14 minutes ago, UndyTaker said:

The only reason we should be taking a OL high in the draft would be to replace Isaac Seumalo if we dont bring him back. Other than that the 1st and 2nd round should be heavily focused on Dline and CB. We have too many expiring contracts and older players at those positions.

If they don't trade down (which is entirely possible) they'll go DE and interior OL with their two first first rounders. Corner in the second. 

Seems to be their track record.

16 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Driscoll. He isn't great, but he can spell Mailata for a couple of games. 

I get it, he's injury prone too. 

Having said that, you don't spend a top 5 pick on a backup.

And especially not a backup at a position where we actually have a history of developing players. 
 

maybe I could buy a WR @ our own late pick if some amazing player is sitting there. Maybe. But def not the saints pick. 
 

Give me a young elite DB or pass rusher for this team all day long. 

18 minutes ago, Swoop said:

Driscoll. He isn't great, but he can spell Mailata for a couple of games. 

I get it, he's injury prone too. 

Having said that, you don't spend a top 5 pick on a backup.

Agreed.

But, there's still the burning question of how long will Lane be around at RT?  Who is the RG?  Can you spend a top 5 pick on a OL... play him at RG to start and then swing him out to RT in a couple years when Lane moves on?  

There's lots of options when selecting in the top 5, but for me... if there is a absolute stud, can't miss, future HoF talent, you don't worry about how he fits on your roster.  You take him, every time, and then figure out the rest later.  I have no idea that such a player exists at all in this draft, let alone along the OL.  But, one thing is certain... this team's greatest stretches of success has ALWAYS been accompanied by outstanding OL play.  That's no coincidence.   So, overspending along the OL to me always makes sense.  Great OL can make average RBs look great.  And RB is a position that you pretty much want to have as 'plug and play' these days.  Investing big money in a RB almost always has a bad return.  Not so much with the OL. 

 

Way too early for me to get too caught up in specifics about who to draft with the possible top 5 pick.  A lot of football is left to be played both in the NFL and NCAA.  Who knows how it will all play out?

8 hours ago, TEW said:

If we get a high pick, I’d be looking for a QB ransom deal to trade down.

if we can’t do that, OL or DB is always fine with me.

Would it be crazy to look at WR? Getting the right guy out there could take an already formidable offense over the top. We have the brute, we have the technician, could we find someone with size and speed who can block but also take the top off a defense?

Not sure I’d be looking to replace JM though. Get a good depth player behind him, sure, but you can’t spend a high pick when you have a young star at the position.

Also why wr is not smart

now a corner? Sure 

DE? Sure

If the Saints pick stays high IMO it's edge rusher or bust for us. Otherwise I'd be looking to trade the pick for someone looking for an OT or QB. 

11 hours ago, Alphagrand said:

It was a wager on rushing attempts as a percentage of passing attempts.  Not sure if Hurts has been below 25% at any point so far 

53 rushing attempts vs. 123 passing attempts - I need to start saving for my trip to Canada. 

18 hours ago, FranklinFldEBUpper said:

About 13th or so if you analyze strictly mathematically. Elliott made 91% of his kicks, but his average distance was only 37.3 yards, which is pretty short. Normally the average is around 39 yards. 

There were a ton of kickers who had a higher percentage AND had a higher average distance.

Tucker 95%, 40.5 yards

Gay 94%, 37.9 yards

Gonzalez 91% (same), 40.9 yards

Folk 92%, 38.9 yards

Carlson 93%, 37.8 yards

Koo 93%, 37.6 yards

Patterson (part time only), 93%, 37.6

And then there are the guys who had almost as good a percentage but kicked from much farther distances, which in my view is much better;

Butker 89%, 41.4 yards

Boswell 90%, 39.6 yards

Gano 88%, 40.7 yards

Where would you rank tucker in terms of all time kickers?

Why would we target a WR high in the draft to replace Watkins? He has only been targeted 4 times in 4 games. I admit Hurts has taken solid steps and is better than I expected, but he still has to show he can distribute to all of these weapons and take advantage of what he has. Quez should actually be flourishing in this offense with Brown and Smith on the outside. 

8 hours ago, TEW said:

If we get a high pick, I’d be looking for a QB ransom deal to trade down.

if we can’t do that, OL or DB is always fine with me.

Would it be crazy to look at WR? Getting the right guy out there could take an already formidable offense over the top. We have the brute, we have the technician, could we find someone with size and speed who can block but also take the top off a defense?

Not sure I’d be looking to replace JM though. Get a good depth player behind him, sure, but you can’t spend a high pick when you have a young star at the position.

We need at least one, maybe two DEs early. Also CB, S, LB depending on who gets resigned. LT is way down the needs list and is more of a luxury pick than need.

