keggerz Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 The Lions have been bad for god knows how long....and yes we know they need a savior...wasn't Joey Harrington supposed to be their savior not to long ago since 1936 there have been 25 QBs selected 1st overall http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_NFL_f...l_draft_choices Only 3 HOFers have come from those 25(Bradshaw, Elway & Aikman...Peyton is of course a safe bet to make it 4 and the only other non active that might get some Hall consideration is Bledsoe). QBs taken 1st overall since 1970:(Super Bowl wins in parentheses) 70: Bradshaw (4) 71: Plunkett (2) 75: Bartkowski 83: Elway (2) 87: Testaverde 89: Aikman (3) 90: George 93: Bledsoe (1) 98: PManning (1) 99: Couch 01: Vick 02: Carr 03: Palmer 04: EManning (1) 05: AlexSmith 07: JRussell fwiw, I didnt list the QBs taken 1st overall from 44-63 (9 of them...only 2 made the Pro Bowl and 1 won a title) because A. The stats provided for them were not consistent B. QB was played much differently back then and also fwiw, if i did list them it helps the "Taking a QB 1st overall is to risky" side. If you look at the trends it looks as if you get 2 QBs that are worth the 1.1 every decade: 70's Bradsaw and Plunkett(yes Bartkowski was good but not that good) 80's Elway and Aikman 90's Bledsoe & PManning 00's EManning & Palmer Odds don't look good for 2 reasons: 1: QB is a risky proposition at 1.1 and 2. It is the Lions making the pick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Dick Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Muck and I were talking about this some today. What if Detroit takes Curry, then trades their 1.20 to Cleveland for Brady Quinn? (this was muck's idea. he had more ramifications and scenarios, but this was one part of it) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seahawks21 Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Nope, I'd take the tackle. They have already proven that drafting skill players will not work if your line is just that terrible. The QB won't even have a chance. I remember when they took Harrington/Smith, and everybody raved, saying they had the best draft on day one that year. I remember thinking...this sure was a sexy draft, but don't know that it really translates to wins. If I'm Detroit, this time I'm building from the front back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 (edited) Muck and I were talking about this some today. What if Detroit takes Curry, then trades their 1.20 to Cleveland for Brady Quinn? (this was muck's idea. he had more ramifications and scenarios, but this was one part of it) I wouldn't take curry either because imo, the OT(Smith or Monroe) and LB at 1.20 would be greater than Curry and OT at 1.20 as far as the quinn scenario I don't know how I would feel about that but I think I would run CPep out there this year again and address the QB situation later (we know there are always vets that are going to be available, IE: Schaub, Rosenfels(sp?), Favre, Cutler( ) etc) Edited April 24, 2009 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 fwiw, I bet it is even scarier when you look at ALL the 1st round QBs (but I dont have time to do that) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 No. I'd take Curry or Jason Smith because they are greater needs. They are also building a team foundation that is necessary to building a champion. Stafford is worth the top pick(no one's worth it) less than a OT or linebacker or Curry's quality. I would pick Beatty or another o-lineman at 20 too. Don't take a QB this year unless it's late. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 No. I'd take Curry or Jason Smith because they are greater needs. They are also building a team foundation that is necessary to building a champion. Stafford is worth the top pick(no one's worth it) less than a OT or linebacker or Curry's quality. I would pick Beatty or another o-lineman at 20 too. Don't take a QB this year unless it's late. I dont see the Value in Curry followed by an OT vs Smith or Monroe and say a Laurentitis(sp?) but alas we are talking about the Lions so they will take Stafford at 1.1 and Harvin at 1.20 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 (edited) Yup. I take Stafford at #1 and then an O-lineman or defensive help at #20 and then if I didn't grab the OT at #20 hope someone like Beatty falls to me in the 2nd round, with the 33rd pick. Edited April 24, 2009 by irish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Square Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Nope, I'd take the tackle. They have already proven that drafting skill players will not work if your line is just that terrible. The QB won't even have a chance. Their offense actually was pretty good last year. They have issues, but the line isn't as bad as everyone assumes. Cue policy, in 3....2....1..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 After looking at the list of names, it makes you realize why teams want to grill these players with stupid questions. I wonder how Jeff George responded to some of the intense questioning or if he's one of the main reasons for them. Imo, yes I would take the QB with the 1.01 pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 Their offense actually was pretty good last year. They have issues, but the line isn't as bad as everyone assumes. Cue policy, in 3....2....1..... 30th in Yards/Game 29th in Yards/Play 3rd in Fumbles(31) 28th in Turnovers (-9) 27th in Points/Game (16.8) 24th in Passing Yards(2960) 2nd in Sacks ALLOWED (52) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 After looking at the list of names, it makes you realize why teams want to grill these players with stupid questions. I wonder how Jeff George responded to some of the intense questioning or if he's one of the main reasons for them. Imo, yes I would take the QB with the 1.01 pick. but you are a Viking fan...you would take a QB with every pick right now if you could Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Ryan Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Stafford played High School football 15 mins from where I live. His High School team is a football factory. OL at Highland Park High School were 300 lbs, and Matthew never got touched. When he went to Georgia, he under performed regularly. The kid doesnt have the mind set and moxy to be great. He was pampered in HS, and even in college. He consistenly lost the big game at GA, and floundered miserably leading his team this past year as the preseason #1. This kid to me compares alot to David Carr, who ironically also went #1 overall to a pathetic team, and flopped. In fact I think Sanchez is going to be alot