Originally Posted by lee909 (Post 800604) Lets be honest we could have selected 6 punters and you'd argue it was the right call. The people who's jobs are on the line if its bad drafts are the ones that live and die by the picks so its all fine by me. The last 2 drafts have been good previous yeats a bit hit and mixed. If Davenport is the difference maker and rest a mixed back then they have still done well.

According to Nathan Forster of ESPN and Football Outsiders, Davenport is projected to have 25.9 sacks through his first five seasons which makes it the most for any other edge rusher. The projected stats are done by SackSEER who precited success for edge rushers such as Von Miller and Kalil Mack. Here's what Forster had to say about Davenport. SackSEER's numbers give Davenport just the slightest edge over the more highly touted Chubb. As Clay Matthews and his 4.5 career college sacks can tell you, success at the edge rusher position can often be more about potential than production. Davenport shows statistical signs that he could be ready to similarly blossom in the NFL.

Originally Posted by jeanpierre (Post 800628) Appreciate of some y'all's optimism, really I do and I don't engage to make light of it - have too much respect for y'all - my post history will show that... But this "no second guessing" and "in Loomis we trust" is naive to not question the FO moves; only local media defends the haul with 'wait and see" as a defense... Let's not forget Payton and Loomis had one great draft, one, in their tenure; and no, don't give them credit for 2006 where all 32 teams passed on Colston and Strief... And I'd remind Loomis was GM when we traded two first round picks passing on eight All-Pro players for Johnathan Sullivan; also on Stanley Jean Baptiste... And we still can't get a member of the press on a story explaining how Stephone Anthony went from being nearly DROTY to incapable of playing football... Again, have always appreciated some of your optimism, loyalty is rare these days and is to be cherished; but this is a dumpster fire of a draft haul... Only two picks came in where they should have - S Natrell Jamerson and C/G Will Clapp; taking two maybe three players, ikely UDFAs, with draft picks... Again, love the blind loyalty, but this draft needs to be questioned because we should be putting the final pieces in place for a run this year...

Originally Posted by jeanpierre (Post 800628) Appreciate of some y'all's optimism, really I do and I don't engage to make light of it - have too much respect for y'all - my post history will show that... But this "no second guessing" and "in Loomis we trust" is naive to not question the FO moves; only local media defends the haul with 'wait and see" as a defense... Let's not forget Payton and Loomis had one great draft, one, in their tenure; and no, don't give them credit for 2006 where all 32 teams passed on Colston and Strief... And I'd remind Loomis was GM when we traded two first round picks passing on eight All-Pro players for Johnathan Sullivan; also on Stanley Jean Baptiste... And we still can't get a member of the press on a story explaining how Stephone Anthony went from being nearly DROTY to incapable of playing football... Again, have always appreciated some of your optimism, loyalty is rare these days and is to be cherished; but this is a dumpster fire of a draft haul... Only two picks came in where they should have - S Natrell Jamerson and C/G Will Clapp; taking two maybe three players, ikely UDFAs, with draft picks... Again, love the blind loyalty, but this draft needs to be questioned because we should be putting the final pieces in place for a run this year...

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 800643) My angle is and has always been that the draft is a crapshoot. Of ALL the players drafted in a given year, how many are still in the league 3 years later? Did the Saints take some risks this year? You bet. They were educated risks to be sure, and the guys taking the risks are FAR more educated about the risks they're taking than you or I - although you are clearly more up to speed about the draft than me, the difference between you and the Saints FO is still significant. I don't think it was "Ditka" draft as some have said, nor do I believe it was a dumpster fire. Far from it, and I think people are undervaluing our ability to coach this talent up, which is surprising considering how we all revere the quality of coaching on or team. It's not about blind faith. I don't have that. Like I said, I think it's a crapshoot. We took some risks. We didn't "play it safe". Safe isn't always the best play.

Originally Posted by llaguardia81 (Post 800652) I give the draft a B- or a C. The Saints needed a TE. What did they leave the draft without? A TE. Davenport may work out, but they still gave a little too much for him. And why draft a RB when you're set at that position?

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido (Post 800636) For all we know we may have. Time will tell. And how do you know those picks could have been had as UDFA's? It is very possible, and I would venture to say very probable, that other teams had their eyes on thos players, as well.

Originally Posted by MarchingOn (Post 800663) This board hasn't panned a draft like this since 2014's.

Originally Posted by Barry from MS (Post 800665) Careful now. We're not allowed to pan this draft b/c we're not scouts, coaches, or GMs. We're just YouTube highlight monitors. That's the requirement for questioning any & all picks, apparently. :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Rugby Saint II (Post 800657) I read earlier where someone said that this felt more like a Payton/Loomis draft. It seems like Ireland has done a good job of scaling back on Payton's tendency to gamble big in recent years but just couldn't keep a lid on it this year. The gambles are big but so are the rewards. It may take more than just training camp to find these young players max potential. I guess I'm in a wait and see mode.

