Muffin's Top 21 - A "Needed" Revision 3

[slanidrac16]

Instead of a first-round pick like Marcus Ingram or Cordy Glenn? No, I wouldn't be happy. I'd be pissed. This is the definition of trading a dollar for three quarters.

We had a Top 10 defense over the last half of the season. Adding two depth players isn't going to make any difference.

We had a crappy offense last year that was unable to protect the quarterback much of the time. Adding a lazy project like Massie isn't going to make a difference, especially when we'd be depending on him to start.

I don't disagree with you. In addition I don't think our organization is savvy enough to "trade a dollar" and get a buck fifty back. I just threw out some names as an example. I just don't want to see us reach for a player based on need.
This is where the front office seems to fail year after year. We seem to paint ourselves into a corner.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

I don't disagree with you. In addition I don't think our organization is savvy enough to "trade a dollar" and get a buck fifty back. I just threw out some names as an example. I just don't want to see us reach for a player based on need.This is where the front office seems to fail year after year. We seem to paint ourselves into a corner.

Then I wouldn't watch this year's draft.

I cannot fathom how this organization would justify not getting the best OT available at #13.

There is a poster or two (or more ) that are fed up with my negativity towards this offseason. Well, I haven't changed my tune, and the success of this offseason will be determined soley by the draft. Since free agency was extremely underwhelming, and the re-signing of Campbell was a complete failure, it all falls on the draft, and not only does it all fall on the draft, there must be at least two players at two positions that need to be home run picks that can be put on the field day one.

If the Cardinals get a solid player for RT (optimally a future LT), get a solid player to round out the WR core, then our team will have slightly improved.

If we re-sign Campbell during this time, then our team vastly improves, IMO. Yes, re-signing Campbell to a multi-year contract is THAT important for this club, and they just continue to fail at getting the job done. It boggles the mind at the ineptitude of the situation.

But this organization is in dire need of a WR, and an OT. Dare I say more than getting a pass rusher, or any other positions right now. So, this organization has to pray that things fall they way they need to. They will have to pass on the BPA, for the BPA that suits their immediate need to fill glaring holes. Sucks but it is, what it is. Furthermore, it doesn't mean the Cardinals will 100% have a bad draft. If everything falls in the right places then they could come out with everything they need, and get good value at every pick.

How about a quick mock (using this guide: http://www.profootballweekly.com/2012/04/06/pfws-exclusive-draft-value-chart-7)

1 - Cordy Glenn, OT
3 - George Iloka, S
4 - Tommy Streeter, WR
5 - Ryan Davis, DE/OLB
6 - Adrien Cole, ILB
6 - Steven Good, OG
7 - Matt Conrath, DE

That is just an example of a draft (and you can mix and match players and positions) but the big two, IMO is Glenn at OT, and Streeter at WR. They would fill glaring holes in our offense.

Obviously OT being the scariest situation. There are only a few OT's that could be a starter by opening day, and they may all be taken by #13 if a stroke of bad luck hits the Cardinals, which it usually does. I woudl be very happy to get Glenn at #13 given the circumstances this orangization will find itself in come draft time. I am not saying Glenn is a lock to be the player the Cardinals need him to be, just saying he would be a good pick, IMO.

The WR ? As much as many disagree, another big body "possession" WR is needed. He doesn't need to be a #2 WR, just a player that can make it on the field, and fill that possession WR role. Tommy Streeter, Jurun Criner, and Greg Childs fits the bill, IMO

The rest ? Bah. Matter of preference.

 

[slanidrac16]

Then I wouldn't watch this year's draft.

I cannot fathom how this organization would justify not getting the best OT available at #13.

There is a poster or two (or more ) that are fed up with my negativity towards this offseason. Well, I haven't changed my tune, and the success of this offseason will be determined soley by the draft. Since free agency was extremely underwhelming, and the re-signing of Campbell was a complete failure, it all falls on the draft, and not only does it all fall on the draft, there must be at least two players at two positions that need to be home run picks that can be put on the field day one.

If the Cardinals get a solid player for RT (optimally a future LT), get a solid player to round out the WR core, then our team will have slightly improved.

If we re-sign Campbell during this time, then our team vastly improves, IMO. Yes, re-signing Campbell to a multi-year contract is THAT important for this club, and they just continue to fail at getting the job done. It boggles the mind at the ineptitude of the situation.

