Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]I just told you BB switched to a 4-3 base which meant Sheard and Reed weren't a projected fit. Carter had 10 sacks, dude.  Anderson has had a bunch of sacks, too. There is more than one way to skin a cat.   Do you not like what Ridely and Vereen look like and the possibility of two 1st rd picks being leveraged to move up? WHy not? Can you imagine the insane jealousy level if NE wins a SB and then has two 1st rd picks again? LMAO
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    They've been switching back and forth from 43 to 34 to 43 all year. They didn't play a straight 43 base all year. Even with Anderson and Carter we were close to dead last in sacks this year and even you complained about lack of pass rush from time to time.

    I like what I see with Ridley but have big question marks on why Vereen is a constant inactive. Do you not think he could have given more then Faulk who had more active games then Vereen?

    We had 2 1st's this past year too, were you excited to trade one into next year? Frankly I was excited to fix the pass rush in one of the most heavy pass rush heavy drafts in a long time and that didn't happen.

    Like I said there is a fine line and the NO trade is still on the fence and completely dependent on Vereen. Since you are playing if's what if they bundled both those 1st's this past year for Aldon Smith who would have made a great OLB on this team? If Vereen turns into a good back and they get a good player out of NO's pick then it was a great trade but as of today it doesn't look good at all. We'll have to wait and see what Vereen becomes but you saying they could package the picks and move up is true for last year and this year both

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    If Dallas loses, they will push us back to 49.  The Giants would not figure into this for us, so go Dallas!!

    Pick Order Round 1SOS
    13ARI0.469
    14DAL0.47
    15PHI0.488
    16NYJ0.500
    17Oak0.506
    18SD0.508
    19NYG0.522
    20CHI0.527
    Pick Order Round 2SOS
    46DAL0.469
    47PHI0.488
    48NYJ0.500
    49Oak0.506
    50SD0.508
    51NYG0.522
    52CHI0.527
    53ARI0.469
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]Best case scenario is that we pick- #24(NO) #32 #45(OAK) #64 Most likely will be- #31 (NO) #32  #49 (OAK) #64 Still not bad though.
    Posted by Army2LT[/QUOTE]

    If the Saints lose to the Lions during Wildcard Weekend, we'd get pick 24.  If the Saints advance they would play the 49ers in the division round.  If they lose to the 49ers we'd get pick 28 since the Saints would have the best record of any of the teams except NE but the Saints have the better SOS.  GB will host the Giants, Falcons or Cowboys and they should easily beat any of those teams.  If the Saints beat the Niners, then lose to GB in the Conference Championship, we'd get pick 30.

    Since the Giants are beating the Cowboys 21-0 at the half, the OAK pick is looking like #49.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    It looks like we'll host either the Steelers or Bengals.  We can't host HOU if they win because they would automatically travel to Baltimore.  I can't see DEN (losers of 3 straight) beating the Steelers.  We should cheer for CIN.  If we beat them, we host either BAL or PIT for the AFC.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Faucetman. Show Faucetman's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks : I think a lot of it hinges on Roethlisturd's health and the play of the O Line against what is a pretty good Denver pass rush. Denver will need to take out Mendenhall and that threat, because that is where they're weak. I think any team playing Tebow has someting to worry about due to his unknown.  Recently, NE and KC have put out the blueprints out on their offense, so we'll see it Pitt can settle into the thin air out there and try to match that.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]
    True, but I think Pittsburgh has the edge with all that play-off experience and lack of same from Denver and Tebow, although he has played in some huge games in college.  Still, I'm betting PIT beats them up pretty good.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    I predict that the Saints pick will be around #28, exactly what was traded away last year, with the profit being #56, which was used to pick Shane Vereen.   Vereen has been injured plenty but might actually be pretty good someday (or he might continue to stay injured for two more years or so, we don't know).  Some second rounders are a Gronk or a Vollmer.  Others aren't.

