Jim Schwartz Talks Draft Strategy
by Sean Yuille on Feb 18, 2009 12:53 AM EST
in NFL Draft
Email
PrintJim Schwartz talked to the media on Tuesday and shared a strategy regarding the #1 pick in the draft that we should all really follow as fans.
"When talk about that slot and how much money it's going to take, it's a different animal,'' Schwartz said. "I've said before, we want to make sure we get the right person there, not necessarily lock into a particular position. The mistakes I've seen made in the NFL are 'Hey, we have to draft a running back here,' Or 'We have to draft an offensive line or a quarterback.' I think a better philosophy is to let your hand play out. Try to get the right player, not necessarily the right position.''
I couldn't agree more. I cringe at posts about how a quarterback has to be the pick no matter what. Then again, I'll admit that I've sort of been on the other side of that extreme. I am squarely against the Lions drafting a QB with the #1 pick mainly because I don't think any of the prospects are good enough to take at the very start of the draft.
At the same time, I also feel like the Lions have an endless amount of needs and quarterback shouldn't be all that high on the list of priorities. Just look at Tennessee last season. They had an awesome season thanks to a great defense, solid running attack, and a quarterback that did a good job of managing games. Obviously having a long-term option at QB would be ideal, but why jump the gun? It's not like the Lions are an elite quarterback away from contending for a Super Bowl year in and year out. They have a long way to go to get to that point.
Right now (to me, at least) it just makes more sense to use the #1 pick on a player that can come in and immediately improve this team and help this team for years to come. I don't think any of the quarterbacks in the draft could do both of those things. Part of that is because I don't think any of the QBs in the draft are out of this world talents, and part of it is because any QB needs talented teammates to succeed. If, for example, Matthew Stafford comes in and has no offensive line, what is the point? He will be running for his life just as Lions QBs did during the Millen era.
Making sure to discuss both sides of the argument to keep other NFL teams wondering about what the Lions will do with their #1 pick, Schwartz talked about drafting a QB as well.
"When you go to the quarterback position, you're going to need to be long-term, eventually, at that position. You can only be stop-gap and you can only be transitional for so long. You want to be long-term,'' he said.
Schwartz's point is that you can only start someone like Kerry Collins for so long until a long-term plan at QB is necessary. He's right, but like I said earlier, the Lions aren't a QB away from contending for anything. They need to worry about building a foundation for a quarterback to someday come in and make them an elite team. I personally think Schwartz understands that and would guess that if he had it his way, the Lions wouldn't be drafting a QB #1 overall in April. I could be wrong, but remember, his philosophy is to run the ball and stop the run. I just think he would rather build the offensive and defensive lines (and the entire defense as whole, for that matter) before worrying about a QB, and personally, I am on board with that strategy 100%.
32 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Draft
Let’s breathe that fresh air in. If Schwartz is hinting at NOT drafting a QB at #1 and Mayhew and company are on the same page with that analysis and insists on building with the best overall players available maybe they’re going to break the norm and draft something unexpected first overall, like Aaron Curry who I have publicly been a big advocate of. I’ll also rejoice at the fact that they plan to build the trenches as a foundation for this team. Our O-line and D-line have been regularly since the inception of the Millen era and if we are to see real change with this organization that’s where the change needs to start. The new coaching staff says that they have key components in place, and I maybe see a few pieces as role players on offense and defense. Obviously besides players like Calvin Johnson you’re lacking your most pivotal players. We may have difference makers on hand that are the guys who come in and change the tempo and make an impact. Swing players so to speak. I think we’re missing the every down guys who can play consistent. It’s akin to building a car, we’ve got the seat belt,s some hub caps, the chairs and a battery. We’re missing things like an engine, a carburetor, oil pan, and gas tank. The real important things that take this team from something that can remain idle and show signs of life into a team that can really make things happen for themselves and achieve 9-12 wins a season. I’m not looking for a good year in between all the bad ones and I’m sure most of you aren’t. What we really want is a contender that’s there every year. I’ll take an Atlanta Braves like organization that is in the running 13 years in a row any day of the week.
