We are settling into the offseason, and frankly that's OK with me. Questions have been edited for length and clarity. Don't forget to send a question for a future mailbag.

From Rin Kazuki:

"Hi Darren.  Trey McBride broke out in a big way this year. Not only in his production, but I think most notably, the calls that went his way. We had multiple games, Sunday included Seattle during the fake FG, where a game-winning play was designed to go to him. That's ultimate trust. Those are the plays you run for a No. 1 WR. You could make the argument that Trey served as our No. 1 receiver this year. There's been a lot of talk about a Mr. Marvin in the upcoming draft. If we were to acquire such a talent, do you think that would diminish Trey's usage?"

Quick clarifier: Michael Wilson said the fake field goal actually was meant for Greg Dortch originally. But look, if you have a No. 1 receiver -- a true No. 1 -- yes, that's going to impact the other pass catchers. I think McBride has proven himself as a reliable guy, and he will remain an important part of the passing game. But like in San Francisco, where there are games when George Kittle doesn't get targeted a ton because of CMC and Deebo and Aiyuk, it's going to be somewhat up and down, I believe. That's OK. Doesn't make him less of a weapon. 

From Nate Smith:

"Hey Darren, I just wanna say I'm a big fan of what you do for Cards and the organization. I have a few questions. Who do you think is going to have their best season in 2024? What position group do you think should be the highest priority heading into the offseason? And would you take the opportunity to trade down in the NFL draft?"

Appreciate that, Nate. As for your queries, I assume you mean which Cardinal will have his best season? Without knowing who will be around, I'm going to go with Kyler Murray. I think he'll fit in this offense and having a whole offseason to prep, and with some upgrades, I think his efficiency will be excellent. The highest priority for a position group I will say defensive line (but I think finding a stud edge rusher needs to be the main goal as a singular player). As for trading down, I need on-the-clock info: what players are available, what package am I being offered, how far down I'd have to go. But would I see it as an option? Yes.

From Sam S:

"Hi Darren. Offseason activated! For all the talk about WR and OL, there's surprisingly little talk about pass rush. Most every team can say this, but I think we need more pass rush. We need a guy. Heart goes out to Chan, and I hope he's doing well, but man alive was that guy a force off the edge. Those guys don't grow on trees, but we urgently need to find one. What do you think the plan is? Draft or free agency? Maybe even a trade?"

As I mentioned above, I do think they need an edge, and I can't speak for others but I (and my podcast/radio counterparts) have chatted about it often especially the last six weeks. Now, as for where you go? Not sure. Usually those guys aren't available in free agency. Wouldn't rule out a trade. But clearly it will be a focus. That's the one tough part about that Texans pick fading later -- if you were 18-20, you might get an edge there.

From Blaine S:

"Hey Darren. I don't know about you but the season always seems to go so fast. I think I've asked this question at this time the last few years but your answers always interest me, so I'm going to keep asking. Looking at the overall past season, what school grade (pretending schools still used A, B, C, D, F grades) would you give to run offense; pass offense; defense; special teams; coaches and just the 2023 season in general? Also on a side note, I'm going to be in town for the Phoenix Open if you want to grab a round of golf? Hot dog at the turn is on me!! Thanks Darren. Always a pleasure reading your work!"

Again, I appreciate it. I appreciate the invitation, but alas, I do not golf -- I never had the temperment (or the time) for it. But enjoy yourself. So as far as the grades, if you have asked me before, I am guessing you have never gotten the answer for it because I am not a grades guy. I'll say this: I think the season overall had to be seen -- for what it was going to be -- as a B at least. I know the wins weren't there. But for me, this season was always about building toward future years when it came to installing culture and getting clarity on Kyler. It felt like by the end of the season, those happened. Defensively this team needs a roster upgrade in multiple areas, but it was a good start. Next year, there will be some expectations. 

From Thomas Kruckemeyer:

"In the era of the 17-game regular season schedule, a competent No. 2 QB is a necessity. Thus, I am wondering how you and the coaching staff feel about Clayton Tune's progress or lack thereof after one year? I don't think his tough outing in Cleveland was anything close to fair test, BTW. In the little that I have seen him play, I find his size. mobility and arm strength most impressive. Thanks."