    I assume that the Saints win versus Detroit in their dome, and then lose out at San Francisco.  The Saints are good but they have weaknesses, and San Francisco does have a bye.  The Saints' hot win-loss record could raise them to the #28 spot among the four divisional round losers.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Army2LT. Show Army2LT's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]If Dallas loses, they will push us back to 49.  The Giants would not figure into this for us, so go Dallas!! Pick Order Round 1 SOS 13 ARI 0.469 14 DAL 0.47 15 PHI 0.488 16 NYJ 0.500 17 Oak 0.506 18 SD 0.508 19 NYG 0.522 20 CHI 0.527 Pick Order Round 2 SOS 46 DAL 0.469 47 PHI 0.488 48 NYJ 0.500 49 Oak 0.506 50 SD 0.508 51 NYG 0.522 52 CHI 0.527 53 ARI 0.469
    Posted by Faucetman[/QUOTE]

    Is that SOS correct?  The website that I looked at has OAK at .492 and with NYG winning, it would mae our situation better.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Army2LT. Show Army2LT's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    According to ESPN-



     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    If the Patriots never made a trade they would have had the
    28th (1)
    60th (2)
    92 (3)
    125 (4)
    159 (5)
    189 (6)
    230(7)
    And I suppose if they used those picks you could all say they didn't trade back and picked higher. But here's the reality, they turned those picks into HIGHER picks. This is what they do every year and it why this trading back is a myth. The Pats have picked 2 first round picks and five 2nd rounders that they were never given over the last ten years. It is mathematically impossible to trade back all the time and end up with more and higher picks then when you started. Here is the picks they were given vs what they actually picked

    Given                                          Picked
    28th given (Ingram)                      17th (Solder). Up 11 picks
    60th (2) (Harris)                           33(Dowling). Up 27 picks
    92nd (3) (Barksdale).                     56 (2) (Vereen). Up 36 picks
    125 (4) (T Jones).                         73 (3) (Ridley). Up 52 picks
    159 (5) (L. Smith).                        75 (3) (Mallett). Up 53 picks
    189 (6) (Mohammed)                     138 (5) (Cannon). Up 51 picks
    230 (7) (Matthews).                      159 (5) (L. Smith) Up 71 picks
                                                    194(6) (Carter). No pick without trade
                                                     219 (7) (Williams). No pick without trade

    So by "trading back for value and not using a high pick" BB has picked higher in every single round plus gained two picks. Any way you slice and dice it, the Pats got better picks than by not "trading back". 

    You would think to move up in every round would mean he had to move back in next years draft, but no. They will pick higher in next years draft than the picks they were given once again...and the next year...and the next year. I certainly hope BB never listens to the advice of this board on how to get higher picks because he will definitely end up with lower picks and less of them doing what some of you guys say.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]I f the Patriots never made a trade they would have had the 28th (1) 60th (2) 92 (3) 125 (4) 159 (5) And I suppose if they used those picks you could all say they didn't trade back and picked higher. But here's the reality, they turned those picks into HIGHER picks. This is what they do every year and it why this trading back is a myth. The Pats have picked 2 first round picks and five 2nd rounders that they were never given over the last ten years. It is mathematically impossible to trade back all the time and end up with more and higher picks then when you started. Here is the picks they were given vs what they actually picked Given. Picked 28th given (Ingram) 17th (Solder). Up 11 picks 60th (2) (Harris) 33 (Dowling). Up 27 picks 92nd (3) (Barksdale). 56 (2) (Vereen). Up 36 picks 125 (4) (T Jones). 73 (3) (Ridley). Up 52 picks 159 (5) (L. Smith). 75 (3) (Mallett). Up 53 picks) 189 (6) (Mohammed) 138 (5) (Cannon). Up 51 picks 230 (7) (Matthews). 159 (5) (L. Smith) Up 71 picks 194 (6) (Carter). No pick without trade 219 (7) (Williams). No pick without trade So by "trading back for value and not using a high pick" BB has picked higher in every single round plus gained two picks. You would think to move up in every round would mean he had to move back in next years draft, but no. They will pick higher in next years draft than the picks they were given once again...and the next year...and the next year. I certainly hope BB never listens to the advice of this board on how to get higher picks because he will definitely end up with lower picks doing what some of you guys say.
    Posted by shenanigan[/QUOTE]
    I guess when they're 13 and 3 with the highest seed it's tough to argue your point. However if you believe that they got to where they are primarily because of Brady and BB the coach (and then go out and lose in the first round because the defensive line is not good enough), you might wish they had drafted a guy at that spot in the first this year. I'd hate to see a guy like Cameron Hayewood stuffing our running game this post season and on the flip side watching a guy like Love get pushed out of run plays.

