Potential reasons for not drafting a FS

[steelbtexan]

2006 (also, KWalter trade)
1. Mario
2. Demeco
3. Winston
4. OD

2007 (also,1/2 Matt Schaub trade)
1. Okoye (like it or not, he's starting)
2. JJ (probably) or Bennett in '07 or Studdard in '09
3. Zac Diles

2008 (also, 1/2 Matt Schaub trade... also, Chris Myers trade)
1. Duane Brown
2. Steve Slaton

2009
1. Cushing
2. Caldwell
3. Quin

I don't neccessarily agree with your philosophy on how to judge a draft. But, Smithiak has been pretty successful using your measurement. It's also worth noting what the Texans have done on the final day of drafting. It seems those picks are more value than you think (at least to the Texans)

Acquired with 4th-7th rounds
2006: OD, D.Anderson, KWalter
2007: Studdard, ZDiles
2008: D.Barber, C.Myers
2009: Quin, McCain, J.Casey

now, I don't think all of that list is "A" talent. But, getting guys like OD, Quin, and ZDiles late in the draft are good reasons not to be so eager to trade those picks in order to move up into the 2nd and 3rd rounds.

2007 was a horrible draft. No I dont like Okoye starting. In fact banking on Okoye ever becoming a playmaker is misguided. IMHO

The only starting caliber guy that was drafted is Diles and he was picked in the 7th rd. That tells me how bad the 07 draft really was.

2008 Brown is the only guy drafted that is starter level quality. That includes Myers and Barber. IMHO

2009 Cushing covers up a rather ordinary draft. Quin was a steal. The last 3 drafts have only netted 1 starter level guy. That's why Smithiak are 7-9,9-7.

This year I believe Smithiak drafted 2 starters Jackson and Tate. All of the other guys hopefully can help the ST's. That's why I would've traded the rest of the draft to trade back into the 2nd rd and make sure I got 3 day one starters out of ths draft.

 

[dalemurphy]

2007 was a horrible draft. No I dont like Okoye starting. In fact banking on Okoye ever becoming a playmaker is misguided. IMHO

The only starting caliber guy that was drafted is Diles and he was picked in the 7th rd. That tells me how bad the 07 draft really was.

2008 Brown is the only guy drafted that is starter level quality. That includes Myers and Barber. IMHO

2009 Cushing covers up a rather ordinary draft. Quin was a steal. The last 3 drafts have only netted 1 starter level guy. That's why Smithiak are 7-9,9-7.

This year I believe Smithiak drafted 2 starters Jackson and Tate. All of the other guys hopefully can help the ST's. That's why I would've traded the rest of the draft to trade back into the 2nd rd and make sure I got 3 day one starters out of ths draft.

2007, 2008, 2009 (only one starter-level guy?): Zac Diles, J. Jones, D. Brown, Slaton, Cushing, Caldwell, Quin. Wow! That's SteelbTexan for you... that list of players = 1!

so, according to SteelbTexan ( I want this on record ), here are some bad Texan draft picks:

Steve Slaton
Jacoby Jones
D. Barber
A. Molden
Connor Barwin
Caldwell
James Casey
Graham
Sharpton
McManus
Holliday
Earl Mitchell
Dickerson

 

[JB]

Don't leave the Schaub out of that list!

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

2007 was a horrible draft. No I dont like Okoye starting. In fact banking on Okoye ever becoming a playmaker is misguided. IMHO

The only starting caliber guy that was drafted is Diles and he was picked in the 7th rd. That tells me how bad the 07 draft really was.

2008 Brown is the only guy drafted that is starter level quality. That includes Myers and Barber. IMHO

2009 Cushing covers up a rather ordinary draft. Quin was a steal. The last 3 drafts have only netted 1 starter level guy. That's why Smithiak are 7-9,9-7.

This year I believe Smithiak drafted 2 starters Jackson and Tate. All of the other guys hopefully can help the ST's. That's why I would've traded the rest of the draft to trade back into the 2nd rd and make sure I got 3 day one starters out of ths draft.

Well I disagree with this but others have argued why.

I'd also like to add that we don't just need starters. I could care less who gets the official start. Situational guys and rotational guys are vital to the success of this team. Connor Barwin is a good example of a guy that's probably never going to "start" for us but could be invaluable to the success of this team.

Same goes for Tate/Slaton. Slaton may not be the "starter" going forward but having 2 running backs (or more) that can carry the rock is vitally important for us.

Drafting guys like Glover Quin, Antoine Caldwell, etc. are extremely important. Quin was drafted with a specific position in mind, nickle corner. Kubiak/Smith felt he could immediately contribute in that role. All the fans want a #1 shutdown corner, but coaches that do it right fill specific roles on their team that are needed for success. Quin ends up starting. Caldwell and other guys like that are so important to get and develop... if you do this successfully, your not forced to fill "need" picks early in the draft because if you lose a starter to FA/injury, their backup may be ready to take over and you can take the absolute stud BPA in the 1st that's not at a need area.