Curry
I’ve been a huge advocate of either O-line/D-line with the first pick, but I’ve been slowly coming around to the idea Aaron Curry. I’d still rather take an O-linemen, but I definitely wouldn’t be upset with the choice. I think drafting him would also have a major impact on the play of Ernie Simms. He spent the entire season trying to cover for the rest of the defense’s faults and just didn’t have his best year. I think drafting Curry would ease some of that pressure and help him step up.
For argument’s sake, say we take Curry number one, who do we take at 20? Is there still enough depth at the O-line position to get an Oher?
at #20, we go C/G instead of LT
Many people (myself included) are underwhelmed at our line starting Backus, Raiola, and Peterman. I mean, didn’t the coaches watch film of the past 3 seasons? Was our run-blocking and pass-protection with these guys really that great?
But since it is what it is, look at our O-Line situation…
1. Mulitalo is gone, leaving a hole at Left Guard. Ramirez may or may not be starter material.
2. Backus is signed on a longer-term deal worth more money than Raiola, so we’ll need a replacement Center before a replacement Left Tackle, and if he doesn’t perform, we can upgrade from Raiola quicker and cheaper than Backus.
So, we kill two birds with one stone: at #20 we draft Alex Mack © out of Cal—put him at Left Guard for now (where he’ll be just fine), and have him be our Center of the future (when he slides to Center next year or the year after, we’ll get another Guard then). This oughta inspire Raiola AND upgrade our run game. You can never have too many solid offensive linemen.
There was a big run on OT’s in the first round last year. The same may happen again this year. At #20, we could realistically get the fourth- or fifth-best tackle, or the best interior offensive lineman.
Stick with Defense
Really the best plan is to take Curry #1 so we can solidify our linebackers then take another defensive player #20, hopefully it will be a DT or DE but a upgrade at CB would not be a bad thing. Our OL next year is not our biggest issue, like it or not our offense was not terrible last year and our biggest problem was that our defense failed in the late game. If we had better coverage and pressure then several of those games last year those losses could have turned into wins and our season would have been a much less embarrassing experience.
Yes we need an improved OL but realistically our defense needs a bigger upgrade and in all likelihood the best OL prospect available at #20 will not have the value of the top D pick at that point, the difference between#20 and waiting till #33 for an OL upgrade really will not be that different.
our O-Line has gaping holes too.
I know our Defense was godawful, but our O-Line was really bad too, in yards gained and sacks allowed.
If we spend 1A and 2A on defense, and 1B on O-Line, we’ll have still invested a lot more in defense this draft.
I don’t think our gaping hole at left guard is any less important than our gaping holes at NT, CB, MLB. If an elite CB or MLB (say, Davis or Maualuga) falls to #20, the get them, but if they’re all gone, and the best player available at a position of immediate need also happens to be the best interior offensive lineman in the draft, take him at #20. Why not? We’re still loaded with draft picks to fix our defense.
Not discounting our o line needs
I am aware of what state our line is in but all mock drafts I have seen and just looking at what is available it does not appear that if we draft a defensive player for the first pick which I feel is the way to go then I don’t see us getting the same value for our pick with any of the OL players who should be available whereas there will probably be a number of talented defensive play makers available who are much better value at that point.
I wouldn't agree...
…if the best Center/Guard prospect in the draft is available at pick #20 (and I think he will be), than that’s a good place to pick him.
There is usually one or two interior O-Linemen picked in the bottom-middle of the first round, and so many mock drafters are surprised because you’re “supposed to” pick a sexy pick in the first round (QB, RB, WR, LT, etc), but we have a huge hole at LG and will need to replace our Center in couple of years if not sooner.
Spend 1A and 2A on defense, but pick Mack at #20, unless somebody clearly better falls.
