Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Look at this list of Scouts inc top 32.
Is there a player in the top 20 you wouldn't want?
I think we'll get a stud at 16 and the options are endless. Even if you back out DE, it still leaves a great group for us to chose from at 16.
Actually I think we could trade down to the 20's and simply pull a name out of a hat and still land a good player. No wonder so mant teams want to trade down. No way we could screw this up, eh?
This is a good year to have multiple 1st day picks. I wouldn't be surprised to see a record number of draft day trades, for both picks and current players.

1. Braylon Edwards WR SR Michigan 1
2. Ronnie Brown RB SR Auburn 2
3. Mike Williams WR JR USC 3
4. Aaron Rodgers QB JR Cal-Berkeley 4
5. Alex Smith QB JR Utah 5
6. Antrel Rolle DC SR Miami-Fla. 6
7. Carnell Williams RB SR Auburn 7
8. Adam Jones DC JR West Virginia 8
9. Derrick Johnson OLB SR Texas 9
10. Cedric Benson RB SR Texas 12
11. Shawne Merriman DE JR Maryland 10
12. Carlos Rogers DC SR Auburn 11
13. Alex Barron OT SR Florida State 13
14. Troy Williamson WR JR South Carolina 14
15. David Pollack DE SR Georgia 16
16. Marcus Spears DE SR LSU 17
17. Travis Johnson DT SR Florida State 18
18. Erasmus James DE SR Wisconsin 18
19. Mark Clayton WR SR Oklahoma 19
20. DeMarcus Ware DE SR Troy 24
21. Thomas Davis DS JR Georgia 22
22. Dan Cody DE SR Oklahoma 20
23. Shaun Cody DT SR USC 21
24. Jammal Brown OT SR Oklahoma 27
25. Heath Miller TE JR Virginia 25
26. Khalif Barnes OT SR Washington 25
27. Marlin Jackson DC SR Michigan 26
28. Roddy White WR SR UAB NR
29. Matt Roth DE SR Iowa 28
30. Fabian Washington DC JR Nebraska 29
31. Brodney Pool DS JR Oklahoma NR
32. Jason Campbell QB SR Auburn NR

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Did you steal that list from my other thread? Thief. lol

I\'ll give you some misses for us though in the top 20. Cadillac or Benson, but they don\'t really count since we have no shot or need for them, unless they fall to 16 and someone wants to trade us a starting LB for one. And Pollack. No way on him. Also James, Ware, and Clayton. No, no, and no. So we CAN miss, hopefully we won\'t.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

See, my rationale is just like yours in most cases. However this year I just can\'t agree. When so many teams are looking to trade out of the top 10 and so few teams are looking to trade INTO the top 10, I think it\'s the time to pull the trigger to trade up, ESPECIALLY when we are coveting DJ. We can probably trade into the top 10 cheaper this year than we could for any other year.

I don\'t take what Jarrod Breaux said totally for the truth, but he does raise an interesting point. We have been movers and shakers ever since Haz and Loomy took over. I would be willing to bet my left kidney that we don\'t stay at 16, and it\'ll be a trade to get DJ or Antrel Rolle.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

I\'m with that line of thinking GT. Also, watching the ESPN two hour draft special yesterday, they also noted this may be the first year trade ups may not go exactly by the draft value chart. Just cause people say there is no clear cut #1 in the draft, doesn\'t mean there isn\'t a clear cut #1 for us. DJ or Rolle are those guys. We maybe able to bilk someone into lettign us get them this year. This is an almost perfect draft for us in that noone knows who the best guy is.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

The list looks good at first -- but let us look at only our most pressing needs (and I am removing those at DE which I do not think could make it at DT

1. Antrel Rolle DC SR Miami-Fla. 6
2. Adam Jones DC JR West Virginia 8
3. Derrick Johnson OLB SR Texas 9
4. Shawne Merriman DE JR Maryland 10
5. Carlos Rogers DC SR Auburn 11
6. Alex Barron OT SR Florida State 13
7. Marcus Spears DE SR LSU 17
8. Travis Johnson DT SR Florida State 18
9. Thomas Davis DS JR Georgia 22
10. Dan Cody DE SR Oklahoma 20
11. Shaun Cody DT SR USC 21
12. Jammal Brown OT SR Oklahoma 27
13. Khalif Barnes OT SR Washington 25
14. Marlin Jackson DC SR Michigan 26
15. Fabian Washington DC JR Nebraska 29
16. Brodney Pool DS JR Oklahoma NR

