Why do Cards need a cornerback?

[THESMEL]

Have you noticed the NFL is passing more? Everybody needs another top CB. How many 3 -3 wr formation plays to you plan to see next year? 70%?

Any how CB is the premium position to me even over QB. I would draft BPA regardless but Rolle was a miss at CB, Mcfad, Hood, Brown

 

[Goldfield]

I think Hood was prety good his first year. Then hiis play dropped off.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Have you noticed the NFL is passing more? Everybody needs another top CB. How many 3 -3 wr formation plays to you plan to see next year? 70%?

Any how CB is the premium position to me even over QB. I would draft BPA regardless but Rolle was a miss at CB, Mcfad, Hood, Brown

Or you could get a pass rusher which we desperately need, and plug away the nickel back slot with a solid veteran. The Ravens have been doing this for years with very good results, and you see them using premium picks on front seven players.

A better pass rush makes your pass defense better.

 

[Chopper0080]

Or you could get a pass rusher which we desperately need, and plug away the nickel back slot with a solid veteran. The Ravens have been doing this for years with very good results, and you see them using premium picks on front seven players.

A better pass rush makes your pass defense better.

OK, but the best pass rusher who would fit as a 3-4 OLBer has size issues, and the other option at #5 has never player standing up, hasn't played in a year, and has only produced more than 2 sacks in a college season once.

With those sorts of issues, I will take the stud CB who has great size, can contribute in both return games, and will at worst contribute in nickel packages.

 

[Hypothesis]

There are far more quality CB's in this draft than there are quality pass rushing OLBs. Not too mention that when FA starts, yes I said when, there are some pretty good quality FA CB's that should hit the market.

 

[DoTheDew]

Even if Peterson is literally the BPA, I still don't take him. Two teams in the last 3 years have gotten to the SB with Bryant McFadden starting. I think BPA needs to be renamed, biggest impact player available.

The elite teams win with elite QBs and sick pass rushes. Look at the SB winners and that is the constant theme among all of them. Until a team gets both of those things, it chances of winning the Lombardi trophy are slim. Plenty of teams have won the big game with CBs no better than DRC and Toler. But no team in the 2000s has won it with as bad a pass rush as we had and as bad of QBs as we've had.

CB, WR, TE, RB...these are luxury picks. QB and 4-3 DEs/3-4 OLBs are the foundation of winning in this pass happy football era.

 

[ARodg]

BPA(APN)

Best Player Available (At a Position of Need)

 

[PJ1]

Even if Peterson is literally the BPA, I still don't take him. Two teams in the last 3 years have gotten to the SB with Bryant McFadden starting. I think BPA needs to be renamed, biggest impact player available.

The elite teams win with elite QBs and sick pass rushes. Look at the SB winners and that is the constant theme among all of them. Until a team gets both of those things, it chances of winning the Lombardi trophy are slim. Plenty of teams have won the big game with CBs no better than DRC and Toler. But no team in the 2000s has won it with as bad a pass rush as we had and as bad of QBs as we've had.

CB, WR, TE, RB...these are luxury picks. QB and 4-3 DEs/3-4 OLBs are the foundation of winning in this pass happy football era.

Good post. Sums it up nicely.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Maybe, but when you're drafting in the Top 5, it makes more sense to take the best player on the board regardless of need in the hope that he becomes a cornerstone for your franchise. The Cards made that mistake in taking Levi Brown over Adrian Peterson.

Or I would argue taking Levi Brown over Patrick Willis, who is the lynchpin of a very defense. Adrian Peterson isn't that much more valuable than a RB found on day two. Rarely will you get a LB as good as Patrick Willis on day two. The last Patrick Willis was Ray Lewis.

But looking at NFL rosters I don't see many CBs that are the cornerstones of NFL franchises. You could argue that Woodson is or Revis is, but that's a matter opinion. IMO neither have the impact of a top pass rusher.

Look at the Steelers: After the 1999 season they had rookie Troy Edwards as their leading receiver after only starting 6 games and Heinz Ward. They drafted Plaxico Burress 8th overall (people forget what a stud Plaxico was when he came out--he was the prototype for Larry Fitzgerald). In 2003 Touchdown Tommy Maddox had more passing yards than he did when he was Comeback Player of the year, and they drafted Ben Roethlisberger. Maddox was only 32 at the time.

