- 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
re: Our OL is looking good
Posted on 4/28/17 at 1:43 am to LSU1SLU
Posted on 4/28/17 at 1:43 am to LSU1SLU
quote:
So in summation, we should not have drafted lattimore bc we needed a defensive end.
I never said that. Lattimore was the best player available at a position of need.
quote:
We should not have drafted OT bc we need defensive end.
Correct. There's no need to draft a backup OT when you need a starting defensive player.
ETA: the problem is that my rating of Ramczyk is significantly less than the rest of the board/some scouts. I don't think he's good enough to start day one and I don't know he'll be worth that 32nd pick whenever he starts.
quote:
Tonight you will complain about which defensive end we pick bc he is not the ones you listed,
Correct. If they draft Hau'oli Kikaha 2.0 instead of a true 4-3 end it'll be a disgrace.
quote:
So it should not matter who we draft tonight as long as its a defensive end, since value doesnt matter and we have a ghost at that position apparently
You're completely missing the point. There's no "value" picks. There's human talent. If they pick Tim Williams because Basham, Willis, McDowell, Lawson etc went before they picked it'll be awful. If they end up having to pick BPA that isn't a position of need it'll also be awful.
This post was edited on 4/28/17 at 1:45 am
2
Posted on 4/28/17 at 1:47 am to rmnldr
Okay so you are also saying if Rueben Foster is there then we shouldnt have taken him bc its not major position of need. Robertson, anthony, klein, teo.
That is your logic. Got it. Force getting a player that saints dont believe is good enough player to draft at that spot just bc you want a body there.
That is your logic. Got it. Force getting a player that saints dont believe is good enough player to draft at that spot just bc you want a body there.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 1:49 am to LSU1SLU
saints should not have drafted michael thomas last year. Needed defensive end
Posted on 4/28/17 at 1:51 am to rmnldr
Literally 10 picks later and you dont think we will get a single one of the mentioned """"immediate starters""""
I emphasized that to show you how stupid it sounds to think last pick in first round is immediate starter no matter what
I emphasized that to show you how stupid it sounds to think last pick in first round is immediate starter no matter what
Posted on 4/28/17 at 1:53 am to LSU1SLU
quote:
Okay so you are also saying if Rueben Foster is there then we shouldnt have taken him bc its not major position of need. Robertson, anthony, klein, teo.
No... I'm saying the exact opposite.
I wasn't the highest on Foster but I'd be absolutely fine with taking him at #32. I didn't think he'd go as high as he went. Foster would immediately start as long as he isn't "radio Reuben" which from what I've gathered, he isn't. LB is a need no matter how much depth you have.
RT isn't a need because Streif is there. If I thought Ramczyk would come in day one and be 10x better than Streif it would be cool, but he won't. He's not better than Streif.
quote:
That is your logic. Got it. Force getting a player that saints dont believe is good enough player to draft at that spot just bc you want a body there.
Have you been reading anything I'm typing? I'm saying the exact opposite of what you're saying. You take the best player at a POSITION OF NEED and you get him wherever you can. If that means "reaching" for Willis at 32 then you do it because you can't guarantee he'll be there for you at 42. I value the good DEs more than the OTs that aren't in dire need.
quote:
saints should not have drafted michael thomas last year. Needed defensive end
And I advocated for a DE over Sheldon Rankins. I was also against picking a WR. That didn't change my opinion of MT though. I said that MT was a great player and it was a pick I was okay with considering they weren't going to draft a DE anyway.
quote:
Literally 10 picks later and you dont think we will get a single one of the mentioned """"immediate starters""""
I'm saying that you can't guarantee it. Just like they couldn't guarantee Foster would be there at 32. They planned on picking Foster but didn't move up.
quote:
I emphasized that to show you how stupid it sounds to think last pick in first round is immediate starter no matter what
It should be. First round picks should be used for starters unless your entire team is elite. If that means reaching (Bears) then go for it.
This post was edited on 4/28/17 at 1:57 am
Posted on 4/28/17 at 1:57 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
False. We do fine.
We can't stop the pass
This is correct.
We just drafted the best cover-corner I have seen in years. Lattimore is freakish fast and has great size. If he comes along quick we have 2 decent cover corners in Breaux and lattimore.
We won't miss out on the next tier of defensive linemen either. There are a ton of pass-rushers still available on the board.
Many of you don't realize how deep the defense is this year in the draft, do you?
Posted on 4/28/17 at 2:00 am to reo45
quote:
We won't miss out on the next tier of defensive linemen either.
You can guarantee that from where you're sitting? Are you Sean Payton?
quote:
There are a ton of pass-rushers still available on the board.
Sure but are they good?
quote:
Many of you don't realize how deep the defense is this year in the draft, do you?
It could have 500 DEs but it won't matter if none of them are worth a damn.
