One man's opinion

[Northern Card]

Originally posted by CardLogic
Disregard for the moment the players selected (personally I think the actual talent the Cards got is not bad, however) here is the Draft Picks Trade with New Orleans in a nutshell:

1st pick Was # 6 Got # 17 Down 11 slots
2nd pick Was # 37 Got # 18 Up 19 slots
3rd pick Was # 70 Got # 54 Up 16 slots
4th pick Was # 102 Got # 70 Up 32 slots



I've got to admit, when I started this post it was to point out how bad a trade this was for the Cardinals (and how they managed to screw up once again), but looking at it in these terms (not talking talent) the trade doesn't look bad!

Yes they moved down in the first round, but improved their position for the next three picks.

Now: Is this a trade you would make?

If the purpose was to have 4 picks in the first 70... the answer is Yes.

 

[Crimson Warrior]

Originally posted by CardLogic
Disregard for the moment the players selected (personally I think the actual talent the Cards got is not bad, however) here is the Draft Picks Trade with New Orleans in a nutshell:

1st pick Was # 6 Got # 17 Down 11 slots
2nd pick Was # 37 Got # 18 Up 19 slots
3rd pick Was # 70 Got # 54 Up 16 slots
4th pick Was # 102 Got # 70 Up 32 slots



I've got to admit, when I started this post it was to point out how bad a trade this was for the Cardinals (and how they managed to screw up once again), but looking at it in these terms (not talking talent) the trade doesn't look bad!

Yes they moved down in the first round, but improved their position for the next three picks.

Now: Is this a trade you would make?

very good analysis card logic.

I would encourage everyone to look at this post.

we moved up a net 56 slots. Actually, that seems pretty smart to me. Anybody who says we got "ripped off" needs to consider this.


posted by Chicard:
That's not what i'm saying at all. What I said was we didn't get ENOUGH for what we did. How was it that even later in the round Miami was forced to give up next years #1 to move 2 spots? We tried to make a statement and failed. That's my point. The number of picks is the issue.

I'm not sure why miami gave up so much to move up two slots chicard. Maybe the dolphins were desperate. But that doesn't change the math in the anlaysis above. The cards made a decent move. I agree that the pace pick is a little shaky. But we still did ok. hang in there man.

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Originally posted by RedStorm
Graves got schooled....Welcome to the NFL.

I get the feeling that McGraves got a call this morning from the Saints GM asking him "How do you like me now?"

 

[Tangodnzr]

Do you really think so?...................

NAAAAHHH!!!

 

[BuckeyeCardinal]

You Experts

You experts loved Andre Wadsworth......Thomas Jones.....Simeon Rice....and David Boston.

What did those above mentioned idiots (sans Wadsworth) really do for us?

 

[kerouac9]

Re: You Experts

Originally posted by BuckeyeCardinal
You experts loved Andre Wadsworth......Thomas Jones.....Simeon Rice....and David Boston.

What did those above mentioned idiots (sans Wadsworth) really do for us?

Simeon and DB put this team on a national stage and attracted people around the league to the team. Simeon was instrumental in getting us to the playoffs and that win against the Cowboys in 1996. DB gave ESPN a reason to show Cards highlights the past three years.

 

[BuckeyeCardinal]

Re: Re: You Experts

Originally posted by kerouac9
Simeon and DB put this team on a national stage and attracted people around the league to the team. Simeon was instrumental in getting us to the playoffs and that win against the Cowboys in 1996. DB gave ESPN a reason to show Cards highlights the past three years.

Yeah...."armpit of the NFL"......"Pat Tillman is an ********".....yeah that Simeon really helped our image.

ESPN should show the real highlights:

David Boston..."That's not MY cocaine!!!"

Thomas Jones..."Phones are phucked up....they should be outlawed."

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Re: You Experts

Originally posted by BuckeyeCardinal
You experts loved Andre Wadsworth......Thomas Jones.....Simeon Rice....and David Boston.

What did those above mentioned idiots (sans Wadsworth) really do for us?

OUCH!

I thought we were all friends here dude...

 

[BuckeyeCardinal]

Re: Re: You Experts

Originally posted by Cardinals.Ken
OUCH!

I thought we were all friends here dude...

Ken....you are a friend....you have common sense and don't come off as a pompous arse.....a few here with their we suck and we will always suck attitude are starting to pi$$ me off.