I just don't understand the concept that if they draft pick isn't a starter, it's a failed draft pick. Consistently trading picks away to move up and take "starter" guys will result in a team that has ZERO depth and sub-quality backups that probably won't develop.

 

[Goldensilence]

2007, 2008, 2009 (only one starter-level guy?): Zac Diles, J. Jones, D. Brown, Slaton, Cushing, Caldwell, Quin. Wow! That's SteelbTexan for you... that list of players = 1!

so, according to SteelbTexan ( I want this on record ), here are some bad Texan draft picks:

Steve Slaton Good pick

Jacoby Jones Took him a while to come around but, finally looks like he's got his head in the game. Good pick.

D. Barber Not sure If I cal lthis a good pick but, he's made the and at times hasn't looked lost. Decent pick.

A. Molden Hasn't seen the field much, before the injury he was great on ST. IMO at this point looks like a wasted pick

Connor Barwin Thought we could've gotten a starter instead, but decent impact on his rookie year. Wasn't high on the pick, right now the pick looks
good.

Caldwell Have big hopes he can continue to solidify the interior of the OL. Really wish they'd give him a shot at Center. Good pick.

James Casey Saw time his rookie season but, didn't impress. Where's his true position? Not a good pick IMO

Graham All these cats here haven't even played a down of NFL football. Let's see what they can do on the field before we call them good or bad picks.
Sharpton
McManus
Holliday
Earl Mitchell
Dickerson

Bolded is JMO.

I dunno the past two years it seems like when 4th and 5th round comes around Gary and Rick pull a WTF, then recover to get what at least looks like good value in the 6th and 7th.

I would guess what SteelB is trying to get to is we all have positions that we think you build parts of your team around.

On the the OL IMO having a quality center is just as important as a LT. IMO for you to have a good secondary you should have good FS play.

We just haven't gotten decent or great play at both really ever.

 

[dalemurphy]

Bolded is JMO.

I dunno the past two years it seems like when 4th and 5th round comes around Gary and Rick pull a WTF, then recover to get what at least looks like good value in the 6th and 7th.

I would guess what SteelB is trying to get to is we all have positions that we think you build parts of your team around.

On the the OL IMO having a quality center is just as important as a LT. IMO for you to have a good secondary you should have good FS play.

We just haven't gotten decent or great play at both really ever.

I get that. However, simply drafting a Center or a FS high in the draft doesn't mean you get a good player. Perhaps they didn't like the players available at those positions. That's a distinct possibility. I would hate for them to start drafting players they don't believe in simply because they feel a need to address the position.

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

I get that. However, simply drafting a Center or a FS high in the draft doesn't mean you get a good player. Perhaps they didn't like the players available at those positions. That's a distinct possibility. I would hate for them to start drafting players they don't believe in simply because they feel a need to address the position simply to appease the fanbase.

fix it.

 

[steelbtexan]

Bolded is JMO.

I dunno the past two years it seems like when 4th and 5th round comes around Gary and Rick pull a WTF, then recover to get what at least looks like good value in the 6th and 7th.

I would guess what SteelB is trying to get to is we all have positions that we think you build parts of your team around.

On the the OL IMO having a quality center is just as important as a LT. IMO for you to have a good secondary you should have good FS play.

We just haven't gotten decent or great play at both really ever.

This is what I'm saying. Thanks GS

The last 3 yrs have yielded Diles,Brown,Quin and Cushing as draft picks that will be starting next season. (I'm not counting AO because he shouldn't be starting) Barwin is a useful player with a high upside so you can count him too if you wish.

This years draft should yield 2 starters (Jackson and Tate) So maybe this is a better draft than the last 3 yrs. But it wont be enough to catch up with the Colts. IMHO

When you're rebuilding a team you have to do better than drafting 1 starter per year over a 3 yr period or you haven't done a good job. IMHO

 

[dalemurphy]

This is what I'm saying. Thanks GS

The last 3 yrs have yielded Diles,Brown,Quin and Cushing as draft picks that will be starting next season. (I'm not counting AO because he shouldn't be starting) Barwin is a useful player with a high upside so you can count him too if you wish.

This years draft should yield 2 starters (Jackson and Tate) So maybe this is a better draft than the last 3 yrs. But it wont be enough to catch up with the Colts. IMHO

When you're rebuilding a team you have to do better than drafting 1 starter per year over a 3 yr period or you haven't done a good job. IMHO

Here's the drafted starters of the Superbowl champs the pas 3 years:

'07: Bushrod
'08: Sed. Ellis
'09: Malcolm Jenkins

that's it, unless you want to count the punter... any thoughts?

 

[steelbtexan]

I get that. However, simply drafting a Center or a FS high in the draft doesn't mean you get a good player. Perhaps they didn't like the players available at those positions. That's a distinct possibility. I would hate for them to start drafting players they don't believe in simply because they feel a need to address the position.

You dont know if your going to get a good player at any position. By your theory they should never draft a FS or C because they aren't the BPA at the time of the pick.

I really like Burnett and Walton and would've traded future draft picks to get them. Smithiak didn't do this and time will tell if they were right.

