View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently September 17th, 2014, 5:38 pm



Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 
 We had a deal to trade down from #20 
Author Message
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2769
Post We had a deal to trade down from #20
Just saw on NFLN, we had a deal in place at #20 with the Giants to take Maclin. When Philly jumped ahead to #19 and grabbed him, there probably wasn't enough time to trade down, or the other offers to trade down were too far back/not enough value, so we stayed with BPA and took Pettigrew.

Just posting this since I know a few criticized the FO for not trading down more. It looks like they were trying, but other teams changed their plans as players were picked.


April 28th, 2009, 9:42 pm
Profile
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3190
Location: Maryland
Post 
I wonder who we would have taken at #29. Maybe Ziggy Hood?


April 28th, 2009, 9:47 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2654
Post 
To quote myself in another topic:

Quote:
M2K, much of the criticism you level against the Lions' draft this year is based on fact that they didn't trade down in a back-loaded draft. While that may be valid, I think it is pretty unjustifiable to say "they should have traded down at #33, they should've traded down at #20..." you weren't there and you don't know what offers they had for the picks--if any.

Further, I'm actually fairly certain that they we're going to trade #20, but someone backed out at the last second. I base this on the Philly trade. Why did Philly jump over the Lions to take Maclin? The Lions weren't going to take him. Perhaps the Giants were going to trade with the Lions to jump Philly?


I wonder if this helps restore my "credibility" on this board? :lol:


April 28th, 2009, 10:03 pm
Profile
Walk On

Joined: November 2nd, 2008, 1:29 am
Posts: 427
Post 
You're like a draft genius.

And so humble too! :D

-ILMP


April 28th, 2009, 10:45 pm
Profile
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: December 9th, 2008, 5:48 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Kansas by way of Ontario
Post 
InterimLionsMasterPimp wrote:
You're like a draft genius.

And so humble too! :D

-ILMP


He just needs bad hair, then he can make millions by pointing at a giant board.


April 29th, 2009, 9:42 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7366
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post 
JEBWrench wrote:
InterimLionsMasterPimp wrote:
You're like a draft genius.

And so humble too! :D

-ILMP


He just needs bad hair, then he can make millions by pointing at a giant board.


With that nappy head of his, he has the bad hair covered. :lol:


April 29th, 2009, 10:37 am
Profile
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: December 9th, 2008, 5:48 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Kansas by way of Ontario
Post 
BillySims wrote:
With that nappy head of his, he has the bad hair covered. :lol:


So, we just need to get him a giant board?

The biggest board ever constructed. So grandiose that it dwarfs the sun. Listing all players available in the draft from every country of the world. As well as potential draftees over the next seven years.


April 29th, 2009, 10:39 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9864
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
Blueskies wrote:
To quote myself in another topic:

Quote:
M2K, much of the criticism you level against the Lions' draft this year is based on fact that they didn't trade down in a back-loaded draft. While that may be valid, I think it is pretty unjustifiable to say "they should have traded down at #33, they should've traded down at #20..." you weren't there and you don't know what offers they had for the picks--if any.

Further, I'm actually fairly certain that they we're going to trade #20, but someone backed out at the last second. I base this on the Philly trade. Why did Philly jump over the Lions to take Maclin? The Lions weren't going to take him. Perhaps the Giants were going to trade with the Lions to jump Philly?


I wonder if this helps restore my "credibility" on this board? :lol:


This is only one possible trade scenario that we know of. You rarely get wind of deals offered, especially of ones refused outright. We only know of this one with the Giants at that particular pick. However, according to Jimmy Johnson teams get offers on their picks during the draft, particularly outside of the top ten, all the time. Multiple offers for picks is not uncommon. For instance, when the Lions traded with Cleveland back in 2004, it was said they had already gotten three offers for that pick and used those offers to pry the second rounder from Cleveland for them to move up just one spot. Supposedly the Jaguars, the Bills and Bucs all had made offers.

PRIOR to this draft, our front office had said that there was interest shown in all three of our first day picks, including the first overall. Did they lie, or was there some truth in that? I believe that there was. I believe that there was some interest in the #20 and #33 picks, and that some deals were brokered based on "if this player is available", similar to the Giants deal. Did all those players disappear prior to that pick? Maybe. But that is talking about BEFORE the draft. During the draft, even more deals are discussed. Remember, this is according to Jimmy Johnson, who has been through this process, and helped revolutionize it with the creation of the Value Chart.

Based on the fact that Mayhew apprenticed under the Immortal Idiot, I believe he is carrying over some of his shortcomings. He expects too much in return for draftpicks in trades, and shows fear of losing a player to another team. I believe that is the reason why the Lions ended up paying an ABSURD amount of guaranteed money to Stafford. He was guaranteed more money than Albert Haynesworth. Despite having a deal with Curry which paid much less, they got taken by Tom Condon. They'll never admit it, but I have the opinion he threated to walk away from the table, and the Lions upped the ante significantly because they feared to see Stafford in another uniform.