 

[Cardiac]

Re: Re: You Experts

Originally posted by kerouac9
Simeon and DB put this team on a national stage and attracted people around the league to the team. Simeon was instrumental in getting us to the playoffs and that win against the Cowboys in 1996. DB gave ESPN a reason to show Cards highlights the past three years.

And then dragged us through the mud with their pouting and me first mentality. Great headlines from both DB and Rice??? I say this fully knowing that the way Bidwill USE to do business contributed to their pouting but no all of their cancer like actions.

 

[RedStorm]

Re: Re: Re: You Experts

Originally posted by BuckeyeCardinal
Ken....you are a friend....you have common sense and don't come off as a pompous arse.....a few here with their we suck and we will always suck attitude are starting to pi$$ me off.

Hey Buckeye....Let me buy you a Guiness.

 

[Cardiac]

Many people disagree on how many impact players there were in this draft but I think it's safe to say it was a very short list. Therefore the Bears number 4 pick was of much more value then the Cards 6th pick. That's why they got the better trade value.

While some are so interested in comparing apples to oranges let's do that with Robertson and Sullivan. Sure the Saints liked Sullivan enough to trade up for him but not enough to give up 2 first rd picks for him without a little something back.

I'm sure if the Saints could have gotten Robertson they would have given up their 2 1sts and even more to get him.

I can't imagine anyone thinks the Jets would have made the same offer for Sullivan as they did Robertson. Think a little folks before you start running around yelling the sky if falling.

 

[JeffGollin]

Yes they moved down in the first round, but improved their position for the next three picks. Now: Is this a trade you would make?
No. Because the decline in value of the top pick is worth considerably more than the increase in value of picks as they get later and later into the draft.

Add to this the fact that the dropoff in talent between the top 10 -12 picks and the 17th pick was considerable and that makes the value of the decline in our top pick even greater in value.

Don't make the trade and take Suggs (or arguably Trufant, Kennedy or Kevin Williams) and the entire Cardinal draft would be worth an "A" instead of a D to C+.

 

[Shane]

Originally posted by CardLogic
Disregard for the moment the players selected (personally I think the actual talent the Cards got is not bad, however) here is the Draft Picks Trade with New Orleans in a nutshell:

1st pick Was # 6 Got # 17 Down 11 slots
2nd pick Was # 37 Got # 18 Up 19 slots
3rd pick Was # 70 Got # 54 Up 16 slots
4th pick Was # 102 Got # 70 Up 32 slots



I've got to admit, when I started this post it was to point out how bad a trade this was for the Cardinals (and how they managed to screw up once again), but looking at it in these terms (not talking talent) the trade doesn't look bad!

Yes they moved down in the first round, but improved their position for the next three picks.

Now: Is this a trade you would make?

Nice post and definately doesnt make it sound as bad!

 

[Cardiac]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
Yes they moved down in the first round, but improved their position for the next three picks. Now: Is this a trade you would make?
No. Because the decline in value of the top pick is worth considerably more than the increase in value of picks as they get later and later into the draft.

Add to this the fact that the dropoff in talent between the top 10 -12 picks and the 17th pick was considerable and that makes the value of the decline in our top pick even greater in value.

That pretty much sums up what went wrong for the Cards in this deal. Again look at anyones mock draft and Haynes or McDougal is still on the board into the twenties. The Cards felt that they would in fact get one of these two and still get a WR etc at picks 17 and 18.

When the Eagles traded up they had to decide if taking Pace this early outweighed getting a 1st rder next year. They decided on Pace and only time will tell if it was the right decision. The way D-lineman were going who would have guessed that no more DE's would be taken for so long after Pace went.

 

[Tangodnzr]

Good post Cardiac,

After some of Ed's tirade, I did a little more checking, just to be sure.

The motivation of each member to the "deal" is the primary driving force for what route the negotiations are going to take place.

Sitting at both 17 & 18 New Orleans had a great position.
They could sit tight and keep them ....no problem at all. Although they did not seem to be showing any particular need or direction they HAD to go. They could also sit back a entertain offers, but controlled the situation simply because they sat in the driver's seat and were not desperately trying to move.
They could afford to be demanding.
Meanwhile the Cards are negotiating from a weaker position because it is THEY who want the deal done.

In the Case of the Bears and the Jets. It was apparently the Jets who were more eager to move up, that was the primary driving factor. So here the Bears had the controlling position.

I still haven't got the details confirmed, but this is what I have been able to piece together so far.....
"On the eve of the NFL Draft, the Jets traded their two first-round picks -- the 13th and 22nd selections -- and a conditional draft pick to the Chicago Bears for the fourth overall pick today. The conditional pick is believed to be a second-day selection tomorrow, in rounds four through seven, and contingent upon which player the Jets select in the first round."

