Lions Locking In On Stafford

[irish]

http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/04/08/...in-on-stafford/

 

Lions Locking In On Stafford

Posted by Mike Florio on April 8, 2009, 11:51 a.m. EDT

 

Though they’ve done a fairly good job of keeping people guessing about their true intentions, we’re told that the Detroit Lions currently plan to take quarterback Matthew Stafford with the first pick in the 2009 draft.

 

If what we’re hearing and how we’re hearing it is part of the smokescreen process, then they’re doing a fabulous job of it.

 

 

 

I know that I've mentioned Florio's name before and some here have said that he's nothing but a rumor-spreader but I just figured that I'd throw it out there.

[irish]

I don't understand the smokescreen thing with the first pick.

 

If it's about money and getting their player signed, why not just say, "we like these four players and the one who signs first is the one we'll take"?

 

Maybe they don't want to leave it up to the players who would be willing to take their monetary offer. Rather if they make it sound as if they are sold on taking Stafford, their thinking may be that someone would be willing to trade up to take Stafford (it is the Lions after all). I doubt it and think it's a last ditch effort to try and move out of the #1 spot before most likely drafting Stafford. Some Lion homers think the pick will be Curry.

[Savage Beatings]

I don't understand the smokescreen thing with the first pick.

 

If it's about money and getting their player signed, why not just say, "we like these four players and the one who signs first is the one we'll take"?

 

There is a ton of money and prestige that goes with being the first pick... if they indicate that they are leaning towards Stafford, then maybe Curry's agent would be more willing to take less in order to get his guy picked #1 overall (which is an agent's wet dream).

 

Not to mention, that if another team REALLY wants Stafford, then indicating that you will take him #1 might inspire another team to try to trade up for him. Although I can't imagine any team willign to trade up to get Stafford, but you never know.

[Capt. Stanky]

Big UGA fan here. I watched Stafford his 3 years at UGA, and while he showed flashes of brilliance, he seems far too inconsistent. People fall in love with big arms, but I think arm strength is one of the more overrated attributes. I just can't see the Lions taking Curry #1. They already have allot of money tied up at the LB pos. with ESims and trading for Julian Peterson. I would take one of those tackles, but that makes way too much sense for the Lions.

[BeeR]

Pretty much sums it up for me. Anchor the OL first, Stafford IMO is not worth 1.01 and you can likely get someone as good next year (esp since you'll be picking first again anyway ).

[Bronco Billy]

Florio...

[Square]

Some Lion homers wish the pick will be Curry.

Fixed.

[Randall]

The Lions would like to thank Mike Florio and his ilk for spreading their pre draft mis information.

[myhousekey]

Who knew Stafford could play WR...

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

Big UGA fan here. I watched Stafford his 3 years at UGA, and while he showed flashes of brilliance, he seems far too inconsistent. People fall in love with big arms, but I think arm strength is one of the more overrated attributes. I just can't see the Lions taking Curry #1. They already have allot of money tied up at the LB pos. with ESims and trading for Julian Peterson. I would take one of those tackles, but that makes way too much sense for the Lions.

 

im not a uga fan...but im a football fan...i watch as much college ball as i do pro....and the sec is on cbs every saturday.,..ive seen plenty of stafford...and i agree with you completely....the nfl is loaded with big arms...what seperates the best from the rest is the ability to process info quickly.....and ive seen plenty of inconsistent stafford in the "speed rules" SEC to be scared

 

if yer gonna throw a rookie qb out there(ryan/flacco) youd better have a strong running game or a strong defense....or both....maybe they think they can take their qb and get their tackle at 20 like the falcons did by trading back into the first to get sam baker....but i see a drop off at the tackle position after the smiths and monroe.....and i doubt any of them make it to 20.....