It's very difficult to know where Tune's game is right now. Obviously the Browns game was not good. We won't really get a sense again until the preseason games, and even then it isn't the regular season. I will be interested to see the QBs the Cardinals bring in for the 90-man roster; will they have four, which has been usual, or will they want Kyler to do enough that they just add one? Either way, Tune has a big offseason ahead. We just watched an NFL season in which the backup QB was squarely in the spotlight -- even for the Cardinals at the beginning of the year.

From Michael Travers:

"Hi Darren. Thanks again for keeping your Cardinal mailbag during the off season. My question is how much consideration Kyler's draft suggestions could influence Monti's selection? I ask this recalling how much Kyler lobbied to draft CeeDee Lamb but Isaiah Simmons was the choice instead. Nobody knows what would work the best for our offense as our franchise quarterback. At least that's the theory."

Look, I have no problem with Kyler offering suggestions, but until he is in all the meetings, and talks about the cap and roster construction, that's all they can be. I will disagree that no one knows what will work better in the offense than the QB -- I'd pick OC Drew Petzing first. I am guessing Kyler would like an OL and a WR, and I do think those are on the to-do list. But Kyler also doesn't want to have to score 37 points a game to have a chance to win, so the defense will need help.

From Jim Davenport:

"The game now moves from the gridiron to the GM's office. I remember a hire of an assistant that was supposed to have a great record on draft picks. Can you name him and give us some background on him? I'm sure MO will be relying on him for valuable information for selections. Now let the next series of the New Cardinal history be written."

Not sure who you are talking about. The Cardinals did hire Dave Sears, who had been with the Lions, to be assistant GM. But he was hired soon after Monti was and was part of the entire draft season last year already. This will be his second Cardinals draft.

From Bob Miller:

"Darren. When Josh Dobbs was traded, did he accumulate enough snaps for Minnesota to forfeit the seventh-round pick back to the Cardinals? If so, I believe that Arizona would have three selections in the seventh round. Thanks."

The Cardinals did not get the seventh-round pick back from the Vikings. They have one seventh-round pick, acquired from the Giants in the Simmons deal. 

From Joe Cardea:

"Darren, without considering contracts, which QB in playoffs would you trade for Kyler? I would trade for Stroud, Mahomes, Allen, Hurts, Jackson. Would not trade for Flacco, Love, Prescott, Purdy, Stafford, Mayfield, Goff, Tagovailoa, Rudolph. I did take age into consideration but not rookie contract or any contract status."

Sorry, this one is moot for me because I operate with what I think the Cardinals will/might do and they aren't trading Murray. (Besides, don't want to get into tampering issues). I'll give you my playoff QB power ranking instead (this is the body of work, not how they performed in the postseason -- although down the stretch matters.)

1. Mahomes
2. Jackson
3. Allen
4. Stroud
5. Stafford
6. Purdy
7. Prescott
8. Hurts
9. Love
10. Goff
11. Tua
12. Mayfield
13. Flacco
14. Rudolph

From Tom Cowley:

"Hi Darren. Can't believe the Prater mishaps. In your opinion what would be the first three selections based on need? Really hope some of the IR guys can/will make a recovery and fill our multiple defensive needs this year. Is that a reasonable expectation?"

Based on need? I'd say edge, defensive line, receiver. As for the IR guys, depends. I think there are some depth guys there. But some of them are free-agents-to-be, and they have to be re-signed first.

From John Turilli:

"I truly love your answers this past mailbag. Monti Ossenfort is  smart and after knowing we started 11 rookies this season or major playtime, I will be thrilled for the next rebuild draft. What do you think about with the cap money and the 6 picks in the first three rounds we: sign a No. 1 WR in free agency and then draft in this order. OL, DL, DL, CB, CB, WR, RB. Then the last five picks go for the best pure athletic studs left. I just think we really need to draft by need this year."

We'll have to disagree, John. The Cardinals have needs. But if you are sitting there, for instance, with a second-round pick and there is an excellent cornerback and he's rated much higher than a lineman, you can't take the lineman. I just talked about Cody Brown and the 2009 reach the Cards did in the second round and that was a mess. 

