Anybody here up for trading down?

[sundevil04]

Go

At #16 we're out of the elite prospect range and I can't say we reall yhave 1 guy we're going after. If we could trade down and pick up another mid round pick, we can still taget one of the prospects mentioned frequently...
Talib
Cason
Stewart
Mendenhall
etc.
thoughts...
________
Vaporite whip

 

[imaCafan]

What I've found a bit interesting is when I look at some of the mocks out there, I'll get excited about a guy projected to go to us (like Talib or Stewart) then the next mock has him at #25, then the next at #7, then #12, then #22, and so on. Apart from the top 6-8 picks, the next 20 or so are all jumbled around. Question: is the talent that close in the mid to lower first round, or is this a matter of early mocks not knowing much about the players yet????

 

[Cards Czar]

It depends on what team is enamered with. It could be a snow ball effect. If Houston likes a RB that they think the Cardinals like they might move up to 14-15 to get that palyer. If dallas wants F. Jones they might move up to get him. Settle now is in a hard spot. Would they move up also the get there RB or wait and get a TE??

What a great time of the year to ponder that.

 

[BigRedMO]

Trading up or down to get the players you need is defintely a tool that the Cards dont use. It appears to me advocates of BPA think that you are locked on to a certain player or need solely by draft position. I dont want a RB with picks 1 or 2. A net increases in yards of 200-400 yards over James does not excite me. It seems BPA advocates act like who ever comes up at your current draft position is who you take whether you need him or not.

Would NE take a QB if that was the BPA when their time came to pick? If they did there would be riots in NE. Also, there is no consensus on the order of players by BPA criteria. What appears to be BPA now is not BPA a few years later. Brady was a 6th round pick I believe. He was the BPA in the year he was drafted but nobody identified him as such.

Yes to consideration of draft repositioning.

 

[TigToad]

cards use

Cards have used this, in my uninformed opinion, as much as most teams.

Last year, we traded up in the second round to get Branch.. at the time, I thought it was a good move.

About 5 years back we all remember the unfortunate pass on Terrell Suggs for Johnson/Pace fiasco by trading down in the first round... it really wasn't that bad of a trade either, we just wasted the two picks.

Then of course, a few drafts before that we traded out of the #1 spot, passing on that Tomlinson guy so we could draft Leonard Davis #2. Another trade, which at the time, didn't look that bad.

Cards haved used it... just not been as fortunate in the results as the people we traded with.

Trading up or down to get the players you need is defintely a tool that the Cards dont use. It appears to me advocates of BPA think that you are locked on to a certain player or need solely by draft position. I dont want a RB with picks 1 or 2. A net increases in yards of 200-400 yards over James does not excite me. It seems BPA advocates act like who ever comes up at your current draft position is who you take whether you need him or not.

Would NE take a QB if that was the BPA when their time came to pick? If they did there would be riots in NE. Also, there is no consensus on the order of players by BPA criteria. What appears to be BPA now is not BPA a few years later. Brady was a 6th round pick I believe. He was the BPA in the year he was drafted but nobody identified him as such.

Yes to consideration of draft repositioning.

 

[Jetstream Green]

hell no, for us Cardinals it just seems to spell doom...though the mighty Q was a second rounder

 

[slanidrac16]

I don't see us trading down simply for the fact that the needs we have will be able to be met at 16. Whether it's a pass rusher, rb, cb, or ot, a quality player will be available.

 

[BigRedArk]

Then of course, a few drafts before that we traded out of the #1 spot, passing on that Tomlinson guy so we could draft Leonard Davis #2. Another trade, which at the time, didn't look that bad.

Cards haved used it... just not been as fortunate in the results as the people we traded with.

I don't remember us making this trade. Who did we trade with? I don't remember us having a chance to take Tomlinson.

 

[football karma]

Then of course, a few drafts before that we traded out of the #1 spot, passing on that Tomlinson guy so we could draft Leonard Davis #2. Another trade, which at the time, didn't look that bad.

Cards haved used it... just not been as fortunate in the results as the people we traded with.

the Cards were never at the #1 spot

they were at #2, and stayed at #2 and took Davis

 

[joeshmo]

If we were in the range to grab a blue chipper I would normally said just say no(unless Ditka is offering you his whole draft), but in no mans land at #16 why the heck not.