Just now, UndyTaker said:

Why would we target a WR high in the draft to replace Watkins? He has only been targeted 4 times in 4 games. I admit Hurts has taken solid steps and is better than I expected, but he still has to show he can distribute to all of these weapons and take advantage of what he has. Quez should actually be flourishing in this offense with Brown and Smith on the outside. 

I don’t think it’ll necessarily happen but it’s not like Watkins is irreplaceable. 

It would be idiotic and insane to take a WR in the first round. Don’t even know how somebody could suggest it

 

My front yard for the week. The Pyrenees are stunning

3 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

I don’t think it’ll necessarily happen but it’s not like Watkins is irreplaceable. 

Its not about that though. Watkins is a good player on a extremely cheap contract. The quality of the player for what youre paying might be irreplaceable. Why would we draft a WR in the first round with a 1st round contract to only get targeted 1 time a game??

6 minutes ago, UndyTaker said:

Why would we target a WR high in the draft to replace Watkins? He has only been targeted 4 times in 4 games. I admit Hurts has taken solid steps and is better than I expected, but he still has to show he can distribute to all of these weapons and take advantage of what he has. Quez should actually be flourishing in this offense with Brown and Smith on the outside. 

With the OL we have... running the ball should always be a major piece of the offensive philosophy.  Investing big in a 3rd WR just doesn't make a ton of sense to me.  And the price of WRs is getting ridiculous.  Having multiple $100M Wrs on the roster is just not a viable roster construction option, in my view.   Whereas, keeping the 2nd and 3rd WRs cost fairly low, and keeping the RB cost fairly low, while investing heavily in the OL means that you should have a sustainable offense for the foreseeable future.  The game is still won and lost, primarily, along the LOS.  2020 was a crap season for a lot of reasons, but the biggest one was the absolute dreck that was thrown out to play OL that year.  2019 wasn't great by any means, but it was a playoff year, in large degree because the OL held up.

8 hours ago, justwinbaby said:

You're a sensitive one aren't ya

Maybe, but I am definitely correct.

3 minutes ago, UndyTaker said:

Its not about that though. Watkins is a good player on a extremely cheap contract. The quality of the player for what youre paying might be irreplaceable. Why would we draft a WR in the first round with a 1st round contract to only get targeted 1 time a game??

How do you know he’d only get 1 target a game? Don’t you think there’s a reason Watkins is only getting 1 target a game while Brown and Smith get 6-10 (guesstimate) each? 

I’m not saying it should happen but if a WR is far and beyond the BPA at your pick, go ahead and take that WR. 

3 minutes ago, UndyTaker said:

Its not about that though. Watkins is a good player on a extremely cheap contract. The quality of the player for what youre paying might be irreplaceable. Why would we draft a WR in the first round with a 1st round contract to only get targeted 1 time a game??

We don't need WR, which is amazing to say.

My opinion we have two #1's right now.  If they wanted to add another WR to replace Quez then look to the later rounds. 

Top 10 picks should be reserved for QB, WR, D-line, Tackle and CB.  As of right now it's assumed we don't need QB and WR.

4 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

How do you know he’d only get 1 target a game? Don’t you think there’s a reason Watkins is only getting 1 target a game while Brown and Smith get 6-10 (guesstimate) each? 

I’m not saying it should happen but if a WR is far and beyond the BPA at your pick, go ahead and take that WR. 

Not in the first round. It’s beyond idiotic

8 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Not in the first round. It’s beyond idiotic

So you’d take Derek Barnett over Jamar Chase? Got it

26 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

If the Saints pick stays high IMO it's edge rusher or bust for us. Otherwise I'd be looking to trade the pick for someone looking for an OT or QB. 

I think the other possibility is DT if Jalen Carter is there for them.  He would make sense given that both Hargrave and Cox may be gone next season.  Arguably DT is a bigger need despite the addition of Davis this year. 

3 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

How do you know he’d only get 1 target a game? Don’t you think there’s a reason Watkins is only getting 1 target a game while Brown and Smith get 6-10 (guesstimate) each? 

I’m not saying it should happen but if a WR is far and beyond the BPA at your pick, go ahead and take that WR. 

Quez is only getting 1 target a game because Hurts is HEAVILY favoring throwing to Brown and Smith, and he SHOULD be. Teams really have to account for Quez's speed and its opening up the space for Brown and Smith to succeed even more. Add in the fact teams have to account for Goedert and the targets he is taking. This offense should be targeting Quez more but that is not an indictment of Quez's skill as a player. Drafting a WR in the 1st round would not change anything in this offense.

What does the upcoming safety class look like? Imagine a possible elite playmaker safety in this defense.

8 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

So you’d take Derek Barnett over Jamar Chase? Got it

I’d trade down 

9 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

So you’d take Derek Barnett over Jamar Chase? Got it

I would take Will Anderson over Jamar Chase

11 minutes ago, EaglePhan1986 said:

So you’d take Derek Barnett over Jamar Chase? Got it

Unfair and you know it.