Murray Conversation: Sunk Cost/Future Risk

Jetstream Green

Kool Aid with a touch of vodka
Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Posts
29,461
Reaction score
16,602
Location
San Antonio, Texas
Crazy nonsense .

I think the chances which define this are Murray has a lesser percentage to be a special QB than Rosen has just to be a good QB. I'm in the Rosen boat but I can still see the 'what if' & if Murray is selected and does meet that great criteria... watch out :)
 

dscher

ASFN Icon
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Posts
12,909
Reaction score
7,802
Location
Mesa, AZ
The trade and draft of Rosen was a desperation move IMO. I was relieved they didn't mortgage the future for him by giving up the 2019 first or second round pick in the trade.

Neither quarterback is a slam dunk in the Andrew Luck mold. The only reason the Cardinals probably end up drafting Murray is the hire of Kliff Kingsbury.

If they do draft him, they better not trade Rosen for less than a first round pick this draft or 2020 . Rosen doesn't cost much and he's good
insurance if K.M. washes out early on.
That's the only reason I would want Murray in the first place...If we had Wilks I wouldn't even give it a second thought, Rosen all the way. Kingsbury literally drools when talking about this kid and we wouldnt allow the guy to pick him? If that's the case... Our front office is in shambles and doesn't operate like a top organization, which I don't think was ever in question. Lol .Jmo
 

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,681
Location
London UK
That's the only reason I would want Murray in the first place...If we had Wilks I wouldn't even give it a second thought, Rosen all the way. Kingsbury literally drools when talking about this kid and we wouldnt allow the guy to pick him? If that's the case... Our front office is in shambles and doesn't operate like a top organization, which I don't think was ever in question. Lol .Jmo

'Drolling' - not a good thing, as health practitioners would tell you.
 

slanidrac16

ASFN Icon
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2002
Posts
15,067
Reaction score
14,562
Location
Plainfield, Il.
Sal Palentinio (sp?) said something compelling. He said every successful team has a great headcoach/qb relationship. That theory screams we are taking Murray.
 

BW52

Registered
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
5,043
Reaction score
1,904
Location
crestwood,Ky
Sal Palentinio (sp?) said something compelling. He said every successful team has a great headcoach/qb relationship. That theory screams we are taking Murray.
So another talking head pontificates a vague statement and the Murray fanboys will lap it up like pablum.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,164
Reaction score
52,709
Imagine the same scenario for a bust.

In the scenario the Cardinals traded 2 firsts, a third, and a fifth for a franchise QB the Cardinals would still have Rosen so are you supposing both players bust.
 
OP
OP
Solar7

Solar7

Go Suns
Joined
May 18, 2002
Posts
11,084
Reaction score
11,874
Location
Las Vegas, NV
In the scenario the Cardinals traded 2 firsts, a third, and a fifth for a franchise QB the Cardinals would still have Rosen so are you supposing both players bust.
Not necessarily. Let's suppose Rosen only nets us back a 3rd or 4th rounder.

It's a pretty bad scenario here. And there's no guarantees in compensation yet. We're not really playing in a position of power - teams know we need to trade Rosen, and once a couple of those "interested" teams decide to go with a Haskins, Drew Lock, or walk away from the table, there could be one last team sitting there able to dictate all we're gonna get.
 

dscher

ASFN Icon
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Posts
12,909
Reaction score
7,802
Location
Mesa, AZ
So another talking head pontificates a vague statement and the Murray fanboys will lap it up like pablum.
Palentonio has been around forever and he is just making an observation. Just like you have been doing. I would personally love that as well.. like Palmer and Arians, Brees and Payton.. not saying Rosen can't have this with KK. But the chance that he would have something special with Murray is more likely. Jmo
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,164
Reaction score
52,709
Not necessarily. Let's suppose Rosen only nets us back a 3rd or 4th rounder.

It's a pretty bad scenario here. And there's no guarantees in compensation yet. We're not really playing in a position of power - teams know we need to trade Rosen, and once a couple of those "interested" teams decide to go with a Haskins, Drew Lock, or walk away from the table, there could be one last team sitting there able to dictate all we're gonna get.

I would not trade Rosen until the Cardinals are sure they have their franchise quarterback so under the originally proposed scenario the Cardinals would still have Rosen and Murray to show for 2 firsts, a third, and a fifth.

So both would have to bust to create a dire scenario. More likely, one of those two quarterbacks would succeed.
 
Joined
Aug 7, 2008
Posts
10,134
Reaction score
6,773
Location
Chandler
It's a gamble no matter what we do. I would rather walk away from the table with the money in hand vs bet it all on a million to one shot.
 
OP
OP
Solar7

Solar7

Go Suns
Joined
May 18, 2002
Posts
11,084
Reaction score
11,874
Location
Las Vegas, NV
I would not trade Rosen until the Cardinals are sure they have their franchise quarterback so under the originally proposed scenario the Cardinals would still have Rosen and Murray to show for 2 firsts, a third, and a fifth.

So both would have to bust to create a dire scenario. More likely, one of those two quarterbacks would succeed.
This is a scenario that would be disastrous and is highly, highly unlikely.

I'm not in the game of dismissing arguments or insulting, so I'll respect your thoughts and what you'd do if you were GM, but there is no scenario where this works out. Not mentally for the players, not in terms of Rosen demanding a trade, not in terms of getting players enough snaps. It's not happening.

Even if your scenario came true, two quarterbacks won't be on the field at the same time. It's not like grabbing another OLB or CB.

I still can’t get over ppl complaining about 3rd and 5th rd picks after Jonathon Cooper, DJ Humphries and Robert Nkemdiche.
When 3rd round picks turn into Tyrann Mathieu, David Johnson, and John Brown, or 5ths that turn into serviceable players that build the belly of a team with an awful roster, it's worth mentioning.
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
12,469
Reaction score
21,391
This is a scenario that would be disastrous and is highly, highly unlikely.

I'm not in the game of dismissing arguments or insulting, so I'll respect your thoughts and what you'd do if you were GM, but there is no scenario where this works out. Not mentally for the players, not in terms of Rosen demanding a trade, not in terms of getting players enough snaps. It's not happening.

Even if your scenario came true, two quarterbacks won't be on the field at the same time. It's not like grabbing another OLB or CB.
Yea, I’m not sure why he keeps suggesting that. This is not high school or even college.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,164
Reaction score
52,709
This is a scenario that would be disastrous and is highly, highly unlikely.

I'm not in the game of dismissing arguments or insulting, so I'll respect your thoughts and what you'd do if you were GM, but there is no scenario where this works out. Not mentally for the players, not in terms of Rosen demanding a trade, not in terms of getting players enough snaps. It's not happening.

Even if your scenario came true, two quarterbacks won't be on the field at the same time. It's not like grabbing another OLB or CB.

It worked out fine for the Cowboys. Players are not that fragile.

Comparing quarterbacks to OLB or CB is off the wall.
 
Top