|
this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; This is pretty interesting I thought. It gave me some insight into the draft and why certain players show up where they do. In fact, I have a theory on our #2 this year now. I'll ya'll draw your own ...
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
04-25-2005, 03:13 AM | #1 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,423
|
Draft Theories
This is pretty interesting I thought. It gave me some insight into the draft and why certain players show up where they do. In fact, I have a theory on our #2 this year now. I'll ya'll draw your own conclusions though.
From: http://www.gbnreport.com/drafttheories.htm
|
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 |
04-25-2005, 04:50 PM | #2 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,423
|
Draft Theories
Bump.
For Kelley. Let me know what you think, buddy. Apologies to those who already saw this. |
04-25-2005, 05:10 PM | #3 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,879
|
Draft Theories
hey jk, i saw the matrix too you know...................smitty
|
04-25-2005, 05:50 PM | #4 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: baton rouge
Posts: 2,540
|
Draft Theories
some thought fo sho. gbn generally has some good stuff.
i still have problems with the f.o. office though about this draft cuz all i can see consistent with those theories would be shopping list. like, we are gonna take an OT in the 1st, a safety in the 2nd, a LB in the 3rd, etc. but as they point out- \"We believe that if a team really wants to work on a position they actually should consider using a good part of a draft to do it, again because of the generally low probabilities involved.\" In the first DJ was both the BPA and biggest need. of course that is just my opinion. i think ya could find a lot of support for that view though far beyond out board here though. some projected him as high as the 3rd overall this week. brown apparently slipped above barron just this past week. many on this board had him pegged available at #16. if he moved ahead of barron then barron would be available. okay, i\'ll go along and say a road grader is needed more than a LB in the first. 2nd round, as you said, wtf?!? kevin burnett the number 2 LB if not the BPA is there. if ya wanted a DB i counted other corners as better pa than bullock. so not need, not bpa. building from strength?? not the approach when you are 32nd imo. parcells wanted to upgrade the dallas d. it is very clear the quality of who he got and how they will fit it. bullock may be fine but it is an IF scenario. not my plan but from those ideas we could have drafted the top 3 LBs if we had taken the #31 from philly- dj, ruud, and burnett. i gotta bet that at least one, probably 2 of them will be an immediate impact guy, vilma-d.j. williams-like at least. then we have the others. as said, not my design but that would have been a big statement- we are tired of LB weakness! the uconn boy is just fine for a #3. but he is just that a tier down choice. limited abilities or upside. he looks like a player and may end up good but again it is with a lot of IF attached. if a LB had been addressed in 1-2 then the third rd could be looking at antonio perkins or travis daniels db\'s. as much potential as lyman has no one can argue that he is a capital IF concerning injuries. with the previous picks i did not think the pointed defensive needs had been addressed sufficiently. donte nicholson a true ss was available here, dt ronald fields, or lb\'s mccune or boley (who were on my wish list for the 4th rd). if lyman was the bpa on their board then i feel even worse. shopping list is all i can imagine. 4th rd we are gonna get a wr. mcpherson i loved. i was scared they were gonna take him at #82. i wouldnt have liked that. but in the 5th rd he becomes a great risk/reward investment imo. i do not have one quibble about this pick. but did they say we are going lb in the 5th. mcpherson or derek anderson guys? (i predicted they would take him in the 6th) i don\'t put a lot into the 6th-7th. if ya get someone useable great. if not, oh well. i do think those are the rounds to go for the high risk/high return types. i\'m no hawthorne fan but he was projected as high as the 1st rd at one time. highness was his problem tho. rotsa ruck on the guys there. didnt mean to draft capsule but i was trying to see if i could work some of those theories into the picks made. those theories lead me to only think there might be less plan and professionalism in the fo than i imagined. |
04-25-2005, 08:22 PM | #5 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,423
|
Draft Theories
I thought this was the interesting point Kelley:
|
04-25-2005, 09:07 PM | #6 |
Rookie
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 28
|
Draft Theories
My problem with this draft is this. A team\'s offseason is part of the draft. If the Fish had gotten Ricky back they would not have gone RB with the number two. They had other holes to fill. Might have traded down. The point being not getting a player in the offseason forced their hand.
