OH PLEASE OH PLEASE! Terrell Suggs wants to play for Cardinals

[dreamcastrocks]

The bottom line is that we got 1 Pro Bowler in Boldin, three starters in Hayes, Pace (not his fault he is a 3-4 SSLB and was drafted into a 4-3) and BJ and quality depth in Wells. Really, why is there all this crying? Most teams would be very pleased with that draft.

Then you don't have any football acumen. It was universally agreed through the media that it was a huge blunder. I doubt you'd get the media, upon reviewing it, to change opinions. I doubt you'd get many people on here to agree with you either.

I agree with cardsfanmd. You look at any draft that the Cards have had in the past 20 years, and I bet that most of think that looking at it now, it was our best draft. Maybe at the time, the deal looked horrible, but looking at it now, it looks a lot better than it did.

If we are going to judge the drafts by what happened on draft day, and not years later, then it looks like Green's last two drafts were great. The more time passes, the more they look bad.

You can't judge a draft on draft day, because others say that it was a bad deal at the time, these players produce or not. Then you can make a judgment.

 

[dreamcastrocks]

I'll never forget the look on Dave McGinnis' face during an interview right after that trade happened. It looked like he had been sucker punched in the 'nads.

Let's not forget we only passed on Suggs. The buzz in the days right before the draft was that we were leaning towards Marcus Trufant. That would've been a pretty good pick too. And, we traded down with the idea of getting Jerome McDougle who has sucked. So, if it had worked as planned, .....ugh. Even so, we got nothing out of BJ and Pace for 3 full seasons.

McDougle has been injury plagued.

 

[CardLogic]

It was universally agreed through the media that it was a huge blunder.

No it wasn't universal. Certainly there were some "experts" with that opinion. There were others that thought the Cardinals had a average or better draft. I recall Gil Brandt applauding the Cardinals draft at the time.

You also seem to be under the impression that Suggs was the only player available when we picked; he wasn't.

Right the Cardinals could have selected Jonathan Sullivan, Jimmy Kennedy or James McDougle. McDougle was rumored to be the Cardinals target; how'd that work out for the Eagles?

So, let us re-examine this trade, okay? First of all, you do know that trades of this nature usually happen using the formula of 2 lower 1sts for one high 2nd, right? That's the baseline.

Is that right, two low 1st round picks for one high 2nd round pick? And you think Graves made a bad deal, lol!

 

[Pariah]

McDougle was rumored to be the Cardinals target; how'd that work out for the Eagles?

To be fair, McDougle got shot didn't he?

While the rest of that draft may have been pretty good, I think it was fairly unanimous that it was a mistake to either A)draft out of our spot and not take Suggs or Leftwich and/or B) to take BJ and Pace where we did.

 

[cardsfanmd]

Then you don't have any football acumen. It was universally agreed through the media that it was a huge blunder. I doubt you'd get the media, upon reviewing it, to change opinions. I doubt you'd get many people on here to agree with you either.

You also seem to be under the impression that Suggs was the only player available when we picked; he wasn't.

So, let us re-examine this trade, okay? First of all, you do know that trades of this nature usually happen using the formula of 2 lower 1sts for one high 2nd, right? That's the baseline. Instead, we did that, PLUS gave up a 4th rounder, PLUS traded back in the 2nd. That right there is insanity itself, without looking any deeper.

So now let's look deeper. We've just discovered that, with that given-away 4th rounder, we could have had Asante Samuel. Granted, we may have blown that pick, but we may not have. Also, Boldin could have been picked anywhere between our original pick and the pick we traded back for. Sheer luck that he wasn't.

You're trying to take other picks in the draft into consideration (Wells, Hayes, Boldin) when talking about this trade. Those picks are irrelevant. Well, except for the fact that we endangered missing out on Boldin because of the crappy trade we made. Bottom line is that we traded the #6 pick, a 4th rounder that may or may not have been Asante Samuel, and a chance to miss out on Boldin...for...Pace (a player that is finally showing some ability but who has yet to live up to his slot), and a questionable #3 receiver who definitely never lived up to his slot and will most likely be off the team after his original contract. Hmm, you're right...how can that possibly be considered a bad trade?

To be fair, I'll take out the 'could have been's'. We traded whoever we could have taken at #6 (a fair sampling of talent, there) and another mid-round player for a possible late bloomer platoon OLB and a #3 receiver that wasn't good enough to stick. Still a pretty bad trade.

