not be worth the risk to many teams and I would expect the Saints to be one of those not wanting to take the risk.

Re: Daryl Washington
 

Just as long as he stays away from Vaccarro he might make it. This isn't what I get Vaccarro gets love on here but any other player gets shut down for the same type of things. Kind of a two sided coin going on in my opionion. Why not kick the tires if Vaccarro got to stay?

Re: Daryl Washington
 

So you just want to look at this in any negative way you possibly can, I guess?

I have already addressed your question before you asked it. There is basically ZERO risk in signing someone to a vet minimum. I don't know for an absolute fact that some team won't offer him more, but if he becomes available for the minimum, I'd make the offer. Why is that not a risk? Because you don't go into camp "expecting" him to make the team, as you put it. You pay high dollar for guys you EXPECT to make it.

If he doesn't make the team, nobody gets hurt but him. If he makes the team, he's not taking a spot away from some pro bowl caliber player. He'd be earning that spot over someone he is better than. If he gets banned during the season, what have you lost? Who did we cut in order for him to make the team that would be so great? Stupar? Mauti? Feeney? Players of that caliber will be floating around all season if anything would happen. And the biggest thing is you wouldn't have lost much money to speak of.