Your vote on Levi Brown trade

[Chaz]

doesn't look like we did save on the salary. apparently we had to pay him 3.1 million to get rid of his ass as the Steelers only could take on 500k because of their cap position. at least that's what they were saying on the radio today.

Well crap.

Probably still worth it to get rid of his perfect timing for killing drives.


Thanks for the info.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Well crap.

Probably still worth it to get rid of his perfect timing for killing drives.


Thanks for the info.

that may or may not be true. the radio guys sounded a little confused about this as well.

it's good that he's finally gone. it's not good that we waited until the middle of the season to do it without actually having a replacement plan in place.

 

[40yearfan]

Like the trade . What are the Cardinals getting in return?

A walnut, 2 sticks of Wrigley's Spearment gum and a gummy worm. All in all, a pretty good trade.

 

[Cardiac]

As all the $ info is coming out about this trade I would like to change my Like It vote to Dislike It. SK handed Levi a $3 mil check to go away. That's not exactly the same message as if you aren't working hard and trying to improve you have no place on this team. Message is go ahead and suck and when we push you out of the plane we will give you a golden parachute.

I'm not saying I want Levi on this team at this point but BASK appears to be all bark and no bite at this point.

 

[GuernseyCard]

As all the $ info is coming out about this trade I would like to change my Like It vote to Dislike It. SK handed Levi a $3 mil check to go away. That's not exactly the same message as if you aren't working hard and trying to improve you have no place on this team. Message is go ahead and suck and when we push you out of the plane we will give you a golden parachute.

I'm not saying I want Levi on this team at this point but BASK appears to be all bark and no bite at this point.

They didn't spend $3M more to get rid of him. They took part of what was owed as part of trade deal and turned it into a bonus. Evidently, the in-house capologist preferred this approach. Why? I don't know and don't think anybody here does. Creative math is what capologizing is all about.

 

[CardLogic]

that may or may not be true. the radio guys sounded a little confused about this as well.

it's good that he's finally gone. it's not good that we waited until the middle of the season to do it without actually having a replacement plan in place.

But there is a replacement plan in place; Bradley Sowell; you may not like it and choose to think that it is a poor plan. But it is pretty clear that was and is the Cardinals plan.

 

[Chopper0080]

The Steelers pay the rest of Levi's contract this year and his non bonus money for the remainder of his contract. The Cardinals are on the hook for Levi's bonus money but that won't hit until 2014.

 

[Chopper0080]

Ross Tucker rained praise upon the Cardinals for making this deal. States Levi never improved his technique over his entire career and had his best year in his contract year.

 

[Mulli]

Ross Tucker rained praise upon the Cardinals for making this deal. States Levi never improved his technique over his entire career and had his best year in his contract year.

I used to hate Ross Tucker, but now I don't.

 

[CardsFan88]

As all the $ info is coming out about this trade I would like to change my Like It vote to Dislike It. SK handed Levi a $3 mil check to go away. That's not exactly the same message as if you aren't working hard and trying to improve you have no place on this team. Message is go ahead and suck and when we push you out of the plane we will give you a golden parachute.

I'm not saying I want Levi on this team at this point but BASK appears to be all bark and no bite at this point.

While if this was the case I wouldn't exactly agree with you, as getting rid of Levi and moving on imo is worth 3 million, the way it really played out was that the Steelers didn't have the cap room, so this had to be done in order to fit Levi in under the Steelers cap.

So I actually feel this shows well for the front office, because they were willing to be creative in order to ship Levi off. I'd rather be in essence getting rid of Levi and picking up a pick for a few million rather then be like $arver and selling picks for a few million.

On the flip side it also means Levi is probably a rent-a-player for the Steelers, and given what we know of his play, barring a miraculous turnaround, he'll be cut in the offseason before his cap hit increases massively from what it will be this year.

 

[Shane]

officially change my vote to HATE it

 

[Mulli]

Me too.

 

[Rivercard]

officially change my vote to HATE it

We can file this in the "be careful what you wish for" file.

 

[CardsFan88]

Not changing my vote yet, but not netting an additional pick makes the trade aspect of the deal seem worse. A swap would still help, but isn't as good as a net addition of a pick.

Still doesn't change that we finally decided to move on. Hopefully Sowell isn't Batiste or Young, but we'll see. At least they feel decently about him not being worse.

At least our front office acts when it figures something out. Blame them for waiting this long, but at least they figured it out. Old front offices would have held onto Brown for the life of his contract.

 

[Duckjake]

But there is a replacement plan in place; Bradley Sowell; you may not like it and choose to think that it is a poor plan. But it is pretty clear that was and is the Cardinals plan.

Just like the plan was D.J. Young and D'Anthony Batiste and Rex Hadnot and Brandon Keith and Adam Snyder and......

