The Official "Don't Waste the #6 Pick on Terrell Suggs" Thread

[SECTION 11]

Originally posted by Ed B
someone who hasn't seen anything but workout numbers

I watch PLENTY of college ball.

This pisses me off.



How many WSU games have you actually seen?

Personally, I watched four this last season. UW, OSU, ASU and OU. Yeah, I'm an expert. Check me out.

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Originally posted by JasonKGME
Once again I ask the question, why does everyone keep calling Suggs a "situational pass rusher"? I remember watching several games last year of ASU, and repeatedly seeing and hearing the announcers talk about how the other team would RUN the ball to the opposite side of the field from Suggs because he was such a force that if they ran to his side there were good odds the RB would be tackled for a loss.

Why does everyone seem to think that he will only be used in 3rd and long situations?

I think it's due to the fact that the NFL game is about 14 notches above that at the college level. While Suggs is an exceptional athelete, he wasn't facing many 330 pound tackles that were 3 steps quicker and just that much stronger than he was. That is where his size (or lack thereof) comes into play. You have to admit, by NFL standards, that Suggs is undersized. He played around 240ish for ASU. In the NFL that would be more LB sized than DE sized. He could join the Boston/Pittman diet and balloon himself up to a more acceptable 260+, but for his own health, I would prefer to see him play at more of his natural weight.

Depending upon his ability to do so, I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possiblity to convert him into an everydown LB. He could still "drop down" into the DE position on passing downs to provide the pass rush this team desperately needs.

 

[SECTION 11]

Originally posted by Ed B
someone who hasn't seen anything but workout numbers.

seeing them play once

someone who's never seen him or only seen him once.

someone just seeing his workout numbers

it's clear they've never even seen the guy play.

compared to someone who's never seen them play

This is hilarious.

I hate college ball. Never touch the stuff.

 

[john h]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
A situational pass rusher is just not worth #6 money.
Rules are made to be broken.

Every team and every situation is different.

The Cardinals - right now - would go into next season with McAddley as our #1 receiver, Barrett as our "other" CB and either Dennis Johnson or VDB as our pass rushing specialist.

A case could be made that we could get by with McAddley and Barrett. Our most glaring weakness remains the lack of a pass rush.

It then becomes a matter of supply and demand.

A. We need a really good pass rushing specialist (situational or everyday) badly.

B. There aren't too many of these in free agency or in the draft.

C. Ergo - Need is high/supply is low. It makes sense to pay big bucks for a


situational pass rusher, and Suggs is an attractive option.


Jeff I agree that to much is being made on these boards about workouts. This is just one factor among many that a team looks at when picking a players.

Finally - for all you stat-boys out there. Suggs isn't qualifying for the US Olympics, he's a football player. Rip up Suggs' workout results and go watch some tape. He can play. He can help us a lot.

Combine and Pro Day times are meant to to support or clarify what the scouts already think about a prospect's ability to play football. The times aren't meant to be used in isolation to predict whether or not the kid can play.

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Originally posted by SECTION 11
How many WSU games have you actually seen?

While this may not be directed at me, I feel a need to reply. I watch as many WSU games as I can. I grew up watching them play, attended class there, and even attempted (unseccessfully) to play football for them.

I watch ASU and U of A when I can...

what this is really boiling down to is:

1. Opinion
2. Want
3. Pride

Everyone wants to see their favorite college players on their favorite pro team.

 

[Ed B]

Originally posted by SECTION 11
This is hilarious.

I hate college ball. Never touch the stuff.

Hey, if you watch lots of ball, so be it. All you kept talking about was workouts. It's not like you said "I saw Suggs play and think he sucks".

If you've seen him play and don't like him, then hey, we just have to agree to disagree. You never mentioned him in any game context though.

 

[SECTION 11]

Originally posted by Ed B
Hey, if you watch lots of ball, so be it. All you kept talking about was workouts. It's not like you said "I saw Suggs play and think he sucks".

If you've seen him play and don't like him, then hey, we just have to agree to disagree. You never mentioned him in any game context though.

I've seen him play. Granted, I don't tape games (unless they involve the Huskers and Yet Another Championship), but I've seen just about every televised ASU game since I moved here in 87, and I go to a few as I can.

And for the record, I don't think Suggs sucks. At all.
He terrorized the PAC 10. He shined against a powerful K-State team in prime time. He's solid. I like the fact that he can be effective from either the left or the right. He's super quick off the ball. He's got a little Bruce Lee in his hands. He's a playmaker.

 

[Shane]

Sorry Section 11 But you are really smoking the crack pipe when it comes to this thread.

The bottom line is that workouts dont mean squat! There is a huge difference between natural speed and "game speed" Many players have natural speed and would be great track stars but it just doesnt equate to the football field with pads and contact!

