Let’s Have It Out!
by DrewsLions on Jan 6, 2009 8:18 PM EST
Email
PrintI figured I’d try to get everyone all riled up and let us all blow off a little steam here. It’s been a long season and I think that we owe it to ourselves to use up a little of that pent up angst. I think it’s time to have it out over the quarterback with the first overall pick debate. I want to hear everyone’s opinion on why you think it’s a good idea or bad idea or even if you fall somewhere in the middle. I’ll start (of course), by giving you my list of why it’s both a good idea and a bad idea and then commence the battle by telling you where I stand on the issue.
Why it is a good idea:
Since the ‘70’s, when Greg Landry was our last pro bowl quarterback (1971), Detroit has been a quarterback’s graveyard. We’ve buried many a veteran and rookie alike. They come here with promise or experience and we burn them to the ground. We (fans, media and losing culture) beat them until they all eventually break. Of course it’s a talent issue, but the story always ends the same. There have been a few mild success stories, a few 4000 yd seasons, one playoff win and a whole lot of wounded ducks flung around Detroit, but it’s time to end this era.
We need our Peyton Manning. We need our Troy Aikman. It is very possible to take a horrible team, place a solid, young quarterback at the helm and build around him. It’s a proven fact. It seems that Lion’s fans are sold on the idea that a highly drafted quarterback cannot succeed… that it’s virtually impossible for that to happen. Just because it has not happened here, doesn’t mean that it can’t happen. The Colts were 3-13 before Manning, then 3-13 his rookie year. The next year they were 13-3 and in the playoffs and he has since brought them a championship. The Cowboys were 3-13 before Aikman, then 1-15 in his rookie year. After that… well, that’s football legend. Three rings in four years.
Detroit will never… I repeat, NEVER... win a championship without a good, if not great quarterback. At some point in this pathetic franchise’s future, the Lions have to nab a guy worthy of taking this franchise to a Super Bowl and winning. If you all want to wait and find that guy in the la-la land of free agency… well, okay… but we might be waiting awhile. If you all want to find that Tom Brady-type in the later rounds of the draft… we might be waiting forever.
The simple fact is that not even the Lions get the first overall pick very often. This is the opportunity to take any player in the nation. But also remember that this guy is going to get a king’s ransom to play and he’s got to touch the ball enough to warrant that salary. There are only a few positions in the game that I think are really worthy of that pick. Quarterback is the top of that short list.
Bottom line is that if Matt Stafford grades out as a top 5 talent, the Lions should have him signed to a contract before the draft begins. You obviously have to build the talent around him – especially on the offensive line. But you HAVE to make sure you get your quarterback.
Why it is a bad idea:
To steal a line from the good ideas section… Detroit has been a quarterback’s graveyard since the ‘70’s. No quarterback will ever have great success behind Detroit’s shoddy O-line. It’s been a sore spot for as long as I can remember. Even when Sanders was here, it was him making plays despite an average O-line. It has kept the team from being above average when our skill players were talented.
On top of that, we’ve had the worst defense in the league for two years running. A quarterback’s best friend is a good defense. Turnovers and a short field are keys for offensive success. If the Lions had a movie based on them, it would be Disney’s “Holes”. There are so many defensive holes, how can we justify taking any position other than the best defensive player on the board. The offense is bad, but we can slap any ‘ol quarterback in there until the defense and offensive lines are fixed.
As this team has reached the bottom of a very deep barrel, there is no better time than now, with 5 of the first 82 picks in the draft, to rebuild the trenches. Then, after we have a little stability, we can try and find a quarterback. Who knows? Maybe Stanton is the guy. With a good defense, better O-line and a little playing time, maybe he is the guy who can take us to a Super Bowl. For now, let’s be smart with our picks and build a solid foundation. Worry about the glamorous positions later.
Millen’s biggest downfall as a GM (aside from complete lack of talent evaluation skills) was to scrap his plans in mid-draft because he fell in love with a guy in a glamour/skill position. I don’t think we need to rehash those names… to be honest, it makes me a little nauseous just thinking of them. Those moves crippled this franchise. If he’d have stuck to his guns and taken a guy like Shawn Merriman over Mike Williams (I feel the nausea setting in…), where would this franchise be? We’ve been in this situation before. We’ve got a high profile, big name player at a skill position staring us in the face and it makes us abandon all reason and forget about the guys that make the team stabile and consistent. Let’s not make that mistake again this year.
One last reason to not draft a QB is the bust factor. It just seems like a high number of top first round quarterbacks bust. The fact that the Lions have more busts than Canton just screams for them to stay away from a quarterback with the first overall pick. For every Peyton Manning, there is a Ryan Leaf, David Carr, Tim Couch or Joey Harrington (here comes that nausea again…). History is against the Lions here.
The Verdict
Okay, so I think that I’ve painted a pretty good picture of how I see each side of the argument. Now is where you ask how can I take a side if I can see the logic in each choice? You probably think I’m just a fence-rider, right? Well, a little. But I’ll end up taking a clear side here as not to be a huge hypocrite. Ultimately, I think that there is no right answer, only what we each think is the best decision for the franchise at the moment. If you think taking a quarterback is a bad idea and then that guy turns into Tom Brady, it obviously didn’t end up being a bad decision. It just ends up being that you thought the other option was better at that time, but you are happy they did what they did. Multiple options can also turn out positive. Maybe Stafford, Smith, Orakpo, Curry and Bradford all turn out to be pro bowlers. What was the right decision then? The grass is always greener, right? Either way, we won’t know the outcome of this debate for about three or four years.
Anyway, I’ll tell you where I sit. With the preface being that I clearly understand how ridiculously many holes this team has… especially on defense… I would choose to take Stafford. Yes, I would take him over Smith, Curry, Orakpo, Oher or Jenkins and certainly over the other quarterbacks, Bradford and Tebow. But I’m not without precondition here. Stafford still has to grade out as a top five talent. If he doesn’t, you go another route. If Mayhew and Co. look at every snap, every game, every breath that this kid has taken and they don’t think he is better than 99% of the eligible draftees… you DON’T take him… period. If there is no single standout “gotta have” player at the top (which I don’t think there will be) and Stafford is within the top five on your board, then you pull the trigger. He also has to be willing to sign a contract before the draft starts. The Lions cannot afford a lengthy holdout.
I think that we Lions fans have become so accustomed to losing that we all go to bed at night praying for a 9-7 season. Contentment comes cheap for the Lions and Lion fans. That is such a skewed vision of success. The goal should be a Super Bowl win… nothing less. We’ve been content to go out and get the journeyman quarterback to get a few wins and be a bridge player until the next big thing comes along. Problem is that it’s become the bridge to nowhere. We keep going from stop-gap to stop-gap, never getting anywhere. True, we failed big time on Harrington. That was a failed attempt, but it doesn’t mean we stop trying to get a quality signal caller. We draft and draft until we hit a home run.
I think the biggest point against my opinion will be that the environment is not suitable for a young quarterback to survive. I agree somewhat, but I’ll counter with two points. First, I think that if we can get two good, serviceable linesman (either a Tackle and a Guard or 2 Guards) in the second to fourth rounds, our line will be good enough until next year to replace Backus or whoever else. Again, this is prefaced with Mayhew hitting on his picks. Any way you slice it, there is no room for busts this year. Second, if Stafford is the right guy, he’ll show flashes without a good line. Manning threw a lot of interceptions his rookie year, but a lot of touchdowns, too. Even though he struggled on a bad team, he showed flashes throughout the season. There is time to get the other pieces in place in later rounds and over the next two years. That quarterback may not always be there. Remember, he’s got Johnson to throw to and Smith to run the ball. That situation could be worse. Also, I think if we do take Stafford, the rest of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd round picks go to defense or O-line. No backs, receivers, etc. See, I’ve still got a little sense left.
I figure that I’ll be in the minority with my opinion. That’s okay. Just be respectful in your opinions and no vulgarity please… there’s just no place for that. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and let’s be real… none of us are going to be in the war room in April. We are all at the same mercy of the new (same as the old) regime. So fire away! It’s open season on me and every Lions fan with an opinion!
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Pride of Detroit or its writers. FanPosts are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable fans.
110 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I wouldnt want to pick a QB with the #1 overall pick
It’s such an interesing debate, on one hand common logic dictates that you select a QB at #1 but football logic dictates that you select an OL because a good offensive line can make average QB’s better. It has been proven that many QB’s selected in the later rounds can turn into franchise QB’s, and in some cases even hall of famers. When we drafted Joey Harrington i was jumping for joy. I got myself a harrington jersey and once the season started i waited patiently for him to figure things out at the NFL level. Obviously it never happened and now we are literaly at the bottom of the barrel. I personally am gunshy about taking a QB at # 1 because if Mayhew is wrong, our franchise will be set back another decade.