But this organization is in dire need of a WR, and an OT. Dare I say more than getting a pass rusher, or any other positions right now.

Okay, but what if Kalil, Reiff and Glenn are gone? What I'm saying is I don't want to see us take a player ranked 35th (Jeff Allen) to fill that need.
If we were shrewd enough to trade down and get a WR and then a Jeff Allen that would be great.
I totally agree with your assessment of our needs. I would also add an ILB to the list.

 

[JeffGollin]

On another thread (& on the BRS) I set up an excercise mock where - pick by pick - I compared (a) drafting according to BPA with (b) drafting to fill a need, (c) drafting to fill an alternate need and (d) a hybrid of the first three (i.e. sometimes BPA/sometimes Need).

Without going into detail, the scenario I was happiest with in the end was the flexible hybrid approach (d) where sometimes it made sense to draft BPA but sometimes it made more sense not to stockpile one position by rigidly sticking to a BPA approach.

The reasons why this seemed to work best included:

- Sometimes a BPA is simply too much better than the other players available to pass up.

- But at other times, the separation between the top-ranked BPA and the next few players is so narrow that you might as well draft for need.

- This, in turn, will sometimes create "gray areas" where the separation between the top BPA and the next group of players is significant but maybe "not enough."

- Or that the position-need is so great that the gray area might tilt away from BPA and toward need.

- Or that we're stockpiled so deep at a given position that we'd be nuts to waste a pick on a player destined to never survive the position logjam and would be cut anyway.

Finally, we're talking about drafting being as much art as science and involving as much luck as skill. (PP21 is a good example. We chose a CB despite being deep in CB talent. Then we traded DRC, Toler got injured and suddenly Peterson was called into action; and boy did he deliver)! Luck came in the form of more than one "lady" - (1) We needed a QB so we traded DRC. (2) Toler was gone for the season. (3) Our BPA turned out to be good or better than anticipated.

But when we do all the detailed analysis of "need" biting us in the butt or BPA saving our butts, there's a built-in bias because we tend to single out the pleasant or unpleasant exceptions, (since they're the most sensational and are best at making our case).

What about all the times we draft a prospect who fills a need and who simply does his job with little hoopla? Or the BPA who fills a backup role because they're 3-deep at his position or he's a jack of all trades but master of none.

A fair analysis might be to categorize all our picks as "BPA", "Need" or "BPA Who Also Fills a Need" and then grade each one according to (a) starred, (b) did OK, (c) floundered and then petered-out or (d) never made it past Year One.

And in the end, the ultimate question figures to be: "Which NFL organizations have the best 'batting averages' at picking talent or developing talent?" (& which ones are "unluckiest")?

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Okay, but what if Kalil, Reiff and Glenn are gone? What I'm saying is I don't want to see us take a player ranked 35th (Jeff Allen) to fill that need.
If we were shrewd enough to trade down and get a WR and then a Jeff Allen that would be great.
I totally agree with your assessment of our needs. I would also add an ILB to the list.

Then Cardinals are screwed, and I believe the team will have to reach, and pick a Jonathan Martin, or Mike Adams.

Ah, the trade down. Good point, but I ask you this. Once you trade down your chances of a player that can be on the field day one, greatly decreases.

What purpose would it be to trade down ? You are still looking at players like Martin, Adams, Massie, and Schwartz. They are less likely to be ready for opening day 2012.

If the Cardinals trade down, then I say we all better get used to saying Jeremy Bridges is our RT for 2012.



As for ILB, I agree, but I think the Cardinals can get a good player late.

 

[Duckjake]

To me using the #13 pick on Cordy Glenn would be a repeat of the 2007 draft.

I have a feeling the Cards brass doesn't think that the RT position is that important and aren't going to either use a high draft pick for it or move Levi to it.

My guess is that they are now focused on athletic, well as athletic as a 300lb guy can be, Guards as the key to their offensive line.

Of course none of this matters if Kolb and/or Double Duece and the blocking schemes don't improve over last season does it?

 

[RugbyMuffin]

To me using the #13 pick on Cordy Glenn would be a repeat of the 2007 draft.

