- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
For those freaking out about trading back into the 2nd read this
Posted on 4/30/16 at 6:24 am
Posted on 4/30/16 at 6:24 am
LINK
Doesn't look good after the 2nd if you ask me
quote:
The percentage of players drafted 2005-14 who became starters by rounds:
Round 1: 65.1%
Round 2: 43.5%
Round 3: 27.7%
Round 4: 19.6%
Round 5: 13.8%
Round 6: 11%
Round 7: 4.5%
Doesn't look good after the 2nd if you ask me
14
Posted on 4/30/16 at 6:53 am to geauxtigers87
Depth is important
Posted on 4/30/16 at 7:12 am to Hoodoo Man
Posted on 4/30/16 at 7:33 am to geauxtigers87
So you're saying we now have an 18.3% chance of drafting a starting OG?
Posted on 4/30/16 at 8:25 am to geauxtigers87
quote:
Round 4: 19.6%
But lester said 4th rounders are expected to be starters.
Hell I tried telling the crazy sons of bitches that only first and second rounders are expected to be starters (and only about half become starters), and third is where it starts changing to hope while the expectation is they will be prominent role players or spot starters.
And hopefully this shows how crazy the notion is that we are the only team that misses all these picks and the rest of the league is so far ahead of us.
This post was edited on 4/30/16 at 8:29 am
Posted on 4/30/16 at 8:31 am to geauxtigers87
The Saints' history is considerably worse than that.
Posted on 4/30/16 at 8:40 am to Neauxla
quote:
So you're saying we now have an 18.3% chance of drafting a starting OG?
That's not how math works.
Posted on 4/30/16 at 8:42 am to Jake88
quote:
The Saints' history is considerably worse than that.
i'd say we knocked it the frick out of the park with jahri nicks and colston even more than i thought looking at the numbers
Posted on 4/30/16 at 8:45 am to geauxtigers87
I wish the trade up would have been for Jack.
Posted on 4/30/16 at 8:45 am to Epic Cajun
quote:
quote:
So you're saying we now have an 18.3% chance of drafting a starting OG?
That's not how math works.
So what's our % chance of finding a starter if we draft an OG in the 5th and 7th?
Posted on 4/30/16 at 8:46 am to geauxtigers87
[quote]Doesn't look good after the 2nd if you ask me
[/quote
That's fantastic since we don't have a starting Guard
[/quote
That's fantastic since we don't have a starting Guard
Posted on 4/30/16 at 9:04 am to WhoDat37
We have two starting guards and both are adequate.
I did want to upgrade to more than adequate but you can't get everything you want.
I'm more concerned with the fact that we have zero depth in the middle of our line, but there are a few FA guards worth a damn still dangling out there for just such an occasion.
I did want to upgrade to more than adequate but you can't get everything you want.
I'm more concerned with the fact that we have zero depth in the middle of our line, but there are a few FA guards worth a damn still dangling out there for just such an occasion.
Posted on 4/30/16 at 9:11 am to bonethug0108
quote:
We have two starting guards and both are adequate.
I disagree. We have a starter, and a good backup who's value is that he can play G and C.
It's the weakpoint of the entire team imo at a position that our offense is heavily reliant on.
But hey, maybe Peat plays there. We had an opportunity to make OL a strength again
Posted on 4/30/16 at 9:17 am to geauxtigers87
quote:
geauxtigers87
I think this is an excellent point. Not too many Marques Colstons out there. With the three quality players we have, I'm not bothered at all about trading back or giving up a 4th round pick.
Posted on 4/30/16 at 9:17 am to geauxtigers87
We switched from a third to a second and gave up a fourth.
Nothing wrong with that
Nothing wrong with that
Posted on 4/30/16 at 9:20 am to bonethug0108
quote:
But lester said 4th rounders are expected to be starters.
Well, they are expected to. My point, which you seemed to have twisted since we first disagreed on this, was that these picks are guys you draft expected to win starting jobs, but in the end are most important to building a fully developed roster.
the best players the Saints have drafted during the Payton era have come in the 3rd-5th rounds.