Troy Edwards was obviously, even a year after he was drafted, was NOT a very good receiver. The Steelers still needed a top WR. And the Steelers had few holes making WR still probably their greatest need. They aren't drafting in the same position of the 2011 Arizona Cardinals (a team with many holes IMO).

Again, Tommy Maddox was not the answer, but the Steelers were also in the position that they could gamble on Rapelisberger because they had a solid team with few holes. QB was probably the Steelers greatest need.

I'm not saying that the Cards should draft Peterson 5th overall because of this, of course, but I'm saying that if Peterson is CLEARLY the top remaining prospect (the way that Adrian Peterson was at the time) when the Cards go on the clock, they shouldn't hesitate to draft him, if only because DRC is going to be in a contract year in 2013.

Even with all the debates back and forth, I still see that in the case of the Steelers, they still addressed their greatest need when drafting in the top 10. What set them apart from other teams drafting in the top ten, is that they already had a good team that was subject to a down year.

Teams drafting near the back of the first round are looking more at BPA since the salaries at that point in the first round are reasonable and they generally don't need the player to start immediately and be an impact player.

Teams that struggle generally aren't struggling because they've missed on first rounders. The Bengals, Lions, Cardinals, etc are struggling because they frequently miss on players selected after the first round.

 

[Krangodnzr]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_NFL_Draft

Quick exercise: How many players drafted in the top ten were BPA? How many could also be viewed as positions of need? I'd argue that about the only player that was drafted in the top ten that was not a position of need for 2010 was CJ Spiller, who was pretty much a wasted pick during the 2010-2011 season since he was playing behind Fred Jackson.

 

[ARodg]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_NFL_Draft

Quick exercise: How many players drafted in the top ten were BPA? How many could also be viewed as positions of need? I'd argue that about the only player that was drafted in the top ten that was not a position of need for 2010 was CJ Spiller, who was pretty much a wasted pick during the 2010-2011 season since he was playing behind Fred Jackson.

Suh and McCoy were both BPA in my opinion.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Suh and McCoy were both BPA in my opinion.

But both picks were needs too. Both teams desperately needed playmakers on the defensive line. Even with the Lions really needing a LT, their need at DE/DT was much greater. The Lions at least have a guy with a pulse playing LT. If they had no one, I bet the probably consider taking Russell Okung instead.

It does beg the question that teams at the top are often times in a position where BPA also answers a position of need.

But if Bradford were available at #2, I seriously doubt the Lions take him, even though IMO Bradford is a better prospect than Matt Stafford ever has been.

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Even if Peterson is literally the BPA, I still don't take him. Two teams in the last 3 years have gotten to the SB with Bryant McFadden starting. I think BPA needs to be renamed, biggest impact player available.

The elite teams win with elite QBs and sick pass rushes. Look at the SB winners and that is the constant theme among all of them. Until a team gets both of those things, it chances of winning the Lombardi trophy are slim. Plenty of teams have won the big game with CBs no better than DRC and Toler. But no team in the 2000s has won it with as bad a pass rush as we had and as bad of QBs as we've had.

CB, WR, TE, RB...these are luxury picks. QB and 4-3 DEs/3-4 OLBs are the foundation of winning in this pass happy football era.

Good post.

Then who is the pick ?

 

[Chopper0080]

Even if Peterson is literally the BPA, I still don't take him. Two teams in the last 3 years have gotten to the SB with Bryant McFadden starting. I think BPA needs to be renamed, biggest impact player available.

The elite teams win with elite QBs and sick pass rushes. Look at the SB winners and that is the constant theme among all of them. Until a team gets both of those things, it chances of winning the Lombardi trophy are slim. Plenty of teams have won the big game with CBs no better than DRC and Toler. But no team in the 2000s has won it with as bad a pass rush as we had and as bad of QBs as we've had.

CB, WR, TE, RB...these are luxury picks. QB and 4-3 DEs/3-4 OLBs are the foundation of winning in this pass happy football era.

So then you would argue against the taking of Suh last year by the Lions, because DT is hardly an impact position? And, if he was (and turned out to be) the "biggest impact player" as you state is the need, how can you argue passing on Patrick Peterson who can be considered the best player in this draft?

