From Twitter...
by jeremy_smith on Aug 19, 2009 6:01 PM CDT
23 comments
wwltvsports Jenkins solidifies himself as No. 1 nickelback with 70-yard INT return, by the way. Nice play to grab ball high in air and take it to EZ.
jeffduncantp Think we can make it official: Jenkins is this team's starting nickel. Randall Gay working with the second team, Jenkins the 1s.
What are your thoughts on the current defensive backs depth chart? My thoughts would be Jabari Greer, Tracy Porter, Malcolm Jenkins, Randall Gay, Leigh Torrence, in that order...
This FanPost was written by a reader and member of Canal Street Chronicles. It does not necessarily reflect the views of CSC and its staff or editors.
0 recs |
23 comments
Email
Print
Comments
wowowowoowow
yessss jenkins!
The Easter Bunny is a savage...
by ShadowFlash on Aug 19, 2009 6:08 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Defensive Rookie of the Year
Nine interceptions, three touchdowns. You heard it here first. Now we return to our regularly-scheduled Kool-Aid.
"Man, these fans are off the charts."
--Drew Brees
by MtnExile on Aug 19, 2009 8:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
wait a minute.... YOU wanted to draft a linebacker
bandwagon jumper
She said, "You're strange, but don't change", and I let her.
by stujo4 on Aug 19, 2009 10:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
lol nice
calling him out. was he one that wanted to either go LB or just trade back? lol
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
by skinnykinney on Aug 20, 2009 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cushing or Clay Matthews was the demand, I believe
And Vontae Davis. Now 2nd string for the Dolphins after getting beat out by 2nd round pick Sean Smith.
She said, "You're strange, but don't change", and I let her.
by stujo4 on Aug 20, 2009 10:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
good
never really liked the things i heard about him. like being over eager to make a play on the ball and letting the receiver beat him. also, i watched some of his videos and he just didn’t look as good as Jenkins did.
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
by skinnykinney on Aug 21, 2009 2:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Welcome to CSC!!!
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Saintsational on Aug 19, 2009 8:40 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Jenkins continues to shine
Makes me feel better about backing him so much pre-draft.
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
by skinnykinney on Aug 20, 2009 4:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
lets be fair here...
The call to draft back was always IF he was not available
We didnt expect him to be available so we looked at other options as well.
Eggs 1 basket and all that.
MT
by MT_always on Aug 21, 2009 3:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The call to draft back was always IF he was not available
No. Not for certain members. It was trade down all the way regardless for them. They know who they are.
She said, "You're strange, but don't change", and I let her.
by stujo4 on Aug 21, 2009 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No matter how well
Jenkins plays this season, trading down would have probably been a wiser way to go. Especially when you only have four picks to work with. I don’t knock that logic whatsoever. And the Saints DID take nearly the entire 10 minutes to make the selection. I’m sure they were fielding calls the whole time and just didn’t receive a substantial enough offer. If Jenkins is the only impact position player to emerge from this draft, no one will be kicking themselves over drafting him — just like no one would have been terribly upset with the Ricky Williams pick had he lit it on fire as a Saint — but there would/will ALWAYS be people who question the VALUE of the selection, deal, non-deal, what have you. And rightly so.
"You'll have sloppy balls. You have to find a way to get a grip on it." -Drew Brees
by coldpizza on Aug 21, 2009 8:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
there will always be people who question the value of every pick in the draft. even if we trade back, did we get a fair enough offer? some ppl would want a 1st and high 2nd while someone would be ok with a mid-late 2nd. i don’t like bringing in that we only had 4 picks. the organization/management team should have been more aware of what they were giving away if they wanted the picks. We worked with what we have. We took a possible future pro bowler and the best of his position. If he doesn’t pan out, ppl will look at him like they do Reggie, thinking we should have taken this player or that one. hindsight is almost always 20/20.
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
by skinnykinney on Aug 22, 2009 1:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And you’re using hindsight now in saying that Jenkins was the proper pick, are you not?
"You'll have sloppy balls. You have to find a way to get a grip on it." -Drew Brees
by coldpizza on Aug 22, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
sorta
he’s definetly looked good so far but i was wanting him before the draft too.