The Cardinals have made the same mistake this year, as they did in 2007 so that would make sense.

They have a need, and they will reach/justify picking a OT over a player who MAY be better with the first round pick. It may work out for them, or it may not.

Now, IMO, the Cardinals have already made the same mistake twice this year going into the draft. So, I say, lets not make the same two mistakes. I say the Cardinals trade up, and get Kalil. Why ? Cause Levi Brown was never better than Joe Thomas, and Cordy Glenn is not better than Kalil. If we need a OT badly, and we do, and the Vikings are willing to move out of the 3rd spot, then why not ?

To further speculated, if the Dolphins are as dumb as they seem and trade with the Vikings for the #3 spot to pick Tannehill, then we can trade up to maybe 4th or 5th to get Kalil. Why not ?

I have a feeling the Cards brass doesn't think that the RT position is that important and aren't going to either use a high
draft pick for it or move Levi to it.

And that is why in 2017 we will be having the same problem we had in 2007, and have this year.

That also means Jeremy Bridges is our RT. I say that because I believe Bridges is better at RT then Adam Snyder, or Brandon Keith.

Of course none of this matters if Kolb and the blocking schemes don't improve over last season does it?

FTFY.

Don't worry about Double Deuce. He is ready.

 

[JeffGollin]

....What purpose would it be to trade down ? You are still looking at players like Martin, Adams, Massie, and Schwartz. They are less likely to be ready for opening day 2012...

Depends on how far we traded down and who was available at #13 when we did it.

Suppose for example, our board at #13 (hypothetically) included:

- DeCastro
- Keuchly
- Glenn
- Floyd
- Barron
- Martin
- Upshaw
- J Brown
- K Wright

And Cincy at #17 is drooling over the prospect of drafting DeCastro (or maybe it's Floyd) They offer us their #17 and #53 (middle of second round).

We know that the worst that could happen between #13 and #17 is that we'd probably lose out on DeCastro, Keuchly, Floyd and Barron - leaving us with Glenn, Martin, Upshaw, J Brown and K Wright to choose from.

We could then either (a) fill our OT need by grabbing Martin, Glenn or Brown at #17 or (b) grab the BPA on our board (who could be any of those 3 picks or Wright or Upshaw) and then sweat out 36 picks before we pick again instead of the normal 67 picks (between #13 and #80).

My point - If (assuming the board falls that way) we love DeCastro or Keuchly enough, we can always draft them at #13 (& move Snyder to RT). Or if we don't love them that much, want to regain a 2nd round pick and are guaranteed that by #17 there will be at least one guy we'll be very happy with.

Or, if we have to trade down so far that we can't be guaranteed at least one player we'd be happy with, we can always stand pat at $13.

It's very fluid.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Depends on how far we traded down and who was available at #13 when we did it.

Suppose for example, our board at #13 (hypothetically) included:

- DeCastro
- Keuchly
- Glenn
- Floyd
- Barron
- Martin
- Upshaw
- J Brown
- K Wright

And Cincy at #17 is drooling over the prospect of drafting DeCastro (or maybe it's Floyd) They offer us their #17 and #53 (middle of second round).

We know that the worst that could happen between #13 and #17 is that we'd probably lose out on DeCastro, Keuchly, Floyd and Barron - leaving us with Glenn, Martin, Upshaw, J Brown and K Wright to choose from.

We could then either (a) fill our OT need by grabbing Martin, Glenn or Brown at #17 or (b) grab the BPA on our board (who could be any of those 3 picks or Wright or Upshaw) and then sweat out 36 picks before we pick again instead of the normal 67 picks (between #13 and #80).

My point - If (assuming the board falls that way) we love DeCastro or Keuchly enough, we can always draft them at #13 (& move Snyder to RT). Or if we don't love them that much, want to regain a 2nd round pick and are guaranteed that by #17 there will be at least one guy we'll be very happy with.

Or, if we have to trade down so far that we can't be guaranteed at least one player we'd be happy with, we can always stand pat at $13.

It's very fluid.

Agreed, JG. Great post.

My only nit-pick, is heaven help this team if Snyder moves to RT. I think Bridges would beat him out at RT. Snyder is an AWFUL OT. The only ones worse per PFF, is Brandon Keith and our current LT.