Any Position But Quarterback
There are plenty of holes to fill…let’s not end up with another Alex Smith or Joey.
relief!!
I like hearing what Schwartz said. Im thinking that depending on what we can do in free agency will effect our draft a lot. It looks like now we could be getting Curry, Raji or maybe even Orakpo. I dont think we will be getting an offensive tackle. With the signing of Peterman and from what Linehan said about how he liked Backus, Raiola, and Cherilus, I think we will be looking for a guard like Robinson to fill the other gap on the line. think about this for the 1st three picks, 1a.) Aaron Curry 1b.) Vontae Davis 2.) Duke Robinson. Then if we could get Haynesworth and maybe Mike Peterson just for the veteran leadership at the MLB spot for a few years It would help our Defense and our O-Line tremendously. After these moves then maybe look at James Casey in the 3rd round for TE and ROn Brace if he is still there for NT. I think a Healthy Dwayne White and a 2nd year Cliff Avril will make a pretty solid sat of ends.
Possibly a trade?
“Letting your hand play out” to me sounds like he’s waiting for teams to offer something to him for the picks.
trade won't happen...
…nobody wants the top spot. There isn’t an elite player player worth that kind of money. Obviously if the Lions were offered a fair trade offer, we’d take it, just like we’d trade Culpepper for Drew Brees if they offered…but that’s not going to happen
I hope we pick BJ Raji at #1. I think the most important position on our defense is also our biggest hole on defense. Our LB’s didn’t play well this past year, but that’s because they were constantly taking on OL’s. Chuck Darby was just getting pushed around. Raji is thick, strong, quick, and aggressive.
Aaron Curry would be okay too, but I think you gotta start in the trenches. DL’s make LB’s better by protecting them from blockers, not the other way around.
I’d take Alex Mack at 1B. 6-4 316 lbs, very athletic, strong, and smart. He can easily play Left Guard, and would inspire Raiola to play better, or would be an upgrade from Raiola if he doesn’t.
I think everyone should wait and see who the Lions pick up in FA
before deciding on who they need to take in the draft.
I believe they will fill some holes through FA and that will totally change the face of the draft for Detroit. Right now, it’s all speculation based on a roster that’s not even close to being firmed up. There are a lot of players I wouldn’t mind snagging at 1-1, 1-20 and 2-1 but there’s no sense in worrying about it until we see what the team looks like heading into April. Just my $0.02.
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five." ~Groucho Marx
Ah ha
"Schwartz’s point is that you can only start someone like Kerry Collins for so long until a long-term plan at QB is necessary. He’s right, but like I said earlier, the Lions aren’t a QB away from contending for anything. "
I would counter that the Lions aren’t an LT, DE, or anything else away from contending, either. People talk about building up a whole team around the QB, THEN drafting a QB—but of all the positions, QB is the one that needs the most time to groom, learn, and develop. After three years of building up the lines, linebackers, secondary, and skill positions, it’s too late to draft a QB and throw him into the fire—unless you get butt-lucky with a Joe Flacco. In the time it takes most QBs to develop, the team you already spent three years building BEFORE drafting that QB will fall apart.
Peace
Ty
http://thelionsinwinter.blogspot.com
by ty@thelionsinwinter on Feb 18, 2009 12:37 PM EST reply actions
yes but...
as you said, qb is the hardest position to develop. so doesn’t it make sense to make the learning curve as easy as possible for a qb? if all the other pieces are in place it should make the development go a lot more smoothly right? Guys like Flacco, Ryan, and Roethlisberger developed quickly because they had solid players around them (in Flacco’s case the D always gave him good field position, Ryan had an incredible running game behind him, and Big Ben just had tons of talent everywhere around him).
in the end, a great player will be great regardless. and a crappy player will be crappy regardless. it just seems like if you build the rest of the team first, and then get that qb, the team makes the jump in a hurry. look at pittsburg vs. indy as an example.
value of OT bests LB...