In all honesty that was one of the most pathetic posts I have ever read. I have always thought that you knew your stuff. Thank you for clarifying it for me.

First off, the media is a bunch of idiots. They also gave us an "A" for the draft the year we took McElroy. Furthermore, what media are you speaking of. I have yet to hear anyone important speak on the issue since draft day. That doesn't count because none of them had played a snap yet. No media outside of Arizona gives a sh-t about the Cardinals, so if you are trying to make me feel bad about not agreeing with a bunch of low-rent wannabes in the Arz media then keep trying.

As for you saying that I brought other players into the conversation I say go back and read the other posts and you will see that I was simply summing up something someone else had already said.

Crying that we missed out on taking Samuel is hilarious. Gimme a break. Every year every team misses out on great guys.

And who besides you thinks that BJ isn't acapable 3rd WR. No one. He isn't gonna leave because he isn't good enough to be our third, its the opposite. Someone else is gonna give him way more money to be their #2. Great football acumen, genius.

The bottom line is that it is what it is. The trade was made and reguardless of what you and a bunch of idiots from the Arizona media think, we came out allright.

 

[abomb]

Interesting read from Pro Football Weekly, circa 2003.

Arizona drops the ball

Cards trade down and fill needs, but reach for two players
By Andy Hanacek ([email protected])
April 26, 2003

The Cardinals could have had any one of a number of top-notch playmakers at No. 6 overall. Instead, they made a valiant move, trading the pick to the Saints for their two first-round picks, Nos. 17 and 18 overall. The trade was a little confusing to me to begin with, since Arizona basically moved down in the first and second rounds and gave up a fourth-round pick for an extra first-rounder.

Contrast that with the two extra picks the Bears secured for the No. 4 overall pick. It seems as though the Cardinals could have gotten more. They weren't hosed, until they made their picks at 17 and 18.

Needing a bazillion things to make their team competitive, the Cardinals decided to split the difference of their two picks, taking offense with one and defense with the other. That's a nice strategy, but poor draft execution followed. After two nice free-agent offseasons on paper (Duane Starks, Freddie Jones last season; Emmitt Smith, Jeff Blake this season), Arizona dropped the ball in the draft.

With the 17th pick, the Cardinals took Penn State WR Bryant Johnson. That's a nice pick for the Cardinals to make, particularly since their top wide receiver was expected to be Bryan Gilmore, a player who has done nothing but flash ability rather than put together a solid season. It's a nice pick, except here. Johnson was expected to last into the low first round, and the WR class is pretty deep at this point.

With the 18th pick, Arizona filled another need — defensive line. Wake Forest DE Calvin Pace should provide a fine all-around effort in place of Fred Wakefield on the outside, opposite a hopefully-more-durable Kyle Vanden Bosch. But again, Pace was taken too high here. He may have even been around far later if the Cardinals really wanted him.

The Cardinals were wise to move down and fill multiple needs — that I can't criticize. However, they went about it all wrong. I was willing to overlook the too-small treasure they received for the No. 6 pick if the Cardinals would have used the picks well. By selecting Johnson and Pace, they did an OK job by filling needs, but they really disappointed me by reaching on these players as much as they did.

 

[abomb]

This one is even better.

Getting it right


Cardinals smart not to pass on Boldin
By Mike Wilkening ([email protected])
April 26, 2003





Finally, a pick that makes sense by the Arizona Cardinals.

Florida State WR Anquan Boldin isn’t a speed demon — he ran in the 4.7 range at the Combine. You know, what some defensive ends in this draft clocked in Indianapolis. But he plays fast. Has good hands. And my, is he big, not so much tall as he is ripped.

It says here Boldin will be a better pro than Bryant Johnson, the Penn State wide receiver whom the Cardinals took a round too early at pick No. 17. Why? Because Boldin just looks like the devil to cover. He’s strong enough to beat press coverage, runs well after the catch, and has the confidence necessary to be a standout.

Johnson is about two inches taller than Boldin and is faster on the track, but I just don’t think he’s anything special. He just doesn’t have that “it” that gives a player a chance to be great.

Kudos to the Cardinals for throwing away the computer numbers and picking Boldin on what their scouts' eyes told them.