 

[kerouac9]

Even with all the debates back and forth, I still see that in the case of the Steelers, they still addressed their greatest need when drafting in the top 10. What set them apart from other teams drafting in the top ten, is that they already had a good team that was subject to a down year.

Teams drafting near the back of the first round are looking more at BPA since the salaries at that point in the first round are reasonable and they generally don't need the player to start immediately and be an impact player.

Teams that struggle generally aren't struggling because they've missed on first rounders. The Bengals, Lions, Cardinals, etc are struggling because they frequently miss on players selected after the first round.

It comes down to how you evaluate the players on your team. If you look at the Arizona Cardinals roster and you see a good roster in a down year, then you're comfortable reaching up a few spots or taking a chance on a talent with some question marks with positional need in mind. If you look at the Arizona Cardinals roster and see a team that needs talent pretty much across the board, then you have to take the best player on the board and then build the team around that player.

The Cards made a mistake by choosing the former path with Levi Brown because they only had Warner for 3 more years, who carried the team on his shoulders and made Brown look better than he was.

The Cards made a good choice with Larry Fitzgerald because he's been with the team 6 years and has become the face of the franchise. Replace Levi Brown with an average player and the Cards are probably still two-time NFC West champions and one-time NFC Champions. Replace Larry Fitzgerald with an average player and the Cards are the Buffalo Bills or Carolina Panthers.

It's hard to read the roster right now for the long-term, which you HAVE to be looking at when you're picking in the Top 5 and signing your pick to a six-year deal. That's one of the reasons I'm trying to lock up as many players as I can right now (even players who are underperforming like Levi Brown) is that I am trying to decide whether this current roster can compete for NFC West titles for the next 5-10 years. What is this team going to look like in 3 years? Who are my core players? I'm not sure I know the answer to that question right now.

But you couldn't be more wrong about teams like Arizona, Detroit, and Cincy being bad because they miss in the first round. Detroit's last five first-rounders were Suh (stud), Stafford (brittle), Cherilus (average), Megatron (stud), Ernie Sims (off the roster). Add in Mike Williams and tell me whether they've developed their first-rounders. Cincy's last five first-rounders were Germane Gresham (incomplete), Andre Smith (not good), Keith Rivers (average), Leon Hall (very good and deeply underrated), Jonathan Joseph (very good and equally underrated). Add in David Pollack (out of the NFL) and tell me where their core of talent is.

Part of the reason these teams struggle is because they have to look for playmakers in free agency. You get your playmakers in the first two rounds and your role players after that. The Cards have gotten a handful of playmakers in their late rounds, but little actual depth from that position, and hardly any playmakers in the first two rounds.

 

[ARodg]

So then you would argue against the taking of Suh last year by the Lions, because DT is hardly an impact position? And, if he was (and turned out to be) the "biggest impact player" as you state is the need, how can you argue passing on Patrick Peterson who can be considered the best player in this draft?

Lol at Suh not getting a pass rush. What is 10 sacks?

I think the rarest breed of player in the NFL, is the DT/NT that get's a pass rush and is stout against the run. In today's NFL, the 3 down DT/NTs are Raji, Suh, and Ngata. Those players are exceptional not only because they prevent a defense from running in the A gaps, but they also provide a pass rush, and more importantly, they collapse the pocket preventing the QB from stepping up and avoiding the outside rush.

Matthews and Suggs excell tremendously from this because QBs are stuck farther back in the pocket so they can take a more looping route to the QB.

Suh is the only example recently that can be studied scientifically. Raji came into the league with Matthews and an already decent defense and Ngata joined the Ravens who were very good.

Suh is the only Lions rookie that played significant snaps on defense, so the comparison is pretty much with and without Suh

2009: 32nd in Yards Allowed, 29th in sacks, 25th Rushing yards per game, 32nd in passing yards per game.

2010: 21st in Yards allowed, 6th in sacks 24th Rushing yards per game, 16th in passing yards per game.

Before I looked at Detroit's and Suh's stats this year, I thought that Suh should have been second in DPOY behind Matthews. Once I looked, I realized that I am an unabashed homer and that Suh was the obvious choice except for the fact that: He's a rookie, his team was 6-10, he plays in Detroit.

I'm not saying that Suh is going to be the most dominant defensive player in the NFL for the next decade, but I'm not saying he won't be either.

There's a reason that Packer fans are clamoring to trade up for Pouncey and Moffit.

