Should the Saints Draft a Running Back?
by Dave Cariello on Apr 19, 2010 6:00 AM CDT
in 2010 NFL Draft
Email
Print"Dave! I love you man! Great pick."
"Good solid pick."
"Love this pick...Great pick."
"Voted A+++"
That was the feedback I received in the comment section as I represented the Saints in the second round and closed out Mocking the Draft's writers mock draft. Who did I select to earn such high praise?
I went with Stanford running back Toby Gerhart. That's right, a running back. Allow myself to quote...myself:
Selecting the 6'0", 231 lbs. former Cardinal here gives the team a chance to get that straight ahead, pile-moving runner to fill the void left by Deuce McAllister two years ago and Mike Bell more recently.
It's no secret the Saints are probably still in the market to add a new running back somehow. Call me skeptical but after they failed at moving up to draft Beanie Wells last year, I never really believed Payton when he said he thought his running back was "in the building" and I really don't think he feels that way now. They've already brought in free agent Jamal Lewis for a visit this off-season.
With the free agency market looking dry in that department, the draft is the next best chance to seriously upgrade the position. Gerhart was just too good to pass up here and we know Mickey and Sean can often feel the same way. And if they really do subscribe to the best player available policy when drafting, Gerhart definitely has to be considered a legitimate option.
But the second round might be a little high for the Saints to select an offensive player given the fact that they've got other pressing needs on the defensive side. The scouting staff has done such a great job finding talent in the late rounds of the draft (see: Marques Colston) and among undrafted prospects (see: Pierre Thomas, Lance Moore) that it may be best to address a position of lesser need like running back during those times instead.
So I'm moving the conversation from Mocking the Draft to CSC and this becomes our topic of the day. Will the Saints draft a running back at any point in the draft or just wait to find an undrafted diamond in the rough? If they draft a back, how high of a pick do they use on one? Is Gerhart the guy you like or is there another RB you'd like to see the Saints select?
Take it away!
41 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I'd select Gerhart
There’s a lot of depth in this draft for defense. We could easily fill our needs from the second round on with solid role players who are coachable and willing to prove they belong. Toby is a game changing running back. not quite an Earl Campbell but still a very powerful runner with good speed. I really think it’s the best use of the 32nd pick. Every other choice can be defense after that.
He’s talking about the 64th pick. Gerhart’s a steal at that point and should definitely be considered … just like any other player whose inherent value outweighs his draft position. Drafting strictly by need often equates to reaching, an approach no team can afford to take when it comes to talent acquisition. Ideally, the 4th-6th round would be the range we’d be looking for help in our RBBC rotation. The mere fact that we’re without a 5th round pick throws a monkey wrench into that, being that if there are any backs in that range that the Saints truly covet, they’ll probably wind up reaching for them in the 4th anyway. Barring a trade, that situation is inevitable regardless of the targeted position, so why limit it to RB? By NOT doing so, there’s a better chance that you won’t have to reach as far, being that a target player at ANY position could conceivably grade out in the early-to-mid 5th. In that case, you’d merely reach for the highest rated player at ANY of the remaining positions you were considering. Personally, I’d be ecstatic with a Hughes/Gerhart 1-2. The interior defensive line and/or center could still be addressed adequately in Rounds 3-4, leaving the latter two rounds open for BPA depth on defense.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
Upon further review
I reread Dave’s statement after reading your reply and realized my error. The things I’ve read from a couple sources lately almost make it seem like Gerhart might not be there for the 64th pick, but if he is, then yeah, you’ld almost have to be crazy to pass him up. As for watching the draft, with the timezone difference I’ll be wide awake at work for both rounds when the Saints are on the clock.
You scare me sometimes CP. I love hughes….i surprisingly like Gerhart…..however, i can’t help but think you imagine Hughes playing OLB for us. Think that’s a mistake. Guy’s made for a 3-4 rush backer or a DE. I love his motor as an every down DE, even at the NFL level. Think he’d be playing out of position as a 4-3 OLB. Where i have no problem with Hughes/Gerhart as a 1-2….gotta wonder how we’re still going to stop the run. No starting DT….no starting OLB in the first 2 picks is a little scary. Still, i admit sometimes you just have to go for the best available and hope for the best, and those 2 at those picks would fit that bill.
I disagree with your assessment of Hughes. I think he’d probably transition a little better as a 3-4 OLB, but there’s no doubt in my mind that he can handle either scheme. It’s kind of like tennis players. Some play better on clay. That doesn’t mean they’re not good on grass or the hard court. In terms of lineup position, a 4-2-5 (what Hughes played at TCU) is actually closer to a 4-3 than it is to a 3-4.