 

[SECTION 11]

There should be a choice for "just plain odd"

 

[JeffGollin]

Not changing my vote yet, but not netting an additional pick makes the trade aspect of the deal seem worse. A swap would still help, but isn't as good as a net addition of a pick...

Can we, therefore, agree that the issue really isn't "Levi for a pick", but instead, "Levi for the elevation of an existing pick?"

Then the issue becomes: "Which is better: (a) getting an extra draft pick? or (b) elevating a pick one pick (or possibly two picks) higher?"

That's a legitimate question, but the inference "that we got nothing for Levi" isn't quite accurate.

 

[D-Dogg]

officially change my vote to HATE it

Me too.

You guys are as consistent as Levi.

:3amigos:

 

[Mulli]

You guys are as consistent as Levi.

:3amigos:

I watched 3 minutes of Levi and wonder if he is elite.

 

[CardsFan88]

Can we, therefore, agree that the issue really isn't "Levi for a pick", but instead, "Levi for the elevation of an existing pick?"

Then the issue becomes: "Which is better: (a) getting an extra draft pick? or (b) elevating a pick one pick (or possibly two picks) higher?"

That's a legitimate question, but the inference "that we got nothing for Levi" isn't quite accurate.

A is better imo. Most people have felt we'd of gotten an extra 5th or extra 6th. Thus the details of the trade are about either gaining that 5th or 6th, or gaining that 5th or 6th by giving up our own.

If that moves down to a swap, then we go from having either two 5th's or two 6th's to having one 5th or one 6th, but it being a few picks higher. This is less likely to impact your draft then gaining an additional pick(and I'm going to go on a limb and have it be where we have the right to swap if it would be higher or keep our own). [Which also might mean that if you can't swap because their pick is lower...then you do indeed receive nothing...so it is possibility]

But getting an additional pick means you get an additional player and at roughly equivalent draft position that we expect our swap to get us. Especially since the lines start to blur on players that far down in the draft.

I don't agree that it was for nothing (though it is possible), just less then we first suspected because I consider B less then A. Especially when you can get two A's that are drafted in a similar spot to one B.

Also all this comes down to is appearance. In reality the only thing that matters is if any of these picks can actually turn into productive players.

So it looks worse when you consider that when it comes down to brass tacks in evaluation, two picks is more likely to make an impact then one.

There's also other scenarios which could increase the value of a swap. Perhaps it's a swap of a 3rd or 4th round pick. That would mean more then a swap of 5th or 6th.

That would be an interesting question. Would you rather have an option to swap up 1-31 places in the 3rd or 4th round, or get an additional pick in say the 6th round?

That's the thing in the draft, on paper, trading down means you get the worse player...in reality there is the possibility that you trade down and still get the better player. So no matter what it all comes down to how you draft. Given slight differences I prefer more picks and given what stage we are in the new regime I would think more picks would be better. But it all boils down to, when you pick, are there NFL players sitting there capable of being picked, and are those the guys you pick?

 

[Cardiac]

Bottom line for me is I'd rather have two 6th rd picks than one 6th & one 7th (for example). Now that's now getting much of a return on Levi but how many times have we read on this board that the Cards should have gotten something for a player who was released. Our FO sucks because he got nothing and they should have gotten something/anything.

Well folks we just got something for Levi who many felt is the biggest piece of crap on the team.

The other thing is that SK has shown he will move around in the draft, will trade back to get extra picks so this gives him more ammo to do so.

 

[CardLogic]

Just like the plan was D.J. Young and D'Anthony Batiste and Rex Hadnot and Brandon Keith and Adam Snyder and......

No, I would say that each of those situations are distinctly different than intentionally dumping Brown and choosing to roll with Sowell, particularly Young and Batiste, which I don't believe there was ever any intention to have them as starters.

Now you can say the Cardinals were ignorant for not considering the likelyhood. . . But then we'd be in agreement.

 

[Duckjake]

No, I would say that each of those situations are distinctly different than intentionally dumping Brown and choosing to roll with Sowell, particularly Young and Batiste, which I don't believe there was ever any intention to have them as starters.

Now you can say the Cardinals were ignorant for not considering the likelyhood. . . But then we'd be in agreement.

Well you are 1/4th correct. I should have left out LT, Young and Batiste, because they only played due to Brown's injury.

But the Cardinals intentionally started Rex Hadnot over Lutui and signed Snyder and dumped Hadnot and intentionally moved Levi Brown to LT and replaced him with Brandon Keith.

 

[Mulli]

Well you are 1/4th correct. I should have left out LT, Young and Batiste, because they only played due to Brown's injury.

But the Cardinals intentionally started Rex Hadnot over Lutui and signed Snyder and dumped Hadnot and intentionally moved Levi Brown to LT and replaced him with Brandon Keith.

5-11 with all of them, 5-11 without any of them...

 

[Duckjake]

5-11 with all of them, 5-11 without any of them...

Actually the Cardinals were 31-23 and went to the Super Bowl with Lutui and Brown (at RT).