The Cost of Trading Up

[Stout]

uh....that was sarcasm......

Ha, like I said, I misquoted you

 

[Solar7]

I think it’s great that we agree as you perfectly underline my point. I have my view on what a so-called game manager is, and you have your view on what a so-called game manager is. I think Tom Brady is playing and utilizing his strengths within the system, and thus is managing the game which would qualify him as a game manager. Quarterbacks that can change the game by improvising is extremely rare. I don’t think it is bad to be a game manager. You do, and that is fine.

I've gotta bring this to the rest of the board, because you're the only one who defines game manager this way.

Well, you wrote that you considered it reaching so I based my response on that. Not wanting to pay the prize is an entirely different matter, and not what I thought we were discussing.

I slightly feel like it may be a reach if four QBs go in the top 5, because I can't imagine all are the top players on the board, but I understand the premium on the position, so I wouldn't be mad with what I consider a slight reach if we were already in that area without trading.

Also, would you please tell me about all the great first round draft selections in Cardinals history. You can just go back the five years that Steve Keim has run the draft. Not that I am ready to call Bucannon, Humphries, Nkemdiche or Reddick busts, but they have hardly been game changers either.

In Arizona Cardinals history, Larry Fitzgerald is probably the greatest player to put on a Cardinals uniform, and Patrick Peterson has never missed a Pro Bowl (and hasn't had to rely on being an alternate) and will likely eventually be a Hall of Famer. Not Keim picks, but outside of Levi Brown, 2/3 players we've picked in the top 5 in the "New Cardinals" era have been franchise-defining players. Levi Brown sucked. Keim's only had one shot at the top 10, and I feel we're going to be picking in the top 10 at least next year. I find it very hard to judge him on guys that have been picked through when he had very deep and talented rosters.

Come on, we both know that the Pro Bowl should not be used as seal of quality for anything. Way too much bias goes into selecting who are Pro Bowlers.

It's still a pretty decent indicator, especially at those percentages. What else would you use as a quality score for rounds? Even % of starters breaks down into the same basic breakup.

Also, once again I would encourage you to list all the first round draft pick Steve Keim has made that absolutely makes is essential to keep them.

Let's see what he does with high round picks. The reason the Patriots can trade out all the time is because their draft position isn't that good anyways. The difference between the back half of round 1 and the second round really isn't that different. Blue chip players go in the top 10. Also, if you don't trust Keim in the 1st round, why do you trust him to take a QB?

That’s right. Personally, I don’t think the Cardinals has won a lot by using your approach. I don’t want to belittle your posts but for a guy who uses history as an argument as much as you do, you sure seem to ignore a lot of the history that undermines your points.

Another thing is that you believe that guy will be there at #15. Again, that is an entirely different discussion, and it changes the foundation for this debate.

The Cardinals haven't done well, no. I'm not at all happy that they didn't try to draft guys like Derek Carr, and that they haven't taken a QB since Logan Thomas. But that's not my argument, that we should skip QBs - it's that we shouldn't so aggressively swing the other way because we feel pressure on our backs for not making the right moves in the past.

I don't really know that the right guy is going to be there at #15. Would I take a shot at Lamar Jackson there? Yes, but that doesn't mean I'm against us moving up to #8 if the right guy is there, or passing on Jackson entirely if the coaching staff doesn't believe.

Well, we can’t guarantee that Darnold will have the exact same numbers, so the question is kind of irrelevant. Like I said, you can’t predict the future. For all we know, Darnold could just as well lead a team to multiple Super Bowl wins and end up a first ballot Hall of Famer.

Sure. But we can't predict the future for any QB. Mike White could end up being a first ballot Hall of Famer after winning 8 Super Bowls with the Dolphins. We could be watching a 30 for 30 on him 20 years from now. But the expectations are markedly different between trading 6 picks to get up to #1 and picking a guy in the 3rd round.