Now which ones probably will be there at 16 -- Maybe T. Johnson, Davis -- I think both are good picks but is this what we need -- Davis is a safety -- can he play linebacker -- who knows -- Johnson is suited for for a 3-4 can play DE or linebacker but we really need a DT --- I\'d take an OT but would prefer alinebacker -- so I am in complete agreement that we shuld move up and take Mr Texas

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Exactly whodi.

I would say that if we were able to get into Tenn\'s #6 for sure, then we have to do it. It\'s guaranteed that either DJ, Rolle, or Mike Williams will be in that spot, most likely two out of the three. Wouldn\'t you say that all of these guys are worth the trade?????

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Looking at the Tenn draft scenario it looks like they would like all the picks they can get, They have a boat load already! I think a trade, if we can deal Howard will happen with them. Here\'s an article stating their unique situation and all their picks.

It\'s form ESPN: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft0...ory?id=2037991

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

johnson can play linebacker? he\'s a DT...

but taking a DT in the first is a bad Idea IMO..but one that we probably will do.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

I am telling you right now GT if those three guys are available, I would not be mad about taking any of them. Williams would be the future at WR and could start day one. Rolle and DJ, well, nuff said there. We have to do something like this if we want a guy who will contribute this year, as it was stated. But I am willing to forego taking defense for Mike Williams. I would not be mad at all were we to draft him. I know some would, but not me. That guy is a beast.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

I agree whodi...we shouldn\'t miss, but we still can. No De\'s,Wr\'s, or RB\'s

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

He played LB at Georgia. Actually a rover position which is kinda a LB/SS combo.
He\'s no bigger a questionmark at LB at the next level than Derrick Johnson or Kevin Burnnet

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Why is this still even an issue?

HE HAS THE TALENT TO PLAY BOTH.
HE IS NOT A TWEENER!

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Assuming he sticks around until #16 (and that we stay there, which I think there\'s a good chance we won\'t), I\'m thinking more and more about OT Alex Barron. OT is still a need, and the choice would give us some good - and relatively young - talent along the O-line. Talented veteran OT\'s usually require quite a paycheck, so getting a good one early in the draft seems to make sense.

I agree we need defense, too. But I wonder if we wouldn\'t get more by grabbing Barron and praying for a Barrett Ruud or Kevin Burnett to fall to us at #40. Still, Jay Bellamy ain\'t gonna last forever - and there are still doubts about Mel Mitchell - so Thomas Davis bears consideration too.

[Edited on 19/4/2005 by mutineer10]

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

I would\'nt be surprized if we were to drop back and get the TE from VA, and trade boo for a later round pick. Makes since being we have\'nt had a good TE since haz has been here. Just a thought, who knows. They will prob pull a jaw droper and pick someone that makes no sense.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

I\'d be shocked. Don\'t see how that really helps us.
If they trade up, they better not overpay. Don\'t overpay for the pick and don\'t overpay for the player either. Get DJ at #10 or don\'t get him at all. Don\'t trade up for a CB. Staying at 16 is still a very good option. I like Barron and Brown, Rogers and Davis. Davis somewhat less probably. One of them will fall.