 

[abomb]

One more;

17. Arizona (from New Orleans): WR Bryant Johnson, Penn State Well, you cannot say wide receiver wasn’t a need. Johnson has great size and speed but doesn’t change directions well and is not a No. 1 receiver in the NFL. Unlike the last time the Cards went to the Big Ten for a wide receiver, David Boston, many scouts considered him a middle of the second round pick at best. Johnson does not play to the 4.4 time he was clocked at during his campus workout. By trading the sixth pick in the draft for No.’s 17 and 18, the Cardinals were able to address multiple needs — a wise move. But VP of player personnel Rod Graves reached for Johnson in this spot and could have done much better with a pair of picks. For example, by taking DE Chris Kelsay and OLB Boss Bailey, the Cardinals could have answered multiple needs and filled the hole at wide receiver at the top of the second round.

18. Arizona (from Miami through New Orleans): DE Calvin Pace, Wake Forest Pace was another major reach at this position. Many scouts had DEs Chris Kelsay of Nebraska, Kenny Peterson of Ohio State, Tyler Brayton of Colorado and Dewayne White of Louisville ranked higher on their boards. Pace fills a major need with the Cardinals ranked last in the league in sacks the last two years. Fred Wakefield has great size and uses it to bat down balls, but is stiff and two steps too slow. Pace will challenge Wakefield for the starting job alongside Kyle Vanden Bosch, who has a good motor when healthy. Pace is a better than good athlete with quickness and power who plays bigger and faster than his times (6-4, 269, 4.75), but his durability is a question as is his inconsistent effort.

 

[Arizona's Finest]

The bottom line is that we got 1 Pro Bowler in Boldin, three starters in Hayes, Pace (not his fault he is a 3-4 SSLB and was drafted into a 4-3) and BJ and quality depth in Wells. Really, why is there all this crying? Most teams would be very pleased with that draft.

The bottom line ends after the bold'in (pun intended)

Everything else was gravy

 

[Skkorpion]

I was in that little room when Graves and McGinnis dragged themselves up on the raised platform to answer questions. They both looked like death warmed over.

I thought it was a bad trade, further botched by losing a shot at the guy they wanted. Every reporter in that room knew it was a bad trade. The questioning was subdued. Nobody wanted to be there at that moment.

Greg Gladysiewski, a nice man and the media guy, was going around, passing out handouts on Johnson and Pace, putting a brave face on it. He looked terrible too.

That day taught me just how hard a job it must be being a Cards beat reporter. The local guys hammered the Cards, rightfully so, despite liking McGinnis and hoping for a better story line.

A lot of you guys bag on the local media. Being up close, watching them work, made me appreciate them.

As we were pounding out our stories afterwards, the long-time EVT columnist, (name escapes me right now) sat in the cubicle next to mine, writing his draft editorial. After two hours of typing, changing, asking others to read it, he was still agonizing over his writing.

I wrote nothing. Couldn't do it. Went home to eat and rest and prepared to be back there the next morning for day two of the draft.

Worst day of my life as a Cards fan.

 

[abomb]

I was in that little room when Graves and McGinnis dragged themselves up on the raised platform to answer questions. They both looked like death warmed over.

I thought it was a bad trade, further botched by losing a shot at the guy they wanted. Every reporter in that room knew it was a bad trade. The questioning was subdued. Nobody wanted to be there at that moment.

Greg Gladysiewski, a nice man and the media guy, was going around, passing out handouts on Johnson and Pace, putting a brave face on it. He looked terrible too.

That day taught me just how hard a job it must be being a Cards beat reporter. The local guys hammered the Cards, rightfully so, despite liking McGinnis and hoping for a better story line.

A lot of you guys bag on the local media. Being up close, watching them work, made me appreciate them.

As we were pounding out our stories afterwards, the long-time EVT columnist, (name escapes me right now) sat in the cubicle next to mine, writing his draft editorial. After two hours of typing, changing, asking others to read it, he was still agonizing over his writing.

I wrote nothing. Couldn't do it. Went home to eat and rest and prepared to be back there the next morning for day two of the draft.

Worst day of my life as a Cards fan.

Awesome story Jim.

 

[Stout]

I agree with cardsfanmd. You look at any draft that the Cards have had in the past 20 years, and I bet that most of think that looking at it now, it was our best draft. Maybe at the time, the deal looked horrible, but looking at it now, it looks a lot better than it did.

If we are going to judge the drafts by what happened on draft day, and not years later, then it looks like Green's last two drafts were great. The more time passes, the more they look bad.