The reason that we lost to the Lions that game other than Rodgers being injured was because Suh dominated our O-Line. He consistenly beat Josh Sitton and Sitton was voted best O-Lineman in the NFL by the NFL Alumni. He went through the double team of Colledge and Wells every single time.

God forbid the Lions get a secondary that isn't historically awful or an O-Line that isn't hideous, because they have the pieces to be scary.

They are the Packers competition in the NFC North for the future, not the Bears with their aging defense or the hapless Vikings.

 

[Chopper0080]

Lol at Suh not getting a pass rush. What is 10 sacks?

I think the rarest breed of player in the NFL, is the DT/NT that get's a pass rush and is stout against the run. In today's NFL, the 3 down DT/NTs are Raji, Suh, and Ngata. Those players are exceptional not only because they prevent a defense from running in the A gaps, but they also provide a pass rush, and more importantly, they collapse the pocket preventing the QB from stepping up and avoiding the outside rush.

Matthews and Suggs excell tremendously from this because QBs are stuck farther back in the pocket so they can take a more looping route to the QB.

Suh is the only example recently that can be studied scientifically. Raji came into the league with Matthews and an already decent defense and Ngata joined the Ravens who were very good.

Suh is the only Lions rookie that played significant snaps on defense, so the comparison is pretty much with and without Suh

2009: 32nd in Yards Allowed, 29th in sacks, 25th Rushing yards per game, 32nd in passing yards per game.

2010: 21st in Yards allowed, 6th in sacks 24th Rushing yards per game, 16th in passing yards per game.

Before I looked at Detroit's and Suh's stats this year, I thought that Suh should have been second in DPOY behind Matthews. Once I looked, I realized that I am an unabashed homer and that Suh was the obvious choice except for the fact that: He's a rookie, his team was 6-10, he plays in Detroit.

I'm not saying that Suh is going to be the most dominant defensive player in the NFL for the next decade, but I'm not saying he won't be either.

There's a reason that Packer fans are clamoring to trade up for Pouncey and Moffit.

The reason that we lost to the Lions that game other than Rodgers being injured was because Suh dominated our O-Line. He consistenly beat Josh Sitton and Sitton was voted best O-Lineman in the NFL by the NFL Alumni. He went through the double team of Colledge and Wells every single time.

God forbid the Lions get a secondary that isn't historically awful or an O-Line that isn't hideous, because they have the pieces to be scary.

They are the Packers competition in the NFC North for the future, not the Bears with their aging defense or the hapless Vikings.

?

The point was being made that the Cardinals need to target players at "impact" positions. It was stated that "QB and 4-3 DEs/3-4 OLBs are the foundation of winning in this pass happy football era." I was pointing out that using this theory, the Lions would have made a mistake last year in drafting Suh which points out the flaw in this thinking.

At some point you have to acknowledge that some players can make impact plays at positions that aren't normally as valued. An example in this is the CB position. Today's rules make CB's more valuable in regards to the need for depth at the position, but devalue the top CB because the rules make it tough for a top CB to shut down a WR. However, this doesn't mean that you pass on a top prospect like Patrick Peterson just because they play CB.

As far as BPA as a draft theory, in principle it is a sound theory. You grade your players by production, potential, scheme fit, health, size and positional need. This generally will provide you with a list to work with. Any player grouping that is extremely close leads to "need" being the tiebreaker. So as the Cardinals rank their top 5 players, they are both considering the best player, but also using positional need as a tiebreaker for any close valuations.

 

[ARodg]

?

The point was being made that the Cardinals need to target players at "impact" positions. It was stated that "QB and 4-3 DEs/3-4 OLBs are the foundation of winning in this pass happy football era." I was pointing out that using this theory, the Lions would have made a mistake last year in drafting Suh which points out the flaw in this thinking.

At some point you have to acknowledge that some players can make impact plays at positions that aren't normally as valued. An example in this is the CB position. Today's rules make CB's more valuable in regards to the need for depth at the position, but devalue the top CB because the rules make it tough for a top CB to shut down a WR. However, this doesn't mean that you pass on a top prospect like Patrick Peterson just because they play CB.

