View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently April 17th, 2014, 3:15 pm



Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
 BPA or NEED? 
Author Message
Mr. Irrelevant

Joined: March 21st, 2005, 2:11 pm
Posts: 999
Post BPA or NEED?
The Lions have a couple of glaring needs going into this draft, IMO, LT and DE, with the latter being the biggest need, also IMO. The Lions have been saying their OK at Tackle. Even if they feel comfortable with their starters (they should still draft one for depth). The same can't be said for DE's, Jones and Young, that's it.
Two of the top 3 LT's will probably be gone by 5, and there's a possibility all 3 could be gone. If their thinking DE at 5, then at least one of the top two should be there.
But, that's not how the Lions draft. BPA is what they preach every year. Is this the year that changes? The year they make a reach for need, in regards to the DE position? My take is that none of the top DE's are worthy of that high a pick. If the Lions take one, I'm sure they'll try to justify it by saying he was the highest rated player left on their board.
To me, the smart play, the safe play, would be to select the top Guard if the Tackles are gone. Then again, he might not be the highest rated player on their board. So, if the Lions do in fact stay true to their board, maybe none of the previously mentioned positions will be their selection. Wouldn't be surprised if the Lions select a player nobody expects, in that scenario.


April 24th, 2013, 11:05 am
Profile
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
liontrax wrote:
The Lions have a couple of glaring needs going into this draft, IMO, LT and DE, with the latter being the biggest need, also IMO. The Lions have been saying their OK at Tackle. Even if they feel comfortable with their starters (they should still draft one for depth). The same can't be said for DE's, Jones and Young, that's it.
Two of the top 3 LT's will probably be gone by 5, and there's a possibility all 3 could be gone. If their thinking DE at 5, then at least one of the top two should be there.
But, that's not how the Lions draft. BPA is what they preach every year. Is this the year that changes? The year they make a reach for need, in regards to the DE position? My take is that none of the top DE's are worthy of that high a pick. If the Lions take one, I'm sure they'll try to justify it by saying he was the highest rated player left on their board.
To me, the smart play, the safe play, would be to select the top Guard if the Tackles are gone. Then again, he might not be the highest rated player on their board. So, if the Lions do in fact stay true to their board, maybe none of the previously mentioned positions will be their selection. Wouldn't be surprised if the Lions select a player nobody expects, in that scenario.


I don't know how anyone can say that LT is not our biggest need.


April 24th, 2013, 11:20 am
1st Round Pick

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1228
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
wjb21ndtown wrote:
liontrax wrote:
The Lions have a couple of glaring needs going into this draft, IMO, LT and DE, with the latter being the biggest need, also IMO. The Lions have been saying their OK at Tackle. Even if they feel comfortable with their starters (they should still draft one for depth). The same can't be said for DE's, Jones and Young, that's it.
Two of the top 3 LT's will probably be gone by 5, and there's a possibility all 3 could be gone. If their thinking DE at 5, then at least one of the top two should be there.
But, that's not how the Lions draft. BPA is what they preach every year. Is this the year that changes? The year they make a reach for need, in regards to the DE position? My take is that none of the top DE's are worthy of that high a pick. If the Lions take one, I'm sure they'll try to justify it by saying he was the highest rated player left on their board.
To me, the smart play, the safe play, would be to select the top Guard if the Tackles are gone. Then again, he might not be the highest rated player on their board. So, if the Lions do in fact stay true to their board, maybe none of the previously mentioned positions will be their selection. Wouldn't be surprised if the Lions select a player nobody expects, in that scenario.


I don't know how anyone can say that LT is not our biggest need.


It's pretty simple, some people think Reiff can handle the LT spot. If that is true then DE is probably the biggest need with WR2, RG, and RT also coming in as pretty important.

I don't doubt Reiff could be an ok LT, but I tend to see having someone special at LT to be crucial to the offense, so I tend to agree with you WJB.

I also see DE as being easily found in the 2nd and 3rd rounds so there is more value in an early LT.

Short of the Lions taking a QB or DT I don't think there is any players in the top 10 that could really be a surprise at #5.


April 24th, 2013, 11:53 am
Profile
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
I guess I should say OT instead of LT... Even if we put Reiff at LT (which, IMO, is a mistake) we still have a huge hole at RT.

For that reason I think OT is a more pressing need, especially for a team that passes more than any other team in the NFL.

Further, and I think you'd agree... If a DE messes up, we have 10 other guys that can make a play, if the LT messes up the play, and likely the drive, is over. That's why I think it's more suitable to take a DE later in the draft.


April 24th, 2013, 12:01 pm
1st Round Pick

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1228
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
wjb21ndtown wrote:
I guess I should say OT instead of LT... Even if we put Reiff at LT (which, IMO, is a mistake) we still have a huge hole at RT.

