Fitz's value?

[DoTheDew]

If this contract issue can't be worked out, what do you think Fitz value is approximately? I'm gonna have my starting point be what the Raiders gave for Moss in 2005. A top 10 pick and a starting caliber player. Granted that trade didn't work out well for either team, but I think that is fair value for Fitz?

 

[RugbyMuffin]

Until the Cardinals give the go for Fitzgerald to seek a trade we really won't know.

I would not have imagined that Pace was going to get 44 mil but he did.

The Iggles little trade offer is nice, but I bet we could get much, much more from a more desparate team.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

If this contract issue can't be worked out, what do you think Fitz value is approximately? I'm gonna have my starting point be what the Raiders gave for Moss in 2005. A top 10 pick and a starting caliber player. Granted that trade didn't work out well for either team, but I think that is fair value for Fitz?

I have been arguing that Fitz is worth at least that much.

 

[DaisyCutter]

1. A troubled/former Pro Bowl player (a la Lito Sheppard) or an up-and-coming but developed prospect (a la Osi Umeniorya after his rookie season), a 2008 2nd round pick, and a 2009 second round pick that can be accelerated to a 1st should Larry Fitzgerald hit performance milestones (1500+ yds. receiving, 12+ TDs, Pro Bowl election).
2. 1st round pick (No. 11-25), solid starting caliber player (a la... hm... Calvin Pace or Antoine Winfield or Chad Clifton), 4th round pick.
3. 1st round pick (No. 26-32), 3rd round pick, experienced starter (a la Eric Steinbach, Daryl Smith, or Darren Sharper

I think any of these deals would bring back value for Larry Fitzgerald. I don't think that Fitz merits a Moss-type trade, first because the Moss trade was ill-advised, but second because I don't think that Fitz is the playmaker that Moss was.

 

[Pariah]

I have been arguing that Fitz is worth at least that much.

A balloon won't float when it's tied to a rock.

Fitz's contract reduces his value to a team, including ours. The Cardinals need to be prepared to take less.

 

[cardsfanmd]

A balloon won't float when it's tied to a rock.

Fitz's contract reduces his value to a team, including ours. The Cardinals need to be prepared to take less.

good anolgy


Aside from that, I dont want a top ten pick. Too much $ IMO.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

A balloon won't float when it's tied to a rock.

Fitz's contract reduces his value to a team, including ours. The Cardinals need to be prepared to take less.

I don't think his value reduces, if he agrees to a new contract. If he doesn't, I agree.

 

[abomb]

Mid-grade pro + 1st rounder and future second.

 

[Pariah]

I don't think his value reduces, if he agrees to a new contract. If he doesn't, I agree.

Sometimes it's like talking in circles with you, DCR. This is the post I responded to:

If this contract issue can't be worked out, what do you think Fitz value is approximately? I'm gonna have my starting point be what the Raiders gave for Moss in 2005. A top 10 pick and a starting caliber player. Granted that trade didn't work out well for either team, but I think that is fair value for Fitz?

I have been arguing that Fitz is worth at least that much.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

Sometimes it's like talking in circles with you, DCR. This is the post I responded to:

If a contract can't be agreed to by the Cards organization, doesn't mean that one wouldn't/couldn't be worked out with whatever organization that he is traded to. If he agrees to a new contract for the Cards, it's pretty pointless to get him to sign a new contract and then turn around and trade him right afterwards.

I feel the same way......about circles that is.

 

[Pariah]

For F's sake.

If a contract can't be worked out, he needs to be traded. With that contract around his neck like an anchor, the Cards need to be prepared to accept less than the top-10 pick and a starter you're proposing we demand. Otherwise, the Cards will go nowhere as a team, Boldin will justifiably hold up Ftz's contract and say "I want this," and ultimately we'll be left with neither when their contracts expire.

 

[red desert]

A balloon won't float when it's tied to a rock.

Fitz's contract reduces his value to a team, including ours. The Cardinals need to be prepared to take less.

Good post.

 

[LoyaltyisaCurse]

Mid-grade pro + 1st rounder and future second.

HINES WARD + 08 1ST + 09 2ND...SOUNDS GOOD TO ME...WARD WANTS OUT OF PITT...

 

[CtCardinals78]

Lito the and the Eagles first round pick OR
Lito the Eagles second round pick and a conditional pick in '09.

 

[Pariah]

HINES WARD + 08 1ST + 09 2ND...SOUNDS GOOD TO ME...WARD WANTS OUT OF PITT...

I don't think teams will go for the addition of the second rounder.

Ward (or a player like him) + 1 rd pick is a deal I'd jump at if I were the Cards. If the deal were done in a vaccuum, i'd be a horrible trade. But, with that contract hampering the Cardinals, I think it's pretty good.

 

[Pariah]

Lito the and the Eagles first round pick OR
Lito the Eagles second round pick and a conditional pick in '09.

That sounds good to me, too. Again, not because I think it's fair for Fitz, but because I thinks it's fair for fitz and his contract.

 

[CtCardinals78]

That sounds good to me, too. Again, not because I think it's fair for Fitz, but because I thinks it's fair for fitz and his contract.

I really believe Fitz does not want to be here. We should get something for him now while we can.

 

[DoTheDew]

I don't really see a trade happening anyway because most teams cant take a 14.5 million hit from Fitz and the signing bonus hit of whoever we take back. If it was Fitz for picks and some low priced players I could see it with a team that does still have space. Otherwise like DCR said it would only happen if he agreed to a sign and trade.

 

[HookemCards]

Fitz's trade value is pretty good to the Cardinals. What I mean by this is, as far as cap value goes there isn't a huge difference between trading him and restructuring him. Using Moss's contract as a baseline, 9mil per year, its only a difference of 3 mil for cap purposes. Obviously the other teams don't care about how it affects our cap, but from the Cards perspective it would have to be a good deal.

Keep one of the top WR in the league and trim 7 mill off the cap, or trade him and shave 10 mil and try to replace him with an below average WR FA crop and draft? I think you have to keep him unless you get a knock your socks off deal. A 1st, 3rd, and very good starting CB or OT/G.

 

[Pariah]

Keep one of the top WR in the league and trim 7 mill off the cap, or trade him and shave 10 mil

For me, at least, all of this trade talk is predicated on the eventuality of him NOT getting a new deal. So, by keeping him in that case, we're not "trimming" anything off the cap space. We're eating it...big time...to the tune of $14M this season.

If we can restructure him, it's a no-brainer that you keep him. That's what everyone wants.

 

[HookemCards]

If we can restructure him, it's a no-brainer that you keep him. That's what everyone wants.

Yeah, thats what I was saying in a round about way. Since you don't save much trading him, it would have to be a "blow you away" deal to trade him. So from the Cards perspective his trade value is very high.

 

[Pariah]

Since you don't save much trading him, it would have to be a "blow you away" deal to trade him.

But that's only if he gets restructured. And, if he gets restructred, he' probably not bing shopped for trades anymore. The only reason they're taking offers nor is because of the ungodly contract.

It really comes down to this, IMO:

Restructered Fitz=Keep
Bad Contract Fitz=Trade for what you can get