 

[kerouac9]

I'm not sure that you can really "reach" for need in this draft class. Yes, drafting Jonathan Martin at #13 overall is probably a reach. But I don't think that this team is going to go outside the "tier" of acceptable players because they NEED an OT.

SOMEONE is going to be there between DeCastro/Glenn/Blackmon/Floyd/Ingram/Gilmore. If one of them are and the Cards draft someone else, they'll legitimately be reaching for a player.

But I'd expect that the Cards would take one of their secondary needs (although I'd argue that OLB is a primary need because I don't think the team wants to depend on O'Brien Schofield as a starter this year) like WR or OG if there isn't a reasonable tackle on the board.

If they do draft Mike Adams or Jonathan Martin when one of those six guys are still available, they'll be roundly criticized.

I think that people are misremembering the 2007 draft. Levi wasn't a bad pick because he wasn't a first-round player, or even a top 15 player (at the time of the draft). He was a bad pick because the Cards didn't draft Adrian Peterson. The next tier of prospects after Peterson was all a jumble based on team system and needs.

The lesson of drafting Patrick Peterson and passing on Adrian Peterson is that if you have a remaining elite player on your board, YOU DON'T PASS ON HIM IN ORDER TO FILL A NEED.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

The lesson of drafting Patrick Peterson and passing on Adrian Peterson is that if you have a remaining elite player on your board, YOU DON'T PASS ON HIM IN ORDER TO FILL A NEED.

Agreed.

The balancing act is whether "DeCastro/Blackmon/Floyd/Ingram/Gilmore"
is worth starting Jeremy Bridges at RT, and Levi Brown at LT, furthermore, starting them with no one in line to take over either position anytime soon ?



I state that question with the following statements attached to it:

1. This question is open ended. Meaning it asks a question that really has no right or wrong answer.

2. Yes, I agree, we should not even have to ask this question. There was more than enough opportunity to add some depth to our OT's in free agency and the Cardinals choked on getting it done.

3. I don't want Levi Brown as our LT, or Jeremy Bridges as our RT, but the situation is what it is at this point.

4. Drafting Glenn is obviously going to make this whole question a moot point.

Sidenote:

K9, you think Gilmore is better than Kirkpatrick ? Just asking, I really don't have a opinion on the difference between the two.

 

[WildBB]

4. Drafting Glenn is obviously going to make this whole question a moot point.

Or Reiff.

Glenn has never played RT. There are also BIG questions whether he'd be any better than Levi in handling the outside rush.

 

[52brandon]

I'm not sure that you can really "reach" for need in this draft class. Yes, drafting Jonathan Martin at #13 overall is probably a reach. But I don't think that this team is going to go outside the "tier" of acceptable players because they NEED an OT.

SOMEONE is going to be there between DeCastro/Glenn/Blackmon/Floyd/Ingram/Gilmore. If one of them are and the Cards draft someone else, they'll legitimately be reaching for a player.

But I'd expect that the Cards would take one of their secondary needs (although I'd argue that OLB is a primary need because I don't think the team wants to depend on O'Brien Schofield as a starter this year) like WR or OG if there isn't a reasonable tackle on the board.

If they do draft Mike Adams or Jonathan Martin when one of those six guys are still available, they'll be roundly criticized.

I think that people are misremembering the 2007 draft. Levi wasn't a bad pick because he wasn't a first-round player, or even a top 15 player (at the time of the draft). He was a bad pick because the Cards didn't draft Adrian Peterson. The next tier of prospects after Peterson was all a jumble based on team system and needs.

The lesson of drafting Patrick Peterson and passing on Adrian Peterson is that if you have a remaining elite player on your board, YOU DON'T PASS ON HIM IN ORDER TO FILL A NEED.

wasn't the reason we passed on AP the same reason Beanie fell so far to us? I thought there were concerns about his durability...

 

[kerouac9]

wasn't the reason we passed on AP the same reason Beanie fell so far to us? I thought there were concerns about his durability...

That was part of the reason/excuse. The bigger problem is that we had a gaping void at the OT position because we'd allowed Leonard Davis to go into free agency. The other issue was that we'd just signed Edge James to a monster contract that he was in the middle of, and didn't want to invest a Top 5 salary at the RB position along with it.

