A 5-question Q&A with David Gladow

Check this out...the last three questions have to do with the Saints (USC LBs, Safeties in a GW system, and re-signing our own FAs). Gladow's no Norman Einstein, but it was OK.

over 3 years ago Hans Petersen 16 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Absolutely agree

Regarding Cushing. Regarding Roman Harper…why single out Harper? At least he’s good against the run. As far as we know, in a rational system he may be good against the deep ball, as well. It’s Kaesviharn and Bullocks who need to worry: if we’re going to cut anybody, it will be one of those two first.

As for the odds of keeping various players: who knows? But as for the odds of wanting to keep them, I’d say:
Deuce: 0. Payton is praying for a graceful departure…but departure there will be, graceful or not.
Moore: 100. They want to keep him, make no mistake.
Stinchcomb: 66. Better the journeyman you know than one you don’t.
Vilma: 100. If we lose Vilma, Williams’ first year goes bye-bye.
Henderson: 1%. At this point, the Saints are so rich in receiver talent that they’ll be glad to keep Henderson if he begs to stay. Otherwise, they’ll buy him a drink the next time he visits.

[Note: if the percent signs don’t show up, it’s not because I didn’t type them…it’s because the code is chaotically implemented. Talk about bugs…call Miller the Killer.]

Oh when the Saints...Start kicking ass...You don't want to be in that number...

by MtnExile on Feb 2, 2009 9:28 PM CST reply actions

I think

Its a givin that KK and Bullocks are gone and its just if Harper stays or not. Do we see 2 new back there or 1 and him.

by MT_always on Feb 3, 2009 8:54 AM CST up reply actions

i dont think it is a given that moore is a must for the saints to resign. he obviously played himself into a better contract due to his production, but how much of that production is due to the offensive system and drew brees’ ability at QB? iow, does another team look at moore and think they can get that production from him? or can another scout team player (arrington) put up similar numbers for the saints if moore departs? that being said, i think the saints will try to resign him. but given that they are stacked at WR, and short on cash, i would think that his re-signing would be wanted, but not needed.

by in the 9th on Feb 3, 2009 9:21 AM CST up reply actions

He can really catch, and Drew likes him.

Change is GOOD.

by stujo4 on Feb 3, 2009 9:40 AM CST up reply actions

Stujo's right

If Moore was just a product of the system, then why didn’t anyone else have the season Moore did? It’s because Moore proved himself the best receiver on the team last year—including Colston.

Oh when the Saints...Start kicking ass...You don't want to be in that number...

by MtnExile on Feb 3, 2009 9:44 AM CST up reply actions

i am not championing his departure, just disagreeing that his remaining with the team is not certain: i just dont see it as a lock that he would be re-signed.
the point i was failing to make is that i dont think the saints will table a large offer to him, potentially opening the door for his departure. the reasoning behind that would be he may not receive that much attention in the off season and that if he did, he is potentially replaceable.

by in the 9th on Feb 3, 2009 10:01 AM CST up reply actions

because...

Brees trusted his ability to catch therefore threw it to him more.
If he was gone he would have just spread the ball around to the rest of the receivers until he found another one that didn’t drop it (Henderson, shockey) as often as they caught it.

Dont get me wrong.. Moore is probably my favorite receiver. Hands of GLUE! Colsten has not proven to me that hes a #1, either has Moore tho. Both are legitimate #2s. Brees makes them better.

by MT_always on Feb 3, 2009 2:23 PM CST up reply actions

I see Moore

as a reincarnation of Danny Abramowicz. (Danny will be surprised, since he’s still alive.) He may not be as effective a weapon anywhere else; but here in New Orleans, he’s deadly. Why throw away good weapons? Sign him and give him David Patten’s salary. Or Devery Henderson’s. Just lock him down and don’t let him get away, or he’ll become somebody else’s version of Wes Welker.

Oh when the Saints...Start kicking ass...You don't want to be in that number...

by MtnExile on Feb 3, 2009 3:02 PM CST up reply actions

i think they should re-sign him, and that they most likely will. i am bored to death at work today, and wanted to split hairs over whether or not there is a 100% chance he will re-sign. it was a selfish act. but i will not apologize.

by in the 9th on Feb 3, 2009 3:25 PM CST up reply actions

I'm not saying there's 100% chance they'll re-sign him

I’m saying there ought to be a 100% desire to re-sign him. But if he gets a humongous payday from some sad-sack team like, say, the Giants or Steelers, he’d be a fool not to go.

Oh when the Saints...Start kicking ass...You don't want to be in that number...

by MtnExile on Feb 3, 2009 3:59 PM CST up reply actions

sad sack???

I think Moore likes the Saints. He’ll re-sign.

Change is GOOD.

by stujo4 on Feb 3, 2009 4:52 PM CST up reply actions

I think he likes the Saints, too

We’re the ones who gave him a chance, and playing in a Payton offense with Drew as quarterback is a receiver’s dream.

But what if someone offered him $5 million more than the Saints? You’re a career journeyman receiver suddenly hitting the big time, with the chance to make a killing at last. What would you do?

Oh when the Saints...Start kicking ass...You don't want to be in that number...

by MtnExile on Feb 3, 2009 8:00 PM CST up reply actions

Take the money, baby. But I’m not that lucky. And I think this is as lucky as Lance gets. He’ll re-sign.

Change is GOOD.

by stujo4 on Feb 3, 2009 10:19 PM CST up reply actions

Good money, playing with Drew vs. a lot more money and trying to catch passes from that Joe Flacko guy? Outdoors in freaking Baltimore? Where do I sign, Mr. Loomis?

Change is GOOD.

by stujo4 on Feb 3, 2009 10:20 PM CST up reply actions