PDA

View Full Version : Shaun Rogers


truth393
01-23-2008, 12:23 PM
I just heard on ESPN first take that the Lions are willing to part ways with Rogers. The organization is tired of him he is too lazy. So I was thinking about sending him and probably a 3th or 4th to the Jets for Vilma. Hopefully Millen can get something for him he still has some value.

Xiomera
01-23-2008, 12:31 PM
I just heard on ESPN first take that the Lions are willing to part ways with Rogers. The organization is tired of him he is too lazy. So I was thinking about sending him and probably a 3th or 4th to the Jets for Vilma. Hopefully Millen can get something for him he still has some value.

This has been discussed at length in at least 3 other threads in the past month.

It is a pipe dream of every Lions fan here to make a trade like this.

BroadwayJoe10
01-23-2008, 12:42 PM
Yaa, as well as a pipe dream for jets fan hah. I did just read this on rotoworld so there could be some sort of validity to it, but im sure itll end up being a 3rdish rounder to some team thats not the jets, because why would the jets and lions do something to benefit their own teams.

St. Petersburg Times writer Rick Stroud reported on ESPN's First Take that the Lions will look to trade Shaun Rogers. The Detroit Free Press has confirmed via a source that Rogers will not be brought back in 2008.
Rogers can be a dominant force inside, but the Lions are clearly frustrated by his failure to stay consistently productive and in shape. If the Lions can't deal him, Rogers is expected to be released. Detroit should be able to get a first-day pick for the 28-year-old, but probably not a first-rounder. Jan. 23 - 11:06 am et

Geo
01-23-2008, 12:42 PM
If I were the Jets, I wouldn't trade Vilma for Rogers and a 4th. Rogers and a 3rd, probably not either. I know what I'll get from Vilma, and I've seen enough of Rogers to expect what I'll get from him.

I think I could do better for Vilma, he's a very good/great 4-3 linebacker. Even though he's coming off injury, it wasn't microfracture surgery as maybe initially feared nor a torn ligament/Achilles injury, so recovery looks good and I think he should have no trouble garnering a mid-2nd round pick at least.

P-L
01-23-2008, 01:03 PM
I doubt we get anymore than a 4th or 5th Round value for Shaun Rogers. I bet we end up cutting him...

Crickett
01-23-2008, 01:28 PM
I doubt we get anymore than a 4th or 5th Round value for Shaun Rogers. I bet we end up cutting him...

If the Jets could get Rogers for a fourth and a fifth, that would be great. Add him and Gholston at #6 to the Jets defense and suddenly, the Jets have a real defense. They'll be able to stop the run, Vilma will be productive again, Gholston would be able to sack a quarterback (something no other Jets OLB can do), mana will fall from the heavens, flower petals will be appear wherever Eric Mangini walks and all will be right with the world.

No seriously, Rogers would be a huge boost for the Jets defense. He's a giant run stuffing nose tackle who can occupy multiple blockers and allow linebackers to make plays. Thats 50% of what the Jets need on defense in a nutshell. The other 50% being a pass rush.

Geo
01-23-2008, 01:30 PM
Sure the idea of shopping Rogers sounds good, but look at the reality of the situation. He's now reached the backloaded three years of his current contract ($16.5M in base salary alone), why would anyone want to take on that deal? Maybe they could convince him to restructure for 08, but there's no guarantee on that end. Plus he's already received a four-game suspension for steriods/related substances, one more positive test and that's more games suspended. Add a somewhat inconsistent motor and weight issues, which prevents him from being the fully dominant player he could be, and you've got a talent that won't be as easy to trade as some may think.

I think the media, whether national or Detroit, does a disservice by simply stating that the Lions could/should trade away Rogers for a great draft pick. They're idiots, but that's no excuse to foster ignorance.

D-Unit
01-23-2008, 01:32 PM
Dallas better be interested.

detroit4life
01-23-2008, 01:39 PM
i dont see the lions cutting rogers ive seen reports saying that marinelli refused to say that he wouldnt back and said he expected everyone back. If they get value then theyll move him but i would be very surprised if they cut him considering they dont have a replacement for him

D-Unit
01-23-2008, 01:58 PM
Are you guys disappointed because he only had a career high 7 sacks last season? Or was it because he had his first INT return for TD? Could it be because he only had 3 Fumble Recoveries? Or did the 2 blocked kicks just put it over the top for you all? Was that the last straw?

Bootland27
01-23-2008, 02:17 PM
Are you guys disappointed because he only had a career high 7 sacks last season? Or was it because he had his first INT return for TD? Could it be because he only had 3 Fumble Recoveries? Or did the 2 blocked kicks just put it over the top for you all? Was that the last straw?

The stats look good but they don't tell the whole story. Most of those numbers were generated in the 1st half when he was dominant for the most part. Once they were 6-2 and making a push for the playoffs, he disappeared in a big way. Remember when you guys came up here and pulled it out late...was he a factor at all in that game? or against the giants???

We've seen this movie many times and not to mention that he's been suspended also for violating the drug policy. I guess you could say that Marinelli going into 2007 looked at it as his make or break year. In the end he decided enough was enough.

Although If it was upto me, I'd waited till April to make this decision so that you can give him a final and ultimate chance to show his commitment to the team.

D-Unit
01-23-2008, 02:22 PM
The stats look good but they don't tell the whole story. Most of those numbers were generated in the 1st half when he was dominant for the most part. Once they were 6-2 and making a push for the playoffs, he disappeared in a big way. Remember when you guys came up here and pulled it out late...was he a factor at all in that game? or against the giants???

We've seen this movie many times and not to mention that he's been suspended also for violating the drug policy. I guess you could say that Marinelli going into 2007 looked at it as his make or break year. In the end he decided enough was enough.

Although If it was upto me, I'd waited till April to make this decision so that you can give him a final and ultimate chance to show his commitment to the team.
I got an idea. Might sound dumb. Rotate him!

Brodeur
01-23-2008, 02:59 PM
I got an idea. Might sound dumb. Rotate him!

Yes because the Lions have never done that with him.

detroit4life
01-23-2008, 03:51 PM
I got an idea. Might sound dumb. Rotate him!

rogers doesnt play close to every snap in a game he's to out of shape to do so. I want him to remain in detroit next year and the only way i want him moved is if we get good value for him the problem is that creates another hole on our defense. We'd be better off keeping him

wingboy2999
01-23-2008, 05:10 PM
I got an idea. Might sound dumb. Rotate him!

Come on D-Unit.... don't stay dumb stuff like that. We rotated him already... but the fact he was so out of shape made it necessary to rotate him even more. You act like they just kept him out there all the time. Yeah right.

wingboy2999
01-23-2008, 05:12 PM
If the Lions can't deal him, Rogers is expected to be released. Detroit should be able to get a first-day pick for the 28-year-old, but probably not a first-rounder. Jan. 23 - 11:06 am et

I HATE it when teams do that crap... that removes all leverage we may have. If we say that we are willing to cut him, teams will just go "Screw you, I'll wait". Dumbdumbdumbdumbdumb. Oh wait..... Millen.

detroit4life
01-23-2008, 05:32 PM
i dont believe this report kowalski on mlive just said it was false as well. Theres no reason the team would make this anouncement now idc how dumb Millen can be there is no positive to anouncing that Rogers wont be back no matter what

Brothgar
01-23-2008, 06:21 PM
Actually Rogers would be great in the Big D and they could afford to throw a 3rd rounder or more since they have 2 first round picks and very few needs plus they could rotate rogers with Ferguson and Johnson so he could rotate almost freely.

BroadwayJoe10
01-23-2008, 06:59 PM
I HATE it when teams do that crap... that removes all leverage we may have. If we say that we are willing to cut him, teams will just go "Screw you, I'll wait". Dumbdumbdumbdumbdumb. Oh wait..... Millen.

I know i posted that little article, but i dont know if i can beleive it either (i just like getting the info out there). I understand that millen may not have a law degree from harvard or anything (and if he does i apologize..and really shocked), but i can't imagine it's he who is the idiot who tells people they he is or isn't going to try to trade a player and then if he can't cut him. Like you said, it is the worst possible scenario to be in, becuase if roger ends up staying im sure he doesn't like hearing he's not wanted.

It's like how mangini and tannenbaum say they expect pennington back; they may have no intentions of keeping him, but by saying you do you automatically make it seem like he is wanted, which raises his value.

Brothgar
01-23-2008, 07:04 PM
I HATE it when teams do that crap... that removes all leverage we may have. If we say that we are willing to cut him, teams will just go "Screw you, I'll wait". Dumbdumbdumbdumbdumb. Oh wait..... Millen.

From what I heard its not like they held a press conference and officially said we want Rodgers out its more like there was a leak in the organization.

Geo
01-23-2008, 07:12 PM
Honestly, it's not that big a deal, given the reality that Rogers' base salary jumps to $4.25M with a $1M roster bonus this upcoming season, and only increases from there. The Lions have to weight their options, including the potential cap hits involved (I'm curious as to what it would be this year versus next).

no love
01-23-2008, 07:12 PM
I'll give you 49ers tackle Jonas Jennings who probably plays the same amount of snaps but is actually on the official injured list. This is seeing how Damian Woody can't seem to ever stay healthy

wingboy2999
01-23-2008, 09:29 PM
I'll give you 49ers tackle Jonas Jennings who probably plays the same amount of snaps but is actually on the official injured list. This is seeing how Damian Woody can't seem to ever stay healthy

Well, he got better at the end of the year for us. He had his little bout of bad health and then he went well.

wingboy2999
01-23-2008, 09:31 PM
Actually Rogers would be great in the Big D and they could afford to throw a 3rd rounder or more since they have 2 first round picks and very few needs plus they could rotate rogers with Ferguson and Johnson so he could rotate almost freely.

Roy and Rogers for a 1st and 2nd.

Bootland27
01-23-2008, 10:55 PM
http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2008/01/kowalski_rogers_exit_is_a_matt.html

TacticaLion
01-23-2008, 11:36 PM
I got an idea. Might sound dumb. Rotate him!

What a joke.

Sure, he was doing great through the first 8 games... then, disappeared for the rest of the season. He's overweight, is having knee problems, can't practice and, as a result, can't stay on the field. Our defense is solid with him playing well, but that isn't often enough to justify keeping him and crossing our fingers.

It's apparent that you don't know the situation, though, so I'll give you that.

Xiomera
01-24-2008, 07:37 AM
Roy and Rogers for a 1st and 2nd.

I wouldn't do that deal. Call me crazy.

wingboy2999
01-24-2008, 01:06 PM
I wouldn't do that deal. Call me crazy.

From our standpoint? Really? That'd give us what we are looking for for both of them.

Xiomera
01-24-2008, 01:08 PM
From our standpoint? Really? That'd give us what we are looking for for both of them.

I don't think we need to deal both of them.

Also, which team are we talking about dealing with here? Dallas? I don't like handing over so much talent to one team . . . I know it doesn't effect our team, but it's a shame to give some team two Pro Bowlers in a trade.

wingboy2999
01-24-2008, 01:27 PM
Yeah, I guess. But if they want out or are on their way out.... then it should be done. Unless we can get both gone in separate deals.

Xiomera
01-24-2008, 01:48 PM
Yeah, I guess. But if they want out or are on their way out.... then it should be done. Unless we can get both gone in separate deals.

I don't think we will ever be able to trade them both in one deal. So this is a moot point.

