View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently October 21st, 2014, 9:33 am



Reply to topic  [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 2009 Detroit Lions Draft Grades 
Author Message
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: December 9th, 2008, 5:48 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Kansas by way of Ontario
Post 
Blueskies wrote:
Every position on this team outside of WSLB (Sims), SSLB (Peterson), #1 WR (Johnson), and RT (Cherilus) was a need.

...

You can knock the players, but don't knock the FO for not addressing "needs".


You can nitpick though. :!:

The most glaring need in many peoples' opinion is on Offensive Line, and the only player they took was in a position you just described as not a need. (Murtha projects as an RT).


April 27th, 2009, 12:20 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
JEBWrench wrote:
Blueskies wrote:
Every position on this team outside of WSLB (Sims), SSLB (Peterson), #1 WR (Johnson), and RT (Cherilus) was a need.

...

You can knock the players, but don't knock the FO for not addressing "needs".


You can nitpick though. :!:

The most glaring need in many peoples' opinion is on Offensive Line, and the only player they took was in a position you just described as not a need. (Murtha projects as an RT).


Pettigrew is OL help. Not sure why people overlook this. He was not brought in as a 1000 yards receiving TE kinda guy. He immediately makes Gosder and Backus better because he can come in and help block very well. There are two ways you can upgrade, replace or add. Our running game should get a giant boost.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


April 27th, 2009, 12:29 pm
Profile
Online
QB Coach
User avatar

Joined: August 21st, 2005, 3:36 am
Posts: 3137
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Post 
JEBWrench wrote:
Blueskies wrote:
Every position on this team outside of WSLB (Sims), SSLB (Peterson), #1 WR (Johnson), and RT (Cherilus) was a need.

...

You can knock the players, but don't knock the FO for not addressing "needs".


You can nitpick though. :!:

The most glaring need in many peoples' opinion is on Offensive Line, and the only player they took was in a position you just described as not a need. (Murtha projects as an RT).

When are we going to learn that drafting for need doesn't work. The only time drafting for need really works is for teams who are 1 or 2 pieces from being championship contenders. History has proven this over and over. This is the first time I can remember that the Lions have truly tried to draft based on BPA and I like it.

_________________
"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams

“The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.” - Neil deGrasse Tyson


April 27th, 2009, 12:30 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12137
Post 
steensn wrote:
Pettigrew is OL help. Not sure why people overlook this. He was not brought in as a 1000 yards receiving TE kinda guy. He immediately makes Gosder and Backus better because he can come in and help block very well. There are two ways you can upgrade, replace or add. Our running game should get a giant boost.


Touchdown Jesus wrote:
When are we going to learn that drafting for need doesn't work. The only time drafting for need really works is for teams who are 1 or 2 pieces from being championship contenders. History has proven this over and over. This is the first time I can remember that the Lions have truly tried to draft based on BPA and I like it.


C'mon now guys, you know its WAY too early for everyone to be using logic! :wink: :lol:
Besides, the way the past regime operated pretty much ruined anything this regime does in its first year or two. Us Lions fans have been conditioned to not use logic, its the Millen way! LOL Its going to take some time before we get back to where we should, organization AND fan wise

Go Lions!!!
headbang.gif


April 27th, 2009, 12:36 pm
Profile
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: December 9th, 2008, 5:48 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Kansas by way of Ontario
Post 
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
When are we going to learn that drafting for need doesn't work. The only time drafting for need really works is for teams who are 1 or 2 pieces from being championship contenders. History has proven this over and over. This is the first time I can remember that the Lions have truly tried to draft based on BPA and I like it.


So can you honestly say that Matthew Stafford was the best player available? [/devilsadvocate]

Logically speaking, BPA must take need into account.
Otherwise, you find a team taking wide receivers four times out of five first round picks.

(Ironically to my point, and probably proving me utterly wrong, is that the fourth one, drafted solely on being the best available, is the only one still here.)


April 27th, 2009, 12:40 pm
Profile
National Champion
User avatar

Joined: December 16th, 2008, 8:44 am
Posts: 843
Post 
JEBWrench wrote:
Touchdown Jesus wrote:
When are we going to learn that drafting for need doesn't work. The only time drafting for need really works is for teams who are 1 or 2 pieces from being championship contenders. History has proven this over and over. This is the first time I can remember that the Lions have truly tried to draft based on BPA and I like it.


So can you honestly say that Matthew Stafford was the best player available? [/devilsadvocate]

Logically speaking, BPA must take need into account.
Otherwise, you find a team taking wide receivers four times out of five first round picks.

(Ironically to my point, and probably proving me utterly wrong, is that the fourth one, drafted solely on being the best available, is the only one still here.)