So far looking back at past drafts 2007-2009 Smithiaks draft strategy should be questioned. IMHO

 

[steelbtexan]

Here's the drafted starters of the Superbowl champs the pas 3 years:

'07: Bushrod
'08: Sed. Ellis
'09: Malcolm Jenkins

that's it, unless you want to count the punter... any thoughts?

How about Colston,Evans,Harper,and Thomas?

 

[dalemurphy]

How about Colston,Evans,Harper,and Thomas?

Thomas was an UDFA.

Colston, Evans, and Harper were drafted in 2006 just like: OD, Winston, Demeco, Mario.

 

[steelbtexan]

Or the Colts, Practically the whole secondary, Muir, Garcon,Collie,Clark,their LT Johnson ETC......

See what I'm getting at?

 

[infantrycak]

How about Colston,Evans,Harper,and Thomas?

Evans was 2006.
Thomas wasn't drafted.
Colston nobody saw coming but sure it worked out and also 2006.
Harper was 2006.

Edit - beat to the punch.

Or the Colts, Practically the whole secondary, Muir, Garcon,Collie,Clark,their LT Johnson ETC......

See what I'm getting at?

Collie and Garcon aren't starters unless you want to consider Gonzalez a bust.
Johnson was 2006 and again starting because of the problems Ugoh had.
Clark is 2003.
Muir was undrafted and originally picked up by Green Bay rather than Indy.

 

[dalemurphy]

You dont know if your going to get a good player at any position. By your theory they should never draft a FS or C because they aren't the BPA at the time of the pick.

I really like Burnett and Walton and would've traded future draft picks to get them. Smithiak didn't do this and time will tell if they were right.

So far looking back at past drafts 2007-2009 Smithiaks draft strategy should be questioned. IMHO

No, I'm saying that some years the Texans may find certain positions in the draft to be weak. I don't want them drafting a FS that they don't like, simply because they have a need there. I think that's what free agency is for. In that regard, they really blew it last season by ignoring the position. Due to the addition of Pollard and emergence of Barber, I don't feel that way this year. But, I'm still concerned about the position if we have injuries.

 

[dalemurphy]

Or the Colts, Practically the whole secondary, Muir, Garcon,Collie,Clark,their LT Johnson ETC......

See what I'm getting at?

Winston, Caldwell, D.Brown, AJ, JJ, Slaton, OD, Mario, Demeco, Cushing, Diles, Quin ETC....

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

You dont know if your going to get a good player at any position. By your theory they should never draft a FS or C because they aren't the BPA at the time of the pick.

I really like Burnett and Walton and would've traded future draft picks to get them. Smithiak didn't do this and time will tell if they were right.

So far looking back at past drafts 2007-2009 Smithiaks draft strategy should be questioned. IMHO

Kubiak and Smith are drafting the guys they feel will have the biggest impact on the team or will be able to make the team better than another prospect would. Your right, you never know if your going to get a good player or not... that's what makes trading several and/or future picks to get one so risky. Who's to say that Burnett or Walton would even be great fits for our scheme and what Kubiak wants to do? To be honest I think Eric Olsen may have been a better fit for us than JD Walton, even though Walton was generally rated higher.

 

[badboy]

No, I'm saying that some years the Texans may find certain positions in the draft to be weak. I don't want them drafting a FS that they don't like, simply because they have a need there. I think that's what free agency is for. In that regard, they really blew it last season by ignoring the position. Due to the addition of Pollard and emergence of Barber, I don't feel that way this year. But, I'm still concerned about the position if we have injuries.

What if there was not a FS in free agency that they liked?

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

Below is the rankings of centers from 02-05 . Let's play ... who's starting . Of course you can do the same for FS .

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/players.php?genpos=C&draftyear=2002&sortorder=tsxpos&order=ASC

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/players.php?genpos=C&draftyear=2003&sortorder=tsxpos&order=ASC

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/players.php?genpos=C&draftyear=2004&sortorder=tsxpos&order=ASC

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/players.php?genpos=C&draftyear=2005&sortorder=tsxpos&order=ASC

 

[steelbtexan]

Thomas was an UDFA.

Colston, Evans, and Harper were drafted in 2006 just like: OD, Winston, Demeco, Mario.

The point is that the Saints got Thomas. The Texans didn't. The Texans didn't have a reiable RB last year and the did have 2 reliable RB's that were UDFA's. The UDFA's were better than any RB's the Texans trotted on to the field last year. The Saints have done a better job scouting than the Texans over the last 4 yrs.

The Saints lost J.Brown their starting LT before last season started and because of their great drafting they were able to plug Bushrod in and not miss a beat. They won the SB with Bushrod as the starting LT. Can you imagine if D.Brown were to get hurt and miss the season. The excuses would run pampant all over this MB.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

The point is that the Saints got Thomas. The Texans didn't. The Texans didn't have a reiable RB last year and the did have 2 reliable RB's that were UDFA's. The UDFA's were better than any RB's the Texans trotted on to the field last year. The Saints have done a better job scouting than the Texans over the last 4 yrs.