I’m not saying the Lions shouldn’t draft Aaron Curry at number one because he’s a LB, I think that’s silly, but it’s the reality of the league. People are going to snatch up the top Linemen asap, leaving top LB’s fall to that number 20 spot. I think we should grab the best OT with number one, UNLESS, we see a clear cut franchise Guard (Duke Robinson) come draft day that will be there at number 20. I would do this because there will still be star LB’s at number 20, but not necessarily a star lineman. Rey Maualuga, James Laurinaitus, or Brian Cushing would do the same for Sims and our LB corps as Aaron Curry could do, in the fact that it will allow Ernie to play football and not try to be everywhere at once.
What I would love to see is us trade out of the number one slot to save on money and then draft Aaron Curry, B.J. Raji, or Brian Orakpo, then at number 20 and 33 draft a OG and LB(order would depend on 1st pick). Then stick to defense (secondary and Ron Brace preferably) the rest of the draft, and possibly pick up a TE unless we get a starting-caliber TE in free agency.
The problem with this is that we have a slim chance of trading out of number one due to the lack of quality in this QB draft class.
I have to say...
that I get a little frustrated when people get so disappointed about taking a quarterback that they forget that we have 2 more picks in the top 33! We can still fill holes on the line or defense. It’s not like that top pick is our only one.
I know it’s a crappy system, but you can’t just take anyone at the top. You just can’t! The pick needs to make sense on a number of levels… cost, impact, etc. I’ll continue to say it until late April…. if the QB grades out that high and you don’t have one… draft him.
I have to agree...
and even take it a step further. I get frustrated when people start saying things like, “we have to draft all defense, because we were ranked last!” It’s very short-sighted, and pinning all of the defense’s failures (and there were many) on only one factor- lack of talent. There are far more factors that went into that #32 ranking, including: the scheme being a poor fit for the players, the offense not being able to sustain drives (particularly early in games), stubbornness on the part of the coaches, etc. It’s a gross oversimplification to say that drafting only defensive players will fix this team.
So basically what Orwell was saying was, "it's not perfect, but I'll take it."
Curry isn't just anyone...
I get your point, but Curry isn’t just a random pick. He’s turning alot of the sold called “experts” heads. Scouts inc and Kiper both have him ranked higher than Stafford, again, according to the experts. He was a stud at Wake and put up big stats. He also works out on several levels; in reference to cost i think he’d cost less than a position player like a QB (but i’m not definite on the specs), we have a need at the position (unless Paris Lenon or Jordon Dizon is the answer), and i think he has the size to be a starter from day one, so thats impact.
There is still alot to be seen, i.e. combine/individual workouts/interviews, but right now most of the “experts” have Curry as a higher value. My biggest concern is whether Stafford is just the best available out of a very weak QB draft class or is he the real deal. I agree, that if Stafford has awesome work outs, great interviews, and his stock rises, then we should give a hard look at drafting him. But from a value argument, I’d rather go with the best player from a position that we have a need. Right now, you can make a strong case for Curry. But like Jettero pointed out, this is all speculation. Lots going on before april. just don’t get frustrated.
Curry appears very solid but...
he’s no rock star. He’s not that Reggie Bush-type of prospect that just blows you away. He’s a smaller school guy, who’s starting to become that fast riser because people are talking about him. I’d be very leary about putting first overall pick money for a non-QB/DE/LT that’s not a sure-fire stud.
Don’t misunderstand me. I like Curry a lot. If we were at say, number four… it’s a no brainer.
Stafford a rock star?
It comes down to personal opinions, but is stafford a rock star? or just the best QB in a weak QB draft class?
Curry was a 4 year starter at an ACC school, not exactly the SEC but still a major conference. Won the Butkus award for best linebacker in the nation last year. 4 pick six.
my first choice is still o-line, even after the curry support, but curry is a close second in my opinion.
