Another Trade debate for Cardinals fans...

Alphaman

Rookie
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Posts
69
Reaction score
0
Since New Orleans is trying to get into the top of the draft to get Trufant, why aren't the Cardinals (or at least the Cardinal fans) jumping all over this.

IF you could get the #17 and #18 picks for the #6 pick you could draft a DE (McDougal) and a WR (Jacobs or Washington). I'd think those two would be better than 1 Suggs.
 

blindseyed

I'm saying you ARE stuck in Wichita
Joined
Mar 20, 2003
Posts
7,425
Reaction score
4,582
Location
Verrado
Well, I'd say with any other team that sounds good but with the Cards track record that would just mean there would be 2 hold outs in camp instead of 1.
 

JeffGollin

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
20,472
Reaction score
3,056
Location
Holmdel, NJ
IF you could get the #17 and #18 picks for the #6 pick you could draft a DE (McDougal) and a WR (Jacobs or Washington). I'd think those two would be better than 1 Suggs.
That's your opinion. The danger in trading down for quantity is that you might wind up with 2 Tommy Knights instead of getting one Charles Woodson or Brian Urlacher.

Personally, I think the quality drops off somewhere around #12, with the possibility of a couple of good ones maybe lasting til 14 or #15 - but if you were to, say, trade with the Jets for their #13 and #21, there would be no guarantee that the football fates would be kind to you.

Re: McDougle - The 10 on his Wunderlic makes me wonder whether or not he can read the "big words" in the defensive playbook.

Re: Washington - Another "me guy." - The Cards aren't very successful dealing with that type of player.

Re: Jacobs - Solid citizen, craftsman - like Paul Warfield or Hilliard. But is he what the receiving corps needs? Or do we need a physical replacement for D-Bo - i.e. 6-3 215+ with speed?
 

BuckeyeCardinal

Cantankerous Curmudgeon
Joined
Jan 8, 2003
Posts
2,252
Reaction score
0
Agree

Originally posted by JeffGollin
IF you could get the #17 and #18 picks for the #6 pick you could draft a DE (McDougal) and a WR (Jacobs or Washington). I'd think those two would be better than 1 Suggs.
That's your opinion. The danger in trading down for quantity is that you might wind up with 2 Tommy Knights instead of getting one Charles Woodson or Brian Urlacher.

Personally, I think the quality drops off somewhere around #12, with the possibility of a couple of good ones maybe lasting til 14 or #15 - but if you were to, say, trade with the Jets for their #13 and #21, there would be no guarantee that the football fates would be kind to you.

Re: McDougle - The 10 on his Wunderlic makes me wonder whether or not he can read the "big words" in the defensive playbook.

Re: Washington - Another "me guy." - The Cards aren't very successful dealing with that type of player.

Re: Jacobs - Solid citizen, craftsman - like Paul Warfield or Hilliard. But is he what the receiving corps needs? Or do we need a physical replacement for D-Bo - i.e. 6-3 215+ with speed?

I agree with Jeff.

The wide receivers this year seem to be bunched up (after Johnson and Rogers) with a bunch of similar talents).....more 2nd-3rd-4th rounders.

McDougle just doesn't impress me and his wonderlic score scares me.

We'd be better off just keepin the 6th becasue at that pick we could be getting the best CB or DE or DT in the draft period.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,045
Reaction score
31,523
Location
Orange County, CA
Re: Agree

Originally posted by BuckeyeCardinal
I agree with Jeff.

The wide receivers this year seem to be bunched up (after Johnson and Rogers) with a bunch of similar talents).....more 2nd-3rd-4th rounders.

McDougle just doesn't impress me and his wonderlic score scares me.

We'd be better off just keepin the 6th becasue at that pick we could be getting the best CB or DE or DT in the draft period.

Or QB...
 
OP
OP
A

Alphaman

Rookie
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Posts
69
Reaction score
0
Good arguments made by you guys.

I'm not all that concerned about the Wonderlick score for a DE. If we were talking about a QB, center, MLB or safety (guys who make calls) then I'd be concerned.

Kelly Washington has talent in the same class as Rogers and Johnson. His injury this year pushed him down. He is definitely a me guy though.

I agree that there is a better chance of getting a good player at 6 than at 17 and 18. However, as one looking from the outside, I'd think AZ would want to add 2 good players in the first round, though your argument is solid.

I thought KC was the only team that couldn't sign a 1st round draft pick until 2 or 3 weeks into camp.

Oh well, back to real deal...KC's 7th for Thomas Jones.