The Saints lost J.Brown their starting LT before last season started and because of their great drafting they were able to plug Bushrod in and not miss a beat. They won the SB with Bushrod as the starting LT. Can you imagine if D.Brown were to get hurt and miss the season. The excuses would run pampant all over this MB.

IMO ... the Saints best moves were Brees and Greg Williams . Their best draft pick was Colston in the 7th .

 

[dalemurphy]

The point is that the Saints got Thomas. The Texans didn't. The Texans didn't have a reiable RB last year and the did have 2 reliable RB's that were UDFA's. The UDFA's were better than any RB's the Texans trotted on to the field last year. The Saints have done a better job scouting than the Texans over the last 4 yrs.

The Saints lost J.Brown their starting LT before last season started and because of their great drafting they were able to plug Bushrod in and not miss a beat. They won the SB with Bushrod as the starting LT. Can you imagine if D.Brown were to get hurt and miss the season. The excuses would run pampant all over this MB.

I can imagine Charles Spencer getting hurt. Let's not forget that piece of the 2006 draft.

The Saints have had poor LB play the past few years and yet they passed on Zac Diles in '07, while we got him in the 7th round. Every team in the NFL passed up Pierre Thomas throughout the draft. I'm sure all 32 teams regret that. You don't expect the Texans to accurately assess every single longshot in the draft, do you?

The Texans did lose both starting OGs in week two of last season and still had a pretty good offense. By the way, Pitts and Briesel (UDFA) were replaced by two mid to late round draft picks. Also, our 4th round all-pro TE was injured in mid-season and was replaced with Joel Dressen (UDFA), and the Texans offense continued to perform well.

 

[steelbtexan]

No, I'm saying that some years the Texans may find certain positions in the draft to be weak. I don't want them drafting a FS that they don't like, simply because they have a need there. I think that's what free agency is for. In that regard, they really blew it last season by ignoring the position. Due to the addition of Pollard and emergence of Barber, I don't feel that way this year. But, I'm still concerned about the position if we have injuries.

Apparently the FS and C positions have been weak all 9 yrs of the Texans existance.

They had a great draft in 2006 and gave me hope that thing were changing in the war room. Since then Smithiak have regressed in the war room. IMHO

This years talent was similar to the 2006 draft. IMHO

They should've been able to walk away with more than 2 starters and some special teamers. IMHO And maybe they did time will tell but I remain skeptical.

 

[dalemurphy]

What if there was not a FS in free agency that they liked?

Free Agency is different than the draft. In the draft, you have a specific and finite amount of resources. In Free Agency, you can sign as many or as few players as you like. After '08, the Texans could've grabbed one or two relatively inexpensive veteran FAs without it damaging any other plans they had, and simply let them compete for a roster spot. That was a mistake. In the draft, you are taking guys that you hope to have on your team for at least 4 years. So, reaching for a player the organization doesn't believe in doesn't make sense. Giving Sean Jones a 1 yr and $2 million contract last season, even if you don't love him, would have insulated them against playing someone like Busing for 1/2 the season.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

The biggest reason they didn't trade up and draft a FS is Smithiak dont place the value on the S position that we on the MB do.

Smithiak should be able to pick 3 starters out of each draft. If they cant they are falling behind the rest of the NFL.

That's why I think trading up and getting a no.1 and two no.2's each draft. That way you are almost assured of getting 3 impact players from each draft.

That's just my philosopy on the draft.

I don't think that's true. As your team gets better, higher and higher round picks end up not starting.

Back in the day (50s-70s), rookies weren't expected to start. Not even 1st rounders. Over time with the increase in rookie salaries, there's more pressure to start your 1st and 2nd rounders but that's not necessarily the best thing for the team. And a rookie that doesn't start isn't necessarily a fail, either.

As I said, as your team gets better, higher and higher round picks end up starting. If your team sucks, then you can get lots of starters from a draft and those starters could all be serious upgrades from what you were starting the year before. But you want to move away from that. And as you get better and get better depth, you can move away from drafting purely for need to drafting best player available. And if you're drafting BPA, there's an even better chance that your rookie isn't going to start.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

Apparently the FS and C positions have been weak all 9 yrs of the Texans existance.

They had a great draft in 2006 and gave me hope that thing were changing in the war room. Since then Smithiak have regressed in the war room. IMHO

This years talent was similar to the 2006 draft. IMHO

They should've been able to walk away with more than 2 starters and some special teamers. IMHO And maybe they did time will tell but I remain skeptical.

Dude ... that's your opinion ... that's it . If you were talking CC , that's another story but because they didn't draft who you wanted or trade how you wanted , doesn't mean they're wrong .

The fact is , the road is littered with bust in each round . One year the crowd screamed for Thomas Davis , S , Georgia ... and we passed ... I think for Travis J . Some fans on this board squealed for vengence , until the Panthers made him an OLB .

 

[infantrycak]

The point is that the Saints got Thomas.