LonghornsLegend
01-24-2008, 02:16 PM
Yea i dont think its anyway both guys go to the same team, that is highly unlikely...I think Dallas goes after one or the other, probably more so Roy, but if he's not budging or going for what they like then I think they can and will land Rogers...I agree with Xiomera thats alot of pro bowl caliber talent to give up to one team, especially one like Dallas on the verge

Brothgar
01-24-2008, 02:24 PM
Yea i dont think its anyway both guys go to the same team, that is highly unlikely...I think Dallas goes after one or the other, probably more so Roy, but if he's not budging or going for what they like then I think they can and will land Rogers...I agree with Xiomera thats alot of pro bowl caliber talent to give up to one team, especially one like Dallas on the verge

I would understand that if the Lions were in some form of contention but really they are not. So the best option is get the most day 1 picks possible if we can net two 2nd rounders and two 3rd rounders I would trade all three of the players who want out (Roy Rogers and KJ) 7 picks in the first 3 rounds allows us to fill every need in the first 3 rounds. Within 1-3 years later we are in the playoffs and ruling the division.

detroit4life
01-24-2008, 02:34 PM
no possible way KJ gets a day one pick we could maybe get a 5th for him but thats about it

wingboy2999
01-24-2008, 02:36 PM
Yeah, we aren't really in the spot to go "Hey... they are going to be too strong for us to deal with". We just need to get better, no matter what.

Bootland27
01-24-2008, 03:02 PM
I would understand that if the Lions were in some form of contention but really they are not. So the best option is get the most day 1 picks possible if we can net two 2nd rounders and two 3rd rounders I would trade all three of the players who want out (Roy Rogers and KJ) 7 picks in the first 3 rounds allows us to fill every need in the first 3 rounds. Within 1-3 years later we are in the playoffs and ruling the division.

That sounds great and everything, however more picks = More chances for Millen to screw up.

wingboy2999
01-24-2008, 03:07 PM
We might as well take the chance.

asmitty45
01-24-2008, 03:34 PM
we really shouldnt have said that we wanted to get rid of him. he officially has no value.

Xiomera
01-24-2008, 08:39 PM
we really shouldnt have said that we wanted to get rid of him. he officially has no value.

Sadly this is now true. Rod is a moron. I can't stress that enough.

detroit4life
01-24-2008, 08:46 PM
Sadly this is now true. Rod is a moron. I can't stress that enough.

thats on millen and the front office this was a leak not an official report if this is even true

Xiomera
01-24-2008, 09:08 PM
thats on millen and the front office this was a leak not an official report if this is even true

Marinelli is the one who keeps publicly talking about Rogers' situation.

detroit4life
01-24-2008, 09:42 PM
he's always said pretty positive things though i never once heard him say negative things

TacticaLion
01-24-2008, 10:12 PM
we really shouldnt have said that we wanted to get rid of him. he officially has no value.

I was thinking that too... "Shaun Rogers will either be cut or traded". What? Why? If other teams knew we'd just cut him, what would stop them from contacting him, waiting until he was cut and offering him a previously agreed contract?

We should either trade Shaun Rogers or get him to work his ass off. Force him to constantly bust his ass and get in shape. He'll either a) get in shape, or b) *****, complain and quit and lose interest from other teams.

WMD
01-24-2008, 10:30 PM
I was thinking that too... "Shaun Rogers will either be cut or traded". What? Why? If other teams knew we'd just cut him, what would stop them from contacting him, waiting until he was cut and offering him a previously agreed contract?

I'm pretty sure that'd be tampering if they did that while he was still under contract with us.

TacticaLion
01-24-2008, 10:40 PM
I'm pretty sure that'd be tampering if they did that while he was still under contract with us.It's hard to catch a team tampering, if done right.

And, either way, we still lose with this approach. We've gotta either trade him or keep him at this point.

Iamcanadian
01-25-2008, 06:37 AM
Well, one thing for sure, given the size of his contract, he's untradable. Nobody is going to pick up his contract, so it's cut him or keep him.
I think if it was totally up to Marinelli, he'd be gone but I'm not sure Millen will risk it. Winning HC's don't keep problem players, desperate GM's do.

The Legend
01-25-2008, 06:39 AM
maybe a 4th round pick like Randy Moss

Addict
01-25-2008, 09:17 AM
maybe a 4th round pick like Randy Moss

yeah I think they made that happen, without Marinelli's comments maybe we could have gotten a second or third for him (Maybe) but now.. fourth

TacticaLion
01-25-2008, 11:33 AM
Well, one thing for sure, given the size of his contract, he's untradable. Nobody is going to pick up his contract, so it's cut him or keep him.
I think if it was totally up to Marinelli, he'd be gone but I'm not sure Millen will risk it. Winning HC's don't keep problem players, desperate GM's do.

Yeah right. No player in the NFL has ever restructured his contract to be traded. Good point.

If Rogers wants out (which he does), and a team wants him (which they will), a trade will be made. There are many ways to get around a big contract... especially if the team feels he's a top DT in the NFL (which some think he is).

LonghornsLegend
01-25-2008, 01:25 PM
Booth Newspapers' Tom Kowalski disputes reports that the Lions have decided to part ways with two-time Pro Bowl DT Shaun Rogers.

Kowalski concedes that coach Rod Marinelli was extremely displeased with Rogers' decline in play last season, but notes that GM Matt Millen makes the personnel decisions in Detroit. The team has so many other defensive needs that giving up Rogers for little or nothing would be counterproductive.


good move by Detroit, you have to say this to drive the price back up, if teams expect him to be cut they will wait or give a terrible offer...If they think its a chance he could stay they will feel like they have to come after him sooner then later and with a decent offer in place

Geo
01-25-2008, 01:27 PM
A team will definitely have to work out a restructured-in-some-way deal with Rogers before trading for him, if that is the case. Of course, if the Lions do trade Rogers then they will take the cap hit (around $5.7 is what some Detroit paper is saying) for Rogers' guaranteed money no matter what.

I don't think much of Drew Sharp, but I thought his recent article on Rogers was interesting:

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080124/COL08/801240394/1049/SPORTS01

casskid
01-25-2008, 07:01 PM
Really I would prefer to move Rogers, but unless you get a 2/early 3 you have to hold on to him. Yeah he sucks and is fat and lazy, but he does have talent which is a commodity this team sorely lacks. If some team falls in love with him and makes a good offer I would say take it but other then that its not worth getting rid of him and creating another hole on the defense. Dealing for picks is all right, but I would rather have a (semi)proven NFL caliber player on my roster.

Plus I would like to call into question the qualifications of our d-line gurus if they dump Rogers.

TacticaLion
01-25-2008, 08:00 PM
Really I would prefer to move Rogers, but unless you get a 2/early 3 you have to hold on to him. Yeah he sucks and is fat and lazy, but he does have talent which is a commodity this team sorely lacks. If some team falls in love with him and makes a good offer I would say take it but other then that its not worth getting rid of him and creating another hole on the defense. Dealing for picks is all right, but I would rather have a (semi)proven NFL caliber player on my roster.

Plus I would like to call into question the qualifications of our d-line gurus if they dump Rogers.
Yeah... I agree. If you can't find a deal, keep him... he can only help.

D-Unit
01-25-2008, 08:16 PM
You guys think the Lions would be interested in Marcus Spears or Bobby Carpenter? They are both on the block.

bearsfan_51
01-25-2008, 08:22 PM
Neither would fit in Marinelli's defense at all.

wingboy2999
01-25-2008, 08:24 PM
Carpenter yeah... Spears... maybe. Can he come in and take over for Rogers at DT? I know he got the size but I forget what he did in college. He definitely has the size.

Can Carpenter play MLB in the 4-3? Or OLB? He's a biggggggggggggg boy.

JagHombre22
01-26-2008, 12:01 PM
well, the Jaguars just hired Donnie Henderson, former Lions DC...so maybe the Jags will look at bringing Rogers in...

I hope so...Henderson, Stroud, Rogers....wow...

Crickett
01-26-2008, 12:08 PM
well, the Jaguars just hired Donnie Henderson, former Lions DC...so maybe the Jags will look at bringing Rogers in...

I hope so...Henderson, Stroud, Rogers....wow...


Aaaaaaand which of these guys is gonna be the backup? ;)

As a Jets fan, I remember Donnie Henderson did a great job as the Jets d-coordinator and while I wasn't upset when Herm left, but Heimerdinger and Henderson were big losses.

wingboy2999
01-26-2008, 12:09 PM
well, the Jaguars just hired Donnie Henderson, former Lions DC...so maybe the Jags will look at bringing Rogers in...

I hope so...Henderson, Stroud, Rogers....wow...

Overkill much?

JagHombre22
01-26-2008, 01:07 PM
actually, the jags FO is not happy with stroud's level of play...plus, he's been injured the past two season's....if this move were to happen I would expect stroud to take the back seat

wingboy2999
01-26-2008, 01:08 PM
What you gonna give us?

wingboy2999
01-26-2008, 01:11 PM
And piss off for giving me negative rep... not my fault you are wayyyyyyyyyyyy behind times.

Addict
01-26-2008, 01:11 PM
Overkill much?

they could play a mean 5-2 defense though

wingboy2999
01-26-2008, 01:21 PM
Hahaha, they could run a sweet NCAA video game offense.

Addict
01-26-2008, 01:35 PM
Hahaha, they could run a sweet NCAA video game offense.

you coudn't run on them.... ever.

wingboy2999
01-26-2008, 01:52 PM
It would work... Hmmmmmmmmmm.

Addict
01-26-2008, 01:53 PM
It would work... Hmmmmmmmmmm.

it would be insane how many teams would throw passes only against us.

Brothgar
01-26-2008, 01:58 PM
actually, the jags FO is not happy with stroud's level of play...plus, he's been injured the past two season's....if this move were to happen I would expect stroud to take the back seat

They bringing back the Bear 64 D

JagHombre22
01-26-2008, 03:19 PM
And piss off for giving me negative rep... not my fault you are wayyyyyyyyyyyy behind times.

don't be angry...neg rep is a part of life, and don't go spouting the end of movies that just came out that half the board has not seen yet...

anyways, I seriously doubt the Jaguars would give you more than a third for Rogers...I'm pretty sure the Lions would just release him...

we'll see...

Lionsfan93
01-26-2008, 03:20 PM
im hoping for 2nd round pick in return

wingboy2999
01-26-2008, 03:32 PM
don't be angry...neg rep is a part of life, and don't go spouting the end of movies that just came out that half the board has not seen yet...


The Sixth Sense - Released August 6th, 1999

Fight Club - Release October 15th, 1999

Either you smoke something STRONG or you've been in a coma. Just came out? HA! And The Trojan Horse.... how have you NOT heard there were people in that horse? Criminy...

Crickett
01-26-2008, 03:32 PM
don't be angry...neg rep is a part of life, and don't go spouting the end of movies that just came out that half the board has not seen yet...

The chick dies, the other guy is actually an alien and the world is saved but only because the most annoying character had a set of matches.
Seriously, a set of matches???

I just made this up.

Addict
01-26-2008, 04:08 PM
The chick dies, the other guy is actually an alien and the world is saved but only because the most annoying character had a set of matches.
Seriously, a set of matches???

I like big butts and I cannot lie

secret messages... mad props

TacticaLion
01-26-2008, 07:43 PM
secret messages... mad props

Are they like mad cows?