You can't judge a draft on draft day, because others say that it was a bad deal at the time, these players produce or not. Then you can make a judgment.

Again, remove Wells, Hayes, and Boldin from the picture. THEY DID NOT FIGURE IN THE TRADE. Did I say it was a bad draft? Nope.

 

[cardsfanmd]

Again, remove Wells, Hayes, and Boldin from the picture. THEY DID NOT FIGURE IN THE TRADE. Did I say it was a bad draft? Nope.

No you blasted me for saying that it was a good draft. Regardless of what you want, the whole thread doesn't have to be about the trade.

 

[Stout]

In all honesty that was one of the most pathetic posts I have ever read. I have always thought that you knew your stuff. Thank you for clarifying it for me.

First off, the media is a bunch of idiots. They also gave us an "A" for the draft the year we took McElroy. Furthermore, what media are you speaking of. I have yet to hear anyone important speak on the issue since draft day. That doesn't count because none of them had played a snap yet. No media outside of Arizona gives a sh-t about the Cardinals, so if you are trying to make me feel bad about not agreeing with a bunch of low-rent wannabes in the Arz media then keep trying.

As for you saying that I brought other players into the conversation I say go back and read the other posts and you will see that I was simply summing up something someone else had already said.

Crying that we missed out on taking Samuel is hilarious. Gimme a break. Every year every team misses out on great guys.

And who besides you thinks that BJ isn't acapable 3rd WR. No one. He isn't gonna leave because he isn't good enough to be our third, its the opposite. Someone else is gonna give him way more money to be their #2. Great football acumen, genius.

The bottom line is that it is what it is. The trade was made and reguardless of what you and a bunch of idiots from the Arizona media think, we came out allright.

It sounded as if you were trying to lump Wells, Boldin, and Hayes into the mix to make the trade sound better than it was. If I misread that, I apologize.

Crying that we missed out on taking Samuel is hilarious? No, it's ironic and sad. We missed out on the CHANCE of taking Samuel. If we were looking at the pick in hindsight, having picked someone else, then it would be a hilarious discussion. We're talking about the fact that we traded the pick entirely, which means we're discussing value that we traded away. Face it: we could've had a pro-bowler with what we 'threw in' to that trade. And, by-the-by, I did say it is unfair to label that pick Samuel period. Like I said, we might not have taken him. Sure would be nice to have found out, though.

What has BJ shown to earn all of this love? He's been at best an average #3. When he's had to play as a #1 or a #2, he has completely disappeared. I hope the 9ers sign him to be a #2 or a #1, because that will only help us.

Still don't know how we came out all right. Instead of taking a pro-bowl player or a solid CB (Trufant was on our radar, as another poster pointed out), we traded a #1 Pick, a 4th Round Pick, and traded BACK in the 2nd, for two Mid-1st Rounders. On the face of it, that's a bad trade, just looking at picks. Horrendous. Add in that we gave up on the chance at a better player in the 1st, a 4th rounder, and a chance at losing Boldin, for an average #3 WR and an OLB that's finally sniffing decent platoon duty, and that equals one heck of a bad trade.

But I'm curious to see what the board thinks now. I'll put it up there in a poll.

 

[CardLogic]

Again, remove Wells, Hayes, and Boldin from the picture. THEY DID NOT FIGURE IN THE TRADE. Did I say it was a bad draft? Nope.

Boldin did figure in the trade because the Cardinals very likely would not have taken him at pick #37! That would have been too high according to his ranking at the time. So the Cardinals would have passed on him just as 31 other teams did.

 

[Stout]

Boldin did figure in the trade because the Cardinals very likely would not have taken him at pick #37! That would have been too high according to his ranking at the time. So the Cardinals would have passed on him just as 31 other teams did.

LOL Are you for real? The only way Boldin figures into the trade is in a negative way...because we risked not getting him by trading down. You seem to be saying that, because the war room was too incompetent to be willing to take him in one spot, they should be praised for including a bad tradedown as part of another deal, because a good player fell into their laps. Wow. Your logic, or lack thereof, astounds.

If that isn't what you mean, then please elaborate. A tradeback in the 2nd round on top of an already bad throw-in of a 4th rounder is what it is...a bad call. There isn't a justification for it...it was sheer dumb luck that landed us Boldin where we got him.

