I didn't mean to suggest that some uncommons and some commons are not better than some rares. I have indeed gotten packs where the good commons and uncommons made up for a really sucky rare. However, this hasn't happened very often in my case. The reason commons and uncommons have such difficulty making up for a bad rare though is simply because you get more of them. Thinking in a simple monetary sense, a good, even great common can't make up for a crappy rare because you can just go buy the good common you need in the 5-10 cent common box. Uncommons are a little more tricky but largely the same principle applies, it doesn't seem like such an event to pull a good uncommon because you get 3 a pack, and again thinking in a monetary sense, even the best uncommons today don't go for the same price even average rares go for. If I get a pack and it has a few good commons, a good uncommon or 2, and a really bad rare, I can't help but think I could have saved some money buy just buying them out of the box of singles. Some people may object to thinking in monetary terms, a good card is a good card regardless of rarity, but because this is a Collectible Card game the cards themselves have value above and beyond their play value. I mean you wouldn't trade a Juzam Djinn(which is an uncommon I would very happy to see in my pack) for a Morphling or even many Morphlings even though Morphling is the superior creature because where as Morpling is worth 10 or so dollars a Juzam can fetch up to a hundred. I don't always think in terms of money, for instance I grossly undervalue foils and usually trade them away for deals that wouldn't be in my favor monetarily but are in my favor as far as play value. But when I just payed $3.19 and open my pack to see a Pale Moon I'm going to have a hard time consoling myself with the good uncommons.