IE Jerry Rice Name me one time in his first 12 years that you can remember that he was caught from behind? Thats coming from a guy that ran damn near a 4.7 40 time! You cant it just didnt happen!

If we were to land Suggs the guy will not be a situational pass rusher. He will start at DE along side KVB on the other side. If we Land Suggs and Holiday then Suggs will beat out KVB to start and KVB will be one of the rotation guys.

His play on the field is unmatched the guy wreaks havoc on the field and has superior quickness and talent to KVB. He will play and play alot all this is said of course hoping that the BIG RED injury bug doesnt hit him!

You are looking into these workout stats way tooooo much almost like they are the gospel.

Bottom line is they are meaningless!

 

[Shane]

Still friends??

 

[SECTION 11]

Originally posted by Shane H
You are looking into these workout stats way tooooo much almost like they are the gospel.

I'm not hung up on workout stats. Really, I'm not.
At least not any more than anyone else is.

Just playing Sun Devil's advocate.

 

[SECTION 11]

Originally posted by Shane H
Still friends??

Of course, my man.
Same goes for Ed. He's got a lot of insight. More than I do on a national scale.

I knew what I was getting into with this thread for the most part!

 

[Ed B]

Oh, I don't really get angry over this stuff. People tend to misinterpret a hot debate for a personal war in this society. Sec 11 is totally entitled to his opinion and I don't think it hurts anyone to kill some time with a little back-and-forth here.

It's always amazed me on these sports boards, sometimes I think we argue this stuff more thoroughly and passionately than the front offices do! A team of people I've encountered on these boards (starting with Russ Smith and Jeff Gollin) could have done a better job as GM than our last 4 GMs have done, and I mean that with all sincerity. I hate the "armchair QB/couch potato" argument. There are some damn smart people out here, and some damn dumb people in front offices.

 

[Russ Smith]

Originally posted by SECTION 11
I wouldn't take him at #6 either, but do I think he's a first round guy? Sure.

I also think he should have gone back for his senior year given the DT class he's competing with. He already said once he was without a doubt going back for his senior year because of Wazzu's new coach (Pardo, or something like that).
Is he regretting his decision? I dunno...

I think Long is the single most risky DL in the draft. He's got an injury history, and he's got clear issues. Scouts question his ability to hold his ground against NFL OL's, scouts question his athleticism(hell one guy asked if he had ANY athleticism). Great college player but I think Long in the first round is going to be a mistake.

I've wavered on Suggs early on I was skeptical but when I compared his monster sack numbers to the rest of the Pac 10 I realized that his stats are STILL head and shoulders above the rest of the guys so even if this was just a bad year for pass blocking in the Pac 10, Suggs is clearly a great college pass rusher.

He's currently the guy I'm hoping to get at 6, if not him I want a DT like Robertson or a trade down. I'm still highly skeptical of Palmer and Leftwich slipping I just don't buy QB's that talented will slip.

 

[Ed B]

Long is not a top-10 pick but with his motor and desire I don't think he can be a <b>bad</b> player in the NFL. I mean he might not be a star but when a guy plays like his ass is on fire, he's at least going to be a contributor.

The question therefore becomes do you risk a #1 on a guy who might just be average rather than good or better.

 

[JasonKGME]

Originally posted by Cardinals.Ken
I think it's due to the fact that the NFL game is about 14 notches above that at the college level. While Suggs is an exceptional athelete, he wasn't facing many 330 pound tackles that were 3 steps quicker and just that much stronger than he was. That is where his size (or lack thereof) comes into play. You have to admit, by NFL standards, that Suggs is undersized. He played around 240ish for ASU. In the NFL that would be more LB sized than DE sized. He could join the Boston/Pittman diet and balloon himself up to a more acceptable 260+, but for his own health, I would prefer to see him play at more of his natural weight.

Depending upon his ability to do so, I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possiblity to convert him into an everydown LB. He could still "drop down" into the DE position on passing downs to provide the pass rush this team desperately needs.

He played about 245 at ASU. You say that is undersized in the NFL. I took a look at the top 10 defensive ends in sacks last year. The average weight was 268lbs. So figure with the proper diet/training that he puts on another 10 pounds of muscle not just added bulk, which is possible especially concidering his only 20 so should still be growing a bit. So he's then only about 13 pounds less then the average of the top 10 players. give him till he's 23 and odds are he'll be right around the average and starting his 3rd year for us. And at 13 pounds less I think that means he could be an every down back, just like most of the top 10 DE's play.

And assuming you want the other 13 pounds if he adds 10 in muscle this year and leaves the 12 in bulk he gained then he is at the average for the nfl.