And so what? How does that lead to the conclusion the Saints are sooo much better at scouting?

Rookie seasons:

Pierre Thomas 52 carries, 252 yards, 4.8 ypc, 1 TD, 17 receptions, 151 yds, 1 TD
Arian Foster 54 carries, 257 yards, 4.8 ypc, 3 TDs, 8 receptions, 93 yds.

The fact is , the road is littered with bust in each round . One year the crowd screamed for Thomas Davis , S , Georgia ... and we passed ... I think for Travis J . Some fans on this board squealed for vengence , until the Panthers made him an OLB .

Or how about Ko Simpson who some folks wanted drafted in the 2nd round of 2006 and howled when they took Owen Daniels. Now Simpson is a special teams player on his 2nd team.

 

[The Pencil Neck]

Apparently the FS and C positions have been weak all 9 yrs of the Texans existance.

They had a great draft in 2006 and gave me hope that thing were changing in the war room. Since then Smithiak have regressed in the war room. IMHO

This years talent was similar to the 2006 draft. IMHO

They should've been able to walk away with more than 2 starters and some special teamers. IMHO And maybe they did time will tell but I remain skeptical.

I think we walked way with as many as 4 starters from this draft although they may not start this year:

Kareem - Starts this year.
Tate - Starts this year.
Sharpton - May start this year in place of Diles.
Shelley - May start this year in place of Studdard.

 

[dalemurphy]

Apparently the FS and C positions have been weak all 9 yrs of the Texans existance.

They had a great draft in 2006 and gave me hope that thing were changing in the war room. Since then Smithiak have regressed in the war room. IMHO

This years talent was similar to the 2006 draft. IMHO

They should've been able to walk away with more than 2 starters and some special teamers. IMHO And maybe they did time will tell but I remain skeptical.

I thought we were talking about Smithiak? what does 9 years have to do with anything?

By the way, they drafted a center in round 3 last year and he was starting at RG midway thru the season. Perhaps you thought we didn't need Cushing or a pass rushing? Or, in 2008, maybe you thought we didn't need a LT(1st)? or CB(3rd) or RB(3rd)? Or, in 2007, perhaps we didn't need a DT? Better yet, maybe we shouldn't have wasted two 2nd round picks on Matt Schaub. After all, I bet you were one of the Sage Rosenfels supporters. Yeah, we could've spent those 2nd round picks on a safety and a center and Sage could've taken us to the Superbowl by now!

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

The Saints lost J.Brown their starting LT before last season started and because of their great drafting they were able to plug Bushrod in and not miss a beat. They won the SB with Bushrod as the starting LT. Can you imagine if D.Brown were to get hurt and miss the season. The excuses would run pampant all over this MB.

You just completely made my point with this post. Rewind to 2005: Saints select Jammal Brown in the 1st round. Brown starts 28 of a possible 32 games going into the 2007 draft. He then starts 30 of a possible 32 starts during '07 and '08 season. So is it safe to say they didn't need Jermon Bushrod?

2007 - Jermon Bushrod gets drafted in the 4th round. Plays in 3 games during '07 and '08 with Zero starts. Injury to Brown places him starting in 2009 where he starts in 14 of 15 games played.

This is NO different than what the Texans are doing in the 4th round on. Instead of drafting for immediate need this late, they are going with players that they feel are better. Ones that either might make an impact right away or ones that might develop into good players. That's what the Saints did with Bushrod and it paid dividends for them this year. The Saints drafted for depth with Bushrod (2007 4th round) and now your praising that but discarding what the Texans are doing.

If Cushing goes down in 2011, in steps 4th rounder Darryl Sharpton and we don't miss a beat. That's why that pick was made just like Bushrod was picked in '07.

 

[dalemurphy]

You just completely made my point with this post. Rewind to 2005: Saints select Jammal Brown in the 1st round. Brown starts 28 of a possible 32 games going into the 2007 draft. He then starts 30 of a possible 32 starts during '07 and '08 season. So is it safe to say they didn't need Jermon Bushrod?
2007 - Jermon Bushrod gets drafted in the 4th round. Plays in 3 games during '07 and '08 with Zero starts. Injury to Brown places him starting in 2009 where he starts in 14 of 15 games played.

This is NO different than what the Texans are doing in the 4th round on. Instead of drafting for immediate need this late, they are going with players that they feel are better. Ones that either might make an impact right away or ones that might develop into good players. That's what the Saints did with Bushrod and it paid dividends for them this year. The Saints drafted for depth with Bushrod (2007 4th round) and now your praising that but discarding what the Texans are doing.

If Cushing goes down in 2011, in steps 4th rounder Darryl Sharpton and we don't miss a beat. That's why that pick was made just like Bushrod was picked in '07.

What Ole Miss said! (can't rep you)

 

[steelbtexan]

And so what? How does that lead to the conclusion the Saints are sooo much better at scouting?

Rookie seasons:

Pierre Thomas 52 carries, 252 yards, 4.8 ypc, 1 TD, 17 receptions, 151 yds, 1 TD
Arian Foster 54 carries, 257 yards, 4.8 ypc, 3 TDs, 8 receptions, 93 yds.



