Manning (1) Fitzgerald (2) Cardinals ?

[SMAC]

If Manning and Fitzgerald go 1-2 on Saturday (it could very well happen). What will Denny do at 3? A safe trade down would be to switch from 3 to 4 with the Giants. Then New York can secure Gallery (a player Arizona won't draft) and Arizona can pickup the Giants 3rd round pick. Another option would be to trade with Daniel Snyder's Redskins and move to 5, but Washington doesn't have draft picks to move up. The best they could do would be to ship the fifth pick and Fred Smoot for the number 3. It's been widely speculated that Arizona has a contingency trade with the Browns to move down to seven if Fitz is gone at 2. If DG and RG go this route then Arizona must get the following: Dennis Northcutt WR, Browns #1 (7) and their #2 (37). If Cleveland doesn't surrender it's number two this year then I would not pull the trigger on this deal. Recouping only a third rounder (with Northcutt/#1) from Cleveland is not adequate compensation for leaving the luxury of a top three choice. If the parameters of the deal with Cleveland are as stated above the trade makes a great deal of sense for Arizona and Cleveland gets the player they badly need. If they stay at three I think the choice is a tossup between Taylor and Winslow. A slight edge may be given to Winslow because I think offensive playmakers are at the top of Green's wish list for round one. The draft would then develop as follows:

1. SD-Manning
2. OK-Fitzgerald
3. CL (AZ)-Gallery
4. NYG-Roethlisberger
5. WS-Taylor
6. DT-Winslow (hard team to gauge could go for Jackson)

At seven Arizona would then pick from this list (order they probably have)
(A) Kellen Winslow (if Lions pass on him for Jackson) he will be the pick
(B) Roy Williams (most likely choice in trade down)
(C) Tommie Harris (probably a little high but Green likes his game)
(D) A second trade down with a team like the Bills who would move up for Rivers (get ahead of the Steelers). Such a trade down would net Arizona their #1 (13), #2 (43), and probably another later pick or player. It's highly doubtful the Cards would go this route because they would lose out on a top player.

 

[Redsz]

Nice post.

However, someone mentioned that on ABC sports Green said that Fitz, Taylor or Winslow will be there at 3.

It seems unlikely that we will trade down.

 

[JeffGollin]

Jurecki did a nice job of scoping out the Cardinals' options last night on FoxSportsAZ. Indicating that the ineligibility of Mike Williams could conceivably alter any Cardinal trade-down plans, he laid out a few options:

1. If Fitz is there at #3, Cards will take him.

2. If Fitz is gone and Gallery is still on the board, Cards could attempt to trade down (with the Giants at #4 or the Browns at #7) but probably no later than #7 ("They don't want to repeat last year's mistake." - Jurecki's words).

3. They like Taylor and Winslow and could draft either one at #3.

4. But if they trade down to #7, you could see Taylor and Winslow snapped up before the Cardinals drafted. Next best option would then appear to be Roy Williams (whom Denny speaks highly of even though he;s not in his top 3).

My take -

The scenario logically leading to Williams at #7 would be - #1 and #2 - Fitz and a QB. #3 Gallery. #4, 5, 6 - The other QB, Taylor and Winslow (in whatever order). #7 Roy Williams.

Only possible flaw - If Roy Williams went earlier and the "other QB" (presumably Roethlisberger) dropped to #7. Although this might not be Denny's ideal situation, I wouldn't be devestated if we wound up with Roethlisberger.

Note - Interesting gut-check of Denny and Rod's discpline and faithfulness to their board would be whether or not they selected Roethlisberger (assuming he was the next guy on the Cardinal board) - or instead, "blinked" and took Wilfork or Tommie Harris or Angelo Hall.

 

[az jam]

Trading down with Cleveland would be a good option but we must get their 2nd round pick. The top choice most likely available would be Roy Williams which would be fine.

 

[Pariah]

If we can get NY or Cleveland's second round pick, that would be ideal, IMO. At the top of the second we could grab any combination of CB, LB, DT and upgrade our defense.

 

[Chainthroer]

You hit it on the button Pariah. However, I would add OG Vernon Carey into the pool, if he's available!!

 

[red desert]

If we want Roy Williams, and I think we do despite what Green is saying are his top three, we will have to take with our number three pick.

If we drop to the number 7 pick Jacksonville will move up to 6 and take Roy. While Jacksonville may not have a ton of picks they have Darious to throw at Detroit for a trade. The Lions could still get Jackson.

 

[SMAC]

One of the considerations when moving to 7 would be the potential of not having your guy there. As pointed out, it's likely the Jaguars would move up to 6 to draft Roy Williams ahead of us at 7. They have two three's to dangle as trade bait for a move up with Detroit. The Lions would love to move down pickup some premium choices and still grab Jackson at say 9. If Fitz is gone at 2 and the Browns want our choice then they must deal Northcutt (insurance if the wideout of Green's choosing is gone at 7), #1 (7), and #2 (37). A third rounder instead of Cleveland's second will not suffice. Also, Northcutt must be included (he would help immensely as a punt returner and as our third or fourth wideout) and a high second for leaving the catbird's seat at number 3.

If the Jags move up with the Lions then this will likely occur:

1. SD-Manning
2. OK-Fitzgerald
3. CL (AZ)-Gallery
4. NYG-Roethlisberger (outside chance Taylor)
5. WS-Taylor (if Taylor goes 4 Winslow here)
6. JX (DT)-Williams
7. AZ (CL)-Winslow (Roethlisberger if Winslow is gone)

 

[ASUCHRIS]

You go for the best player available. Robert Gallery. Either that, or trade to seven, get Roy Williams, Northcutt, and a second. A foursome of Boldin/Williams/Northcutt/Johnson could be the best in football.

