DET - why give up on young QBs

[BeeR]

Maybe it's right, neither has done much at all - but neither has had much of a chance either. The long list of great QBs who started poorly is long, and though I doubt either Orlavsky (sp) or Stanton will ever be great, wouldn't it be jumping the gun to bail on both already and draft a "flashy" pick like Stafford or Bradford - esp when their D was FAR worse than their O? Or maybe draft OL instead?

[Ursa Majoris]

With two young QBs on the roster, drafting another makes zero sense, IMO. The Lions other multitude of weaknesses mean they can draft almost anywhere and automatically improve but I'd look at where it all really begins - in the trenches on both sides of the ball.

[Puddy]

draft a "flashy" pick like Stafford or Bradford?

That would be just like the Lions. Draft a guy number one overall who is staying in college.

[Kid Cid]

I was thinking about this last week. IMO, the Lions would be far, far better off trying to fill as many of their numerous holes left by Matt Millen and wait until next year or even later for a sure-fire, can't miss QB prospect. I know nothing is guaranteed but I just don't see anyone in this years class being in that category. Next year you have Bradford, McCoy, Tebow and a couple of others to choose from, all of whom stand a better chance of hitting than this year's crop. Right now, building up the overall talent levell on the team is the most important thing.

[alexgaddis]

I was thinking about this last week. IMO, the Lions would be far, far better off trying to fill as many of their numerous holes left by Matt Millen and wait until next year or even later for a sure-fire, can't miss QB prospect. I know nothing is guaranteed but I just don't see anyone in this years class being in that category. Next year you have Bradford, McCoy, Tebow and a couple of others to choose from, all of whom stand a better chance of hitting than this year's crop. Right now, building up the overall talent levell on the team is the most important thing.

Good luck with that...

[Furd]

Orlovsky is terrible. He'll be starting his 4th season next year, so I wouldn't call him a kid. And he's a free agent, so there is no guarantee that he'll be back on the roster.

 

Stanton hasn't had any time, is injury prone and he hasn't show that much, in practice or otherwise.

 

Detroit should try this year and next year to get a quality QB.

[Square]

I remember reading (I think from Policy's blog) a quote from the new GM that they were going to be pretty tight lipped about their draft picks/strategy. Basically they want to give themselves more room to go with what the board gives them. I think they should move down from the #1 spot, but I don't know exactly what they could get (anybody have an idea what other teams have gotten for that in the past?). I don't think Stanton is as bad as everyone is assuming because of his lack of playing time this year. This is all hunch on my part so take it for what its worth. I just remember the comments about how they wanted to bring him along slowly and they weren't just going to rush him out their when he wasn't ready. I don't necessarily think it is bad for a rookie QB to sit for a year (I think it was 3 in Rodgers case up in Green Bay). Stanton also had some kind of hand injury IIRC. He might still be a serviceable QB. Besides, I probably would have gone with Bradford if I was DET. With him staying in college, I'd be content with a top O lineman.

[Puddy]

Detroit should try this year and next year to get a quality QB.

Well using our first pick of the draft those two years would have a boatload of cap room tied up with two unproven QB's. Can't happen. It would handcuff the Lions in the other positions where there are obvious needs as well.

[Furd]

Well using our first pick of the draft those two years would have a boatload of cap room tied up with two unproven QB's. Can't happen. It would handcuff the Lions in the other positions where there are obvious needs as well.

 

I didn't advocate taking a QB with the first pick of the draft. The Lions are so bereft of talent that they can go any position at just about any spot. However, I think that the Lions should look to take a QB somewhere along the line, even if requires an early pick.

 

I just disagree with those who say that you need to build up other positions first, when the QB is the most important position in the game, and it might take a couple of years to develop one.

[Furd]

Isn't Culpepper under contract for another year? What's the status of Kitna?

 

These guys are under contract for next year:

 

Kitna (?)