I also think a little bit too much is made over getting an immediate starter with the 64th pick. We’re probably going to be lucky to get a starter at 32, much less with both top picks. If you can name the last Super Bowl champion to start the 32 and 64th overall picks as rookies, both for the majority (at least 9 games) of the following season, that’s when I’ll start buying into the notion of passing over the BPA for the position of bigger need.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
yup - like the pick
If he makes the difference on a few 3rd and short or 4th and short conversions, then we won’t need that defensive player as much because our offense will stay on the field. Also, if it rounds out our “RBBC” and adds years to the life of our RBs, I’m all for it.
As M-E keeps reiterating, I trust Wil-Mis-Pay to make the best selection based on value for us – they’ve done pretty good so far…
Remember, this is a deep draft!
CONVENTIONAL WISDOM! CONVENTIONAL WISDOM! MEL KIPER’S HAIR! MEL KIPER’S HAIR!
On a related note, I have scheduled a vacation day for Friday so that I can enjoy Thursday night without worry of being too tired for work the next day – is anyone else with me???
"I have all of the love in the world for Darren Sharper. I just don't have all the money in the world for Darren Sharper." Mickey Loomis
“On a related note, I have scheduled a vacation day for Friday so that I can enjoy Thursday night without worry of being too tired for work the next day – is anyone else with me???”
Put in for it nearly two weeks ago!
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
see you at the OPEN THREAD! Beer and wings for everyone!!
"I have all of the love in the world for Darren Sharper. I just don't have all the money in the world for Darren Sharper." Mickey Loomis
by Hans Petersen on Apr 19, 2010 7:10 PM CDT up reply actions
No laptop, unfortunately. I usually watch it at Buffalo Wild Wings in Slidell, but I have a feeling the Saints will not have picked yet, by the time they start shutting down the place down. Might have to catch it at Cooter Brown’s this year instead.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
do they do something special at cooters?
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Apr 19, 2010 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions
I can't get off of work....
but I have the DVR set.
As far as picking a RB or any other positon, let me quote Micky Loomis:
I think that if you look at our team, we’ve lost some guys on defense and have the potential to lose some guys on defense. Obviously we had the number-one rated offense in the league last year and our defense performed very well, but we can improve in that area. I probably would lean toward the defensive side of the ball, but there’s always the but. There’s always that guy that jumps up at you that you don’t expect to be there. In years past that guy has been Deuce McAllister; he’s one example of someone where we had no intention going into the draft of selecting a running back and at 22, Deuce was there staring at us and we said, ‘Let’s take this guy.’ That’s the caveat.
Loomins has no idea what he’s talking about. Deuce was drafted at 23.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
I believe we can get
Anthony Dixon as late as the 6th-7th round and he is a very underated player probably the best deal of the draft at that position
World Champions at last
by mississippisaintsfan on Apr 19, 2010 8:29 AM CDT reply actions
I love the Gerhart pick
but I don’t think he’ll still be there at 64. Maybe the best reason for the Saints to trade down is to nab Gerhart with their first pick in the middle of the second round, get another second rounder (or a bunch of other picks) as well, and still have their own pick at the end of the second round. If that happens, I will personally see to it that someone has Mickey Loomis’s baby. I’ve already got a list of candidates, and the fax is fired up.
This comment is sponsored by Southern Bell, the 'Then' Network.
by MtnExile on Apr 19, 2010 9:02 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Yes, but...
Trading down and getting someone like Gerhart would be an excellent move, especially because it means you can get more picks, but it may mean that we wouldn’t get one of the 1/2 round linebackers we’ve been looking at. If the Saints think that they can’t get a Jerry Hughes/Daryl Washington at #64 (or their next highest 2nd round pick, depending on the draft deal), and they don’t grade a guy like Rennie Curran that high (personally think Rennie would be very good, but he’s not going anywhere in the 2nd), then maybe we’d have to pass on Gerhart and hope he’s there at #64. This draft has tons of pounding RBs in it, and a guy like Anthony Dixon or Ben Tate could be picked up almost in the 4th. But with that said, if we trade to the middle of the 2nd, and Gerhart and perhaps 2-3 LB we like are there, definitely go Gerhart. If only 1 LB is left, I think you might have to go LB.
As far as drafting an RB for the Saints, I think you go Gerhart in the second, Charles Scott/Anthony Dixon/Ben Tate in the 4th (whichever of those is left by then), or go UFA. Don’t reach for someone in the 2nd like Scott. He’s good, but guys just like him can be had later.
But I definitely like trading down though.
by Andrew Tessier on Apr 19, 2010 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions
So, is a RB at 64 going to be a replacement for PT? In 2 years or less?
If not, I’d recommend picking someone who we think has starting (this year) capability, with the 64th pick.
If we want a #3/4 RB, we can get one of those in the later rounds/FA rookies (see PT).
Pigs have flown! Hell has frozen over! The Saints HAVE WON the Superbowl!!