One more thing, if the Lions have the opportunity to hire Ron Rivera, they better do it because he is the real deal. From watching him play the game to watching him coach the game, this guy is a winner and he will DEFINITELY make our beloved Detroit Lions winners as well.
Whether it be this year, next year, or 50 years from now. The Detroit Lions will eventually win a Super Bowl............I f'n hope.
Work Smarter, Not Harder
I think that if New England does not put the franchise tag on Cassel, then bringing someone in free agent like that, would end this debate and let the Lions do what they really need to do, and that is draft a damn good offensive lineman, then go after a powerfull defensive end or a talented linebacker.
If Cassel is not available, then I think that even though building a good offensive line can make any average quarterback better, it does not solve Detroits problems. Quarterback is a position where, unless you have a good running game, he needs to be extremely better than average. And, without a good offensive line, Detroit cannot be a good running team. It is a double edge sword, and it is going to be interesting to see who is picked as head coach and what decisions will be made during Free Agency and the Draft. I will be anxiously waiting in Texas.
I agree on Cassel
He is the one this that could free up a ton of options for the Lions. They could get other teams scrapping over Stafford and potential trade the pick. But from what I’ve heard, the Patriots will screw everything up and tag him. What a freakin’ shame.
oh yeah one more thing
I personally think the defense needs way more work than the offense.
now im done.
Whether it be this year, next year, or 50 years from now. The Detroit Lions will eventually win a Super Bowl............I f'n hope.
I think the QB can wait.
Dan-O showed a very consistent nature and was fairly good on the issue of turnovers. His numbers don’t really represent how solid he played. That was his first real experience in the NFL starting. I think he could be a great hold-over QB until we can get the rest of the team on solid ground. I also think that with a better line and more time, he is fairly accurate and makes good throws and decisions and could turn out to be a quality QB in this league.
Also, Kevin Smith showed us that he is a very capable back. With our O-line, he still managed to put up decent numbers this year (and he didnt get a lot of carries in some of the early games). If we can get him better blocking, it will only improve the run game, which will make them respect that aspect of the game, and open it up more for Dan-O.
Our defense is wretched. I can’t even stand watching them play. They need help everywhere. They show maybe 1 quarter of decent play and then just fall apart every game. Bodden and whoever else is playing corner now are terrible.
So here’s what I would do. Take Oher or Smith #1 because they should rank worthy of the pick and would greatly improve the offense as a whole. Then use every other pick on the defense. Keep Dan-O as a holdover and wait to see what happens with QBs like Brady Quinn, Derek Anderson, Matt Cassel, and also look towards the next couple drafts at QB options.
I honestly believe Dan-O showed us some solid play this season given the situation and should be given another chance with a better O-line and a defense that can keep him in the game. I think next season Kevin Smith will turn into something special and we already know that Calvin should be a pro-bowler. So we just need a defense that can keep us from giving up 20-30 points in the first half.
Two things...
1) Sorry, but I think Dan-O is an average at best quarterback. He’ll never be a great starter. I’ve said this before… he’s Charlie Batch. He’ll tease you at times, but he’s a glorified back-up… nothing more.
2) I agree that Andre Smith would be a good pick. The O-line needs help and I think he’s the next Orlando Pace. If we don’t go Stafford or pick up a QUALITY free agent (Cassel), I think you go Smith.
We have THREE questions that need to be answered before we go after a QB
1. Orlovsky
2. Stanton
3. Culpepper
When you have three QB’s (not one, not two) who are in a perfect position to fail because of the team around them, you don’t get rid of the QB’s—you fix the team around them.
Orlovsky had just as many TD’s as INT’s, which is pretty good, considering how often he was playing from behind (because of our horrible defense) and throwing on 3rd-and-long (because of our subpar run-blocking).
Orlovsky deserves to be the starter Day 1. Draft at least 2 linemen (a LT and G, or possibly LT and C) to give him better protection and a run game to lean on, and he might just surprise you.
Stanton deserves at least one more year to evaluate. We’ve already spent money, a 2nd rd pick, and a roster spot on the team for him; don’t throw him away until we KNOW that he can’t be our guy. I know he’s had injury problems, but we don’t know for certain yet whether he’s a bust, and he deserves at least three years on the team (with some actual playing time mixed in those years) before we know we need to get rid of him.
Culpepper hasn’t been very good in recent years because of two major factors:
1. rushing back too soon from injury
2. coming in off the street and starting for Detroit one week later
Don’t forget, he is a three-time ProBowler. If he’s not dealing with issues 1 & 2—that is, if he stays healthy and has an entire offseason to prepare, he may have a lot left to contribute. He still has a strong arm (assuming his shoulder is healing up well). I wouldn’t toss him away until he’s had a healthy offseason followed by playing time in the regular season.
We’re 109 days from the draft (the most exciting time of year for Lions fans), so it’s really easy to buy into hype, and you know we’re all going to hear a lot of “Matt Stafford this”, “Matt Stafford that” for a while.
But we should not be overly eager to toss away the potential we still have in these three QB’s just to fall in love with whatever 22-year old college QB is supposed to be the best prospect this year.
We should spend 2009 letting Orlovsky, Stanton, and Culpepper show us what they have to offer when we put them in a position to succeed—that means: fix the O-Line and fix the Defense with our draft picks.
If we need a QB in 2010, draft a QB in 2010.
The problem is...
you have to resign Orlovsky. If you can get him dirt cheap on a one or two year deal, then maybe. Stanton will be here… guaranteed. He’s under contract and it would be foolish to give up on an untested 2nd round pick so early. I think if you are going to throw caution to the wind with one of these guys, go with Stanton. Neither is truly tested and Stanton has the most upside, so go with him.
As for Culpepper… sheesh. He is completely washed up. It would be a total waste of time to give him any snaps when we could play a young guy. There’s nothing to build on there. I would rather win 2 games next year with Stafford and then have a bright future versus winning 9 games with Culpepper as another stop-gap and go 6-10 the next year and have no plan.
When Andy Reid rebuilt the Eagles
He built from the inside out. Time to get some FAs to get on both the offensive and defensive side of the line.The first two picks in the draft should be lineman. No skill player except Barry Sanders succeeds with a terrible line.
E-A-G-L-E-S EAGLES!!!
A LOT DEPENDS ON THE COACH
I think a lot depends on who the coach ends up being. If they hire a defense first type like Schwartz, Ryan, Bowles, Frazier etc I can’t see them drafting a QB #1 overall. Those guys would rather build up the defense and develop the special teams and running game into solid unit (IMHO). The QB just has to NOT turn the ball over on teams like those,not be a super star. However, if they sign an offensive minded coach like Mularkey, Fassell, Shanahan etc they might be all for drafting the best available QB and developing him.
The one caveat is this. This year might be the one year we could afford to draft a QB early and develop him since we have so many early picks(5 picks in the first 82 I think). Persoanlly I hope they sign a defensive minded coach like Schwartz or Rex Ryan because that side of the bal is simply awful. I also find it ridiculous that the Lions haven’t interviewed the experienced head coaches like Marty Schottenhiemer, Dan Reeves, Jim Fassell etc? This makes me think they want to go cheap with an unknown gamble much like Moronweg or Moronelli were. YUCK.
Very good point
I agree that it greatly depends on the coaches and coordinators that we hire. That might give us a clue as to the direction.
I’ve got to disagree with one point you made, though. That a QB just has to be average and not turn the ball over does not win championships. That’s a rare commodity and usually only when the team has a brilliant defense. If the goal is to win 7 to 9 games a year, then yes… that theory might work. But I want to win the Super Bowl and be a consistent contender. That takes a great quarterback.
A Defensive Coach's Philosophy.
My bad Drew. My point was thats most likely what the defensive minded coaches mindset would be: build up the D, the special teams and running game. Then bring in another a young QB in a year or two later after the rest of the team is solid and the QB is set up for success (rather than playing behind our awful offensive line).
W
well, the reason why those coaches arent coaches anymore
was because they were fired, and fired for not being very good coaches. were they good, theyd have a job
"Sometimes Joe (morgan) doesn't like facts to get in the way of his opinions."- billy beane
"That was a great pick...if this was 2002" Me, to guy who selected Barry Zito in a fantasy draft
by harendaman365 on Jan 10, 2009 8:40 PM EST up reply actions
Defense, defense, defense (and then some offense)
Since 1970 there have been 16 quarterbacks selected with the #1 overall pick.
Seven of them won at least 1 super bowl and nine of them made the Pro bowl.
