10 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

But if they’re trying to implode the thing then why give up a 2023 1st just to get two 2022 firsts while dealing with cap issues? Wouldn’t it make more sense to go the opposite direction especially with them giving up a future 2nd and a current 3rd round pick as well? Also I don’t know exactly how the Saints contracts are right now, but I wonder how many of these contracts they have are even that movable to begin with considering their cap issues. There’s also the fact that in the league today teams do not make deals for running backs especially guys making a lot of money. After the pro bowl Vegas incident no one is touching Kamara any time soon. To me the Saints only make these moves if they believe they’re a quarterback away from something. This is the type of go for broke stuff the Eagles fans were hoping Roseman did this off-season to get a quarterback. 

I'm no expert on the Saints, but I would believe that they do think they can get some 2023 draft capital back for guys like Kamara and Thomas.  They just need to be patient.  Thomas needs to show he's healthy and they can get a nice haul for him  Still plenty of teams, including the Eagles, that got caught holding their wangs in the crazy WR market.  As for Kamara, RB's are worthless in the offseason but make great pieces at the deadline.  That's plenty of time to sort out any suspensions and what not.  

5 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

That sounds vaguely familiar for both teams too. In that same span the Eagles are the team that got a ring recently. 

Yes but the saints remained competitive after their ring. I wouldn't call what we did since 2018 competitive. In my opinion competitive to me is being able to get to the super bowl. 

12 minutes ago, dawkins4prez said:

Yeah i thought the value at positions of need was there for the Eagles to take all 3, but yeah, they probably did a couple too many mocks where they felt stuck making bad value picks.  the Ojabo injury didn't help.  they still have plenty of ammo to move around 3 weeks from now.

The odds that 2 guys they had rated say top 10 fall to 15 are slim.  And if that somehow happens they can always try to trade up from 18 to 14 which still nets you a 1 next year+.  Seems like little chance 3 of your top guys fall to 15.

1 hour ago, Road to Victory said:

I think he’s looking at the Draft Pick Value Chart not the Johnson chart one but you’re right, he not depreciating the future picks properly. If you look at the Draft Pick Value Chart, the Saints won this trade by a mile. Probably by about 400 or so points which is equivalent to a 2nd rounder this year. 

This is the single most inaccurate post in the history of the new EMB.

1st, 2nd, 3rd- (in a historically deep draft), 5th (“value” of moving from 19 to 18), 7th

IS CLEARLY AND UNDENIABLY BETTER THAN

1st and 6th

You stated the opposite to be true.

1 minute ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

Yes but the saints remained competitive after their ring. I wouldn't call what we did since 2018 competitive. In my opinion competitive to me is being able to get to the super bowl. 

We haven't been legit competitive since 2004 outside of 2017.  By that I mean a top 2 seed. I think we might have hit 3 once or twice in that time.  It's been very 30-50th percentile type stuff

3 minutes ago, SB52 said:

This is the single most inaccurate post in the history of the new EMB.

1st, 2nd, 3rd- (in a historically deep draft), 5th (“value” of moving from 19 to 18), 7th

IS CLEARLY AND UNDENIABLY BETTER THAN

1st and 6th

You stated the opposite to be true.

Think of it this way.  Is there a guy that will be there at 16 that you wouldn't trade for that 1,2,3 combo that we got? No way even if a guy projected at 10 drops.  Eagles won that trade every day of the week.

1 hour ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

They were at least competitive for how many years so their bad cap is excusable

Whatever, we won a Super Bowl in the process so I'm OK with having to deal with that longer than expected afterward.  Howie mistakenly thought he could run it back and win another - that is what led to the mess we have been in.  He is slowly digging us out.  

11 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

Yes but the saints remained competitive after their ring. I wouldn't call what we did since 2018 competitive. In my opinion competitive to me is being able to get to the super bowl. 

? The saints have failed to reach the SB every single year since the ring. So they weren’t competitive or they were?

In fact, up until 2018, 9 seasons later, they didn’t even make the NFCCG. Their best finish was equal to where we finished in 2018.

18 hours ago, Diehardfan said:

I know we shouldn't root for injuries, but Winston going down would make that a heck of a pick next year.

You're allowed to root for him to suck. 

1 hour ago, Mike030270 said:

Never understood why people do this

So I can be drunk at a bar and link Asante Samuel to Carson Wentz?

15 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

? The saints have failed to reach the SB every single year since the ring. So they weren’t competitive or they were?

In fact, up until 2018, 9 seasons later, they didn’t even make the NFCCG. Their best finish was equal to where we finished in 2018.

Yes but they have been in the conversation a lot of the years since that ring. We're not even in conversation for making the playoffs most of the time. 

Saints before last year were 11-5 13-3 13-3 12-4. 

I should of worded it differently by saying they were in contention going into the playoffs and had a team that could get to the super bowl

 

 

The part of this trade that would bother me if I was NO is that Philly made us swap 18 and 19.

This means that NO drafts at 16, with Philly having the trumping pick at 15. Then NO drafts at 19, with Philadelphia again before them at 18. If they want ANYBODY, they’ll have to wait until Philadelphia passes on that player in both spots. That’s a terrible position to be in, and one that could have been easily avoided with an extra 4th rounder here or there. 

So why would they agree to this? Because they confided in Philadelphia they will be moving up, and they don’t really care if it’s from 18 or 19. However, Philadelphia has a vetted interest in making sure any team that trades with NO is screwed over in this regard so that Philadelphia does not shoot themselves in the foot with this trade by allowing someone else to swap with NO and punk them out of their picks.

2 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

The part of this trade that would bother me if I was NO is that Philly made us swap 18 and 19.