It happened with CJ. Denver had a deal in place with Detroit prior to that draft to give the Lions a slew of picks (reports vary between five and seven picks total, over two drafts) including their #21 pick that year, plus their first round pick the following year (last years number 12, when they landed their LT of the future in Ryan Clady). After that deal was passed on at the last minute and the reports came out about that, the Lions (Mustachioed Moron) made a statement that CJ was just too good to pass on and 'I didn't want to see him scoring touchdowns in the league for someone else'. While I like CJ and believe he is a star in the making, what improvements could we have made elsewhere with those picks?
In the case of Pettigrew, the Lions probably felt that Atlanta would take him. In the case of Delmas, the Lions probably knew that the Pats would have taken him.

My criticisms are not just mine, but shared by others. Did I KNOW that the Lions had an opportunity to deal these picks? No. But it is my opinion that opportunities could have been created if they were willing to pass on the top player on their board to get additional value and picks.

I like both players. I just see both selections as not in sync with what truly needed to happen to improve this team in the right way. Whether or not the Lions are going to be in the playoffs this season is irrelevant. Build inside out. Is that NOT what the Lions said they would do? Do YOU think that they followed that path of fixing this team?


April 29th, 2009, 11:21 am
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2769
Post 
I agree M2, I think Mayhew may be trying to get too much. But unlike Millen, he didn't reach for players due to need. I too scratched my head on the Levy and Brown picks, but for Levy, I think he's what they had in mind as MLB. If you look back at the Tennessee defenses, they're MLB's aren't any bigger than Levy is now, and he has room to bulk up a bit. But like Levy, they're hitters, they're fast, and they're smart (football wise) players. MLB's in Schwartz's system didn't have to QB the defense, or drop in coverage alot. They rushed in, create a pile in the middle, and let the OLB's and DL clean up. I think Levy and Follet could both handle that.

As for Pettigrew, I was like, wow, when it happened, but I don't hate the pick. Have you seen him stand up defensive linemen, including Orakpo? On rushing plays, he's basically a 3rd tackle on the field. Is that worth a replacement for Backus at LT? Its debatable. As for the TE depth, most if not all of the other TE prospects this year, were either great recieving poor blocking, or great blocking, poor recieving TE's. No other TE is as complete as Pettigrew. I think he's going to make an immediate impact this year.

I don't think they're sold on Standeford or Curry in the slot, so while Derrick Williams can make an immediate impact on Punt Returns, he will also get a chance as the slot reciever. Maybe not this year because most recievers take longer to adapt to the new systems.

The only pick i have no clue on is Brown. I know they had him rated high because of his 32 yard avg return on kickoffs, so maybe for the first time in decades, the FO put a premium on special teams late. Follet fits there too, although he might be able to join the LB rotation eventually. 6th-7th rounders are projects with possible gems, and I'd say we have more potential with our 6th and 7th rounders this year than we have in a long time.

We can speculate all we want on what we think, but until I see what the combined draftees and FA's we got prior to the draft look like on the turf, I think its all an unknown. They might look worse this year than they did last year, or they might just have gotten enough pieces that combined will make us somewhat competitive. We're rebuilding, so any progress is a good thing at this point. Did they do enough? We'll see.


April 29th, 2009, 12:15 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9864
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
njroar wrote:
I agree M2, I think Mayhew may be trying to get too much. But unlike "Moron of the Millenium", he didn't reach for players due to need. I too scratched my head on the Levy and Brown picks, but for Levy, I think he's what they had in mind as MLB. If you look back at the Tennessee defenses, they're MLB's aren't any bigger than Levy is now, and he has room to bulk up a bit. But like Levy, they're hitters, they're fast, and they're smart (football wise) players. MLB's in Schwartz's system didn't have to QB the defense, or drop in coverage alot. They rushed in, create a pile in the middle, and let the OLB's and DL clean up. I think Levy and Follet could both handle that.


I don't hate the Levy pick, and I will give both Schwartz and Levy their due if he can play the MIKE and destroy runners. On the surface, it looks like they passed on other good LBs with experience in the middle, like McKillop and Phillips. But, if Levy is better athletically and can do the job, I have no problem with that. I didn't see Levy as a reach, as much as something we've tried before, although it was with players we reached for (Lehman and Dizon).

njroar wrote:
As for Pettigrew, I was like, wow, when it happened, but I don't hate the pick. Have you seen him stand up defensive linemen, including Orakpo? On rushing plays, he's basically a 3rd tackle on the field. Is that worth a replacement for Backus at LT? Its debatable. As for the TE depth, most if not all of the other TE prospects this year, were either great recieving poor blocking, or great blocking, poor recieving TE's. No other TE is as complete as Pettigrew. I think he's going to make an immediate impact this year.


