Anyone buying this about Alfred Fincher?

GumboBC · 04-24-2005, 04:55 PM

Didn\'t you want Hartwell? 3-4 ?

Yes I did want a PROVEN NFL stud instead of ANOTHER third round HOPE. James Allen, Sed Hodge, Cie Grant. 3rd round LBs. Add Fincher.

Ed Hartwell Drafted: 2001, 4th Round.

I think all the LBs in the draft were \"hopes\" besides DJ.

JKool · 04-24-2005, 04:58 PM

It doesn\'t really matter where Hartwell was drafted. What matters is that he is a proven, vetran player. I would not have been in favor of drafting Hartwell to shore up the 32nd ranked defense when he was drafted, but in FA (barring cost) I would have been more than pleased to get him THIS year.

saintswhodi · 04-24-2005, 05:00 PM

Exactly Kool.

GumboBC · 04-24-2005, 05:02 PM

It doesn\'t really matter where Hartwell was drafted. What matters is that he is a proven, vetran player. I would not have been in favor of drafting Hartwell to shore up the 32nd ranked defense when he was drafted, but in FA (barring cost) I would have been more than pleased to get him THIS year.

Agreed, JKool.

But let me ask you something.

Do all of you draft choices \"suck\" unitl proven otherwise?

Let\'s not use \"suck\" as an example. Do none of them \"upgrade\" our defense until they prove it? How do you look at it?

I mean, after Jamal Brown, that is.

JKool · 04-24-2005, 05:06 PM

There are two questions there:

1. Do you like the pick in terms of value, and
2. Do you like that players chance of upgrading the team.

Here\'s my take on all of them:
1. Brown. Yes on both.
2. Bullocks. No, Yes.
3. Fincher. Yes, Yes.
4. WR (I can\'t even remember his name). No, No.
5. McPherson. Yes, No.
6. Jefferson. Yes, No.

So, I think that given what is said about a player by professionals (like scouts and coaches) does give you a good idea of how a player will improve a team. This is how guys get ranked for the draft in the first place - so obviously they don\'t all \"suck\" or \"fail to improve the team\" until they hit the field.

That said, there is still an important difference between a vetran and a player that hasn\'t even seen the field in terms of the information available about them.

GumboBC · 04-24-2005, 05:16 PM

The draft is a funny thing. Most of the time the \"hyped\" superstars turn out to be pretty good. Quarterbacks excluded. There tends to be a higher % of busts at QB.

If you look around the NFL, there are a lot of low round draft picks on defense who are quality players. Like Ed Hartwell (4th round).

And the samething is true for offensive players too.

The point is ... anything after the first round is far from a given. Which is why they aren\'t drafted in the first round.

But, many of the 2nd, 3rd, and later round picks go on to have outstanding careers.

From what I\'ve read on our first 3 picks, all seem highly capable of making an impact this year.

Haslett is finally going after \"football\" players who appear ready to contribute.

Football isn\'t rocket science like it\'s made out to be sometimes. Many rookies make a big impact. It happens every year.

Like I said, I think all of our first 3 picks have a good shot of contributing this year.

That is ... unless they have to prove it to you first.

Since there is no proof ... there\'s really not much use in discussing them is it?

But, going by what I\'ve read ... I\'m encouraged. What else can you ask for?

04-24-2005, 04:55 PM	#11
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Anyone buying this about Alfred Fincher? Didn\'t you want Hartwell? 3-4 ? Yes I did want a PROVEN NFL stud instead of ANOTHER third round HOPE. James Allen, Sed Hodge, Cie Grant. 3rd round LBs. Add Fincher. Ed Hartwell Drafted: 2001, 4th Round. I think all the LBs in the draft were \"hopes\" besides DJ.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-24-2005, 04:58 PM	#12
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Anyone buying this about Alfred Fincher? It doesn\'t really matter where Hartwell was drafted. What matters is that he is a proven, vetran player. I would not have been in favor of drafting Hartwell to shore up the 32nd ranked defense when he was drafted, but in FA (barring cost) I would have been more than pleased to get him THIS year.

04-24-2005, 05:00 PM	#13
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Anyone buying this about Alfred Fincher? Exactly Kool.

04-24-2005, 05:02 PM	#14
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Anyone buying this about Alfred Fincher? It doesn\'t really matter where Hartwell was drafted. What matters is that he is a proven, vetran player. I would not have been in favor of drafting Hartwell to shore up the 32nd ranked defense when he was drafted, but in FA (barring cost) I would have been more than pleased to get him THIS year. Agreed, JKool. But let me ask you something. Do all of you draft choices \"suck\" unitl proven otherwise? Let\'s not use \"suck\" as an example. Do none of them \"upgrade\" our defense until they prove it? How do you look at it? I mean, after Jamal Brown, that is.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-24-2005, 05:06 PM	#15
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Anyone buying this about Alfred Fincher? There are two questions there: 1. Do you like the pick in terms of value, and 2. Do you like that players chance of upgrading the team. Here\'s my take on all of them: 1. Brown. Yes on both. 2. Bullocks. No, Yes. 3. Fincher. Yes, Yes. 4. WR (I can\'t even remember his name). No, No. 5. McPherson. Yes, No. 6. Jefferson. Yes, No. So, I think that given what is said about a player by professionals (like scouts and coaches) does give you a good idea of how a player will improve a team. This is how guys get ranked for the draft in the first place - so obviously they don\'t all \"suck\" or \"fail to improve the team\" until they hit the field. That said, there is still an important difference between a vetran and a player that hasn\'t even seen the field in terms of the information available about them.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

04-24-2005, 05:16 PM	#16
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Anyone buying this about Alfred Fincher? The draft is a funny thing. Most of the time the \"hyped\" superstars turn out to be pretty good. Quarterbacks excluded. There tends to be a higher % of busts at QB. If you look around the NFL, there are a lot of low round draft picks on defense who are quality players. Like Ed Hartwell (4th round). And the samething is true for offensive players too. The point is ... anything after the first round is far from a given. Which is why they aren\'t drafted in the first round. But, many of the 2nd, 3rd, and later round picks go on to have outstanding careers. From what I\'ve read on our first 3 picks, all seem highly capable of making an impact this year. Haslett is finally going after \"football\" players who appear ready to contribute. Football isn\'t rocket science like it\'s made out to be sometimes. Many rookies make a big impact. It happens every year. Like I said, I think all of our first 3 picks have a good shot of contributing this year. That is ... unless they have to prove it to you first. Since there is no proof ... there\'s really not much use in discussing them is it? But, going by what I\'ve read ... I\'m encouraged. What else can you ask for?
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616