Culpepper (1 year)

Stanton (2 years)

Henson

 

After putting Kitna on IR last year when he said that he could play, Kitna is likely done in these parts.

 

Culpepper will get a 2.5 millions dollar bonus if on the roster next year. He's done, so they should cut him.

 

 

[Azazello1313]

With two young QBs on the roster, drafting another makes zero sense

 

it's a question of quality, not quantity. I think they could very reasonably conclude that none of the guys on their roster is ever going to be more than mediocre. now, that doesn't mean they should take stafford #1 overall. I don't know that he represents good value there, at all. but QB is NOT a position where they should be thinking of standing pat.

[Egret]

it's a question of quality, not quantity. I think they could very reasonably conclude that none of the guys on their roster is ever going to be more than mediocre. now, that doesn't mean they should take stafford #1 overall. I don't know that he represents good value there, at all. but QB is NOT a position where they should be thinking of standing pat.

It wouldn't be horrible if the Lions took a QB with the other pick they have in the first round, just no the number one overall.

[Kid Cid]

I still think that QB is not aposition that should be addressed during this year's draft by the Lions. They do need to raise the overall talent level of this team. A serviceable FA QB (of which Kitna qualifies) would server them better in building a franchise. Do you really want to bring another David Carr into the league, someone that should make it but gets so pummeled in his first couple of years that the mental part of the game gets destroyed for him? A solid team gets built from the lines out. If I were the GM I would seriously consider drafting 7-8 linemen between the two days and only departing from that strategy if insane value were to appear. This would also help with the salary cap in the next couple of years as a skill position player taken at the same point in the draft as a lineman will require a higher overall contract. Throw in some veteran FA pickups for character and attitude and you could have the start of something good.

 

Also, the GM/Coach has to be given more than three years to turn this bunch around. Aside from raising the overall talent level, they have to create a culture of wining, something that just doesn't exist in Detroit.

[BeeR]

Reading this thread convinced me beyond any doubt drafting Stafford would be stupid (thx for info on Bradford). He looks good but not amazing and as stated they have so many other holes. I know a top QB can be huge, but it's also a huge risk, not to mention the $.

 

This D nearly set all-time records for pathetic play and the OL still needs work, so I would say draft one of the top OLs or shift to D. Maybe take a flyer on a QB round 3-ish.

 

PS lol @ Kitna or Culpepper. Backups at most. This is hardly a team that it makes sense to use patch jobs with (and weak ones at that).

[Pope Flick]

Even if it's not the year for it, they should trade the #1 and pick up as many 2's and 3's as possible and restock that way. Build the lines, and go out from there.

 

Sign Grossman.

Edited January 19, 2009 by Pope Flick

[Furd]

Why would Kitna be done for being competitive? He wanted to play instead of being put on IR, is that bad?

 

I didn't say that he was done being competitive (whatever that means). The Lions pretty much arbitrarily put him on IR, probably as an excuse to get rid of him.

 

He wasn't that happy about it.

 

[Furd]

I know a top QB can be huge, but it's also a huge risk, not to mention the $.

 

I've heard this quite a bit. Why is a quarterback any more of a risk than any other position? A bust is a bust.

[Puddy]

I've heard this quite a bit. Why is a quarterback any more of a risk than any other position? A bust is a bust.

I think it's harder to cover up the mistakes on the field of a QB versus other positions. He handles the ball every offensive possession.

[ebartender]

Even if it's not the year for it, they should trade the #1 and pick up as many 2's and 3's as possible and restock that way. Build the lines, and go out from there.

 

Sign Grossman.

 

Maybe the Eagles could trade their 2 #1's for the #1 overall and draft Crabtree. But with the possibility of losing both starting OTs this offseason maybe the Eagles will need those two picks.

[Square]

I've heard this quite a bit. Why is a quarterback any more of a risk than any other position? A bust is a bust.