There were some durability concerns with AP, but the difference between him and Beanie is that Beanie had RB injury concerns--knees, hammies. Peterson had a couple of busted clavicles that aren't as big a deal for a running back, IIRC.

 

[JeffGollin]

wasn't the reason we passed on AP the same reason Beanie fell so far to us? I thought there were concerns about his durability...

Correctomondo!

Peterson was considered a significant durability risk. Levi was considered "not as good as Joe Thomas" but a fairly safe and competent pick at OT.

Who knew?

(With our kind of luck - if we drafted AP, he would have blown out a knee by mid-july).

 

[52brandon]

Correctomondo!

Peterson was considered a significant durability risk. Levi was considered "not as good as Joe Thomas" but a fairly safe and competent pick at OT.

Who knew?

(With our kind of luck - if we drafted AP, he would have blown out a knee by mid-july).

yeah man. His injury last year would have happened week 3 if we took him

 

[Chopper0080]

Agreed.

The balancing act is whether "DeCastro/Blackmon/Floyd/Ingram/Gilmore"
is worth starting Jeremy Bridges at RT, and Levi Brown at LT, furthermore, starting them with no one in line to take over either position anytime soon ?



I state that question with the following statements attached to it:

1. This question is open ended. Meaning it asks a question that really has no right or wrong answer.

2. Yes, I agree, we should not even have to ask this question. There was more than enough opportunity to add some depth to our OT's in free agency and the Cardinals choked on getting it done.

3. I don't want Levi Brown as our LT, or Jeremy Bridges as our RT, but the situation is what it is at this point.

4. Drafting Glenn is obviously going to make this whole question a moot point.

Sidenote:

K9, you think Gilmore is better than Kirkpatrick ? Just asking, I really don't have a opinion on the difference between the two.

I always refer to the adage that there are plenty of average players out there, so it is never a good idea to pass on a great talent for an average one. In reference to our dilema, yes, I would prefer to have Bridges/Snyder/3rd round or later draft pick battle for the RT spot over passing on DeCastro or Ingram and possibly Floyd/Glenn/Gilmore.

You didn't ask me, but yes, I think Gilmore is better than Kirkpatrick. A CBs ability to redirect, his level of acceleration, and his body control are the most important aspects of a CBs game in todays NFL, and I believe Gilmore is better than Kirkpatrick in all of these areas.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

You didn't ask me, but yes, I think Gilmore is better than Kirkpatrick. A CBs ability to redirect, his level of acceleration, and his body control are the most important aspects of a CBs game in todays NFL, and I believe Gilmore is better than Kirkpatrick in all of these areas.

Appreciated.

 

[Vermont Maverick]

Or Reiff.

Glenn has never played RT. There are also BIG questions whether he'd be any better than Levi in handling the outside rush.

Great point, Wild. Glenn has only played the left side, both LG and LT. And he is NOT quick enough at 350 LBS to play LT in the NFL, so there is little chance for him to transition to our LTOF. He is a RT (or Guard) only, and he has never played the right side. Another reason why he will be a huge reach at 13. For those that want Levi Brown at RT, you better hope not to hear Cordy Glenn's name, because that means Levi is your LT for the next 5 years.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Great point, Wild. Glenn has only played the left side, both LG and LT. And he is NOT quick enough at 350 LBS to play LT in the NFL, so there is little chance for him to transition to our LTOF. He is a RT (or Guard) only, and he has never played the right side. Another reason why he will be a huge reach at 13. For those that want Levi Brown at RT, you better hope not to hear Cordy Glenn's name, because that means Levi is your LT for the next 5 years.

In most cases you are correct about a 350lb'er but Glenn has shown a good deal of athleticism (sticked it) for his size.

It is rare but there has been a few 320+ LT that have done well in the NFL.


And IMO, Levi Brown is our LT for the next 5 yrs regardless, IMO.

 

[Chopper0080]

Great point, Wild. Glenn has only played the left side, both LG and LT. And he is NOT quick enough at 350 LBS to play LT in the NFL, so there is little chance for him to transition to our LTOF. He is a RT (or Guard) only, and he has never played the right side. Another reason why he will be a huge reach at 13. For those that want Levi Brown at RT, you better hope not to hear Cordy Glenn's name, because that means Levi is your LT for the next 5 years.

