Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Commonsense said:

Fair. Maybe then should have taken LVE without trading up and then taken a guy like Nick Chubb. 

 

Allen makes up for all of Edmunds sins ATM so let’s ride.

There's Vander Esch again.

 

I'll need to watch Edmund's more closely this weekend.

Posted
1 minute ago, whatdrought said:

Gregory wants the saints to win. 

 

LVE was taken at 19 which was before our original spot. The trade up was necessary either way. 

Fair. But a slight move would have been feasible in comparison to a second trade “up”

1 minute ago, DisplacedBillsFan said:

There's Vander Esch again.

 

I'll need to watch Edmund's more closely this weekend.

Don’t hurt your eyes. They aren’t even close. Edmunds is younger but...more experienced so we can all hope for that. LVE was playing rinky dink football throughout high school. 

Posted
Just now, Commonsense said:

Fair. But a slight move would have been feasible in comparison to a second trade “up”

 

Well, we went from 22 to 16, you’re talking about a 2 pick difference to get ahead of the Cowboys and take LVE, so it’s hard to know what kind of compensation change that would create.

Posted
Just now, whatdrought said:

 

Well, we went from 22 to 16, you’re talking about a 2 pick difference to get ahead of the Cowboys and take LVE, so it’s hard to know what kind of compensation change that would create.

The parcel is price is on the folks that get paid...it would be a hard argument to trade up for Edmunds instead of LVE.

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Commonsense said:

Fair. But a slight move would have been feasible in comparison to a second trade “up”

Don’t hurt your eyes. They aren’t even close. Edmunds is younger but...more experienced so we can all hope for that. LVE was playing rinky dink football throughout high school. 

 

I think that the prevailing thought in the lead up to the draft was that LVE was a more refined pick, while Edmunds has a higher ceiling. 

 

1 minute ago, Commonsense said:

The parcel is price is on the folks that get paid...it would be a hard argument to trade up for Edmunds instead of LVE.

 

If we’re judging based on 3 quarters of a season, then yeah. I’ll wait and see.

 

Also, at the time, Edmunds was universally viewed as the better option. 

Edited by whatdrought
Posted
Just now, whatdrought said:

 

I think that the prevailing thought in the lead up to the draft was that LVE was a more refined pick, while Edmunds has a higher ceiling. 

I’d say that thought needs more of explanation. LVE is older but his trajectory was second to none late last season. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, Commonsense said:

I’d say that thought needs more of explanation. LVE is older but his trajectory was second to none late last season. 

 

LVE was seen as a solid linebacker prospect who had the chance to be great. Edmunds was seen as a physical freak who could be dominant at a whole other level. 

 

I’m not arguing that that was a correct assessment, but rather that it’s what was believed of the two.

 

I think what we’re seeing so far this season is that Edmunds is less instinctual and is learning how to play in the middle, while LVE is more fluid and thus producing better right now. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

 

I think that the prevailing thought in the lead up to the draft was that LVE was a more refined pick, while Edmunds has a higher ceiling. 

 

 

If we’re judging based on 3 quarters of a season, then yeah. I’ll wait and see.

 

Also, at the time, Edmunds was universally viewed as the better option. 

Not true, and I’m not judging by tonight’s game. As I said earlier, has Kamara got outside of 55 all night? Catching or running? The answer is no.

 

Kamara is the most dynamic threat in football. Sure, TG is better through the tackles etc. but AK41 is legit and he has spent four quarters under the watch of LVE.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, whatdrought said:

Gregory wants the saints to win. 

 

 

LVE was taken at 19 which was before our original spot. The trade up was necessary either way. 

 

Nick Chubb went early in the second which was not a pick we traded. 

 

Not to harp on you. ?

 

Yea, but who knows who’s there at 20 if we don’t take Edmonds. Heck, it could’ve been tremaine. Hard to guess but they got their guy and I do trust mcd with linebackers

Posted
1 minute ago, Commonsense said:

Not true, and I’m not judging by tonight’s game. As I said earlier, has Kamara got outside of 55 all night? Catching or running? The answer is no.

 

Kamara is the most dynamic threat in football. Sure, TG is better through the tackles etc. but AK41 is legit and he has spent four quarters under the watch of LVE.

 

What? 

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

Yea, but who knows who’s there at 20 if we don’t take Edmonds. Heck, it could’ve been tremaine. Hard to guess but they got their guy and I do trust mcd with linebackers

 

True enough. And then there’s the fact that Darius Leonard is playing incredibly as well. Hindsight is a cruel mistress.

Posted

Maybe a combined 140 years of experience for the refs is not necessarily a good thing...

Posted
Just now, stevewin said:

Maybe a combined 140 years of experience for the refs is not necessarily a good thing...

Maybe that number is just an indication that these zebras are long past their due dates.

×
×
  • Create New...