View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently December 26th, 2014, 1:54 pm



Reply to topic  [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Speculate on who to take. 
Author Message
Millen Draft Pick - Epic Bust

Joined: December 27th, 2006, 4:53 pm
Posts: 693
Post 
Even Kitna, an undrafted QB, sat and watched Warren Moon for 2 years and by the third year played decent and started his only playoff game. Could we draft Matt Stafford, sit him for a couple years in a consistent system and build a team around that? Sure we can. Would sitting a $35 million dollar bonus player on the bench for years be something a smart person would do? Doubt that. Since we have established that there are productive quarterbacks in every draft, and with 2010 being the equivalent in QB talent, at minimum, it shouldnt be a question.


December 21st, 2008, 4:20 am
Profile
Heisman Winner

Joined: December 8th, 2008, 3:16 pm
Posts: 785
Post 
Drafting a player to sit him when your 0-14 does not make sence.

I think if they want to draft a QB in the later rounds, and truly develop him into a franchise QB that is fine but not with the first pick. Or first round for that matter. There is a few QB's that would be nice projects. Harrell can make all the throws, just would have to learn how to translate the college play into pro. He has the attributes to build a good QB.


December 21st, 2008, 4:46 am
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2789
Post 
Quote:
Recent NFL history is rife with low round or undrafted QBs who sat for years watching and learning a consistent system and came in and produced (Brady,Romo,Warner,Cassel,Hasslebeck,Delhomme,Garrard,Bulger) and high round QBs that came into already built football teams and produced (E. Manning, Roethlisberger,Cutler,Rivers,Culpepper). The majority of the good QBs in the NFL today are one or the other. Guys like Peyton and Matt Ryan are anomalies of the highest regard.


The simple fact is that in any given year, roughly 1/3 of the starting QBs will be former top 10 draft choices. I don't think you can say that about any other position.

Here's my attempt to put the "drafting a guy and sitting him for a year is a waste of money" argument to bed:

With the exception of a handful of players, and a couple positions (CB, RB, perhaps LB on a bad defensive team...) rookies do not make significant impacts. Mario Williams did nothing his first year. Calvin Johnson played worse McDonald. Gholston has done nothing this year. Glen Dorsey--one career sack. Gosder has shown flashes of potential, but has he really "wowed" anyone in his play this year? Do you get my point?

Nine times out of 10 the rookie player, even if he's widely heralded and a top 10 draft choice, will play no better than some mediocre FA picked up for a $2M contract. There's a learning curve in the NFL, no matter how great the kid was in college or what position he played.

So we can take a QB first overall sit him on the bench and "waste his contract"--the next year he starts and plays all pro. Or we can draft a different position, have that player start day one and play crappy/mediocre. The next year they play all pro.

Doesn't seem to be much of a difference to me. If you think the Lions ought to draft based on what positions will provide an instant boost: why don't you advocate taking all RBs, CBs, and speedy LBs?

Ultimately, even if they did say Stafford was the next Manning, I would still advocate trading down. These Lions are talent depleted like none other and need all the picks they can get. Should that fail, then take BPA.


December 21st, 2008, 8:09 am
Profile
Play by Play Announcer - Al Michaels
User avatar

Joined: October 15th, 2005, 12:45 pm
Posts: 1834
Post 
First off I have to say that all the people saying that drafting a QB doesn't make sense or isn't something a smart person would do need to take off their blinders. It is a viable way to build and nfl team as is drafting a LT or defensive players.

Quote:
Rex Grossman went to the bench for a slightly better QB in Kyle Orton. Recent NFL history is rife with low round or undrafted QBs who sat for years watching and learning a consistent system and came in and produced
Orton sat for 2 years after starting an entire season as a rookie.

Quote:
high round QBs that came into already built football teams and produced (E. Manning, Roethlisberger,Cutler,Rivers,Culpepper). The majority of the good QBs in the NFL today are one or the other.