It was "supposed" that the conditional would be something from the second day, rounds 4-7, but I didn't see anything. So to date, that "conditional" is still a mystery...and if real...could indeed alter the equation.
Summary = Jets trade thheir 2 firsts, a 4th, and a conditional to move up to Chicago's first.
Net result = Bears drop 9 slots for their first pick, add another 1st round pick at 22, add a 4th round pick, and a conditional pick
Jets...Move up 9 with their first pick, give up a 1st round, a 4th, and a conditional.
. Just realiized....the 4th round pick (#116) WAS the conditional
Jets wanted the deal, they paid
Cards wanted the deal, they paid.

Each trade has to be evaluated on its own individual merit, and to what each team is acquiring or losing in the deal.

I see nothing inherantly wrong in the basic deal with the Saints.

If Graves/ or whomever, is to be criticized, I'd say it be for how they handled things AFTER that, once they say how things were turning

 

[AZCB34]

Originally posted by Cardiac
The way D-lineman were going who would have guessed that no more DE's would be taken for so long after Pace went.

But it is also pretty evident Pace would never have made it back for the Cards to pick. Maybe some panic set in when they realized what was happening but I no longer believe that Pace could have been had by the Cards later in the draft. In fact, judging by some info that is now out there, it is entirely likely Pace would never have made it out of the first round.

Cardiac, I am not sure I agree with the logic about why the Bears got so much more at #4 than the Cards got at #6 when they each traded down. The problem you point out is trading partners and their plans...which is dead on. I just think the Cards seemed, in the big picture, to get so much less than the Bears even though the picks were so close. I wonder if the Saints really wanted to trade up as badly as the Cards wanted to trade down and thus they were hesitant and in order to grease the wheels, Graves agreed to swap 2nd rounders.

The way I look at it, trades should be slotted almost like contracts so if the Bears got 2 1st rounds and a 4th, then the Cards should have gotten say 2 1st rounders and a 6th (hypothetically of course). The Cards were taking all the real risk because the Saints knew their guy would be there while the Cards hoped the guy they targeted would still be on the board.

 

[AZCB34]

Originally posted by Tangodnzr
In the Case of the Bears and the Jets. It was apparently the Jets who were more eager to move up, that was the primary driving factor. So here the Bears had the controlling position.

I still haven't got the details confirmed, but this is what I have been able to piece together so far.....
"On the eve of the NFL Draft, the Jets traded their two first-round picks -- the 13th and 22nd selections -- and a conditional draft pick to the Chicago Bears for the fourth overall pick today. The conditional pick is believed to be a second-day selection tomorrow, in rounds four through seven, and contingent upon which player the Jets select in the first round."

It was "supposed" that the conditional would be something from the second day, rounds 4-7, but I didn't see anything. So to date, that "conditional" is still a mystery...and if real...could indeed alter the equation.
Summary = Jets trade thheir 2 firsts, a 4th, and a conditional to move up to Chicago's first.
Net result = Bears drop 9 slots for their first pick, add another 1st round pick at 22, add a 4th round pick, and a conditional pick
Jets...Move up 9 with their first pick, give up a 1st round, a 4th, and a conditional.

Jets wanted the deal, they paid
Cards wanted the deal, they paid.

Maybe I am wrong...will have to recheck but I thought the Bears got the 2 1st rounders and then the conditional turned out to be #19 pick in the fourth round. I don't think they got a 4th pick in the deal.

 

[Tangodnzr]

I have already edited.....and noted so....
You are correct Cubby.
The 4th rounder (#116) WAS the conditional.

 

[AZCB34]

Originally posted by Tangodnzr
I have already edited.....and noted so....
You are correct Cubby.
The 4th rounder (#116) WAS the conditional.

The Bears had so many picks it started to get confusing because they got picks from NYJ, JAX and MIA...plus quite a few compensatory picks.

 

[BuckeyeCardinal]

Re: Re: Re: Re: You Experts

Originally posted by RedStorm
Hey Buckeye....Let me buy you a Guiness.

All right buddy....by the way...I really like your signature.....our family have fought and died in just about every war.

 

[LVCARDFREAK]

Originally posted by AZCB34
The Bears had so many picks it started to get confusing because they got picks from NYJ, JAX and MIA...plus quite a few compensatory picks.

