Kipper & McShay's picks as of 9 March

[john h]

Mel Kipper still has us selecting Von Miller at #5. He has moved Gabbert to the #1 pick for Carolina. Both Kipper & McShay say that Gabbert is the best QB in the draft and if you want a QB he is the one to select. Todd McShay added to that by saying that Carolina, Arizona, or the Panthers are teams that could use him. They indicate he is better than Newton.

Gabbert has been my favorite to select for a month now. He is probably not going to be available to us, unfortunately. Granted that Von Miller looks to be a very good player he is not going to change where we finish next year or this year. The only position player that can do that is a QB and is the reason we should go all out to acquire a QB that can make a difference. I do not think that Max Hall, or Skelton come anywhere near being a difference maker. Hall, I think, should be cut and some low QB selection should be added to our draft picks in hopes of lightning striking.

 

[stewdog1]

As much as I like Gabbert, I don't think we should try and move up to #1 to get him. It would cost too much.

 

[ARZCardinals]

Move up...no way

Pp7 or Von miller are just fine. Stay put at 5

And auburn QB goes 1st

 

[Goldfield]

I want Peterson and trade for Orton or Kolb. Or draft Gabbert. But QB IMO is #1 issue.

 

[juza76]

i think now without new cba the team will take a qb in round 1

 

[PJ1]

i think now without new cba the team will take a qb in round 1

It certainly changes things. They will have to seriously consider it.

 

[Mitch]

i think now without new cba the team will take a qb in round 1

I'm wondering, juza76, if it's actually the other way around. You risk losing one year of development...if let's say the pre-season doesn't start until late August.

You can assimilate a pass rusher into the defense fairly easily.

A rookie QB needs all the mini-camps and pre-season practices just to gain a fair understanding of the offense and the terminology.

What's looking very good for the Cardinals in this scenario is the work they were able to give to John Skelton. Had he been relegated to 3rd string offense and simply running the scout team the entire year, without getting reps with the first team, his development would be still almost at square one.

 

[juza76]

I'm wondering, juza76, if it's actually the other way around. You risk losing one year of development...if let's say the pre-season doesn't start until late August.

You can assimilate a pass rusher into the defense fairly easily.

A rookie QB needs all the mini-camps and pre-season practices just to gain a fair understanding of the offense and the terminology.

What's looking very good for the Cardinals in this scenario is the work they were able to give to John Skelton. Had he been relegated to 3rd string offense and simply running the scout team the entire year, without getting reps with the first team, his development would be still almost at square one.

because you think a qb couldnt start to work on playbook with offensive coordinator or you believe there wont be any contact between players and coaching staff

 

[Mitch]

because you think a qb couldnt start to work on playbook with offensive coordinator or you believe there wont be any contact between players and coaching staff

Exactly.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Exactly.

Nothing prevents players from getting together on their own and working out. Don't need the playbook to run the route tree, over and over.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Mayoch's top 32, regardless of position, has Dareus at one; Miller at two - and Peterson at three.

BIM: Kiper (one "p")

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

I want Peterson and trade for Kolb. QB IMO is #1 issue.

ftfy.

 

[Pariah]

Nothing prevents players from getting together on their own and working out. Don't need the playbook to run the route tree, over and over.

It's not the same.

And there WON'T be contact between coaches and players in any meaningful fashion.

 

[Chopper0080]

Yes, by drafting a QB with the lockout in place, you are wasting a year of development and wasting a draft pick. The QB will be a waste of a roster spot, and the money that will be paid to a guy who will essentially not be playing football for the year will be wasted. The key to this years draft is to try and match up players who did in college what you will ask them to do in the pros. If Von Miller was successful standing up and rushing the passer in college, then that is the role that you should be asking him to play in your defense if you want him to contribute next year. Project players should drop due to the inability to work over the offseason.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

BIM: Kiper (one "p")

You must be registered for see images

Would much rather read her mock and talk about her hair

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Yes, by drafting a QB with the lockout in place, you are wasting a year of development and wasting a draft pick. The QB will be a waste of a roster spot, and the money that will be paid to a guy who will essentially not be playing football for the year will be wasted. The key to this years draft is to try and match up players who did in college what you will ask them to do in the pros. If Von Miller was successful standing up and rushing the passer in college, then that is the role that you should be asking him to play in your defense if you want him to contribute next year. Project players should drop due to the inability to work over the offseason.