Or how about Ko Simpson who some folks wanted drafted in the 2nd round of 2006 and howled when they took Owen Daniels. Now Simpson is a special teams player on his 2nd team.

The Super Bowl rings that were won with a 2nd year 3/4th rd starting LT,(Bushrod) a UDFA RB (Thomas) starting for them and a 7th rd WR (Colston) as their no.1 WR tell me they've done a better job scouting than the Texans.

This is comparing apples to apples too. Both the Saints and the Texans regimes have been in place for four yrs. The Saints have the rings to prove it.

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

The Super Bowl rings that were won with a 2nd year 3/4th rd starting LT,(Bushrod) a UDFA RB (Thomas) starting for them and a 7th rd WR (Colston) as their no.1 WR tell me they've done a better job scouting than the Texans.

This is comparing apples to apples too. Both the Saints and the Texans regimes have been in place for four yrs. The Saints have the rings to prove it.

How many rings would they have if they didn't have Brees ? Do you think that makes Thomas , Bushrod , and Colston look much better

 

[steelbtexan]

I think we walked way with as many as 4 starters from this draft although they may not start this year:

Kareem - Starts this year.
Tate - Starts this year.
Sharpton - May start this year in place of Diles.
Shelley - May start this year in place of Studdard.

I hope you're right.

Ther's a chance you maybe. I'm very high on Shelley Smith. Not so much on Sharpton.

 

[dalemurphy]

The Super Bowl rings that were won with a 2nd year 3/4th rd starting LT,(Bushrod) a UDFA RB (Thomas) starting for them and a 7th rd WR (Colston) as their no.1 WR tell me they've done a better job scouting than the Texans.
This is comparing apples to apples too. Both the Saints and the Texans regimes have been in place for four yrs. The Saints have the rings to prove it.

The Saints' haven't done a better job scouting than the Texans.

Biggest difference (other than the division they play in)... The Texans had to trade two 2nd round picks to get their probowl level QB. The Saints gave nothing away and got an all-pro QB. The Saints made a huge gamble that DBrees' shoulder would heal. They were only able to even make that gamble because Miami passes on Brees and decided to trade their 2nd for Culpepper.

Good job by the Saints! It was a gamble that worked but it certainly can't be attributed to the scouting. Even Dr. Andrews was unsure if Brees could recover fully.

 

[steelbtexan]

How many rings would they have if they didn't have Brees ? Do you think that makes Thomas , Bushrod , and Colston look much better

We have Schaub are you saying that Brees is that much better than Schaub?

If not how come Schaub could couldn't make Moats or C.Brown look as good as Thomas did? It could be that Thomas had more talent than C.Brown or Moats put together. Same with Bushrod or Colston, would they be starting on the Texans? It all goes back to scouting and being a little lucky.

 

[infantrycak]

The Super Bowl rings that were won with a 2nd year 3/4th rd starting LT,(Bushrod) a UDFA RB (Thomas) starting for them and a 7th rd WR (Colston) as their no.1 WR tell me they've done a better job scouting than the Texans.

This is comparing apples to apples too. Both the Saints and the Texans regimes have been in place for four yrs. The Saints have the rings to prove it.

I'm unaware of the Saints having won multiple Super Bowls and it is naive at best to think the biggest thing to benefit the Saints wasn't Drew Brees, that and they didn't suck near as bad to begin with.

By the way, Thomas started 6 games for them last year and acting like he is what drove that team with his under 800 yard season is unrealistic. There is zero reason to believe Arian Foster couldn't have done the same thing for them last year. Ole Miss addressed Bushrod and how he proves exactly the opposite of what you are asserting. And sorry but Colston was a blind hog finding a truffle.

And again you are fascinated by position. Would the Texans have been better off drafting Ko Simpson than Owen Daniels? Clearly not.

Biggest difference (other than the division they play in)... The Texans had to trade two 2nd round picks to get their probowl level QB. The Saints gave nothing away and got an all-pro QB. The Saints made a huge gamble that DBrees' shoulder would heal. They were only able to even make that gamble because Miami passes on Brees and decided to trade their 2nd for Culpepper.

Spot on.

 

[steelbtexan]

The Saints' haven't done a better job scouting than the Texans.

Biggest difference (other than the division they play in)... The Texans had to trade two 2nd round picks to get their probowl level QB. The Saints gave nothing away and got an all-pro QB. The Saints made a huge gamble that DBrees' shoulder would heal. They were only able to even make that gamble because Miami passes on Brees and decided to trade their 2nd for Culpepper.

Good job by the Saints! It was a gamble that worked but it certainly can't be attributed to the scouting. Even Dr. Andrews was unsure if Brees could recover fully.

Now we are on to something Dale.

The Saints are willing to take gambles on guys with injury histories drug charges etc.... The Texans aren't. The result is the Saints are reigning SB champs and the Texans are still hoping to make the playoffs.

Smithiak had the same ability to get Brees as the Saints did and they passed.