 

[Pariah]

Boldin did figure in the trade because the Cardinals very likely would not have taken him at pick #37! That would have been too high according to his ranking at the time.

riiiighht. because the cardinals were so worried about taking players ahead of their ranking.

That's why we didn't take Pace in the middle of the first... oh, wait....

 

[Stout]

No you blasted me for saying that it was a good draft. Regardless of what you want, the whole thread doesn't have to be about the trade.

Um, no, actually, not even a little bit. I blasted you for saying it was a good trade. Very specifically.

No, the whole thread doesn't have to be about the trade. You did claim it was a good trade, though, and I called you on that point. That does make our argument about the trade. The rest of the draft does not factor into the trade. Thus, if we're going to debate the point, let's stay on topic. Or, you can concede and make it all easier

 

[cardsfanmd]

It sounded as if you were trying to lump Wells, Boldin, and Hayes into the mix to make the trade sound better than it was. If I misread that, I apologize.

Crying that we missed out on taking Samuel is hilarious? No, it's ironic and sad. We missed out on the CHANCE of taking Samuel. If we were looking at the pick in hindsight, having picked someone else, then it would be a hilarious discussion. We're talking about the fact that we traded the pick entirely, which means we're discussing value that we traded away. Face it: we could've had a pro-bowler with what we 'threw in' to that trade. And, by-the-by, I did say it is unfair to label that pick Samuel period. Like I said, we might not have taken him. Sure would be nice to have found out, though.

What has BJ shown to earn all of this love? He's been at best an average #3. When he's had to play as a #1 or a #2, he has completely disappeared. I hope the 9ers sign him to be a #2 or a #1, because that will only help us.

Still don't know how we came out all right. Instead of taking a pro-bowl player or a solid CB (Trufant was on our radar, as another poster pointed out), we traded a #1 Pick, a 4th Round Pick, and traded BACK in the 2nd, for two Mid-1st Rounders. On the face of it, that's a bad trade, just looking at picks. Horrendous. Add in that we gave up on the chance at a better player in the 1st, a 4th rounder, and a chance at losing Boldin, for an average #3 WR and an OLB that's finally sniffing decent platoon duty, and that equals one heck of a bad trade.

But I'm curious to see what the board thinks now. I'll put it up there in a poll.

I am not calling BJ the second coming of Christ (on this board that role is reserved for Adrian Peterson ), but he catches 40 balls every year and is durable. That makes him a capable #3 in my eyes. I guess I am in the minority here, but I thought Pace played his butt off all year and was very impressive.

Maybe I didn't say exactly what I meant earlier. I'm not trying to say that Graves made a great move, but had he taken Suggs we would have been throwing big bucks at a guy who would not have produced here with our system and surrounding players, thus causing you guys to hate him even more. Of that I am certain.

 

[cardsfanmd]

Um, no, actually, not even a little bit. I blasted you for saying it was a good trade. Very specifically.

No, the whole thread doesn't have to be about the trade. You did claim it was a good trade, though, and I called you on that point. That does make our argument about the trade. The rest of the draft does not factor into the trade. Thus, if we're going to debate the point, let's stay on topic. Or, you can concede and make it all easier

Actually yes, you took a post in which I responded to someone else's comment about the draft as a whole and pasted it into a post I had directed towards you in an effort to make it look as though the whole thing was one post.

 

[Stout]

I am not calling BJ the second coming of Christ (on this board that role is reserved for Adrian Peterson ), but he catches 40 balls every year and is durable. That makes him a capable #3 in my eyes. I guess I am in the minority here, but I thought Pace played his butt off all year and was very impressive.

Maybe I didn't say exactly what I meant earlier. I'm not trying to say that Graves made a great move, but had he taken Suggs we would have been throwing big bucks at a guy who would not have produced here with our system and surrounding players, thus causing you guys to hate him even more. Of that I am certain.

The latter is certainly possible, although impossible to tell. Hard to quibble with you on that point, because you may be right.

With BJ, he is what he is: an average #3, as you say. Pace? He played well this year. Not well enough to earn a definite starter job, but enough to at least earn his way into a solid platoon role, sure. For an average #3 receiver and a guy who earns solid platoon status in his contract year, we gave up a high 1st rounder, a 4th rounder, and some spots in the 2nd round. That's still a lousy trade.

 

[cardsfanmd]

None have shown until recently?

