Rapoport: Cardinals trading out of #3 very very likely

[RON_IN_OC]

With the signing of Jimmy G. the desire by the Raiders to move up and pay the freight has diminished greatly. McShay must realize that. As for, Indy... why not? We lose nothing by that move.

Jimmy G is effectively on a 1 year deal in Vegas. They are absolutely not out of the rookie QB running.

 

[QuebecCard]

Jimmy G is effectively on a 1 year deal in Vegas. They are absolutely not out of the rookie QB running.

And they can probably stay put and pick up one to develop.

 

[oaken1]

With the signing of Jimmy G. the desire by the Raiders to move up and pay the freight has diminished greatly. McShay must realize that. As for, Indy... why not? We lose nothing by that move.

No it hasnt. Jimmy G on 2 years just allows them to not have to start the rookie...and Jimmy plus the Rookie are still cheaper than the $40mil check they had to write for Carr if they didnt cut him.

And now Jimmy is having issues with his physical so the deal aint done yet...

Its a bad sign when a guys injuries keep him away from his introductory press conference!

 

[Totally_Red]

No it hasnt. Jimmy G on 2 years just allows them to not have to start the rookie...and Jimmy plus the Rookie are still cheaper than the $40mil check they had to write for Carr if they didnt cut him.

And now Jimmy is having issues with his physical so the deal aint done yet...

Its a bad sign when a guys injuries keep him away from his introductory press conference!

Exactly. Depending on who McDaniels likes they will call the Cardinals. Jimmy is a short term solution not a franchise QB.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Zach Allen and Byron Murphy, for two. Kyzir White can probably fall into that zone.

I think there's a difference between a team that doesn't care about winning/is tanking and a team that wants to compete. The 2021-2022 Detroit Lions wanted to compete and do so responsibly. The 2020-2023 Houston Texans don't care about winning or about competing.

I'd prefer to follow the Lions model that had them with a winning season and on the brink of the playoffs in year 2 vs desultory endless transactions.



All of them? Are we trying to recruit a top WR or TE? No? What's the difference to an OL if you give them a three year contract? Professional football players don't really care about winning, but they do care about being competitive.

I don't think our QB situation is any worse than the ones in Green Bay (if they move Aaron Rodgers), San Francisco, Washington, Carolina, Pittsburgh, Tennessee, Atlanta, and Indy. That's a quarter of the league.

I don't want big splashy free agents this year.

I'd be looking for foundational type players, OL and DL.

 

[GatorAZ]

Just listened to an interview with McShay. He said Cards would be crazy not to trade 3rd pick. Thinks it will be with Raiders or Indy.

Also said something else very interesting - he said Mahomes told him that coming out of college he could not even identify the Mike linebacker on most plays. That says one heck of a lot about Kliff's coaching to me.

Almost started a thread after listening to that. Kliff’s agent in the GOAT.

 

[BulldogCard]

Maybe it's time to draft a Stroud, Richardson..just the pattern of the league is so strong

 

[BritCard]

I don't want big splashy free agents this year.

I'd be looking for foundational type players, OL and DL.

Are not foundational type players also the splashy free agents?

Everyone wants foundational players. They are usually the ones that command the most money no?

 

[BritCard]

Jimmy G is effectively on a 1 year deal in Vegas. They are absolutely not out of the rookie QB running.

It's a 2 year deal sadly before they can get out of it, and with that in mind would you take one of the guys in this class or wait until next years?

I think it does make it unlikely they trade up for a QB.

 

[RON_IN_OC]

It's a 2 year deal sadly before they can get out of it, and with that in mind would you take one of the guys in this class or wait until next years?

I think it does make it unlikely they trade up for a QB.

They have a 1 year out. You may not agree with it, but they have it...with numbers more favorable than the Cards moving on from DHop this year.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[BritCard]

They have a 1 year out. You may not agree with it, but they have it...with numbers more favorable than the Cards moving on from DHop this year.

You must be registered for see images attach

I don't think $19m in dead money is an out. If their plan was to draft a rookie QB surely they wouldn't sign Jimmy to a deal that guarantees them that much dead money next year?

You'd just sign Brissett or similar.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Maybe it's time to draft a Stroud, Richardson..just the pattern of the league is so strong

Sarcasm?

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I don't think $19m in dead money is an out. If their plan was to draft a rookie QB surely they wouldn't sign Jimmy to a deal that guarantees them that much dead money next year?

You'd just sign Brissett or similar.

Looking at that contract, I think they are out of the running too. 33M in dead money next year is a ton.

 

[BritCard]

Looking at that contract, I think they are out of the running too. 33M in dead money next year is a ton.

The $33m is this year but it's still $19m next year. Makes no sense if they are looking to draft a QB.

 

[RON_IN_OC]

The $33m is this year but it's still $19m next year. Makes no sense if they are looking to draft a QB.

