Sando's take on the draft.

[Folster]

Peterson is probably going to return punts, not KO's, so LSH is still going to be our KOR.

Hasn't the kick-off spot been moved up this year. If so, I imagine KO returner might not even be a concern since most kickers will be able to force a touchback sans for extreme wind or penalty.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

I usually agree with you, Hypothesis...but on this one, all I have to say is Brooks Reed is a better pass rusher than anyone we have on the roster right now---and he is significantly better than Acho (whom I love too---for other reasons and the ones you gave, save the fact that when you stack his tapes up next to Reed's and even Houston's you don't see the same natural pass rushing ability.

We need guys who can rush the passer---it doesn't even matter if they start, as long as they are in there when we need a pass rush most.

We still have no one---other than Schofield---but he hasn't shown yet what he is capable of---so we really don't know.

Brooks Reed is going to thrive with the Texans---you just watch. He may not even start but he will be rushing the passer left and right.
The other point is---if you draft a pass rusher at #5, THEN the Williams pick is fine!

The Cardinals needed to come out of this draft with one edge pass rushing threat and they did not when they had a golden opportunity to.

This is what irks me to no end about this organization and about Ken Whisenhunt who repaetedly ignores the defensive needs, including up till now getting a decent coordinator in place.

2010 - Brooks Reed: 6.5 sacks - 8 tackles for loss
2010 - Sam Acho: 8.0 sacks - 14 tackles for loss

2009: Schofield: 12 sacks - 24.5 tackles for loss

(Well, as Mitch says, and the eye in the sky don't lie: Reed is clearly better than either Acho, or anyone on the present roster. Who knows... he may replace Connor Barwin on the Texans, another of Walter's can't miss prospects.)

 

[conraddobler]

The thing will Mallet is here in Arizona was likely not a good spot for him, NE is. In NE there is no pressure for him to play right away, and he's in an organization that is equipped to teach him, and around players that will show him what it takes to be an NFL QB. If he is too immature or wants to party too much etc, he won't make it, but it won't be their fault.

With us look at Leinart, after Kurt beat him out he was in a similar spot not having to play and learning from a great veteran, the problem was as a high #1 pick him not starting was seen as a total failure and put tons of pressure on him and the organization which I think clearly stunted his development.

Nobody is going to be wondering if Mallet isn't starting in 2 years, with Brady still there. Here as great as Kurt was, people were still wondering why the hell is Matt holding a clipboard.

I think Matt got the high hard one on that front but then again this is the NFL and he could of dealt with it more effectively.

I think if he had been aces at his playbook, known it backwards, forwards and sideways then he would of forced a chance for himself after Kurt left, and in that he failed I guess and that happens.

When you don't get along with your boss, you had best be darn near perfect at your job or you are on borrowed time, I think Matt could of done more but got disgusted or never saw it the way I'm describing it, whatever.

 

[Russ Smith]

I think Matt got the high hard one on that front but then again this is the NFL and he could of dealt with it more effectively.

I think if he had been aces at his playbook, known it backwards, forwards and sideways then he would of forced a chance for himself after Kurt left, and in that he failed I guess and that happens.

When you don't get along with your boss, you had best be darn near perfect at your job or you are on borrowed time, I think Matt could of done more but got disgusted or never saw it the way I'm describing it, whatever.

All true but I think in the end the problem with Matt was he was only valuable to US as a starter, because he was a high first round pick with a big contract. If he's just the backup, people see him as a mistake so that's hanging over his head all the time. now that doesn't impact him he wasn't a first rounder by the Texans.

Mallet won't have to deal with that, and he'll be in a situation where if he is immature and parties too much the peer pressure from the team will either get him to stop, or get him a ticket out of town.

If Mallet comes here there's no Brady to sit behind, and even as a 3rd rounder there's an element of why is he not the starter.

 

[82CardsGrad]

2010 - Brooks Reed: 6.5 sacks - 8 tackles for loss
2010 - Sam Acho: 8.0 sacks - 14 tackles for loss

2009: Schofield: 12 sacks - 24.5 tackles for loss

(Well, as Mitch says, and the eye in the sky don't lie: Reed is clearly better than either Acho, or anyone on the present roster. Who knows... he may replace Connor Barwin on the Texans, another of Walter's can't miss prospects.)

 

[kerouac9]

I agree, I love LSH. I couldn't help but notice that this draft really made him expendable though. Honestly, did anyone on our team get screwed more than LSH in this draft? We got a new kick returner and a new RB. I'm hoping he is still on the team when the season starts, because he's shown he's a gamer.

Peterson is probably going to return punts, not KO's, so LSH is still going to be our KOR.

