Of All the Questionable Keim Drafts, this Year's is the ....

TRW

ASFN Addict
Joined
Jan 13, 2003
Posts
5,584
Reaction score
3,676
Location
Avondale, AZ
So help me out here.

It appears the Cardinals knew Hopkins was going to be suspended therefore the trade for Brown. But the trade would not have happened if one of the top 3 Wr were still available when we picked.

Am I right so far? What would we have done if Hopkins WASN’T going to be suspended?

Would we still have made the trade?
We’ll never know because Hopkins WAS suspended, the WRs WERE off the board and the trade DID happen. The “what if’s” are irrelevant.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
11,578
Reaction score
16,349
Location
UK
I think the trade was a good one period. Brown + Sanders was better value than drafting a player there.

The only other option for Keim was do a trade with the Vikings as the Lions did. But in that case your probably trading the 1st and a 3rd to move up for a player that may or may not be able to hack it in the NFL.

Jameson Williams was my WR1 but no WR in this draft is a sure thing.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
27,420
Reaction score
16,471
Location
Orange County, CA
The only other option for Keim was do a trade with the Vikings as the Lions did. But in that case your probably trading the 1st and a 3rd to move up for a player that may or may not be able to hack it in the NFL.

Jameson Williams was my WR1 but no WR in this draft is a sure thing.
I don't think I make that trade because of his injury AND slight frame.

He's a nice prospect, but he only had one productive season playing with a team loaded with all star talent...and he was coming off an ACL tear. That's a move I make if I'm loaded with talent and I'm looking down the road, not the 2022 season.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
11,578
Reaction score
16,349
Location
UK
Apparently the press release went out to everyone to use Bird City (another bird bites the dust)

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
 

slanidrac16

ASFN Icon
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2002
Posts
12,051
Reaction score
8,247
Location
Plainfield, Il.
We’ll never know because Hopkins WAS suspended, the WRs WERE off the board and the trade DID happen. The “what if’s” are irrelevant.
Not questioning the trade . Just wondering if Hopkins had not been suspended would the Cards still have made the trade or just drafted BPA.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
27,420
Reaction score
16,471
Location
Orange County, CA
Not questioning the trade . Just wondering if Hopkins had not been suspended would the Cards still have made the trade or just drafted BPA.
I would think so.

If you looked at what the Cardinals did at their peak last season, the team was able to throw four quality receivers that defenses had to account for with different traits on the field at one time. Losing Kirk meant that the team needed another receiver to make up for those four. I think most people would say that Brown is a better player, or at least has a higher ceiling than Kirk.

Even with the loss of Hopkins, the Cardinals can still throw Brown, Moore, Green, and Ertz on the field. Brown should be able to open up short and intermediate routes, and teams shouldn't be able to camp on Moore's routes like they did at the end of last year. If all things work out, having Brown and Moore (two guys that run low 4.3s) on the field could be pretty explosive. This also isn't considering Conner and McBride when they are on the field. If managed properly, even without Hopkins, this is a pretty good group of skill players.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
27,420
Reaction score
16,471
Location
Orange County, CA
Apparently the press release went out to everyone to use Bird City (another bird bites the dust)

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Lecitus Smith kind of reminds me of Jonathan Cooper's movement skills. He didn't test as well, but they look similar.
 

gmabel830

It's football season!!
Joined
May 8, 2011
Posts
10,786
Reaction score
4,103
Location
Gilbert, Arizona
I think the trade was a good one period. Brown + Sanders was better value than drafting a player there.
I don't disagree with this take at all, but in terms of value you also have to factor in the cost difference of having a first round pick cost controlled for 4-5 years vs Brown likely getting a big extension after this year. So the value really becomes if Brown + Sanders - $$$ we could have spent addressing additional needs over the next 3-4 years was worth our first round pick. Since we still would have a big hole at WR without the trade, I think the answer is still yes - but that's why you can't straight compare "is veteran X better value than rookie Y" without taking into account the salary implications of each.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
27,420
Reaction score
16,471
Location
Orange County, CA
I don't disagree with this take at all, but in terms of value you also have to factor in the cost difference of having a first round pick cost controlled for 4-5 years vs Brown likely getting a big extension after this year.
This is a legitimate view, but you also have to ask yourself, "Do you want a prospect who has never played in the NFL, or would you rather have a guy with a proven track record who also already has chemistry with your starting QB?"