JagHombre22
01-26-2008, 09:34 PM
The Sixth Sense - Released August 6th, 1999

Fight Club - Release October 15th, 1999

Either you smoke something STRONG or you've been in a coma. Just came out? HA! And The Trojan Horse.... how have you NOT heard there were people in that horse? Criminy...

I neg repped you because of what you said about "there will be blood" not ten year old movies...

and if I was mistaken...then,

oops...

wingboy2999
01-26-2008, 10:12 PM
Yeah... you were way off. The fact you thought either of them was about that... wow. Brad Pitt isn't even in TWBB. Real bright. And I haven't even seen TWBB.

Or were all the people dead somehow?

Addict
01-27-2008, 07:11 AM
Are they like mad cows?

In a way, but don't tell them, they'll feel insulted.

(mad cows don't really get much respect in the world of crazy)

JagHombre22
01-27-2008, 10:11 AM
Yeah... you were way off. The fact you thought either of them was about that... wow. Brad Pitt isn't even in TWBB. Real bright. And I haven't even seen TWBB.

Or were all the people dead somehow?

sorry I don't keep up with your mindless banter....

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-27-2008, 10:19 AM
I got an idea. Might sound dumb. Rotate him!

You know, someone bashed you for this. But this would actually be the best smartest thing to do considering Rogers might not have much trade value. Rogers is talented we all know this. He just needs another solid nose tackle to spell him. If we go into next season with Redding,Cody,Langston Moore and some rookie, it will be a LONG season.

Shaun Rogers is out of shape, but who wouldn't be gassed if you are the only Lions player capable of taking on a double team on every play. He was recovering from knee surgeries in the offseason which might be a reason he ballooned up to 360lbs. Plus he always played under tackle until this year. Nose tackle is a new position for him.

The games he disappeared in were for a reason. We were playing against very good O-lines. Philly,Dallas,Washington,Giants,Green Bay twice, Minnesota and San Diego all have good O-lines. Redding disappeared more than Rogers in those games. Redding needs to help out Rogers a lot more next year. He needs to live up to his giant contract he signed. Basically when Rogers played well we won and our defense played at least above average That sounds to me like we need him.

Does anyone remember our run defense in 2006 after Shaun Rogers got supsended/stayed out with injury. It was absolutely dreadful. Any time Rogers was out of the game the Lions D played terrible. Any time Rogers was in the game playing hard, our D played well. That sounds to me like we need him still. Just get someone behind him that isn't terrible like Cody and Langston Moore are. 60% of Rogers is better than 100% of Cody/Moore.

wingboy2999
01-27-2008, 10:19 AM
Hey, it made complete sense if you actually knew something about movies. It was in the movie discussion thread so it was very mindful and related to the topic.

And you obviously paid enough attention to it to get all uppity about it. You did your panties in a twist thinking it was the ending for TWBB thus showing you did, infact, pay attention to what I said. Game... set... match.

wingboy2999
01-27-2008, 10:21 AM
You know, someone bashed you for this. But this would actually be the best smartest thing to do considering Rogers might not have much trade value. Rogers is talented we all know this. He just needs another solid nose tackle to spell him. If we go into next season with Redding,Cody,Langston Moore and some rookie, it will be a LONG season.

Shaun Rogers is out of shape, but who wouldn't be gassed if you are the only Lions player capable of taking on a double team on every play. He was recovering from knee surgeries in the offseason which might be a reason he ballooned up to 360lbs. Plus he always played under tackle until this year. Nose tackle is a new position for him.

The games he disappeared in were for a reason. We were playing against very good O-lines. Philly,Dallas,Washington,Giants,Green Bay twice, Minnesota and San Diego all have good O-lines. Redding disappeared more than Rogers in those games. Redding needs to help out Rogers a lot more next year. He needs to live up to his giant contract he signed. Basically when Rogers played well we won and our defense played at least above average That sounds to me like we need him.

Does anyone remember our run defense in 2006 after Shaun Rogers got supsended/stayed out with injury. It was absolutely dreadful. Any time Rogers was out of the game the Lions D played terrible. Any time Rogers was in the game playing hard, our D played well. That sounds to me like we need him still. Just get someone behind him that isn't terrible like Cody and Langston Moore are. 60% of Rogers is better than 100% of Cody/Moore.

We bashed him because we DO rotate him.... It's not like Rogers stays out there all the time. He plays like 50-70% of the snaps on defense... if that.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-27-2008, 10:25 AM
We bashed him because we DO rotate him.... It's not like Rogers stays out there all the time. He plays like 50-70% of the snaps on defense... if that.

I know we do rotate him. But we rotate him with garbage. Anytime at the end of halves or late in games, teams were marching down the field against Moore and Redding or Cody and Redding. Basically Redding needs to step up and our backups need to step up because Rogers is the only DT that made a difference this year. Even if it was only 60% of the time.

If we got a decent backup nose tackle, we might be better off. Good teams have a D-line rotation with solid back ups. Look at Chicago this year without Tank and his backups.

TacticaLion
01-27-2008, 03:38 PM
I know we do rotate him. But we rotate him with garbage. Anytime at the end of halves or late in games, teams were marching down the field against Moore and Redding or Cody and Redding. Basically Redding needs to step up and our backups need to step up because Rogers is the only DT that made a difference this year. Even if it was only 60% of the time.

If we got a decent backup nose tackle, we might be better off. Good teams have a D-line rotation with solid back ups. Look at Chicago this year without Tank and his backups.
Well, you said it yourself. He made a comment about rotating him, which we do. He wasn't "bashed" for questioning our depth at DT, he was "bashed" because he said something stupid.

I like the idea of trading Roy Williams and drafting Rogers' backup. That way, we can rotate Rogers with the rookie and get Rogers rest and the rookie experience. If Rogers has a good year, he can be traded without leaving a hole at the position.

Scotty D
01-27-2008, 03:50 PM
Trevor Laws!!!! Its going to be hard to take a DT without getting more draft picks though. We have so many holes, that is Rogers is still on the team DT should not be addressed to early. We just need to steal Tampa's big board and follow that.

Geo
01-27-2008, 03:57 PM
Good call. Laws is a perfect example of a fit for the defense with a great motor.

wingboy2999
01-27-2008, 04:56 PM
But can he replace the role of Rogers at NT?

Scotty D
01-27-2008, 05:48 PM
But can he replace the role of Rogers at NT?

Just my understanding of the scheme. Probably wrong, but I was under the impression we don't really need a true NT.

Addict
01-27-2008, 06:04 PM
Just my understanding of the scheme. Probably wrong, but I was under the impression we don't really need a true NT.

Cover 2 has NT's you silly boy! We also only need 2 people to play DB, since we only cover 2 people at once. So two DB's, 2 DE's, a NT and... about six linebackers, well I know our new priority... Damn this 3-6 defense is needy.

but seriously, no we don't need a NT, that's for the 3-4, which we don't run, thank god considering all our linebackers except Sims suck.

wingboy2999
01-27-2008, 06:24 PM
Let's run a 5-2 and a 3-6-2.

TacticaLion
01-27-2008, 07:32 PM
Trevor Laws!!!! Its going to be hard to take a DT without getting more draft picks though. We have so many holes, that is Rogers is still on the team DT should not be addressed to early. We just need to steal Tampa's big board and follow that.I dunno.

If we trade Roy, we could fill LB, CB, CB and DT with our first 4 picks (two in the first round). I'd rather fill the position with a stud this year (and with a "free pick"), than have the same problem next year.


Let's run a 5-2 and a 3-6-2.

Lets run a 3-1-7... 2 safeties and a CB (rookie, of course), Sims at LB and lets draft a ton of pass-rushing DEs. I mean, with 7 players down on the line, you've gotta be able to create some sort of pressure. If we trade Rogers, we could throw Kitna in at NT.

Perfect.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-27-2008, 09:19 PM
Well, you said it yourself. He made a comment about rotating him, which we do. He wasn't "bashed" for questioning our depth at DT, he was "bashed" because he said something stupid.

I like the idea of trading Roy Williams and drafting Rogers' backup. That way, we can rotate Rogers with the rookie and get Rogers rest and the rookie experience. If Rogers has a good year, he can be traded without leaving a hole at the position.

I guess you can bash him if he assumed Rogers played almost every down.

But after thinking about it, putting in Cody or Moore is a "rotation" on technicality only. We put in those guys, not because Marinelli wants too, but because he has too or Shaun Rogers would have collapsed from lack of oxygen.

A true rotation would be someone who you want to play the other half of the time and not lose a beat on defense. Like to get a younger talented player playing time, or two evenly talented veterans vying for playing time. Someone who at the very least can fill in and the team doesn't suffer and there isn't a huge drop off in talent(unlike our situation). Cody and Moore really didn't provide that. They were mere bodies that filled in when Rogers "had" to go out. Rotations are usually a coaches decision like Barber/Julius Jones, Eagles/Packers D-line etc.

As for trading Roy away I just don't get it. I know people love making trades(sometimes too much) but why trade away such a rarity(a Millen pick that actually plays very well for another Millen pick that could go either way). Calvin hasn't proven enough to justify getting rid of Roy IMO. Furrey and McDonald might struggle without Martz, even though we are running a similar system. And Furrey and McDonald are only signed for 2 or 1 more year respectively. I say resign Roy this offseason. Give him a solid offer. He deserves it IMO. We do have some money now with Mike Williams and Charles Rogers finally coming off our books. If this team is willing to resign Jeff Backus and Corey Redding, why not resign one of our best players. We never had this problem before with 1st rounders because we wanted them gone. Good teams keep their talented players.

wingboy2999
01-27-2008, 09:28 PM
A rotation is a rotation is a rotation. It is pretty hard to have a rotation where there isn't a drop off in talent when you have Shaun Friggin' Rogers in there. You just can't do that. Because when he is on, he is a top, if not, the best DT in the game.

We are only playing with the idea of trading him because of the fact there is rumblings he wants out. And if we are going to be fielding a team that is going to have a high draft pick... we might as well try and build our defense.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-27-2008, 09:54 PM
Techincally it is a rotation as I said so I agree, but its a terrible one and one that Marinelli probably didn't want to see. We could get young talent to spell him as someone else mentioned. Getting rid of Shaun Rogers doesn't build up our defense IMO. We could get a great linebacker in the draft but it will not matter if we have no DTs to free up the linebackers. I'm sure you know the D-line is the most important part of a Cover 2 defense. Well pretty much any defense. And you really want to give Millen more draft picks to mess up.

Rumors are just that rumors. The rumors with Roy started with a Kowalski article so I don't believe that for a second. Rogers was ESPN and Marinelli had said every player under contract will be back next year. I'd believe the Rogers rumor more, but I just can't see it happening. And if we go into next year with Redding,Moore,Cody and a rookie, well I'll go out and say it right now our defense will be worse than this year.

Roy and Rogers are both under contract. Rogers has at least 2 year left. Roy has this year and trading him just creates another huge void IMO.

Look at the last 4.5 games after Roy went down. Roy was our only semblance of offense in the first half of the Minnesota game, the offense played great against Dallas, but really it was the O-line and running game sparking that(plus Dallas's weakness is their secondary), the Chargers game was dreadful(any points scored were pretty much with the game out of reach after terrible D and Offensive performances) KC game (Kitna had 115 yards, running game and defense won that one) and the GB game was another dreadful performance. To summarize, we need Roy Williams.

TacticaLion
01-27-2008, 11:45 PM
Marinelli came out and spoke about this before, during and after the season: rotating Shaun Rogers. He talks about how many snaps he takes week after week and how many more he thinks he should take during the next game. Marinelli is aware of how many plays Rogers is on the field for and puts someone else in when he has reached a certain number of snaps or certain level of fatigue.