I also think this could be a draft where teams deliberately don\'t pick like the Vikings last year. Get the player you want, but save a few million dollars.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Of course we can miss at #16. History teaches us that on draft day, just about every one of the players taken in the first round will be a consensus \"first round value\" player. Maybe a couple of guys will be \"reaches\" that some teams will have considered a \"second round guy\", but for the most part, all of those names you listed will be the names filling the slots after the first round is over--the only variable will be the actual order. But basically, all the players whose names appear in all of the first round mocks leading up to the draft will be the names there after the first round\'s over. The problem is that simple history tells us that a few years from now roughly half of those players will not have proven to be \"worthy\" of a first round selection. Oh, they won\'t necessarily be \"busts\" per se, because they still will likely play to the level of a No. 2 or No. 3 or whatever...just not first round quality. It\'s one of the few things that Mel Kiper gets right, and it\'s because it\'s more a matter of going back to \"re-evaluate\" the draftees after a few years rather than \"projecting\" beforehand how they\'ll do. And the parameters you use to make your projections (production as a collegian, measurable physical attributes, etc.) often end up not being nearly as valid as \"predictors of success\" as we all like to think every year at this time. But what else to you have to go on? Of course you take the guy who ran for all the yardage, or made all the tackles, or had the most reps on the bench press....because it seems like an even bigger gamble to take a guy who didn\'t produce, or who ran the 40 like a turtle. But that helps to point out what the draft really is, after all--a gamble. Like any Vegas gambler, you try to stack the odds in your favor as much as you can, but when push comes to shove, you still have to roll the dice.

So can we miss at #16? I say of course--if it\'s like most every other year, and 16 of those 32 original names you listed end up being \"worth\" a No. 1 and 16 don\'t, then you start out with roughly a 50-50 chance at \"missing\" from the get-go. All 32 of those guys look like first rounders today, but only half will three years from now.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Oh, by the way....I\'m in the very small (but apparently growing, from some of the stuff I\'m reading) minority who think Johnson, Williams, and Davis have the most potential to not live up to their draft hype and eventual selection placement.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

that sounds like a donte,sully,devery kind of thing........
just what are you saying, lol.....................smitty

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

While I agree with your take 100% Williams/Johnson, I don\'t agree on Davis (as an OLB).

He\'s earned his reputation while mostly playing close to the line of scrimmage, which is exactly what WLB\'s do in the NFL. He\'s the perfect size/speed/instincts to become the next Derrick Brooks, only bigger and faster. Just because he was forced to play safety at UGA doesn\'t mean he\'s an NFL safety.
I think he\'d start day one at WLB for this team.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

I\'ll wade into this only long enough to say:

\"Can\'t miss\" and \"Saints\" in the same sentence is a recipe for disaster. You would know that if you hadn\'t intentionally forgot the name Jonathan Sullivan. ;)

These kinds of predictions make me nervous Danno, ma-boy.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

While I was being a bit sarcastic I think if you take away one player we\'ve done pretty good with our top few picks. That one glaring mistake still leaves a bad taste though. But not too bad if you consider Howard, Grant, McAllister, Bentley, Stallworth, Smith, Watson.

Last year I listed 5 players I\'d be happy with. We picked the 5th on my list, after the 1st 4 were gone. We\'re on a roll dude. ;)

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Jonathan Sullivan was SUPPOSED to be a really good DT. Fact of the matter is, he has done realitively nothing since coming to the Saints. I don\'t put too much blame on the FO for taking him. IMO everyone you draft could be a bust. The guy looked great coming out of college, the fact that he never lived up to expectations is hardly all of the FO/Coaches fault. Sully looked very promising, but he is nothing but an overpaid benchwarmer. Bottom line is, you can\'t say the Saints really screwed up by taking him, when at the time, he was a very good prospect. Thats Monday Morning Quarterbacking, and we all know that isn\'t relative to the situation when it arises. I\'m sure the FO and coaches are really kicking theirselves in the b@lls about drafting fatty, but they couldn\'t have forcasted this. If so, they never would have drafted him.

The Saints could draft DJ and he could end up on the bench or injury ridden. It\'s all a big gamble.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Well, actually you can blame them cause sully was rated as the 5th or 6th best DT in the draft, and we took him second. Passing on a pro bowler in Kevin Williams, and a damn good corner in Trufant. That\'s exactly why they catch so much heat for that pick. They are absolutely 100% to blame for blowing that one. Except for the 3rd rounds of almost every draft, they have faired okay outside of that.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Sorry bro...not the same thing. I don\'t think you\'ll find any record of ANYONE ANYWHERE saying Sully was a can\'t miss. I didn\'t even know who he was until the Saints picked him. I thought they had traded up to get Terrell Suggs.

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

Can't miss at 16, can we?
 

This last pos was confusing baron as Vilma and Dansby were not in the same draft as Sullivan.