Why the Arizona Cardinals Should Consider Trading for the Player in This Picture
Before you panic, I'd like to see the Cards trade for the other guy in the picture. What were you thinking about? Trading for JaMarcus Russell? Um...
It's been one crazy offseason, huh?
I could keep going. But I want to focus on your team, the Arizona Cardinals.
So with all the pre-draft trades going on, shouldn't the Birds get into the act? (And yes, I know they've already traded to get Kerry Rhodes.)
But with Marshall going for a couple of second rounders, I think the Broncos aren't asking too much for some of their stars, and it's another Bronco that I'd love to see the Cards deal for: Elvis Dumervil.
I'm dreaming of course, but follow me for a second here. Or rather count with me: 17.
That's how many sacks Dumervil had last season with the Broncos, a defense that's not any better than Arizona's.
But you look at how Dumervil affected the Broncos pass defense last year—Denver was third in the league, giving up around 186 yards per game.
That's about 40 yards per game less than the previous year. Hmm...
According to reports, Dumervil has been offered just a tender so far. Nothing substantial, so a trade isn't completely out of the question.
Arizona is definitely in need of a guy that can get to the QB for several years, and seeing how Dumervil is just 26, he would be a great long-term solution. On top of all that, he would fit right into the Cards system, as Denver also plays a 3-4, with Dumervil as an OLB.
Of course, the Broncos wouldn't want to give him up easily. But maybe the Cardinals could sacrifice their second rounder, and perhaps one of their third rounders for him.
So let me know what you think. Comment below on whether the Cards should go for Dumervil. Or if not Dumervil, let me know for whom you think Arizona should trade.
I'm going to be focusing on the upcoming NFL draft (next week!) for the next several articles. Stay tuned for Arizona's possibilities with their first pick later this week.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?