For that reason I think OT is a more pressing need, especially for a team that passes more than any other team in the NFL.

Further, and I think you'd agree... If a DE messes up, we have 10 other guys that can make a play, if the LT messes up the play, and likely the drive, is over. That's why I think it's more suitable to take a DE later in the draft.


I'm definitely with you on doing everything they can to get a blue chip LT. I think it's a good thing that what we perceive as the biggest need also seems to match up with BPA. IMO the only real question is if those players will still be there at 5.


April 24th, 2013, 12:20 pm
Profile
League MVP
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3632
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
wjb21ndtown wrote:
I guess I should say OT instead of LT... Even if we put Reiff at LT (which, IMO, is a mistake) we still have a huge hole at RT.

For that reason I think OT is a more pressing need, especially for a team that passes more than any other team in the NFL.

Further, and I think you'd agree... If a DE messes up, we have 10 other guys that can make a play, if the LT messes up the play, and likely the drive, is over. That's why I think it's more suitable to take a DE later in the draft.


agreed, but I'd like to add that starting Defensive guys all over the board can be found in rounds 1-4.the same can not be said for Tackles. If we can get one of the big 3 and dont, I will be greatly disapointed.


April 24th, 2013, 12:21 pm
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3257
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
wjb21ndtown wrote:
liontrax wrote:
The Lions have a couple of glaring needs going into this draft, IMO, LT and DE, with the latter being the biggest need, also IMO. The Lions have been saying their OK at Tackle. Even if they feel comfortable with their starters (they should still draft one for depth). The same can't be said for DE's, Jones and Young, that's it.
Two of the top 3 LT's will probably be gone by 5, and there's a possibility all 3 could be gone. If their thinking DE at 5, then at least one of the top two should be there.
But, that's not how the Lions draft. BPA is what they preach every year. Is this the year that changes? The year they make a reach for need, in regards to the DE position? My take is that none of the top DE's are worthy of that high a pick. If the Lions take one, I'm sure they'll try to justify it by saying he was the highest rated player left on their board.
To me, the smart play, the safe play, would be to select the top Guard if the Tackles are gone. Then again, he might not be the highest rated player on their board. So, if the Lions do in fact stay true to their board, maybe none of the previously mentioned positions will be their selection. Wouldn't be surprised if the Lions select a player nobody expects, in that scenario.


I don't know how anyone can say that LT is not our biggest need.

Agree.

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


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


April 24th, 2013, 12:52 pm
Profile
Online
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2007, 5:51 pm
Posts: 2271
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
Im with you guys. I wont rage if we end up with Warmack, Ansah or Milliner, but truly believe the Obvious choice for both next year and the next 5 is 1 of the 3 OTs. Only caveat would be if we got a HUGE offer to trade down, wed have to consider it.

See updated Sig for Draft Preference.

_________________
Time to Move on from the Schwartz Era. My Favorite Offense Minded Coaching Candidates: O'Brien, Whisenhunt, John Gruden, Jay Gruden, David Shaw, Tom Coughlin


April 24th, 2013, 1:44 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: October 30th, 2004, 12:30 pm
Posts: 2205
Location: Austin, TX
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
I personally think one of the 3 top LTs will be available at 5...and mostly likely it will be Johnson.

Also, I'd be pretty ticked if we didn't get one of the top 3 LTs unless we trade back and got multiple picks.

_________________
Image

NEVER GIVE UP!


April 24th, 2013, 2:20 pm
Profile
Mr. Irrelevant

Joined: March 21st, 2005, 2:11 pm
Posts: 999
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
wjb21ndtown wrote:
liontrax wrote:
The Lions have a couple of glaring needs going into this draft, IMO, LT and DE, with the latter being the biggest need, also IMO. The Lions have been saying their OK at Tackle. Even if they feel comfortable with their starters (they should still draft one for depth). The same can't be said for DE's, Jones and Young, that's it.
Two of the top 3 LT's will probably be gone by 5, and there's a possibility all 3 could be gone. If their thinking DE at 5, then at least one of the top two should be there.
But, that's not how the Lions draft. BPA is what they preach every year. Is this the year that changes? The year they make a reach for need, in regards to the DE position? My take is that none of the top DE's are worthy of that high a pick. If the Lions take one, I'm sure they'll try to justify it by saying he was the highest rated player left on their board.
To me, the smart play, the safe play, would be to select the top Guard if the Tackles are gone. Then again, he might not be the highest rated player on their board. So, if the Lions do in fact stay true to their board, maybe none of the previously mentioned positions will be their selection. Wouldn't be surprised if the Lions select a player nobody expects, in that scenario.


I don't know how anyone can say that LT is not our biggest need.