Originally Posted by jeanpierre (Post 800628) ...Again, love the blind loyalty, but this draft needs to be questioned because we should be putting the final pieces in place for a run this year...

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido (Post 800666) No. It's because you are not psychics hovering over your crystal balls knowing all. The fact is that none of us have a fraction of the information that the true decision makers have at their availability. How many of us have personally interviewed these players? How many of us have worked them out? Pan away, but be prepared to eat the proverbial crow.

Originally Posted by Barry from MS (Post 800677) Nobody is claiming to be psychics or knowing it all. And your questions are designed to intimidate anyone who disagrees by infusing the unrealistic & the improbable. None of us met & worked out all 250+ prospects individually. None of us work for or in an NFL war room. Yet that's your prevailing argument for any voice that questions anything this great team does. It's an intimidation tactic that's designed to render opposing opinion invalid & worthless. The Saints F.O. is not infallible. I give props where props are due. The 3rd Rd pick was decent and the 5th-7th Rd picks were on point. I just don't like the price we paid for MD (unless he Pro Bowls it in 3-5 yrs). The 4th was a complete waste. There are very knowledgeable football folks on here...30+ years worth for a bunch of us. We should have a voice without the veiled intimidation. When MD becomes a Pro Bowler & Slick Rick cracks the PS, I'll go on the "All Crow" diet.

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido (Post 800678) And what do you base your biased proclamation that the 4th round pick was a total waste? If he becomes the versatile swing OL that we need then how is that a total waste? How do you already know that is the final outcome? :confused:

Twitter

New Orleans Saints Head Coach Sean Payton

Post-Draft Press Conference

Saturday, April 28, 2018

Are (Natrell) Jamerson and (Kamrin) Moore similar?

“I would say here is what they have in common, they are both smart, good football players with some position flexibility. I think in Natrell’s case our vision initially is outside and he is someone that tested out very well and can run. He is very quick, quick twitch so sudden. And I think with Moore, you see him play nickel you know you can see him have the flexibility and can go back and be a safety but both are smart, savvy football players that as you get later in the draft and you're trying to project a vision with as much as our game has changed, these are guys that can come in and compete in the secondary. And the vision will be a little different for each but they have similar traits.”

Was Natrell’s ability to return kicks a consideration?

“That was part of it. We’ll have a chance to evaluate these guys in two weeks to see how they do. You know I would say the same thing took place with Boston (Scott). He's a guy that we worked out, also was a punt returner. So trying to have a role for these players and really see how their skills apply to your team and then trying to get them to the right position when they first get here will be our goal.”

Natrell played safety at Wisconsin, how do you take what he did on film and turn that into the vision?

“Well he's also a guy that has gone outside. That’s a good spot to start. He's a guy that is very athletic. We had some individual workouts with some of these players so I would say both with Natrell, Kamrin, Boston those guys, we've all worked out separate and then other than a pro day. So I think most importantly as we were discussing these guys both Natrell and Cameron we discussed at that very same pick and fortunately you know around later we were able to select the other player but we'll see as they come in here and see where their weights are at, how they tackle. We do think they're both guys that are physical and both guys that fit our profile.

Mickey mentioned yesterday that you guys probably weren’t trading away picks on the last day, do you think that was important?

“Yeah. We made the trade in the first round. It wasn't like there weren't times today where “oh there was discussions about moving one direction or another.” But in the end we felt pretty good about where we were sitting with both sixes, the seven, the five and it kind of fell to us rather than maybe in the first round where we went and got a player that we felt good about overall how it unfolded in we'll see. We're anxious to get these guys out there and prepared and in bringing them up to speed with our system.”

What is your vision for Will Clapp?

“He has played a lot of games at a high level competition. We know he can give us center snaps. We're very familiar of course with the program. And to play as many games as he's played and SEC competition and he's been very reliable. He's got outstanding football IQ. Our vision initially would be at center.”

Anybody in the room make a joke about how you guys finally drafted an LSU guy?

“When did we take, probably I can't think of what year (Al Woods in 2010). (I) Didn't really pay attention to that. I understand it and each year it's just hard how it unfolds sometimes. So we got an LSU player and we also I called him and I always ask everyone where you at. And he's like I’m in Metairie. And I said all right. So he's local and he probably can save some money on rent (laughter).”

How much have you seen pretty much on every positon across the board over time the position flexibility level increase?

“I think the challenge is always different than in college as the rosters are smaller. And then the gameday roster is not 53, you have to even go down fewer than that. So when you when you bring 46 players to the game and you begin to look at the snaps that they're playing both offensively and defensively, it's hard to have a lot of backups that are just only going to play in the event of an injury, that can happen on the offensive line, it can happen (at) quarterback. And so that versatility in the kicking game, whether it's second or third down packages, jumbo packages. We try to spend a lot of time on what we think they can do and not as much time on what they can't do. Do they fit? Do we have a good vision? And then how can they help us on Sunday? And you just have to be that much more efficient when you're looking at roster sizes like that.”