Manning and Rivers teams were not exactly built. Rivers sat the bench and learned while a team was built around Brees until he took over. New York wanted to sit Manning but Warner was turning the ball over so badly they had to put him in.

Quote:
Aaron Rodgers sat and watched Brett Favre for 3 years and learned the West Coast Offense front and back. is it any wonder why he is suceeding?
I wonder what round Rodgers was taken in...hmmmm

Quote:
In the past 10 years, there are way too many low round/undrafted QBs that got to sit and learn the system for years and produce. Without the large draft signing bonus. Hell, we even have one of those in Dan Orlovsky (maybe). You and many of these other Lions fans have to wake up and watch the trend of modern day NFL. Until the Lions draft, scout, and think like it is 2009, we wont go anywhere.

According to the numbers I have only 9 of the 64 QB's taken after round one are starters since 2000. So yeah there are nine starters drafted after the first but it is not something you can actually count on. It is more luck then anything.

_________________
2011 Adopted Lion: Rob Sims/Looking for a side job at I.H.O.P because he can't stop making pancakes.


December 21st, 2008, 2:18 pm
Profile
Millen Draft Pick - Epic Bust

Joined: December 27th, 2006, 4:53 pm
Posts: 693
Post 
Blueskies wrote:
Quote:
Recent NFL history is rife with low round or undrafted QBs who sat for years watching and learning a consistent system and came in and produced (Brady,Romo,Warner,Cassel,Hasslebeck,Delhomme,Garrard,Bulger) and high round QBs that came into already built football teams and produced (E. Manning, Roethlisberger,Cutler,Rivers,Culpepper). The majority of the good QBs in the NFL today are one or the other. Guys like Peyton and Matt Ryan are anomalies of the highest regard.


The simple fact is that in any given year, roughly 1/3 of the starting QBs will be former top 10 draft choices. I don't think you can say that about any other position.

Here's my attempt to put the "drafting a guy and sitting him for a year is a waste of money" argument to bed:

With the exception of a handful of players, and a couple positions (CB, RB, perhaps LB on a bad defensive team...) rookies do not make significant impacts. Mario Williams did nothing his first year. Calvin Johnson played worse McDonald. Gholston has done nothing this year. Glen Dorsey--one career sack. Gosder has shown flashes of potential, but has he really "wowed" anyone in his play this year? Do you get my point?

Nine times out of 10 the rookie player, even if he's widely heralded and a top 10 draft choice, will play no better than some mediocre FA picked up for a $2M contract. There's a learning curve in the NFL, no matter how great the kid was in college or what position he played.

So we can take a QB first overall sit him on the bench and "waste his contract"--the next year he starts and plays all pro. Or we can draft a different position, have that player start day one and play crappy/mediocre. The next year they play all pro.

Doesn't seem to be much of a difference to me. If you think the Lions ought to draft based on what positions will provide an instant boost: why don't you advocate taking all RBs, CBs, and speedy LBs?

Ultimately, even if they did say Stafford was the next Manning, I would still advocate trading down. These Lions are talent depleted like none other and need all the picks they can get. Should that fail, then take BPA.


Calvin didnt do much last year because he didnt fit the Martz offense and Mike had no interest in catering to him. Gholston did not provide a boost because the NFL tests for steroids. There are 7 top 10 QBs that are starting. (Manning,Manning,Rivers,McNabb,Russell,Collins,Ryan). That would be 21%. There are 6 top QBs that are backups currently (Leftwich,Harrington,Carr,Boller,Smith,Young). Theres another one thats in jail and we dont know whether he will start or not. When you are 0-16, you make safe picks. Having contributing players to replace the many starters that should not be in the NFL would be the instant boost I am looking for. The Giants had every one of their draft picks contribute last year.


December 21st, 2008, 2:18 pm
Profile
Millen Draft Pick - Epic Bust

Joined: December 27th, 2006, 4:53 pm
Posts: 693
Post 
Stallion wrote:
First off I have to say that all the people saying that drafting a QB doesn't make sense or isn't something a smart person would do need to take off their blinders. It is a viable way to build and nfl team as is drafting a LT or defensive players.