2007 JaMarcus Russell Oakland Raiders
2005 Alex Smith San Francisco 49ers
2004 Eli Manning San Diego Chargers
2003 Carson Palmer Cincinnati Bengals
2002 David Carr Houston Texans
2001 Michael Vick Atlanta Falcons
1999 Tim Couch Cleveland Browns
1998 Peyton Manning Indianapolis Colts
1993 Drew Bledsoe New England Patriots
1990 Jeff George Indianapolis Colts
1989 Troy Aikman Dallas Cowboys
1987 Vinny Testaverde Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1983 John Elway Baltimore Colts
1975 Steve Bartkowski Atlanta Falcons
1971 Jim Plunkett New England Patriots
1970 Terry Bradshaw Pittsburgh Steelers
Manning, Manning, Aikman, Elway and Bradshaw. Excellent picks, turned out great. The rest are mediocre at best (even though Bledsoe and Plunkett won SB).
Nice list. Do you want to see Stafford or Bradford added to the top? I don’t, at least not right now. No need, yet.
And I stress the yet. There are several reason why I believe they should not draft a QB #1 and here they are:
1. As n4ry4 stated above, there are already 3 QB’s on the roster. Orlovsky is a decent stop gap until something better comes along. I’d like to see Stanton get a chance at playing. I’d also like to see them cut Culpepper. He’s done, stick a fork in him.
2. Cost. Taking a QB at #1 is going to be a huge hit to the salary cap for Detroit and they could better use the money on O-line and Defense.
3. The defense blows goats. And that was being nice. There needs to be some remarkable work done this off-season to get the defense up to NFL caliber. They certainly weren’t last year.
4. O-line is porous and needs work. Kevin Smith is a stud. Look how well he did his rookie season with a poor o-line. Now imagine what his numbers would be with some run blocking up front. Calvin Johnson is a stud. Imagine what his numbers could be like if the QB (Stanton or Orlovsky) had time in the pocket instead of scrambling and throwing the ball away because of quick pressure.
5. Again, defense wins games. Keep the opposing team off the field and when they are on the field, make sure it’s a short one. Give the offense time to put up points. Get turnovers. Sack the QB. Stuff the run. 3 and out. Man, I’d like to see Detroit with a D like that.
I have no idea what so ever what Mayhew and Lewand are going to do with a coach. I think that might be a big part of who gets selected first. Hopefully they do the right thing and don’t just go after a guy because he’s a hot commodity. Look to the Lions needs and rebuild the team. It definitely needs to be almost completely from scratch. Snagging a QB who won’t be able to start for a couple years or if he does, spend the first few on his back because there is no line to protect him is a great waste of a pick.
Of course, my 1st option would be to trade the pick away and maybe add a pick or two in the process.
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five." ~Groucho Marx
FYI: DANO IS A FREE AGENT IN FEB
Actually Orlovsky is an unrestricted free agent next month. Culpepper will probably get cut rather than receive another $1.7 mil bonus in Feb unless the new coach is in love with him. Culpepper, Kitna and Stanton are the only QBs under contract next season. Drew Henson might be back as well.
I completely agree with your post as far as go deep into the draft for defense. The Lions should also draft offensive line and return man. Their return teams were awful.
W
43% Chance?!
So a 43% chance of winning the Super Bowl is not good enough odds to take a quarterback? What are the Lions odds right now? I’d say about 0%. I think that you helped prove my point more than yours. Also, every player is going to cost about $60MM regardless of position at that pick. So Andre Smith will not be any cheaper than Matt Stafford. That’s the cost of being the worst team in the league.
There is no denying the Lions have O-line and defensive need a ton of help. You made a lot of solid, unarguable points. But we have to remember that we have a lot of picks. We can get quality players with the 4 subsequent picks in the 1st through 3rd rounds. If Mayhew is as good as he thinks he is, he could infuse a good base of talent this year.
I agree with you on two more points… The coach is a big factor on what we do and that trading the first pick would be the best scenario… but it’s quite unlikely. The only way I see that happening is if the Patriots decide not to franchise Cassel… we sign him… and it causes a bidding war for Stafford at the number one spot. Even then, I think it’s too rich for a team to move that high.
Good comments!
I did stress the no need to take a QB yet.
Give Stanton a shot. he’s a second round pick and may shake out to be a decent option. needs to have some playing time, though. The Lions need stability on the o-line before they spend big bucks on a QB. Get D and O-line first, build up the trenches, THEN go get a franchise guy.
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five." ~Groucho Marx
He should have gotten more time this year...
Yeah, I think Stanton deserves to compete, but hedge your bet with competition. I HATE the fact that Marinelli didn’t give him more time this year. So he hadn’t practiced much… big deal. The kid’s got some raw talent and it is a piss poor team. At least see what you have, right? But now, they can’t just go into next year without a plan B… and that plan B can’t be named Culpepper or Kitna.
I can't beleive nobody has suggested this yet.....
Don’t take a QB with the first overall pick for all the reasons stated above. In fact don’t take anybody with the first overall pick. TRADE DOWN. With as many holes as we have, we need as many picks as we can get. Honestly, what’s the difference between the 1st and the 4th, 5th, or 6th, pick considering that we are looking for non-skill players. We could add another 2nd or 3rd round pick to the mix and still get the same guy we would have selected first. Doesn’t this seem like the most logical thing to do or is it just me?
Trading Down
Trading down would be nice, but with as many holes as Detroit has, I think that the Offensive Line is the biggest, and Big Andre Smith would fill that nicely. But if Detroit can make some smart Free Agent acquires before the draft, then trading down would definately benefit the Lions.
It hasn't been suggested because...
it’s very, very unlikely to happen. Teams have to give up too much to move that high. There is no one player right now that will cause a team to give up the 3 or picks that they would have to give the Lions to move up 3 or 4 spots to get the pick. You look at the last few years of the draft and it just doesn’t happen. It’s a great theory and the best possible scenario, but highly, highly unlikely.
Trading Down
To intice a team to trade-up, the Lions will have to offer some other value. Getting full value based upon the “draft chart” is almost impossible. I would not mind seeing the Lions trade down if they can get 70% of the “draft chart” value in return. The extra picks would be worth it.
Build on what's there.
The Lions are putrid on both sides of the ball. But they’re a little less putrid on offense. While I’d love to build up a dominant defense, it’s not happening with one draft. As crazy as it sounds, the offense isn’t all THAT far from being solid. CJ is already a stud. Kevin Smith had a solid rookie year and has the potential to be a very good running back. I’d prefer to get Oher or Smith with the first pick (if for no other reason but to stop seeing our QBs lying on their backs every down) but with Dallas’ pick it wouldn’t be the end of the world if we took a QB at #1 and then a LT a #20 (and then spend the rest of the draft on defense).
If we do take a QB I’d really prefer Bradford. Coming from a shotgun offense doesn’t scare me too much. He may not have the strongest arm but he’s accurate, he’s smart, and he makes good decisions with the ball. Those are the qualities you find in most franchise QBs. Stafford’s physical tools have everyone drooling but look at the knocks on him. He’s erratic, he’s an inaccurate under pressure, and makes bad decisions (sounds a lot like Ryan Leaf or Todd Marinovich to me). Look at guys like Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, or Drew Brees. None of them are overly intimidating physically. But they’re the most intelligent, accurate passers in the game. And that’s why they dominate.
I’d still prefer to see a LT at #1 (Oher or Smith) and then an ILB at #20 (Maualuga, Laurinitis, or Spikes). This is a critical draft for our boys. I hope I’m not just talking myself into the notion of a win-win situation. April can’t come fast enough for me.
I agree in part
This draft, like last year, will be deep at tackle. It’s very feasible that we could get one at #20 or #33. I disagree whole-heartedly with Bradford. I really, really think he’s a product of his environment and won’t translate the NFL game as well as Stafford might. Who knows, that could change the more tape I see on Bradford, but right now, that’s how I see it.
Your option of Smith/Oher at #1 and a good linebacker at #20 makes a lot of sense, too. This is what I’ve been seeing in many mocks around the web.
Draft Choice
First of all I agree with most of what you wrote about this topic. I agree that in order to be succesful in the NFL you need to have a good quarterback regardless of where they came from. But it is also a must that the team have both a good offensive line and a good defense, neither of which the lions posses. I think that the Lions should draft the player that is the least risky becuase the lions can not afford to have another bust, bottom line. The franchise was set back 7-10 years due to the bad choice of Joey Harrington. The lions did not have a good team when they drafted him and they tried to build around Harrington which obvioulsy did not happen. If the lions were to draft a less risky player like a monster of an offensive lineman like Smith from Alabama, the lions could build their team from the inside out, placing players around the core of the team, all the while dealing with the quarterbacks that we can get. It is more important right now to build the team from its core, then focus on the “skill players”. If the NFl has taught us one thing it is that the quarterback is a very very important position, but it can be “managed” by lesser talents, while we focus on other areas of the team.
by NCHonoluluBlue&Silver on Jan 7, 2009 8:38 AM EST reply actions
Excellent points
I agree with you that they should take the safest player on the board… I just hope that’s Stafford. They cannot afford to draft a bust with that first pick. Just remember this… Smith and Oher are not guarantees either. When they drafted Harrington, they had taken tackles in the first round two years prior (Backus, McDougle). They tried this approach and failed on all levels. The most important thing is not missing on the pick, regardless of position.