[forever in debt to mo lewis]

i forgot to add oher in there with the smiths and monroe...maybe somehow andre smith or oher fall and the lions could trade up from 20 and land one of them....that would be ideal.....play smith or oher at guard for awhile....until backus is no longer useful....then you could have yerself a decent set of bookend tackles with cherilus

[policyvote]

i forgot to add oher in there with the smiths and monroe...maybe somehow andre smith or oher fall and the lions could trade up from 20 and land one of them....that would be ideal.....play smith or oher at guard for awhile....until backus is no longer useful....then you could have yerself a decent set of bookend tackles with cherilus

 

You nailed it right there; I believe that is the Lions' current plan. Stafford, then Oher . . . combine that with Laurenitis or Matthews at the top of the second round, and the LIons will have addressed two of their biggest "right-now" holes, and gotten their QB of the future--with two third-rounders yet to spend.

 

Peace

Ty

[irish]

You nailed it right there; I believe that is the Lions' current plan. Stafford, then Oher . . . combine that with Laurenitis or Matthews at the top of the second round, and the LIons will have addressed two of their biggest "right-now" holes, and gotten their QB of the future--with two third-rounders yet to spend.

 

Peace

Ty

 

Do you think either or maybe even both Matthews and Laurenitis will be available into the 2nd round?

[LoneWolf1023]

If the Lions were smart, and maybe they will be now that Mr. Idiot is done screwing up the team, they'll take Jason Smith with the 1.01 pick, either take Josh Freeman with the #18 pick, provided he makes it past the Jets, or maybe take a WR like Harvin or Heyward-Bey with the #18 pick then hope Freeman makes it back to them with the 2.01 pick.

 

This way, they get a top level OT, a very good young WR to pair with Calvin Johnson, and a QB they can groom for a year then turn over the reigns to him next year.

 

I don't really see Oher making it past the Redskins unless they do something crazy, but you never know.

 

Anyway, just another thought.

[Bronco Billy]

If the Lions were smart, and maybe they will be now that Mr. Idiot is done screwing up the team, they'll take Jason Smith with the 1.01 pick, either take Josh Freeman with the #18 pick, provided he makes it past the Jets,

 

 

Why would DET pick Freeman with DEN's #18 pick? Freeman doesn't make it past the Jets at #17 anyhow - if someone wants Freeman, they'll have to trade up in front of NY to get him.

[Randall]

Do you think either or maybe even both Matthews and Laurenitis will be available into the 2nd round?

 

 

It doesn't look like it these days. Matthews had a great showing at USC's pro day. Maybe Laurenitis will.

[irish]

Not so fast says Tom Kowalski...

 

http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2009/...t_made_a_f.html

 

Source: Lions have not made a final decision on drafting Matthew Stafford

by Tom Kowalski

Thursday April 09, 2009, 4:20 PM

 

There have been numerous reports, including one on ProFootballTalk.com, that the Detroit Lions have already decided on drafting Georgia quarterback Matthew Stafford. According to a league source, those reports are premature. The Lions have narrowed their list, but there's one very good reason why a final decision has yet to be made.

 

The Lions have made it clear they want to have their No. 1 pick under contract by the time the draft starts on April 25. According to the source, there have only been preliminary contract discussions with several draft prospects and that no signing is imminent. Because of the new rules involved in the 2010 uncapped season, contract language will be more complex than rookie deals in recent years.

 

In addition to Stafford, other potential draft picks include Baylor tackle Jason Smith, Wake Forest linebacker Aaron Curry and Virginia tackle Eugene Monroe.

 

Contract talks are expected to heat up and become more specific next week. While the Lions will ultimately have a No. 1 target and try to get that player signed, they will also try to play each of the players against each other to try to get the best deal. In the end, though, if the No. 1 target doesn't come to terms, the Lions will then turn to target No. 2 and then, if necessary, target No. 3.

 

The Miami Dolphins used the same philsophy with the first overall pick last season when they were negotiating with four different players before they signed Michigan tackle Jake Long prior to the draft.

 

Again, according to the source, Detroit's No. 1 target has yet to be identified.

[policyvote]

In all the mocks I've been a part of, LB & DL have been overdrafted, and QB have been ridiculously underdrafted. For example, in the Huddle mock, I nabbed Freeman with the 2.1, but at this point I'll be shocked if he makes it past 1.17 . . . he might not even last that long. Between Maualuga, Laurenitis, Cushing, and Matthews, someone that can step in and play MLB better than Paris Lenon will be there at 2.1. However, if none of the top four OTs are there at 1.20, they might take their LB or there, go DL at 2.1, and wait for some of the nice interior linemen in the third, like Urbik.