Quote:
Rex Grossman went to the bench for a slightly better QB in Kyle Orton. Recent NFL history is rife with low round or undrafted QBs who sat for years watching and learning a consistent system and came in and produced
Orton sat for 2 years after starting an entire season as a rookie.

Quote:
high round QBs that came into already built football teams and produced (E. Manning, Roethlisberger,Cutler,Rivers,Culpepper). The majority of the good QBs in the NFL today are one or the other.

Manning and Rivers teams were not exactly built. Rivers sat the bench and learned while a team was built around Brees until he took over. New York wanted to sit Manning but Warner was turning the ball over so badly they had to put him in.

Quote:
Aaron Rodgers sat and watched Brett Favre for 3 years and learned the West Coast Offense front and back. is it any wonder why he is suceeding?
I wonder what round Rodgers was taken in...hmmmm

Quote:
In the past 10 years, there are way too many low round/undrafted QBs that got to sit and learn the system for years and produce. Without the large draft signing bonus. Hell, we even have one of those in Dan Orlovsky (maybe). You and many of these other Lions fans have to wake up and watch the trend of modern day NFL. Until the Lions draft, scout, and think like it is 2009, we wont go anywhere.

According to the numbers I have only 9 of the 64 QB's taken after round one are starters since 2000. So yeah there are nine starters drafted after the first but it is not something you can actually count on. It is more luck then anything.


Aaron Rodgers was of course taken in Round 1, but you swung and completely missed my entire point. The Packers had the support system in place for him to sit. Did not kill their cap either as Aaron was the 24th selection. Aaron Rodgers succeeding and Alex Smith failing has far more to do with circumstance than it has to do with talent. Matt Hasselbeck had the exact same situation as Rodgers only he was a 6th rounder and was traded to another team with the same system. Eli was drafted to a team with multiple pro bowl players and still had key components from a Super Bowl team. Rivers, while drafted to a bad Chargers team, took the field in 2006 to a great Chargers team who had two of the greatest drafts of all time in 2004 and 2005. If the Lions, took Matt Stafford in 2009, sat behind Dan Orlovsky for years, and took over in 2011 after great drafting? Sure he can succeed. Personally, I dont see a difference between Matt Stafford and Andre Woodson. Same size, similar skillset, same conference, Stafford has a considerably better supporting cast. He is definitely a project QB and a high risk, regardless of what the draft experts say.


December 21st, 2008, 3:05 pm
Profile
Play by Play Announcer - Al Michaels
User avatar

Joined: October 15th, 2005, 12:45 pm
Posts: 1834
Post 
Quote:
Personally, I dont see a difference between Matt Stafford and Andre Woodson. Same size, similar skillset, same conference, Stafford has a considerably better supporting cast. He is definitely a project QB and a high risk, regardless of what the draft experts say.
The only comparison is confernce. Woodson had horrible mechanics and throw a slow side arm motion. Stafford is argueably the most talented QB to come out in years. He has a cannon and for and arm and can put the ball anywhere he wants. He has great release and mechanics. The ball goes form a to b in no time. He plays in a pro offense and makes his own read and audibles. The only problem is he sometimes he forces the ball much like Brett Farve.

_________________
2011 Adopted Lion: Rob Sims/Looking for a side job at I.H.O.P because he can't stop making pancakes.


December 22nd, 2008, 12:54 am
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3398
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post 
Stallion wrote:
Quote:
Personally, I dont see a difference between Matt Stafford and Andre Woodson. Same size, similar skillset, same conference, Stafford has a considerably better supporting cast. He is definitely a project QB and a high risk, regardless of what the draft experts say.
The only comparison is confernce. Woodson had horrible mechanics and throw a slow side arm motion. Stafford is argueably the most talented QB to come out in years. He has a cannon and for and arm and can put the ball anywhere he wants. He has great release and mechanics. The ball goes form a to b in no time. He plays in a pro offense and makes his own read and audibles. The only problem is he sometimes he forces the ball much like Brett Farve.


