Bryant Johnson and Calvin Pace

[TJ]

The two reasons you stick and pick MHJ

Looking forward to Maserati Marv in Cardinal red this season

 

[Proximo]

I f'ing hate this being brought up over and over again.

This is not the 2003 draft - the players are not the same, the GM is not the same and they never will be.

It's like saying a 2003 Hyundai was a piece of crap and so no one should ever buy a Hyundai now.

Things change - ALWAYS. There are at least 100 different variables in this draft.

Any scientist will tell you a small sample size is a terrible way to draw a conclusion - that's bad enough - but you aren't even comparing similar things.

If Adrian Peterson, Ladanian Tomlinson and Priest Holmes were all available in the top 10 of that draft - and the cards traded down for one of the other 2 that would be a lot closer to this draft situation.

 

[Stout]

I f'ing hate this being brought up over and over again.

This is not the 2003 draft - the players are not the same, the GM is not the same and they never will be.

It's like saying a 2003 Hyundai was a piece of crap and so no one should ever buy a Hyundai now.

Things change - ALWAYS. There are at least 100 different variables in this draft.

Any scientist will tell you a small sample size is a terrible way to draw a conclusion - that's bad enough - but you aren't even comparing similar things.

If Adrian Peterson, Ladanian Tomlinson and Priest Holmes were all available in the top 10 of that draft - and the cards traded down for one of the other 2 that would be a lot closer to this draft situation.

Well, you're all over the board spouting absolutes yourself. There's no way you can "know" trading back is the right call yet that's what you preach. Someone making comparisons and showing that trading back is often a terrible idea isn't any more outlandish than your certainty.

 

[BullheadCardFan]

Bryant Johnson

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[TJ]

I f'ing hate this being brought up over and over again.

This is not the 2003 draft - the players are not the same, the GM is not the same and they never will be.

It's like saying a 2003 Hyundai was a piece of crap and so no one should ever buy a Hyundai now.

Things change - ALWAYS. There are at least 100 different variables in this draft.

Any scientist will tell you a small sample size is a terrible way to draw a conclusion - that's bad enough - but you aren't even comparing similar things.

If Adrian Peterson, Ladanian Tomlinson and Priest Holmes were all available in the top 10 of that draft - and the cards traded down for one of the other 2 that would be a lot closer to this draft situation.

Or you take the player who’s a generational talent at his position instead of risking it with players who *might* be good. Bird in the hand

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I f'ing hate this being brought up over and over again.

This is not the 2003 draft - the players are not the same, the GM is not the same and they never will be.

It's like saying a 2003 Hyundai was a piece of crap and so no one should ever buy a Hyundai now.

Things change - ALWAYS. There are at least 100 different variables in this draft.

Any scientist will tell you a small sample size is a terrible way to draw a conclusion - that's bad enough - but you aren't even comparing similar things.

If Adrian Peterson, Ladanian Tomlinson and Priest Holmes were all available in the top 10 of that draft - and the cards traded down for one of the other 2 that would be a lot closer to this draft situation.

I'm completely in agreement.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Or you take the player who’s a generational talent at his position instead of risking it with players who *might* be good. Bird in the hand

How are you a generational talent, when some people say he isn't the best WR in THIS draft? The two statements don't jive. (and I'm a fan of MHJ and think he is WR1 this draft)

 

[Cheesebeef]

How are you a generational talent, when some people say he isn't the best WR in THIS draft? The two statements don't jive. (and I'm a fan of MHJ and think he is WR1 this draft)

"some people" also said Ryan Leaf was the best QB in the Manning draft. Didn't change the fact that 99.99% of every mock-draft then had Manning. It's the same situation here.

 

[Proximo]

Well, you're all over the board spouting absolutes yourself. There's no way you can "know" trading back is the right call yet that's what you preach. Someone making comparisons and showing that trading back is often a terrible idea isn't any more outlandish than your certainty.

I am doing exactly the opposite of spouting absolutes. I freely admit I don't know how any player will pan out.

The draft is a proven crap shoot. Giving yourself more chances to pick correctly is the logical thing to do.

Putting all your eggs in one basket when you don't have to is the smarter move - especially when all scouting suggest you can still get a player that is 95% as good in the process of getting yourself extra chances to score.

