re: Saints Talk Draft Project: The Dirty Dozen for #27

I'm not disagreeing with any of that or saying we should rely on Jimmy.

I'm disagreeing with the notion that you beat Seattle but out physicaling them. That's not the way to go.

I'm also disagreeing with the notion that you need size at WR to win. Size is irrelevant compared to talent level. We need talented WRs no matter if they are 5'6" or 6'10".

A combo of size and speed is great, but their talent level is 100x more important. If the Saints feel any of them are legit great. If not they should go with whoever they see as the most talented and meets BPA value with whatever pick it is regardless of size or speed.

First point is having tall receivers doesn't guarantee success, as well as having short ones don't keep you from it.

Second point is that tall receivers aren't the way to go to beat Seattle.

Let's talk about little receivers in the draft

quote:

---

First point is having tall receivers doesn't guarantee success,

---

nope, but it certainly improves your chances.

quote:

---

Only if that height is aided by talent. There have been plenty of big for nothing busts.

On the flip side there have also been plenty of speed for nothing busts.

---

That's not the point. I didnt say anything about busts.


the best WRs in the NFL are big. The biggest WRs are drafted first. Both facts. Size matters.

Doesn't mean short WRs cant thrive. but the odds are stacked against them.

You don't have to say anything about busts. This whole thing started with a couple of people saying we don't need to DRAFT a short WR like Cooks, but someone 6'2" or bigger in the DRAFT.

In the DRAFT you can pick busts. Just because one guy is taller than someone else doesn't mean he'll be a better player.

The other argument that PurpleDrank made was that you need tall WRs to beat Seattle and I simply pointed out how untrue that is.

Then I added the fact the Seattle just won the super bowl without even a 5'11" WR as one of their top 3, while Denver lost with 3 of their top 4 guys being 6'3" or taller, my point being that having tall guys doesn't guarantee you shite, just as having short guys doesn't keep you from winning it all. This is a team game.

I NEVER said Seattle had better receivers or that Denver's sucked. That is a false argument you are trying to manufacture.

You came in the middle of our discussion bringing stuff off point. Yes size helps just like speed helps just like good hands help just like route running helps just like shiftiness helps etc. etc. etc.

Size is not the most important factor and that is fact. And though you will try to twist this into something I'm not saying, your "fact" about tall receivers being drafted first was untrue last year. Yeah the guy was over hyped and that's why I'm saying talent outweighs size and speed.

Fact: overall talent will trump whatever perceived limitations a guy may have. Some of the best players have been "misfits" and some of the worst have been prototypes.

Yes it's more rare, but there's no guarantee Cooks can't be the next Steve Smith, and it's possible Moncrief will be the next Brandon Lafell.

There is no magic saying a 6' something WR is automatically better than all sub 6' WRs.

That is my point.

I'm saying size is one of many factors, but not the most important one like some here are saying.

And the rest of the stuff you quoted was directed towards my original discussion with the other fellows that you stepped in on while breaking one point of a larger discussion into a side tangent.

And the stuff about WR1 or WR2 or whatnot doesn't mean jack because those are depth chart positions and not roles. DeSean Jackson was a WR1. Steve Smith was a WR1. Golden Tate was a WR1.

Not everyone has a Calvin or Andre Johnson as their WR1.

Cooks can(not saying will) be a WR1 just as easily as Matthews. It all depends on their talent level, what team drafts them, and how they use them.

Size isn't going to determine if you are a WR1, it just gives a slight edge that can easily be lost if you suck at the other stuff. Same can be said of the speed guys and that giving them a leg up. If they can't catch all the speed means jack shite.

I'll do a follow up just to help illustrate. There are prototypes that teams look for and that is why some really good players fall very far or don't even get drafted.

Peyton Manning was the prototype QB. Smart, strong arm, accurate, and tall. Brees was all of those things(minus some arm strength) except tall. Both are now considering some of the best to ever play the game. Brady fell to the 6th round because he was viewed as some scrawny kid. Also now one of the best ever.

So would you rather have Brees or Alex Smith? This is the type of false dilemma you keep presenting me with only now I've flipped it so the prototype guy is average and this misfit is all world.

This is all I'm saying. DO NOT FALL IN LOVE WITH THE PROTOTYPE. It's about the talent. If they feel Cooks is a better player than they should take him and not shy away because he doesn't fit "the mold".

If they feel he's going to be a bust than pass. Same goes with every guy, regardless of what size they are.

Size is not THE determining factor.

out of town a few days, missed the debate

I took your last tally GOON and created the next thread which should give us an official ST wish list HERE

thanks ye contributors

oh yeah, was so entertained in you taking paddys sparring partner on I mistook.