As far as BPA as a draft theory, in principle it is a sound theory. You grade your players by production, potential, scheme fit, health, size and positional need. This generally will provide you with a list to work with. Any player grouping that is extremely close leads to "need" being the tiebreaker. So as the Cardinals rank their top 5 players, they are both considering the best player, but also using positional need as a tiebreaker for any close valuations.

The point is idotic because an elite NT is more valuable than an Elite OLB because the NT's effect is greater. The problem is that there are more (a lot more) Elite OLBs than there are NTs.

In face Elite NTs are so rare that there's no blueprint to build a defense around one, because it would be wasted time because you're chances of finding one in the draft is less than 1%. Honestly Elite NTs are rarer than Franchise QBs and the Cards know as well as anybody how rare those are. Where I would say that there are a dozen "elite" pass rushing OLBs that teams can scheme around, there are really only 3 elite NTs and Suh is the best of the bunch by a lot.

If I was starting a team and I had to choose between Suh and Clay Matthews, I would probably choose Suh because his effect on the run game is significantly higher, and his effect on the passing game is probably more because of the amount of pressure he causes because a QB can't step up into the pocket.

I'm guessing that your point is that OLBs are more importand but I'd say NT is just as important in the 3-4, and that it's foolish to discount the importance of said position.

An elite NTs value is probably second in effect on the game only to an elite QB.

An average NT is the 2nd or 3rd most valuable position on defense.

 

[Krangodnzr]

I'd argue that today's rules make cornerbacks less valuable, since they can't hit receivers down the field like they once could. What that means is that more and more, it's not as important to have one top guy, and is much more important to have 4 solid guys. Look at the Ravens model, the Steelers model, and the Packers model. Not a single first round pick by the team on the roster at cornerback.

Also from a cap economics, the Cardinals will struggle to carry two highly paid corners (once DRC gets his first big contract). It just doesn't make a lick of sense.

Spend money on the passrushers, since you can't spend a ton of money everywhere, plug in decent corners drafted later or acquired through free agency. That's the model I'd like to see the Cardinals follow.

I agree that NT is important, and we have a pretty good one in Dan Williams IMO. But I wouldn't say that they are more important than a good edge rusher since edge rushers make gamechanging plays.

 

[ARodg]

I'd argue that today's rules make cornerbacks less valuable, since they can't hit receivers down the field like they once could. What that means is that more and more, it's not as important to have one top guy, and is much more important to have 4 solid guys. Look at the Ravens model, the Steelers model, and the Packers model. Not a single first round pick by the team on the roster at cornerback.

Also from a cap economics, the Cardinals will struggle to carry two highly paid corners (once DRC gets his first big contract). It just doesn't make a lick of sense.

Spend money on the passrushers, since you can't spend a ton of money everywhere, plug in decent corners drafted later or acquired through free agency. That's the model I'd like to see the Cardinals follow.

I agree that NT is important, and we have a pretty good one in Dan Williams IMO. But I wouldn't say that they are more important than a good edge rusher since edge rushers make gamechanging plays.

Suh and Dan Williams might as well not even play the same position because Suh in addition to being a run stuffer provides a ridiculous pass rush (10 sacks)

The point I'm trying to make is that if you can find a NT who can get pressure on a QB he's more valuable than an OLB who provides the same pass rush.

The problem is that those guys are so rare, that there is no way to plan a defense around one because there are 2 or 3 in the entire league at the same time while there are a dozen elite OLBS.

 

[DoTheDew]

So then you would argue against the taking of Suh last year by the Lions, because DT is hardly an impact position? And, if he was (and turned out to be) the "biggest impact player" as you state is the need, how can you argue passing on Patrick Peterson who can be considered the best player in this draft?

Exceptions can be made for players that make a huge impact in the pass rush at other positions. Guys like Suh, or Warren Sapp/Eric Swann back in the day are equivalent to getting a Dwight Freeney or Clay Matthews as far as their impact. There are exceptions to every rule, but I just don't feel like taking a coverage guy is worthwhile if you give the QB all day to throw. The way the leagues rules are designed now, favor WRs in that situation. CBs are going to get called for penalties, or burned if they are forced to cover for too long. Now, if there were simply no top 10 pick quality pass rushers or QBs on the board where we were picking, then yes, Peterson would be worth considering.

 

[DoTheDew]

Good post.

Then who is the pick ?