Everyone's first round pick is a need pick purely because of the money involved. That is why Stafford went first, why first rounds of any draft are relatively easy to predict (compared to the rest of the rounds), and the answer to your question.

It's what you do the rest of the draft that determines whether you need drafted or BPA drafted.


April 27th, 2009, 12:44 pm
Profile
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: December 9th, 2008, 5:48 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Kansas by way of Ontario
Post 
faulkn22 wrote:
Everyone's first round pick is a need pick purely because of the money involved. That is why Stafford went first, why first rounds of any draft are relatively easy to predict (compared to the rest of the rounds), and the answer to your question.

It's what you do the rest of the draft that determines whether you need drafted or BPA drafted.


The Stafford pick strikes me more as a "that's what you're supposed to do with the first overall pick", rather than a "we need a QB to win in a few years time" pick.

Getting Stafford now doesn't help us much more than getting a QB next year, because we're not likely to be contending for the division next year or the year after that. And we likely would not have been stuck with a $40 million clipboard holder next year.


April 27th, 2009, 12:50 pm
Profile
Fair Weather Fan

Joined: December 12th, 2008, 7:36 pm
Posts: 6
Post 
I just wrote my full overview of what I feel about the Lions' Draft this year, feel free to check it out if you would like. http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-1330-Detroit-Lions-Examiner~y2009m4d27-Detroit-Lions-2009-NFL-Draft-final-assessment

_________________
Visit Detroit Lions Examiner for Lions News and Articles


April 27th, 2009, 12:55 pm
Profile
Online
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: January 26th, 2005, 9:34 pm
Posts: 10302
Location: Sycamore, IL
Post 
Sven Draconian wrote:
Stafford- D
I like Sanchez, Curry and Smith more. I'm just not sold on Stafford, sorry.

Pettigrew- A
Great pick IMO. Avoided some "hype" players. Oher is a sure-fire bust (IMO), Rey Rey has his issues as well. Peria Jerry doesn't fit our system and some others were a big reach. Pettigrew was the BPA and a position we needed. Was TE our biggest need, obviously not, but we have trotted out sub-par talent for years.

Delmas-B
Don't know a lot about him other than he's tough and we started a run on safeties. Graded fairly highly by the experts as well. Safety is still a need position (Alexander and Bullocks aren't cutting it, sorry).

Levy- F
Bad pick IMO. I've watched enough wisconsin games I should have noticed him if he had that kinda talent. I'll credit them for going BPA (on their board) but I just don't like the kid.

Williams- C
I suppose he might have been BPA, but I'm not sold. Not enough speed IMO. Could prove me wrong and be a nice pick, but I'm not a huge fan of him. We certainly didn't pick him on being the best returner in the game, or the best pure receiving prospect.

Hill- A+
Massive but athletic. Fits the system and may be able to start by years end. Great value in the 4th round considering potential.

Brown F
Didn't start at TCU. We already had drafted a returner. Do not like. Give it, I haven't seen him play, but I just don't see him as the BPA.

Murtha A
Awesome pick. Really should have been the pick instead of Brown (IMO). Injury risk is a factor, but hey, he's athletic enough to be a very good LT. 6'7 300 4.8 speed.

Follet A
Tough and plays tough. He's only 21, graduated from Cal and has room to grow into his frame. With time to develop (and fill out that frame) he coudl be pretty good.

Gronkowski N/A
Don't know a thing about him.


I agree with all except that Oher is a sure-fire bust.

I think Gronkowski was added depth and we'll have all new TEs this coming season. If he can play STs, he'll make the squad.

I also think that Murtha could see some goal-line TE action.

Brown and Levy were absolutely HORRIBLE picks IMO. We already have an Alex Lewis, why draft another SAM? He's going to be buried behind Peterson and Lewis at SAM. I think Lewis or Dizon are going to get cut because of this pick.

_________________
_____
I have no faith this team will win a game the rest of the year. The kitties finish at 7-9 and Miss the playoffs as GB wins out and takes it from the kitties.
Image


April 27th, 2009, 1:05 pm
Profile
Junior Varsity

Joined: March 30th, 2009, 11:55 pm
Posts: 182
Post 
Stafford- C
Sorry, but after having Staffords 'obvious' greatness crammed down my throat the last 4 months or so I still consider him a boom or bust prospect. You draft a QB #1 and pay a guy $70m+ with almost $42m guaranteed? Well... that says "Super Bowl or bust" to me. "C" now, "A" or "F" in 5-7 years, with no in-between. I really hope Mayhew & co nailed it.