The Pettigrew pick didn't shock me at all, and I had him projected at that spot. However, I really thought the Lions would trade down. I like Pettigrew, and I do think that he'll add something to the offense in both aspects. But I think we had other, more pressing needs that could have been filled there, like our LT situation with Oher. BP is a day one starter, and that's a good thing, at a position long overlooked by this franchise. Let's just say I have mixed emotions. I like the player, but would have preferred getting him a little lower and with additional picks to show for it. Maybe that wasn't possible, but maybe it was and the Lions braintrust couldn't bring themselves to pass on him. We'll never know.

njroar wrote:
I don't think they're sold on Standeford or Curry in the slot, so while Derrick Williams can make an immediate impact on Punt Returns, he will also get a chance as the slot reciever. Maybe not this year because most recievers take longer to adapt to the new systems.


Standeford should be the backup to Bryant Johnson, he's not a slot guy at all. However, I think Curry is good for the slot. We'll see with Derrick Williams on returns. He did well in college, but that doesn't mean it works in the NFL. I have my reservations on him. Still, they could have gotten a really good return guy in Joe Burnett, and added decent depth at CB. If Williams ends up being a solid returner and contributing as a receiver, then I have no issues.

njroar wrote:
The only pick i have no clue on is Brown. I know they had him rated high because of his 32 yard avg return on kickoffs, so maybe for the first time in decades, the FO put a premium on special teams late. Follet fits there too, although he might be able to join the LB rotation eventually. 6th-7th rounders are projects with possible gems, and I'd say we have more potential with our 6th and 7th rounders this year than we have in a long time.


All very true. Brown could end up being pretty decent because he has incredible speed. He could be a good speed option out of the backfield. Still, I would have liked to have seen us get a big back like Jennings for short yardage stuff. But, if he can be versatile, he's a good find.

njroar wrote:
We can speculate all we want on what we think, but until I see what the combined draftees and FA's we got prior to the draft look like on the turf, I think its all an unknown. They might look worse this year than they did last year, or they might just have gotten enough pieces that combined will make us somewhat competitive. We're rebuilding, so any progress is a good thing at this point. Did they do enough? We'll see.


It's all an unknown. But the draft grades are expected by our readers and I project them as a result. Believe me, I'd love to have the Lions make every pick I thought they should. Problem is, not every player I think is good turns out that way. Go figure. I believe I did do a decent job of judging last years draft (I said Goz and Dizon were reaches, I hated the Moore pick, but had Smith as a great choice and reserved judgement on Avril and Fluellen). We'll see how it works out this year.


April 29th, 2009, 1:50 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2769
Post 
Quote:
All very true. Brown could end up being pretty decent because he has incredible speed. He could be a good speed option out of the backfield. Still, I would have liked to have seen us get a big back like Jennings for short yardage stuff. But, if he can be versatile, he's a good find.


Perhaps they felt we had Felton for short yardage and needed a speed back to compliment Smith and Morris. Felton was hurt alot of last year, so the fans didn't see him as much as the FO and coaches.

And I know why draft grades get posted right after the draft even though the true grades can't be found for 3 years. I'm actually going to write up my post draft analysis soon, just been a busy week at work. Golf Season HAS to get busy as soon as the draft ends...


April 29th, 2009, 2:33 pm
Profile
#1 Overall Pick

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 10:34 am
Posts: 1427
Post 
Quote:
njroar wrote:

As for Pettigrew, I was like, wow, when it happened, but I don't hate the pick. Have you seen him stand up defensive linemen, including Orakpo? On rushing plays, he's basically a 3rd tackle on the field. Is that worth a replacement for Backus at LT? Its debatable. As for the TE depth, most if not all of the other TE prospects this year, were either great recieving poor blocking, or great blocking, poor recieving TE's. No other TE is as complete as Pettigrew. I think he's going to make an immediate impact this year.


The Pettigrew pick didn't shock me at all, and I had him projected at that spot. However, I really thought the Lions would trade down. I like Pettigrew, and I do think that he'll add something to the offense in both aspects. But I think we had other, more pressing needs that could have been filled there, like our LT situation with Oher. BP is a day one starter, and that's a good thing, at a position long overlooked by this franchise. Let's just say I have mixed emotions. I like the player, but would have preferred getting him a little lower and with additional picks to show for it. Maybe that wasn't possible, but maybe it was and the Lions braintrust couldn't bring themselves to pass on him. We'll never know.



I heard somewhere that Baltimore was trying to trade up to get Pettigrew BEFORE they traded up to get Oher.


April 29th, 2009, 5:18 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 12 posts ] 

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.