 

[outcent13]

Thats right because we were talking about taking either Davis or the wideout from Michigan. We had taken Jones a year or two earlier and weren't going to take Tomlinson. One other thing from that draft that was interesting is a lot of people liked Hutchinson out of that draft but thought it was to high for a gaurd.LOL San Diego actually traded out of number one to number 5.

 

[earthsci]

Trading up or down to get the players you need is defintely a tool that the Cards dont use. It appears to me advocates of BPA think that you are locked on to a certain player or need solely by draft position. I dont want a RB with picks 1 or 2. A net increases in yards of 200-400 yards over James does not excite me. It seems BPA advocates act like who ever comes up at your current draft position is who you take whether you need him or not.

400 more yards would have given us the 3rd leading offense in the NFL. Count me as excited by that prospect.

You are misunderstanding, or overly simplifying, how BPA advocates wish to draft. Personally, if the players grade closely, there is no problem with selecting the player that is graded lower to account for need.

I'm not saying that this is the case, just an example. Our turn to draft. We need an OLB/DE. Our pass rush sucks. There has just been a run on OLB/DE and the best one left grades as a second rounder. I hope that we don't draft that OLB/DE. Do you think that we would regret drafting a RB who turned out to be one of the better in the NFL? I hope that we can draft a good OLB/DE. I think that it is a high priority for this team to upgrade that position. I just don't want to pass on a true impact player to get what we need.

Would NE take a QB if that was the BPA when their time came to pick? If they did there would be riots in NE. Also, there is no consensus on the order of players by BPA criteria. What appears to be BPA now is not BPA a few years later. Brady was a 6th round pick I believe. He was the BPA in the year he was drafted but nobody identified him as such.

Tom Brady was a 6th rounder. Terell Davis was a 6th rounder. Bart Starr was a 17th rounder. Do you think that we should abandon the first five rounds? Of course not. If you look at Hall of Fame players, first rounders make up a higher percentage of them than any other round. The earlier rounds, where you find the higher graded players, are where your chances of finding a great player are the best.

 

[joeshmo]

Cards have used this, in my uninformed opinion, as much as most teams.

Last year, we traded up in the second round to get Branch.. at the time, I thought it was a good move.

About 5 years back we all remember the unfortunate pass on Terrell Suggs for Johnson/Pace fiasco by trading down in the first round... it really wasn't that bad of a trade either, we just wasted the two picks.

Then of course, a few drafts before that we traded out of the #1 spot, passing on that Tomlinson guy so we could draft Leonard Davis #2. Another trade, which at the time, didn't look that bad.

Cards haved used it... just not been as fortunate in the results as the people we traded with.

I think you are thinking of the 1998 Leaf/Wadsworth trade. Went from #2 down to #3.

We also tried to trade up from our 2nd rounder to get Chris Gamble at the end of the first round but the Niners shut us down and took a slightly lower package from another team because we were in their division.

 

[BigRedArk]

. I dont want a RB with picks 1 or 2. A net increases in yards of 200-400 yards over James does not excite me. It seems BPA advocates act like who ever comes up at your current draft position is who you take whether you need him or not.

Yes to consideration of draft repositioning.

We need to add speed to the offense. We need a home-run/big play/"take it to the house" type of player on offense either at RB or WR.
Doing so could hopefully make our Offense even more dangerous and unpredictable and thereby hopefully keep the opposing "D" on their collective heels perhaps.
We could also stand to improve the depth at RB as well. I'm not sure which round you take this guy in but it seems like it should be high priority along with bolstering the Defense.

 

[joeshmo]

400 more yards would have given us the 3rd leading offense in the NFL. Count me as excited by that prospect.

And that fact it would improve the passing game for Matt, make it easier for him, more TD's, better time of possesion keeping the D off of the field and putting away games in the 4th quarter eating up the clock not putting it on our D's shoulders. That last thing alone would have won us 2 or more games this season.

25 more rushing yards a game is huge. Thats something like a 33% increase which is huge.

 

[TigToad]

sorry

Sorry, I screwed up my history. This was before I was avid... Its my bad.

I think you are thinking of the 1998 Leaf/Wadsworth trade. Went from #2 down to #3.

We also tried to trade up from our 2nd rounder to get Chris Gamble at the end of the first round but the Niners shut us down and took a slightly lower package from another team because we were in their division.

 

[CardShark]

It would be nice if someone posted a thread with the trade value chart and it was stickied.