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Originally posted by JasonKGME
He played about 245 at ASU. You say that is undersized in the NFL. I took a look at the top 10 defensive ends in sacks last year. The average weight was 268lbs. So figure with the proper diet/training that he puts on another 10 pounds of muscle not just added bulk, which is possible especially concidering his only 20 so should still be growing a bit. So he's then only about 13 pounds less then the average of the top 10 players. give him till he's 23 and odds are he'll be right around the average and starting his 3rd year for us. And at 13 pounds less I think that means he could be an every down back, just like most of the top 10 DE's play.

And assuming you want the other 13 pounds if he adds 10 in muscle this year and leaves the 12 in bulk he gained then he is at the average for the nfl.

Valid points, but I think you missed mine.

The points I as trying to express was:

1) The reason a lot of people question his ability to everydown is due to his current size.

2) It is entirely possible for him to gain that mass, but it may lead to future injury considerations. Depending on his "frame" added mass (muscle or otherwise) could ultimately lead to unecessary injuries. Look at Jamal Anderson, he could squat-thrust a house, but his ligaments just wouldn't stay healed, because you can't make those stronger, only weaker. I hate to see players get over-muscled only to have them drop due to injury.

I believe that Suggs is a good pick at #6 overall. I believe he has nothing but upside, whether as a DE or LB. And you're right, he has some natural growth left to fill out the rest of his frame.

 

[JeffGollin]

Is #37 too high for Peek? I dunno.
I made it a point to watch Peek in a late season game. He wasn't effective rushing the passer. He wasn't particularly good stopping the run. He was pretty invisible. Maybe he had a bad day.

I did the same thing with Dewayne White (& watched a late season game). He made plays. I was impressed. (Maybe he had an unusually good day).

I could see White at #37 if we didn't draft Suggs. But I'd be wary of drafting Peek - until #70 or even later.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by JeffGollin
Is #37 too high for Peek? I dunno.
I made it a point to watch Peek in a late season game. He wasn't effective rushing the passer. He wasn't particularly good stopping the run. He was pretty invisible. Maybe he had a bad day.

I did the same thing with Dewayne White (& watched a late season game). He made plays. I was impressed. (Maybe he had an unusually good day).

I could see White at #37 if we didn't draft Suggs. But I'd be wary of drafting Peek - until #70 or even later.

Jeff,

Did you watch White in the GMAC Bowl? He looked pretty darn invisible, chasing after a Qb playing on a broken shin. After watching him in that game, I don't think I (only my opinion) could draft him with the 37th pick.

 

[X-29Fan]

Originally posted by kerouac9
Dude, I'm staying out of this one. I'm just here to regulate on people saying we should draft Leftwich or, now apparently, Boller (who is in my book as being the prime candidate for First Round Bust of the 2003 Draft. He came out of nowhere from being a late 2nd Round QB to possibly being in the Top 15). It would be so "old Cardinals" to trade down and take Boller.

Time will tell.

At this point, Boller or Boeller (however you spell his name) has as much a chance to make it as any of the prospects. And IMO, more of a chance to make a decent NFL starting QB than McCown.

Don't agree that trading down and drafting Boeller would be so "old Cardinals". Especially depending on what they got in return for their pick. Signing Emmitt Smith long after his prime is so "old Cardinals" IMO.

 

[SECTION 11]

Originally posted by SECTION 11
This idea... is horrible.

It's about time we gave this thread some more playing time, don't ya think?

 

[Shane]

Re: Re: The Official "Don't Waste the #6 Pick on Terrell Suggs" Thread

Originally posted by SECTION 11
It's about time we gave this thread some more playing time, don't ya think?

NOPE!

But feel free to find that WE SHOULD DRAFT TERRELL SUGGS WITH THE #6 PICK thread and bump it on up!

 

[Card Trader]

Re: Re: Re: The Official "Don't Waste the #6 Pick on Terrell Suggs" Thread

Originally posted by Shane H
NOPE!

But feel free to find that WE SHOULD DRAFT TERRELL SUGGS WITH THE #6 PICK thread and bump it on up!

1 step ahead of ya

 

[kerouac9]

Yup, I'm a giant idiot and so is anyone else that thinks the worst pass rush in NFL history could use a guy who got 24 sacks last year.

Let's draft Leftwich so he can sit on the bench while we go 4-12 again thanks to a pass rush that generates 20 sacks total.

April 1st, 2003. Ed pegged the 2003 season exactly. Correct record, one wrong on the sacks (21 as a team).

 

[SECTION 11]

Good times, good times.


Don't waste our pick on Roy Williams!!!

 

[Pariah]

Good times, good times.


Don't waste our pick on Roy Williams!!!

In the context of this thread does that mean we should most definately draft Roy Williams?