Payton wants a new toy soldier
Last year, with the unusually low number of picks they had, they didn’t draft one offensive player and chose to go all defense and one punter (Morstead was a great pick, by the way). Defense was the obvious weakness going into last year and they drafted wisely and, most importantly, hired wisely when they brought in G-dub. SUPER BOWL CHAMPS!
Today, defense is still the weaker of the three units and I truly expect them to spend their first pick on that side of the ball. I love the RB pick in the second round and I’d be very happy with Gerhart. Pay-Loo haven’t been at all aggressive at filling Bell’s roster spot. They may see great things in Hamilton, but I’m guessing they’re waiting to see if one of their higher-rated RB prospects drops to them in the draft first. If that doesn’t happen, there’s a plethora of FA RBs still looking for a team out there that they could later bring in. What is a plethora, El Guapo?
"As soon as Tony (Dungy) said we had no chance, I knew we had 'em right where we wanted 'em"--Coach Sean Payton right after Super Bowl XLIV with the Lombardi Trophy firmly in hand. WHO DAT!!
by David "Satch" Kelly on Apr 19, 2010 9:32 AM CDT reply actions
Ben Tate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The dude is a total beast! In my opinion, for whatever that’s worth (not too much in pro football circles, I’m sure), he’s the best running back in this year’s draft, hands down. CJ who? Sure he’s a big play guy and all that, but he’s not an every down possibility like Tate is, in addition to being a great return man too!
We could possibly get him with our #64 pick late in the 2nd, but I would much rather see the Saints trade out of the first round altogether with their #32 pick and get an earlier 2nd rounder to pick Tate with, as well as another later pick in this year’s draft (like a 3rd or 4th I think it would probably be).
Watch his film on you tube if you don’t want to take my word for it!
Tate definitely undervalued
In Breesus' name we play
by Breesus Christ Superstar on Apr 19, 2010 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions
What about Charles Scott
Gerheart is a little faster maybe, but I think Scott from LSU is the right build for that short yardage pounder like Deuce that we need now.
by ReggieVilma on Apr 19, 2010 10:50 AM CDT via mobile reply actions
I’m fine with Scott as a backup plan, but I wouldn’t pass on Gerhart at 64 for any other back. Primarily because it would be a steal, but also because there’s no guarantee any of those guys are going to be there later on. Further, in the case of any projected to go in the 5th or 6th, you’d either be reaching for them in the 4th or crossing your fingers and toes, hoping they drop two more rounds. I’d much rather get great value at the position than go either of those two routes. A bird in the hand. Btw, I like Tate too, just not enough to bypass defensive talent for. The only two early round RBs I’d consider are Dwyer and Gerhart. The former probably won’t be the BPA at 32 and will be long gone by 64. The latter will probably also be gone, but is the better overall fit in our offense.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
Ben Tate would be a far better option still...
I would take Tate over Gerhart and way over Scott, but I guess that’s just me since no one has voiced their opinions on him at all in here yet…
Opinion on Tate
Good solid RB but pretty inconsistent. Some games he would take over, others it was like he wasn’t even on the team. He would be a good 5th round pick(which we don’t have). So a 6th round pick if he is still there.
disagree
Gerhart over Tate, any day. Look at the LSU-Auburn game. LSU doesn’t have an NFL type run-stopping defense, not even close, and Tate barely did anything. Not saying that he wouldn’t work in the NFL, just saying that he’s not a great RB, or else he’d dominate in almost every game.
by Andrew Tessier on Apr 19, 2010 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions
There's a number of quality backs
who should be available in the 3-6th rounds who fit the bill as a “power” back. Charles Scott, Legarette Blount, and Ben Tate just to name a few. Blount has a chance to be the best, but he also has a chance of being a bust. He’s got more than a few well documented issues, and he’s 25 which is a bit old for a rookie running back. The point is, there will be a chance to get a quality power back in the mid to late rounds. I would rather have a player who can be an every down player, on offense or defense, in the 2nd round instead of a player who will be used sparingly on the occasional 3rd and short.
Peyton, I can eat Oreos faster than you!!!!
The best part of picking 32nd
Is that every year a quality player drops far below thier value. If we stick with BPA strategy, we are going to get some steals.
In Breesus' name we play
by Breesus Christ Superstar on Apr 19, 2010 3:55 PM CDT reply actions
Best part of picking 32nd…..you won the year before.
by jeff.l.b on Apr 19, 2010 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Not one mention of Montario Hardesty?
I have him rated as good, if not better than, Tate. I do thunk he at least deserves to be in the conversation.
hmm...
I say we draft defense and if we need another back pick him up through FA but I don’t know if we need another back. Put someone on the practice squad and leave him there, just in case.
Don't worry I got your back cuz...
We have ZERO reason to draft one early
and I am just in shock that anyone would want us to draft anyone BUT a defensive player
Our offense is just fine with who we currently have
My god, WE NEED DEFENSE
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