Stafford is not a rock star, but he's...
a quarterback. If Curry and Stafford rank closely, you take Stafford based on overall value and impact.
Ok, so say they rank closely...
What are the odds that he starts day one compared to Curry starting day one? Whoever we draft needs to make an immediate impact. In my opinion, the odds are better for Curry to make an impact sooner.
I think Schwartz disagrees...
I’ve said before, we want to make sure we get the right person there, not necessarily lock into a particular position. The mistakes I’ve seen made in the NFL are ‘Hey, we have to draft a running back here,’ Or ‘We have to draft an offensive line or a quarterback.’
- Jim Schwartz on the #1 overall pick, emphasis added
I think the only players you dismiss outright with the #1 overall are 1. guys you don’t want, and 2. guys you could clearly get later in the draft.
But if a guy projects to be a long-term starter and a solid prospect, and he fills a gaping hole on our team, what’s wrong with spending the #1 overall on him?
Here’s how I see it…
Suppose Detroit won three of those few close games in 2008 (hooray, 3-13!). Now, Detroit has the #4 overall selection in the draft, instead of the #1 overall.
We look closely at all the elite prospects, and decide that the best risk/reward guy who fills an immediate need is either BJ Raji, or Aaron Curry. They’re both elite prospects, and according to “conventional wisdom”, there’s nothing wrong with taking a LB or DT #4 overall, if he measures up as an “elite” prospect.
Back to reality, we didn’t win those three games, so we have the #1 overall pick, not the #4 overall.
Do we really completely dismiss those elite prospects who would fit our needs, who we would have been happy to fill three spots lower? Do we punish ourselves for having a horrible record instead of a merely bad record by not allowing ourselves to draft that guy who could be the best player?
If this is our mindset, then the only difference between spending our top pick on the guys we really want being acceptable and unacceptable is the fact that we didn’t win three games last year.
If we won three games last year, we could draft the top defender (Curry or Raji), but since we lost those games, we’re not allowed to—we have to pigeon-hole ourselves into drafting only a QB, DE, or LT.
There are lots of defensive tackles and linebackers around the NFL who, knowing what we know now, teams would have certainly picked #1 overall if they could have. Guys like Albert Haynesworth, John Henderson, Ed Reed, Kevin Williams, Patrick Willis, DeMarcus Ware, Shawne Merriman, all outperformed the QB who was drafted ahead of them that year. All are first-round picks on defense (though none of them went #1 overall), and all are guys who are worth paying big money for.
So what if you have to overpay a little bit for the #1 pick? You pay less for a non-QB than a QB anyway.
If Curry or Raji helps anchor our defense for years, makes a pro bowl or two, improves our team, etc, then he’s not a wasted pick, even if he is a DT or LB.
The pigeon-hole you refer to...
is sad, but true. It would be great for Detroit to trade down, but I fear they’ll be forced to pick and have to deal with the unfortunate position of taking best player with respect to draft slot.
The bottom line is...
Whatever position gets drafted with the 1st and 20th pick, it has to work. No projects, and no busts.
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.
+100
Take the best player available, and hopefully the one that won’t be a bust. No guarantees at any spot but look for the best player that fits what you want.
"A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five." ~Groucho Marx
I'm annoyed...
with myself. I can’t make up my mind so I think I might give up. I’m actually starting to think that OT at #1 and Freeman at #2(as long as he shows up in the combine and pro-day. I rationalize this with the fact that it’s a bonus draft pick I guess. What the hell is my problem.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Pride Of Detroit
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Report: Tebow sends cease and desist letter to maker of Jesus-y Jets T-shirts
- Joe McKnight says too much McDonald’s helped him gain 16 pounds in offseason
- Nick Mangold says goodbye to some chest hair on ‘Late Night with Jimmy Fallon’
- Saints will honor suspended Sean Payton with empty chairs
- Junior Seau’s home burglarized just days after his death