???

Only if there is no football in 2011, and without a CBA that player's contract, under your scenario, wouldn't come into effect until 2012.

Same goes for anyone selected if the work stoppage wipes the coming season.

 

[kerouac9]

???

Only if there is no football in 2011, and without a CBA that player's contract, under your scenario, wouldn't come into effect until 2012.

Same goes for anyone selected if the work stoppage wipes the coming season.

Fair enough, although you are losing 5 or six months of development from April (when the QB would get the playbook and a list of things to work on) until the start of the regular season (reps and reps and reps in training camp and the preseason).

The thing is, if you think that a QB can be your guy for the next decade, that stops mattering, because your impact horizon is longer. I've always expected that the team will have a veteran free agent starter at the beginning of the season, but that didn't keep underprepared John Skelton from starting the end of the season.

If you think that Cam Newton can be a top 15 QB in three years, you have to draft him at #5 overall. If you are drafting to plug a hole for this year, then you've already lost the draft.

 

[Pariah]

If you think that Cam Newton can be a top 15 QB in three years, you have to draft him at #5 overall. If you are drafting to plug a hole for this year, then you've already lost the draft.

I think you're already saying this, but I believe the above applies to the QB position almost exclusively at #5 in the draft. Any other position ought to step into a starter's role --or at least get a very significant amount of snaps--almost right away.

 

[WildBB]

You must be registered for see images

Would much rather read her mock and talk about her hair

True, this seems a waste of time at the moment!

 

[kerouac9]

I think you're already saying this, but I believe the above applies to the QB position almost exclusively at #5 in the draft. Any other position ought to step into a starter's role --or at least get a very significant amount of snaps--almost right away.

But that's the case because of position more than anything. 5 OL and 3 or 4 DL on the field at once, one RB in rotation for most of the game, 2 to 4 WRs in the game at once, one to three TEs, two safeties, two to four cornerbacks, three or four linebackers.

There's only one QB on the field at any one time, and they usually play that position the entire game. I really have no problem drafting a QB and letting him sit for the first half of the season come hell or high water, Jay Cutler-style. If the season is gone in week 8, give him some reps so he has some film. "Worst"-case scenario, you're stuck in a Warner-#7 situation. While that was kind of embarrassing, the reward is worth the price.

The issue with the Cards is they don't have a legit starting QB on the roster, and it would be hard to recruit a free agent if we draft a QB at #5 overall. Warner would never have signed with the Giants if he knew they we going to get Eli Manning. I'm not sure Alex Smith (my preferred FA) would come here if he was going to have to look over his shoulder all season. Not sure what Bulger would do.

 

[MrYeahBut]

The issue with the Cards is they don't have a legit starting QB on the roster, and it would be hard to recruit a free agent if we draft a QB at #5 overall. Warner would never have signed with the Giants if he knew they we going to get Eli Manning. I'm not sure Alex Smith (my preferred FA) would come here if he was going to have to look over his shoulder all season. Not sure what Bulger would do.

Hasn't he had to look over his shoulder every year since he's been in the league anyway? I, too prefer Smith btw

 

[kerouac9]

Hasn't he had to look over his shoulder every year since he's been in the league anyway? I, too prefer Smith btw

I think that's part of the problem. Martz brings in O'Sullivan, then Shaun Hill comes in and is productive, then terrible coach Singletary undermines Smith by putting in Troy Smith. Is it any wonder that Smith is interested in leaving San Francisco?

If you look at the other young QBs who have become productive, they haven't had to look over their shoulder every time they throw an ill-timed INT. It's different with a proven veteran like Warner here in AZ, IMO.