As for trading down right now, I would take Dallas' two firsts for our #16. I don't know if that works out on the chart because there is no chart to look at!

 

[football karma]

It would be nice if someone posted a thread with the trade value chart and it was stickied.

As for trading down right now, I would take Dallas' two firsts for our #16. I don't know if that works out on the chart because there is no chart to look at!

it doesnt (from value to Dallas perspective) by a long shot

 

[DaisyCutter]

It depends on whether or not a team passes on an elite talent, which I suppose is possible. If a team passes on a player (say his name were "Adrian Peterson") and instead drafted for need (say "Levi Brown"), then I like the position we'd be in.

But I think where we're likely looking to upgrade--namely OT, DE/OLB, CB, you're going to get nearly equivalent value at 20 or even 25 as you could get at 16. It certainly sounds like a good idea on paper.

On the bright side, I think that the Cards could be in the position to offer a team the top prospects at WR and maybe even QB in trade. Could be a good deal.

 

[Goodyear Card]

I usually like trading down if a player you have targeted in the first round is not available but this year I don't think we should trade down. Of course we usually have a higher pick. We should be in a good position to select a quality player with the 16th pick. Our biggest needs IMO are CB, OLB/DE, and OT and hopefully someone we slip in the draft and we will be able to fill a position of need.

 

[BigRedMO]

400 more yards would have given us the 3rd leading offense in the NFL. Count me as excited by that prospect.

You are misunderstanding, or overly simplifying, how BPA advocates wish to draft. Personally, if the players grade closely, there is no problem with selecting the player that is graded lower to account for need.

I'm not saying that this is the case, just an example. Our turn to draft. We need an OLB/DE. Our pass rush sucks. There has just been a run on OLB/DE and the best one left grades as a second rounder. I hope that we don't draft that OLB/DE. Do you think that we would regret drafting a RB who turned out to be one of the better in the NFL? I hope that we can draft a good OLB/DE. I think that it is a high priority for this team to upgrade that position. I just don't want to pass on a true impact player to get what we need.

Tom Brady was a 6th rounder. Terell Davis was a 6th rounder. Bart Starr was a 17th rounder. Do you think that we should abandon the first five rounds? Of course not. If you look at Hall of Fame players, first rounders make up a higher percentage of them than any other round. The earlier rounds, where you find the higher graded players, are where your chances of finding a great player are the best.

You are counting on a rookie RB getting 1,600 yards. That would be an exceptional season. I am more interested in points than yards anyway. The Cards scored the third most points in the NFC last year. The team scores enough points but allowing the third most in the NFC makes it very difficult to move beyond .500.

I would regret a great RB if the defense still sucks. The Cards made their move into competitiveness when their defense was playing. Injuries happened and the defense went in to the tank with the Cards losing to teams they should have beat. The team needs more players on defense before we think about replacing parts that already work. Gore owned the Cardinals in the second game. If a team can run at will against the Cards next year it does not matter who is RB. The teams that gave NE problem were teams that could put Brady on his back. Upgrading the pass rush and run defense is what the team needs to focus on.

 

[DoTheDew]

It's too early to make decisions like that. See what happens in free agency and with the combine and the answer will be more clear. The nice thing with trading down (or up) is if you do it right, you can make need and BPA be the same thing.

 

[BigRedMO]

The nice thing with trading down (or up) is if you do it right, you can make need and BPA be the same thing.

Exactly.

 

[BigRedMO]

For the first time in forever the Cardinals have a RB get 1,200 yards rushing and that is not good enough. Where was the push for a RB in the first round all those other years?

 

[CardShark]

You are counting on a rookie RB getting 1,600 yards. That would be an exceptional season. I am more interested in points than yards anyway. The Cards scored the third most points in the NFC last year. The team scores enough points but allowing the third most in the NFC makes it very difficult to move beyond .500.

I would regret a great RB if the defense still sucks. The Cards made their move into competitiveness when their defense was playing. Injuries happened and the defense went in to the tank with the Cards losing to teams they should have beat. The team needs more players on defense before we think about replacing parts that already work. Gore owned the Cardinals in the second game. If a team can run at will against the Cards next year it does not matter who is RB. The teams that gave NE problem were teams that could put Brady on his back. Upgrading the pass rush and run defense is what the team needs to focus on.

Add in the CB positions and I agree 100%.