One thing to consider is stronger OTs (Glenn) coming out of college have a bit of an advantage because they can handle the bull rush more effectively than more athletic OTs (Reiff). Yes, they will struggle with speed outside, but a QB can control the outside rush easier than the inside rush. It is easier for a QB in the NFL to move up in the pocket and complete a pass than roll outside the pocket and do so despite what Kolb showed us last year.

 

[kerouac9]

Agreed.

The balancing act is whether "DeCastro/Blackmon/Floyd/Ingram/Gilmore"
is worth starting Jeremy Bridges at RT, and Levi Brown at LT, furthermore, starting them with no one in line to take over either position anytime soon ?

I state that question with the following statements attached to it:

1. This question is open ended. Meaning it asks a question that really has no right or wrong answer.

2. Yes, I agree, we should not even have to ask this question. There was more than enough opportunity to add some depth to our OT's in free agency and the Cardinals choked on getting it done.

3. I don't want Levi Brown as our LT, or Jeremy Bridges as our RT, but the situation is what it is at this point.

4. Drafting Glenn is obviously going to make this whole question a moot point.

Sidenote:

K9, you think Gilmore is better than Kirkpatrick ? Just asking, I really don't have a opinion on the difference between the two.

I don't think that the answer to your question is either drafting an OT at 13 overall OR starting Jeremy Bridges at one of the tackle positions. I think that's a false dichotomy.

I think the Cards are cash-strapped enough that they're holding off on contracts for veteran players that they want back (like Vonnie Holliday and Clark Haggans) to make sure that they'll actually make the roster. The same may be true for veteran free agents. OTs like Stacy Andrews, Kirk Chambers, Marc Columbo (IMO an excellent fit for what the Cards do with their OTs as well as familiar with the RT position), Sean Locklear, Kareem McKenzie, Pat McQuistan, Ryan O'Callahan (another excellent fit since he worked in a similar offense in Kansas City), Barry Richardson (ditto), Dennis Roland, and Max Starks are still available in free agency, and maybe aren't going anywhere as they train and rehab. Brandon Keith also remains unsigned. I think the Cards want the flexibility to get one of these guys if they can't plug the hole with Riley Reiff or Cordy Glenn.

I know you don't want Levi Brown starting at LT, but he's signed to a five year deal, and I think that's where you're going to see him for at least the next two years.

EDIT: W/R/T Gilmore--I like him better for our system. He's an inch shorter but four pounds heavier than Kirkpatrick, so I think he'll be better able to force the run than Kirkpatrick. NFL.com thinks that Kirkpatrick is better in off-man and zone schemes, so I may be wrong.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I don't think that the answer to your question is either drafting an OT at 13 overall OR starting Jeremy Bridges at one of the tackle positions. I think that's a false dichotomy.

I think the Cards are cash-strapped enough that they're holding off on contracts for veteran players that they want back (like Vonnie Holliday and Clark Haggans) to make sure that they'll actually make the roster. The same may be true for veteran free agents. OTs like Stacy Andrews, Kirk Chambers, Marc Columbo (IMO an excellent fit for what the Cards do with their OTs as well as familiar with the RT position), Sean Locklear, Kareem McKenzie, Pat McQuistan, Ryan O'Callahan (another excellent fit since he worked in a similar offense in Kansas City), Barry Richardson (ditto), Dennis Roland, and Max Starks are still available in free agency, and maybe aren't going anywhere as they train and rehab. Brandon Keith also remains unsigned. I think the Cards want the flexibility to get one of these guys if they can't plug the hole with Riley Reiff or Cordy Glenn.

I know you don't want Levi Brown starting at LT, but he's signed to a five year deal, and I think that's where you're going to see him for at least the next two years.

EDIT: W/R/T Gilmore--I like him better for our system. He's an inch shorter but four pounds heavier than Kirkpatrick, so I think he'll be better able to force the run than Kirkpatrick. NFL.com thinks that Kirkpatrick is better in off-man and zone schemes, so I may be wrong.

From what I've seen of him, he's a very aggressive tackler.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

Lol!

You are lost in a strange thread, do you press on or try a new thread? Turn to page http://www.arizonasportsfans.com/vb/f4/crazy-draft-draw-day-177862.html