JSn
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2008
- Messages
- 7,428
- Reaction score
- 1
So I know they have Matt Leinart and that would probably cause weirdness, but hear me out:
If they were to use two #1's to sign Cassel, they only lose a practical #2 this year and put Cassel in an almost identical receiver situation as he had here, practically guaranteeing his success.
The Pat's get a low #1 this year and probably a mid #1 next year.
In my mind we get better value for the #31 pick than the #3, especially if we can't unload it. If we want to move up we can package a #3 and that #1, as well.
This "article" from PFT got me pondering this. Since getting picks is draft related and this forum isn't as full of knee-jerkers as the main forum, I though I'd toss this at a wall and see if it sticks. I like the idea of two firsts, even low ones.
ProFootballTalk.com - WARNER CONFIRMS THAT IT’S CARDINALS OR NO ONE IN 2009
If they were to use two #1's to sign Cassel, they only lose a practical #2 this year and put Cassel in an almost identical receiver situation as he had here, practically guaranteeing his success.
The Pat's get a low #1 this year and probably a mid #1 next year.
In my mind we get better value for the #31 pick than the #3, especially if we can't unload it. If we want to move up we can package a #3 and that #1, as well.
This "article" from PFT got me pondering this. Since getting picks is draft related and this forum isn't as full of knee-jerkers as the main forum, I though I'd toss this at a wall and see if it sticks. I like the idea of two firsts, even low ones.
ProFootballTalk.com - WARNER CONFIRMS THAT IT’S CARDINALS OR NO ONE IN 2009