IF Cards gave our R1 & some combo of '22s Rs 1, 2, &/or 3, who would they be trading up for?

Discussion in 'Arizona Cardinals' started by SissyBoyFloyd, Apr 15, 2021.

Who do you think if available, Keim and Cards would give that much up for?

  1. Slater, OT/OG

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Pitts, TE

    18 vote(s)
    75.0%
  3. Surtain, CB

    3 vote(s)
    12.5%
  4. Smith, WR

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. Parsons, LB

    1 vote(s)
    4.2%
  6. Chase, WR

    2 vote(s)
    8.3%
  7. Sewell, OT

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. SissyBoyFloyd

    SissyBoyFloyd Pawnee, Skidi Clan

    Age:
    72
    Posts:
    3,451
    Likes Received:
    800
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    IF they made this deal right before or during the draft moving up into the 5-9 range, who would you think Keim they desire this much and feel is worth it. I make this into a poll, so as to pretend who all would be available to choose from.
     
  2. gmabel830

    gmabel830 It's football season!!

    Posts:
    9,514
    Likes Received:
    2,319
    Joined:
    May 8, 2011
    Location:
    Gilbert, Arizona
    Don’t we have a ton of guys out of contact after this year? I wouldn’t be mortgaging future picks.

    But the answer is Pitts.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  3. Proximo

    Proximo Registered

    Posts:
    4,620
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    First off it would be a really dumb thing to do, we need more young players not fewer. But if they were going to do it, the only two that make the slightest bit of sense to me would be Pitts or Chase
     
  4. Chris_Sanders

    Chris_Sanders Super Moderator Contributor

    Age:
    49
    Posts:
    28,290
    Likes Received:
    9,512
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Location:
    Scottsdale, Az
    Pitts. He is #2 on their board
     
    speedy and PACardsFan like this.
  5. juza76

    juza76 Registered

    Posts:
    10,570
    Likes Received:
    4,772
    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    Location:
    milan-italy
    How do you know their board?
     
  6. SECTION 11

    SECTION 11 vibraslap

    Age:
    50
    Posts:
    15,030
    Likes Received:
    934
    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2002
    Location:
    Between the Pipes
    This would be such a terrible decision that I can’t vote.
     
    WisconsinCard likes this.
  7. Ouchie-Z-Clown

    Ouchie-Z-Clown I'm better than Mulli!

    Age:
    52
    Posts:
    34,913
    Likes Received:
    18,705
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Location:
    SoCal
    Who is #1?
     
  8. Chris_Sanders

    Chris_Sanders Super Moderator Contributor

    Age:
    49
    Posts:
    28,290
    Likes Received:
    9,512
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Location:
    Scottsdale, Az
    Because a reporter posted it and it's Keim who hides nothing
     
  9. Chris_Sanders

    Chris_Sanders Super Moderator Contributor

    Age:
    49
    Posts:
    28,290
    Likes Received:
    9,512
    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Location:
    Scottsdale, Az
    No idea but I assume Lawrence
     
  10. juza76

    juza76 Registered

    Posts:
    10,570
    Likes Received:
    4,772
    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2009
    Location:
    milan-italy
    So it's a no sense board
     
  11. Ohcrap75

    Ohcrap75 Registered

    Posts:
    1,262
    Likes Received:
    719
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2014
    I would only trade more next years 3rd for a player that’s proven in the league. Only a QB is worth that to move up for that and obviously we don’t need one. If you told me that we made this trade then it better be for Pitts or Chase, but I wouldn’t agree with it.
     
  12. SissyBoyFloyd

    SissyBoyFloyd Pawnee, Skidi Clan

    Age:
    72
    Posts:
    3,451
    Likes Received:
    800
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2012
    I would be thrilled to get Pitts, Chase, Sewell, Slater, or Surtain, even if it costs us an extra 2nd or 3rd next year. All these would make a huge improvement to our WR corp and offense, Running game and protection for Murray, or a solid starting CB for years to come.

    I am tired of mediocre players we keep settling for in the draft. I wouldn't give up next year's R1 for a OLman, but would love to get one of the other 3 even if it costs us that. I would expect next year's R1 to be much lower than this year's if we got one of these guys. And it would be wonderful to replace a PP or LF with someone similar in their youthful prime. You don't get a player like that without moving up high in a draft. And that kind of players build a winning team.
     
  13. Syracusecards

    Syracusecards DA's pass went that way

    Posts:
    2,473
    Likes Received:
    803
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    I do not understand all the love for Pitts. Yes, he is a great receiver for a tight end and the freak of an athlete. But he is a liability in the run game so how does this make him any different from a big receiver. I don’t think he’s going to be a bust but I don’t think he’s going to be as amazing as everyone else thinks he’s going to be. A LB like Parsons can have a much bigger impact on the game than a TE.
     
    neojdc likes this.
  14. HairZach

    HairZach Registered

    Age:
    30
    Posts:
    244
    Likes Received:
    301
    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2020
    Location:
    VA
    His measurements and speed are very close to Calvin Johnson's. From what experts say, he's not just a great receiver for a tight end, he's a great receiver period. Of course there's never a guarantee, but people think he's going to be VERY special.

    I'm actually afraid the 49ers use their #3 pick on Pitts, instead of picking up a QB that could easily bust out. Putting him and Kittle on the field at the same time would be a nightmare for our defense. They already use 2 TE sets a lot in their offense.
     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2021
    speedy likes this.
  15. Ouchie-Z-Clown

    Ouchie-Z-Clown I'm better than Mulli!

    Age:
    52
    Posts:
    34,913
    Likes Received:
    18,705
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2002
    Location:
    SoCal
    Eh Pitts 40 was a tenth of second slower than Calvin and it was an unofficial time, so I take it with a grain a salt - it could be two tenths slower. Either one is a big difference.
     

Share This Page