View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently October 24th, 2014, 2:54 pm



Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Remaining Needs 
Author Message
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Remaining Needs
I just do NOT understand you people and wanting to pick an offensive lineman. I can understand that if Jake Matthews falls to number 10 (I think Robinson will be gone by then) that he could be the BPA. But I don't think picking a right tackle is wise in the top ten. If that's the case, the Lions would be better off trading down with a team who needs a left tackle selecting in the 11-15 range.

And moving Waddle to guard? Replacing whom? Warford was OUTSTANDING last year. Sims is our other starter, and is a pretty solid player in his own right. And Waddle, as an undrafted rookie, was very solid as a starter last season. With all the other needs we have, I'm sure the Lions have other options at their disposal than to take an offensive lineman who may not even be capable of cracking our current starting line up. There are receivers (still a need), safeties (still a need) and cornerbacks (still a need) we could take. We could even look at linebacker (strongside starter needed), or defensive end (need another for rotation).

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


March 21st, 2014, 5:52 pm
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3827
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Remaining Needs
m2karateman wrote:
I just do NOT understand you people and wanting to pick an offensive lineman. I can understand that if Jake Matthews falls to number 10 (I think Robinson will be gone by then) that he could be the BPA. But I don't think picking a right tackle is wise in the top ten. If that's the case, the Lions would be better off trading down with a team who needs a left tackle selecting in the 11-15 range.

And moving Waddle to guard? Replacing whom? Warford was OUTSTANDING last year. Sims is our other starter, and is a pretty solid player in his own right. And Waddle, as an undrafted rookie, was very solid as a starter last season. With all the other needs we have, I'm sure the Lions have other options at their disposal than to take an offensive lineman who may not even be capable of cracking our current starting line up. There are receivers (still a need), safeties (still a need) and cornerbacks (still a need) we could take. We could even look at linebacker (strongside starter needed), or defensive end (need another for rotation).


This..I actually WANT Waddle starting this year. if he can improve over last year we could be looking at a potential PB RT! (not saying he is there yet, but so far has he disapointed anybody yet? certainly not me.) I personally think the sky is the limit with him, so long as he gets the playtime to improve!

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


March 21st, 2014, 6:08 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1387
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Remaining Needs
regularjoe12 wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
JL wrote:
inheritedlionsfan wrote:
... it looks like Mayhew is setting us up for BPA in the draft and possibly a move up for Watkins or Clowney.


Okay, I think the idea of the Lions moving up to draft Watkins is ludicrous. This draft is too deep, with WAY too many great prospects, for any team to consider giving up picks to move up. It would probably take moving up to the #2 spot to pretty much guarantee Watkins will still be there (and there's no sure bet that Houston won't take Watkins to pair with THEIR own #1 in Andre Johnson).

Better the Lions get what they need for solid starters during free agency, and then go for a great prospect in the #10 spot.


Would you think it was ludicrous for the Lions to move up if it were a Calvin Johnson type player? Probably not. Watkins may not be that guy, but he is head and shoulders the best WR available in this draft. The Lions tried to move up to get Patrick Peterson in a draft that was deemed "deep" as well, and it was a solid attempt. Securing a top notch WR to play opposite Calvin would be a GREAT move. But certainly not at any cost. Last year Miami moved up for merely a second round pick. I think Watkins is worth that.

Oh.....and sorry. Andre is no longer a #1 receiver. Health issues and age have made him a subpar #1, but still a pretty solid #2 receiver.


Houston looks like they will trade Schuab. That puts them in the market for a QB...

Cross your fingers boys!!!


The texans already traded Shaub for a sixth rounder to the Raiders but they also signed Fitzpatrick. I wouldn't be surprised if they take Clowney and go for a QB in the second.


March 21st, 2014, 6:51 pm
Profile
5th Round Pick - Traded

Joined: March 21st, 2005, 2:11 pm
Posts: 1054
Location: Wolverine, Mi.
Post Re: Remaining Needs
m2karateman wrote:
I just do NOT understand you people and wanting to pick an offensive lineman. I can understand that if Jake Matthews falls to number 10 (I think Robinson will be gone by then) that he could be the BPA. But I don't think picking a right tackle is wise in the top ten. If that's the case, the Lions would be better off trading down with a team who needs a left tackle selecting in the 11-15 range.

And moving Waddle to guard? Replacing whom? Warford was OUTSTANDING last year. Sims is our other starter, and is a pretty solid player in his own right. And Waddle, as an undrafted rookie, was very solid as a starter last season. With all the other needs we have, I'm sure the Lions have other options at their disposal than to take an offensive lineman who may not even be capable of cracking our current starting line up. There are receivers (still a need), safeties (still a need) and cornerbacks (still a need) we could take. We could even look at linebacker (strongside starter needed), or defensive end (need another for rotation).


