AsylumGuido

Why did the Saints choose Andrus Peat over Larry Warford?



John Sigler
May 9, 2020 1:24 pm ET

If you were to go back to the initial days and weeks after the 2019 season wrapped up, polling fans on which of the New Orleans Saints guards would be around in 2020 and beyond, most would probably have suggested right guard Larry Warford rather than left guard Andrus Peat.

Warford is an ironman, with 107 starts under his belt (including the playoffs) and three trips to the Pro Bowl in each of his first three years in New Orleans, even if his play trailed off last season. Meanwhile, Peat has been perceived as an injury-prone anomaly who finally found his footing after washing out at left tackle, right tackle, and right guard, too. To his credit, Peat was also voted into the Pro Bowl in 2018 and 2019.

The analysts at Pro Football Focus graded Warford as a top-10 guard last year (clocking in at No. 8, with an overall grade of 75.8) while Peat was, well, less impressive (ranked at No. 70, due to a 48.5 grade).

Obviously, the Saints disagreed with the wisdom of the crowd. Peat was signed to a massive contract extension with $33 million in guarantees, whereas Warford was released after the team drafted his replacement in the first round (even if the jury’s out on whether rookie phenom Cesar Ruiz will slot in at guard or push Erik McCoy out of the center spot). Why did the Saints do that?

In all likelihood, this wasn’t an easy this-or-that decision. Smart teams like the Saints do thoughtfully allocate salary cap dollars to different position groups and specific players, but they probably didn’t sign Peat to a long-term contract with Warford’s uncertainty in mind. But what if they did?

Internal projections might have looked more favorably on Peat than Warford, if the team’s actions are any sign. Peat is just 26 years old and his issues have largely been connected to injuries — he missed a six-week chunk of the 2019 season with a broken arm, after 2018 was derailed by a concussion, sprained ankle, and broken hand, all of which followed a season-ending broken leg in 2017. He’s never suited up for a 16-game season, but the Saints are apparently betting big that he’ll begin to. If he can stay healthy, his level of play would probably skyrocket.

As for Warford: he’s turning 29 in June and has grappled with conditioning problems, which may have contributed to his less-than-satisfactory performance last year. The Saints were said to be unhappy with his game tape throughout the offseason, but it’s still surprising that they chose to punt on an accomplished player. If the goal all along was to upgrade from Warford, keeping him around as a backup along with the also-expensive Nick Easton (due more than $5.8 million against the salary cap this year) didn’t make sense. It’s worth noting that young reserves like Will Clapp and Cameron Tom have also logged meaningful NFL snaps.

Schematically, Warford hasn’t been the best fit in New Orleans. As pointed out by Nick Underhill of NewOrleans.Football, he was timed as one of the slowest guards in the NFL back at the Combine, which stands out in a bad way on one of the league’s fastest offensive line groups. Upgrading to a more mobile blocker like Ruiz or McCoy at his spot would do a lot to bring back the carefully-timed screen plays New Orleans was once known for.

So, the answer to our original question is that the Saints probably didn’t compare Peat and Warford before making a call. They did see an opportunity to get better up front by moving on from Warford, and separately took a chance on Peat putting his injuries behind him.

More here ...

“The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty.” — Winston Churchill