Idea of trading Cardinals back David Johnson ludicrous

A suggestion was made on Wednesday that the Arizona Cardinals should trade running back David Johnson

Someone in the Phoenix media market finally went insane.  Yes friends, Arizona Sports’ Dan Bickley said during his Bickley Blast segment on his show on Wednesday that the Arizona Cardinals should consider trading running back David Johnson.

No, I am not making it up.  He also thinks in place of Johnson, the Cardinals should add former Kansas City Chiefs running back Kareem Hunt.  Yes, the same Kareem Hunt that was waived because of a video that surfaced assaulting a woman.

I mean, c’mon man.  Let’s get serious.  Bickley thinks Johnson’s best days are already behind him?  Really?  He had a great rookie season, an excellent sophomore season, breaks his hand in game one of season three, and then doesn’t get played properly under Steve Wilks?

Johnson isn’t the problem and getting rid of him won’t help improve whatever it is Bickley truly believes what the issues are.  Adding Hunt would be a public relations nightmare.

There are teams that are reportedly interested in Hunt but those are only rumors and I’m not going to talk about any of them here.  He’s not worth the time.

It is worth the time to get someone to try and explain to Bickley that you don’t have to be a shock jock for the sake of nothing else to talk about when it comes to the Cardinals.  There is plenty to talk about and none of those topics should include trading Johnson.

Sure, some will likely agree with Bick.  I haven’t found them yet, but they exist.  Listen, Bick’s job is to stir the pot.  I get it.

I don’t often agree with Bick, sometimes I do.  He is a great guy who did come to my defense a couple of years ago when Arizona Diamondbacks pitcher Addison Reed called me out on Twitter.

The bad takes though aren’t necessary.  Listening to him talk, you have to wonder if he even believes this is something even remotely possible?  I think he just wanted some attention.  He got it.  Love ya Bick, but you’re wrong here.