Early in the offseason I was touting a trade for Thomas Jones for a DE we had named Duane Clemons. He had a down year this year (2 sacks), but before that has averaged 7 to 9 sacks per year. We cut him (saving $3M against the cap). I'd think he could be had cheap these days, has been a starter for 3 years and had some very good games. Just a thought.
 

BACH

Superbowl, Homeboy!
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
5,727
Reaction score
905
Location
A rotten place...
McDougal is the second best pass-rusher in the draft, but just too one-dimensional and IMO a terrible fit for the Cards.

Besides, I wouldn't take him at #18. You can get better quality there. Remember, the decrease in quality from DE#1 Suggs to #2 McDougal is bigger than from #2 McDougal to #5 White. You should be able to pick White with #37.
 
OP
OP
A

Alphaman

Rookie
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Posts
69
Reaction score
0
Originally posted by BACH
McDougal is the second best pass-rusher in the draft, but just too one-dimensional and IMO a terrible fit for the Cards.

Besides, I wouldn't take him at #18. You can get better quality there. Remember, the decrease in quality from DE#1 Suggs to #2 McDougal is bigger than from #2 McDougal to #5 White. You should be able to pick White with #37.


That's a fair point, but how many "dimensions" does Suggs have?
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,045
Reaction score
31,523
Location
Orange County, CA
Originally posted by Alphaman
That's a fair point, but how many "dimensions" does Suggs have?

Not only did Suggs have 24 sacks, he also had 30 tackles for a loss.

If you watched Arizona State's defense last year, it seemed like he was the only player out ther at times. If you take Suggs off the team, ASU might not have won a single game imo.

(note: I go to ASU so I am a little bit biased, but I will admit that minus Suggs, ASU's defense was absolutely atrocious)
 

BACH

Superbowl, Homeboy!
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
5,727
Reaction score
905
Location
A rotten place...
Originally posted by Alphaman
That's a fair point, but how many "dimensions" does Suggs have?

My point was that teams are concerned that Suggs is too one-dimensional. It's much worse with McDougal. If you look at the skill rating of the DEs Suggs is rated 4th and 7th in the draft in run/pass recognition and regular run stopping respectively. McDougal is rated 19 and 15 in those two catagories.
 
OP
OP
A

Alphaman

Rookie
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Posts
69
Reaction score
0
Originally posted by Krangthebrain
Not only did Suggs have 24 sacks, he also had 30 tackles for a loss.

If you watched Arizona State's defense last year, it seemed like he was the only player out ther at times. If you take Suggs off the team, ASU might not have won a single game imo.

(note: I go to ASU so I am a little bit biased, but I will admit that minus Suggs, ASU's defense was absolutely atrocious)

Help me out with the stats. Wouldn't 24 sacks be 24 tackles for a loss, meaning 6 tackles for a loss on run plays? Isn't that pretty low for a DE? Isn't that one dimensional?
 
OP
OP
A

Alphaman

Rookie
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Posts
69
Reaction score
0
Originally posted by BACH
My point was that teams are concerned that Suggs is too one-dimensional. It's much worse with McDougal. If you look at the skill rating of the DEs Suggs is rated 4th and 7th in the draft in run/pass recognition and regular run stopping respectively. McDougal is rated 19 and 15 in those two catagories.

There is no doubt that Suggs is a better prospect than McDougal. My question is: Is he so much better than McDougal that his impact to the team is better than McDougal AND Washington?
 

BACH

Superbowl, Homeboy!
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
5,727
Reaction score
905
Location
A rotten place...
Originally posted by Alphaman
There is no doubt that Suggs is a better prospect than McDougal. My question is: Is he so much better than McDougal that his impact to the team is better than McDougal AND Washington?

In my opinion - Yes.
 

Solar7

Go Suns
Joined
May 18, 2002
Posts
11,073
Reaction score
11,853
Location
Las Vegas, NV
I don't think Sacks count as tackles for a loss, which would make the two separate.

--Solar
 

john h

Registered User
LEGACY MEMBER
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Posts
10,552
Reaction score
13
Location
Little Rock
Originally posted by Alphaman
Since New Orleans is trying to get into the top of the draft to get Trufant, why aren't the Cardinals (or at least the Cardinal fans) jumping all over this.

IF you could get the #17 and #18 picks for the #6 pick you could draft a DE (McDougal) and a WR (Jacobs or Washington). I'd think those two would be better than 1 Suggs.

