Article 747JD Saints re-sign OL Dillon Radunz

Saints re-sign OL Dillon Radunz

by
from on (#747JD)
b7845aebd05dfecfbe045b95a2592e20Sep 14, 2025; New Orleans, Louisiana, USA; New Orleans Saints offensive tackle Dillon Radunz (77) lines up against the San Francisco 49ers during the first half at Caesars Superdome. Mandatory Credit: Stephen Lew-Imagn Images | Stephen Lew-Imagn Images

The New Orleans Saints have re-signed offensive lineman Dillon Radunz to a two-year deal.

The Saints have signed offensive lineman Dillon Radunz to a two-year contract! pic.twitter.com/ry9nPhUUVL

- New Orleans Saints (@Saints) March 12, 2026

Radunz, 27, signed with the Saints during the 2025 offseason. The former second-round pick played in 15 games with New Orleans, starting in 10. Radunz's 2025 season with the Saints was up-and-down, and he logged a poor 48.5 overall grade from PFF, ranking 75th out of 81 guards. He was much better in pass blocking; however, ranking 31st.

Radunz is the second Saints' move on the offensive line so far this offseason. New Orleans signed guard David Edwards to a four-year deal worth $61 million.

While the specifics of the deal haven't been revealed, Radunz's resignation opens up an interesting decision for the Saints with Cesar Ruiz. The former first-round pick has been inconsistent in his career, and his $11 million per year hasn't felt warranted.

6efaeac5877e5822eadf4ce5ae205b6b

If New Orleans is content with starting Radunz, they could look to trade Ruiz, as a cut would lose them money in 2026 or push $9 million into 2027 if they designate him as a post-June 1st cut.

At worst, the Saints signed Radunz to a value deal, and he'll work as offensive line depth. New Orleans has dealt with offensive line injuries a lot in recent seasons and Radunz could be insurance in case more injuries occur.

External Content
Source RSS or Atom Feed
Feed Location http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/rss.xml
Feed Title
Feed Link https://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/
Feed Copyright Copyright (c) 2026 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Reply 0 comments