 

[Gandhi]

In Arizona Cardinals history, Larry Fitzgerald is probably the greatest player to put on a Cardinals uniform, and Patrick Peterson has never missed a Pro Bowl (and hasn't had to rely on being an alternate) and will likely eventually be a Hall of Famer. Not Keim picks, but outside of Levi Brown, 2/3 players we've picked in the top 5 in the "New Cardinals" era have been franchise-defining players. Levi Brown sucked. Keim's only had one shot at the top 10, and I feel we're going to be picking in the top 10 at least next year. I find it very hard to judge him on guys that have been picked through when he had very deep and talented rosters.

That argument is dependent on the Cardinals having high picks the next couple of years. Again, we can’t predict the future. We can only control what to do right now. We don’t know what picks they will have in the future. We can say, though, that if they did give up some future picks to trade up and select a quarterback, they would surely do so with the intent of not having high picks for a long time. That said, now the argument becomes speculative instead of specific.

Another point I think is significant is that you highlight how good they have drafted in the top five, which you are right about, yet you don’t want them to select a prospect in the top five. I don’t understand that?

It's still a pretty decent indicator, especially at those percentages. What else would you use as a quality score for rounds? Even % of starters breaks down into the same basic breakup.

Well, I wouldn’t have scores. I think it is a much to static way to look at something as dynamic as the NFL. That’s also why I think in this specific case it is not relevant to use history from more than two or three years back as proof of anything. The NFL changes.

Also, if you don't trust Keim in the 1st round, why do you trust him to take a QB?

I never said I don’t trust Keim. You used history in some of your arguments, so I thought it was only fair to point out where history did not support your view.

The Cardinals haven't done well, no. I'm not at all happy that they didn't try to draft guys like Derek Carr, and that they haven't taken a QB since Logan Thomas. But that's not my argument, that we should skip QBs - it's that we shouldn't so aggressively swing the other way because we feel pressure on our backs for not making the right moves in the past.

Another way of looking at it is that whatever has happened in the past has brought the Cardinals to where they are now, and only once to the NFC Championship game in almost the last ten years. Continuing with that same approach could be seen as not learning from the past, and maybe even continuing to make the same mistakes over and over again.

I have no doubt that your approach could work, and if it did, it would be a lot more desirable than my approach. It just hasn’t work for the Cardinals yet, and I think it might be time to go in another direction.

 

[POISON]

This is where we disagree. How do you know that Darnold et al are appreciably better than Rudolph? Will Darnold and all those missing draft picks garner better results than Rudolph? Didn’t elevate USC to an NCAA title.

Darnold’s 2 Years:
64.9%. 7229yds. 8.5ypa 57td / 22int
Record 21-6

Rudolph 3+ Years:
63.2% 13618yds. 9.4yoa 92td / 26int
Record 30-9 (not counting 2014; only played in 3 games)

Based on the facts and not some arbitrary scouting grade, I don’t see much of a difference. And oh btw, Rudolph has shown to be a smart, tough, team leader that eats, sleeps, and breathes football. If that’s being “bad,” then I’ll take that everyday and at 1 or 2pm on Sunday’s.

Rudolphs stats are superior to Darnold, and a much better W/L record. I see Darnold failing as a NFL starter....

 

[Solar7]

That argument is dependent on the Cardinals having high picks the next couple of years. Again, we can’t predict the future. We can only control what to do right now. We don’t know what picks they will have in the future. We can say, though, that if they did give up some future picks to trade up and select a quarterback, they would surely do so with the intent of not having high picks for a long time. That said, now the argument becomes speculative instead of specific.

Another point I think is significant is that you highlight how good they have drafted in the top five, which you are right about, yet you don’t want them to select a prospect in the top five. I don’t understand that?

I don't want them to burn top draft picks to do it. I might give up what the Rams gave up a few years back... maybe. But I think the market is too strong this year and we have to give up too much. I also don't think we're getting ourselves out of top picks if we draft a QB. Odds are, Bradford and Glennon play the whole year.

Well, I wouldn’t have scores. I think it is a much to static way to look at something as dynamic as the NFL. That’s also why I think in this specific case it is not relevant to use history from more than two or three years back as proof of anything. The NFL changes.

