Dayman
ASFN Addict
So you are just going to conveniently leave out the other moves that happened that offseason like Arians replacing Whisenhunt, Palmer replacing Kolb/Skelton, Dansby replacing Lenon, etc?
Super hot take, dude.
Would you trade Budda?
- Thread starter BritCard
- Start date
Super hot take, dude.
I think that's what he means (in general), is that safety is a less impactful position compared to ones you pointed out (and in general).
Yeah I'm going to leave them out considering the whole point is that you can replace a star safety and not notice any difference and even get better by using that money elsewhere. As we did when we cut A-Dub.
That's two Ackshually fails in two days for you. Take some time off.
PJ1
ASFN Icon
What team? Without DHOP, Budda and a good draft this team beats nobody 40-7.
QuebecCard
ASFN Addict
Ok - subtract a Dhop TD scored and a Budda TD prevented = 33 - 14
kerouac9
Klowned by Keim
Dayman
ASFN Addict
A-Dub's contract had nothing to do with Arians taking over for Whisenhunt. It also wasn't forcing us to save face on the Kolb trade rather than moving on to a vet like Palmer. Have fun on your victory lap, though.
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
Lol. Based on what, exactly?!?
This thread is pretty Emo. You'd think Budda was carrying the team. Anyone thinking we can't get better by moving on only needs to look at 2013.
If people can't see that signing Josh Johnson (for example) and redistributing the $10m+ cap saved this year and $14m saved next year into other more crucial positions can make us better I don't know what to tell you.
Hell we might get better just by moving Simmons to SS and Thompson to FS and spending the Budda cash at CB.
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
We get objectively worse moving on. There's no way, shape, or form of denying that. Can we later, someday be better with picks and other players? It's possible. Not likely. Unless you're penciling in that famous player Cap Space as a pro bowler.
It depends how you distribute the resources.
You can EASILY get better. You take the $24m you free up the next 2 years and invest it in a more crucial position and get a pick or 2 in the draft.
Moving on from Budda and using that money on say, Marcus Peters, John Johnson III and drafting Brian Branch with the pick makes you better.
Taking the money draft capital from Budda and use it on Frank Clarke, draft Will McDonald or Ojulari while moving Simmons to safety. Makes us better.
You could take the resources from Budda and add Matt Ioannidis, Adrian Amos, Shelby Harris and draft DJ Turner. And get better.
You don't even have to get that creative.
I'm sure you want to say "We could do that anyway with the cap we have AND keep Budda" but that's not the point. The point is how you can be better without Budda using those resources on positions of more importance.
DVontel
ASFN Icon
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2015
- Posts
- 13,314
- Reaction score
- 23,940
What the hell is this even based on lol
Stout
Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Losing BB today makes us significantly worse on defense. What you state as fact, which is in reality mere speculation, are plans that maybe, down the road, if they bear fruit and if everything works out, make us as good as or better than we were with BB. Cap space doesn't do jack but provide options. Options don't always pan out. Draft picks are very hit or miss, often on the miss side. FAs don't always work out, and you need ownership and management willing to spend on those FAs. We don't, as it stands.
Bottom line: Losing/trading BB makes us worse. We hope we can be better in the future without him.
PJ1
ASFN Icon
I suggest you look at this pile of crap being assembled for the upcoming season.
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
Luxury
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
Actually, it’s precisely the point. The budda situation isn’t an either/or proposition as you’re attempting to frame it. You know that, as you’ve acknowledged it, but that reality causes your argument to fail.
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
Nothing really. This is the Brit way. Conjure up potential situations that have flimsy support of accuracy or success and state it as definitive. Nothing that Brit types in that write up can be accurately predicted a) because there’s zero chance of predicting an individual being available at a certain draft pick; b) that said draft will produce anything; c) that said free agents may have any desire to play for the cardinals; d) that they’ll do so at Brit’s projected salary; and e) whether the combination would produce better play than the combination of budda and whatever other players that the team would field in lieu of Brit’s choices is complete conjecture. Could any of it happen? Sure. Is there likelihood of a) - e) all coming together? Not really.
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
Correct. At the present juncture we objectively have less talent on the roster having lost Murphy and Allen and brought in white than in 2022. The rest of the signings could bear fruit, but there’s little in their respective histories to suggest there’s a likelihood of same. If we trade/lose budda we take a step further in the direction of less talented roster.
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
Cmon we are building a monster roster of special teamers and sub-average offensive linemen! They’ll be lead by a backup QB for likely half/most of the season.
You don't just replace a special player like Budda:
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
I understand the sentiment and Budda is great for a lot of reasons. I don't want him to go.
At the same time I don't think that's true. I can state a similar recent example with a DB when the Jets traded Revis to the Bucs. Revis was 27 and a far better player than Budda.
The Jets went 6-10 in 2012 with Revis. They traded him for pick #13 which was Sheldon Richardson. Richardson won DROY and was a Pro Bowler in his 2nd year.
The Jet's went 8-8 the year after the trade.
That is pure conjecture.
There is no way you can equate trading Revis as resulting in two extra wins. There are just too many variables.
Well thats kinda my point. There are hundreds of variables way beyond "We get better or worse depending if this one player is here or not". No single player makes you better or worse. It's a team game.
You said we can't get better trading Budda but the Jets did get better trading a far better Revis. So it can happen. There are definitely ways we could be better with the $24m saved from Budda and some draft picks.
Edit
I can even see a scenario where we trade Budda and get no worse with what we have. Move Jalen to free safety and Simmons to SS. I've always thought Simmons a better fit there and if he can finally find his niche Simmons could develop into a star similar to A-Dub.
Last edited:
Ouchie-Z-Clown
I'm better than Mulli!
This just isn’t true. A single player does make you incrementally better or worse. It might be bolstered or engulfed by the success/failure of other aspects of the team, but the performance of each individual player is what ultimately builds the success or failure of the team. So your example has little relevance, if any.
If the move of Simmons in place of budda bears fruit it could be an improvement, but that would also be predicated on the success in replacing Simmons at his old position, or where he could be used elsewhere in gannon’s defense. In essence you’re betting that moving Simmons and finding his replacement will be better in the aggregate than keeping budda and keeping Simmons where he is.
To put it into general terms, you are betting that changing a heretofore underperforming players position plus an unknown will be better than a multi-year all pro, in his prime plus said underperformer will net to the plus side of the equation. Could that happen? Of course. The likelihood of success? Seemingly very small.
