Stafford to Lions "a done deal"?
-
I always though the Lions would go Stafford.
The guy is the top QB prospect and a top 5 pick no matter how you slice it...when you have that....you take the QB if you even come close to having a need.
If he was there at #5, we should have taken him.
-
I always though the Lions would go Stafford.
The guy is the top QB prospect and a top 5 pick no matter how you slice it...when you have that....you take the QB if you even come close to having a need.
If he was there at #5, we should have taken him.
I always though the Lions would go Stafford.
The guy is the top QB prospect and a top 5 pick no matter how you slice it...when you have that....you take the QB if you even come close to having a need.
If he was there at #5, we should have taken him.
At that same token, you take a QB that high and are wrong, you set your franchise back several years, which DET has experience at.
Though I am more sold on Stafford, based on him having the number of starts he has in the SEC.
But if I am the Lions, I want to move down a couple of spots and if I can't, I am probably taking Smith, who Mark Schlereth thinks is better than Joe Thomas or Jake Long coming out of college. While that's quite a statement, if he is right, DET really couldn't go wrong with him. We also all know what happens when you have QB but no one to block him.
-
mz. said:
I don't see this as a smokescreen. There doesn't appear to be anyone anxious to trade for the #1 pick, so what would their "smokescreen" motivation be?Hopes that someone else really wants Stafford. Or that someone a few spots back really wants Smith and thinks SEA or STL will take him before they get a chance if Stafford is off the board. These guys play mind games for the sake of mind games at this time of year.
-
At that same token, you take a QB that high and are wrong, you set your franchise back several years, which DET has experience at.
Ahhhhh....the ultimate quandary.....you also set your team back years if you pass a top qb....you get just good enough to not have a shot at another for 7-8 years unless you get lucky.
-
At that same token, you take a QB that high and are wrong, you set your franchise back several years, which DET has experience at.
Ahhhhh....the ultimate quandary.....you also set your team back years if you pass a top qb....you get just good enough to not have a shot at another for 7-8 years unless you get lucky.
Ahhhhh....the ultimate quandary.....you also set your team back years if you pass a top qb....you get just good enough to not have a shot at another for 7-8 years unless you get lucky.
It is the ultimate quandary.
Of course in DET's case, you look at this QB draft, where you are likely drafting next year, and what that QB class projects to look like, it might give you extra pause this year though.
-
Aloysius said:
If the Lions take Stafford, I see the picks before us going as follows:- 1. Detroit -
2. St. Louis - Jason Smith, LT, Baylor
3. KC - Aaron Curry, LB, Wake Forest
4. Seattle - Eugene Monroe, OT, Virginia
That'd leave us with a very interesting choice between Orakpo and Crabtree. Who we choose may depend on whether Mangini & Kokinis are going to trade Braylon Edwards.Even if CLE takes Crabtree, it is no guarantee they ship Edwards out. I think if they took Crabtree they'd rather him spend his first year not having to be the #1 target. Braylon may not be a UFA come next year depending on what happens with the collective bargining agreement, CLE will always have the option to franchise (or transition tag him) after the season, then trade him for picks in next years draft, and it's always possible with success next season he wants to stay and CLE would want him to stay.
Still not sold KC takes Curry, since they do need a NT for that 3-4, and Pioli is going to build from the inside out.
Masters said:
Even if CLE takes Crabtree, it is no guarantee they ship Edwards out. I think if they took Crabtree they'd rather him spend his first year not having to be the #1 target. Braylon may not be a UFA come next year depending on what happens with the collective bargining agreement, CLE will always have the option to franchise (or transition tag him) after the season, then trade him for picks in next years draft, and it's always possible with success next season he wants to stay and CLE would want him to stay.Yeah, you're probably right. The ideal scenario would be to do something similar to what Detroit did when they drafted Calvin Johnson, where they kept Roy Williams around for about a year before trading him.
But it's possible that Braylon wouldn't respond all too well to Crabtree coming in. Don't know if that's the case - but if the coaching staff thinks that'll happen, we'll likely see Braylon traded, especially if they can get a proven receiver as part of the trade package.
Still not sold KC takes Curry, since they do need a NT for that 3-4, and Pioli is going to build from the inside out.
Personally, I think Orakpo's more likely to be KC's pick than Raji. And I would be shocked if they took Rak.
-
Naaa....you can't let next years draft influence this years draft.
Be sort of like not betting strong with a full house because you might have 4 aces on the next hand.
If everybody had like minds, we would never learn. -
Naaa....you can't let next years draft influence this years draft.
Be sort of like not betting strong with a full house because you might have 4 aces on the next hand.
Naaa....you can't let next years draft influence this years draft.
Be sort of like not betting strong with a full house because you might have 4 aces on the next hand.
Not if you believe one of the QBs you can get next year is better than either guy you can get this season. Just saying, if you are DET and you have any doubt about the QBs this year, the thought of who will be available via draft and FA next year has to cross your mind. There is a reason teams have scouting departments working year round. Teams are always looking more than one year ahead, from a franchise and roster perspective. They can't live only in the now and expect success over the long haul.
As we have agreed, you have a huge gamble w/ your franchise when taking a QB high in the 1st. It makes or breaks you for years, just as passing does. So if you can make your team better now, and get a QB next year who you believe is better than those in front of you high in this draft, you do that.
If DET is absolutely sold that Stafford can be their QB for years to come and they can put in him in position to be successful and grow, you take him for sure.