From Ed Helinski:

"Who are your candidates for team MVP? Feel free to list several if you wish."

To me there were two: James Conner, who I would call MVP, and a close second would be Trey McBride. Conner was magnificent this season, and McBride kept the passing game afloat when the receivers were in a drought. 

From Jon Miller:

"On the subject of PJJ (and possibly Alt or Fanashu) and the subject of LT or RT. PJJ says the right things. Love the guy, they drafted a winner, but being LT or RT matters a lot, financially. What player in this league is content making less money? None. PJJ is capable of playing LT, so if he's stuck at RT long term, is he going to be content making, on average $10M p/y, less than his LT counterpart?"

I think I'd point to Lane Johnson and the Eagles and say it's doesn't have to be a big deal. There is no rule that says the right tackle has to make significantly less than the left.

From Slade Brorman:

"Hi Darren, when Coach Gannon took over, plenty of people made fun of the initial videos behind the scenes. Regardless, the fan base is energized and his culture change is noticeable on Sundays. What did you make of those initial first impressions? We now know that he's not one to show emotion to the media or press, so were those clips outliers?"

When Gannon took over, it was at a time when there were many (mostly Philly) fans that were willing to take shots at him because of how last season ended. To be honest, I've never really understood people being that way. Fans often clamor to be able to see what a person is like behind the scenes or to have them speak their mind, but then when they see it or hear it, they criticize it. I think Gannon is full of energy and emotion, but he isn't going to flaunt that in the face of opponents.

From Cole Lavallee:

"Hey Darren, what is your take on Kyler Murray's progression as a leader? There were several times where Kyler looked like he was going to throw a fit when the game or play didn't go his way but he handled himself very well."

I'm not sure when it was that Kyler looked that way; I don't remember that at all. I think Kyler looked like a new player in several aspects after he came back from his injury and some of that is natural in my opinion. He's another year older and wiser, he's been through serious adversity for the first time, and he has a coaching staff with which he clicked.

From Rob S:

"It seems like everyone is being polite about what things were like under Kliff and Keim vs now with KG and Monti. It's the classy thing to do and that's how they should handle themselves, but I am dang curious about it. Any insights there?"

I mean, I don't think anyone is going to deny it got sideways at the end with Steve Keim, and unfortunately for Kliff Kingsbury that was going to make things difficult -- and the relationship between he and Kyler had obviously frayed as well. Mostly, I saw an injury-riddled team that was struggling to win games and when you add all that together, it wasn't good at the end -- but that's what it's like at the end of eras usually, it wasn't much different at the end of Dennis Green, or Whisenhunt/Graves. 

From Ford Burrow:

"Well now I have to retort. You know what I meant. A No. 1 overall pick is going to the HOF at a higher clip than Mr. Irrelevant. Not only due to playtime opportunity, but also because of talent. Mind you the greatest player in NFL history was pick #199, so we understand it's not black and white; but the point is logically simple: the best players are usually high picks (and higher the better). And no, we shouldn't 'move on' from Suggs. It was an all-time bone-head move. We could've have a dominant, HOF pass rusher for 10-plus years. Who's to say we don't win the Super Bowl in 2009, if Suggs was the pick? Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. Larry Fitzgerald was drafted No. 3 overall. Imagine if we traded back. Marvin might be the next Fitz."

My favorite part of this being my mailbag is that I get the last word. So this will be the last word on this subject. I'll take it one point at a time.

1. Yes, a higher pick will have a higher chance at being in the Hall of Fame. Doesn't mean I can't come up with dozens of examples of mediocre to bad top 10 picks. 
2. I feel sorry for anyone in your life -- and actually you too -- if you carry around 20-year-old grudges. That's a hell of a way to live, whether it is about a football team or anything else. 
3. The Cardinals drafted a near Hall of Fame pass rusher in Simeon Rice. He wasn't here 10-plus years. You don't know what would've happened with Suggs. I am not arguing they shouldn't have taken him. But your assumptions are just that -- assumptions. If Suggs is the pick in 2003, then maybe they win more games and the Cardinals don't pick 3 in 2004, and then they don't get Fitz. And so on and so forth. Just acting like you'd add Suggs to the same 2008 roster is disingenuous.