Agree, but if they can't trade and tackle is BPA, oh well. Our young o-line did perform very well last season. But still think it wise to draft more linemen to improve the quality depth. That doesn't necessarily have to be done in the early rounds. I don't believe the Lions will have to worry about Matthews or Robinson being there at 10.


March 21st, 2014, 7:28 pm
Profile
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3216
Location: Maryland
Post Re: Remaining Needs
If a LT was taken at 10, what could happen is the line would stay the same this season (maybe he'd push for time at RT) and then next year Reiff would move to LG to replace Sims who would be a free agent and the rookie would start at LT if ready. I think both Matthews and Robinson project better at LT than Reiff but he has the experience of a full NFL season and he was pretty solid last year. However I think both will be gone by the time we draft. We should still have several good options and we can really do anything with our first pick. Can't wait for the draft. Thanks for moving it back a month especially with all the excitement gone from free agency already.

If we add to the Oline I want us to land another Warford type guy at guard or center in the mid rounds. We need someone to replace Raiola sooner than next year and since he and Sims will likely be gone next season, it'd be good to have the replacements already on the roster. There are a lot of centers this year that look to be pretty good prospects.


March 22nd, 2014, 12:28 am
Profile
Rookie Player of the Year

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:03 am
Posts: 2311
Post Re: Remaining Needs
The one thing people that say "move him to LG" have to keep in mind with Reiff is that he is one of the new rookie wage scale players and has yet to sign his big deal. There is no way that when his contract is up after next season that he or his agent are going to sign a new contract based on him being a G and I highly doubt an arbitrator would allow them to tag him as such. So if they did go that route it's more than likely they would ever be paying him LT money to play G or he will be playing for another team. So unless they are sold on moving away from Reiff in another year taking a LT at #10 doesn't make a lot of sense.


March 22nd, 2014, 7:58 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Player
User avatar

Joined: May 7th, 2005, 3:25 pm
Posts: 7443
Location: Earth/Sagittarius Dwarf Galaxy
Post Re: Remaining Needs
sweetd20 wrote:
The one thing people that say "move him to LG" have to keep in mind with Reiff is that he is one of the new rookie wage scale players and has yet to sign his big deal. There is no way that when his contract is up after next season that he or his agent are going to sign a new contract based on him being a G and I highly doubt an arbitrator would allow them to tag him as such. So if they did go that route it's more than likely they would ever be paying him LT money to play G or he will be playing for another team. So unless they are sold on moving away from Reiff in another year taking a LT at #10 doesn't make a lot of sense.


There is no tag for a guard. All O-linemen are tagged with the same position, O-line. If you tag a Center, your going to pay him at LT pay. Same with a Guard.


March 22nd, 2014, 9:48 am
Profile
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1387
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Remaining Needs
BillySims wrote:
sweetd20 wrote:
The one thing people that say "move him to LG" have to keep in mind with Reiff is that he is one of the new rookie wage scale players and has yet to sign his big deal. There is no way that when his contract is up after next season that he or his agent are going to sign a new contract based on him being a G and I highly doubt an arbitrator would allow them to tag him as such. So if they did go that route it's more than likely they would ever be paying him LT money to play G or he will be playing for another team. So unless they are sold on moving away from Reiff in another year taking a LT at #10 doesn't make a lot of sense.


There is no tag for a guard. All O-linemen are tagged with the same position, O-line. If you tag a Center, your going to pay him at LT pay. Same with a Guard.


Your right about the tag, but the man still makes a good point. There is no way Reiff's agent is going to accept OG money on his next contract, they are going to expect a LT contract because thats what he has been playing and what he was drafted to do.


March 22nd, 2014, 11:26 am
Profile
Div 1 - Starter
User avatar

Joined: August 19th, 2010, 9:24 pm
Posts: 583
Post Re: Remaining Needs
if he plays well then pay the man


March 23rd, 2014, 8:57 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Remaining Needs
liontrax wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
I just do NOT understand you people and wanting to pick an offensive lineman. I can understand that if Jake Matthews falls to number 10 (I think Robinson will be gone by then) that he could be the BPA. But I don't think picking a right tackle is wise in the top ten. If that's the case, the Lions would be better off trading down with a team who needs a left tackle selecting in the 11-15 range.

And moving Waddle to guard? Replacing whom? Warford was OUTSTANDING last year. Sims is our other starter, and is a pretty solid player in his own right. And Waddle, as an undrafted rookie, was very solid as a starter last season. With all the other needs we have, I'm sure the Lions have other options at their disposal than to take an offensive lineman who may not even be capable of cracking our current starting line up. There are receivers (still a need), safeties (still a need) and cornerbacks (still a need) we could take. We could even look at linebacker (strongside starter needed), or defensive end (need another for rotation).


