Get ready to trade down… more than once.

[slanidrac16]

First , I worked in the meat industry for 43 years so I like Monti and his dad already, lol!

This board is going to blow up on draft day. Think of where MO came from. Think of watching the draft and hearing, “ The Patriots have traded their pick for …”. And then hearing it again.
If the value is there and MO and his staff can find the right players I would not be surprise if we trade our pick a couple of times to acquire 4 or 5 additional picks in this draft in round 2 and 3.

We will all cry, “Oh we could have should have drafted this guy or that guy”.
Truth is this teams underbelly need an overhaul. “ Build a sustainable roster”. Can anybody argue that?

What I came away from the MO press conference is be ready to operate in a manner we just ain’t use to.

 

[JeffGollin]

I buy the general approach, assuming we get a good return on our investment and Anderson isn’t a legitimate franchise-changer.

 

[slanidrac16]

I buy the general approach, assuming we get a good return on our investment and Anderson isn’t a legitimate franchise-changer.

I get it. But remember where MO is coming from. This teams roster does not offer the luxury of depending on one player.
Yes we might have to watch Anderson become a star.. maybe. But in return we can acquire good talent, maybe. imagine getting a couple of o-lineman, rb, d-lineman and a Wr with addition picks. I’m not talking about all pros, but solid starters that can contribute.

 

[JohnnyCakes]

I buy the general approach, assuming we get a good return on our investment and Anderson isn’t a legitimate franchise-changer.

the only players that can change a franchise are QB's.

The OP is correct IMO.....this team isnt 1 , 2 or even 3 players away......they are 20 players away, and th rebuild will be deep this time.

 

[Snakester]

It would really have to work out with some good players. I would rather have one Eric Swann or Reggie White than four just okay players. Maybe even get a pro bowler in that trade.

 

[slanidrac16]

It would really have to work out with some good players. I would rather have one Eric Swann or Reggie White than four just okay players. Maybe even get a pro bowler in that trade.

Yes. However, let’s take Watts for example. Even as well as he played the defense could not overcome the deficiencies around him.
We need players.

 

[JohnnyCakes]

It would really have to work out with some good players. I would rather have one Eric Swann or Reggie White than four just okay players. Maybe even get a pro bowler in that trade.

we had an eric swann and even an Aeneas Williams an we stunk up the joint season after season.

This team needs a new aggregate

 

[RON_IN_OC]

If they didn't have #3 overall, I'd agree on the trade down. Even NE didn't trade down when they picked high in the draft...Only when they were mid-late 1st would they trade out of the 1st (accumulate a crap ton of picks) and then trade back into the last couple of spots in the 1st.

 

[BurqueCardFan]

That would be reminiscent of trading the pick to draft Suggs for two later round #1's that were average to below average at best.
Always take the surest thing possible (BPA). The majority thought Suggs would do great things and turned out true. The other two guys were just shots in the dark.

 

[RON_IN_OC]

That would be reminiscent of trading the pick to draft Suggs for two later round #1's that were average to below average at best.
Always take the surest thing possible (BPA). The majority thought Suggs would do great things and turned out true. The other two guys were just shots in the dark.

I think the absolute only way they trade #3 is if there's a player on a team picking in the teens, who can come in and be a defining piece to the puzzle for the Cardinals. Cards then trade back to the teens, while getting said player and probably a day 2 or 3 pick, as well.

 

[Cardinal88]

I think the absolute only way they trade #3 is if there's a player on a team picking in the teens, who can come in and be a defining piece to the puzzle for the Cardinals. Cards then trade back to the teens, while getting said player and probably a day 2 or 3 pick, as well.

Kind of agree but if trade back to the teens, I would be upset we got a 3rd out of that trade back. Minimum of a mid first plus a second and maybe even a third not “or”.

 

[Harry]

If they didn't have #3 overall, I'd agree on the trade down. Even NE didn't trade down when they picked high in the draft...Only when they were mid-late 1st would they trade out of the 1st (accumulate a crap ton of picks) and then trade back into the last couple of spots in the 1st.

The traded picks were all in the 20s & 30s. They kept the 6th pick in 2001. They’ve only traded first rounders in 5 years.

 

[BritCard]

I'd be pissed if we pass on Will Anderson but at the end of the day we have to trust Monti and judge him on the outcome.

 

[AZ Native]

So we pick Anderson at #3 and keep him for 10 years? Great. But the past says he gets overpaid an amount that we can't/don't match and we lose him after his rookie contract.