Which makes it a rotation.

Anyway. Trading Roy Williams makes sense for many reasons:

1.) Mike Martz, who loves to pass (and got Roy to the Pro Bowl), just left and is being replaced by a coach that has vowed to balance the offense. When you have CJ, Roy, Furrey and McD in the WR group, the numbers wont be the same as your Pro Bowl year.

2.) If the numbers decline (which they may), Roy will probably want to test the FA market after this year. Why not trade him now, while he's under contract and his value is high?

3.) Trading Roy wont create a void. CJ is an ideal #1, McDonald makes a solid #2 and Furrey is great as a slot receiver.

We don't need Roy Williams because we had some horrible games down the stretch... we need to trade Roy Williams to improve the areas of the team that fell apart during that stretch. We need a defense... a solid OLine... a good running game... those are the things a team needs. If trading Roy improves another area of the team, and still leaves us with a solid WR group, we should do it.

wingboy2999
01-27-2008, 11:57 PM
If trading Roy improves another area of the team, and still leaves us with a solid WR group, we should do it.

Which it will.... we don't need a ton of big guns if we aren't going to use them.

TacticaLion
01-28-2008, 12:06 AM
Which it will.... we don't need a ton of big guns if we aren't going to use them.

Word for word... agree completely.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-28-2008, 06:37 AM
Marinelli came out and spoke about this before, during and after the season: rotating Shaun Rogers. He talks about how many snaps he takes week after week and how many more he thinks he should take during the next game. Marinelli is aware of how many plays Rogers is on the field for and puts someone else in when he has reached a certain number of snaps or certain level of fatigue.

Marinelli spoke out about it because he knew Shaun Rogers was out of shape based on the pre-season because of Rogers knee injuries. He had to rotate him because of this. If Rod has confidence in Cody/Moore after 2007, than I don't know what he is thinking. Rod has confidence he can "coach them up" but some players just don't have the talent. Thus the resigning of Kalimba Edwards mistake. Plus there were occasions when (Dallas game) I believe where Rod saw Rogers on the sideline and asked why he was out of the game.

Which makes it a rotation.

I agree it is a rotation but we need a better one. Getting rid of Rogers makes the rotation worse. And getting rid of Rogers makes this defense worse. 2006 we were decent agains the run the first 6 games. After Rogers went out with suspension/injury for the final 10 games the Lions were terrible against the run.
Anyway. Trading Roy Williams makes sense for many reasons:

1.) Mike Martz, who loves to pass (and got Roy to the Pro Bowl), just left and is being replaced by a coach that has vowed to balance the offense. When you have CJ, Roy, Furrey and McD in the WR group, the numbers wont be the same as your Pro Bowl year.

Roy was on pace for 1,000 yards until his injury. Roy had very good numbers this year and was the focal point of the offense. Calvin right now can't handle the load by himself. McDonald is a terrible number 2. He is a slot reciever like Furrey IMO. McDonald is too small to be a number 2. Remember the Giants game on the deep ball intercepted that was too McDonald. Roy or Calvin as a number 2 should make that catch.

2.) If the numbers decline (which they may), Roy will probably want to test the FA market after this year. Why not trade him now, while he's under contract and his value is high?

This is McDonalds last year of his contract as well. Martz would love to have McDonald and the 49ers need wide receivers. Why not trade McDonald now and every player in their last year of their contract

3.) Trading Roy wont create a void. CJ is an ideal #1, McDonald makes a solid #2 and Furrey is great as a slot receiver.

We don't need Roy Williams because we had some horrible games down the stretch... we need to trade Roy Williams to improve the areas of the team that fell apart during that stretch. We need a defense... a solid OLine... a good running game... those are the things a team needs. If trading Roy improves another area of the team, and still leaves us with a solid WR group, we should do it.

The passing game fell apart down the stretch except for the Dallas game. The running game was strong in two games down the stretch and the defense was horrible except for the KC game. The Oline played well against Dallas and KC as well. But getting rid of Rogers makes the defense worse. We do need a defense but we can get one in the draft and free agency. We can move around in the draft to accumulate more picks. Remember last year when we had THREE Second Round Picks. We didn't have to trade anyone good to get them. We moved back from the top of the second and used our extra fifth(which we got from trading away horrible players,James Hall,Joey) Good teams keep their best players. Just because its their last year of their contract doesn't mean you should trade them away. RESIGN Roy this offseason.

TacticaLion
01-28-2008, 11:03 AM
The passing game fell apart down the stretch except for the Dallas game. The running game was strong in two games down the stretch and the defense was horrible except for the KC game. The Oline played well against Dallas and KC as well. But getting rid of Rogers makes the defense worse. We do need a defense but we can get one in the draft and free agency. We can move around in the draft to accumulate more picks. Remember last year when we had THREE Second Round Picks. We didn't have to trade anyone good to get them. We moved back from the top of the second and used our extra fifth(which we got from trading away horrible players,James Hall,Joey) Good teams keep their best players. Just because its their last year of their contract doesn't mean you should trade them away. RESIGN Roy this offseason.A few notes:

Lets end the rotation conversation: the original poster made it sound like we keep Rogers on the field for the entire game. He rotates. You may not like the rotation, but he rotates. That was the point.

McDonald... too small to be a #2? Are you serious? He only started 7 games this year, but finished with 79 receptions (11th in the NFC), 943 yards (14th in the NFC) and 6 TDs (T-14th in the NFC). What... is Steve Smith the right size to be a #1? If a player can play, size means nothing.

Getting rid of Rogers may weaken the defense, but I'd rather have a "good" player that can stay on the field over a "great" player that can't. He has weight problems, knee problems and character problems... get rid of him now while he's still worth something. Hell... trade him and draft his replacement.

Yeah... you don't trade a player on the last year of their contract... unless you know they'll walk in FA. Roy Williams may have been on pace for 1,117 yards this year, but that's still a decline from last years 1,310. Now, think about next year: a balanced running attack with CJ, McD, Furrey and Roy on the roster. The numbers will fall... and Roy wont want to be back.

Roy or Calvin as a number 2 should make that catch.With how many passes Roy and CJ dropped this year, you can't focus on one McDonald drop. McD made some great plays this year and was a more consistent receiver than both Roy and CJ.

McDonald and Roy are in two very different situations. Roy's numbers are declining (and wont stop next year), he wants to be closer to Texas and has been here for 4 years (without success as a team). McDonald was given a great opportunity here (in his first year with the team) and led the team in receiving stats. He wasn't here for the 3-13 season... or the 5-11 season... or the 6-10 season... he came here and helped the team win 7 games. It'll be much easier to resign McDonald than it will be to resign Roy.

If we don't have to "trade anyone good" to get multiple picks, what will happen if we trade someone? We'll have even more picks! At this point, that's exactly what we need.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-28-2008, 11:26 AM
A few notes:

Lets end the rotation conversation: the original poster made it sound like we keep Rogers on the field for the entire game. He rotates. You may not like the rotation, but he rotates. That was the point.

And I agree.

McDonald... too small to be a #2? Are you serious? He only started 7 games this year, but finished with 79 receptions (11th in the NFC), 943 yards (14th in the NFC) and 6 TDs (T-14th in the NFC). What... is Steve Smith the right size to be a #1? If a player can play, size means nothing.

Teams didn't gameplan for McDonald. McDonald got open because teams were worrying about covering Roy Williams, CJ and even Furrey. A number 2 corner for the opposing team on McDonald is not a good matchup for us. He won't have the same year without Roy or Mike Martz. As I showed before, our passing attack declined without Roy Williams

Getting rid of Rogers may weaken the defense, but I'd rather have a "good" player that can stay on the field over a "great" player that can't. He has weight problems, knee problems and character problems... get rid of him now while he's still worth something. Hell... trade him and draft his replacement.

Name a player in free agency that is of the caliber of Shaun Rogers. And if you say Haynesworth you are dreaming. I for one do not want to use a Day 1 pick on a position that should be set if we keep Rogers. Whats the point of getting an extra pick if DT becomes a Day 1 need then

Yeah... you don't trade a player on the last year of their contract... unless you know they'll walk in FA. Roy Williams may have been on pace for 1,117 yards this year, but that's still a decline from last years 1,310. Now, think about next year: a balanced running attack with CJ, McD, Furrey and Roy on the roster. The numbers will fall... and Roy wont want to be back.

He will if we are winning with that balanced attack and we offer him a nice sized contract. He can go to Texas in the offseason all he wants. You really want to trade him to Dallas. The one area of weakness for Dallas and we just give it to Dallas for a 1st rounder that may nor may not be a good player. I'm 100% sure Roy is good. Kitna is our QB. He needs all the help he can get.

With how many passes Roy and CJ dropped this year, you can't focus on one McDonald drop. McD made some great plays this year and was a more consistent receiver than both Roy and CJ.

It wasn't a drop I was talking about with McDonald. It was an inability to get to a jump ball in the end zone because he is a midget. I wasn't talking about the one that went off his hands. Even though that won't help your argument about McDonald in crunch time helping us out.

McDonald and Roy are in two very different situations. Roy's numbers are declining (and wont stop next year), he wants to be closer to Texas and has been here for 4 years (without success as a team). McDonald was given a great opportunity here (in his first year with the team) and led the team in receiving stats. He wasn't here for the 3-13 season... or the 5-11 season... or the 6-10 season... he came here and helped the team win 7 games. It'll be much easier to resign McDonald than it will be to resign Roy.

McDonald could be given that same opportunity in San Francisco next year. Maybe even more money with Martz trying to get him back. McDonalds numbers will decline without Roy and wihtout Martz and a more balanced running attack too. As I said, winning next year and nice contract offer during the year can lure Roy back to Detroit. And theres a reason it will be easier to resign McDonald. He's no where near the talent of Roy

If we don't have to "trade anyone good" to get multiple picks, what will happen if we trade someone? We'll have even more picks! At this point, that's exactly what we need.

We'll have even more picks but at the cost of losing our best players. I'll take the extra picks but not at the cost of losing Roy Williams and Shaun Rogers. That just means another hole we have to replace so the extra picks don't really mean anything if we need another DT on Day 1.

Brothgar
01-28-2008, 02:24 PM
We'll have even more picks but at the cost of losing our best players. I'll take the extra picks but not at the cost of losing Roy Williams and Shaun Rogers. That just means another hole we have to replace so the extra picks don't really mean anything if we need another DT on Day 1.

Well you have to ask can the Lions make it to the playoffs before we lose these players in FA. Ideally for Roy Williams in able to accomplish this we would have to strike gold on probably 4 of our draft picks and 2 of them must in all reality be CBs. Also we would have to have a fruitful FA. Possible ... yeah but not likely also some of our current players will have to step up.

All and all not very likely. So it makes sense if you are able to get a 1st round pick for him. Better yet Miami and Atlanta have 2 second round picks trade that 1st round pick into 2 second round or a second and a 3rd. This gives the lions 5 picks in old day 1 picks with that you could draft 1OT 1CB 1RB 1 ILB 1 DT then pick up another CB with a 4th and now the only need that you haven't addressed is a pass rushing DE and an OLB

- Roy + those 5 players it is a plus in my book


Now for Rogers, correct me if I'm wrong but his contract isn't as big of an issue as many think considering that all the guaranteed money is paid by the lions which takes 5 mil +off the contract. So the question there is do we want to go full out into rebuilding mode and if his overwhelming talent outweighs his laziness and does said laziness provide a detriment to the other players on the team. So lets say we take the middle road and say that for the right price it would be worth trading. For me I say that a 3 + 4 is a good price. This allows us fill all the holes with really leaving one hole in the DT rotation.