Draft
while smith an oher are not gurantees, I think they might be the closest thing to it in this draft. Smith is an absolute monster and while I do not put much stock in them, mock drafts have had Oher as a top 5 pick basically since he arrived at Ole Miss. There are many questions about Bradford and Stafford. Bradford works mainly out of the shotgun and plays against defenses in the Big 12 that make the Lions look good (average I should say). With Stafford, he is highly inconsistent and is not a very good decision maker, he forces many throws into coverage and that is with the team he has now, imagine what he would do on the Lions. I think that the obvious best case scenario would be to trade down, but as you mentioned that simply does not happen anymore, with the cost being too high to land a number 1 pick. It is ultimantly going to come down to what Mayhew wants to do, but he has seen Millans mistakes and if he doesnt learn from them as he has mentioned then we are in a world of hurt. I still think going the “parcells” route and signing a big O-Line before draft day would be the best and least risky choice, as the downside to drafting a QB #1 is much more than drafting a O-line, and while the upsides may be larger for the QB we cannot afford a miss.
by NCHonoluluBlue&Silver on Jan 7, 2009 9:46 AM EST up reply actions
Remember...
Andre Smith was just suspended by Saban for unauthorized contact of a sports agent. Big deal? I don’t know… but it could be the start of some character issues. The skinny on Oher is and has been a bit wishy-washy. I’ve seen him scouted as a top five and I’ve seen him placed as a lower pick behind other tackles like Eugene Monroe. Granted most of this comes from the plethera of mocker out there, but my point is that no one is rock solid as the number one. Let’s not kid ourselves… NO ONE in this draft is a guarantee. There are questions on everybody.
Smith's suspension--not a big deal, in my mind
So he’s overly eager to get started on his NFL career and broke a procedural rule. Not a big deal. Reggie Bush has turned out to be a good-character guy for New Orleans in spite of the cloud hanging over him when he was drafted.
I think it’s important to look at character, obviously, but as far as I’m aware, I don’t think Smith has exhibited any signs of the real character issues that have plagued other talented NFL players, like:
- criminal dogfighting
- getting in fights at strip clubs
- drugs (performance enhancing or recreational)
- attention-seeking diva behavior
- laziness
- complaining
I tend to agree...
that the Smith thing is not a big deal. My point is that it casts some doubt on his character… whether that’s right or wrong is another debate. No one is impervious to speculation. No one is guaranteed.
O-Line is right choice
There are a lot more teams that have multiple good quarterbacks in this league as opposed to good left tackles. How often do you hear about a team putting an offensive tackle on the trading block? The odds of a good quarterback falling into a teams hands are so much higher than finding a cheap option at offensive tackle. The Dolphins picked manimal Jake Long with the #1 pick, and later Chad Pennington, second in MVP voting, fell into their laps. Maybe the Raiders could have won the AFC West this year if they had taken Joe Thomas instead of JaMarcus Russell?
Okay, but...
Do you think Chad Pennington will take the Dolphins to a Super Bowl? I guarantee you he won’t. He is a slightly above average quarterback. The only way that happens is if Miami puts together a STELLAR, I mean 2000 Ravens-type of stellar defense. That’s it. Their hope is in Chad Henne… who will replace Pennington sometime next year… mark my words.
It is not easy to find either a good left tackle or a good quarterback in this league. You must have dialed Bill Parcell’s 1-800-FIND-A-QB hotline. There are less than 10 great quarterbacks in this league right now. Consistent, Super Bowl winning caliber quarterbacks are not a dime a dozen. The last three Super Bowl winning QBs were Eli Manning (1st overall pick), Peyton Manning (1st overall pick) and Ben Roethlisberger (11th overall pick). Coincidence? Not really. The fact is that some high picks pan out. When they do, it sets a team up for a decade of winning.
Also, when was a superstar QB traded? Did I miss something? And don’t tell me you’re talking about Favre. That doesn’t count as a blockbuster trade.
Has to be an LT
To me, there’s no discussion on this; it HAS to be a left tackle. Premium left tackles are only available one place—at the very top of the draft. With the possible exception of Marcus McNeill in San Diego, every excellent left tackle in the NFL was a top five-top ten pick. Good quarterbacks, however, can come from anywhere in the draft; there’s no correlation between draft position and success. Look at Green Bay: they took highly touted Brian Brohm in the second round and a nobody, Matt Flynn, in the sixth. That nobody beat Brohm out in minicamp for the backup job behind Rodgers, and the depth chart never changed all year. We invested too heavily, too recently, in DS to give up on him now for another shot in the dark. I bet you bottom dollar that one of these two (Stafford and Bradford) will be the next Brady Quinn or Aaron Rodgers—the guy in the suit who falls into the mid-to-late first because that’s where he grades out.
I guess if one of them falls to our later first round pick, fine, but 1.1 has to be Oher or Smith.
http://thelionsinwinter.blogspot.com
by ty@thelionsinwinter on Jan 7, 2009 10:27 AM EST reply actions
Whatcha Smokin'?
Man, I don’t about this one. Here’s the quote I’m having trouble with:
Good quarterbacks, however, can come from anywhere in the draft; there’s no correlation between draft position and success
.
Let me throw a few names at you real quick…
Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Matt Schaub, David Ragone, Chris Simms, Josh McCown, Giovanni Carmazzi and Chris Redman.
Those are every second and third round quarterback taken from 2000-06 (guys with at least two years of playing under their belts). With the arguable exception of Matt Schaub and maybe Jackson, there is not a good quarterback in this bunch. And this is only the second and third rounds! The other rounds conjure up names like Josh Booty, Joe Hamilton, Jesse Palmer, Seth Burford, Kliff Kingsbury and B.J. Symons just to name a few. The only quality (and that’s a matter of opinion) quarterbacks beyond the first round I could find in those years were:
Kyle Orton, Derek Anderson, Matt Cassel, Seneca Wallace, David Garrard, Marc Bulger and Tom Brady
Only Brady and Bulger (maybe Garrard) are what I would consider a franchise quarterback. That’s it. Two guys.
I think that you need to look at the results and determine from there. In addition, these tackles were taken in rounds outside the first….
Jeremy Trueblood (2), Jeromey Clary (6), Zach Strief (7), Nick Kaczur (3), Todd Herremans (4), Stacy Andrews (4), Adrian Jones (4), Shane Olivea (7), Wade Smith (3), Jonathan Stinchcomb (2)… and the list goes on.
No, these guys aren’t elite. Most elite talent only comes in the first round… REGARDLESS of position. Hopefully, I’ve helped change your view on this, because it is NOT easy to find a good quarterback.
Okay, let me throw a few names at you
My point was that the idea of “having” to take a quarterback very, very high is folly. I think we’re in the exact same position that the 49ers were a few years ago—awful team, bare cupboard, new coach, no clear-cut #1 player, two “first round” quarterbacks on the board. Depsite the fact that most places had them grading out in the middle of the first round at best, the 49ers openly waffled between Alex Smith and Aaron Rodgers for weeks. Eventually they went with the “high upside” guy at 1.1, and the “ready to play but low upside” guy fell all the way down to where he graded out. The 49ers paid an average guy a gazillion guaranteed dollars and thrust him into the ‘savior’ role . . . look how that played out. Why don’t you ask Mike Nolan if he’d rather have had Ronnie Brown (the next player taken), Braylon Edwards (the player after that), or even the first OT taken that year (Jammal Brown, 1.13) instead?
Now let’s look at Top 3 overall QB picks for the same time frame you gave, 2000-2006: Michael Vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning, Alex Smith, Vince Young, and—okay, I threw in 2007—Jamarcus Russell. Yikes, Palmer showed All-World skill early on, but has been both hurt and ineffective for the past of couple years. Eli Manning was nearly a confirmed bust until last year’s playoff run; I still don’t think he’s nearly as OMG FRANCHISE as everyone likes to pretend. After those two it’s pure brutality.