 

Peace

Ty

[Big John]

Peace

Ty

[policyvote]

 

I slip up once in ten years and you catch me in thirty seconds! Yeah, on my blog I don't use a pseudonym but I still sign my posts the same way . . . the blog is way more personal, and I figure people have the right to read my stuff without pretense.

 

Here, I'm policyvote and always will be.

 

Peace

policy

[irish]

I slip up once in ten years and you catch me in thirty seconds! Yeah, on my blog I don't use a pseudonym but I still sign my posts the same way . . . the blog is way more personal, and I figure people have the right to read my stuff without pretense.

 

Here, I'm policyvote and always will be.

 

Peace

policy

 

You actually slipped up the other day and I just didn't mention it. I was wondering what the hell that was as well when I saw it.

[LoneWolf1023]

 

Why would DET pick Freeman with DEN's #18 pick? Freeman doesn't make it past the Jets at #17 anyhow - if someone wants Freeman, they'll have to trade up in front of NY to get him.

 

Because I was talking on another site about what the Broncos should do with the #12 and #18 picks and when I started responding about the Lions, I just had that #18 stuck in my head.

 

Either way, as I said in my message, IF Freeman were to make it past the Jets, then the Lions could draft him with that #20 pick or just let him go on past and hope that nobody drafts him and he makes it back to the their next pick. He probably wouldn't, but you never know.

 

Then again, they could just use those picks, the #1, #20 and their 2nd round pick to address other needs then wait until next year to draft their QB of the future. Because quite frankly, until they get both lines and their defense fixed, it really won't matter whose at QB.

[Furd]

Then again, they could just use those picks, the #1, #20 and their 2nd round pick to address other needs then wait until next year to draft their QB of the future. Because quite frankly, until they get both lines and their defense fixed, it really won't matter whose at QB.

 

 

This argument is so tired in these parts. To say that it doesn't matter who is at the most important position in the game is ridiculous. Sure, the Lions wouldn't be any better with Manning or Brady or any other top QB for that matter.

 

As far as "waiting until next year," what if the Lions go 8-8 next year and draft in the middle of the round, missing the top QBs? What if this years draft picks don't pan out or somebody gets injured and the offensive line isn't any better next year? I know, let's wait until 2010, because it doesn't really matter who is starting at QB.

Edited April 10, 2009 by Furd

[policyvote]

This argument is so tired in these parts. To say that it doesn't matter who is at the most important position in the game is ridiculous. Sure, the Lions wouldn't be any better with Manning or Brady or any other top QB for that matter.

 

As far as "waiting until next year," what if the Lions go 8-8 next year and draft in the middle of the round, missing the top QBs? What if this years draft picks don't pan out or somebody gets inured and the offensive line isn't any better next year? I know, let's wait until 2010, because it doesn't really matter who is starting at QB.

 

Man I have been preaching this for a while. I am not sold on Matt Stafford--but to me it's inarguable that QB is a giant hole on the roster. Lions fans have gotten so jaded about quarterbacks that they think that 'good quarterback play' means a minimum number of mistakes made. They look at Trent Dilfer winning a Super Bowl with the Ravens and think that that's the ideal--that getting a quarterback any better than Trent DIlfer is a waste. That the only way to build a team is with the best defense ever and a 2000 yard rusher . . . I'm not saying I wouldn't love for the Lions to have that kind of a defense and running game, but denying that a great quarterback can singlehandedly elevate a team is simply stupid.

 

Peace

policy

[BeeR]

This argument is so tired in these parts. To say that it doesn't matter who is at the most important position in the game is ridiculous.

esp since that's not what people are saying. They're saying the value isn't there to merit Stafford at 1.01 but it is for a top OL, and it's likely they can get a Stafford-level QB next year even picking later, even if they are 8-8 (and lmao @ that - yeah hold your breath).

 

And you can "what if" stuff to death in any direction so it's pretty meaningless.