Willing to take chances > conservatism.

The division arguement is weak. After next year you may have a case but Carolina and Atlanta are the = of the Tacks and Jags. IMHO

 

[Honoring Earl 34]

We have Schaub are you saying that Brees is that much better than Schaub?

If not how come Schaub could couldn't make Moats or C.Brown look as good as Thomas did? It could be that Thomas had more talent than C.Brown or Moats put together. Same with Bushrod or Colston, would they be starting on the Texans? It all goes back to scouting and being a little lucky.

Brees is every bit as important as P Manning to his team . Manning made some rookie WR look good as they were playing musical LTs .

 

[dalemurphy]

We have Schaub are you saying that Brees is that much better than Schaub?

If not how come Schaub could couldn't make Moats or C.Brown look as good as Thomas did? It could be that Thomas had more talent than C.Brown or Moats put together. Same with Bushrod or Colston, would they be starting on the Texans? It all goes back to scouting and being a little lucky.

Brees is somewhat better than Schaub. But, the key is the cost of the two 2nd round picks that we spent to get Matt while the Saints spent nothing.

Regarding Pierre Thomas: you are right. He's very good and we missed him. But, the Saints have missed players we took very late that they could've improved their team with: Zac Diles, OD, Quin.

However, Chris Brown was a UFA while Pierre Thomas was a 2007 UDFA. They aren't the same thing nor were they acquired in the same off-season.

 

[Goldensilence]

I think we walked way with as many as 4 starters from this draft although they may not start this year:

Kareem - Starts this year.
Tate - Starts this year.
Sharpton - May start this year in place of Diles.
Shelley - May start this year in place of Studdard.

I think Kareem starts and Tate might not but, he'll likely be so heavy in the RB rotation that he'll essentially be one.

Maybe people are more high on Sharpton than myself. I think he might make the roster,but his big contribution will likely be made on ST. From what I recall Sharption has similar measureables as Diles. Only way I would think Sharptopn would get the edge is if he physically just blows Diles out of the water. I don't see it happening this year. Again I just thought it was an odd pick.

Hard to say about Shelly as well. I think he'll get a shot at trying to take one of the guard spots. I doubt as well Studdard gets the starting nod at either spot unless he just blows people away at camp. I just don't see that happening.

I think it's fine to question the FO because outside looking in the past few years at times their strategy has looked IMHO a bit haphazard.

It's also concerning to me that we've had a bunch of turnaround in the secondary for younger players. I like the addition of talent but, the lack of experience is a source of concern for me at the same time. Guess it's a bit of a paradox atm.

 

[Goldensilence]

Brees is somewhat better than Schaub. But, the key is the cost of the two 2nd round picks that we spent to get Matt while the Saints spent nothing.

Regarding Pierre Thomas: you are right. He's very good and we missed him. But, the Saints have missed players we took very late that they could've improved their team with: Zac Diles, OD, Quin.

However, Chris Brown was a UFA while Pierre Thomas was a 2007 UDFA. They aren't the same thing nor were they acquired in the same off-season.

Umm sorry dude there's no somewhat better. Brees is clear cut and above better.

 

[dalemurphy]

Now we are on to something Dale.

The Saints are willing to take gambles on guys with injury histories drug charges etc.... The Texans aren't. The result is the Saints are reigning SB champs and the Texans are still hoping to make the playoffs.

Smithiak had the same ability to get Brees as the Saints did and they passed.

Willing to take chances > conservatism.

The division arguement is weak. After next year you may have a case but Carolina and Atlanta are the = of the Tacks and Jags. IMHO

Plenty of teams take those risks without success. Similarly, there are teams with similar methodology to the Texans who are successful: Indy and Pittsburgh, for instance.

Lots of teams passed on Drew Brees and Matt Schaub... and they still need a QB. Are you really going to be critical of the Texans for getting Matt Schaub instead of Brees? You act as if the Texans are failures when they miss on Brees, or Pierre Thomas. So are 31 other teams... By the way, the Saints passed on Brian Cushing in the draft and took a CB that has to be converted to FS. Good pick?

let me rephrase.. which is better: MJenkins and Scott Fujita? or Cushing and Quin?

 

[dalemurphy]

Umm sorry dude there's no somewhat better. Brees is clear cut and above better.

huh? I didn't say I was unsure about it. But, Matt Schaub certainly belongs in the conversation of great QBs in the NFL right now.

 

[Ole Miss Texan]

I think Brees is more polished. Some of that may be he's been in the league 3 extra years than Schaub and Matt's only been starting for season. Let's come back and visit this comparison when they both have the same amount of experience.

I think the main point, which has been alluded to, is that we traded two 2nd round draft picks for Schaub in 2007. The Saints got Brees in free agency in 2006. It was really risky, but the Saints hit a homerun. As good as Brees is and the cost to get him > Schaub - two 2nd rounders. There's definitely a high risk element to both... and both have panned out. I'm not sad we have Schaub at all though - I loved it since Day 1. Both are success and make their respective team/offenses what they are.

