HARD HITTING DETROIT LIONS FORUM
http://www.lionbacker.com/forum/

C.J. Spiller at #2
http://www.lionbacker.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=13340
Page 1 of 2

Author:  Taug107 [ April 6th, 2010, 10:59 am ]
Post subject:  C.J. Spiller at #2

After watching tape on C.J. Spiller, I have no problems if the Lions decided to take him #2 in the draft. This kid has top notch speed and tremendous acceleration. He is a true game changer and is a threat to score any time he touches the ball. He catches the ball very well out of the backfield and would have to be accounted for anytime he's on the field. He makes people miss and has an ability to break tackles as well.

He could line up in the backfield or in the slot as a receiver and create matchup nightmares for opposing defenses. Reggie Bush was drafted #2 overall and this kid is better than Bush IMO so if that's the way they end up going I'm ok with that.

Author:  Wayne Fontes [ April 6th, 2010, 11:10 am ]
Post subject: 

Reggie Bush has been a relative disappointment considering his draft position. Sure he's a great change of pace back and adds a lot on the PR, but in retrospect I don't think he was worth #2.

I think Spiller is of the same mold as Bush and wouldn't want to take him at #2. If they wanted to drop down to 9 or 10 then maybe I'd consider it, but not at #2.

Author:  Stallion [ April 6th, 2010, 11:17 am ]
Post subject: 

I would take Matthews before I would draft Spiller.

Author:  yostevo [ April 6th, 2010, 12:06 pm ]
Post subject: 

No.










Code:
This is not a  fantasy football dynasty draft we are talking here.

Author:  m2karateman [ April 6th, 2010, 1:04 pm ]
Post subject: 

Too many people see Spiller and imagine the next Chris Johnson. Well, for every Chris Johnson there's a dozen guys who become part time players, ala Bush, or simply aren't able to cut it in the NFL.

I think Spiller would best be utilized by a team looking for their speed guy in a platoon situation, who already have a big back in place.

I don't see him going earlier than the sixth pick, and even then if I were Seattle I'd be more inclined to get a tackle first.

With our offensive line, I don't think Spiller makes as big of a difference. He may be fast, but he's no Barry Sanders. And he certainly isn't a tackle breaker in the mold of Adrian Peterson.

Stick to the plan.....either trade down or take Ndamukong Suh. First impressions are usually the right ones.

Author:  liontrax [ April 6th, 2010, 1:08 pm ]
Post subject: 

Even though I like Spiller a lot, I would rather address our shortcomings at the line of scrimmage with a lineman (preferably defense) then take a RB at 34 or 66.

Author:  yostevo [ April 6th, 2010, 1:12 pm ]
Post subject: 

liontrax wrote:
Even though I like Spiller a lot, I would rather address our shortcomings at the line of scrimmage with a lineman (preferably defense) then take a RB at 34 or 66.


Taking Spiller that high would be very Millenesque. You are trying to put drywall and windows up when you haven't even built the foundation.

Author:  liontrax [ April 6th, 2010, 1:34 pm ]
Post subject: 

yostevo wrote:
liontrax wrote:
Even though I like Spiller a lot, I would rather address our shortcomings at the line of scrimmage with a lineman (preferably defense) then take a RB at 34 or 66.


Taking Spiller that high would be very Millenesque. You are trying to put drywall and windows up when you haven't even built the foundation.


Agreed, that's why I think they should wait on a Rb til 2 or 3. They could even take Best (if he's still there) at 34, and get basically the same kind of back that Spiller is.

Author:  Taug107 [ April 6th, 2010, 1:45 pm ]
Post subject: 

I don't want Spiller at #2, but I'm ok with it if they feel he is the player that can have the biggest impact to win right away given the talent already present on offense. I don't think it will happen unless they trade down out of the top ten which is going to be near impossible to do unless some team wants Suh or Mccoy real bad and is willing to pay a price that would include next years #1 or #2 and a pick(s) in this years draft.

Author:  kdsberman [ April 6th, 2010, 1:57 pm ]
Post subject: 

I like the idea, and it would be awesome to have Spiller on our team, but I think we need to address that line on both sides of the ball first. In my opinion the first 2 rounds.

Author:  yostevo [ April 6th, 2010, 2:13 pm ]
Post subject: 

liontrax wrote:
yostevo wrote:
liontrax wrote:
Even though I like Spiller a lot, I would rather address our shortcomings at the line of scrimmage with a lineman (preferably defense) then take a RB at 34 or 66.


Taking Spiller that high would be very Millenesque. You are trying to put drywall and windows up when you haven't even built the foundation.


Agreed, that's why I think they should wait on a Rb til 2 or 3. They could even take Best (if he's still there) at 34, and get basically the same kind of back that Spiller is.


I think Best is every bit of a prospect considering I think neither is a complete back. So, I'd completely agree with the pick at 34.

Author:  Topweasel [ April 6th, 2010, 3:20 pm ]
Post subject: 

They are going to draft a Running Back early. But early is probably the third round if someone real good isn't staring them in the face at 34 (or 33 if they decide they want to move up to make sure they get whomever).

It will not be any pick for the lions between #2 and #16 or so.

Author:  slybri19 [ April 6th, 2010, 4:47 pm ]
Post subject: 

I hate to say it, but I wouldn't put it past them. Mayhew has consistently said that he plans to address the RB position this offseason through free agency or the draft. Since he hasn't signed one in FA yet, I have to assume that he plans to draft one. The coaching staff has also made comments about wanting a home run hitter at RB. This tells me that they're interested in guys like Spiller, Best, or McCluster. While I don't think it's likely that they would select Spiller at #2, I wouldn't completely rule it out either.

Author:  inheritedlionsfan [ April 6th, 2010, 5:28 pm ]
Post subject: 

Please no. I'd be less against him if we were in the bottom part of the top 10 but at #2? No thanks.

Author:  kdsberman [ April 6th, 2010, 5:41 pm ]
Post subject: 

If we happen to trade down i can definetly see it happening.

Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/