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
by skinnykinney on Aug 22, 2009 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
“We took a possible future pro bowler and the best of his position.”
I don’t disagree with this whatsoever. I’d just rather improvement in more than one area, if at all possible.
"You'll have sloppy balls. You have to find a way to get a grip on it." -Drew Brees
by coldpizza on Aug 22, 2009 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
agreed
alot of ppl didn’t like the possibilites of anyone we had a chance to draft and felt like we needed to get more picks. I’m glad Jenkins was available. Also, alot of ppl wanted to forget about Jenkins and go after a LB. I didn’t see anyone I really liked besides Curry and Maulaluga.
Superbowl bound!!!...I hope? Go Saints! :D
by skinnykinney on Aug 22, 2009 1:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
“Also, alot of ppl wanted to forget about Jenkins and go after a LB. I didn’t see anyone I really liked besides Curry and Maulaluga.”
Agreed, although going after Maulaluga seemed fairly pointless with Vilma already re-signed. He’d definitely be more worthy of consideration now, being that Simoneau is hurt. Staying put, the only other player I would have been happy with is Oher. In fact, I would have preferred Oher at the time and that too holds more water now, due to a training camp injury. Still, without trading back, Jenkins is/was pretty darn close to the optimal pick. Of course, I would have said the same thing about Jonathan Sullivan, had we not traded up to get him. Or Glenn Dorsey, had he and Ellis flip-flopped. You’re absolutely right about hindsight.
"You'll have sloppy balls. You have to find a way to get a grip on it." -Drew Brees
by coldpizza on Aug 22, 2009 11:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WHY???
Do people dwell on the only 4 picks
The reason we had 4 was we used the rest up before the draft. We STILL had them we just prespent them.
The jury is out if we got fair value for them just as if they were used at the draft tho.
I would say anyone that thinks the Vilma draft pick usage was not good value keep that to themselves.
The Poochie draft pick usage is …. debatable but if you disagreed with it BEFORE we saw him play feel free to stand up.
So to recap.. we had 4 draft picks PLUS 2 players. Looks like we got 3 starters out of this years draft class. .. Pretty damn good I would say.
MT
by MT_always on Aug 26, 2009 9:03 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
“Looks like we got 3 starters out of this years draft class. .. Pretty damn good I would say.”
I’m assuming the 3 starters you’re referring to are Shockey, Vilma and Morstead(?) As good those “draft results” may be, I’m not sure what relevance that angle holds in a debate over whether to stay put at 15 or trade down. Had they traded down, they would have STILL had the three aforementioned starters and possibly more.
You’re right in a sense. The fact that they only had four picks shouldn’t factor in. But the fact that they may have the opportunity to recoup those surrendered draft picks (i.e., potential starters) should. No one’s making light of the trade values in saying that, they’re just looking to come out even further ahead. Injuries aside, we have three starters and three POTENTIAL starters, for a grand total of six players.
We started off with seven picks, meaning we already lost a POTENTIAL starter (at worst) right there. There were a few teams that walked away with MORE than seven POTENTIAL starters (at worst) and that’s not even including compensatory picks.
It all depends on how you look at it. In any talent pool, there’s quality and there’s quantity. And the two CAN possibly co-exist. When you’re talking about spells of 101 and 45 straight non-Saint selections at the podium, odds are we probably missed out on one more POTENTIAL starter, possibly more, in staying put and selecting Jenkins. Obviously, a trade can’t occur without second interested party. It all boils down to speculation, but it’s certainly nothing out of the ordinary for fans to hope their favorite team maximizes the potential of a rookie class.
"You'll have sloppy balls. You have to find a way to get a grip on it." -Drew Brees
by coldpizza on Aug 26, 2009 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hey at least you realize there has to be a second interested party. I’m about ready to shoot somebody over the morons who are so busy over on cincyjungle to crucify Mike Brown for not trading down from 6. I keep wanting to scream TRADE WITH WHO YOU BLEEPING MORONS!!!
Gah. Thanks for giving me somewhere to get that off my chest.
by FriarBob on Aug 28, 2009 1:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