This means that NO drafts at 16, with Philly having the trumping pick at 15. Then NO drafts at 19, with Philadelphia again before them at 18. If they want ANYBODY, they’ll have to wait until Philadelphia passes on that player in both spots. That’s a terrible position to be in, and one that could have been easily avoided with an extra 4th rounder here or there. 

So why would they agree to this? Because they confided in Philadelphia they will be moving up, and they don’t really care if it’s from 18 or 19. However, Philadelphia has a vetted interest in making sure any team that trades with NO is screwed over in this regard so that Philadelphia does not shoot themselves in the foot with this trade by allowing someone else to swap with NO and punk them out of their picks.

Some people think the Saints are going to trade up again.  If that's true, it could be why they did this trade so far ahead of the draft.  Heck the Eagles still might move around, we'll see how it shakes out.

1 minute ago, NOTW said:

Some people think the Saints are going to trade up again.  If that's true, it could be why they did this trade so far ahead of the draft.  Heck the Eagles still might move around, we'll see how it shakes out.

Conversely, what is NO’s benefit in doing this trade if they’re just going to stand Pat, without knowing who’ll be there when they pick? It’s a head scratcher

2 hours ago, Vee said:

By a mile?  Can you show me the math on that mile?

Basically a 1st this year for a 3rd this year, a 1st next year and a 2nd after that.

The Saints are giving up picks 18 and 101.  Then they give the Eagles their #1 next season, so lets say they pick at #8, adding 32 for the devaluation makes it a 40.  Then they get their #2 the season after that.  Let's say they're drafting 16 that year, so that's 48, now devalue that by 64 picks (or two rounds) and it's pick #112.  So basically compare giving up picks 18, 101, 40 and 112 for the Eagles 16, 19 and 194.  Show me the mile math here please...unless I missed something? 

Let's put the chart down for a minute and think this through.  Seriously. 

On draft day anything is possible, but do you think that a team might have offered better than that?  Maybe a 2nd this year and a 1st next season?  Maybe a slide down and stay in the first while picking up a....fourth maybe?

Then there's also the thought that you might not get so many calls.  Let's say no one slides...the leverage is the other way....

I don't think there's a mile on either end of this deal.  It really is a win win for both teams.  I don't think anyone seriously thought the Eagles were gonna make all three picks.  Personally, I think it was a good trade.  Now let's see what happens,

Sure. Using the Draft pick value chart. Each future pick is worth one less round per year. Also, for future picks, the team trading the pick should be placed in the middle of the future round (16) because we have no idea where they’ll be picking. 

Eagles get #18 = 900 pts

Eagles get #101= 96 pts 

Eagles get #237 = 2 pts

2023 1st Rd = 420 pts

2024 2nd Rd = 70 pts

total 1488

Saints get #16 = 1000 pts

Saints get #19 = 875 pts

Saints get #194 = 15 pts

total = 1890

 

I'm good with this trade I don't like any of the qbs this year and gives us plenty to move up next year if Hurts isn't the guy... I'm now hoping for a de or dt with 1 and cb with the other in the first... Hell I wouldn't even mind if we made another trade back for another first next year if the compensation is worth it 

1 hour ago, SB52 said:

This is the single most inaccurate post in the history of the new EMB.

1st, 2nd, 3rd- (in a historically deep draft), 5th (“value” of moving from 19 to 18), 7th

IS CLEARLY AND UNDENIABLY BETTER THAN

1st and 6th

You stated the opposite to be true.

You may disagree with the post but the information is 100% accurate.

 

16 minutes ago, Aerolithe_Lion said:

Conversely, what is NO’s benefit in doing this trade if they’re just going to stand Pat, without knowing who’ll be there when they pick? It’s a head scratcher

See below. They have no cap space and lack talent. They want 2 impact players now.

19 hours ago, NOTW said:

 

 

 

33 minutes ago, NOTW said:

Some people think the Saints are going to trade up again.  If that's true, it could be why they did this trade so far ahead of the draft.  Heck the Eagles still might move around, we'll see how it shakes out.

I agree. This trade reminds me of when the Eagles made some pre-draft moves to trade up for Wentz. 

The Saints are probably targeting Pickett and the Howie knows it because they did their DD on Pickett. They are a QB away from being a real contender. 

43 minutes ago, Road to Victory said:

Sure. Using the Draft pick value chart. Each future pick is worth one less round per year. Also, for future picks, the team trading the pick should be placed in the middle of the future round (16) because we have no idea where they’ll be picking. 
 

 

That is an arbitrary premise that fans like to regurgitate. Just repeating it doesn't make it so. Next year's first round pick is going to be a first round pick. The player chosen will demand first round money. 

23 minutes ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

That is an arbitrary premise that fans like to regurgitate. Just repeating it doesn't make it so. Next year's first round pick is going to be a first round pick. The player chosen will demand first round money. 

Huh, having a 1st round pick this year offers more value than next year. Every team would rather pick now than later. 

6 hours ago, dawkins4prez said:

Uhm, no.  Picks in future drafts have depreciated value, lost cost opportunity basically.  As a general rule of thumb, for every year in the future you deduct a rd.  So that 2nd rdr in 2024 is worth a 4th rd in 2022.

Yep the current value of those picks is less.  But when 2023 rolls around no one will be saying, "well shoot that extra 1st from NO is really only worth a 2nd” (ditto the 2024 2nd).  

I like the fact that we spread out the high picks (rounds 1 and 2) - we now have 3 in 2022, 3 in 2023, and 3 in 2024 (rather than 4 in 2022, 2 in 2023, and 2 in 2024).