The choice is clear at 13

[football karma]

T

lets assume that Cam Robinson is judged to be far and away the best player sitting there at 13 --

you can move him inside to guard to start, fortify the O line, and protect yourself next year if another tackle goes down and/or when Veldheer's contract expires in 2 years

there is a logic to adding another o-line piece to a team with A. a stud RB and B. A QB that when protected, is really good

 

[AZfaninMN]

lets assume that Cam Robinson is judged to be far and away the best player sitting there at 13 --

you can move him inside to guard to start, fortify the O line, and protect yourself next year if another tackle goes down and/or when Veldheer's contract expires in 2 years

there is a logic to adding another o-line piece to a team with A. a stud RB and B. A QB that when protected, is really good

Especially in our offense, I couldn't agree more. Does anyone really think Dak and Zeke in Dallas are legitimate MVP candidates behind our offensive line? I don't. They're good, but not this good.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

No sir on the trade back. Perfect "Bird in the hand is better than 2 in the bush" situation.

If we are sitting there at #13 and we have Fournette and Hooker available.....you take Hooker. Because if you try to cash in on Fournette and trade back, you will lose hooker.

Hooker is far more valuable than the 2 players we get in that trade. Take the sure thing.

You originally mentioned Fournette and Cook available, not Hooker, which is why I suggested trading back.

Need I remind you of the Parable of Terrell Suggs? Id prefer not to. sensitive subject.

You really think this Keim is afraid to make trades (down) because of what Graves did? I sure hope not.

 

[Bodha]

You originally mentioned Fournette and Cook available, not Hooker, which is why I suggested trading back.


You really think this Keim is afraid to make trades (down) because of what Graves did? I sure hope not.

Im generally in favor of trading back, but not at the cost of losing a top tier player. And the lower youre drafting (down) the more valuable the players. If we are drafting #25, I dont care. #13? That guy might be a 12 year franchise cornerstone. The dropoff in talent from #13 to #20 is significant. Most drafts only have maybe 5 elite guys.

And thats my 2nd point. Theres about 5 elite guys in this draft: Garrett, Fournette, Adams, Hooker, Cook.

If you can get one of the 5 best guys at #13 and hes a need? You sprint to the stadium to take him.

If the guys available at #13 werent special, then trade back. But Hooker looks super special.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Im generally in favor of trading back, but not at the cost of losing a top tier player. And the lower youre drafting (down) the more valuable the players. If we are drafting #25, I dont care. #13? That guy might be a 12 year franchise cornerstone. The dropoff in talent from #13 to #20 is significant. Most drafts only have maybe 5 elite guys.

And thats my 2nd point. Theres about 5 elite guys in this draft: Garrett, Fournette, Adams, Hooker, Cook.

If you can get one of the 5 best guys at #13 and hes a need? You sprint to the stadium to take him.

If the guys available at #13 werent special, then trade back. But Hooker looks super special.

To use another crappy parable, we sprinted to the podium to pick Leinart. Again, that's the warning on using past drafts and GMs.

For the record, I don't think Hooker will be there. There is a better chance one of Cook/Fournette will be.

 

[Reign Blood]

lets assume that Cam Robinson is judged to be far and away the best player sitting there at 13 --

you can move him inside to guard to start, fortify the O line, and protect yourself next year if another tackle goes down and/or when Veldheer's contract expires in 2 years

there is a logic to adding another o-line piece to a team with A. a stud RB and B. A QB that when protected, is really good

Cooper 2.0

 

[82CardsGrad]

Pointless thread as Hooker will NOT be around come pick 13.

 

[Bodha]

To use another crappy parable, we sprinted to the podium to pick Leinart. Again, that's the warning on using past drafts and GMs.

This is a very odd point youre trying to make. "Since Matt Leinart was a bust, you shouldnt target the best players in the draft".


That isnt some past drafts superstition. Its just common sense. If you want the best players.....you try and draft the best players. Whether they bust or not is a mystery, but in general the top guys are usually pretty safe.

 

[Sunburn]

In constructing a building, foundation is the most important element. Without a strong foundation, everything else doesn't matter. The foundation of a football team is O line and D line.

 

[Cbus cardsfan]

Cooper 2.0

Why do you say that? I don't think he's anything like Cooper, who btw, was very highly regarded coming out. Cooper didn't have the inner desire to overcome his injury and has never been the same player since. That's why he failed, not ability. Look at it this way. He was starting from day 1 until injury and when has another rookie started from day 1 under Arians other than by injury, ala Williams.

 

[cardpa]

I think a true FS is one of the most important things this defense is missing. Neither Jefferson, Swearinger, or Mathieu are true FS. How many times did you see one of our CBs get beat and there was no help over the top?

 

[Reign Blood]

Why do you say that? I don't think he's anything like Cooper, who btw, was very highly regarded coming out. Cooper didn't have the inner desire to overcome his injury and has never been the same player since. That's why he failed, not ability. Look at it this way. He was starting from day 1 until injury and when has another rookie started from day 1 under Arians other than by injury, ala Williams.

We shouldn't waste another high draft pick on a Guard. Let's get a player that has a chance on touching the ball first.

 

[Finito]

We shouldn't waste another high draft pick on a Guard. Let's get a player that has a chance on touching the ball first.