Hopefully he has a quick release too, cuz hes gonna need it behind this horrible line.

_________________
April 22nd, 2010 @ 7:44p.m. "The Detroit Lions select...Ndamukong Suh". Those are some beautiful words.


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


December 22nd, 2008, 2:45 pm
Profile
Play by Play Announcer - Al Michaels
User avatar

Joined: October 15th, 2005, 12:45 pm
Posts: 1834
Post 
kdsberman wrote:
Stallion wrote:
Quote:
Personally, I dont see a difference between Matt Stafford and Andre Woodson. Same size, similar skillset, same conference, Stafford has a considerably better supporting cast. He is definitely a project QB and a high risk, regardless of what the draft experts say.
The only comparison is confernce. Woodson had horrible mechanics and throw a slow side arm motion. Stafford is argueably the most talented QB to come out in years. He has a cannon and for and arm and can put the ball anywhere he wants. He has great release and mechanics. The ball goes form a to b in no time. He plays in a pro offense and makes his own read and audibles. The only problem is he sometimes he forces the ball much like Brett Farve.


Hopefully he has a quick release too, cuz hes gonna need it behind this horrible line.
He does have a quick release and is used to playing behind a horrible OL. Georgia OL is the college version of lions OL.

_________________
2011 Adopted Lion: Rob Sims/Looking for a side job at I.H.O.P because he can't stop making pancakes.


December 22nd, 2008, 2:49 pm
Profile
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: December 16th, 2008, 8:44 am
Posts: 843
Post 
Also, Stafford lost his starting LT before the season even started. Sounds like he's used to playing under pressure and with mediocrity protecting him. He's the only QB we can take where I won't completely blow my lid, but I'm still all about rebuilding everything else first. IF we take him at number one, I can get over that as long as we are addressing the LT and then all defense.


December 22nd, 2008, 3:36 pm
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3398
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post 
faulkn22 wrote:
Also, Stafford lost his starting LT before the season even started. Sounds like he's used to playing under pressure and with mediocrity protecting him. He's the only QB we can take where I won't completely blow my lid, but I'm still all about rebuilding everything else first. IF we take him at number one, I can get over that as long as we are addressing the LT and then all defense.


I am still set againt taking QB at #1. BUT, if we did we BETTER get a good LT with our next pick and a good linebacker too sometime. I still say sign Cassel that way we dont blow our number one pick.

_________________
April 22nd, 2010 @ 7:44p.m. "The Detroit Lions select...Ndamukong Suh". Those are some beautiful words.


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


December 22nd, 2008, 4:06 pm
Profile
Millen Draft Pick - Epic Bust

Joined: December 27th, 2006, 4:53 pm
Posts: 693
Post 
sweetd20 wrote:
One big problem I've noticed is a lot of people whether they really feel that way or not are coming off like this can be turned around in a year. Well guess what that's what Millen tried to do every year he was the GM. This has to be looked at as a five year project with significant improvement (playoffs) in year three. If they get there sooner that's great but to expect it is ridiculous. Yes teams have done it in the past and even this year Miami and Atlanta. But for the most part all those teams already had a core group of players that were much better than what Detroit is working with. Also it's not unlikely that those quick turn around teams go back to losing just as quickly the next season, just ask the Jets.

Go the way of the Steelers and continue to have a strong core year after year and plug a couple of holes. It's the teams that try to make major repairs to five, six, seven positions each year that have a hard time maintaining any consistantcy. As far as the Texans and Carr go they did take care of the LT position with their first move. They grabbed Boselli one of the elite LTs of the time unfortunately though he never recovered from his shoulder injuries. You can't compare failures or successes in the draft and say this is the way to do it because there are numerous examples for every side of an argument.