Now, let’s look at some of the QBs taken after the 10th overall pick, for just the last three years: Joe Flacco (1.18), Brady Quinn (1.22), Kevin Kolb (2.2), Trent Edwards (3.28), Tyler Thigpen (7.7), Jay Cutler (1.11), Tarvaris Jackson (2.32). Now I’m not saying these guys are all-world, but they all somewhere between excellent starters and guys who will challenge for a starting role in camp, in just two years. It’s my firm opinion drafting a QB in the top few overall picks is fraught with financial and franchisal (not a word) risk, and doesn’t correlate any higher with success than a mid-to-late first rounder, second rounder, or third rounder. “The Right Quarterback” can come from anywhere in the draft, but a step-in-and-start-over-Jeff-Backus LT is only going to come from the top of the first round.
http://thelionsinwinter.blogspot.com
by ty@thelionsinwinter on Jan 7, 2009 2:23 PM EST up reply actions
Touché!
Love it. Great comments. You got a few really good points here.
My ultimate position on this was that the true stud players typically come from the top of the draft and every player has bust potential regardless of position. The bust potential for Stafford is no different than Andre Smith right now. No different at all. They are both talented, but their NFL potential is a complete unknown… even to most GMs. If not, there would never be busts and Ryan Leaf would have been drafted in the seventh round. The only difference is the position they play and the circumstantial impact that a player busting at that position has within a particular organization.
I’ll go back to that same 2005 draft you discussed regarding Alex Smith. Sure the 49ers would love to have a redo on that one… after all, hindsight is 20/20. But who would they have picked? What if they liked Benson more than Brown? What about Pacman, who went 6th overall? Braylon might even be considered a bust had he been taken 1st overall. There is no guarantee that the Lions hit a homerun on a pick just because it isn’t a quarterback. You and I could do this analysis on every position and have the same argument over and over with the same results. A bust is a bust… pure and simple.
The Lions don’t HAVE to take a quarterback. The beauty of the first overall pick is that you can marriage need with talent. You take the safest need position with the most talent. If Smith, Oher, Bradford and Stafford all grade out as picks that would be deserving of the first overall pick… I THINK (just my humble opinion)… that a quarterback trumps a tackle every time. If we had a good young quarterback to build with… no question… take a tackle or the best defensive player on the board. But we don’t. We’ve got jack. And that won’t get us far.
Excellent retort by the way.
OTs don't bust as often
Have to disagree with one point of yours here:
“The bust potential for Stafford is no different than Andre Smith right now. No different at all.”
As you can see from n4ry4’s post below, tackles work out with far more frequency than QBs. I’m not saying that there is no risk involved with Smith or Oher. Obviously there is always a risk. I’m talking about managing that risk. We can’t afford to blow this one and Stafford and Bradford have a much higher bust potential (3-1 based on n4ry4’s numbers)
I might be contradicting myself but...
I think that the bust factor is more individual based than position based. It’s not necessarily based on history or the law of averages. You can’t always measure heart, determination, work ethic, character, self-motivation, commitment, etc. That’s why it’s so hard to judge talent based on football skills in a college setting and physical measurables. In the end, I guess all I want the Lions to do is pick the best player that matches need with talent and is worthy of the first overall pick. Whether it’s a tackle, quarterback or God help us… a wideout (I know it won’t be), I will be happy as long as the guy is a stud and a cornerstone of the team.
What Mayhew can’t do, though, is use history or averages to influence his decision. It’s got to be based on the individual and his translation to the NFL.
It's no fun when we agree
0-16 teams need to draft the best player on the board plain and simple. We’ve got six painfully anxious months ahead of us to determine who that is. If they draft Stafford I hope to God you’re right about him. This is one case where I’m praying I have to eat some crow.
thanks!
. . .and let me say, I really enjoyed the article as well. What it comes down to for me is that I don’t agree that a QB trumps tackle every time. I’d say that elite QBs and elite LTs are equally rare, and equally important to a team’s success. The obvious examples to me are the Ravens and Rams; they each won Super Bowls with elite LTs (Ogden, Pace) but mediocre QBs (Dilfer, Warner). I DO agree that it’s got to be the safest pick—but left tackles are much easier to consistently scout and grade out than quarterbacks. For linemen, the “mental game” consists mostly of being disciplined and motivated—other than that, what you see at the combine, measurables and technique, is what you get. Meanwhile, a quarterback can have every concievable indicator—size, strength, accuracy, mobility, athleticism, arm strength, college competition—and fall apart once they hit the league (Hello, Vince Young). There is a magical “X Factor” in evaluating quarterbacks that I don’t want ot have to pray we hit the lottery on. Even the biggest flops at OT are usually servicable players; the first guy people think of when they think of bust OTs, Robert Gallery, has been a decent starting guard for the Raiders all year long. The worst busts at QB collect double-digit millions to tank the entire franchise. I will take Oher or Smith, thanks—but I’ll try to only jump off a short cliff if we take a QB 1.1.
Peace
Ty
http://thelionsinwinter.blogspot.com
by ty@thelionsinwinter on Jan 8, 2009 11:03 AM EST up reply actions
Okay...
point taken. I think I can best summarize by using a quote from the movie Cool Hand Luke, “What we’ve got here is a failure to communicate. I guess there are some men you just can’t reach”.
I just don’t think that I’ll ever buy into the opinion that one position is easier to scout than others. If that were the case, no team would ever have players that turn into busts. Every team would choose the safe pick at the top… the safe money… and the run at tackles would start at 1 and end at 10, followed by the next easiest scouted position and so on. What GM (I know, aside from Miller) would have every taken something that he thought was a risk, when a sure thing was right there. That theory doesn’t hold a lot of water for me.
I’ve said it a million times… no pick is a guarantee. No position is safe. And no one can say that they can, without uncertainty, tell just how a college player will translate to the NFL. That is the “X Factor” you are talking about. But that’s not just a quarterback “X Factor”, that’s any college player’s “X Factor”. I made comments on an earlier fan post talking about this exact subject here. Look at the comment called “Hmmm… still not sold on your comments.”
Anyway, I value your opinion here Ty. It’s a strong argument on drafting an O-linesman that I don’t completely disagree with – aside from the scouting part. We need good players at every position. But at the number one spot, if Stafford grades out high enough, I think that you’ve still got to try and get your quarterback.
lot's of great idea's
Of course none of this matter’s until we have a coach hired and everyone would be happy if we traded down. My gut tells me we will go with a QB and I am pulling for Bradford (Stafford did not impress me against MSU as I had heard going in he is inconsistent and the difference between him in the first half vs. second half showed that). I get the sense that the majority of fans don’t want to go with a QB though and I think it’s because it’s percieved to be an all or nothing pick. Either the QB wins you a super bowl or he is a bust and it sets the franchise back 5 years. One thing I see is a lot of people are happy with what we have. Well, look 5 years down the line, Culpepper will likely be out of the league. I never liked Stanton at MSU, I hated the pick when we got him. He is inconsistent, injury prone and when he throws down field the ball seems to hang up there forever. Dan-O needs to be resigned before he can be the answer and I wouldn’t blame him for a second if he wanted to skip town instead of trying to learn a third offense in Detroit. Reports also suggest that Cassel will be franchised so cross him out. So as of today, our options our Stanton, Culpepper and Henson … not good.
So why not take a shot at QB. Because everyone can name about a dozen busts in the last ten years. Well, let’s look at the last 20 # 1 picks:
’88:Aundray Bruce- LB Falcons (bust)
’89: Aikman- QB- Cowboys (HOFer)
’90: Jeff George- QB- Colts (journey man/bust)
’91: Russell Maryland- DT- Cowboys (All-Pro/bust for ’Boys)
’92: Steve Entman: DT- Colts- Bust
’93: Drew Bledsoe: QB- Pats- All Pro
’94: Dan Wilkinson: DT-Bengals (journey man/bust)
’95: Ki-Jana Carter: RB- Bengals- Bust
’96: Keyshawn Johnson: WR- Jets- All Pro
’97: Orlando Pace- LT- Rams- future HOFer
’98: Peyton Manning: QB- Colts- future HOFer
’99: Tim Couch: QB- Browns- Bust
’00: Courtney Brown- DE- Browns- Bust
’01: Mike Vick: QB- Falcons- All Pro/bust due to off field issues
’02: David Carr- Texans- QB- bust
’03: Carson Palmer- Bengals- QB- All Pro
’04: Eli Manning- QB- Giants- All-Pro/Super Bowl champ
’05: Alex Smith: QB- 49ers- Bust
’06: Mario Williams: DE- Texans- All-Pro
’07: Jamarcus Russell: QB- Raiders- likely bust
’08: Jake Long: OT- Dolphins- too early to tell
So what do we learn. Over half these picks could be considered busts. Only 2 OT taken with one future HOFer. QB’s include 3 Super Bowl Champs (not counting Bledsoe who won his as a backup). Six QB’s who have reached the Pro- bowl out of 11. A lot of defensive line busts. A terrible RB and a LB no one has heard of since. The reason I did this is to remind everyone that who ever we take will be a gamble. For every Joey-Heisman out there there is usually a Robert Gallery as well. The pick is virtually irrelevant. It is the people we put in place to develop that pick and others that will make the difference. I just hope if the Lions do draft a QB that the fan base doesn’t ultimately dismiss him. I personally think Sam Bradford has all the tools and appears to be a good decision maker with the ball and has room to grow. I would be very happy if the Lions land him.