(I've said this before but I can't remember if it was here or not so sorry if I'm repeating myself)

wingboy2999
01-28-2008, 02:42 PM
I agree with you as well. I think that if we do trade Roy it has to be soon. If he can walk, he'll do it. We might as well get something out of it because, realistically, we are still off from the playoffs. We made strides forward last year but there is times we took HUGE steps back. We need better D and better OL. We can't even get the ball to Roy [or anyone else] if our QB is on his ass.

Like I said, yeah, having big guns is cool to look at. But really, if we know we aren't going to use them [and by Coletto saying we are going to have a more balanced attack, there will be less of a chance] we might as well get something out of it.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-28-2008, 02:49 PM
Well you have to ask can the Lions make it to the playoffs before we lose these players in FA. Ideally for Roy Williams in able to accomplish this we would have to strike gold on probably 4 of our draft picks and 2 of them must in all reality be CBs. Also we would have to have a fruitful FA. Possible ... yeah but not likely also some of our current players will have to step up.

Rogers is signed until 2010. Roy we would have to sign this offseason or during the season . We wouldn't necessarily have to hit on all 4. A corner though is something we need to hit on. Who is to say we will hit on the pick/picks we trade with Roy. It's Millen doing the drafting remember.

All and all not very likely. So it makes sense if you are able to get a 1st round pick for him. Better yet Miami and Atlanta have 2 second round picks trade that 1st round pick into 2 second round or a second and a 3rd. This gives the lions 5 picks in old day 1 picks with that you could draft 1OT 1CB 1RB 1 ILB 1 DT then pick up another CB with a 4th and now the only need that you haven't addressed is a pass rushing DE and an OLB

We had 4 day 1 picks last year and 2 4th rounders without trading Roy or Rogers. Why can't we do that again by moving around in the draft?


- Roy + those 5 players it is a plus in my book

Roy would equal 2 of those players in that scenario. Not all five.


Now for Rogers, correct me if I'm wrong but his contract isn't as big of an issue as many think considering that all the guaranteed money is paid by the lions which takes 5 mil +off the contract. So the question there is do we want to go full out into rebuilding mode and if his overwhelming talent outweighs his laziness and does said laziness provide a detriment to the other players on the team. So lets say we take the middle road and say that for the right price it would be worth trading. For me I say that a 3 + 4 is a good price. This allows us fill all the holes with really leaving one hole in the DT rotation.

You can bash Rogers. But he is the only DT that made a difference last year. Bash Redding(never lived up to his contract, 1 sack are you kidding me),bash Cody(terrible 2nd rounder, is that what Millen will get us with an extra 2nd rounder this year),bash Moore(never heard of this guy until this year), bash Kalimba(huge disappointment, another Millen 2nd rounder),where did DeWayne White go after his injury, DeVries overachieved the first half of the year but overall exceeded my expectaiton of him, Corey Smith disappeard to after the first half of the year. Plus we played much better O-lines Giants,Dallas,Green Bay twice, Minnesota and the Chargers. Everyone piles on Rogers. Rogers did disappear but so did the entire D-line.



(I've said this before but I can't remember if it was here or not so sorry if I'm repeating myself)

The holes we have now can be filled in free agency and the draft without losing Roy and Rogers. I know message board fans like myself love trades and draft picks(before they actually become players selected by Millen) but we can't lose the little talent we have. I can see 2 free agents and 3 or 4 day 1 picks depending on movement in the draft. Millen just has to get incredibly lucky and stumble onto some talent for once. I don't care when we pick them. Give me a 5th rounder that comes out of no where for once and plays well.

TacticaLion
01-28-2008, 09:25 PM
Teams didn't gameplan for McDonald. McDonald got open because teams were worrying about covering Roy Williams, CJ and even Furrey. A number 2 corner for the opposing team on McDonald is not a good matchup for us. He won't have the same year without Roy or Mike Martz. As I showed before, our passing attack declined without Roy Williams What?

CJ didn't start at the beginning of the year and Roy was injured for the last 4 games... how wasn't McDonald covered by a #2 CB? He was. For the entire season. Stop making his success sound like a fluke and watch him play. Hes got solid hands and great quickness and can easily be a solid #2 WR.

I wont answer the rest (because I hate repeating myself). My point: CJ, McD and Furrey is a great WR group. Trade Roy before his contract becomes an issue (or we lose him without compensation) and improve another area of the team. I'd rather have a solid defense and a balanced offense than a great passing offense without a running game and a horrible defense (this year).

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-28-2008, 09:43 PM
What?

CJ didn't start at the beginning of the year and Roy was injured for the last 4 games... how wasn't McDonald covered by a #2 CB? He was. For the entire season. Stop making his success sound like a fluke and watch him play. Hes got solid hands and great quickness and can easily be a solid #2 WR.

I wont answer the rest (because I hate repeating myself). My point: CJ, McD and Furrey is a great WR group. Trade Roy before his contract becomes an issue (or we lose him without compensation) and improve another area of the team. I'd rather have a solid defense and a balanced offense than a great passing offense without a running game and a horrible defense (this year).

Well as I said 3 out of the last 4 games the offense was dreadufl without Roy. I watched McDonald play all year too. He had a good year, but he had it with Roy getting the double teams and Furrey and CJ to worry about as well. And Martz calling the plays not Skippy and Dippy. McDonald was the least proven wide out last year and thus no one worries about him. Teams were more worried about Furrey and his 98 receptions the previous year. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't think Roy Williams will be traded based on Millen's past actions. If a player has any glimmer of talent no matter how small and was a Millen pick, Backus for some reason, Redding in 06, Kalimba in 05, then Millen resigned him.

We can build a solid defense without losing Roy is my point. And losing Rogers doesn't build the defense. Nobody has named a DT that could fill in for losing Rogers.

TacticaLion
01-28-2008, 10:02 PM
Nobody has named a DT that could fill in for losing Rogers.Use a pick and draft his replacement... I said that.

I'd rather have a hard working, high character rookie on the field than a disgruntled, overweight Rogers with poor conditioning and bad knees on the sidelines.

Bootland27
01-28-2008, 10:08 PM
Well as I said 3 out of the last 4 games the offense was dreadufl without Roy. I watched McDonald play all year too. He had a good year, but he had it with Roy getting the double teams and Furrey and CJ to worry about as well. And Martz calling the plays not Skippy and Dippy. McDonald was the least proven wide out last year and thus no one worries about him. Teams were more worried about Furrey and his 98 receptions the previous year. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't think Roy Williams will be traded based on Millen's past actions. If a player has any glimmer of talent no matter how small and was a Millen pick, Backus for some reason, Redding in 06, Kalimba in 05, then Millen resigned him.

We can build a solid defense without losing Roy is my point. And losing Rogers doesn't build the defense. Nobody has named a DT that could fill in for losing Rogers.

I've been reading the discussions and honestly, I feel the exact same way you do. Its like everyone has an agenda to get rid of Roy, just so that they can get that 1st round pick. Everyone argues how his #s are gonna drop, yet they beleive Mcdonald will have no problem duplicating those numbers when in fact he is a product of the Martz system.

As far as Rogers goes, keeping him is the best option at the moment. Trading him means you also have to add DT to the laundry list. He's a vital part of the defense, and without him they'll get destroyed and exposed. Also opponents still have to respect and gameplan for him.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-28-2008, 10:13 PM
I just don't get that. Why not just add a rookie in Round 4 then to rotate with Rogers. If we get an extra pick for Rogers and have to use a day 1 pick anyway for a DT, it defeats the purpose. Can Red Bryant or Frank Okam really fill in for Shaun Rogers? DTs take about a year before they hit full stride as well.

TacticaLion
01-28-2008, 10:20 PM
Everyone argues how his #s are gonna drop, yet they beleive Mcdonald will have no problem duplicating those numbers when in fact he is a product of the Martz system.
I've been doing most of the arguing and never once suggested that McDonald would be able to duplicate his numbers. I simply said that a WR group of CJ, McDonald and Furrey is a solid WR group... which it is. I'd rather have that WR group and a better LB group/secondary than an incredible WR group and a horrible defense.

As far as Rogers goes, keeping him is the best option at the moment. Trading him means you also have to add DT to the laundry list. He's a vital part of the defense, and without him they'll get destroyed and exposed. Also opponents still have to respect and gameplan for him.
Without him we'll get destroyed and exposed? Of course... you see it every year WITH Rogers. Why? He can't stay on the field. He's an dominant player but has weight issues and injury concerns. He can't practice and plays about 1/2 of the snaps during a game. I'd rather trade him and improve another area than keep him and cross our fingers that he can stay out there.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-28-2008, 10:26 PM
I've been reading the discussions and honestly, I feel the exact same way you do. Its like everyone has an agenda to get rid of Roy, just so that they can get that 1st round pick. Everyone argues how his #s are gonna drop, yet they beleive Mcdonald will have no problem duplicating those numbers when in fact he is a product of the Martz system.

As far as Rogers goes, keeping him is the best option at the moment. Trading him means you also have to add DT to the laundry list. He's a vital part of the defense, and without him they'll get destroyed and exposed. Also opponents still have to respect and gameplan for him.

FINALLY. I thought I was going crazy there. I see their arguments. They are valid and we could lose Roy and we need defense. But we also could resign Roy and end up losing McDonald to Martz next year. And we also could keep Roy and still build up our defense.

It's simple draft all defense on Day 1. And focus on a tackle in free agency and maybe a D-End if money allows. Wait to sign Roy during the season if we must and have cap room available once the season starts. Sean Locklear,Max Starks, possibly Jordan Gross or Travelle Wharton, Woody played decent at right tackle, Jonathan Scott played decent at Right Tackle and is back, Backus won't be inhibited by a pass happy Martz system and is healthier, Dan Campbell is coming back(huge blocking tight end, we really missed him) and Flozell Adams is a free agent(but the least likely to sign for Detroit).

If we go into this new more balanced attack with only 2 WRs on the field, I just can't see Shaun McDonald getting open. I want those 2 WRs to be Roy Williams and Calvin Johnson. I have confidence in those guys getting open by themselves and if not they have a chance to win a jump ball, unlike McDonald. McDonald had a very good year with alot of 3 and 4 WR sets. But McDonald can not win jump balls, isn't the greatest red zone threat that teams have to worry about and he can't break tackles. Plus he drops balls too. He has good hands but I've seen him drop balls. Giants game is the best example.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-28-2008, 10:39 PM
I've been doing most of the arguing and never once suggested that McDonald would be able to duplicate his numbers. I simply said that a WR group of CJ, McDonald and Furrey is a solid WR group... which it is. I'd rather have that WR group and a better LB group/secondary than an incredible WR group and a horrible defense.




Without him we'll get destroyed and exposed? Of course... you see it every year WITH Rogers. Why? He can't stay on the field. He's an dominant player but has weight issues and injury concerns. He can't practice and plays about 1/2 of the snaps during a game. I'd rather trade him and improve another area than keep him and cross our fingers that he can stay out there.

Why does not trading Roy inhibit are ability to get better at LB/Secondary. Round 1 take a corner, Round 2 take a linebacker. Sign Brian Kelly to a 2 year deal. Talib or McKelvin,Bryant,Kelly with Bullocks back, Alexander no longer a rookie and Kennoy rotaing out on 3rd downs. Looks like a decent secondary to me.

