Arizona Cardinals set price tag to move off of fourth

[kingm56]

Sure, the most SB were won by teams that had 1st round QB's.  They were probably won by teams that had 1st round receivers.  I wont debate that the QB position is important, but it takes way more than that to win a SB.  I think you'll find that teams that win the SB are pretty solid in other areas besides QB.  Oh, and there are some 1st round QB's that aren't that good but win SB only because of the other parts of the team were great (Trent Dilfer).

I'm not tracking your WR example as most teams have 4 starting WRs, as opposed to 1 starting QB;  thus, the former has a much higher probability of possessing 1st round WRs.

Again, in the modern NFL, with very few exceptions, you need a prolific passer to win SBs.   When reviewing data over 40 years, the obvious best chance to draft said passer is in the 1st round.  Suggesting the Giants can wait until later rounds to find a Brady or Purdy type player seems like a plan based on hope, and not statistical probability (i.e. a plan).

Your Trent Dilfer example is fair, but occurred 24 years ago; the post 2012/2013 rule changes fundamentally changed the game. Said rules have explicitly given offenses the advantage, making the QB even more important. The same paradigm for winning SB that applied 20+ years ago are no longer relevant today. In those days, you could win SB with a strong running game and defense.  How many teams in the last decade have won with that formula?  Even before the rule changes, 93% of SB winners over the last 40 years were won with HoF-caliber QBs; the noticeable exceptions are Foles, Dilfer, Johnson, and Flacco.  I will also note that 3 of those 4 teams each had no less than 4x HoF players on their defenses; though, I suspect under the new rules, if would be far more difficult for defensive-oriented teams to enjoy the same success.  SF, for example, is loaded with Def talent but lost to NFLs best QB.   

There's a reason KC has played in 6 straight champion games; it's not because they have the best team, it's because they have the best QB....today, that gives you the best chance to win!

[katkavage]

Arizona wants an offer they can't refuse. That's the only way they are giving up taking Marvin Harrison.

[jgrangers2]

Sure, the most SB were won by teams that had 1st round QB's.  They were probably won by teams that had 1st round receivers.  I wont debate that the QB position is important, but it takes way more than that to win a SB.  I think you'll find that teams that win the SB are pretty solid in other areas besides QB.  Oh, and there are some 1st round QB's that aren't that good but win SB only because of the other parts of the team were great (Trent Dilfer).

It's nearly impossible to win without great QB play today. As others have mentioned, the game has changed significantly over the past few decades so that Ravens team is kind of irrelevant. Look at some of the top receivers in the game today and you'll find that most were drafted outside of the first round. Of the top 10 Chiefs in receiving yards last year, two were first round picks (Clyde Edwards-Helaire and Kadarius Toney) and they were 9th and 10th on the list. Of the top 10 in the NFL in receiving yards, only 4 were first round picks. Of the positions considered to be "premier positions", wide receiver is probably the easiest to find outside the first round.

[coggs]

If this is true, it is more ridiculous than what Chicago originally wanted for Fields.

[Painter]

I don't think it really matters because as I see it, Schoen and Co have no intention to trade up. Moreover, even if McCarthy is still available at 6- the other 3 won't be- I'm not at all sure, they will roll the dice in his favor.

The 3 teams still speculated as trade-up for a QB candidates are: Vikings at 11, Broncos at 12, and Raiders at 13. If one of them feels that it would be worth such a major investment to achieve immediate competitiveness, then it would seem that its target would be either Daniels or Maye at earlier than the Giants 6th overall.

And so, that begs the (my) question, would one of them otherwise make an offer to Our Heroes to get McCarthy? And if so, would Schoenco- reminds me of a Tight End- be interested? My wag is only if it allowed them to still get Nabers or Odunze. Otherwise, Niet!

Cheers!

[katkavage]

Like everyone on this board,I'm not a professional scout, coach, or talent evaluator. But if those who are feel the player is worth sacrificing future picks for, then you do it. You can't win or even compete much with mediocre to subpar play from your QB no matter who you have surrounding him. That is the reality in today's NFL.

[andrew_nyGiants]

I get playing safe but thise franchise has played it safe and not taken chances the past decade and where has that gotten us?

If we gave up a 2 1sts and 2 2nds for Josh Allen, no one would think twice. I get it there are risks, but anything is better than trotting out a backup for the 6th year in a row and hope we lose enough again next year to get a qb in a weak qb class.

So if they see a guy that they think is the guy, then yes absolutely. Neal, Wandale, Banks, and JMS are the last 2 1st and 2 2nd round picks, would you not trade an elite Qb for those 4 guys? Absolutely you would.

If this class offered a generational talent at Quarterback, I could align with your position. But each of the top 4 QBs have their own set of question marks.

Not worth that price to gamble on what could be a colossal bust.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[jgrangers2]

If this class offered a generational talent at Quarterback, I could align with your position. But each of the top 4 QBs have their own set of question marks.

Not worth that price to gamble on what could be a colossal bust.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The issue is that those guys don't come out too often and the opportunity to trade up for such a player may not be there. You simply can't wait on QBs.

[andrew_nyGiants]

The issue is that those guys don't come out too often and the opportunity to trade up for such a player may not be there. You simply can't wait on QBs.

That philosophy landed us Daniel Jones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[katkavage]

That philosophy landed us Daniel Jones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Jones was a projected 3rd Round pick. Gettleman screwed that up. It was his incompetence as a GM, not the philosophy that was the issue. 

[andrew_nyGiants]

Jones was a projected 3rd Round pick. Gettleman screwed that up. It was his incompetence as a GM, not the philosophy that was the issue.

My point is a reach is a reach. Giving up three 1st round picks and then some for anyone in this class (with the possible exception of Williams) is a massive reach.

Just as DJ @ 6 was a massive reach.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see us upgrade at QB, and I'm open to trading up to make it happen.

But not at AZ's price.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Jclayton92]

If this class offered a generational talent at Quarterback, I could align with your position. But each of the top 4 QBs have their own set of question marks.

Not worth that price to gamble on what could be a colossal bust.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

No one thought Lamar Jackson, Josh allen, or Pat Mahomes was a generational talent, so who's to say this class doesn't have one or multiple. In fact the great talents that have come out lately have been less than ie Lawrence, Herbert.

[andrew_nyGiants]

No one thought Lamar Jackson, Josh allen, or Pat Mahomes was a generational talent, so who's to say this class doesn't have one or multiple. In fact the great talents that have come out lately have been less than ie Lawrence, Herbert.

You're willing to bet three 1st round picks plus other picks on that with the condition of this roster?

I'm not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[jgrangers2]

That philosophy landed us Daniel Jones.

Except my philosophy isn't to take a QB just to take a QB. If the Giants drafted Daniel Jones just because they felt they had to take a QB, that was a mistake. I say this to all the people who say they'd be disappointed if we don't come out of this draft with a new QB.

My point is that if you like a QB and believe he can be your franchise QB for the next decade, there's nothing wrong with making your move to get him. You can't just sit around and wait for the next generational QB to fall into your lap.

[katkavage]

My point is a reach is a reach. Giving up three 1st round picks and then some for anyone in this class (with the possible exception of Williams) is a massive reach.

Just as DJ @ 6 was a massive reach.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see us upgrade at QB, and I'm open to trading up to make it happen.

But not at AZ's price.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

AZ's price is a joke. They won't get it.