Murray Conversation: Sunk Cost/Future Risk

[Solar7]

I know we don't really need another Murray thread, but I want to post one that isn't necessarily about who the better player will be in Murray vs. Rosen, but more focused on what we've given up, and the opportunity cost of what we're losing.

So the question becomes... how mad would you have been last year if I proposed that we were going to give up the #15, a 3rd, and a 5th, for next year's #17 (at best)? That's what we're looking at tossing away here...

...and it dovetails into what we're potentially sacrificing for our future: flexibility.

If Murray isn't transcendent, and let's just be frank - in the past 20 years, only two #1 overall picks have been arguably transcendent to this point - we can probably consider this to be a failure already. But we're not going to have the flexibility to change coaches and QBs next year again.

This is it, this is handing Kyler the keys to the car and saying "for the next 2-3 years, we go as you go."

I just don't trust it enough. He's tantalizing, but the QBs on the horizon are our built in out.

Although, I guess the last thing I'll say... our comments on Murray during this disaster of an offseason probably mean we threw the baby out with the bathwater, and whatever potential Rosen has just won't ever be realized here.

 

[football karma]

So the question becomes... how mad would you have been last year if I proposed that we were going to give up the #15, a 3rd, and a 5th, for next year's #17 (at best)? That's what we're looking at tossing away here...

you reference the sunk cost fallacy in your thread title, and then make a sunk cost based argument

can we all agree that IF the Cards take Murray, it will be because they concluded that Murray has a far greater likelihood to become a Franchise QB than Rosen? I doubt they make this move if it were close. (btw: for the "I dont trust Keim's judgement" argument -- Keim also took Rosen, so....)

for the most important position on the field, if the team plans to not be drafting at #1 ever again, and the team really believes that this is a special player: i think you have to take him, prior cost be damned, a recoup as best you can on Rosen.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Imagine that the Cardinals traded 2 firsts, a third, and a fifth for a franchise QB.

That's not terrible.

 

[Krangodnzr]

One peculiar criticism of Murray that isnt being applied to any other player:

He played on a really good team.

Tua and Lawrence are on even BETTER teams. Clemson and Bama are so freaking stacked. OU isnt as good as those two, but Tua and Lawrence are getting free passes on this criticism.

 

[Solar7]

you reference the sunk cost fallacy in your thread title, and then make a sunk cost based argument

can we all agree that IF the Cards take Murray, it will be because they concluded that Murray has a far greater likelihood to become a Franchise QB than Rosen? I doubt they make this move if it were close. (btw: for the "I dont trust Keim's judgement" argument -- Keim also took Rosen, so....)

for the most important position on the field, if the team plans to not be drafting at #1 ever again, and the team really believes that this is a special player: i think you have to take him, prior cost be damned, a recoup as best you can on Rosen.

I never mentioned the sunk cost "fallacy," I just mentioned pure sunk cost. There's no fallacy here, our future assets do have value.

As to the bolded... no, I don't think we can all agree. I think if Murray ends up the pick, KK made the winning argument about "his system" and the potential for a better fit, over the team and everyone being unified in him being a more competent QB in a vacuum.

If Jim Caldwell had been the head coach, I don't think Murray's even in the discussion here. So that's why I don't think this is a "likelihood of franchise QB" argument, but better fit.

 

[cardncubfan]

Imagine that the Cardinals traded 2 firsts, a third, and a fifth for a franchise QB.

That's not terrible.

Imagine the same scenario for a bust.

 

[Solar7]

Imagine that the Cardinals traded 2 firsts, a third, and a fifth for a franchise QB.

That's not terrible.

Imagine that they traded 2 firsts, a third, and a fifth for a guy who struggles to stay invested and committed in his playbook, gets injured and never recovers, or ditches the sport for baseball. The eternal "he's a sure thing" optimism is mind-blowing. The evidence has shown for years that these guys basically aren't.