better pro than Stafford, and no way I take him 1.1 either. If it was me, Im taking the OL and building that first. At the end of the round Im going OL again, unless somehow Pettigrew falls that far, or I trade out of that pick for a 2nd and 1st next year. In fact I may get in the Boldin sweepstakes and use this later pick and the 3rd from Dallas to upgrade Roy to Anquan. LB isnt as big of a need with the addition of Peterson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swiss Cheezhead Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Do I want to rely on Daunte Culpepper -- even with Linehan and Megatron in the mix? No. Do I want to pay $30 million guaranteed to any OTHER position? No. The main problem is that the further down you go in the draft, the ratio of QB Hall-of-Famers (and Pro Bowlers, for that matter) gets even WORSE. I also tend to believe Stafford is smart and very, very talented (I like the other two QBs, too). He's about as worthy of the #1 pick as 90% of other QBs who've selected at the top spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 (edited) but you are a Viking fan...you would take a QB with every pick right now if you could lol OT is the easy answer IMO. You don't draft a MLB #1 overall, the position just isn't as important as QB or an "anchor" OT. Stafford isn't nearly good enough/enough of a sure thing (I know there are no guarantees but still) to draft #1 and f*** taking that chance and after Harrington - I can't believe they are stupid enough to eve think.....well wait, what am I saying..... Smith is the choice. Who knows Stafford might have a fine career but it's the wrong move IMO. Smith, then best DL avail probably with next pick, then yeah Laurentis if avail, if not then best OL or D player avail. Suffer with the crapass QBs they have now (and I agree Beck is worth a flyer) and go for one next year, esp since they will suck again and the QB class next year is likely better anyway. Edited April 24, 2009 by BeeR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Ryan Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Do I want to rely on Daunte Culpepper -- even with Linehan and Megatron in the mix? No. Do I want to pay $30 million guaranteed to any OTHER position? No. The main problem is that the further down you go in the draft, the ratio of QB Hall-of-Famers (and Pro Bowlers, for that matter) gets even WORSE. I also tend to believe Stafford is smart and very, very talented (I like the other two QBs, too). He's about as worthy of the #1 pick as 90% of other QBs who've selected at the top spot. Stafford would be the #3 QB taken if Bradford and McCoy came out. So I take my chances on a QB next year. Its not like Det is not going to be drafting high again next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 Absolutely not. As discussed above, I'd take Curry or an OT at 1.01 and trade 1.20 to CLE for Quinn ... and look to either trade 2.01 for Boldin or Edwards ... or ... use it on another OT/OG (Loadholt?) ... or get a falling LB (if any) ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 Absolutely not. As discussed above, I'd take Curry or an OT at 1.01 and trade 1.20 to CLE for Quinn ... and look to either trade 2.01 for Boldin or Edwards ... or ... use it on another OT/OG (Loadholt?) ... or get a falling LB (if any) ... cleveland wanted a 1st and KIWI for Edwards and you think that 1.20 & 2.01 is gonna fetch Quinn and Edwards? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Hammock Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 My answer to the question "Would Stafford be your pick at 1.1?" Yes. And I will explain why: 70: Bradshaw (4) Worthy 71: Plunkett (2) Worthy 75: Bartkowski 83: Elway (2) Worthy 87: Testaverde Worthy 89: Aikman (3) Worthy 90: George 93: Bledsoe (1) Worthy 98: PManning (1) Worthy 99: Couch 01: Vick 02: Carr 03: Palmer Worthy 04: EManning (1) Worthy 05: AlexSmith 07: JRussell 9 out of 16 is pretty good odds if you ask me. The odds of finding a veteran or a late pick are much tougher odds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 cleveland wanted a 1st and KIWI for Edwards and you think that 1.20 & 2.01 is gonna fetch Quinn and Edwards? 1.20 should get you Quinn (I'd think) 2.01 + __(a second round pick next year?)___ should make you a player for Edwards (I'd think) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 24, 2009 Author Share Posted April 24, 2009 1.20 should get you Quinn (I'd think)2.01 + __(a second round pick next year?)___ should make you a player for Edwards (I'd think) again, I ask.."if cleveland was asking for a 1st and Kiwi then why do you think 2.01 and _____(a 2nd next year)" gets it done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 again, I ask.."if cleveland was asking for a 1st and Kiwi then why do you think 2.01 and _____(a 2nd next year)" gets it done? The same reason I think that 1.29 and a 3rd or 4th rounder this year gets it done (i.e., CLE comes down on their price). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Square Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 30th in Yards/Game29th in Yards/Play 3rd in Fumbles(31) 28th in Turnovers (-9) 27th in Points/Game (16.8) 24th in Passing Yards(2960) 2nd in Sacks ALLOWED (52) They played from behind a lot because of the terrible defense and a rotation of (hurt) Kitna, (inexperienced and eventually hurt) Orlovsky, & (quick hired) Culpepper can make any line look bad. They need to upgrade their LG spot. Backus isn't an elite LT but he is decent. I'm not saying that they have any elite linemen, but they aren't quite as terrible as everyone assumes from looking at the record from last year. Rookie K. Smith ran for 975 yards, 8 TDs, and averaged 4.1yards per carry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 need to upgrade their LG spot. Maybe they'd be interested in Brian Waters... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted April 24, 2009 Share Posted April 24, 2009 The Lions have been bad for god knows how long....and yes we know they need a savior...wasn't Joey Harrington supposed to be their savior not to long ago Odds don't look good for 2 reasons: 1: QB is a risky proposition at 1.1 and 2. It is the Lions making the pick The Lions should either take Curry, then stand pat with their picks, or take less value and trade this year's #1 for a #1 pick in next year's draft and target a QB then with their 2 #1's. Retool this year and shake out Culpepper to see if he'll be able to 'mentor' a rook for a year. That's one thing I haven't heard much of: do you really want Stafford learning from Culpepper? Other than in a "don't do what he does kind" of way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.