Once upon a time, I criticized the Rams for doing this with some of their trades for veterans and I've seen now that I would rather have a young veteran nearing or in their prime over a dice roll who is much less likely to work out.
So the value really becomes if Brown + Sanders - $$$ we could have spent addressing additional needs over the next 3-4 years was worth our first round pick.
I think the need was pretty large..the Cardinals almost had to walk away with a receiver and Brown at least won't cost $20+ million for two years, which is the going rate for a good starting receiver right now.
Since we still would have a big hole at WR without the trade, I think the answer is still yes - but that's why you can't straight compare "is veteran X better value than rookie Y" without taking into account the salary implications of each.
If the prognosticators are correct with how much the salary cap will grow over the next 5 years, a lot of these complaints will seem trivial real soon. I expect we'll see OK QBs making 40 million, Superstars making 55 million, and top WRs over 30 million. For years, I've thought WRs were a bit devalued and it looks like the NFL is finally starting to value WRs like they should.

If I'm a GM, I'm stocking up on WRs and moving on from them regularly...ala the Steelers approach.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
49,660
Reaction score
34,282
Location
SoCal
I agree to an extent with @DVontel on this point. Ideally, Hollywood is a high end #2.

But who knows, maybe McBride ends up being a 1,000 yard receiver at TE and Hollywood becomes the guy to open up the underneath routes.
Agree. If he becomes a legit #1 due to ability and not role he’d have to be a tyreek hill. Don’t see that. But more likely he could be a legit high end #2.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
49,660
Reaction score
34,282
Location
SoCal
Its not obvious is it. Tyreek Hill, Dontae Johnson, Tyler Lockett, Brandon Cooks are a similar size and WR1 on their teams.
Other than hill that’s by role and not by talent. Someone has to be the #1 on every team. Doesn’t mean they should be. And really Lockett is 1a/1b.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
49,660
Reaction score
34,282
Location
SoCal
This is a legitimate view, but you also have to ask yourself, "Do you want a prospect who has never played in the NFL, or would you rather have a guy with a proven track record who also already has chemistry with your starting QB?"

Once upon a time, I criticized the Rams for doing this with some of their trades for veterans and I've seen now that I would rather have a young veteran nearing or in their prime over a dice roll who is much less likely to work out.

I think the need was pretty large..the Cardinals almost had to walk away with a receiver and Brown at least won't cost $20+ million for two years, which is the going rate for a good starting receiver right now.

If the prognosticators are correct with how much the salary cap will grow over the next 5 years, a lot of these complaints will seem trivial real soon. I expect we'll see OK QBs making 40 million, Superstars making 55 million, and top WRs over 30 million. For years, I've thought WRs were a bit devalued and it looks like the NFL is finally starting to value WRs like they should.

If I'm a GM, I'm stocking up on WRs and moving on from them regularly...ala the Steelers approach.
I’m chuckling at your “once upon a time” because you’ve consistently stated that such a course of action would have a price to pay, but now that the cardinals have done it you’ve changed your mind. Juuust having some fun . . .
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
27,420
Reaction score
16,471
Location
Orange County, CA
I’m chuckling at your “once upon a time” because you’ve consistently stated that such a course of action would have a price to pay, but now that the cardinals have done it you’ve changed your mind. Juuust having some fun . . .
Uh no after seeing the Rams do so over and over and seeing it be successful.

Quentin Harris pointed out a very clear reason to also make the deal: all the other veterans on the market would have cost significantly more. Hell, if Kirk had resigned at the low end of his value, he would have cost substantially more than the $15 million Hollywood will make over the next two years.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
49,660
Reaction score
34,282
Location
SoCal
Uh no after seeing the Rams do so over and over and seeing it be successful.

Quentin Harris pointed out a very clear reason to also make the deal: all the other veterans on the market would have cost significantly more. Hell, if Kirk had resigned at the low end of his value, he would have cost substantially more than the $15 million Hollywood will make over the next two years.
Oh I like the deal. But I also haven’t been crowing about the rams having to eventually pay the piper doing similarly…
 
Top