bgard72 10 Posted April 1, 2006 Saints | Team to trade out of No. 2 slot; seeking defensive help? Sat, 1 Apr 2006 12:42:10 -0800 http://www.kffl.com/hotw/nfl According to FOXSports.com's John Czarnecki, the New Orleans Saints are definitely trading out of the second spot in the NFL Draft, and they are looking for a defensive player. WOW...this guy says "definitely"? Guess they don't want that slot for DE Super Mario. Might as well trade down a few spots and nab him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nobody 2,109 Posted April 1, 2006 They have the worst linebacking core in the league, a pretty bad secondary, and two pretty good defensive ends, I don't know why everyone thinks they want Mario so bad when they can trade down and get Hawk or Michael Huff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Walter34 3 Posted April 1, 2006 Seeing as how Lienart is the concensus #2 and they just signed Brees, trading down makes the most sense for them. Is a team willing to pay the steep price is the question. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CA_7 0 Posted April 1, 2006 As a Chris Brown owner I would love to see a team move up to grab Leinart and have TEN grab Da'Brick. Just hope they don't bite on Young. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vikings4ever 496 Posted April 1, 2006 Seeing as how Lienart is the concensus #2 and they just signed Brees, trading down makes the most sense for them. Is a team willing to pay the steep price is the question. At the same time, the Saints have painted themselves into a corner. Leinart is the consencious number 2, and the Saints have no need for him. So if the Saints can trade down, they have to bite the bullet and take a (slightly) inferior prospect. And teams know this, so the number 2 becomes less valuable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toofunny 0 Posted April 1, 2006 At the same time, the Saints have painted themselves into a corner. Leinart is the consencious number 2, and the Saints have no need for him. So if the Saints can trade down, they have to bite the bullet and take a (slightly) inferior prospect. And teams know this, so the number 2 becomes less valuable. Wrong. Not if there's numerous teams trying to get the pick, which there is. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kitrick Taylor 0 Posted April 1, 2006 I think the Saints sent out a smokescreen about being interested in Super Mario after they signed Brees. Not having a need for Leinart anymore, the player I am guessing they covet the most would be AJ Hawk. Their LBs are TERRIBLE. I think they are trying to put some pressure on the Packers to trade up if they want Mario Williams. The Packers won't be trading up however. Someone will probably fall in love with Leinart and make the move however. Could be the Jets, Raiders, Bills, Cards...... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MicktheGreat 1 Posted April 2, 2006 I think the Saints sent out a smokescreen about being interested in Super Mario after they signed Brees. Not having a need for Leinart anymore, the player I am guessing they covet the most would be AJ Hawk. Their LBs are TERRIBLE. I think they are trying to put some pressure on the Packers to trade up if they want Mario Williams. The Packers won't be trading up however. Someone will probably fall in love with Leinart and make the move however. Could be the Jets, Raiders, Bills, Cards...... Yep...I'm not sure why so many people think the Saints are gonna take DE Mario Williams. They already have Charles Grant and Will Smith at DE--both of whom are young and talented. In fact, DE might be the best position on the Saints DEF (even AFTER losing Darren Howard). Thus, I think the most likely option is for the Saints to trade down and nab LB A.J. Hawk (as Kitrick said) or OT D'Brickashaw Ferguson. If the Saints don't trade down from #2, I think Ferguson would be the best pick for them. They DID draft Jamaal Brown last season. However, their other starting OT (Wayne Gandy) is 35-years-old; thus, they certainly need a full-time replacement for him (either for this season or, more likely, next season). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jocstrap 8 Posted April 2, 2006 Note to ones self - Delhomme plays the NO defense twice a year! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LunaTick 29 Posted April 2, 2006 It is not a dumb thing for the Saints to trade down. Trading down means: 1. smaller contract, especially if you are intending to take someone that should not get #2 draft pick money. 2. at least another draft pick or perhaps veteran to fill holes or add depth. There are teams that may want to move up and take a player before another the Saints do not want. The only issue, when this game is played, is knowing the implications of dropping down to take someone. This means being willing to take the #2 person on your list. Fans, and bad ones at that, want to have the high pick player. But a true fan wants to be able to field the most competitive team possible. This may mean trading down for more help. Heck, I think this is something Houston should do. But I doubt they will. They have let the PR implication of Bush take over the management of the club. Potential of a draft pick mean little if you do not have the means to realize the potential. Would the saints in this case be better? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