My original post 2 years ago. That thread is hilarious. Guess who started it?
saying(calling me out) we were good at drafting. Bhahahahahahaha
Posted on 4/30/16 at 9:20 am to WhoDat37
Kelemete played his arse off at LT after Armstead went down. It's not guard (though he has spot started at guard also with mixed results, thus adequate) but it shows he can hold up against the better pass rushers on some teams.
He is a legit starter. He has started. He hasn't totally shite the bed while doing so.
We have two starting guards. Not great. Not even good. So so.
I totally agree about wanting to upgrade but as I said we can't get everything. We also need another CB, DE, TE wouldn't hurt, another DT would be nice, etc.
But when looking at the depth charts DT, WR, and S were the biggest needs. G/C is up there with them because we have zero depth there. We didn't have enough picks to get all 4 so we did what we could with what we had.
We could still get a 5th round guard but I wouldn't expect a starter at that spot. We need one for depth though but FA is also an option depending on how the draft falls.
He is a legit starter. He has started. He hasn't totally shite the bed while doing so.
We have two starting guards. Not great. Not even good. So so.
I totally agree about wanting to upgrade but as I said we can't get everything. We also need another CB, DE, TE wouldn't hurt, another DT would be nice, etc.
But when looking at the depth charts DT, WR, and S were the biggest needs. G/C is up there with them because we have zero depth there. We didn't have enough picks to get all 4 so we did what we could with what we had.
We could still get a 5th round guard but I wouldn't expect a starter at that spot. We need one for depth though but FA is also an option depending on how the draft falls.
Posted on 4/30/16 at 9:26 am to Lester Earl
Hope not expect.
How can teams expect starters in the 4th when it's a less than 1 in 5 success rate.
If there are 35 picks, only 7 become starters. 28 never become starters. It cannot be expected from a logical or realistic stand point.
Edit:
Also since that time we've had two poor drafts in a row prior to last year. 2012 was also a year in which we didn't pick until the third for two reasons (Ingram and Bountygate). And at the time Hicks was looking good.
But things appear to be going back to before that time when we did do well drafting. We'll have to wait another two years to see if last year's and this year's class are any better, but last year's class is off to a good start.
How can teams expect starters in the 4th when it's a less than 1 in 5 success rate.
If there are 35 picks, only 7 become starters. 28 never become starters. It cannot be expected from a logical or realistic stand point.
Edit:
Also since that time we've had two poor drafts in a row prior to last year. 2012 was also a year in which we didn't pick until the third for two reasons (Ingram and Bountygate). And at the time Hicks was looking good.
But things appear to be going back to before that time when we did do well drafting. We'll have to wait another two years to see if last year's and this year's class are any better, but last year's class is off to a good start.
This post was edited on 4/30/16 at 9:30 am
Posted on 4/30/16 at 9:29 am to bonethug0108
I am freaking pumped that we upgraded WR and DT and bolstered the saftey position. Some people fail to include our FA acquisitions as key components. Also, some guys that were injured that we've yet to tap into from last years draft (tull/pj). Another note is that guys like anthony, peat, kik, breaux, davison, etc. have a year under their belts and should show improvement in year 2. This team just got better. Way better. I am super excited about this year and cannot wait to see the new guys and 2nd year guys on the field together. Throw in the FAs like Fairley, Fleener, and Laurinaitis and I think we will have a fricking solid unit.
The trade up was worth it. You want solid, immediate impact guys. That's what we got. Can't ask for much more than that. Solid fricking draft in my eyes.
Here's a little fluff on Tull just to get you excited for his potential in 2016:
LINK
The trade up was worth it. You want solid, immediate impact guys. That's what we got. Can't ask for much more than that. Solid fricking draft in my eyes.
Here's a little fluff on Tull just to get you excited for his potential in 2016:
LINK
This post was edited on 4/30/16 at 9:30 am
Posted on 4/30/16 at 9:31 am to geauxtigers87
To be fair, a lot of 1st and 2nd rounders are given starting spots simply because they were drafted high and the team doesn't want to admit that they made a mistake. Then they are benched within a year or two. I would say that that skews the numbers a bit.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News