I also don't want to hear about letting Rogers go and especially Bly. What has Bly done since leaving Detroit? He is consistantly burnt by WRs and since he had to be the #1 CB Denver's pass defense has been one of the worst in the league. Anyways the Steelers let their best players walk on a regular basis and they have no problem gettign replacements at much better value while maintaining a high level of success. Let the new GM run the show and hopefully do a god job of talent evaluation.

I'm hoping to move out of the #1 spot but that will be a tough cookie to crack. If not looking at the potential top 10 picks as of right now I'd have to Stafford if he declares. Keep in mind I'm all about replacing Backus and the defensive side is my favorite side of football to watch. There is unbelieveable depth across the O-line in this draft especially if a bunch of underclassmen declare. Curry is high on my wish list but as mentioned in the other thread a LB can't be paid #1 money. Look at what guys like DJ Williams, Keith Bullock, Lofa Tatupu, and Ray Lewis have signed recently. Those contracts would be dwarfed compared to what an unproven rookie LB would be getting as the #1 pick. Willis last year only signed a $16.7 million contract as the #11 pick. The only defensive player this year as of right now that I'd eventhink of taking at #1 would be Jenkins from OSU. He's not flashy or overly exciting in any one area but he's solid across the board and has the OSU pedigree on his side at the CB position. Also if he ends up not cutting it at the CB position they can slide him over to FS in a year or two.

So right now before I sit down and really start breaking these guys down I'd have to go Stafford, Jenkins, then Curry. I also like Maualuga but he doesn't offer the versatility of Curry unless of course he was able to put his hand in the dirt and play DE. O-line is just too deep to go #1 and Smith has a smell of McDougle and Mike Williams (Buffalo). The DEs don't wow me at the #1 spot with Orakpo having knee issues and Johnson not showing much outside of being a tall lanky one trick pony speed rusher. I also see Johnson taking a drop on boards unless he just blows them away at the combine. I still can't believe I'm saying it but at #1 for the cash I'd have to take the big arm QB that isn't scared to step up in the pocket. I don't think he will ever be Manning, Marino, or Elway but give him talent and I think he can put up Aikman stats.


Me bringing up Dre Bly and Shaun Rogers doesnt really have to do with how great they are or what they have done in Denver and Cleveland. That doesnt matter to me. What matters is what they did with the Lions and the Lions replacing Bly with a guy that "fit the system" in Travis Fisher, and replacing Shaun Rogers with "consistent" Chuck Darby. The Lions put forth very little effort in replacing either player. Rod Marinelli's ego led him to think they were easily replaced.The two positions are still major holes so the Lions have the worst defense in league history. I agree with the gist of your post. The Steelers,Colts,Patriots,Eagles regularly let free agents walk with no compensation and rely on a constant influx of youth to the core veteran parts that they decide to keep. The superior scouting staffs of the teams contributed greatly, as they really dont have to break the bank signing unrestricted free agents. Although the Patriots have in recent years.


December 22nd, 2008, 6:35 pm
Profile
Millen Draft Pick - Epic Bust

Joined: December 27th, 2006, 4:53 pm
Posts: 693
Post 
I read too much downgrading of certain quarterbacks in this board and by draft "experts" based on the type of offense their college teams run. That would be some of the most backwards, half arse scouting I can read. Drew Brees played in a very similar college offense to what Sam Bradford, Graham Harrell and other spread QBs played in. At below 6 feet tall to boot. Hes doing just fine in the pros and look at what offense he plays in today? The offense that isnt "pro style". The offense he played in at Purdue. Donovan McNabb ran the option regularly at Syracuse. Aaron Rodgers got wrongly vilified for being in Jeff Tedford's offense as somehow its Tedford's fault that a few QBs went to the NFL and disappointed for various reasons. He went to Green Bay, learned the right way, learned a new system and 3 years later he is doing fine. Sam Bradford plays in the spread at Oklahoma and can rely on throwing short passes to dynamic playmakers for huge gains. Does it mean hes inable to do anything else? Can he make every throw? Look at that trait. What the hell is a pro style offense anyway? The west coast type offense at USC and some NFL teams use? The spread attack at Oklahoma that the Patriots,49ers,Saints use? Even the Packers ran it with Favre last year. People need to scout for themselves and not rely on safe buzz words and cliches.