Linebackers aren't usually taken in the first round. Rivers will be gone and Connor most likely will be gone, but there still should be some good talent available. David Harris was a Round 2 pick last year. Who is this year's David Harris.

Round 3, take best available what we didn't solve via free agency. Possibly RB, OT or DE or a DT to rotate with Rogers. Rogers being gassed because he has take on all the double teams means Moore and Cody have to step up. I don't see a rookie playing 100% of the snaps. For the first year they should rotate with Rogers while they learn the position.

2006 our Run D was decent and Rogers started out pretty well. Then he got suspend/injury and our run defense rose by about 50 yards a game. Redding got some sacks but our defense got worse. This year if Rogers played well, we won and our defense played pretty good with a terrible secondary and sub par linebacking core. As I said, Redding, DeWayne White,Kalimba,Cody DeVries, Corey Smith all disappeared. And Ikaika didn't have much of an impact.

wingboy2999
01-28-2008, 10:45 PM
These points and counterpoints are far too long to read.

Bootland27
01-28-2008, 11:00 PM
I've been doing most of the arguing and never once suggested that McDonald would be able to duplicate his numbers. I simply said that a WR group of CJ, McDonald and Furrey is a solid WR group... which it is. I'd rather have that WR group and a better LB group/secondary than an incredible WR group and a horrible defense.

CJ, McDonald and Furrey would be a solid group under Martz. Without Martz, there would be question marks to how effective McDonald and Furrey can be. Besides, Colleto even said (Radio interview) that Roy and CJ will be thrown to more often on passing plays as opposed to using them as a decoy at times under Martz. You're not gonna upgrade the defense in 1 off-season anyway.

Without him we'll get destroyed and exposed? Of course... you see it every year WITH Rogers. Why? He can't stay on the field. He's an dominant player but has weight issues and injury concerns. He can't practice and plays about 1/2 of the snaps during a game. I'd rather trade him and improve another area than keep him and cross our fingers that he can stay out there.

Yes he is overweight, but he can trim down in a few months time by joining a weight loss program or clinic. It will also alleviate his knee problems. If he can get his weight back down around 340, he can return to pro-bowl form of 2004 and 2005.

wingboy2999
01-28-2008, 11:01 PM
I was talking to WMD about this. Rogers lives down the street from my grandparents. I'll go up to Michigan and pitch my Liposuction idea to him in person.

Bootland27
01-28-2008, 11:04 PM
Why does not trading Roy inhibit are ability to get better at LB/Secondary. Round 1 take a corner, Round 2 take a linebacker. Sign Brian Kelly to a 2 year deal. Talib or McKelvin,Bryant,Kelly with Bullocks back, Alexander no longer a rookie and Kennoy rotaing out on 3rd downs. Looks like a decent secondary to me.

Linebackers aren't usually taken in the first round. Rivers will be gone and Connor most likely will be gone, but there still should be some good talent available. David Harris was a Round 2 pick last year. Who is this year's David Harris.

Round 3, take best available what we didn't solve via free agency. Possibly RB, OT or DE or a DT to rotate with Rogers. Rogers being gassed because he has take on all the double teams means Moore and Cody have to step up. I don't see a rookie playing 100% of the snaps. For the first year they should rotate with Rogers while they learn the position.

2006 our Run D was decent and Rogers started out pretty well. Then he got suspend/injury and our run defense rose by about 50 yards a game. Redding got some sacks but our defense got worse. This year if Rogers played well, we won and our defense played pretty good with a terrible secondary and sub par linebacking core. As I said, Redding, DeWayne White,Kalimba,Cody DeVries, Corey Smith all disappeared. And Ikaika didn't have much of an impact.

Yeah, I was listening to Kowalski and he was sayin the same thing; address DE, RT and RB in FA and go all defense in the draft.

TacticaLion
01-29-2008, 12:03 AM
CJ, McDonald and Furrey would be a solid group under Martz. Without Martz, there would be question marks to how effective McDonald and Furrey can be. Besides, Colleto even said (Radio interview) that Roy and CJ will be thrown to more often on passing plays as opposed to using them as a decoy at times under Martz. You're not gonna upgrade the defense in 1 off-season anyway.

Yeah... without Martz, Furrey and McDonald wont be able to catch the ball. Not buying it.

Actually, I think that "without Martz" argument works against you. Without Martz, there will be fewer passing plays and a more balanced offense... which will lead to lower numbers for all of the WRs (Roy included)... which will encourage him to walk after the season.

A balanced NFL offense doesn't need 2 great #1 WRs and a few solid #2s and #3s... it needs a great #1, a solid #2, and a decent slot receiver. Why keep 4 talented wideouts just to sit one of them on the bench?

MNYM2: you gave me your round-by-round draft suggestions. Instead of going that route (CB in round 1, LB in round 2, fill holes in round 3), why not take a CB and MLB in round 1, another CB in round 2, either a DT, RB or OT in round 3 and fill holes throughout the rest of the draft? Load our defense with incredibly talented players instead of hoping for a 3rd round pick to pan out.

If we went this route... Talib and Connor in round 1 and Cason or Jackson in round 2 (for example)... we could take Rogers' replacement at DT in round 3. Imagine that... a talented young player to rotate with him and learn the ropes. Then, when Rogers either a) gets even more overweight and refuses to lose it, b) develops a serious problem with his knees, c) declines in play, we have his replacement drafted and ready to go.

And... all of that is possible while maintaining a great NFL WR group.

Roy is no longer a need... improvements on defense are.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-29-2008, 09:53 AM
Yeah... without Martz, Furrey and McDonald wont be able to catch the ball. Not buying it.

They can catch and be effective in 3 and 4 WR sets. But in a 2 WR set I want Roy and I want Calvin. Everyone legitimized the drafting of Calvin by saying he would take pressure off Roy and open up the running game. If Roy leaves the pressure is all on Calvin and we are back to where we started. And what happens if Calvin goes down. Season over instantly.

Actually, I think that "without Martz" argument works against you. Without Martz, there will be fewer passing plays and a more balanced offense... which will lead to lower numbers for all of the WRs (Roy included)... which will encourage him to walk after the season.

Roy won't walk if we win next year and we give him an offer during the season. Trading someone because they might become a free agent is just a dumb idea when they are not a locker room cancer like Bly was. Did the Colts just say oh well lets let Reggie Wayne go, Dwight Freeney and Bob Sanders this year. No they resigned their talent.

A balanced NFL offense doesn't need 2 great #1 WRs and a few solid #2s and #3s... it needs a great #1, a solid #2, and a decent slot receiver. Why keep 4 talented wideouts just to sit one of them on the bench?

Its called depth. I know Roy wouldn't be sitting on the bench. It would be Furrey or McDonald. We will still use 4 WR sets as well. Just not as much.

MNYM2: you gave me your round-by-round draft suggestions. Instead of going that route (CB in round 1, LB in round 2, fill holes in round 3), why not take a CB and MLB in round 1, another CB in round 2, either a DT, RB or OT in round 3 and fill holes throughout the rest of the draft? Load our defense with incredibly talented players instead of hoping for a 3rd round pick to pan out.

We can find a good MLB in Round 2. Lofton/Mao for example. I love Connor, I went to PSU, but I'd rather have Roy and either of those guys instead of Connor. Also I don't want two rookie corners getting significant playing time. One corner in Round 1 and a guy like Brian Kelly to play nickel makes us better than two rookies IMO. Corners will go through growing pains. We just have to develop the corner properly.



If we went this route... Talib and Connor in round 1 and Cason or Jackson in round 2 (for example)... we could take Rogers' replacement at DT in round 3. Imagine that... a talented young player to rotate with him and learn the ropes. Then, when Rogers either a) gets even more overweight and refuses to lose it, b) develops a serious problem with his knees, c) declines in play, we have his replacement drafted and ready to go.

Redding,Cody,Moore and a rookie DT from Round 3 is the worst case scenario IMO. Rogers rotating with a rookie DT is what we need.

And... all of that is possible while maintaining a great NFL WR group.

Roy is no longer a need... improvements on defense are.

As I said, we can keep Roy and improve the defense.

TacticaLion
01-29-2008, 11:09 AM
Redding,Cody,Moore and a rookie DT from Round 3 is the worst case scenario IMO. Rogers rotating with a rookie DT is what we need.I said exactly that... draft a rookie DT and rotate him with Rogers.

If we went this route... Talib and Connor in round 1 and Cason or Jackson in round 2 (for example)... we could take Rogers' replacement at DT in round 3. Imagine that... a talented young player to rotate with him and learn the ropes. Then, when Rogers either a) gets even more overweight and refuses to lose it, b) develops a serious problem with his knees, c) declines in play, we have his replacement drafted and ready to go.

If Calvin goes down, the season wouldn't be over "instantly" (unless we were in a Mike Martz offense). If we can run the ball consistently and have a solid defense, 1 WR wont ruin a season. (Note: Furrey had an incredible season two years ago as our #2 WR. Why sit him on the bench and struggle as a defense?)

You also mentioned having "depth" at WR with the 4 of them on the roster. Yeah... depth at WR and absolutely no talent at many defensive positions. Sure, we could improve the defense through the draft and keep Roy. But, trading Roy gives us the opportunity to improve it that much more. We'd probably get a 1st round pick for Roy, and that's 2 1st round defenders on our roster... not just 1. The logic behind the draft: the higher a player is picked, the better a prospect that player is. I'd rather have a 1st round MLB over a 2nd round MLB and Furrey sitting on the bench.

I just don't see it. We're not the Colts or the Pats... we have major holes on defense and they need to be addressed. Keeping Roy would be great, but we need too much to reject a trade that offers a 1st round pick.

Xiomera
01-29-2008, 12:08 PM
If we trade Roy, I think we would be foolish to not bring in a Free Agent WR.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-29-2008, 12:55 PM
I said exactly that... draft a rookie DT and rotate him with Rogers.

I must have misread that. I read Rogers replacement and thought you wanted him gone this year.


If Calvin goes down, the season wouldn't be over "instantly" (unless we were in a Mike Martz offense). If we can run the ball consistently and have a solid defense, 1 WR wont ruin a season. (Note: Furrey had an incredible season two years ago as our #2 WR. Why sit him on the bench and struggle as a defense?)

With McDonald and Furrey, I can't see us having much success. Teams would just stack the box if that is the case. This is a passing league now. Plus we have Kitna as our QB. Brady/Manning could probably make McDonald and Furrey works but I just can't see Kitna being successful without Calvin and Roy.

You also mentioned having "depth" at WR with the 4 of them on the roster. Yeah... depth at WR and absolutely no talent at many defensive positions. Sure, we could improve the defense through the draft and keep Roy. But, trading Roy gives us the opportunity to improve it that much more. We'd probably get a 1st round pick for Roy, and that's 2 1st round defenders on our roster... not just 1. The logic behind the draft: the higher a player is picked, the better a prospect that player is. I'd rather have a 1st round MLB over a 2nd round MLB and Furrey sitting on the bench.

We would still have talent on Defense. Rogers, Sims,Bullocks is back, Brian Kelly FA addition, 1st round rookie corner and a 2nd round MLB who could just as easily be as successful as Dan Connor. 1st Rounder should be better, but in realitly a lot of the times they aren't. Especially at Linebacker. That is not typically a position to pick in Round 1 Its basically one less person on D, a rookie corner in your scenario. And as I said, I'd rather have Brian Kelly than two rookies.