    But you're probably right to be honest. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]I predict that the Saints pick will be around #28, exactly what was traded away last year, with the profit being #56, which was used to pick Shane Vereen.   Vereen has been injured plenty but might actually be pretty good someday (or he might continue to stay injured for two more years or so, we don't know).  Some second rounders are a Gronk or a Vollmer.  Others aren't. I assume that the Saints win versus Detroit in their dome, and then lose out at San Francisco.  The Saints are good but they have weaknesses, and San Francisco does have a bye.  The Saints' hot win-loss record could raise them to the #28 spot among the four divisional round losers.
    Posted by Paul_K[/QUOTE]

    PatsEng~

    As Paul described up above, THIS is the way to look at it.  We Traded away the 28th pick in 2011 to NO's, and we acquired their 1st Round Selection in '12, along WITH The Saints 2nd Round Selection (#56) in this past 2011 Draft.  Whether or not Vareen becomes a stud or a dud, BB is parlaying this bet here into far greater odds... Unless The Saints make it to The NFC Championship Game (30/29) and/or The Superbowl (picks 31/32), New England will get as good or in better probability (here)-A better (i.e. higher) 1st Round Selection.  Absolutely The worst case scenario is That NE gets: the 32nd selection in 2012 + the 56th selection in 2011- By NE giving up: the 28th selection in 2011.  Overall, this is an extremely good move wherein BB will get more than he gave, no matter what

    Now, what Belichick does with this, is another thing...  For instance: Belichick reaches by selecting a guy who by every resource is a late 2nd Round Quality guy <just like BB did a full 1 Rd reach for Vareen-according to the most conservative of specific player selection-spot resources />; Add Vareen (early 3rd Rd quality) + BB doing a late 1st Rd reach this year for a guy regarded as Late 2nd Rd quality & consensus for coming off the Big Board, INSTEAD of perhaps selecting a higher quality (consensus Mid 1st Rd) prospect whom might have slipped down to the end of Rd #1...then= Yea, it'll be safe to safe that it was sorta worthless by and large (but not due to the trade itself, just do to wasting the selection(s) on guys of quality for whom, 99% chance ya coulda still gotten with a pick that wasn't as high).    
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks : Ridley is an SEC lead back from a top notch program and although not an exact mirror of Ingram's style, has some power and size, with great production there. He wasn't a Hesiman Trophy winner or even a candidate, but is a very nice draft pick to develop. I like how BB took two RBs, because we'll need two to develop, and one is close in skill set, if not better for our offense (pass catching, solid blocking) as well as dodging Ingram as an optioin with his questionable knee issue as a senior. I don't understand why you're confused. NE passed on INgram, got two RBs to develop and secured NOs 1st rd pick. It's basically a fleecing.  Barring Ingram morphing into Emmit Smith, I don't see how you can't agree. I liked Reed or Sheard as an option too, but if BB was moving to a 4-3 then those two don't fit.  At the time, we did not know he would be switching.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    I think it is way too early to judge this. Ingram missed most of the year with injuries. For all you know he could still be a consistent starting back in the NFL. Ridley did not start contributing consistently until the last three weeks of the season (he had a few weeks were he dressed and never saw a snap on offense). 

    As far as the first round pick, we could take the next Meriweather or trade it for lower picks that end up being Wheatley and Butler all over again. If they get nothing from the pick and Ingram turns out to be a better RB in year then it looks like the Patriots are the team who got fleeced.

    I think you need to give players and drafts two or three years before you can say what was and what was not a good move. 

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]I don't disagree. But, if NOs doesn't win a SB, NE gets a great pick next year and sees a Ridley and Vereen bonus, which is likely, then BB won. I mean, really. If we lost our lead back into the postseason, we'd be concerned. Pierre Thomas is a nice back, but he's coming off a leg problem. We'll see.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    I am not trying to disagree, but if the Patriots lost Ridley or BJGE going into the playoffs, I would not be very concerned. I think for NO's offense, Sproles, Thomas, and Ivory are enough for the playoffs. I do not think the lack of Ingram will be the difference for that team.