Working on the assumption that there's no FA period before the draft this year, I'd wrestle between Von Miller, Robert Quinn, Aldon Smith, Cam Newton, or Blaine Gabbert. To me, the most "Whiz like" of those 5 are Gabbert, Miller, and Smith, in no particular order. I get the best feeling from Miller. That'd be my pick right now.

 

[Chopper0080]

The point is idotic because an elite NT is more valuable than an Elite OLB because the NT's effect is greater. The problem is that there are more (a lot more) Elite OLBs than there are NTs.

In face Elite NTs are so rare that there's no blueprint to build a defense around one, because it would be wasted time because you're chances of finding one in the draft is less than 1%. Honestly Elite NTs are rarer than Franchise QBs and the Cards know as well as anybody how rare those are. Where I would say that there are a dozen "elite" pass rushing OLBs that teams can scheme around, there are really only 3 elite NTs and Suh is the best of the bunch by a lot.

If I was starting a team and I had to choose between Suh and Clay Matthews, I would probably choose Suh because his effect on the run game is significantly higher, and his effect on the passing game is probably more because of the amount of pressure he causes because a QB can't step up into the pocket.

I'm guessing that your point is that OLBs are more importand but I'd say NT is just as important in the 3-4, and that it's foolish to discount the importance of said position.

An elite NTs value is probably second in effect on the game only to an elite QB.

An average NT is the 2nd or 3rd most valuable position on defense.

You do understand that I am agreeing with you right?

 

[Chopper0080]

I'd argue that today's rules make cornerbacks less valuable, since they can't hit receivers down the field like they once could. What that means is that more and more, it's not as important to have one top guy, and is much more important to have 4 solid guys. Look at the Ravens model, the Steelers model, and the Packers model. Not a single first round pick by the team on the roster at cornerback.

Also from a cap economics, the Cardinals will struggle to carry two highly paid corners (once DRC gets his first big contract). It just doesn't make a lick of sense.

Spend money on the passrushers, since you can't spend a ton of money everywhere, plug in decent corners drafted later or acquired through free agency. That's the model I'd like to see the Cardinals follow.

I agree that NT is important, and we have a pretty good one in Dan Williams IMO. But I wouldn't say that they are more important than a good edge rusher since edge rushers make gamechanging plays.

Keep in mind that of those three teams combined, they only have spent 2 1st round picks on OLB's. Also keep in mind that neither of those were a pick inside the top 10. (Suggs was drafted 10 so I am fudging a bit)

OLBer in a 3-4 is hard to draft high because it comes with such a "bust" risk. This is why I am so hesitant at taking one of the top 3 OLB's, because they all come with significant red flags. As far as Peterson and investing too much money in one position, that's bull. You never pass on the best player in the draft unless that player plays a position where only one is on the field at a time. We play 2 cbs almost every play, you can't ask for more of an impact than that.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Keep in mind that of those three teams combined, they only have spent 2 1st round picks on OLB's. Also keep in mind that neither of those were a pick inside the top 10. (Suggs was drafted 10 so I am fudging a bit)

OLBer in a 3-4 is hard to draft high because it comes with such a "bust" risk. This is why I am so hesitant at taking one of the top 3 OLB's, because they all come with significant red flags. As far as Peterson and investing too much money in one position, that's bull. You never pass on the best player in the draft unless that player plays a position where only one is on the field at a time. We play 2 cbs almost every play, you can't ask for more of an impact than that.

But in the past 3-4 years, like 8 teams have moved to a 3-4 and it's created much more a premium on 3-4 OLBs.

Not to mention we need an immediate impact at the position.

It's not that it comes with a high "bust" risk, it's just that it takes a specific type of player. Over the years, the Steelers actually found quite a few good 3-4 OLBs, probably more good ones than bad ones.

We can't afford to sink $20 million dollars into CB. That's not bull, it's smart economics.

And teams routinely pass on "best player available" which is fully subjective. Remember, the Cardinals viewed both Dan Williams AND D Washington as being better than where they were drafted, both as top 20 picks.

IMO BPA is not a real draft strategy that teams use. Much more often you see teams draft BPAPN (BPA at a Position of Need). Sometimes BPAPN intersects with BPA, but that's generally teams drafting in the top five that have lots of needs. The Cardinals do have lots of needs, but in some ways we're closer to the Steelers when they drafted Big Ben, with one glaring need at QB.