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 7, 2009 11:44 AM EST reply actions
Very excellent post
Like the details a lot. The only thing I’ll disagree about is Bradford over Stafford. No he didn’t have a great bowl game, but I think he’ll translate the NFL better. He’s probably more capable of handling a weak roster too.
Good post!
Also
for everyone who is demanding a left tackle, Michael Oher is currently sitting at #23 on scouts inc. list of prospects.
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 7, 2009 11:55 AM EST reply actions
Save some bucks?
Matt Ryan – $72 million, 3rd Overall Pick
Jake Long – $57.5 Million, 1st Overall Pick
Just some food for thought. Quarterbacks always demand way more money than any other position. With Ford struggling financially, could WCF make this a financially driven choice?
I don't know what the cap looks like for us next year...
But it was terrible this season, so that could be a consideration.
Check out Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
Cap looks great!
Killer had a column on MLive talking about as much as $39MM in cap space!! Couple that with our draft picks and we could really make some progress. Again, not the time to cheap out.
Seriously
Hainsworth and Peppers are available….
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five." ~Groucho Marx
I'm on board with Peppers!
I agree that we need to build through the draft and keep the free agency spending to a minimum… or at least be smart about it. But I’d love to see the Lions throw a little dough at Peppers.
Haynesworth is a bit volatile, but a hell of a tackle and run-stuffer. Thinks Shaun Rogers, but in shape and mean.
Painful memories
Is anyone else having flashbacks of 2001 when all the Lions had to do was lose the last game of the season against Dallas to finish 1-15 and get the 2nd overall pick? But instead won a meaningless game thus dropping them to 3rd and allowing Carolina to draft Peppers and leave us with Harrington. Subsequently leading them to think that their quarterback problem was solved and drafting Charles Rogers the following year in the Carson Palmer draft. All they had to do was lose one stinking game and our lives would be completely different.
Ok I know there’s a ton of things that could’ve happened in the following years but this is what being a Lions fan has done to my brain. Here’s hoping they can make amends and sign Peppers!!!
final thought
I would also be happy with Mark Sanchez in the second round but I don’t want to miss out on a QB with our top 3 picks.
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 7, 2009 11:57 AM EST reply actions
He's not a senior
And it is unknown if he will go pro.
Check out Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
Not coming out
I can’t see Sanchez coming out. Especially if he’s projected as a 2nd rounder. He’d probably end up taking a pay cut from what he’s making at USC. haha
Another thing against Stafford
Mel Kiper appears to like him better than Bradford. I have never been able to take the guy seriously ever since he refused to budge on thinking Mike Williams was the number one prospect in 2005. I do see why he projects well to the NFL with his arm but the one thing Detroit always seems to lack at QB is a good decision maker. The best decision maker Detroit has had at QB in my life time is Eric Kramer and we went 12-4 with him. After that you have guys like Mitchell, Batch, Harrington and Kitna who can all do some things well but also make stupid decisions with the ball. I will be interested to see how Bradford does against the Gators on Thursday. They have a fast defense and if he can play mistake free (or atleast reasonably mistake free) I will be impressed. If he has a dog of a game I would hope he stays in school another year.
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 7, 2009 12:12 PM EST reply actions
Couldn't agree more
Kiper also had Ryan Leaf graded higher than Peyton Manning. His reasoning was Leaf’s arm strength. Sound familiar?
I’ve made my opinion known before, but I am against a QB with the #1 pick, mainly because I don’t care for Stafford or Bradford. I am 100% against Bradford and about 75% against Stafford (he looked downright awful in the first half against MSU, though he played much better later on).
My biggest hope is that the Lions build the offensive line or defense. The biggest needs right now are at OT and pretty much every defensive position. A QB is a need as well, but for right now I think it is more important to build the trenches, which has never happened with the Lions. A solid defense with a great running game can take you a lot farther than a potential bust of a QB. Although Stafford could end up being pretty good, he just doesn’t seem like someone that can become an elite QB, especially in only a few seasons. If this were last year’s draft, I would still say to draft someone like Jake Long over a QB, but I wouldn’t have had an issue with drafting Matt Ryan one bit.
Check out Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
As far as the cap goes,
Yes a QB costs more but I believe the cap will go up to over 120 million this year. I don’t know what Roy’s number was but he will be gone. Most of the garbage DB’s we added (see Brian Kelly) should be gone. Kitna’s gone, etc. The money should be there and frankly I don’t care if hurt’s the Ford’s pocket book.
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 7, 2009 12:17 PM EST reply actions
Would you rather have
Joe Thomas or CJ?
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 7, 2009 12:17 PM EST reply actions
CJ But....
CJ was as close to a guarantee as there is in a draft. None of the QBs available this year come close to that.
No one in this draft does...
Again, the tackles that everyone wants so badly are not guarantees. Smith is the closest, but you’ll start to see the speculation will soon show a few flaws in his game. Very few guys come out as sure things. Even then, sure things can bust… yeah, Reggie Bush… I mean you.
or a better question
Would you rather have Robert Gallery (drafted 2nd in 2004) or Phillip Rivers (drafted 4th) or even Big Ben (drafted 11). The thing Lions fans need to worry about is who is developing the kid we draft at #1. Andre Smith could be a bust. A d-lineman could be a bust. If we trade back and get extra picks each one of them could be a bust.
I still stand by my desire to simply draft smart football players. To me when I watched Bradford this year he seemed to understand how to protect the ball. I don’t see that with Stafford. Thursday’s game could change my opinion though.
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 7, 2009 12:23 PM EST reply actions
Bradford protected the ball because...
he had a great O-line. Stafford played well on a relatively below average team. Also, the offenses that these guys play in make a huge difference. That’s why I think that Stafford will eventually grade out higher than Bradford. Beside, Heisman winners almost always bust… that’s you Eric Crouch and Ty Detmer.
I heard a ridiculous stat the other day
I don’t remember it exactly, but Bradford only gets hit like 3 times a game on average or something like that. His o-line is amazing.
Check out Pride of Detroit, SB Nation's Lions Blog
Can someone explain to me
What makes a draft pick a guarentee. I agree CJ has all the tools and was probably Millens best pick but there is no guarentees. Andre Smith is not a guarentee, Sam Bradford is not a guarentee, my gut tells me that Stafford is likely a bust anyway. Malcom Jenkins, the MLB from USC and anyone else you want to look at is not a guarentee. One thing I will guarantee though is that the Lions will never go anywhere if we don’t have a QB that can protect the ball. Dan-O could be that guy but he has a very low ceiling in my opinion and is little more than a game manager. If the teams resigns him and gives him a shot I will be content with that but otherwise don’t be upset if we draft a QB (unless it’s Stafford) :)
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 7, 2009 12:32 PM EST reply actions
Guarantee
I said “as close to a guarantee as there is in a draft.”. I would define this as a player that has shown no obvious or glaring weaknesses. CJ had all the physical tools, a good head on his shoulders, and a great track record in college. This is not to suggest that he couldn’t have been a bust, but the risk was as low as possible with him.
I just don’t see that with the QBs coming out of this draft. They are both very high risk (especially Stafford). Yes there are risks with the LTs as well but that position is easier to project and is therefore inherently lower risk.
Maybe being a Lions fan has made me a bit jaded (and who could blame me?) but I’d like to go the safest route with this pick and take some risks down the road. No matter who they draft the Lions are gonna suck next year and have another high draft pick. Next year’s QB class is supposed to be the best since 2004 (so I’ve read). Waiting a year to take a QB makes sense when everything else is in shambles.
too many comments
so why not add 1 more? Football is won with QBs and defense. Whether they have serviceable QBs now or not, they have the worst D in the league. They need to trade out of #1 and get more help on that side of the ball. Maybe trade down to 2 or 3 if KC or the like needs a QB, and then they can take Smith and the top D guy on the board left at wherever… 20th. No magic, just smart picks.
Not enough comments!
The more the merrier here!