Not only that, but LSH is one of our best gunners on punt and kickoff coverage. Even if LSH doesn't get his 3-5 touches per game in the offense (and I don't think he's good for much more than that), he's going to make an impact and have a roster spot.

Russ is right about LSH returning kicks. Punts are much less physically risky than kickoffs are; no way you're putting your #5 overall pick out there to return kicks. :JasonSehorn:

 

[AZCARDSFANATIC]

This is all I can say about our "highest rated player" theory. The following quote is from the article.
"The Cardinals hit on a couple themes in this draft. Emphasizing value was one. Targeting players with strong intangible qualities another. Singling out playmakers was also a priority. "
The staff said the same thing about Max Hall. I am sick of us using the word "intangibles". How about drafting for tangibles since they tend to win games.

 

[Cardiac]

This is all I can say about our "highest rated player" theory. The following quote is from the article.
"The Cardinals hit on a couple themes in this draft. Emphasizing value was one. Targeting players with strong intangible qualities another. Singling out playmakers was also a priority. "
The staff said the same thing about Max Hall. I am sick of us using the word "intangibles". How about drafting for tangibles since they tend to win games.

This is an age old debate that should have been decided a long time ago. All those tangibles get Mallet drafted in the 3rd rd instead of the 1st. Randy Moss slides to the Vikings, does well for awhile but is that ticking time bomb and has "blown up" on the Vikings, Raiders, Vikings AGAIN, and was just nothing for the Titans. Even with the Pats and their strong longer room he finally popped off and was sent packing.

There are plenty of uber talented people who aren't in the NFL because they don't have the intangibles. Having physical skills are necessary but if the player doesn't have drive, dedication, toughness and heart then they can only go so far.

Maybe we just need to define intangibles better?

I also need to see the quote from anyone in the Cards FO that used the phrase strong intangible qualities.

 

[JeffGollin]

The Certitude is Breathtaking

Take a look at most if not NFL rosters, and you'll find a lot of guys you never heard of (Way to go, Peyton Hillis)!

What it all boils down to is that, when it comes to the draft, there are no set rules. (There may be probabilities that pan out more often than not, but there are plenty of exceptions. Guys like Hightower get drafted as late as the 5th round and guys like Steve Williams and AJ Jefferson don't get drafted at all).

What does that tell you? It tells you that, if you pass on Adrian Peterson in favor of Levi Brown, you bet wrong.

But, just as easily, Peterson could have gotten injured as expected and, who knows? Levi could have played LT on Day One and turned out to be All Pro. Or not.

You rolls your dice and takes your chances.

I think the correct approach to the BPA vs. Need issue is that the best you can do is be "site-specific" - i.e. to look past the ratings/numbers and dig down into what makes either of two choices tick. Sometimes (though not most of the time), your gut might point to the needs-guy over the BPA.

And even then, you won't always be right. I do believe that, in the long run, if you follow a BPA/Value philosophy, you'll be more right than wrong and will gradually raise the over-all talent on your football team to a higher level than if you usually put need over value.

There's a political dynamic in play here - If you're a GM, you can afford to follow a philosophy that gradually strengthens the overall value of your roster, but if you're a HC, if you bypass need in order to strengthen the overall long-term talent-level, you might be building a terrific team for your successor.

But back to fan-certitude. If Bill Belicheck were drafting for the Cardinals, we'd be trying to lynch him. He fills all those extra picks he gets mostly with guys you never heard of. Yet his teams are perennially in the playoffs. Maybe he and other guys know something about football and maybe we don't know as much as we think we do.

 

[187]

I really wanted Brooks Reed in round 2, but if the guy wasn't a spitting image of Clay Matthews when it comes to looks and his nonstop motor I don't think I would have been nearly as high on him. And I don't know how the hell you can say he is a better pass rusher than anyone on this roster when Schofield was a better college player and recorded a sack in each of the two games he started. Hopefully other teams sleep on Scho as hard as some of our fans are.

I also don't understand the hard on people have for Akeem Ayers. He is not a natural pass rusher and I've read on a few different sites that he might be better suited inside. Bruce Carter is coming off of an ACL tear and I don't know if targeting guys coming off of knee surgery to build your LB core is the greatest idea. Especially when you are taking them in round 2, Scho was great value in essentially the 5th round.

Not only that, but LSH is one of our best gunners on punt and kickoff coverage. Even if LSH doesn't get his 3-5 touches per game in the offense (and I don't think he's good for much more than that), he's going to make an impact and have a roster spot.

Russ is right about LSH returning kicks. Punts are much less physically risky than kickoffs are; no way you're putting your #5 overall pick out there to return kicks. :JasonSehorn:

I agree. LaRod is too damn valuable on special teams to not have a roster spot. He will get a handful of touches, return kicks, and continue to kick ass gunning on kick coverage.