 

[steelbtexan]

I'm unaware of the Saints having won multiple Super Bowls and it is naive at best to think the biggest thing to benefit the Saints wasn't Drew Brees, that and they didn't suck near as bad to begin with.

By the way, Thomas started 6 games for them last year and acting like he is what drove that team with his under 800 yard season is unrealistic. There is zero reason to believe Arian Foster couldn't have done the same thing for them last year. Ole Miss addressed Bushrod and how he proves exactly the opposite of what you are asserting. And sorry but Colston was a blind hog finding a truffle.

And again you are fascinated by position. Would the Texans have been better off drafting Ko Simpson than Owen Daniels? Clearly not.

They won one. While the Texans are still dreaming about the playoffs. The Texans had the same shot at Brees as the Texans did (probably better since Brees grew up in Austin) and passed.

Thomas,Hamilton (another UDFA) Bell (Cheap FA) and Bush shared the load. None of the Saints RB's should have great stats. But they were all more productive and held onto the ball better than the Texans RB's did. Fster had a chance to prove your point but Kubes was content to let Slaton (Fumbles) and C.Brown (Suckage) run the team into the ground.

Apparently Smithiak disagree with you on Foster being able to get the job done. Or they wouldn't have spent a 2nd rd choice on Tate. You can debate Bushrod if you want but the Facts are this 3/4th rd pick was the starting LT on a SB winning team. This points to the Saints doing a great job of scouting.

I'm not fixated on position. But Smithiak appear to be. TE's for $1000 Alex.

Yes I would've been wrong taking Simpson over Daniels. You dont get every pick right. That's why the draft is a crapshoot.

I just happen to think that the Saints have done a better job of scouting over the last 4 yrs and they've got the rings to prove it.

 

[steelbtexan]

Plenty of teams take those risks without success. Similarly, there are teams with similar methodology to the Texans who are successful: Indy and Pittsburgh, for instance.

Lots of teams passed on Drew Brees and Matt Schaub... and they still need a QB. Are you really going to be critical of the Texans for getting Matt Schaub instead of Brees? You act as if the Texans are failures when they miss on Brees, or Pierre Thomas. So are 31 other teams... By the way, the Saints passed on Brian Cushing in the draft and took a CB that has to be converted to FS. Good pick?

let me rephrase.. which is better: MJenkins and Scott Fujita? or Cushing and Quin?

Point Dale is the Texans were unwilling to take a chance on Brees and the Saints were. Risk takers > Conservatism.

 

[Goldensilence]

huh? I didn't say I was unsure about it. But, Matt Schaub certainly belongs in the conversation of great QBs in the NFL right now.

IMO Matt had a big break out year and finally managed to stay healthy.

In terms of yards Matt's in that discussion. But Brees takes over games. Manning takes over games. Brady in the past has taken over games.

IMO, and maybe it's unfair, but I think it's hard to tel lif Matt's taking over games of if AJ is.

I think Brees is more polished. Some of that may be he's been in the league 3 extra years than Schaub and Matt's only been starting for season. Let's come back and visit this comparison when they both have the same amount of experience.

I think the main point, which has been alluded to, is that we traded two 2nd round draft picks for Schaub in 2007. The Saints got Brees in free agency in 2006. It was really risky, but the Saints hit a homerun. As good as Brees is and the cost to get him > Schaub - two 2nd rounders. There's definitely a high risk element to both... and both have panned out. I'm not sad we have Schaub at all though - I loved it since Day 1. Both are success and make their respective team/offenses what they are.

No I get the fact what we gave up to get Schaub. I don't have a problem with it. I'm just saying I think we should slow down about putting Schaub in that category until we gt more than one healthy year.

 

[infantrycak]

No I get the fact what we gave up to get Schaub. I don't have a problem with it. I'm just saying I think we should slow down about putting Schaub in that category until we gt more than one healthy year.

His skill level is there regardless of injuries. It would just be a tragedy if that skill gets lost due to injury.

Let's let this develop a little as well. QB ratings first three years as starters:

Brees - 76.9, 67.5 and 104.8
Schaub - 87.2, 92.7 and 98.6

 

[Mr teX]

Point Dale is the Texans were unwilling to take a chance on Brees and the Saints were. Risk takers > Conservatism.

Tell this to:

The Detroit Lions after Scott Mitchell

The Buffalo Bills after Rob Johnson

& coming soon:

Tennessee Titans after VY

Kansas City Chiefs after Matt Cassell.

& every other team who selected a qb #1 overall only to waste time & effort on developing "potential".

You can say the above bolded statement when it works out as it did in this case, but when it doesn't work out (as it doesn't more often than not with FA qb's) you set your franchise back half a decade.

Furthermore as it was, there were only 2 teams willing to take the Ginormous gamble on Brees & another 2 who didn't need to (NE & Indy). With this in mind, why is it you're singling out the texans when just about every other team pretty much passed on him?

Let's just call it what it was....Luck, scouting pretty much had nothing to do with it when it came to the main guy responsible for the team's success.