Trading down is a fantasy… won’t happen. That’s everyone’s solution, but to trade, you’ve got to have a trade partner. Who wants to give up half thier draft to move up a few spots for one player? No one. Won’t happen. We will have to pick someone at number one. Pick Stafford!
don't think it's gonna happen
i would LOVE to trade out of this pick. but i don’t think there are any takers out there. there’s only 2 teams with multiple 1st rounders this year. Detroit is one of them and Philadelphia is the other. with the eagles and panthers (philly’s other pick) in the playoffs, their picks are way too low to trade for the #1 overall. KC is the only team I could see that might be interested in trading up to get a QB. But if Bradford and Stafford both come out it’s more likely that they’ll just stay at #3 and take whoever the Lions don’t.
this situation wreaks of the 2005 NFL draft where the niners were dying to trade out of the first pick and nobody was interested. they ended up with alex smith. god help us.
Not like 2005
I don’t think this year will be the same as 2005. In ’05, there was no one deserving of the first overall pick. The talent was average. This year, with all of the juniors cashing in, the talent will be great. The problem will be deciding which of the 5-10 players are the best overall player. There are several good options at the top for Detroit. That will also keep teams from trading up. They can stand pat and still get a good player.
yup
Again. I don’t think it’s the end of the world if we take a QB. Especially if we take a LT with the 20th pick. But it’s been so long since that position has been locked down (Lomas Brown), I’d really like to not worry about it any more.
And I know what your’e gonna say, “It’s been even longer since we’ve had QB” but I guess the bottom line is I feel better about the LTs in this class than I do about the QBs.
yup, agreed
You’re asking a bunch of Lions fans if they want to draft the next David Carr (Bradford) or the next Joey Harrington (Stafford). I don’t think you’re going to get a lot of positive reponses. :P
http://thelionsinwinter.blogspot.com
by ty@thelionsinwinter on Jan 7, 2009 2:26 PM EST reply actions
History says take the top OT
Instead of just looking at who happened to be the #1 overall pick, since we’re trying to decide between the Top Offensive Tackle (Smith or Oher) and the Top Quarterback (Stafford or Bradford), I looked at the past 20 drafts from 1988-2007 to answer the question:
In hindsight, who would I have taken—the top QB, or the top OT?
My criteria are pretty subjective, so feel free to disagree, and some were hard to call because they were both good (Steve McNair vs Tony Boselli) or neither was any good (Charles McRae vs Dan McGwire).
I used # of ProBowls, All-Pro selections, starts, games played, “bust factor”, etc.
My results:
The top OT was a better choice 12 times
The top QB was a better choice 4 times
It was too close to call (either one would be just as good/bad) 4 times
1988 – OT (close call) – P.Gruber, C.Chandler
Gruber (OT)=3x All-Pro, started 183 games
Chandler (QB)=2x ProBowler, 79.1 career rating
1989 – QB – T.Aikman > T.Mandarich
T.Aikman = HoF
1990 - OT – R.Webb > J.George
Webb = 7x ProBowler, 5x All-Pro
1991 - OT – C.McRae > D.McGwire
Neither was anything special, but McRae played & started far more games over several seasons. McGwire was a career backup for a short career.
1992 - OT – B.Whitfield > T.Maddox
B.Whitfield = 1996 All-Pro, 1998 ProBowler
1993 - OT – W.Roaf > D.Bledsoe
Roaf = 11x ProBowler
Bledsoe = 4x ProBowler
1994 - neither
QB Heath Shuler had a 15-33 TD-INT ratio, 54.3 rating
OT B.Williams started 16 games then failed drug tests
Shuler did become a U.S. Congressman though.
1995 - TIE – T.Boselli – S.McNair
CLOSE call.
T.Boselli = 5x ProBowler, 3x All-Pro
S.McNair = 3x ProBowler, 1x All-Pro, 1x Co-MVP
Boselli was more dominant at his position, but McNair was a QB (more important position)
1996 - OT – J.Ogden > T.Banks
no question
1997 - OT – O.Pace > J.Druckenmiller
no question
1998 - QB – P.Manning > K.Turley
no question
1999 - OT – J.Tait > T.Couch
neither made a ProBowl, but Tait played more seasons
2000 - OT – C.Samuels > C.Pennington
C.Samuels = 6x ProBowler
2001 - OT – L.Davis > M.Vick
Both are multiple-ProBowlers, but Vick is a criminal disgrace
2002 - neither – M.Williams/D.Carr
both busts
2003 - QB – C.Palmer > J.Gross
Palmer=3x ProBowl, Gross=1x ProBowl
2004 - QB – E.Manning > R.Gallery
easy call
2005 - OT – J.Brown > A.Smith
Brown=2x ProBowler
2006 - too early to tell
V.Young impressed early, then struggled & benched, D.Ferguson has started 32 games, but has been kinda mediocre
2007 - OT – J.Thomas > J.Russel
I say Lions go Left Tackle.
Great post
Wow I thought I had a lot of time. Great info on OTs vs QBs. The bottom line is that the Lions suck. When you’re 0-16 you pretty much need EVERYTHING. So why not just take the best player available? If that player was a QB, I say let’s get him. If it’s a LB, I say get him. If it’s a DE, I say get him. If it’s a WR, I say SHOOT ME IN THE HEAD. This year seems to be a solid OT draft. Why reach for QB when there are so many other needs. Don’t get sucked in by Atlanta’s success. This thing isn’t getting turned around in one year.
Nice!
I love it when guys do their homework before a post. Nicely done.
All this said… I still say go QB. If you knew me, you’d know I’m a stubborn son-of-a-gun.
Seriously though, I would not be disappointed if Detroit took a tackle… as long as he turns out to be a complete stud. If he busts and Stafford becomes Peyton, I’ll cry for ten years straight and then move to Green Bay.
Just kiddin’ on the Green Bay bit. Almost couldn’t get my fingers to type that…
This would be funny
Things would be looking up for the Lions if this happens.
Take OT (Smith) with the #1, and watch Stafford drop to #20.
It has happened a number of times in the past (Rogers, Quinn, Cutler) All who dropped below their projected spot.
Just don’t take a QB #1, Risk is too great for it to be a bust.
It would be funny, but...
I think Kansas City would jump all over him at #3. It’s Bradford who could have a Quinn/Rodgers-like slide on draft day. Hopefully, he doesn’t accept the invite to New York.
You may be right, but
It is always fun to dream. Who knows, KC may bring in Millien, and they take a wide out.
Rey Maualuga anyone?
Yeah, I’m saying first over all. Somebody who can step in and do a job. This guy would be a great compliment to Sims and be a big help in divisional games.
Not worth it for a MLB, even a good one
The first overall pick is BIZARRELY EXPEN$IVE. No matter who it is, he’ll demand a lot of money (though a QB would demand the most).
I would bet we could get a solid MLB in free agency cheaper than drafting a MLB #1 overall, and the FA would be someone who actually has NFL experience.
Last year, before he ever played a down in the NFL, #1 overall Jake Long signed with Miami for a $57mil / $30mil guaranteed five-year contract. Extrapolate to six years, and that’s over $68mil / #36 mil guaranteed.
I would expect Maualuga to demand a similar amount, possible less because he’s a LB, but possibly more because $$ amounts get higher every year.
For comparison, the Seahawks extended LB Lofa Tatupu last year to a six-year $42mil deal with $18m in guarantees. Tatupu is a 3x ProBowler in the prime of his career who has already proven himself in the NFL.
If we really wanted Tatupu (and he’s just an example, pick any other stud young NFL MLB) we could probably get him from Seattle for a lot less the #1 overall pick plus $68mil / $36 mil guaranteed (which is essentially what we’d give up to draft Maualuga).
Rey Maualuga would have to turn into the second coming of 10x ProBowler Ray Lewis (who was the fourth LB taken in his draft, by the way) to justify that amount of money on a middle linebacker, because you can get a MLB far cheaper.
Maualuga is talented, but the probability of anyone being an “all-decade team” kind of guy is very, very slim.
On the other hand, you cannot get a stud Left Tackle in Free Agency cheaper nearly as easily though; teams hang onto those guys for dear life because they protect the QB, their best asset.
Which makes sense if you think about it…if you trade your stud MLB for good value and your defense suffers for a while, you can handle the criticism. If you trade your stud LT and your franchise QB takes a lot more sacks and get injured the next season, your whole offense is shot and you’ll never hear the end of it.
Middle Linebacker just isn’t a good value with the #1 overall. The only positions of value for the #1 overall pick (and the guy had better be freaky good, not just whoever happens to be the best one this draft) are:
-Quarterback
-Left Tackle
-Running Back
-4-3 Defensive End (e.g. Mario Williams)
-3-4 Outside Linebacker (the “Lawrence Taylor position”)
-Once-in-a-decade Wide Receiver (Calvin Johnson, for example)
-Defensive Tackle (arguably)
am I missing any?