 

[vikesfan]

(1) Northcutt doesn't want to go anywhere but BAL. Northcutt will probably be cut.

(2) Moving down to 4 is a no-brainer unless they want Gallery. But it will not get you a second round pick it might get you a 3rd rounder at best. It is just one spot after all.

(3) Moving down to 7 CLE better come up with a #2 to start with then sweeten the pot.

(4) The Cards won't take a QB at 7.

(5) The breakdown:

1. Manning
2. Fitz
3. Gallery
4. Ben? Roy or Mike?
5. Winslow
6. Taylor

7. That leaves who? Roy or Mike WR. Hall CB. Wilfork DT. Udeze (LDE). Andrews T.

 

[Pariah]

(4) The Cards won't take a QB at 7.

Are you contradicting the great Dennis Green? He's said that he'll take the BPA, regardless of position. What if Big Ben is the BPA at #7? (and that's very likely, IMO).

 

[vikesfan]

Are you contradicting the great Dennis Green? He's said that he'll take the BPA, regardless of position. What if Big Ben is the BPA at #7? (and that's very likely, IMO).

Well each round the Cards draft a QB might be the BPA does that mean the Cards take 7 QBs in the draft? Take Ben round 1 Rivers round 2 Dinwiddie round 3 etc... BPA is always somewhat influenced by need. It is never pure BPA.

DG also said he wants someone who can start right away and play and not have to develop - that is not any QB.

Was Ben even on his personal blue chip list?
Would Ben really be the BPA over Roy or Mike? Maybe, maybe not.

 

[JeffGollin]

What if Big Ben is the BPA at #7? (and that's very likely, IMO).
It makes the case for not trading out of #3 and guaranteeing ourselves either Taylor, Winslow or Roy Williams should Fitz not be on the board (plus either Manning or Gallery as well).

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Nice post.

However, someone mentioned that on ABC sports Green said that Fitz, Taylor or Winslow will be there at 3.

Brilliant assessment.Is he sure that one of those three will be there at 3?

 

[Skkorpion]

Listen people, nobody drafts the BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER (BAP) anymore. The salary CAP killed that.

Teams draft the BAP who fits in with their top three greatest needs. That's why we might consider a QB, WR, S, TE, DT, CB, and RB depending on how the brass has these needs ranked. And that's why nobody trusts what Denny Green is spewing.

No way we draft Gallery. Under any condition.

Furthermore, why o why would New York trade up one spot to get Gallery when they can draft Rivers at #4 if Gallery is gone? Makes zero sense.

 

[red desert]

Listen people, nobody drafts the BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER (BAP) anymore. The salary CAP killed that.

Teams draft the BAP who fits in with their top three greatest needs. That's why we might consider a QB, WR, S, TE, DT, CB, and RB depending on how the brass has these needs ranked. And that's why nobody trusts what Denny Green is spewing.

No way we draft Gallery. Under any condition.

Furthermore, why o why would New York trade up one spot to get Gallery when they can draft Rivers at #4 if Gallery is gone? Makes zero sense.

Well said.

 

[vikesfan]

The Vikings drafted BPA last year.
They had a 1 gap UT they drafted a 1 gap UT #1.
They 2 MLBs (both FA signings) and they drafted a MLB #2. They drafted a WR #3 that fit need but he was also BPA. Then depite having a pro-bowl RB and 2 good back up RBs they drafted BPA RB in the 4th round. The one guy they drafted for need was punter and he will be replaced by a FA signing this year.

BPA drafting always is offset somewhat by need. But BPA drafting does still happen in this age. DG will take BPA if he was drafting a little lower and Gallery came free he would take him. If K Jones falls through to #33 DG might very well take him. DG likes BPA it has always served him well and remember his whole career in MIN was in this new Salary Cap/Free Agency era. You can draft BPA within reason.

For example DG might take a OL round 2 or 3 I really believe this.

 

[dopleganger]

Listen people, nobody drafts the BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER (BAP) anymore. The salary CAP killed that.

Teams draft the BAP who fits in with their top three greatest needs. That's why we might consider a QB, WR, S, TE, DT, CB, and RB depending on how the brass has these needs ranked. And that's why nobody trusts what Denny Green is spewing.

No way we draft Gallery. Under any condition.

Furthermore, why o why would New York trade up one spot to get Gallery when they can draft Rivers at #4 if Gallery is gone? Makes zero sense.

 

[Redsz]

Brilliant assessment.Is he sure that one of those three will be there at 3?

Say what you will. But from POV, trading downs seems unlikely with one of those three avaliable.

About the BPA. What happened when the Ravens drafted Suggs? Wasn't he the BPA avaliable?

 

[slanidrac16]

Listen people, nobody drafts the BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER (BAP) anymore. The salary CAP killed that.

Teams draft the BAP who fits in with their top three greatest needs. That's why we might consider a QB, WR, S, TE, DT, CB, and RB depending on how the brass has these needs ranked. And that's why nobody trusts what Denny Green is spewing.

No way we draft Gallery. Under any condition.

Furthermore, why o why would New York trade up one spot to get Gallery when they can draft Rivers at #4 if Gallery is gone? Makes zero sense.

Skorp, you keep saying "makes no sense" to most trade scenarios. Why? If the Giants REALLY want Gallery and they REALLY believe the Browns are trying to move to that spot to get Gallery, why does that not make sense?
The Chargers moved up 1 spot for leaf, right? Unless we know every teams "board", we really can't conclude what make sense and what doesn't.
Heres one that makes no sense to me. Why would the giants stay at #4 and not trade down to get your beloved Phillip Rivers?