 

[Shane]

The two reasons you stick and pick MHJ

Looking forward to Maserati Marv in Cardinal red this season

That would be great if Odunze or Nabers were anything close to a Bryant Johnson level talent. They’re not! Thread is mehhh

 

[Shane]

Or you take the player who’s a generational talent at his position instead of risking it with players who *might* be good. Bird in the hand

Kyler was “generational” too… look at us now wooohooooo

 

[TJ]

That would be great if Odunze or Nabers were anything close to a Bryant Johnson level talent. They’re not! Thread is mehhh

You’re meh

 

[SECTION 11]

Why did you bring it up again with it’s own thread lol‽

 

[dreamcastrocks]

"some people" also said Ryan Leaf was the best QB in the Manning draft. Didn't change the fact that 99.99% of every mock-draft then had Manning. It's the same situation here.

I don't think the two comparisons are anywhere near that close, but I get what you are saying.

 

[TJ]

How are you a generational talent, when some people say he isn't the best WR in THIS draft? The two statements don't jive. (and I'm a fan of MHJ and think he is WR1 this draft)

“Experts” always want to be the ones who stands out.

 

[kerouac9]

Or you take the player who’s a generational talent at his position instead of risking it with players who *might* be good. Bird in the hand

I don't think that Terrell Suggs was a generational talent then or now. Good player, wish we'd taken him instead of Calvin and Bryant, but I'd take the two MN firsts and a future second.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Kyler was “generational” too… look at us now wooohooooo

no he wasn't. there were wild homers claiming that, but his size alone barred him from being in any generational talent convo.

 

[SECTION 11]

Bump. Let’s get into Suggs and Peterson. Deep dive.

 

[TRW]

One more day…one more day…one more day…

 

[kerouac9]

no he wasn't. there were wild homers claiming that, but his size alone barred him from being in any generational talent convo.

I dunno. There’s no way that Bryce Young gets drafted #1 overall if Kyler had been a bust. He’s opened doors but people would recognize Lamar Jackson as the true generational talent if...

 

[SECTION 11]

I dunno. There’s no way that Bryce Young gets drafted #1 overall if Kyler had been a bust. He’s opened doors but people would recognize Lamar Jackson as the true generational talent if...

If he was a gym rat.

 

[azmike74]

Bryant Johnson

You must be registered for see images attach

Skillet Hands!

 

[TJ]

I don't think that Terrell Suggs was a generational talent then or now. Good player, wish we'd taken him instead of Calvin and Bryant, but I'd take the two MN firsts and a future second.

Not generational, but Suggs was all but a lock to be a pro bowler. Instead, we got a guy who only put in effort during his contract year and a WR with no hands

 

[Stout]

I am doing exactly the opposite of spouting absolutes. I freely admit I don't know how any player will pan out.

The draft is a proven crap shoot. Giving yourself more chances to pick correctly is the logical thing to do.

Putting all your eggs in one basket when you don't have to is the smarter move - especially when all scouting suggest you can still get a player that is 95% as good in the process of getting yourself extra chances to score.

"I am doing exactly the opposite of spouting absolutes." Goes on to spout an absolute.

I get it. You're 100 percent convinced trading down is the right call. The problem here is you're presenting you're opinion as a fact. Your opinion is an opinion, nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Fitz4Ever]

I get it....but the problem with the trade down is we picked 2 duds. I know we ended up getting Boldin in the 2nd round...but lets just say we traded #10 (Suggs) and at #17 & #18 we had drafted Anquan Boldin and Robert Mathis (123 career sacks)...what would say about the trade then?

Trading down is a great idea if you draft stud players with the extra picks. There are no "sure things" when it comes to prospects. Yes, Suggs seemed like he was going to be good, and was. MHJ seems like he is going to be good, and probably will. But Robert Gallery seemed like a sure thing too...and he was not.

Trading down is a gamble and can set your team back. Taking a player high who busts can also set your team back.

Also, just for what its worth. I was working at Chandler Mall in 2003 and met Suggs in a cell phone store. I said "Man I was really hoping the Cardinals were going to get you" and his response was "No way, Bidwill wouldnt pay me my money". This was years before the rookie wage scale. For all we know Suggs would have held out and fizzled out here.