FanPost

Those Who Forget History... 'Best Available' vs. 'Need'

In all fairness, it's all really a system of levers and pulleys in the end. There is no right answer, nor is there a wrong (at least until hindsight is the only criteria available by which to judge it). And one can always (and often does) analyze the options in any way that suits the theories and principles said individual is already predisposed to supporting.

That being said, I hear a lot of talk lately (again) about drafting talent as opposed to team needs. This is an ageless debate, and as I said, one that doesn't necessarily have a right or wrong answer in my mind until all is said and done. Of course the Lions could desperately use defensive players. I'd venture to call it a "need". And if a seemingly supreme talent (as Suh is so widely regarded) is available in the draft, and it happens to match up with our needs, there is no question about it.

But the problem in logic for me lies after that hypothetical scenario is off the table. It astounds me that such a significant percentage of fans have been calling for the Lions to draft offensive skill positions within the first three rounds again. Don't get me wrong here; Of course it is my opinion that we certainly do need to add (or develop) a capable receiving threat other than Calvin, no question about it. While I do feel that a healthy and more experienced Pettigrew (and possibly other current players) will definitely alleviate some of the pressure that opposing defenses are able to place on the Lions offense, I don't feel that the current presence alone will draw ever sufficient attention to fix the underlying problems.
I personally do not feel that the RB position as it stands now needs to be addressed in the first half of the next draft, although of course I will always be happy to welcome any improvement in that area as well.

However- To this humble dullard, the acquisition of more offensive skill position players.. or "weapons", so to speak, is and will continue to be a negligent waste of talent and money until the offensive line is addressed adequately enough to give the team the opportunity to utilize those weapons efficiently. Among other admittedly glaring problems (such as the secondary), this is a familiar story that I feel I've seen play out in some way or another during every single year of my lifelong rampant fanaticism for this team.

I read print and I hear other fans once again calling for the best available players as draft time nears, and preaching the many virtues of not reaching for position "needs". In clear-cut cases, it's a strategy that I am unable to argue with. But in most cases I believe there must be a somewhat liberal happy-medium employed between 'best available' and 'need'... Because, quite frankly, after seeing almost an entire decade of 'best available players' who are no longer on the team, I believe the risk is universal regardless of the strategy. Even in the most basic usage of the words, I see my own opinion validated. "Best", in my opinion, is a purely speculative term when considering the uncertainty regarding the futures of NFL draft picks (both figuratively and historically). "Need" is.. well, wouldn't it be obvious?

On a team where the needs seem to grossly outweigh the perceived luxury of glamourous picks, one would think that 'need' and 'talent' would mesh together slightly to create a much lower level of possible risk in the draft regarding the best players available, but history has no doubt proven otherwise. At this early juncture, the 2009 draft looks to have been a possible turning point for this era's Lions team. But what I really go into the offseason hoping to see, once again, is the cultivation of a new foundation for the team.. not more patches, and not more bells and whistles...

A foundation.

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Pride Of Detroit or its writers.