Mayfield
Goff
Winston
Luck
Newton
Bradford
Stafford
Russell
Smith
E. Manning
Palmer
Carr
Vick

...The past 20 years of #1 overall QBs. Which of these guys are "franchise" QBs? I'm literally only counting 3 (Luck - being generous, Newton, Manning), with the jury out on Mayfield and Goff. That's a 23% chance of hitting.

One peculiar criticism of Murray that isnt being applied to any other player:

He played on a really good team.

Tua and Lawrence are on even BETTER teams. Clemson and Bama are so freaking stacked. OU isnt as good as those two, but Tua and Lawrence are getting free passes on this criticism.

Who says we're not applying it? I'm certainly not stumping for Tua or Lawrence in the sense that we HAVE TO take them, but in the sense that we draft Murray, that we definitely CAN'T.

If it comes around to draft time next year or after and we're talking about taking one of those guys, we can certainly have the argument.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Imagine the same scenario for a bust.

Imagine passing on Manning because you have Plummer. Passing on Rodgers because you have McCown.

 

[DVontel]

One peculiar criticism of Murray that isnt being applied to any other player:

He played on a really good team.

Tua and Lawrence are on even BETTER teams. Clemson and Bama are so freaking stacked. OU isnt as good as those two, but Tua and Lawrence are getting free passes on this criticism.

Don’t worry it’ll come once they’re eligible.

 

[Totally_Red]

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.

 

[Krangodnzr]

If this was a Haskins vs. Rosen, I'd be 100% team Rosen.

I just think Murray has a chance to be a special QB, whereas Rosen has a chance to be a good QB.

A special QB is worth trading three Bosas and one Rosen for.

 

[Krangodnzr]

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.

I dont know if anyone outside of this board thinks Rosen is actually worth a first.

 

[Delmar M Lewis]

But if we have to make that choice Yet again then Murray and most likely Klingsbury will be gone ya see how Damn Stupid of a idea ot is to Ditch Rosen after only 1 year Now

 

[The Kraken]

you reference the sunk cost fallacy in your thread title, and then make a sunk cost based argument

can we all agree that IF the Cards take Murray, it will be because they concluded that Murray has a far greater likelihood to become a Franchise QB than Rosen? I doubt they make this move if it were close. (btw: for the "I dont trust Keim's judgement" argument -- Keim also took Rosen, so....)

for the most important position on the field, if the team plans to not be drafting at #1 ever again, and the team really believes that this is a special player: i think you have to take him, prior cost be damned, a recoup as best you can on Rosen.

While everyone is talking sunk cost (which is completely fair) we need to look at future cost and with all of the potential upside with Murray (arm, athleticism, accuracy, fit in the system) the major issues I have are:

-Unless you are a huge fanboy/girl, his size is a legitimate concern
-There is no guarantee that CK2 will be successful, I think MB will give him room to grow, but we could find ourselves in a complete rebuild in 3 years, looking at a more conventional system
-I am concerned that Murray has a golden parachute with baseball, I am not sold on a 1-year wonder, especially one with an escape pod.

*Here is the biggest issue I have, if we move on from Rosen and Murray doesn't work out (for whatever reason) we will be drafting a franchise QB for the 3rd year in a row...let that sink in, most teams use their 1st round picks to build cornerstones of the organization...

So instead of drafting the next great edge rusher or left tackle or lockdown CB (all premium positions behind QB), we are stuck in an endless groundhog day drafting the QBOF, all the while guys who were on the rookie contracts now needing to be resigned to large deals constraining our ability to bring in quality FAs.

The potential future cost of a Murray decision can put us back to square one, our other cornerstone players, Patrick Peterson, Chandler Jones, and others would be past their prime before we solidify the QB situation.

If I was SK and as tempted as I would be to go after KM, I would stay the course, develop Rosen, and build the team around him.

 

[Solar7]

Imagine passing on Manning because you have Plummer. Passing on Rodgers because you have McCown.

Imagine passing on Paxton Lynch because you have Palmer. Jimmy Clausen because you have Kevin Kolb.

