Per ESPN: Bengals/Cardinals Talking Trade

[cardsfanmd]

I wouldn't even consider trading him for a second or third right now. Williams is fresh off major surgery and we have no proven backup option. We would then be forced into using the pick to try and replace Wells, who is a proven commodity and severely undervalued on this board. The man is a beast and a top 10-15 back IMO.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

I would destroy small villages to get back into the 2nd round.

You must be registered for see images attach

We need you to get on the Cardinals front office, get things done around there.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

I know many/most will blast what I am about to type.

RG states how much he loves Richardson knowing that Cinci also covets him.

Then trade rumors come out that Cinci wants to trade up to our slot with the speculation that it's for Richardson.

RG is already working it and creating value for our 13 pick with the idea of getting back the 2nd rd pick. Most of us (with exception of John H) don't want the Cards to take another RB in the top 2 rds for a 3rd time in what would be 4 years.

Is it possible that RG isn't really considering taking Richardson but had the foresight to send at the smoke screen early so that we entice the Bengals to trade up with us?

That would take subtlety, finesse, and cunning. I don't know if Graves has that in him.

 

[imaCafan]

The way RG trades I fear we would trade #13 for #17 & their second and send them our third, or something stupid like that....

 

[Pariah]

If by some miracle Richardson is waiting for us at #13, then I think we take him. IMO, that's ridiculous value and he's a better prospect than Beanie. I'm generally not in favor of risking a proven commodity for an unknown, but in this case I think the potential reward outweighs the risk.

Does that mean we go into the season with three 1st or 2nd round RBs on the roster? No. If we land Richardson, we should trade Beanie and hope we can get back into the second round with him. I think there could be teams that look at him as a good every-down starter, and maybe his injury history will cancel out with the spectre of drafting a bust.

(and again, the only reason I'm even mentioning this is because it's already being discussed on the board--I think there's about a 1% chance Richardson gets out of the top-10)

 

[Snakester]

I don't like the trade for this reason. The two players that I want, David Decastro and Luke Kuechly I believe will be taken in the top 15 picks. As much as I would love to get that second round pick back I would not want it if it meant not getting one of those two players. Now if both of them are gone when we pick then by all means trade away. The next players that I like that could be taken at 17 that make sense for us would be Whitney Mercilus, Nick Perry, Michael Floyd and Mike Adams.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I don't like the trade for this reason. The two players that I want, David Decastro and Luke Kuechly I believe will be taken in the top 15 picks. As much as I would love to get that second round pick back I would not want it if it meant not getting one of those two players. Now if both of them are gone when we pick then by all means trade away. The next players that I like that could be taken at 17 that make sense for us would be Whitney Mercilus, Nick Perry, Michael Floyd and Mike Adams.[/QUOTE]

After 19 reps on the bench at the Combine, a number matched and bettered by cornerbacks and wideouts, I'd go with Cordy Glenn in this scenario.

 

[JeffGollin]

A few points...

1. The best way to extort a trade isn't by hinting that you "love" a player (Richardson) that a potential trading partner covets (because if he were there at #13, you'd take him yourself). The more traditional way would be to drop the hint that at least one other tam was trying to trade up to get RIchardson or someone else.

2. If you're really interested in trading down, you'll be prone to failure if you lock onto one single player you've got to have (Chances are better than even that he'll be gone).

3. What's missing in the process is a Cardinal Top 17 - are there 17 players we'd be happy to use our first pick on?

Off the top of my head - Luck, RG3, Richardson, Blackmon, Floyd, DeCastro, Martin, Coples, Keuchley, Clairborne get me to 11.

You could make the case for Upshaw, Ingram and Glenn to get to 14 (though Ingram and Upshaw make me nervous).

(I'm not sold on Reiff and K Wright is dropping out of my top 20).

Who would be the other 3? A strong case could be made for the top 3 NTs (Brockers, Poe & Cox). That gets me to 17, Reyes (who reminds me of Dockett) would put us one over at 18.