There's a huge difference between Jordan Willis and Demarcus Walker
Posted on 4/28/17 at 2:04 am to rmnldr
quote:
Sure but are they good?
they might not believe who was left on the board was any good. So I repeat, do we continue to reach regardless just bc rmnldr thinks so?
Posted on 4/28/17 at 2:06 am to LSU1SLU
quote:
they might not believe who was left on the board was any good.
Then damn. The Saints can't fricking scout
quote:
So I repeat, do we continue to reach regardless just bc rmnldr thinks so?
Sheesh. If you fall in line with the Saints in thinking that the guys still on the board at DE weren't/aren't good...
Maybe there's a reason they've had a bunch of problems at DL outside of Jordan. shite.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 2:21 am to CocoLoco
Let's all face it. Payton is too hard headed to pick two defensive players with the two first round picks. No matter how bad the d sucks.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 2:22 am to baobabtiger
Yep.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 5:07 am to LSUlefty
Print the shirts...
Posted on 4/28/17 at 5:17 am to NOFOX
Think about it...
Payton actually moves more to a run game with Ingram and AP and the ability to open up the passing game with Thomas, Snead, Fleener, et al. This allows your offense to control the clock and tempo and thus keeps your defense off the field.
Ramczyk isn't a sexy pick by any means, but at 32 he's great value and a guy that'll have a long career in this league. Rivers, Willis, Williams should all be there are 42 in which you case you take Rivers or Willis. You can then build on depth with later picks.
Payton actually moves more to a run game with Ingram and AP and the ability to open up the passing game with Thomas, Snead, Fleener, et al. This allows your offense to control the clock and tempo and thus keeps your defense off the field.
Ramczyk isn't a sexy pick by any means, but at 32 he's great value and a guy that'll have a long career in this league. Rivers, Willis, Williams should all be there are 42 in which you case you take Rivers or Willis. You can then build on depth with later picks.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 5:59 am to chRxis
quote:
and our D still looks NFL record terrible...
pussyPosted on 4/28/17 at 11:56 am to rmnldr
quote:
You can guarantee that from where you're sitting? Are you Sean Payton?
Most mocks have Cornerbacks, safeties, and quarterback (Kizer) going ahead of us. We may lose one, but we will have a lot of pass rushers available.
quote:
Sure but are they good?
We need someone who can set the edge. I beleive Willis from Kansas State will be there at 42. They may trade up a little to get him if they sense someone might jump ahead. If we do get him you can start being a little more happy. I don't mind Bowser and believe he can put on some more weight and still keep his great athleticism.
We are sitting pretty, stay calm brother. The real fun begins tonight.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 11:58 am to reo45
I'd be shocked if they moved up. If they get Willis or McDowell my entire opinion of this will change. Everything is banking on not completely screwing this up.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 12:00 pm to blafayette
quote:
Everyone whines that we don't have the cowboys O line. Now we do.
so getting then 2nd T taken in a very down OL year puts us over the top, huh?
Posted on 4/28/17 at 12:02 pm to chRxis
Yes I love how adding Ramcyzk gives us the Cowboys OL.
And they call everyone else stupid.
chRxis, did you know that adding a tackle was the missing piece of the puzzle? Now the Saints will actually have an offense!!!!
And they call everyone else stupid.
chRxis, did you know that adding a tackle was the missing piece of the puzzle? Now the Saints will actually have an offense!!!!
Posted on 4/28/17 at 12:03 pm to rmnldr
I doubt they move up
But I could see them moving back into the 2nd for another player they liked. Did it last year.
Regardless, Ramczyk is a Saint. We use extra tackles sometimes and he will eventually overtake Strief. We could potentially move toward a more balanced attack with a great OL and two great RBs in order to help the D stay off the field.
But I could see them moving back into the 2nd for another player they liked. Did it last year.
Regardless, Ramczyk is a Saint. We use extra tackles sometimes and he will eventually overtake Strief. We could potentially move toward a more balanced attack with a great OL and two great RBs in order to help the D stay off the field.
Posted on 4/28/17 at 12:04 pm to chRxis
quote:
so getting then 2nd T taken in a very down OL year puts us over the top, huh?
Yeah, it kinda does actually.
Armstead is a fantastic, top-3 LT talent. He has health issues - Peat was amazing last year filling in at LT when Armstead was out.
Peat is good at LG, he was dominating in the run game. The left side suits him. Kelemete was great in the spot as well when Peat got moved to LT.
Unger is rock solid in all facets and a good leader.
Warford is a road grader in the run game, an absolute bulldozer - arse & mass. Fantastic addition.
Strief has been solid forever, but the guy is 33 years old. The cliff is coming for him.
Strief is literally the only thing even CLOSE to a hole on this offensive line and now we have a 1st-round-talent tackle prospect to replace him. Ramczyk was the #1 tackle on most boards (Bolles is old, has a learning disability and a drug history). Dude is super talented.
If Drew really did get upset and walk next offseason, his replacement will be sitting in a shiny as frick Ferrari IMO
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News