Agreed
Maualuga is going to be a very good, possibly great middle linebacker. But I don’t like the idea of taking him #1 overall. Too much money. I’d even argue that running back isn’t really worth the number 1 overall simply because they have such a short lifespan in the NFL. Either Lauranitis or Brandon Spikes should be available at #20 and would be a huge upgrade over Paris Lenon. If the Lions take a LT at #1 i’d like to see them go that route. Then a DT at #33 and address the QB through free agency or a trade for someone like Derek Anderson or Matt Cassel. If they go QB at #1 then we can forget about our ILB in this draft cuz they’ll have to take a LT at #20 to protect the QB.
I agree with n4ry4 on this
You just can’t take a MLB with the first overall pick. Your list looks good… outside linebacker is iffy, but possible. I’m not sure that Maualuga is even the best linebacker in the draft let alone best player. In fact, I’ll bet money he’s not the best player in the draft. He’ll probably slide out of the top ten.
I agree with wumanchu01 that there are several linebackers that are first rounders and one of them… probably Laurinaitis or Spikes will still be there at #20. I know the early bird mockers are taking mostly stabs in the dark right now, but many have both of these guys in the twenties, with Aaron Curry steadily becoming the best linebacker in the draft.
Not sure how I would rank them now. To be honest I haven’t seen a lot of tape on Spikes or Curry. I’ll have to scour the web and catch up on my linebacker knowledge.
strangely
I agree with taking Rey Maualuga 1st over a LT or QB too but I know it won’t happen. I believe the depth at both QB and LT make it reasonable to think we could address both positions with the #20 pick and the #33 pick. I don’t think MLB would be as easy to address there. Sadly, it won’t happen unless Mayhew is filling to take the heat and reach for someone likely to project outside of the top five of the draft. I stlll like the thinking though.
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 8, 2009 3:42 AM EST reply actions
Sorry if I repeat a prior argument...
But has anyone discussed trading down if the first pick is so ridiculously expensive?
it's been discussed
but it’s worth reminding people that the one reason it is so hard to trade down is because it so expensive. In a dream world though I could actually see Detroit trading down twice in order to land extra 2nd and 3rd picks this year. The first would be to trade back with Seatle who I personally think should look for a future QB to replace Hasselback and then trade back again with Jacksonville who could be interested in moving up to grab Michael Crabtree. It’ll never happen but it’s fun to dream. This would also put us in an appropriate spot to grab Rey Maualuga.
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 8, 2009 5:37 PM EST up reply actions
Anyone else keeping tabs on
ESPN Scouts Inc. top 32 prospects. The list is way different today and Rey Maualuga at 20 and Mark Sanchez ahead of Stafford. If Sanchez is in the mix as a first rounder I could definetly see one of these guys falling to us at 20 or possibly even 33 making it a no brainer to go LT at number 1. I am still anxious to see how Bradford plays against Florida tonight. By comparison Stafford throw for ~250 yards, 0 tds and 3 ints against Florida.
by tigerfaninChicago on Jan 8, 2009 5:41 PM EST reply actions
once again we pass on a proven winner!! why?
jere we go another lion offseason and another debate,imagine that we fall back into the same old same old potential verses solid results on one hand we have our shining knight florida’s mister everything tim tebow .two championships,one hiesmann ,two top 3 hiesmann finishes. a leader,a lockerroom guy a solid person… or we have the dreaded "mr. potential " underclassmen full of promise but not proven. what does a lions fan ,with the #1 pick , do??? so as i sit here after watching the title game and of the two qb’s we watched how can anyone else argue anymore that tebow cant make the throw’s an nfl qb can make he did it in the biggest scale , twice now in tiltle games he has become one of the great college players of all-time a winner at every level and with all the positives weve seen most people will tell you that hes not ready lets look at history ,recent history, flacco in baltimore, ryan in atlanta, lets start putting lions and tebow lets start there and build an o-line and d-line with the other picks still avail. we have 5 high picks SUPERMAN should be a lock!!!!pls everyone’ s deserves to have an opinion thats mine also lets bring in REX RYAN TRUE DEFENSIVE GENIUS OR WHAT ABOUT BRIAN BILLICK HE TURNED AROUND A FRANCHISE WITH TRENT DILFER AS HIS QB THATS SHOULD BE RESUME ENOUGH!!
BONECO419 IS ALWAYS RIGHT!!
where do i start?
first of all tebow isn’t coming out. no one thinks he’s even a second rounder at this point. drafting him with the #1 pick would be absolutely ludicrous (so yeah…the lions might do it). if he were to come out, MAYBE take a flier on him with the 2nd 3rd rd pick. anything higher than that would be insane.
making throws in college is completely different from making throws in the nfl. in college, QBs can wait for their receivers to get open and have a huge window to get the ball in. in the nfl, QBs have to anticipate when and where their WRs will be when they get open and make strong accurate throws get there at precise moments. tebow just doesn’t have the ability to do that (i don’t think bradford stafford can either). he comes from a gimmick offense that plays to his strengths and hides his weaknesses. guys like that get exposed in the nfl.
as for him being a “proven winner”, do the names vince young or eric crouch ring a bell? those guys were “proven winners” in college who had no shot in the nfl. and there are decades and decades of evidence that show that winning the heisman means absolutely nothing when projecting nfl talent (desmond howard, ron dayne, andre ware, rashaan salaam, gino toretta, etc).
the lions just need to take the best player available. it’s that simple.
Tebow...what a joke
I don’t think it is worth spending a #1 pick on a fullback. That position is dying in the League anyways.
Check out motownballin.blogspot.com
Winning doesn't mean anything
Know who else won…Chris Leak
Matt Flynn
Eric Crouch
Troy Smith
Joey Harrington
Tebow is no good
Check out motownballin.blogspot.com
Sanchez at the # 20 pick
It would be best to get the best available player at the # 1 spot ( be it Andre Smith or a defensive player) and use our 20th pick to draft Sanchez who has shown late in the year that he is an early round nfl draft pick.
O LINE first!
I just wonder why we never went after STEVE HUTCHINSON. Look at what he did for AP, Shaun Alexander, Hasselbeck, Frerotte/Jackson. Same can be said for Mo WIlliams in J-ville, plowing paths for Garrard & Taylor. Even Leftwich looked good hiding behind Mo!
They virtually got their entire offense drafted into the NFL, and are still producing Pro Bowlers. Everyone is getting older, but Hutch and Mo are still “pancake masters” with good years left. Reunite those guys before Backus (and Raiola) decide to walk. Let the younger guys study their family-based loyalty, technique, and interactions with each other.
Commit to blocking for once will ya? #20 would be proud. Hey Lomas, wanna coach O line?
by michigangeorgia on Jan 11, 2009 5:52 PM EST reply actions
Hutch & Mo
Hutchinson was drafted ahead of Backus by one pick in 2001, so we had no shot to get him there. And then in Free Agency, the Vikes paid an exorbitant price to get him. Was it worth it? Probably, but you just don’t see the Lions making those kind of off-season moves. I’m glad for that.
As for Maurice Williams… he didn’t end up being a great pick. He’s been moved to guard for some time now as he didn’t play well as a tackle. So no missed opportunities there.
Point taken
…but I disagree. Sure, Damien Woody is better than Mo, but his position didn’t influence anything by itself. Infuse the “homegrown trio” out there, and I think it’d equate to better effort from the sum, not the pieces. I believe that their familiarity would motivate them at this stage in their careers. That’s exactly why I’d trade that top pick to MIN for Hutch. Take the Pro Bowl blocker and let them take Stafford… Now his salary isn’t so exhorbitant (yes, I’m a Hutch fan)..
Mo was moved to guard while healing from an injury. He may not be statistically premier, but he’ll only fetch an incentive-laden deal anyway. He’s still a highly serviceable blocker that Backus/Hutch already KNOW will fight for them. If it doesn’t work, the only waste of salary is Mo’s as opposed to a crippling QB bust. I think the fans would enjoy watching them together again. K Smith would have a Pro Bowl year.
“Imagine what Mike Vick is gonna do do behind them, when he gets here!” LOL.
by michigangeorgia on Jan 13, 2009 3:09 AM EST reply actions
I'm trying to figure out...
where you’re going with this? Neither Hutchinson or Williams are free agents this year. Are you suggesting the Lions trade for them? It’d take a first round pick to get Hutchinson and I’m sure the Vikes wouldn’t let him go anyway and I hope to God that the Lions wouldn’t give up a high pick for a guard. I understand that they all know each other and might play well as a group, but logistically it just can’t happen.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