Despite all of that, Alex Smith has been a productive quarterback the last two years (neither with a QB rating under 80, positive TD-INT ratio, completion percentage about 60). The only issue that I have with Smith the last two years is that he's lost 3 fumbles in that time.

Cutler, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Josh Freeman, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, etc. were all secure in their starting position when they came to that point.

 

[Chopper0080]

But that's the case because of position more than anything. 5 OL and 3 or 4 DL on the field at once, one RB in rotation for most of the game, 2 to 4 WRs in the game at once, one to three TEs, two safeties, two to four cornerbacks, three or four linebackers.

There's only one QB on the field at any one time, and they usually play that position the entire game. I really have no problem drafting a QB and letting him sit for the first half of the season come hell or high water, Jay Cutler-style. If the season is gone in week 8, give him some reps so he has some film. "Worst"-case scenario, you're stuck in a Warner-#7 situation. While that was kind of embarrassing, the reward is worth the price.

The issue with the Cards is they don't have a legit starting QB on the roster, and it would be hard to recruit a free agent if we draft a QB at #5 overall. Warner would never have signed with the Giants if he knew they we going to get Eli Manning. I'm not sure Alex Smith (my preferred FA) would come here if he was going to have to look over his shoulder all season. Not sure what Bulger would do.

I could get behind this thought process if I knew that Whis was safe in his job if we had another terrible season, but I don't. I think that Mike B is new enough to the concept of winning on the field that he will make a snap decision if we continue to struggle. If we drafted a QB in the first round, had a terrible season, and Whis was fired, history shows how often that works out for the QB.

What makes this decision very critical is that it is not unthinkable that both Patrick Peterson and Von Miller could be off the board when we pick (going to Carolina and Buffalo respectively), add the fact the Cincy might take a QB (Gabbert) and we have a HUGE decision to make as an organization, Jake Locker or Cam Newton at 5? This is a much more difficult decision than you would think as Locker has several years of experience in a much more pro style offense, where as Newton has only one year of experience in an offense that is as far from a pro style as you can get.

 

[kerouac9]

I could get behind this thought process if I knew that Whis was safe in his job if we had another terrible season, but I don't. I think that Mike B is new enough to the concept of winning on the field that he will make a snap decision if we continue to struggle. If we drafted a QB in the first round, had a terrible season, and Whis was fired, history shows how often that works out for the QB.

What makes this decision very critical is that it is not unthinkable that both Patrick Peterson and Von Miller could be off the board when we pick (going to Carolina and Buffalo respectively), add the fact the Cincy might take a QB (Gabbert) and we have a HUGE decision to make as an organization, Jake Locker or Cam Newton at 5? This is a much more difficult decision than you would think as Locker has several years of experience in a much more pro style offense, where as Newton has only one year of experience in an offense that is as far from a pro style as you can get.

See, if you spend time with people in the organization, you'll find that there's kind of a cult of personality around Ken Whisenhunt where I think that he has more rope inside the organization than he'll have in the press.

The question is whether you trust Whis's evaluation of the talent on the field, and whether you're willing to pass on a Top 15 QB talent to ensure the job security of Ken Whisenhunt. Whis seems to be telling fans that talent wasn't a problem, that it was a coaching and motivation issue, plus QB. For me, the Max Hall Experiment really shook my faith in Ken Whisenhunt. Falling in love with the passing game is one thing; thinking that Max Hall not only belongs in the NFL but can start of an NFL team is quite another.

I don't think the question between Locker and Newton is even close. Locker is more publicity than he is reality--truly. I've said it before and you never replied to it, so I'll say it again: McShay and Mayock and Kiper can repeat that Jake Locker would've been the #1 overall pick last year, but when Locker submitted for an opinion from the NFL Draft committee last season, they told him he wasn't even a first-round pick. After a worse season, why would he suddenly be a Top 5 pick? Especially for this offense?