I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

I've let myself become too fascinated with all of the highly talented players in the draft.

What I mean is: " I think about how one of the CBs might fall in our lap.". Or some other player at another position.

But the fact of the matter is, I think the only way the draft is truly going to upgrade our defense if is we draft a LB or a DT. And as strange as it might sound ... We might actually be weaker at DT than LB. Drafting a DT would not hurt my feelings at all.

I'll take a DT over a CB any day of the week!!

Drafting a CB in the 1st round would be very very foolish IMO. And I don't care if the best CB drops to us at #16.

Unless that CB can stop the run, then I'll pass.

Oh, yeah ... I know, we can always pick up a LB in the 2nd round.

Yeah, well .... according to most of the experts, all the LBs in the 2nd are not expected to be probowl caliber LBs.

IMHO ... We need a "play-maker" at LB. We need that one guy who can make a game-changing play.

Are all the years of watching sub-standard play at LB starting to affect my decision making? You bet!!

And I hope it's affecting Loomis and Haslett too!!!

I'd rather come out of this draft with the highest rated LB rather than 5 guys who might make an impact.

I'm tired or hoping one of our LBs step-up.

Maybe it is an over-reaction. But, at this point ... I'd rather over-react than under-react.

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

I would consider one of the top CBs should he fall right to us...but like you, I\'m more inclined to jump on a DT that does the same. I personally don\'t see a \"runstuffer\" LB worthy of a first round selection in this year\'s draft (both Johnson and Davis--if move to WLB--are more \"run \'em down\" LBs than \"plug the gap\" guys), so the best course of action if we\'re intent on improving our run defense is to jump on a top DT should he fall, or go with one of the top three OT if a DT doesn\'t.

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

THANK YOU GUMBO!!!! I have been saying this for weeks. It\'s all about the playmakers. I\'m tired of drafting mediocre players who we believe will \"make a difference.\" I\'m with you all the way.

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

I\'m tellin\' you guys ... I\'m sick of us needing LBs. Sick, I tell ya!!

Maybe the dome-patrol made me fall in love with great LBs.

Or maybe Orlando Ruff and crew made me hate our LBs.

I don\'t know. But I do know I\'m sick of worring about LBs.

What\'s it gonna take to get a play-making LB?

It\'s not like I\'m asking Loomis and Haslett to solve world hunger.

Just get me a damn play-making LB!!!

PLEASE!!!

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

Again, awfully close to criticism. ;)

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

Dude, I criticize this team all the time. You don\'t think I see the problems with this team? Come on!!

The thing is ... I just don\'t expect the worst and DWELL on the past like some of you do.

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

To answer your question, no I do not think you see the problems with this team. :P

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

The problem with this team is Aaron Brooks. He can\'t read defenses and racks up stats in garbage time.

And Joe Horn makes him look better than what he is.

If only we would have had another QB then we would have been in the playoffs every year.

It\'s a damn shame. A damn shame, I tell ya!!!

[Edited on 22/4/2005 by GumboBC]

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

A little over the top, but you are getting warmer. :P

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

Given the changes in the rules that CB\'s have in the passing game since last season--I\'m not sure there\'s a CB in this year\'s class worth giving a 1st rounder for.

I don\'t see a true 2 gap DT (ala Wilfork) coming out. I think Patterson from USC is an interesting prospect, but looks like another 1 gap guy and we have several of those.

A LB wouldn\'t hurt my feelings, in fact I\'d be pretty happy with anyone but Crowder. What I keep kicking around are 2 questions.

1. What if Barron or Brown freakishly falls to 16?
2. What if Mike Williams falls to 16?

I\'d take any of those 3 guys before I\'d take a Thomas Davis. I\'d also rather take the chance that Odell Thurman or Ruud is there in round 2.

I\'d still prefer to go with a BPA strategy than take just any linebacker. I\'d even be in favor of swapping places with the Bengals to give them a shot at Davis and pick up a 3rd or 4rth rounder from them.

.02

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

What\'s up, BMG? Good to see ya around...

I\'m usually all about taking the common-sense approach. I\'m never one who likes to take needless risks!!

And I don\'t want to sell the farm or mortgage the future, but .. DAMN!!

I am just so sick of being linebacker needy!!

Whoever the best LB is in this draft, then we should do whatever it takes to get him. And that might require some sacrifice, but at least it gives us the best chance of finally getting a play-making LB.

How many YEARS has it been?

As WhoDat would say: When is enough enough?

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

While I agree that LB is still a major need and I share your frustration, simply throwing your hands up and saying, \"well, this guy is still around at 16 so let\'s just take him b/c he plays LB\" isn\'t a recipe for success either.

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

I\'m not say take ANY LB at 16. I\'m saying make a move and get the BEST LB.

What do ya think?

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

The hard part of this strategy is whether the LB is worth the #16 pick. It wouldn\'t make sense to me to grab a guy like Thurman, for example, who very well might be there for us in round 2. Even if Thurman were the best available, that seems like too much of a reach.

I\'d like to see us get good value for the pick at 16. If we\'re dead set on drafting all LB\'s then let\'s move down and get a few more picks. Otherwise, stay at 16 and take the best guy there.

But then of course, I am fully prepared for us to take a RB so that Haslett can dump Deuce next year.

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

Seems like I have to translate Billy again to the common folk.
He\'s not saying the Saints should draft a linebacker at 16, he\'s saying: \"Draft Derrick Johnson, even if you have to trade up into the Top 10 to do it and give up draft picks (2nd rounder + ?). I\'m sick of getting Watson instead of Vilma or Cie Grant instead of Terrell Suggs. Just gimme a linebacker that gives me hope their might one day be a sequel to the Dome Patrol. PLEASE!\"

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

That cracked me up. But, you are correct. I\'ve had enough with the projects at LB.

See, what the Saints need is a linebacker who can flat run, and you know what, I want him to run forward. I don\'t care if he can cover. The Saints over the past few years have found too many linebackers who can cover. Darn it, how about one who might get 100+ tackles? How about one who will wreak havoc blitzing. Let all those high-dollar DB\'s cover. Get me a game changing LB.

Draft Derrick Johnson!!!

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

Been saying that for a couple of weeks. With DJ obviously gone by #16, Jammal Brown could look like a steal at RT in a few years.

Never happen, but I agree you\'ve gotta take him if he does somehow. We\'re not exactly infused with YOUNG talent at WR, and Mike Williams is my early pick for offensive rookie of the year.

Wouldn\'t complain if they did, and DJ seems to be slipping a bit on the \"experts\" draft boards. So long as we don\'t sell the farm for DJ, I\'m game.

With the exception of Barrett Ruud, I agree, and #16 is probably too high for Ruud. Not sure there\'s a sure-fire Pro-Bowler in this LB crop at all, but I like DJ and Ruud better than anyone else. Time will tell...

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!
 

DJ is not the answer, can\'t tackle, PERIOD. We need LB, CB and QB.

When the Saints went to the playoffs with a chance to go to the bowl they had the best LB\'s in the game. Let\'s all remember the offense was\'nt spectacular. IT WAS THE DEFENSE.

I'd rather reach for a LB than under-react!