I never said I don’t trust Keim. You used history in some of your arguments, so I thought it was only fair to point out where history did not support your view.

I guess in what I do for a living, the numbers are what I follow (even though I'm more of a creative type). If I'm a GM, I take the high percentage shots all the time, and very rarely do I make a move that's all or nothing. I view that as what some fans are asking us to do - lay it all on the line for one guy, and expect him to be the savior of our franchise, where I see the successful franchises never making that desperation, low-floor, high-ceiling move. But I can respect the history viewpoint, even if I don't think the amount of data is statistically relevant.

Another way of looking at it is that whatever has happened in the past has brought the Cardinals to where they are now, and only once to the NFC Championship game in almost the last ten years. Continuing with that same approach could be seen as not learning from the past, and maybe even continuing to make the same mistakes over and over again.

I have no doubt that your approach could work, and if it did, it would be a lot more desirable than my approach. It just hasn’t work for the Cardinals yet, and I think it might be time to go in another direction.

I think this team has taken many approaches. I'd like to see us risk some reasonable draft capital on a QB before we try the drastic measure, though. Why can't we just take some shots at guys and work on developing them? It seems like it's either 0% effort, or 120%, in the eyes of some ASFN posters.

 

[Gandhi]

I view that as what some fans are asking us to do - lay it all on the line for one guy, and expect him to be the savior of our franchise, where I see the successful franchises never making that desperation, low-floor, high-ceiling move. But I can respect the history viewpoint, even if I don't think the amount of data is statistically relevant.

You might be right about that, but the Cardinals are not much of a successful franchise. I agree, by the way, that taking the all-in approach are rarely a good idea. This time I believe it is, though, because of the circumstances.

You are also very right that the history from two or three years back are not statistically relevant. That’s why I don’t think you can take the high percentage shot in this instance. It simply doesn’t exist.

I think this team has taken many approaches. I'd like to see us risk some reasonable draft capital on a QB before we try the drastic measure, though. Why can't we just take some shots at guys and work on developing them? It seems like it's either 0% effort, or 120%, in the eyes of some ASFN posters.

Again, you are right, and I have no doubt that your approach would be much better than mine if the right quarterback would be there at #15. Maybe he is. Maybe the right quarterback is Mason Rudolph. It’s just that I wouldn’t count of that, and I believe that Sam Darnold, Josh Rosen or Josh Allen could in fact be franchise changers. That’s basically my whole point. I believe in those guys, and I want one of them with the Cardinals.

I think Stout had a good point in another thread about how the Rams aggressively acquired Jared Goff just two years ago, and how they on paper looks like very competitive right now.

 

[Solar7]

I think Stout had a good point in another thread about how the Rams aggressively acquired Jared Goff just two years ago, and how they on paper looks like very competitive right now.

We're probably coming to the end of our argument here, as we've both well stated our opinions and probably aren't going to change, but this season is going to be very telling for them. I don't think Goff and McVay, two players who are in the positions generally reserved for leaders, have the gravitas at their respective ages to keep some of the egos on that team in check. Talib and Suh, probably two of the worst offenders, are within months to a year of McVay's age. The first time things start going wrong, are they going to listen to the voice of a guy they could have played against and dominated in college?

If things gel, they're scary, but one year lost on that rookie deal before Gurley comes to be paid too is cutting it close for them.

 

[Gandhi]

We're probably coming to the end of our argument here, as we've both well stated our opinions and probably aren't going to change, but this season is going to be very telling for them. I don't think Goff and McVay, two players who are in the positions generally reserved for leaders, have the gravitas at their respective ages to keep some of the egos on that team in check. Talib and Suh, probably two of the worst offenders, are within months to a year of McVay's age. The first time things start going wrong, are they going to listen to the voice of a guy they could have played against and dominated in college?

If things gel, they're scary, but one year lost on that rookie deal before Gurley comes to be paid too is cutting it close for them.

That’s a great question. It will be very interesting to see if the situation should arise.