 

[SissyBoyFloyd]

No reason in this draft you couldn´t come away with 3 starters improving you OL, CB, and DL with an intelligent trade back and then maybe up too. Is it too much to ask to get possibly Skoronski around 10 or 12 and then use 1 of your 2/3s and maybe a 4 or 5 to move back up to mid R1 and get a starting CB. Then with your other R2 have a bit of luck with someone like the Army kid Carter, Ika, Mazi Smith, or Van Ness be there for you. Or do you feel even those players would be questionable starters and too much of a gamble compared to just taking Anderson at 3?

 

[MadCardDisease]

We will all cry, “Oh we could have should have drafted this guy or that guy”.
Truth is this teams underbelly need an overhaul. “ Build a sustainable roster”. Can anybody argue that?

Careful when you say "we will all cry". I would have no problems moving back if we can land several draft picks. On a team that has holes all over the roster this team will need much more than 5 picks in the 2023 draft.

 

[BurqueCardFan]

I think the absolute only way they trade #3 is if there's a player on a team picking in the teens, who can come in and be a defining piece to the puzzle for the Cardinals. Cards then trade back to the teens, while getting said player and probably a day 2 or 3 pick, as well.

Yeah but what kind of player are you talking about? Not sure who would be a defining piece at this stage.
I just think, you don't get cute. You draft the best player at that spot and move on. Many examples of us doing the wrong thing with our FO trying to outsmart themselves. Urlacher, Suggs, AP, etc... Same could have been said about Nick Bosa they year we took Kyler. Bosa was the BPA on many boards and may have been the right choice at #1 given recent events.

 

[Chopper0080]

Guy better put in some work in FA if he is gong to trade down. Also, he better not miss. This would be a common New England disciple mistake. You have to build credibility before you pass on top talent at key spots for mystery boxes.

You want to burn all of your good will. Hire a dope for a HC or pass on Anderson/Carter for magic beans. Maybe you can find a golden goose but if you can't, you will never be forgiven.

 

[Proximo]

First , I worked in the meat industry for 43 years so I like Monti and his dad already, lol!

This board is going to blow up on draft day. Think of where MO came from. Think of watching the draft and hearing, “ The Patriots have traded their pick for …”. And then hearing it again.
If the value is there and MO and his staff can find the right players I would not be surprise if we trade our pick a couple of times to acquire 4 or 5 additional picks in this draft in round 2 and 3.

We will all cry, “Oh we could have should have drafted this guy or that guy”.
Truth is this teams underbelly need an overhaul. “ Build a sustainable roster”. Can anybody argue that?

What I came away from the MO press conference is be ready to operate in a manner we just ain’t use to.

Good. I hope we do. The draft is a near total crap shoot, the more shots you get on target the better your odds of finding some good ones is the way I look at it.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

That would be reminiscent of trading the pick to draft Suggs for two later round #1's that were average to below average at best.
Always take the surest thing possible (BPA). The majority thought Suggs would do great things and turned out true. The other two guys were just shots in the dark.

Calvin Pace ended up being a good player. The problem was drafting skillet hands with the other pick. Plus that trade down was at #10 overall. The perfect spot to trade down when you need higher quality players.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Calvin Pace ended up being a good player. The problem was drafting skillet hands with the other pick. Plus that trade down was at #10 overall. The perfect spot to trade down when you need higher quality players.

The Cardinals 2003 draft was actually fairly productive.

Pace, Boldin, Hayes, Reggie Wells all became good to great (Boldin) players. Even Tony Gilbert who was poached off the practice squad stuck around for awhile.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

The Cardinals 2003 draft was actually fairly productive.

Pace, Boldin, Hayes, Reggie Wells all became good to great (Boldin) players. Even Tony Gilbert who was poached off the practice squad stuck around for awhile.

Yep. We just got a new GM. If we like the GMs hire because he has a plan, and his plan is to trade down I say go for it.

 

[Chopper0080]

Good. I hope we do. The draft is a near total crap shoot, the more shots you get on target the better your odds of finding some good ones is the way I look at it.

It's only smart if you hit on the picks.

 

[Chopper0080]

Yep. We just got a new GM. If we like the GMs hire because he has a plan, and his plan is to trade down I say go for it.

I thought we were checking ego at the door?

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I thought we were checking ego at the door?

The GM's ego?