-
Aloysius said:
If the Lions take Stafford, I see the picks before us going as follows:- 1. Detroit -
2. St. Louis - Jason Smith, LT, Baylor
3. KC - Aaron Curry, LB, Wake Forest
4. Seattle - Eugene Monroe, OT, Virginia
That'd leave us with a very interesting choice between Orakpo and Crabtree. Who we choose may depend on whether Mangini & Kokinis are going to trade Braylon Edwards.Even if CLE takes Crabtree, it is no guarantee they ship Edwards out. I think if they took Crabtree they'd rather him spend his first year not having to be the #1 target. Braylon may not be a UFA come next year depending on what happens with the collective bargining agreement, CLE will always have the option to franchise (or transition tag him) after the season, then trade him for picks in next years draft, and it's always possible with success next season he wants to stay and CLE would want him to stay.
Still not sold KC takes Curry, since they do need a NT for that 3-4, and Pioli is going to build from the inside out.
Masters said:
Even if CLE takes Crabtree, it is no guarantee they ship Edwards out. I think if they took Crabtree they'd rather him spend his first year not having to be the #1 target. Braylon may not be a UFA come next year depending on what happens with the collective bargining agreement, CLE will always have the option to franchise (or transition tag him) after the seasonThe nice thing about this is Cleveland has no other player that they would have to worry about Franchising. In some cases you'll want to try and sign the player to a long term deal after tagging him so you can free the tag up for another player.
The only other player they would need to franchise one day would be Thomas and I think he's signed through 2012....Unless someone corrects me.
They won't let Edwards leave without getting something. They'll either trade him or tag him and trade him.
-
Naaa....you can't let next years draft influence this years draft.
Be sort of like not betting strong with a full house because you might have 4 aces on the next hand.
Naaa....you can't let next years draft influence this years draft.
Be sort of like not betting strong with a full house because you might have 4 aces on the next hand.
Oh, I think they look at the following year's draft. Let's say Schwartz is crazy about Snead or Bradford or Tebow and wants any of them and believes all three could be solid NFL Qb's.......And let's say at the same time the 2010 draft has no talented left OT's coming out. I'm sure coaches think and talk about it. Why take a QB this year when we can get any of the the three we want next year? If we don't take a top left OT this year we won't be getting one next year either!
This weighs heavily on their mind.
The only problem with you gambling analogy is that in cards you don't know what's coming in the next hand...The coaches do know what is coming in 2010.
-
Not if you believe one of the QBs you can get next year is better than either guy you can get this season.
The point is you don't know unless you are going to throw games....and then you still don't know.
Really man....you can't let what might happen influence what you do this year....that is as simple as i can put it.
-
Not if you believe one of the QBs you can get next year is better than either guy you can get this season.
The point is you don't know unless you are going to throw games....and then you still don't know.
Really man....you can't let what might happen influence what you do this year....that is as simple as i can put it.
The point is you don't know unless you are going to throw games....and then you still don't know.
Really man....you can't let what might happen influence what you do this year....that is as simple as i can put it.
Coaches and teams have a realistic and pretty accurate idea of how they should do in a coming season. I am sure DET doesn't have any real expectations of more than 6 wins next season. Not with that roster.
I disagree with you regarding forward thinking, when you factor in that the NFL team is a business first and foremost. That is as simple as I can put it.
-
Not if you believe one of the QBs you can get next year is better than either guy you can get this season.
The point is you don't know unless you are going to throw games....and then you still don't know.
Really man....you can't let what might happen influence what you do this year....that is as simple as i can put it.
-
Look....of course you have an idea of who is entering.....but we are talking QB here...top QB's go early.....you don't pass them thinking you can get one next year
You can think what you want....
-
You can pass them if you think what you have a shot at next year is that much better than either of the QBs this year. If you question that these guys may not be a sure locks, and your looking at a year away that you see as sure QB (or multiple, which looks to be the case), you certainly do. QB isn't going to fix all of DET's issues, and with no one to keep that QB up right....
These aren't just players, they are financial investments by teams. Not just an investment in the player, but their own franchises future.
You can think what you want too.....
-
So basically you leave it to chance....skip a guy this year because you might get better next year...OK....lol.....with the financial investment you mention, i think teams try to control as much as they can.
Why draft anybody.....you might do better next year..
You are a good egg Masters, but on this issue I think.....no....I know.....you need to re-evaluate.
-
Only need to re-evaluate it if you take it to the rediculous extream you just tried to take it to.
Teams that want success and end up successful do not get trapped in the tunnel vision of "I need a QB and there is one available in the first of this draft, I have to take him."
It's all chance. This year, next year, or 10 years from now. That isn't going to change about the draft. Teams have to make the most educated risk/chance. You don't do that with tunnel vision.
You are a good egg too, but when all you can do is take something to an exagurated extream, you're arguing to argue.
-
Doesn't it make sense though? If you have a need at both QB and LT, and they're both availible now, but comparable QB's are availible next year at your projected draft pick whereas comparable LT's are not availible, wouldn't you take the LT?
-
So basically you leave it to chance....skip a guy this year because you might get better next year...OK....lol.....with the financial investment you mention, i think teams try to control as much as they can.
Why draft anybody.....you might do better next year..
You are a good egg Masters, but on this issue I think.....no....I know.....you need to re-evaluate.
Why draft anybody.....you might do better next year..
I'm fairly certain that's not what we're advocating here. You get that.
So you're saying if you're DET, and you have guys like Bradford and McCoy rated significantly higher than Stafford, and Stafford rated slightly higher than Jason Smith, who you rate much higher than any LT prospect next draft, you still select Stafford?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login