DHops dead cap number is going to be higher than $19 million, while saving $8 million...worse than what it would be for Raiders to move on from Jimmy G. I guess one is totally plausible (and acceptable), but the other isn't...lol The Raiders can easily move up and draft a QB this year and then see how he is for next year...If he's ready, like a couple of them should be, then bye bye Jimmy G...If he's not ready (kid from Florida), then you hold Jimmy G for 1 more year. It's actually a much better way to manage a rookie QB deal than what Keim did with Murray, IMO.

 

[BritCard]

DHops dead cap number is going to be higher than $19 million, while saving $8 million...worse than what it would be for Raiders to move on from Jimmy G. I guess one is totally plausible (and acceptable), but the other isn't...lol The Raiders can easily move up and draft a QB this year and then see how he is for next year...If he's ready, like a couple of them should be, then bye bye Jimmy G...If he's not ready (kid from Florida), then you hold Jimmy G for 1 more year. It's actually a much better way to manage a rookie QB deal than what Keim did with Murray, IMO.

Well yes, they are completely different. One is a two year old legacy contract the new FO inherited and the player wants out. The other the Raiders literally just signed.

If they planned to draft a rookie QB they would have made the get out easier with Jimmy or signed a cheaper option. McDaniels knows Brissett well and Brissett would have gone there if they were intending to draft a rookie.

I think they are out, I might be wrong.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Well yes, they are completely different. One is a two year old legacy contract the new FO inherited and the player wants out. The other the Raiders literally just signed.

If they planned to draft a rookie QB they would have made the get out easier with Jimmy or signed a cheaper option. McDaniels knows Brissett well and Brissett would have gone there if they were intending to draft a rookie.

I think they are out, I might be wrong.

I don't know if they are Mitch level out, but if a QB falls to them and they don't have to move up to take one, I could see it happening.

 

[BritCard]

I don't know if they are Mitch level out, but if a QB falls to them and they don't have to move up to take one, I could see it happening.

I'm not sure the Falcons are out though. I think it's possible they move up for Anderson as I mentioned in another thread.

But I don't think they are out of the QB market. They have made quite a few free agency moves at Ridder didn't show much in his limited time last year. Ridder always looked like backup materiel than starter to me.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Are not foundational type players also the splashy free agents?

Everyone wants foundational players. They are usually the ones that command the most money no?

My use of foundation is different here.

I mean sign good, young, not too expensive players.

 

[ASUCHRIS]

My use of foundation is different here.

I mean sign good, young, not too expensive players.

Like, take fliers on guys like James Conner trying to rebuild their market or re-establish themselves? Would love to see some of those moves!

 

[BirdGangThing]

if we do trade the #3 pick it would likely be to one of these teams imo

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

 

[BritCard]

My use of foundation is different here.

I mean sign good, young, not too expensive players.

Ok, but how many of these are there in FA?

Good, young, not too expensive players are what every team wants. Which is why not many hit FA. I'm looking at the top 100 from pre FA starting and there are good young players that are at positions we don't need or went for big money.

We need to build through the draft. Which is what KC and Philly have done. And then you supplement them with FA's.

 

[kerouac9]

My use of foundation is different here.

I mean sign good, young, not too expensive players.

You must be registered for see images attach

I'm with @BritCard on this. If you have a good young player on your roster, you should re-sign him before he reached free agency and he's less expensive (Brit doesn't believe this is possible).

I think achieving this goal is especially hard this offseason because Monti doesn't have his own scouting group in place yet, the coaches don't really know what to ask for, etc., etc.

I think we might find some values and gems in next free agency once Monti has a staff he trusts and the coaches can communicate what the do and don't want. Especially when the process can start in early January instead of with the Combine.

I have my doubts that we'll be able to do that, TBH, even with all the time in the world. I suspect that we're going to try and just hit some singles and doubles in the draft and see what we can do with a full staff and a high draft pick in each round next year.

 

[BritCard]

You must be registered for see images attach

I'm with @BritCard on this. If you have a good young player on your roster, you should re-sign him before he reached free agency and he's less expensive (Brit doesn't believe this is possible).

I think achieving this goal is especially hard this offseason because Monti doesn't have his own scouting group in place yet, the coaches don't really know what to ask for, etc., etc.

I think we might find some values and gems in next free agency once Monti has a staff he trusts and the coaches can communicate what the do and don't want. Especially when the process can start in early January instead of with the Combine.

I have my doubts that we'll be able to do that, TBH, even with all the time in the world. I suspect that we're going to try and just hit some singles and doubles in the draft and see what we can do with a full staff and a high draft pick in each round next year.

Good post.

Monti might have one of the toughest GM initiations ever.

How many new GMs have started with a QB recovering from an ACL, a roster and cap situation in dire need of overhaul and a new staff with barely 4 weeks in the job before FA starts?

 

[kerouac9]

Good post.

Monti might have one of the toughest GM initiations ever.

How many new GMs have started with a QB recovering from an ACL, a roster and cap situation in dire need of overhaul and a new staff with barely 4 weeks in the job before FA starts?

I get what you're saying, but most GMs aren't fired because things are looking great, and few GMs leave the game on their own terms.

Monti is probably in a better position because at least he has a potential/likely/bona fide franchise quarterback in-house and under contract.