I just don't see it. We're not the Colts or the Pats... we have major holes on defense and they need to be addressed. Keeping Roy would be great, but we need too much to reject a trade that offers a 1st round pick.[/B]

Exactly we aren't the Colts or the Pats. They keep their talented players and they draft much better than we do. Draft all defense and pray they work. Roy Williams, Talib, Lofton, and Brian Kelly is better than no Roy,Talib,Connor and Cason.

TacticaLion
01-29-2008, 05:14 PM
and a 2nd round MLB who could just as easily be as successful as Dan Connor. 1st Rounder should be better, but in realitly a lot of the times they aren't. Especially at Linebacker. That is not typically a position to pick in Round 1 Its basically one less person on D, a rookie corner in your scenario. And as I said, I'd rather have Brian Kelly than two rookies.
For the sake of this conversation, we have to assume that the 1st round players are better than the 2nd round players. Better prospects get drafted in higher rounds... period. Suggesting that the MLB you choose to draft in round 2 is better than the MLB I draft in round 1 is pointless and will drive this nowhere.

Also, who said we still wouldn't go after Brian Kelly? Killler mentioned that we may only keep Fisher from last years CB group... and, I'd rather take 2 rookies and Kelly over 1 rookie and Kelly.
[/B]

Exactly we aren't the Colts or the Pats. They keep their talented players and they draft much better than we do. Draft all defense and pray they work. Roy Williams, Talib, Lofton, and Brian Kelly is better than no Roy,Talib,Connor and Cason.
So... I'ma write it out.

Group 1:
Roy Williams
Talib (Round 1 CB)
Lofton (Round 2 MLB)
Brian Kelly (FA)

Group 2:
Talib (Round 1 CB)
Connor (Round 1 MLB or best MLB after the combine)
Cason (Round 2 CB)
Brain Kelly (FA)

You'd rather have Group 1, whereas I'd rather have Group 2. We'd either sign a FA WR or draft one in rounds 4-5.

When I look at these groups, I also look at the future. Martz is gone and the offense will be more balanced than it was last year. If Roy finishes the season unhappy, he's (most likely) gone without compensation. Kelly is also nearing the end of his career.

Taking Group 2 gives us a talented Cover 2 CB and 2 great CB prospects... and we still have a solid WR group. That's the direction I'd like to go.

detroit4life
01-29-2008, 05:35 PM
If we trade Roy, I think we would be foolish to not bring in a Free Agent WR.

which they would and could find a solid #2 pretty easily idk the FA wrs out there but im sure there are some solid ones available there usually are.

Scotty D
01-29-2008, 06:39 PM
If we trade Roy and Shaun Rogers this off-season I think we have we are looking at a top 5 pick next year.

wingboy2999
01-29-2008, 06:41 PM
Yeah, it's a possibility. But if CJ steps up like he should, there fall off may not be that big.

Scotty D
01-29-2008, 06:45 PM
Yeah, it's a possibility. But if CJ steps up like he should, there fall off may not be that big.

We just don't have a lot of talent on the roster. Take away two of our arguably most talented players and its going to hurt. Sure we would be able to bring in a bunch of young draft picks, but thats not going to help us next year. I don't think we can trade Roy and Shaun without rebuilding. Millen is going to look to win now.

wingboy2999
01-29-2008, 06:47 PM
Well.... I don't see us winning now under any circumstances. Kitna, for all he has done as far as bringing us back to semi-respectability, is only a stopgap. He isn't the answer. And no this is not me stating Stanton is the answer. But I know that Kitna is not the guy who is going to push us to the next level.

Scotty D
01-29-2008, 06:50 PM
Well.... I don't see us winning now under any circumstances. Kitna, for all he has done as far as bringing us back to semi-respectability, is only a stopgap. He isn't the answer. And no this is not me stating Stanton is the answer. But I know that Kitna is not the guy who is going to push us to the next level.

What I hate with our situation is that we in this grey area of rebuilding and trying to win now. I think committing to one or the other would be wise. But its probably impossible for us to blow up the roster and completely re-build.

WMD
01-29-2008, 09:19 PM
http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2008/01/marinelli_lions_wont_waive_rog.html

Marinara says the Lions won't cut Shaun Rogers.. the only way he'll be out of Detroit is if he's traded. Smart move..

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-29-2008, 09:40 PM
For the sake of this conversation, we have to assume that the 1st round players are better than the 2nd round players. Better prospects get drafted in higher rounds... period. Suggesting that the MLB you choose to draft in round 2 is better than the MLB I draft in round 1 is pointless and will drive this nowhere.

I don't have to assume that. Because I don't believe it. Theoretically, that should be the case but in reality it doesn't work that way. Anybody can become a good player. A Second Round MLB has just as good a shot to make an impact as First Rounder. Personally, I don't think it matters when you pick someone. You need good coaching for player development, relative health, the player to fit the scheme and enough talent to make a difference.Not a first round grade by Mel Kiper. You can get that with a second round pick. And the compensation for picking high in the first round is ridiculous because you don't always get the dividends. Besides draft boards are very different for each team. They are based on needs and if they fit the scheme along with talent/game tape.

Also, who said we still wouldn't go after Brian Kelly? Killler mentioned that we may only keep Fisher from last years CB group... and, I'd rather take 2 rookies and Kelly over 1 rookie and Kelly.

That is still possible to draft two corners and MLB without losing Roy. My scenario is assuming only a 1st, 2nd and 3rd round pick. As I said, Millen can move around in the draft. We can move back a little and acquire an extra 2nd or 3rd round pick. Carolina did it last year from 14. They got the guy they wanted in Beason, Jarrett and Kalil in Round 2.

So... I'ma write it out.

Group 1:
Roy Williams
Talib (Round 1 CB)
Lofton (Round 2 MLB)
Brian Kelly (FA)

Group 2:
Talib (Round 1 CB)
Connor (Round 1 MLB or best MLB after the combine)
Cason (Round 2 CB)
Brain Kelly (FA)

You'd rather have Group 1, whereas I'd rather have Group 2. We'd either sign a FA WR or draft one in rounds 4-5.



When I look at these groups, I also look at the future. Martz is gone and the offense will be more balanced than it was last year. If Roy finishes the season unhappy, he's (most likely) gone without compensation. Kelly is also nearing the end of his career.

Well make Roy happy with winnning and money and that doesn't happen.

Taking Group 2 gives us a talented Cover 2 CB and 2 great CB prospects... and we still have a solid WR group. That's the direction I'd like to go.

I just want the best possible team. And IMO that includes keeping Roy Williams because he is our best receiver/best player. Receivers take 3 years to develop. Calvin didn't do enough this year to make we want to get rid of Roy. Plus McDonald had 1 good year in 3 and 4 WR sets. Lets see him in 2 WR sets before we really make him our future. If we are passing less, I want to make sure the Receivers make the most out of them. Roy and Calvin should give us the best bet of making the most out of them, actually breaking tackles, actually winning jump balls thrown up by Kitna.

TacticaLion
01-29-2008, 10:47 PM
I don't have to assume that. Because I don't believe it. Theoretically, that should be the case but in reality it doesn't work that way. Anybody can become a good player. A Second Round MLB has just as good a shot to make an impact as First Rounder. Anybody can become a good player? Ok, MNYM2... let's use that draft "logic".

You'd rather trade out of the first round then, right? Trade our 1st for another teams 2nd/3rd/4th round picks, right? After all, "anybody can become a good player", so you'd rather have more picks, right? Forget drafting in the 1st round... just a wasted pick. Instead, we should do everything we can to acquire more picks... because "anybody can become a good player".

No. You can't have that mentality when dealing with the draft. The goal of the draft is to take the best prospects available, and the best prospects are picked first, not last. When suggesting draft picks, you have to assume that the best talent is being picked first. If that's not the case, why not trade your 1st and 2nd round picks for another teams 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th round picks. More picks are better, right?

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-30-2008, 08:19 AM
Anybody can become a good player? Ok, MNYM2... let's use that draft "logic".

You'd rather trade out of the first round then, right? Trade our 1st for another teams 2nd/3rd/4th round picks, right? After all, "anybody can become a good player", so you'd rather have more picks, right? Forget drafting in the 1st round... just a wasted pick. Instead, we should do everything we can to acquire more picks... because "anybody can become a good player".

No I wouldn't go to that extreme. Many second rounders are successful though and its because they have talent/good coaching and the desire to be good.You do need to get talent from the first round. But there is not much of a talent drop off between a late first round Linebacker and a mid second round linebacker. The talent drop off is not so extreme that it will hurt our team. Losing Roy, you lose a ton of talent and only gain Connor instead of Roy and Lofton/Mayo.

No. You can't have that mentality when dealing with the draft. The goal of the draft is to take the best prospects available, and the best prospects are picked first, not last. When suggesting draft picks, you have to assume that the best talent is being picked first. If that's not the case, why not trade your 1st and 2nd round picks for another teams 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th round picks. More picks are better, right?

Who is to say Dan Connor is definitley the best prospect available. In 5 years, he might have not have been. Nobody knows for sure because nobody has played a snap in the NFL. However, Roy has played in the NFL and so has McDonald and I know Roy is better than McDonald and Connor right now. Roy is the best player availabe to us out of Roy and Connor. If you are going BPA, its Roy Williams.

TacticaLion
01-30-2008, 10:27 AM
Who is to say Dan Connor is definitley the best prospect available. In 5 years, he might have not have been. Nobody knows for sure because nobody has played a snap in the NFL. However, Roy has played in the NFL and so has McDonald and I know Roy is better than McDonald and Connor right now. Roy is the best player availabe to us out of Roy and Connor. If you are going BPA, its Roy Williams.
I've said, time after time, that I want Connor or the best MLB prospect in round 1. It's foolish to place a player before the combine. I think adding a stud MLB to our defense would have a more positive impact than keeping Roy.

The fact that many 2nd rounders are successful is irrelevant. You try to take the best players possible, and the best players are drafted first.

Why is trading up in the draft so popular? Because a team wants Player A... not Player B. That team wants Player A so bad that it'll trade additional picks to get him... instead of just waiting and taking Player B. A 1st round pick has better value than a 2nd round pick because it gives you a chance to pick a better prospect.

So, in these conversations about picks, you can't justify taking a 2nd round MLB over a 1st round MLB because you think yours "can be good enough". I don't want a solid starter... I want a beast. The Bears wouldn't be the same with just a solid starter at MLB... they have Urlacher.

I want a stud. And, after the combine, we'll know who that prospect is.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-30-2008, 12:18 PM
Lofa Tatupu(Round 2) is a beast and Roy Williams is a beast. Was a Chirs Claiborne, a beast for us in Round 1? Our Round 2 pick may become beastly with good coaching and the right attitude. I know Barry can coach LBs. He made Quarles look good for many years and he wasn't a 1st round beast.

And who is to say just because we are committed to the run game that our run offense will actually be good. Having Roy and Calvin gives a better threat of pass which opens up the running game. This is a pass first league now. Passing opens up the run game to seal the game. We're still going to need to have a good passing game IMO. KJ is coming off another injury.

"I want a stud. And, after the combine, we'll know who that prospect is."

No we won't. We'll know 5 years after the draft who the stud is. There may be more than one. All the combine does is break ties for the order to be picked of the players that are incredibly close based on their game tape. The combine also confirms things shown on tape such as speed. But many times measurables don't matter.