Boldin, certainly you are not including him in the "none"! No need to expound further in his case

Wells has been a starter for 4 years / 58 games; he became a permenant starter for the Cardinals in his second year. We all would like to replace him with an perennial All-Pro, however he has been better than most give him credit for.

Hayes has been decent the past two seasons and was showing signs the year prior (2005) but missed the entire season on IR. Likely would have been a regular starter in this third year.

Johnson, obviously not the caliber of the Cardinals two Pro Bowl starters at WR, but he has been solid since his rookie season when he started 8 games and caught 35 passes. He has at least 40 receptions every year since.

Pace has taken the longest to develop and not surprisingly has been the one to be most effected by coaching and being put in a postion to succeed.

Bad draft, no I don't agree. Unpopular draft, yes - so much so that people are still unwilling to see it for it's results.

The bottom line is that we got 1 Pro Bowler in Boldin, three starters in Hayes, Pace (not his fault he is a 3-4 SSLB and was drafted into a 4-3) and BJ and quality depth in Wells. Really, why is there all this crying? Most teams would be very pleased with that draft.

Then you don't have any football acumen.


You're trying to take other picks in the draft into consideration (Wells, Hayes, Boldin) when talking about this trade. Those picks are irrelevant. Well, except for the fact that we endangered missing out on Boldin because of the crappy trade we made. Bottom line is that we traded the #6 pick, a 4th rounder that may or may not have been Asante Samuel, and a chance to miss out on Boldin...for...Pace (a player that is finally showing some ability but who has yet to live up to his slot), and a questionable #3 receiver who definitely never lived up to his slot and will most likely be off the team after his original contract. Hmm, you're right...how can that possibly be considered a bad trade?

To be fair, I'll take out the 'could have been's'. We traded whoever we could have taken at #6 (a fair sampling of talent, there) and another mid-round player for a possible late bloomer platoon OLB and a #3 receiver that wasn't good enough to stick. Still a pretty bad trade.

See

 

[Stout]

Actually yes, you took a post in which I responded to someone else's comment about the draft as a whole and pasted it into a post I had directed towards you in an effort to make it look as though the whole thing was one post.

LOL You got to it just as I was looking back at it. Actually, I meant to say in the post that I had quoted two posts, but I forgot. Silly me. And yes, looking back, I did misconstrue your second post, and thus misrepresented that part of your argument. Sorry for that. You did NOT try to use Wells, Hayes, and Boldin to argue that it was a good trade. I apologize for accidentally making it look like you did.

We'll still have to disagree about the trade itself, though. I will maintain it was a lousy trade, and I have yet to hear how it can have been a good one. If it had simply been BJ/Pace for the #6? Arguments could be made. We threw a couple of more additions to make it sweeter for the Saints and worse for us, though, making it more of a rape than a trade.

 

[Wild Card]

I have seen every game Suggs has played, and you guys really aren't seeing the truth when you look at his stats. He has racked up bunches of sacks no doubt, but how many can you really attribute to him?? ...If you think Suggs' #s would have been 1/2 what they have been had we drafted him your crazy. JMHO.

CFMD:

The problem for Arizona-based fans is that many of us saw Terrell Suggs first be a difference-maker for the ASU Sun Devils. And that we saw that draft as a chance for the Cardinals to fill a need with a legitimate home-grown star.

When the Cards traded out of the spot, those of us trying to see the glass as half-full hoped that Suggs really was too slow to play at a high level in the NFL, and that Graves had found two underrated players in BJ and Pace. So it really s*cked when Suggs went to Pro Bowls with the Ravens, while Pace sat on the bench and Johnson dropped passes that hit him in the hands.

You may be right that Suggs wouldn't have played as well for the Cards. Certainly his surrounding cast in Baltimore has mostly been a cut above, and the Cardinals' recent coaching staffs didn't distinguish themselves in developing talent. But Arizona football fans have watched Terrell Suggs terrorize opposing QBs at both the collegiate and pro levels, and we're tired of hearing that he couldn't have done it for the Cardinals.

I'd like to see him get the chance to try.

WC

 

[ajcardfan]

You may be right that Suggs wouldn't have played as well for the Cards.

I'm so tired of this argument made to defend the Cards not drafting/signing/re-signing a player. What the hell kind of thinking is that? "We're so bad, we make most good players suck?"


Look, Jim's story on that draft is just flat out awesome. It tells anyone EVERYTHING they need to know about what a disaster that trade was.