    For the trade, it is one of those time will tell things. It is just a pet peeve of mine when people try to judge drafts before the players all have time to develop. For all we know, Vereen might not make the team next year or he could become the starting RB. My point is more, right now it is too soon to judge.
     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]Does anyone think the Lions can upset the Saints to give us a better selection come April? How about the Raiders going 8-8?  There seems to be a plethora of teams with that record.  It seems like we could be picking anywhere between 48-56.  Does anyone have a better idea how to narrow that one down?
    Posted by Army2LT[/QUOTE]

    re the first question, of course the lions can upset the saints. they competed with the packers well. if they get to brees and rough him up, it will help their cause.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks : They've been switching back and forth from 43 to 34 to 43 all year. They didn't play a straight 43 base all year. Even with Anderson and Carter we were close to dead last in sacks this year and even you complained about lack of pass rush from time to time. I like what I see with Ridley but have big question marks on why Vereen is a constant inactive. Do you not think he could have given more then Faulk who had more active games then Vereen? We had 2 1st's this past year too, were you excited to trade one into next year? Frankly I was excited to fix the pass rush in one of the most heavy pass rush heavy drafts in a long time and that didn't happen. Like I said there is a fine line and the NO trade is still on the fence and completely dependent on Vereen. Since you are playing if's what if they bundled both those 1st's this past year for Aldon Smith who would have made a great OLB on this team? If Vereen turns into a good back and they get a good player out of NO's pick then it was a great trade but as of today it doesn't look good at all. We'll have to wait and see what Vereen becomes but you saying they could package the picks and move up is true for last year and this year both
    Posted by PatsEng[/QUOTE]

    re: "We had 2 1st's this past year too, were you excited to trade one into next year? Frankly I was excited to fix the pass rush in one of the most heavy pass rush heavy drafts in a long time and that didn't happen."

    thanks for saying eng
    remember last year, i was harping regularly on this leaading up to the draft.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]Sorry, disagree 100%. You're doing that because you haven't seen it in for a SB win.  Woodhead can't be a lead back for this team. NOs wouldn't have started Ingram if that wasn't the case. Thomas is a nice player, but he is coming off a leg injury. Sproles is a scatback.  Ivory could be a possible guy, but he's like a Ridley for us. Compare the backs. Thomas is BJGE.   Ivory a Ridley. Sproles a better Woodhead and we haven't mentioned a Vereen or Faulk yet.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    I guess I do not get the comparison, Thomas will be their number 1 back, Ivory will get some carries and Sproles is not an every down back, I would not compare him to Woodhead.  He was the Saints leading rusher in terms of yards and second on the team in receptions. I would not want him to be my everydown running back, but a team is going a lot further with him then they are with Woody.

    Ingram was technically the starting RB, but he was fighting injuries all year and was not critical to that team. He only played in 10 games and the Saints we 8-2 with him and 5-1 without him. I think it is fair to say they did not win or lose based on his performance this year. 
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]The point is reps.  If Ingram is a true lead back and they start pretending Thomas or Ivory is that when they need it, it may not work. I like their personnel, but at some point it's always about continuity.
    Posted by RidingWithTheKingII[/QUOTE]

    Isn't that what the Patriots have done with BJGE and Ridley the past few weeks. Thomas has gotten consitent reps this year. He only trails Ingram by a handful of carries. I think a majority of teams are mixing up the backs more. There are plenty of top backs on non-playoff teams (Jones-Drew, McCoy, Lynch, Chris Johnson, Beanie Wells, Steven Jackson) and plenty of playoff teams without "lead backs". Five (the Packers, Saints, Lions, Giants and Lions) of the six NFC playoffs teams do not have back averaging 10 carries per game. 

    I do not think that one approach is right and the other is wrong. There is more than one way to win a Super Bowl.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    While I usually find Rusty wrong, I have to agree on this issue. Many on this board were calling for Ingram, a questionable first round talent in most other draft years, health concern with his knee, questionable pass blacking skills. To come out of the draft with Ridley, Vereen and the Saints number 1 is genius. While battling injury this year, Vereen was very worthy of his draft position. I expect him to be very productive next year giving the Pats a speed element missing from the RB position for quite some time. Assuming a reasonable number for Benny, Ifind the Pats quartet of Ridley, Vereen, Woody and Benny very diverse, and allows BB togame plan depending on that weeks opponent. I do feel a return to a heavier run game is possible with these 4 players, but a stronger C is needed with a top 2-4 round choice depending on how the draft plays out.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks

    In Response to Re: Saints and Raiders 2012 draft picks:
    [QUOTE]It looks like we'll host either the Steelers or Bengals.  We can't host HOU if they win because they would automatically travel to Baltimore.  I can't see DEN (losers of 3 straight) beating the Steelers.  We should cheer for CIN.  If we beat them, we host either BAL or PIT for the AFC.
    Posted by Faucetman[/QUOTE]

    or denver if they get a miracle...
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share