Because, on one hand I see Reiff, Fox, and Hilliard, on the other I see Jones and Young, to me that's a no-brainier in regards of need. Believe me I'm not a proponent of taking a DE early. In fact, I would be thrilled to get one of the Tackles at 5. If that doesn't happen, next on my list would be Warmack. But, I'm picking with need in mind, and in my mind I believe we should build the O-line to protect the franchise and improve the run game. Even if we don't get one of the top Tackles in the 1st, I hope they would think about getting one in the 2nd. I'm no more comfortable than you going into training camp with Reiff, Fox, and Hilliard as our Tackle group. Hopefully, if the big three are gone when we pick, maybe someone like the 49ers will be willing to part with 3 or 4 of their picks for a player their infatuated with at the top of the draft. They've got 14 picks, and I doubt they will be adding all those picks to their roster.


April 24th, 2013, 2:45 pm
Profile
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
liontrax wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
liontrax wrote:
The Lions have a couple of glaring needs going into this draft, IMO, LT and DE, with the latter being the biggest need, also IMO. The Lions have been saying their OK at Tackle. Even if they feel comfortable with their starters (they should still draft one for depth). The same can't be said for DE's, Jones and Young, that's it.
Two of the top 3 LT's will probably be gone by 5, and there's a possibility all 3 could be gone. If their thinking DE at 5, then at least one of the top two should be there.
But, that's not how the Lions draft. BPA is what they preach every year. Is this the year that changes? The year they make a reach for need, in regards to the DE position? My take is that none of the top DE's are worthy of that high a pick. If the Lions take one, I'm sure they'll try to justify it by saying he was the highest rated player left on their board.
To me, the smart play, the safe play, would be to select the top Guard if the Tackles are gone. Then again, he might not be the highest rated player on their board. So, if the Lions do in fact stay true to their board, maybe none of the previously mentioned positions will be their selection. Wouldn't be surprised if the Lions select a player nobody expects, in that scenario.


I don't know how anyone can say that LT is not our biggest need.




Because, on one hand I see Reiff, Fox, and Hilliard, on the other I see Jones and Young, to me that's a no-brainier in regards of need. Believe me I'm not a proponent of taking a DE early. In fact, I would be thrilled to get one of the Tackles at 5. If that doesn't happen, next on my list would be Warmack. But, I'm picking with need in mind, and in my mind I believe we should build the O-line to protect the franchise and improve the run game. Even if we don't get one of the top Tackles in the 1st, I hope they would think about getting one in the 2nd. I'm no more comfortable than you going into training camp with Reiff, Fox, and Hilliard as our Tackle group. Hopefully, if the big three are gone when we pick, maybe someone like the 49ers will be willing to part with 3 or 4 of their picks for a player their infatuated with at the top of the draft. They've got 14 picks, and I doubt they will be adding all those picks to their roster.


IMO Jones and LoJack (we can still get him back relatively cheaply) are better than any pair we have at OT, and like I said, IMO OT is a more important position to this team than DE is.


April 24th, 2013, 3:30 pm
Butkus Award Winner

Joined: July 3rd, 2012, 2:06 am
Posts: 641
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
WJB will like this... looks like Mayhew is SERIOUS about a left tackle;

http://nfltraderumors.co/report-raiders ... rst-round/

_________________
Image


April 24th, 2013, 5:22 pm
Profile
League MVP
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3632
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
Shotty wrote:
WJB will like this... looks like Mayhew is SERIOUS about a left tackle;

http://nfltraderumors.co/report-raiders ... rst-round/



I cry smoke screen. I just dont see us selling quality picks to get just one guy. as has been pointed out we have too many holes to fill. I think Oak is trying to bait Jax.


April 24th, 2013, 5:29 pm
Profile
Mr. Irrelevant

Joined: March 21st, 2005, 2:11 pm
Posts: 999
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
We all know you can't believe anything that's said prior to the draft. If Mayhew was to trade away multiples to move up? Why not? He doesn't know how to draft beyond round 1 anyway!


April 24th, 2013, 5:34 pm
Profile
Butkus Award Winner

Joined: July 3rd, 2012, 2:06 am
Posts: 641
Post Re: BPA or NEED?
liontrax wrote:
We all know you can't believe anything that's said prior to the draft. If Mayhew was to trade away multiples to move up? Why not? He doesn't know how to draft beyond round 1 anyway!


EXACTLY. I thought I was the only one who thought this. We should trade our fifth and sixth picks for a 4th and if Oakland wants our 3rd and it means we get Fisher, I say DO IT RIGHT ON THE SPOT. Mayhew literally doesn't know how to draft from the 4th, arguably 3rd, round on guys who can even get off the practice squad.

_________________
Image


April 24th, 2013, 5:40 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  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.