Because statistically you have a 50 / 50 chance of a 1st round QB panning out to be very good. At some point when you have a person X size, Y fast, and Z strong they can play line. Whether they are pro bowl caliber or not, there is less risk with taking a big strong lineman than with taking a QB. Just like 3rd year WRs typically break out...there are statistics to drafting particular players that show how well they do.

[PatsFanCT]

Orlovsky is terrible. He'll be starting his 4th season next year, so I wouldn't call him a kid. And he's a free agent, so there is no guarantee that he'll be back on the roster.

 

Stanton hasn't had any time, is injury prone and he hasn't show that much, in practice or otherwise.

 

Detroit should try this year and next year to get a quality QB.

 

Based on what? The fact that he played behind an awful line that gave him no chance to make a play, or based on the fact that from High School through College he was a winner, racking up fantastic numbers? Detroit drafting a QB with the number one overall pick is like throwing away a pair of Aces to chase an inside straight. You might want to see what you have at QB before dismissing him, and you can't do that without an improved O-Line.

[MTSuper7]

If you actually compare Orlovsky's numbers last year to Kitna's, there wasn't really a drop off when Orlovsky took over. I'm not saying that makes Orlovsky the answer at QB, but as has already been stated elsewhere in the thread, the Lions are a team with a lot of needs. Orlovsky with an improved offensive line will be serviceable, so they need to grab a mauler at #1. I would love to see them trade down for more picks, but I don't see any no-brainer clear #1 overall picks that will tempt another team to want to pay the price to move up. The Lions would actually have an easier time trading down from the #4 or #5 spot.

[Furd]

Based on what? The fact that he played behind an awful line that gave him no chance to make a play, or based on the fact that from High School through College he was a winner, racking up fantastic numbers? Detroit drafting a QB with the number one overall pick is like throwing away a pair of Aces to chase an inside straight. You might want to see what you have at QB before dismissing him, and you can't do that without an improved O-Line.

 

Watching him.

 

Orlovsky payed in 10 games, started 7, and was sacked 14 times. He had time to make plays, he just can't make them.

 

I've never claimed that the Lions should draft a QB with the number one pick. But they need to find a QB that will lead them to victory. Maybe "terrible" is too strong a word, but they're going nowhere with Orlovsky. Waiting to try to get better at the most important position in football doesn't make sense to me, particularly if you're from the school that it takes 3 years to develop a quarterback.

[MTSuper7]

Watching him.

 

Orlovsky payed in 10 games, started 7, and was sacked 14 times. He had time to make plays, he just can't make them.

 

I've never claimed that the Lions should draft a QB with the number one pick. But they need to find a QB that will lead them to victory. Maybe "terrible" is too strong a word, but they're going nowhere with Orlovsky. Waiting to try to get better at the most important position in football doesn't make sense to me, particularly if you're from the school that it takes 3 years to develop a quarterback.

 

Yes, they are better off trying to find a proven guy in free agency than to draft a QB early. They should definitely draft an OL with the #1 pick, because an OL will have an immediate impact. Drafting a guy like Sanchez or Stafford is more likely a long-term project. In the meantime, I don't think Orlovsky is all that bad of a stopgap if they can't improve via free agency. Truth be told, we don't know what either of the young Detroit QBs could do with a good offensive line and running game to help them out.

[BeeR]

Truth be told, we don't know what either of the young Detroit QBs could do with a good offensive line and running game to help them out.

 

Exactly. And rip on Millen all you want but he did make some excellent picks, eg CJ and IMO Kevin Smith, and I'm not convinced either Olsavsky or Stanton cannot be the answer at QB, or at least good enough until DET has a viable team and then bring in the key QB move. Plus odds are they will still be picking high for at least another year or 2 (I know shocking) so they will have plenty of time/chances to address QB...just saying to see where you're really at there first. Not to mention there's no Peyton Manning among the draft picks.

 

Really their needs are much more on D, but it seems "O" positions are generally ranked as best bets for those top few picks...there isn't a Mario Williams or whatever.