Should have seen it coming? How in the hell do you predict two jumps of 10+ picks?
"SK shouldn't have listened"
Yes & who wanted to hire Wilks with Mikey McCoy as the OC lol? I hope that was all on MB & not SK lol. SK will get another season as the GM, I hope he wasn't that stupid. You're probably right though, all SK more than likely.
I hope he just sticks to his "secretive plan" for 2020. Draft the exact players PFF has us taking in every round lol. He can kick back, drink his beer & not have to worry about a thing lol. His 2019 draft was almost identical to PFF. I think he just grabbed their draft spread sheet & said "here's our board guys". Gotta be better than him doing it by himself.
I guess we'll just agree to disagree on this one and what the meaning of reactionary vs proactive is in our world's.
I disagree with this, but it is more because I believe that how the board was built was flawed. If, listening to Arians, the Cardinals targeted both Watson and Mahomes with their first round pick, those players being QBs should have been elevated on their board. Keim should have had a range in mind pre-draft of how high he was willing to move for those players. Example...if Mahomes and Watson were 1 and 2 on their draft board, and the Cardinals are sitting at 13...you have to know that you are likely to need to make a move to get one of the two. Now, you can argue that if both are gone by #5, it was never in play. If one or two are available past #5, you need to know pre-draft who is interested in moving back. When both are available after 5, it is ok to wait if you have similar grades on each player, but you also need to be ready to move up immediate if one is gone. You also need to know what spots are people willing to move out of. So, if I know the Jets aren't willing to move out, but the Chargers and Panthers are, I need to be on the phone with the Panthers to know what the cost is if Chargers trade back or take one of the two QBs.
This is where the logic is flawed though. You're assuming those teams would just move back no matter what, and that they weren't enamored with the guy they selected. If you look back at that draft, probably the only team after 5 and before 10 that was willing to move back would be the Bengals, and then at that point, why make the trade when there's only 3 picks to go in order to get two players you covet, and none of the teams in front of you seemingly want QBs?
Again, that is why the groundwork needs to be set pre-draft. To think that these teams preferred to move back to the 20's when they could have moved back 2 or 3 spots is kind of silly. The price was high because it needed to be that high to pass on all of those players. If the price is a 3rd and a future 1st to go back to 18 spots and you offer a 2nd to go back 2 spots...the value of the second trade is better for the team trading out.
The value of a first round pick is almost never better than a first rounder. Especially if those teams don't particularly care for anyone in that range. I'm sure this was all discussed pre-draft, but teams maneuver and change their deals, as you mentioned. This is where I struggle discussing with not only you, but others on this subject, I just don't think you understand how important that first round pick really is, especially when the Browns/Bills are sitting thinking "do I really want a Haason Reddick-tier player right now?"
Yes, I'm sure we had the opportunity to up our deal. I'm sure those teams both knew we were interested, and I have zero doubt we talked to them and found out what other teams were prepared to give up. And I think we smartly passed on the deal because it was way too rich.
I still don't see how this is "bingo." moving back into the 20s is no big deal if you're netting a top pick for next year. Unfortunately the value charts don't account for for trades from additional years, but that first rounder is worth sooooo much more.
Recent evidence shows it's revised, but 1,310 is what the Browns received in that case compared to our 1,600 if we gave up our 2nd rounder (to move up one spot), for a pick valued at 1,150. For the Bills, they received 1,542 for a pick worth 1,300. Of course, assuming all picks were equal to the "last pick of the first round."
Stockholm syndrome.In our dysfunctional Cardinal history, that makes perfect sense. Do you really feel that comfortable that MB would even hire a better GM than Keim? I don't. AW would probably get the job & who really knows how that would play out. Keim did sit over 10-6, 11-5, and 13-3 seasons. No guarantee he ever gets back to that, but it did actually happen. With Murray at QB, this team will only get better.
Yes. All this. Happy with kyler but still an indicator of keim sucking.
Oy such bad argument when you resort to overinflating an argument. Never indicated would go the Ricky Williams route. Nor do I believe that’s what it would’ve taken. But just to play along with your scenario, would I have traded:
I don't see Keim or Joseph being fired this year. Not saying I agree with it, just don't see it. We'll see.
No man. Just no. In your world every first is worth the same. They’re not. Moving down 3 spots and getting a first half second the same year is likely better than moving down 10 spots and an end of first round pick a year later. The first round move down is more valuable to the cards slot than to either the Texans or chiefs. And the current year 2nd is likely close to equal value for a next years late first. Current draft picks are always more valuable than later year picks. So if took our 1st, 2nd, and 4th (or even our 3rd) that year to move up and get one of those two it would’ve (a) likely been worth it; and (b) been an equivalent, of not superior, deal in terms of value than what the chiefs or Texans offered.
Of course, those players all suck (or are okay at best). But you're assuming that's how it would have played out. Keim hasn't had a good draft, but if you're willing to blow through picks under the assumption that we can get one major player and no one else will be decent, it's time to change GMs. Although I don't think you and I are arguing about changing GMs at all, haha.
Wow this where I think you’re totally out to lunch. The greatest difference in value in the draft tends to be between first round picks. So the difference of our slot and the chiefs and Texans slots in the first would have been overwhelmingly in favor of our position. And the absolutely recognized time value of picks favoring a current pick over a future pick would’ve favored our deal as well.