How about Rick Leonard? What did you guys like about him?

“Leonard came into Florida State playing on defense, defensive end. There’s a physicalness about him. We think that there is still some growth because of his lack of experience. He’s a big body, he’s physical. Right away I can see a jumbo role. I could see him compete to be a gameday backup tackle. I thought as the season went on with his film it got better and better and you could see him becoming more and more familiar with playing on the offensive side of the ball. He is athletic. It was a number of those things.”

Was special teams versatility something you targeted with some of these picks?

“If you are looking at it I think Tre’Quan (Smith) is going to have some special teams value. I think both Jamerson and Moore clearly will have that value. I think Scott in a return phase will compete. We'll just talk about the player. Here's the vision. What do we see? Is it four corners in the special teams or is it just two-phased or one-phased. Of course, the player has to come in and earn all of that. But we do want to kind of hear it again just like we did a month ago in our readings and two months ago in our February readings.”

What’s your vision for Smith?

“He's physically is big. He's a guy that blocks. I like his size. I like his strong hands. I think he is very competitive. For us, with that selection, it was clearly a magnet with a great value pick for us. A guy that I think has that grit and toughness that will help him on the next level.

Do you feel like you guys feel like you were able to fill some needs?

“Hopefully. I think that you’re trying to find guys that can make the roster, that bring something to the table and you are trying to look at specifically. With Tre’Quan, we're looking at the group in general but there's a big physical receiver I don't know that we went into the draft saying we must draft a receiver. The two DBs, Leonard and Jamerson, we had a corner need or want and we feel like we've got some position flexibility with these guys when you get into some of your packages defensively. Scott’s someone that we're really familiar with, worked out not too long ago for us. He too was local in Baton Rouge. He is a pretty good runner as well as a guy that can catch the ball out of the backfield. He has some versatility. And then you'll have a chance to learn and see how he can come around as punt returner. Hopefully we have.”

Video Presser from SP

Originally Posted by Euphoria (Post 800689) I think the right move was to go get him. We needed an edge rusher NOW. he probably has the best potential besides chubb to start NOW. Waiting to see who falls to us isn't the rright answer. Plus after what Ireland has been doing I don't feel its a wise decision to second guess him - example Kamara.

Twitter

Originally Posted by Utah_Saint (Post 800674) Of course the draft needs to be questioned but to try to judge it before the picks have even put on pads is silly. The Saints front office must think these players have a good chance of being coached up to their potential. As of now, how can anyone say they're wrong? I recognize that it's offseason and there's not much to do other than debate potential but it's purely wasted time until the players take the field and we see how they shake out. I suspect the coaches and scouts have spent more time analyzing each of these players and how they would fit into the Saints plans than any so called "draft expert" and far more than any of us here on the board. That's not blind loyalty, that's just common sense. Some examples of last years "draft experts" wisdom... “A big question mark here was the value given up to draft Kamara. Even if you question any possibilities beyond 2017 for Mark Ingram or Adrian Peterson, trading a second-rounder to move up and take my No. 88 overall player is iffy." - Mel Kiper, ESPN Ryan Ramczyk "I don't get this pick. Where does he play..." C+ , Pete Prisco, CBSNFL This one makes no sense at all. If the Saints already have an elite multipurpose back in Mark Ingram Jr. and signed an aging up-the-middle bruiser in Adrian Peterson, then why on Earth did the Saints trade up to draft Tennessee Volunteers running back Alvin Kamara near the top of the third round? Kamara is a good player, but can’t handle a bell-cow workload. New Orleans is a terrible landing spot for him." - John Buhler, NFL Fansided ""We saw a little bit of a safety run in the middle of the second round. New Orleans was right in the mix of that nonsense and overdraft Utah Utes safety Marcus Williams." - John Buhler NFL Fansided "Ryan Ramczyk C+" Larry Holder, NOLA Times Picayune I don't mean to say the front office shouldn't be held accountable. Two first rounders for one player needs to be held to a very high standard. In my opinion, to justify the picks, Davenport needs to beat out Okafor and start game 1. And by the end of the season he needs to be, at least, a serious probowl contender. The point I'm trying to make is that until they take the field, judging the draft at this point, positive or negative, is waste of time.

Originally Posted by llaguardia81 (Post 800652) I give the draft a B- or a C. The Saints needed a TE. What did they leave the draft without? A TE. Davenport may work out, but they still gave a little too much for him. And why draft a RB when you're set at that position?

Originally Posted by rezburna (Post 800695) You never have a perfect team. You’ll always have a weak spot. It’s all about depth. We need depth. Injuries happen and strong positions become weak. Growth happens and weak positions become strong.

Originally Posted by triman (Post 800799) Where the saints failed was in not being able to fill needs at TE,DT,LB.