Our two biggest offseason move. A RT and a FS. First pick RT second FS. ?????? I agree with everyone else that has said DJ was the best value and also the biggest need. I like the first three picks and love our pick in the 5th. at FSU he showed he can play. He will start for us soon. |
04-25-2005, 09:29 PM | #7 |
Site Donor
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Posts: 1,739
|
Draft Theories
Pretty interesting read...
I\'m not gonna go into lengthy analysis, but in regards to picking Jammal Brown in the first, I think several of the theories apply. Several teams are rumored to have ranked Brown their #1 OT in the draft, so by that rationale we may have taken our personal BPA per the aforementioned ranking system. In addition to that, the Saints expressed no real interest in resigning Victor Riley at RT. I guess this would be \"team fixing,\" but it\'s hard to deny RT was a glaring need on draft day. Brown is a natural RT, so if he happened to meet multiple theories, all the better for us I suppose. Still baffled by much of the rest of the draft, but Loomis did say today on the Gerry V show that he believes Bullocks will be learning from Bellamy. Perhaps they plan on the right/left safety strategy after all. Hope that run support shows up... |
04-26-2005, 02:17 AM | #8 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,423
|
Draft Theories
Ok, I\'ll just out and say it.
I think that the Bullocks pick is a Building from Strength strategy. Our defensive backfield may be the best unit on our defense (with our weak LBs and DTs). This will at least make the other team one dimensional - they won\'t really be able to pass so easily. This will allow us to play call and game plan against the run, which should help our beleagared run defense. With a true Right-Left safety system and speed at our WLB and MLB (Colby and Watson) we can run blitz more, mix coverages, and utilize deception a bit more. Also, with ballhawks in the middle of the secondary (not to mention our stud McKenzie), we can funnel oppenents offenses a LOT more. Also, again, building from strength, we took Brown. This builds to Duece, Karney, and our massively improved line - this also, derivatively, helps a good passing game. BPA isn\'t the only good way to build a team. I also thought this was interesting: drafting for need can get you in trouble, since the rookie may well be the best player in the unit. It is easier to isolate, game plan, and neutralize single quality players than an attack that isn\'t as obviously focused around one player. In a sense, not picking DJ made it harder for teams to game plan against our LBs, since the strike could come from any of the three (rather than designed to set up a single player). The Lymon pick may never make sense to me, but I\'m starting to feel pretty good about our first three. |
"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks
|
|
04-26-2005, 04:36 AM | #9 |
Registered
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 53
|
Draft Theories
papz and lifer have seen Lyman play, and say when healthy is a very good player...
Danno got me thinking in another tread stating that Lyman could be a player for next year or the year after. While I am still very weary about taking him with the #4 pick when he surely would\'ve been there later on in the draft... maybe not other teams might have been willing to gamble on him just the same. Bottom line is...given a year to train in a NFL system and fully recoup from nagging injuries could lead to a solid contributor in the future. I think Danno\'s post in conjunction with papz and lifers comments opened a new light on the selection. Is it possible the Lyman wasn\'t brought in for special teams, but instead to shape for 06-07? Might turn out to be a better pick than most are giving credit for. I personally am not ready to jump on the bandwagon and say it was a great pickup...it still baffles the heck out of me. However, I realize that someone saw something special in this kid to draft him despite his injuries. Here\'s to hoping all of us \"professional scout posters\" could be wrong. BB&G |
04-26-2005, 11:14 AM | #10 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,423
|
Draft Theories
Don\'t get me wrong, I don\'t mind having Lymon on the team (if he makes the team). I just don\'t really understand the strategy there - that is what I don\'t get.
|