Games are won in the trenches. I wouldn't mind drafting a guard if they were worthy. Just cause one guy was a bust you don't write off the whole position.

 

[Reign Blood]

Games are won in the trenches. I wouldn't mind drafting a guard if they were worthy. Just cause one guy was a bust you don't write off the whole position.

Don't you know that we all know this?

Let's gat an ILB or a CB. Or a qb.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

This is a very odd point youre trying to make. "Since Matt Leinart was a bust, you shouldnt target the best players in the draft".


That isnt some past drafts superstition. Its just common sense. If you want the best players.....you try and draft the best players. Whether they bust or not is a mystery, but in general the top guys are usually pretty safe.

I'm making the point of not that you shouldn't use past draft's bad decisions as a reason for not making future decisions. It is the same point I made earlier. Look at New England if you want to find a team that trades down consistently and is a better team for it.

 

[Finito]

Don't you know that we all know this?

Let's gat an ILB or a CB. Or a qb.

Like I said IF ONE WAS WORTHY

There isn't one in this draft

 

[Reign Blood]

Like I said IF ONE WAS WORTHY

There isn't one in this draft

Lol

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Games are won in the trenches. I wouldn't mind drafting a guard if they were worthy. Just cause one guy was a bust you don't write off the whole position.

I am with the Slayer fan on this one.

What the Cardinals need is a right guard. I would hope the Cardinals would try to address this in free agency. Normally your LT, RT, LG are the higher priced guards. A RG should not break the bank, and can be "solid" and not destroy an offensive line.

I have Larry Warford from the Lions circled as my top offensive lineman free agency for the Cardinals, and only behind Dont'a Hightower as my top free agent the Cardinals should keep an eye on.

Unless, Mitch Trubisky, DeShone Kizer, or Malik Hooker drop to the Cardinals, I can see them taking one of the multiple good cornerbacks coming out this year, or a linebacker of some sorts.

And I am one that would not blink to draft an offensive lineman in the first round, but unlike the last time with Cooper, who was drafted to play LG, I think the Cardinals can do better in free agency for the RG position.

EDIT: And that his point I would not know if there would be a "worthy" guard this draft, just generally speaking.

 

[Bodha]

I'm making the point of not that you shouldn't use past draft's bad decisions as a reason for not making future decisions. It is the same point I made earlier. Look at New England if you want to find a team that trades down consistently and is a better team for it.

New England is regularly drafting in the late 20's, at which point the talent dropoff is comparable to 2nd-3rd rounders, so trading back is of no consequence.

Lottery picks, top 15, are the 1% guys who most likely project to be franchise cornerstones. You dont get greedy and trade back if you have a potential franchise cornerstone in hand.

 

[Finito]

I'm making the point of not that you shouldn't use past draft's bad decisions as a reason for not making future decisions. It is the same point I made earlier. Look at New England if you want to find a team that trades down consistently and is a better team for it.

New England has Tom freaking Brady and for that reason is why they have so much success

 

[dreamcastrocks]

pick

New England is regularly drafting in the late 20's, at which point the talent dropoff is comparable to 2nd-3rd rounders, so trading back is of no consequence.

Lottery picks, top 15, are the 1% guys who most likely project to be franchise cornerstones. You dont get greedy and trade back if you have a potential franchise cornerstone in hand.

I do agree with you that there is a talent drop off drafting later in the first round than the middle, but I disagree with how much.

Either way, you have to treat each event individually. You shouldn't necessarily pick heads if you lost your last coin flip picking tails.

 

[Bodha]

Either way, you have to treat each event individually.

I agree. I am not hardline on anything. If at #13 all the 1% guys are gone, then of course trade back.

However, projecting the 2017 draft, there is a very good probability that somebody special might be there at #13. Be it Adams, Hooker, Wilson. Maybe all, maybe none. But if you have a shot at one, you take it 100%.

Any one of those 3 guys instantly becomes the 2nd or 3rd best player on our defense.

 

[Jetstream Green]

New England has Tom freaking Brady and for that reason is why they have so much success

And Belichick which cloaks a majority of their blunders by the front office... a great coach with a great QB

 

[JeffGollin]

Im generally in favor of trading back, but not at the cost of losing a top tier player. And the lower youre drafting (down) the more valuable the players. If we are drafting #25, I dont care. #13? That guy might be a 12 year franchise cornerstone. The dropoff in talent from #13 to #20 is significant. Most drafts only have maybe 5 elite guys.

And thats my 2nd point. Theres about 5 elite guys in this draft: Garrett, Fournette, Adams, Hooker, Cook.

If you can get one of the 5 best guys at #13 and hes a need? You sprint to the stadium to take him.

If the guys available at #13 werent special, then trade back. But Hooker looks super special.

The way to trade back:

Assume we pick #13. If the gap between the BPA on our board and the next guy is significant, we draft the BPA.

But if there are, say 5 players similarly rated from #13 to #17, be willing to trade back but not past #17. That way, you're guaranteed you'll get one player you really like.

If you're not thrilled with the BPA at #13, be willing to trade back for an extra pick or two (based on your draft value chart). How far you'd be willing to trade back depends on how willing you are to pass on fairly talented players (but not necessarily players you love) in order to stockpile picks later on.

 

[Garthshort]

I'd love to get Hooker, but in the Revenge of the Birds (Seth Cox) mock, he wasn't available at #13.