Etienne’s contract makes Love still a possibility at 8

Etienne and love can coexist and it could be the goat draft cover ever.

Bottom line, he’s not off the saints board.

I'm one of the people leaning away drafting Love, unless he is a generational talent and no one else available is close, but at the same time it's also stupid for people to say signing Etienne means we absolutely are not drafting Love when first you need 2 good backs in this league these days, and second Kamara is on his last contracted year so even if he plays (seems the decision is playing here or retiring) he is extremely unlikely to be here past this year.

It's the same thing with Elliss signaling nothing about Styles. you sign FAs to fill holes and then draft BPA that fits your team. QB is the one position you likely skip if you have a sub 30 pro bowl QB, and even that is dependent.

quote:

---

Love won't be available at 8 which is why the Saints and Chiefs signed the two best free agents on the board.

---

I tend to agree the titans take him at 4

You fill the holes in FA BECAUSE you don't know how the draft will go, so of course there's a correlation. But there's also the false correlation that signing x means you absolutely don't draft y, when we have shown time and time again we will do that exact thing.

quote:

---

You fill the holes in FA BECAUSE you don't know how the draft will go, so of course there's a correlation

---

I was talking about the other half where you DON'T fill holes in free agency because of the draft options you have. Or you trade players because of the draft options you have.

The Chiefs/ Saints didn't sign the 2 best RB's because they were MORE unsure that a team would take Love ahead of them.

By your philosophy you are simultaneously saying that we didn't fill Cam and Alontae's role because of the draft options. If we were so unsure about those positions being available then we would have filled those holes.

quote:

---

Travis has never been called that, so I don't where this is suddenly coming from

---

in his presser he gave a story about his naming being pronounced "ay-chan" and how hard he tried to keep it that way but got tired of correcting people.

guess the presser worked

Cam's role is backup, and teams don't list backups as holes (plus we have a couple of options to help fill in currently). That's a want, not a need.

I do agree about Taylor, but FA is not over and/or they might feel like they can fill the role with a combination of players they already have (such as Blackmon and Sanker, as well as some other CBs we have).

There's still a month before the draft and a lot of signings will still happen between now and then.

Why does Travis think he has the power to dictate how his last name is correctly pronounced? Makes me sort of wonder about his character and integrity tbh.

quote:

---

Cam's role is backup, and teams don't list backups as holes (plus we have a couple of options to help fill in currently). That's a want, not a need.

---

You could say the exact same thing about RB. You could actually say it about WR too even though that's a bigger need. Its still really not necessary to spend #8 on a WR2-WR3 when you can draft the same value in Rd 2. If we still see Olave as the WR1 and want a compliment then it doesn't make sense to draft a replacement.

Signing Etienne and extending Olave does not create a bigger need for Love/ Tate. Letting Cam/ Alontae walk does create a bigger need for defense.

Its very obvious that DE/ DT/ CB/ WR are our needs and none have been addressed in FA. The fact that 3/4 are defensive positions doesn't scream we are focused on offense early.

Cam as a backup had 10.5 sacks, that's still a big role to fill at DE3. Our NT1 and DT1 will be gone after the season and we have a decision on Bresee. So we could need a DT1, DT2, NT1, DE3, CB1 and offense a backup OG + a WR3.

Defensive needs > offensive needs.