The Cards may want Trufant themselves for one possible reason. I think we can get a decent DE in round 2. My gut instincts tell me we will take Leftwich if he is there and if not will take one of two premier DL that may be available. However I never rule out Mr. B taking Suggs as another home town hero who might put people in the seats. If he is all that great then we can use him but for me there are two many qestions to take him at number 6. I like Emmitt and I am glad he is here but make no doubt about it he is here primarly to put people in the seats.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,045
Reaction score
31,523
Location
Orange County, CA
Originally posted by Alphaman
Help me out with the stats. Wouldn't 24 sacks be 24 tackles for a loss, meaning 6 tackles for a loss on run plays? Isn't that pretty low for a DE? Isn't that one dimensional?

Nope, they are separate stats.

Suggs basically made 54 plays in the backfield last year, which is obviously dominate. He actually made more plays in the running game than anything else!
 

AZCB34

ASFN Icon
Joined
Sep 23, 2002
Posts
14,104
Reaction score
5,876
Location
Mesa, AZ
Originally posted by Krangthebrain
Nope, they are separate stats.

Suggs basically made 54 plays in the backfield last year, which is obviously dominate. He actually made more plays in the running game than anything else!

Do you have a link the Suggs season stats from last year?
 

AZCB34

ASFN Icon
Joined
Sep 23, 2002
Posts
14,104
Reaction score
5,876
Location
Mesa, AZ
Bears hire Richard Dent as Assistant Oline Coach...presumably to coach the DEs in pass rushing. Think it means a run at Suggs?

http://www.chicagobears.com/news/in...rsnews_module.cfm&include=&show_headline=true

Suggs hits second speed bump
By Larry Mayer
Senior Writer
April 18, 2003
LAKE FOREST, Ill. - Terrell Suggs had few problems defeating opponents that lined up across from him last season when he set an NCAA record with 24 sacks. But the Arizona State defensive end hasn't fared nearly as well against stopwatches this spring.

Suggs, one of the prospects the Bears are believed to be considering with the fourth pick in the April 26-27 draft, failed to improve on disappointing times in the 40-yard dash at a private workout Friday on the ASU campus.

The session was scheduled to help Suggs attempt to redeem himself after being clocked between 4.77 and 4.83 seconds in the 40 at a March 26 workout in Tempe. Most scouts expected the 6-3, 258-pounder to run in the 4.6 to 4.7 range.

Bears general manager Jerry Angelo said that Suggs was timed in the "high 4.8s-4.9 range" Friday.

"The workout was about the same as it was the last time in terms of his 40-time," Angelo said. "He did not do anything else except drill work, which he was good at. So really nothing's changed. The short of it is he can't run fast."

The disappointing times have left many scouts wondering if the 18 pounds Suggs has gained since dominating as a junior last season has diminished his remarkable quickness.

"My 40 times were a bit slow, but I can't really complain," Suggs said. "I'm a lot heavier, but that's no excuse. I think I can still play and get better."

Angelo was surprised by Suggs' first poor workout and conceded that it would be factored into the evaluation process. But he also insisted last week that it would not preclude the Bears from drafting Suggs.

"It won't set him back," Angelo said at the time. "He's still going to go very high. I'm not ruling him out based on the workout because the guy has a lot of great tape. Don't minimize what he's done in terms of his production at a major level. You don't want to get too carried away on the workout."

Bears all-time leading sacker Richard Dent, who rejoined the team last week as an assistant defensive line coach, believes that Suggs' 24 sacks are a better indication of his potential than his 40 times.

"It's all about on the field," Dent said. "Jerry Rice had a poor 40, but look at him now, he's world class. The 40 is OK, but it all comes down to will. If you've got the will, there's a way."

In other news, the Jacksonville Jaguars took a pass on Bears salary cap casualty Marcus Robinson.

"They said they weren't interested," Robinson's agent, Ken Sarnoff, told The Florida Times-Union. "They're right up against the salary cap and said they're not going to do anything with free agents until after the draft, if then."

Sarnoff told The Washington Post that he plans on contacting the Redskins about the veteran receiver, who was released by the Bears on Wednesday.
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
35,045
Reaction score
31,523
Location
Orange County, CA
Originally posted by AZCB34

Bears all-time leading sacker Richard Dent, who rejoined the team last week as an assistant defensive line coach, believes that Suggs' 24 sacks are a better indication of his potential than his 40 times.

"It's all about on the field," Dent said. "Jerry Rice had a poor 40, but look at him now, he's world class. The 40 is OK, but it all comes down to will. If you've got the will, there's a way."

Hmmm....so Richard Dent seems to agree with the Pro-Suggs crowd....interesting.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
537,468
Posts
5,270,834
Members
6,276
Latest member
ConpiracyCard
Top