Argument works both ways, man.

 

[b8rtm8nn]

I dont know if anyone outside of this board thinks Rosen is actually worth a first.

Oh, I disagree. A mid round first for a previous year first with the bulk of the cost paid? That has a lot of value. You know Rosen can play in the NFL, he proved it, it's just a question of how much better can he get. That removes the floor question you have with draft picks and that has real value too.

 

[GuernseyCard]

I know we don't really need another Murray thread, but I want to post one that isn't necessarily about who the better player will be in Murray vs. Rosen, but more focused on what we've given up, and the opportunity cost of what we're losing.

So the question becomes... how mad would you have been last year if I proposed that we were going to give up the #15, a 3rd, and a 5th, for next year's #17 (at best)? That's what we're looking at tossing away here...

...and it dovetails into what we're potentially sacrificing for our future: flexibility.

If Murray isn't transcendent, and let's just be frank - in the past 20 years, only two #1 overall picks have been arguably transcendent to this point - we can probably consider this to be a failure already. But we're not going to have the flexibility to change coaches and QBs next year again.

This is it, this is handing Kyler the keys to the car and saying "for the next 2-3 years, we go as you go."

I just don't trust it enough. He's tantalizing, but the QBs on the horizon are our built in out.

Although, I guess the last thing I'll say... our comments on Murray during this disaster of an offseason probably mean we threw the baby out with the bathwater, and whatever potential Rosen has just won't ever be realized here.

With you up to the last paragraph : our comments have no bearing on Rosen's future here or anywhere else.

 

[Solar7]

With you up to the last paragraph : our comments have no bearing on Rosen's future here or anywhere else.

I don't mean ASFN comments, I mean the team's comments - going out and talking glowingly about Kyler Murray like this.

Colin Cowherd actually said it pretty well - "if you're talking this much about breaking up the relationship to other people, you're probably breaking up the relationship."

 

[dscher]

At this point, we need MORE Murray threads!! Go all in.... Just like we do for Murray! Lol. *Shameless plug, I know.

 

[Jetstream Green]

Oh, I disagree. A mid round first for a previous year first with the bulk of the cost paid? That has a lot of value. You know Rosen can play in the NFL, he proved it, it's just a question of how much better can he get. That removes the floor question you have with draft picks and that has real value too.

For what the Cardinals traded to move up in the first to select him and then the position, the grades other teams had on him, the clusterflip situation every team is aware of him playing in last year, Rosen is not being moved without a first and every team knows this and this is just the opening high bid (which seems to be a second reported) which will be at the least then a late round first. I like Rosen and want him as our QB, but I also see the slight but still possible 'wow' factor Murray could bring in KK's offense. I'm good... bring on the draft

 

[BW52]

One peculiar criticism of Murray that isnt being applied to any other player:

He played on a really good team.

Tua and Lawrence are on even BETTER teams. Clemson and Bama are so freaking stacked. OU isnt as good as those two, but Tua and Lawrence are getting free passes on this criticism.

Neither of those are in consideration for Cards pick are they?

 

[dscher]

Don’t worry it’ll come once they’re eligible.

I doubt it. Their height will give them a pass.

 

[Solar7]

Neither of those are in consideration for Cards pick are they?

Down the line they could be if Rosen doesn't show improvement. If we draft Murray... no.

But they're not eligible to be drafted this year.

 

[BW52]

If this was a Haskins vs. Rosen, I'd be 100% team Rosen.

I just think Murray has a chance to be a special QB, whereas Rosen has a chance to be a good QB.

A special QB is worth trading three Bosas and one Rosen for.

Crazy nonsense .

 

[GuernseyCard]

I don't mean ASFN comments, I mean the team's comments - going out and talking glowingly about Kyler Murray like this.

Colin Cowherd actually said it pretty well - "if you're talking this much about breaking up the relationship to other people, you're probably breaking up the relationship."

But, KK wasn't talking about 'breaking up a relationship': He has responded to questions and has been positive in his comments about both.