Pettigrew- A
Hey, you're gonna draft a franchise QB with #1, I can't find fault with grabbing the best, most complete TE in the draft. A great TE can be a QB (and OLs) best friend. 'Groo (gonna give him a nickname already 8) ) is about as big an upgrade as we could've expected, considering the fat fumbling machine known as Gaines we had starting last year.

Delmas- A
Let's see.... a smart, big hitting FS for our secondary that can also cover? Yes, please!

Levy- C
Ok, this one I'm just gonna have to see to believe. Adds LB depth and is a sure tackler- two traits the defense can really use.

Williams- B
A nice upgrade to our abysmal punt return game. Has underrated speed (as mentioned, he was sick at the combine and ran MUCH better at his pro day) and great vision. This turns into a potential 3rd round steal if he ends up developing into a solid #2/3 option at WR.

Hill- A
Think he's the hidden gem of this draft class. Huge upside, massive frame, athletic... a little raw, but that's what they pay the coaching staff the big bucks for. He'll have the luxury of spot duty to start off with and being able to learn from a solid veteran presence like Jackson. Love this pick :idea:

Brown- C
He'd get a "D", but the "C" is for (hopefully) C ya latah Cason and Calhoun! Good hands, good speed.... kickoff return guy/ 3rd down back who gives us a potential breakaway threat in the backfield.

Murtha- A-
Developmental guy with a lot of upside if he gets proper coaching. Besides, as raw as he is, he's huge and he's a potential fill at LT so I won't complain at all about this pick.

Follett- A
This pick actually made me not mind skipping over some of the (imo overrated) MLB prospects in this draft. I think either he or Levy ends up taking over the Mike spot. Great playmaker on defense, solid tackler and a hard hitter, and we got him in the 7th round! Besides, if neither he, Levy nor Dizon end up being able to cut it at MLB... there's always Spikes to look forward to next year!

Gronkowski- C+
Not the best hands guy, but we got that in Pettigrew. Gives us a solid blocking option in 2 TE sets and could easily get a roster spot just by being a solid ST guy.

Overall I'd give the draft a B/B+. Didn't fill the 'obvious' holes but addded leadership and playmakers for all 3 phases of the game, which I believe this team may have needed just as much. They manage to fill a hole or 2 through offseason trades/ FA acquisitions and I'll be back at the punch bowl chuggin the koolaid :oops:


April 27th, 2009, 1:13 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9888
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post 
Some are being too hard on particular picks, some are being too soft.

Stafford - my biggest beef with this pick is that we gave him much more money than we would have given Curry. That extra money means cap space we don't have to sign free agents in the coming seasons. I know the Lions need a QB for the future, but it did NOT have to come in this draft. Curry would have filled an immediate need and have given the Lions linebackers a chance to gel as a unit.

Pettigrew - Once Stafford was in the fold, I knew this would be their pick if he was available. If Stafford hadn't been taken, and we would have brought Curry in, I don't think Pettigrew is the selection. Yes, Pettigrew was probably the BPA for most teams at this point, but I believe the Lions could have traded down and still landed him. Plus, there were 20 tight ends taken in this draft. It was considered particularly deep in tight end talent. We could have had a TE in just about any round that would have contributed right away. It makes me laugh that Kiper called Pettigrew a reach, despite the fact that Moronic Mel had BP as his top overall rated player at this selection.

Delmas - Once again, I think we could have traded back and still have gotten a quality safety. We didn't have to get the top rated players at each position. You have to measure their value at that pick, versus players that may be available later on and what you can get in return for trading down. The Pats and Brown kept trading down, and they did a marvelous job of adding starters and depth. Certainly Louis will be a starter for us at strong safety, and probably be a good one. But what could we gotten if we had traded down and then taken Rashad Johnson (who I believe is nearly as good as Delmas, and has the same leadership qualities) later?

Levy - I am hearing that the Lions plan to move him inside. This is Ted Lehman/Jordan Dizon all over again, IMHO. Levy won't hack it in the middle, and we'll have yet another linebacker who will be a backup/STer that we had no business taking. I would have preferred the Lions had used this pick to take a pass rusher, if they were going to do anything. However, I will say that the trade down to pick up two more picks was a stellar move.

Williams - This pick reminds me of the Kenneth Moore selection from a year ago. Remember him? Our kick returner of the future? Didn't make the grade, or the roster. He was too slow. While Williams may have been a solid returner in college, that was not the NFL. With a slow straight line speed time, he won't be that good at getting into the wedge in time. There will be guys coming down the field that run faster than him, and he will have trouble breaking free and running away from coverage. A wasted pick, in my opinion.

Hill - Slight reach, but a great pick. The only reason I didn't give it an A is because I had Hill as a fifth round pick. But it is possible he would have been snapped up earlier, so I have no qualms about this one.