Bottom line - I think we do that deal if we can get it (unless our FO is in love with someone like Kalil or Richardson & he falls into our lap at #13).

 

[Snakester]

After 19 reps on the bench at the Combine, a number matched and bettered by cornerbacks and wideouts, I'd go with Cordy Glenn in this scenario.[/QUOTE]

I didn't like the fact that Adams only had 19 reps either. If we drafted him at 17 ( trade down ) I'm sure John Lott would do wonders for his strength. I like Cordy Glenn as a guard. I just don't think he will ever be a really good tackle.

Mike Adams on the other hand has the feet and skill set to be a good tackle. He needs work and it will take him a couple of years, but he has the feet to be a good pass protector. I wouldn't really be disapointed with either of them at 17 if we took them. O-line is a huge need for us and either would be an improvement over Brandon Kieth.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

After 19 reps on the bench at the Combine, a number matched and bettered by cornerbacks and wideouts, I'd go with Cordy Glenn in this scenario.

I didn't like the fact that Adams only had 19 reps either. If we drafted him at 17 ( trade down ) I'm sure John Lott would do wonders for his strength. I like Cordy Glenn as a guard. I just don't think he will ever be a really good tackle.

Mike Adams on the other hand has the feet and skill set to be a good tackle. He needs work and it will take him a couple of years, but he has the feet to be a good pass protector. I wouldn't really be disapointed with either of them at 17 if we took them. O-line is a huge need for us and either would be an improvement over Brandon Kieth.[/QUOTE]

My problem with Adam's (19) is what it says about his dedication.

Coach Lott can't give him what he doesn't have (IMO)

 

[Snakester]

I didn't like the fact that Adams only had 19 reps either. If we drafted him at 17 ( trade down ) I'm sure John Lott would do wonders for his strength. I like Cordy Glenn as a guard. I just don't think he will ever be a really good tackle.

Mike Adams on the other hand has the feet and skill set to be a good tackle. He needs work and it will take him a couple of years, but he has the feet to be a good pass protector. I wouldn't really be disapointed with either of them at 17 if we took them. O-line is a huge need for us and either would be an improvement over Brandon Kieth.

My problem with Adam's (19) is what it says about his dedication.

Coach Lott can't give him what he doesn't have (IMO)[/QUOTE]

True. The Cards will have to really look into what makes him tick to be sure that he will dedicate himself to football. The interview process will be big for Adams.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

My problem with Adam's (19) is what it says about his dedication.

Coach Lott can't give him what he doesn't have (IMO)

True. The Cards will have to really look into what makes him tick.[/quote]
Tattoos and weed is the answer.

 

[MadCardDisease]

Why would they be considering this at this point?

One has no idea how the draft will play out, and doubt seriously that Cinci would be showing their hand.

Draft day... Who knows?

Believed for awhile that (13) may be coveted depending on what happens up top.

Wouldn't take it if I have a plug-in day one starter on the board that I'd lose by moving.

I agree.

Odds are the Seahawks started this rumor to try and entice the Cowboys to trade with them.

 

[kerouac9]

I don't like the trade for this reason. The two players that I want, David Decastro and Luke Kuechly I believe will be taken in the top 15 picks. As much as I would love to get that second round pick back I would not want it if it meant not getting one of those two players. Now if both of them are gone when we pick then by all means trade away. The next players that I like that could be taken at 17 that make sense for us would be Whitney Mercilus, Nick Perry, Michael Floyd and Mike Adams.

I'm sure the boundries of a POSSIBLE trade are being set up. If a player that Cincy wants isn't there, the trade won't happen. If the player that the Cards want IS there, then the Cards will just take their guy.

This isn't a situation where teams are going to trade out a week or even a day before the draft. It's interesting that apparently Cincy is putting this out there, though. I'm sure lots of calls are being made, because, as CC likes to point out, it's difficult to gauge what value to put on traded picks under the new CBA.

 

[kerouac9]

I didn't like the fact that Adams only had 19 reps either. If we drafted him at 17 ( trade down ) I'm sure John Lott would do wonders for his strength. I like Cordy Glenn as a guard. I just don't think he will ever be a really good tackle.