Agree, but if they can't trade and tackle is BPA, oh well. Our young o-line did perform very well last season. But still think it wise to draft more linemen to improve the quality depth. That doesn't necessarily have to be done in the early rounds. I don't believe the Lions will have to worry about Matthews or Robinson being there at 10.


There are options. Trade down is an option, and a realistic one as well. There are a number of teams drafting behind us that would like a starting LT. Moving down and getting an additional pick is OK if you are getting better value and filling a need. One of the important parts of an offensive line playing well is the continuity of keeping the same personnel. If we can throw $4M per season at Pettigrew, we will probably be able to afford re-signing Rob Sims if he is playing well. I'd rather pay a little more to keep these five starters together than draft someone with the idea of moving a player who did well as a left tackle and move him inside to play a position he's not familiar with and may not excel at.

I understand the idea of taking BPA, and I agree with that. But it has to be done within reason. Millen lost his mind in taking WR after WR in the first round, passing on the opportunity to fill other needs or trade down to get better value and pick up additional picks. If Blake Bortles is still on the board at #10 and is considered the BPA, we don't take him. If a DT is available and considered BPA at that spot, we don't take him.

There are plenty of other players that will likely be available at #10 that we could select that will be a good value and fill a bigger need. WR, CB, LB, S.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


March 24th, 2014, 11:15 am
Profile
Online
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: August 6th, 2004, 9:21 am
Posts: 9494
Location: Dallas
Post Re: Remaining Needs
Based on M2K's thinking we would have then taken DE Gaines Adams over Calvin Johnson most likely in 2007 when we took WR after WR in the first round! :shock:

DT might not be an immediate need but Suh isn't on contract for next year and who knows what Fairley's (who was drafted at a position of strength based on BPA as well) future holds. You already know my thoughts on drafting QBs. The Giants seemed to draft a DL in the first every year for a while, they won two SBs with that strategy.

I generally like the idea of drafting BPA in the first, you have other rounds to fill needs. I just don't see the need at WR, CB, LB or S so pressing that you need to reach for one at #10 if the value isn't there. That said, if it is a OT, DT or QB sitting there as BPA and you can get decent value by moving back - that would be my preference.

_________________
Image
LB Tweet


March 24th, 2014, 11:35 am
Profile WWW
Rookie Player of the Year
User avatar

Joined: August 24th, 2010, 9:54 pm
Posts: 2311
Post Re: Remaining Needs
Pablo wrote:
Based on M2K's thinking we would have then taken DE Gaines Adams over Calvin Johnson most likely in 2007 when we took WR after WR in the first round! :shock:

DT might not be an immediate need but Suh isn't on contract for next year and who knows what Fairley's (who was drafted at a position of strength based on BPA as well) future holds. You already know my thoughts on drafting QBs. The Giants seemed to draft a DL in the first every year for a while, they won two SBs with that strategy.

I generally like the idea of drafting BPA in the first, you have other rounds to fill needs. I just don't see the need at WR, CB, LB or S so pressing that you need to reach for one at #10 if the value isn't there. That said, if it is a OT, DT or QB sitting there as BPA and you can get decent value by moving back - that would be my preference.


I pretty much agree. Luckily, like last year, I think the BPA at 10 will line up nicely with our needs, so this conversation could be moot.

_________________
Driver of the Jim Caldwell bandwagon. Climb aboard.


March 24th, 2014, 1:16 pm
Profile
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3216
Location: Maryland
Post Re: Remaining Needs
James Ihedigbo tweeted that he signed. Still need to draft a young safety, but maybe not til 2nd or 3rd now.


March 24th, 2014, 10:55 pm
Profile
Div 1 - Starter
User avatar

Joined: April 8th, 2010, 3:24 pm
Posts: 545
Post Re: Remaining Needs
inheritedlionsfan wrote:
James Ihedigbo tweeted that he signed. Still need to draft a young safety, but maybe not til 2nd or 3rd now.


I was thinking Round 4 for a Safety. We could still use another WR, CB, or LB and maybe a Center prospect.


March 25th, 2014, 2:34 am
Profile
Junior Varsity

Joined: March 26th, 2006, 11:09 am
Posts: 165
Post Re: Remaining Needs
With the 2 4th rd comp picks awarded to the Lions today, would you use one of them to draft a QB, possibly AJ MCCarron, or Aaron Murray?


March 25th, 2014, 10:40 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Hystrix, Majestic-12 [Bot], Pablo and 6 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.