The Lions traded the first pick of the sixth round to Denver for a seventh in this draft and fifth rounder in 2010. Another stellar trade. I am beginning to think we should allow Mayhew to arrange trades, but keep him out of any draft discussion or decisions.

Brown - Uggh! If possible, this was a worse pick than Williams. Do we really need two kick returners? If Williams was drafted as a returner, why take Brown? Do the Lions not trust Williams? Too bad Burnett was off the board at this point. I think he'll be a better return guy than either of the two we've picked.

Murtha - I actually like this pick. I thought Murtha would go in the fifth to sixth round. He has experience at both tackle spots, but projects more as a RT in the pros, which is kind of bothersome. However, he has the athleticism to play the guard spots and contribute with his speed for traps, counters and sweeps, which would be good.

Follett - Great motor and character guy. If the Lions are going to move anyone inside and give them a shot at the Mike, it should be Follett and not Levy. His shoulder injury history is a concern, and may affect his ability to shed blockers effectively.

Gronkowski - Nothing against him, but the Lions should have taken one of the ILBs still left, like Ellerbe or Beckwith. We have no starter. I cannot live with another year of Paris Lenon in the middle of our defense, but it is looking like the Lions are angling towards re-signing him.

AREAS OF NEED COVERED-starters: QB, SS, TE ; backup: NT, OLB

AREAS OF NEED NOT COVERED-starters: MLB, CB, OT, UT; backup: DE, OG

We had ample opportunity to get players that could have contributed on our defense, but passed them over in favor of others who did not fill a pressing need or at positions that we could have gotten good talent later in the draft. Likewise, the Lions failed to trade down from 20 and 33, which I feel that they could have and should have done. Nobody will convince me that they weren't getting calls, as Schwartz and Mayhew said that in the days prior to the draft teams were inquiring about those picks.

Getting a pick next year, even a fifth rounder, is a nice move. We might have been able to get a first rounder next year for our 33 pick, in addition to a later round pick this year. Who knows?

The Lions made moves to fix both sides of the ball, and that's a good thing. But I don't see significant enough improvement in this defense to make me happy. I realize it couldn't have all been done in one year, and I am taking that into consideration. However, getting just a couple more pieces of the puzzle on defense would have allowed those young players to get experience this year and have been better prepared to make an impact next season. As it stands, we will have to depend on a very good free agency period, or a stellar draft in 2010 to fill the voids needed to make this team a contender. Schwartz and Mayhew said that they wanted to build this team the right way, add size and get strength along the offensive and defensive fronts through the draft. They failed. So they can defend their picks all they want, but they didn't live up to their promise, and didn't venture far from the Mustachioed Moron's drafting playbook, in my opinion. The only difference is that Schwartz and Mayhew may have better judgement on who the best player available truly is.


April 27th, 2009, 2:08 pm
Profile
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: December 9th, 2008, 5:48 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Kansas by way of Ontario
Post 
conversion02 wrote:
I also think that Murtha could see some goal-line TE action.


I find your suggestion very intriguing with his athleticism.

*has bizzare visions of Murtha at TE, Pettigrew at FB on the goalline*


April 27th, 2009, 2:12 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post 
Didn't see this posted...

Consensus grades from all over.


http://sports.espn.go.com/chat/sportsnation/story?id=4104114

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


April 27th, 2009, 3:44 pm
Profile
Head Cheerleader

Joined: March 9th, 2009, 3:49 am
Posts: 30
Post 
JEBWrench wrote:
faulkn22 wrote:
Everyone's first round pick is a need pick purely because of the money involved. That is why Stafford went first, why first rounds of any draft are relatively easy to predict (compared to the rest of the rounds), and the answer to your question.

It's what you do the rest of the draft that determines whether you need drafted or BPA drafted.


The Stafford pick strikes me more as a "that's what you're supposed to do with the first overall pick", rather than a "we need a QB to win in a few years time" pick.

Getting Stafford now doesn't help us much more than getting a QB next year, because we're not likely to be contending for the division next year or the year after that. And we likely would not have been stuck with a $40 million clipboard holder next year.


and that's been a proven strategy used by most NFL teams hasn't it? Fix everything else first and get your QB last.


April 27th, 2009, 4:05 pm
Profile
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: December 9th, 2008, 5:48 pm
Posts: 116
Location: Kansas by way of Ontario
Post 
kendawg wrote:
and that's been a proven strategy used by most NFL teams hasn't it? Fix everything else first and get your QB last.


I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or disagreeing with me, but more than a few teams have progressed well by doing that. Baltimore, Pittsburgh, San Diego, Miami....


April 27th, 2009, 4:08 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 83 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Falkes and 9 guests


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.