49ER MAN 0 Posted April 2, 2006 I could see the Saints trading down as well, but who would move into that spot and at what price? Denver could bt it would cost them their 2 1st round picks and maybe something else as well. The Saints could draft Ferguson to team him with Jamaal Brown to solidify the tackle position or drop to 4 and take AJ Hawk to upgrade their LB's. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Portis26 0 Posted April 2, 2006 Id love to see the Skins trade next years #1, and the 53rd pick this year -- for that #2 pick it won't happen though Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dj88 0 Posted April 2, 2006 Id love to see the Skins trade next years #1, and the 53rd pick this year -- for that #2 pick it won't happen though The Saints would have to be smoking crack to take that trade. Horrible trade. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
devildog 0 Posted April 2, 2006 Id love to see the Skins trade next years #1, and the 53rd pick this year -- for that #2 pick it won't happen though not even close to fair value. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
49ER MAN 0 Posted April 3, 2006 Yep...I'm not sure why so many people think the Saints are gonna take DE Mario Williams. They already have Charles Grant and Will Smith at DE--both of whom are young and talented. In fact, DE might be the best position on the Saints DEF (even AFTER losing Darren Howard). Thus, I think the most likely option is for the Saints to trade down and nab LB A.J. Hawk (as Kitrick said) or OT D'Brickashaw Ferguson. If the Saints don't trade down from #2, I think Ferguson would be the best pick for them. They DID draft Jamaal Brown last season. However, their other starting OT (Wayne Gandy) is 35-years-old; thus, they certainly need a full-time replacement for him (either for this season or, more likely, next season). I think some people think the Saints will take Williams because it follows a similar path when the Saints had Grant and Howard and took Smith a few years back. From what I know, the Saints are very high on him so the likelihood of the Saints taking Williams will be minimal at best. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Raider 84 29 Posted April 3, 2006 If the Saints want to draft Mario Williams they might want to keep the 2nd overall because he might not be there if they trade down. They will have to get a great offer to trade down. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Voltaire 4,593 Posted April 3, 2006 According to PFT, Brees' contract bonus is enormous for next year. His contract looks like he may only be a one year filler in NO. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Walter34 3 Posted April 3, 2006 According to PFT, Brees' contract bonus is enormous for next year. His contract looks like he may only be a one year filler in NO. Arent they paying him 10 mill this year? Also, if they did dump him, the entire bonus would be due next year. The one year filler theory doesnt make much sense. Do you have the numbers to support this? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sjanson 0 Posted April 3, 2006 Arent they paying him 10 mill this year? Also, if they did dump him, the entire bonus would be due next year. The one year filler theory doesnt make much sense. Do you have the numbers to support this? NO did a good thing. If Drew has a good season and they want to stick with him they can extend his deal and re-structure the big payout that they owe him. And if they decide to go in another direction after this season then they didnt pay out the nose up front. I dont know why this particular deal is bringing so much discussion. Teams back load salary all the time...take a look at WAS and MIN - they are notorious for it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted April 3, 2006 I could see the Saints trading down as well, but who would move into that spot and at what price? Denver could bt it would cost them their 2 1st round picks and maybe something else as well. The Saints could draft Ferguson to team him with Jamaal Brown to solidify the tackle position or drop to 4 and take AJ Hawk to upgrade their LB's. If they trade down with the Jets, I love the move for them. They may still get the same choice of non-QBs at #4 that they had at #2. Ferguson and Brown would be one hell of a pair of bookends. I think Mario might be the best player in the draft (outside of Bush at least) but I can see why they'd be tempted to go elsewhere after picking so many d-linemen in the first round the last few years. NO did a good thing. If Drew has a good season and they want to stick with him they can extend his deal and re-structure the big payout that they owe him. And if they decide to go in another direction after this season then they didnt pay out the nose up front. I dont know why this particular deal is bringing so much discussion. Teams back load salary all the time...take a look at WAS and MIN - they are notorious for it. Backloaded deals are effective at protecting a team if they want to let a guy after 3-5 years on a 6-year deal, not after 1. When a guy has an 8-figure signing bonus there is no way the team is thinking about starting him only one year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vikings4ever 496 Posted April 3, 2006 I dont know why this particular deal is bringing so much discussion. Teams back load salary all the time...take a look at WAS and MIN - they are notorious for it. Actually, the Vikings have been front loading contracts more often. They have 20+ million in free space (they gone into free agency with that much for the least 3 or 4 years), so they give big roster bonuses instead of big signing bonuses, and/or they add a bunch of incentives that count against the cap the first year, and when they aren't reached, the space that cleared up gets transferred to next year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