December 22nd, 2008, 6:47 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7569
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post 
dh86 wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Given the number of picks we have in the first 3 rounds, I wouldn't mind taking a flyer on Gram Harrel or Hunter Cantwell if they're available in the 4th round. I'd take either of those guys over Stanton in a heartbeat! Orlovsky, Culpepp or Kitna, and rookie is ok with me, AS LONG AS WE IMPROVE THE TEAM AROUND THEM.

That said, I do think it is important to help out our OL THIS DRAFT. The draft defense first people, IMO, are short-sighted. Our offense is only a couple of positions away from being complete, our defense is AT LEAST FIVE. We can't fix our D this year no matter what we do. We could draft ALL defense and still have holes. I'd like to grab either a starting LB or a starting caliber SS/FS in the first two rounds and spend the majority of the picks we have in the first three rounds on offense. Get an OT and either a OC or a OG in Rds 1 and 2, pick up a LB or SS with the other first round pick, and go BPA from there on out.

If we do that we should have a MUCH improved offense and a better defense. And remember, our defense won't be as bad off because 1) we'll be able to score more points, and 2) if we upgrade our OL we'll be able to move the ball on the grond more, control the clock, and keep the D off of the field.


What happens in the draft also depends on who we can sign in February. Lions gotta replace half the defensive starters, the Lions have the cap room to bring in a top rate defensive player in their prime like Peppers,Nnamdi,Haynesworth or Suggs. If the Lions got one of those players, it is one less hole to fill in the draft and makes it easier to plug holes.


And I think the draft offense people are friggin morons. Why? Offense isn't the damn problem. Open your eyes and watch that wretched defense.


December 23rd, 2008, 1:17 am
Profile
Play by Play Announcer - Al Michaels
User avatar

Joined: October 15th, 2005, 12:45 pm
Posts: 1834
Post 
BillySims wrote:
dh86 wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
Given the number of picks we have in the first 3 rounds, I wouldn't mind taking a flyer on Gram Harrel or Hunter Cantwell if they're available in the 4th round. I'd take either of those guys over Stanton in a heartbeat! Orlovsky, Culpepp or Kitna, and rookie is ok with me, AS LONG AS WE IMPROVE THE TEAM AROUND THEM.

That said, I do think it is important to help out our OL THIS DRAFT. The draft defense first people, IMO, are short-sighted. Our offense is only a couple of positions away from being complete, our defense is AT LEAST FIVE. We can't fix our D this year no matter what we do. We could draft ALL defense and still have holes. I'd like to grab either a starting LB or a starting caliber SS/FS in the first two rounds and spend the majority of the picks we have in the first three rounds on offense. Get an OT and either a OC or a OG in Rds 1 and 2, pick up a LB or SS with the other first round pick, and go BPA from there on out.

If we do that we should have a MUCH improved offense and a better defense. And remember, our defense won't be as bad off because 1) we'll be able to score more points, and 2) if we upgrade our OL we'll be able to move the ball on the grond more, control the clock, and keep the D off of the field.


What happens in the draft also depends on who we can sign in February. Lions gotta replace half the defensive starters, the Lions have the cap room to bring in a top rate defensive player in their prime like Peppers,Nnamdi,Haynesworth or Suggs. If the Lions got one of those players, it is one less hole to fill in the draft and makes it easier to plug holes.


And I think the draft offense people are friggin morons. Why? Offense isn't the damn problem. Open your eyes and watch that wretched defense.


I guess Im a moron

_________________
2011 Adopted Lion: Rob Sims/Looking for a side job at I.H.O.P because he can't stop making pancakes.


December 23rd, 2008, 2:06 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 73 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.