Mike Adams on the other hand has the feet and skill set to be a good tackle. He needs work and it will take him a couple of years, but he has the feet to be a good pass protector. I wouldn't really be disapointed with either of them at 17 if we took them. O-line is a huge need for us and either would be an improvement over Brandon Kieth.

I like Glenn as a guard in a man-blocking scheme at 345, too. But what if Glenn slimmed down to 325 (which Lott would without question ask him to do?). Even Glenn at 330 could be a devastating RT.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I think Cincy has cooled on Kirkpatrick since the drug charges were dropped .

I can still see the real trade being discussed is for Wells and Cincy giving up their 2nd or 3rd round pick. Mike Brown loves Wells and, if he checks out healthy, picks up a 1000 yard back who is still young. The question is, would you give up Wells for a 2nd/3rd round pick? I think most here will say yes. I think it would be a big mistake.

Must be a tough crowd, I thought it was funny.

I don't think I'd give up Beanie for a 2nd rounder. He isn't a perfect back and his injury problems concern me but he has shown the ability to be a force out there. I'd like to see how he pairs up with a healthy Williams (assuming we have a healthy Williams) before I'd considered moving him. This is a passing league but having a great run game sure makes passing a lot easier.

Steve

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I like Glenn as a guard in a man-blocking scheme at 345, too. But what if Glenn slimmed down to 325 (which Lott would without question ask him to do?). Even Glenn at 330 could be a devastating RT.

Good point!

 

[Vermont Maverick]

The way RG trades I fear we would trade #13 for #17 & their second and send them our third, or something stupid like that....

Actually, if you look at the draft value chart, that would be very close to what it should be.

I don't see Cinci giving up a second rounder to move up 4 spots, considering the value chart says it's too much, and they never trade up.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

Actually, if you look at the draft value chart, that would be very close to what it should be.

I don't see Cinci giving up a second rounder to move up 4 spots, considering the value chart says it's too much, and they never trade up.

According to Michael Lombardi the value chart is dead under the new CBA.

You get what you can, pure and simple.

If anything first-rounders acquire more value because dollars and cents are largely out of the equation.

 

[ARZCardinals]

I hate trading down!

Suggs for BJ and Pace - Example 1 - if you need example 2 you didn't read example 1.

 

[Snakester]

I like Glenn as a guard in a man-blocking scheme at 345, too. But what if Glenn slimmed down to 325 (which Lott would without question ask him to do?). Even Glenn at 330 could be a devastating RT.

A slimmed down Glenn might have the movement skills to be a RT. Right now Mike Mayock is leaning towards Glenn as a tackle because of how he performed at the combine. I would be interested to see Glenn play RT at 325.

 

[JeffGollin]

...I can still see the real trade being discussed is for Wells and Cincy giving up their 2nd or 3rd round pick. Mike Brown loves Wells and, if he checks out healthy, picks up a 1000 yard back who is still young. The question is, would you give up Wells for a 2nd/3rd round pick? I think most here will say yes. I think it would be a big mistake.

It's time we stop giving up players for much less than we got them for..

If Mike Brown loves Beanie that much, let him give up a 1st & 2nd round pick for him.

 

[Mitch]

A slimmed down Glenn might have the movement skills to be a RT. Right now Mike Mayock is leaning towards Glenn as a tackle because of how he performed at the combine. I would be interested to see Glenn play RT at 325.

I thoroughly concur. 38" arms are a rarity---that and the athleticism Glenn shows at his size and weight. I think he will be a top 15 pick and the second tackle taken after Kalil.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I thoroughly concur. 38" arms are a rarity---that and the athleticism Glenn shows at his size and weight. I think he will be a top 15 pick and the second tackle taken after Kalil.

And keep in mind that Grimm is attending Glenn's Pro Day.

 

[Fitz Rulz]

Bengals tagged kicker Mike Nunget
first time I hear such a thing about a kicker