Yet they had a horrible draft! of course, we wont really know for a couple of years but they passed on guys and took others that I just couldnt believe

 

[AZCB34]

Originally posted by LVCARDFREAK
Yet they had a horrible draft! of course, we wont really know for a couple of years but they passed on guys and took others that I just couldnt believe

Overall I was unimpressed too. The pick that really pissed me off was the Grossman pick. Completely idiotic IMO. Tried to get cute and I think it will cost them. Like you said though, it may be a couple years before we really know.

 

[Cardiac]

Originally posted by AZCB34
The way I look at it, trades should be slotted almost like contracts so if the Bears got 2 1st rounds and a 4th, then the Cards should have gotten say 2 1st rounders and a 6th (hypothetically of course). The Cards were taking all the real risk because the Saints knew their guy would be there while the Cards hoped the guy they targeted would still be on the board.

I agree with most of what you stated but do disagree with your slotting theory in this circumstance. Many teams had 3 to 5 players rated as blue chip prospects. Sullivan was not one of those players (except for the Saints) but Robertson was in almost every teams eyes that kind of player. Would you give up more for Jerry Rice then Eric Moulds? Moulds is a great receiver but knowing what we do now teams would give up their entire draft plus more for Jerry Rice. I hope this illustrates my point well.

So yes they were only two slots apart but the perceived talent was vastly different.

Oh and no I wasn't and still am not thrilled with the trade the Cards made, I just have calmed down from the draft day frenzy I was experiencing.

I don't think we got robbed but I think we did give up a little too much considering picks 18 thru 30 pretty much had the same level of talent available. Of course this is hindsight talking and not predraft knowledge.

 

[ChiCard]

Originally posted by Tangodnzr
Good post Cardiac,

After some of Ed's tirade, I did a little more checking, just to be sure.

The motivation of each member to the "deal" is the primary driving force for what route the negotiations are going to take place.

Sitting at both 17 & 18 New Orleans had a great position.
They could sit tight and keep them ....no problem at all. Although they did not seem to be showing any particular need or direction they HAD to go. They could also sit back a entertain offers, but controlled the situation simply because they sat in the driver's seat and were not desperately trying to move.
They could afford to be demanding.
Meanwhile the Cards are negotiating from a weaker position because it is THEY who want the deal done.

In the Case of the Bears and the Jets. It was apparently the Jets who were more eager to move up, that was the primary driving factor. So here the Bears had the controlling position.

I still haven't got the details confirmed, but this is what I have been able to piece together so far.....
"On the eve of the NFL Draft, the Jets traded their two first-round picks -- the 13th and 22nd selections -- and a conditional draft pick to the Chicago Bears for the fourth overall pick today. The conditional pick is believed to be a second-day selection tomorrow, in rounds four through seven, and contingent upon which player the Jets select in the first round."

It was "supposed" that the conditional would be something from the second day, rounds 4-7, but I didn't see anything. So to date, that "conditional" is still a mystery...and if real...could indeed alter the equation.
Summary = Jets trade thheir 2 firsts, a 4th, and a conditional to move up to Chicago's first.
Net result = Bears drop 9 slots for their first pick, add another 1st round pick at 22, add a 4th round pick, and a conditional pick
Jets...Move up 9 with their first pick, give up a 1st round, a 4th, and a conditional.
. Just realiized....the 4th round pick (#116) WAS the conditional
Jets wanted the deal, they paid
Cards wanted the deal, they paid.

Each trade has to be evaluated on its own individual merit, and to what each team is acquiring or losing in the deal.

I see nothing inherantly wrong in the basic deal with the Saints.

If Graves/ or whomever, is to be criticized, I'd say it be for how they handled things AFTER that, once they say how things were turning

First off I don't know what "tirade" you're refering to. As I entitled this thread "one man's opinion" I think I stated it as clearly as I intended. At the risk of being blunt, your post is just plain silly. If you're saying that the Cardinals were so intent on trading down, whether or not the players they wanted would be available, you've proved my point in spades.

To say that they were the ones who wanted the deal, and that the Saints merely accomodated them and picked their pocket for the priviledge, makes the front office out to be baffoons. To say we were in a "weaker" position while we held a pick which presumably would garner one of the few impact players in the draft defies logic. If what you say is true this team is in worse shape then I could have imagined. To accept your version of events is to believe they just wanted to trade down come what may and even I don't think that was the case.

I reiterate what I stated. They blew the trade and no comparison with other teams will change that fact. IN MY OPINION that is.