Why is trading up in the draft so popular?

Well when somebody trades up, someone else is trading down. They think they can get a good player later on in the draft and get an extra pick for their efforts.

D-Unit
01-30-2008, 12:47 PM
Erin Henderson might be the best MLB in this draft. You guys could get him in Round 2.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-30-2008, 01:14 PM
Erin Henderson might be the best MLB in this draft. You guys could get him in Round 2.

Perfect example. This draft is fairly even talentwise at MLB. Henderson is only a junior coming out early and has a ton of potential too. He could slip to Round 2 just like many LBs do every year.

Xiomera
01-30-2008, 01:23 PM
Sadly I have zero confidence in Millen's ability to pick the right guys in the second round.

Kalimba Edwards, Boss Bailey, Teddy Lehman, IAF . . . all these guys should have been the foundation for our defense . . . all 2nd round picks under Millen. The jury is still out on Daniel Bullocks but he didn't exactly show star potential as a rookie.

Crickett
01-30-2008, 01:26 PM
Sadly I have zero confidence in Millen's ability to pick the right guys in the second round.

Kalimba Edwards, Boss Bailey, Teddy Lehman, IAF . . . all these guys should have been the foundation for our defense . . . all 2nd round picks under Millen. The jury is still out on Daniel Bullocks but he didn't exactly show star potential as a rookie.

The thing is though, at the time, everyone hailed the selections of Boss Bailey and Teddy Lehman. To me, it isn't Millen's fault that they have been so injury prone.

Oh good lord, I just defended Matt Millen. I feel dirty.

TacticaLion
01-30-2008, 01:32 PM
Lofa Tatupu(Round 2) is a beast and Roy Williams is a beast. Was a Chirs Claiborne, a beast for us in Round 1? Our Round 2 pick may become beastly with good coaching and the right attitude. I know Barry can coach LBs. He made Quarles look good for many years and he wasn't a 1st round beast.Is Urlacher a beast for the Bears? He was a 1st round pick.

For every example you give, I can give one of my own. Hey... how about Nick Barnett and Boss Bailey. One was a 1st round pick, the other a 2nd... and one is a great player while the other is horrible.

Your argument is logical about life but ignorant about the draft... and we're talking about the draft. Sure, any player can succeed... but certain prospects are ranked ahead of others. Show me a stat that has more 2nd round picks as being more successful than 1st round picks and I'll buy your argument... but you can't give me that. The scouting process and NFL draft are huge for a reason. Every team is trying to draft the best prospects... not "settle" for another player later in the draft.

And who is to say just because we are committed to the run game that our run offense will actually be good. Having Roy and Calvin gives a better threat of pass which opens up the running game. This is a pass first league now. Passing opens up the run game to seal the game. We're still going to need to have a good passing game IMO. KJ is coming off another injury. Umm... since when did the NFL turn to a pass-first league? Teams with great NFL quarterbacks can pass to open up the run... we aren't that team (unless you have an argument for that as well). Running the ball can open up the pass and can put a game away... we lacked both last year. And, when we ran the ball last year, we had success. The only games we dominated were supported by a strong running game.

"I want a stud. And, after the combine, we'll know who that prospect is."

No we won't. We'll know 5 years after the draft who the stud is.

No... read what I said. "Prospect". Not "player", but "prospect". The draft is about evaluating "prospects". You never know which players will be stars in the NFL, but the best "prospects" have the best chance of becoming just that.

Why is trading up in the draft so popular?

Well when somebody trades up, someone else is trading down. They think they can get a good player later on in the draft and get an extra pick for their efforts.Not always. A lot of teams try to trade up (Dallas this year?) to grab a certain player. Why? They believe that he's a better prospect than another player available later in the draft.

If you honestly believe that a 2nd round pick has the same chance to be successful (and the same player) that a 1st round pick has/is... you should be voting to trade out of the 1st round completely. It wouldn't make sense to believe that and hold onto a 1st round pick... when you can grab additional picks (and more players) in the process.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-30-2008, 01:37 PM
Sadly I have zero confidence in Millen's ability to pick the right guys in the second round.

Kalimba Edwards, Boss Bailey, Teddy Lehman, IAF . . . all these guys should have been the foundation for our defense . . . all 2nd round picks under Millen. The jury is still out on Daniel Bullocks but he didn't exactly show star potential as a rookie.

I don't have much confidence in Millen in the 1st Round either though. I can see him taking someone like Justin King at corner in Round 1, who has talent but just doesn't fit the system. Followed by me throwing my shoe at the tv.

The blame for Kalimba falls on Kalimba and bad development early in his career. Resigning Kalimba is Millens ego, Kalimbas one decent season in 2005, and Marinelli/Henderson not knowing too much about him but believing they needed him. Plus he is undersized so that is on Millen, but some undersized do very well like Dumervil for example.

Bailey and Lehman, injuries really stunted their growth as well. Lehman doesn't look the same at all. Plus we switched schemes after they were drafted. Bailey just can't fight his way through traffic. He has the athletic ability to stay with tight ends but in the run game he just isn't the greatest tackler and gets lost in the shuffle. We could very well end up with a Bailey/Lehman story in Round 1 or Round 2 again. That is why I think we need to hang on to Roy for dear life. He is a rarity(a Millen pick that actually produces a lot).

TacticaLion
01-30-2008, 01:48 PM
Hey MNYM2... why do you want Talib in the 1st round?

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-30-2008, 01:53 PM
Is Urlacher a beast for the Bears? He was a 1st round pick.

For every example you give, I can give one of my own. Hey... how about Nick Barnett and Boss Bailey. One was a 1st round pick, the other a 2nd... and one is a great player while the other is horrible.

Exactly. Every one you give. I can give one. Meaning you can find one in Round 2 and don't have to rely on Round 1 by losing one of your best players. Roy is proven to be better than McDonald. The draft picks are to be determined.

Your argument is logical about life but ignorant about the draft... and we're talking about the draft. Sure, any player can succeed... but certain prospects are ranked ahead of others. Show me a stat that has more 2nd round picks as being more successful than 1st round picks and I'll buy your argument... but you can't give me that. The scouting process and NFL draft are huge for a reason. Every team is trying to draft the best prospects... not "settle" for another player later in the draft.

Certain prospects are ranked ahead of others on a team by team basis. One team might have Lofton higher than Connor and vice versa. Just because Connor is ranked higher by someone else doesn't mean the Lions won't love to have Lofton. Both players can turn out to be good, or both could be bad or 1 good/1bad. It's how you develop the player/luck with injuries and fitting the scheme that matters the most


Umm... since when did the NFL turn to a pass-first league? Teams with great NFL quarterbacks can pass to open up the run... we aren't that team (unless you have an argument for that as well). Running the ball can open up the pass and can put a game away... we lacked both last year. And, when we ran the ball last year, we had success. The only games we dominated were supported by a strong running game.

Since they changed the way a corner can play against a wide receiver. We don't have a QB, which is why we need more weapons like Roy to minmize Kitnas weaknesses.



No... read what I said. "Prospect". Not "player", but "prospect". The draft is about evaluating "prospects". You never know which players will be stars in the NFL, but the best "prospects" have the best chance of becoming just that.

Stud prospects mean nothing unless they turn into stud players. A non-stud prospect can become a good player and a stud prospect can turn out bad. They call it a bust.

Not always. A lot of teams try to trade up (Dallas this year?) to grab a certain player. Why? They believe that he's a better prospect than another player available later in the draft.

And the teams that moves down thinks the player they want will be there later.

If you honestly believe that a 2nd round pick has the same chance to be successful (and the same player) that a 1st round pick has/is... you should be voting to trade out of the 1st round completely. It wouldn't make sense to believe that and hold onto a 1st round pick... when you can grab additional picks (and more players) in the process.

We might have a player in mind that we really want/need in the 1st Round and there is no way at this point in time that he will be availabe in Round 2. If we don't then yes trade out of the first round if you think you can get him at the top of Round 2. However, if there are evenly matched players such as the MLB class this year, it doesn't make sense to trade away your best player to get the one that might go before you pick. If Millen thinks Connor or whoever, is that good, then he might trade Roy Williams. I personally don't and I went to PSU. And I don't think anyone despite having a great combine would benefit this team more than Roy Williams.

Kid_Ego
01-30-2008, 02:00 PM
I have followed the draft for several years and I can attest to the fact first rounder doesnt make them a great player I could list countless times lesser players have been taken ahead of better more productive players at the smae position.
Generally First rounders are bust or boom they are graded as first rounders more times then not on potential and not production. Atheletic ability and not athletic accomplishment, Combine numbers which have little to do with actual football speed.
The combine is a tool to measure atheltic ability but is far from a bible. Usually when I judge a player I try to find the guy who has good maybe not great combine numbers but has the production to back them up. I usually look for 2-3 years solid production with a steady incline of production as he progressed which generally leads me to believe he may stil have a chance to grow. Generally in alot of drafts The Second Third and fourth rounds tend to have the more productive players. WHile the first round has more athletic more upside potential picks. Please keep in mind Kajana Carter was taken over Curtis Martin and Terrell Davis
Tia Streets was selected over Terrell Owens
And Andre Dyson over Randy Moss
Ryan Leif over Peyton
Millens main problem that I see he falls in love with Athletic Ability and seems to ignore their actual production on the field.
Now Kevin Jones and Roy WIlliams production has alot less to do with the players then the fact they have tried to learn such diffrent schemes in such a short time. the have yet to have consistantcy on either side of the ball. They also play in a division where the teams have probably top to bottom some of the best defenses in the entire league all in one division.
Minnasota beast against the run
Bears Beast Period
Green Bay Very good D
which doesnt bode well for their young stars

wingboy2999
01-30-2008, 02:12 PM
You guys should start a thread... and then turn it into a book. Criminy.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-30-2008, 02:28 PM
Hey MNYM2... why do you want Talib in the 1st round?


1) I'm not set on Talib only. It was just an example. Talib, McKelvin, Rogers Cromartie. Any corner that fits our system and has some return abilities. If Millen believes he can get one of those later in the 1st, I would expect him to trade down much like Carolina did last year. Corners go fast in Round 1 and Round 2 so we have to make sure we get one good corner.

2) I think corner is our biggest need based on the play of the Defense I saw last year and the number of players signed on the Lions roster right now.

3) We are not giving up anything to draft a corner in Round 1. We get the pick because we are an NFL team(barely in the Millen era) In your scenario, we are giving up a player who I value highly, in order to get a MLB. On top of that, I think the MLB field is pretty even this year, which is why I wouldn't trade Roy for a MLB Round 1 pick. If hypothetically Patrick Willis was available at pick 20 something this year, someone I highly valued, maybe I pull the trigger on the Roy trade but only with a free agent WR. But that scenario is impossible because all the good WRs are gone before the draft in free agency. Free agency isn't after the draft though because prices would be even more ridiculous.

wingboy2999
01-30-2008, 02:33 PM
McKelvin and DRC don't fit....

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-30-2008, 02:56 PM
McKelvin and DRC don't fit....

McKelvin is a very good tackler and has excellent coverage skills. Plus great return ability. He's aggressive which is something we need.

Cromartie not so much in run support(so I agree) but he has very good coverage skills. He would be a trade down pickup because I think we could get him in Round 2 actually. I wouldn't take him at Pick 15. Since corner is such a pressing need I might stick with just Kalib and McKelvin as my top two choices.

D-Unit
01-30-2008, 03:04 PM
What kind of draft pick are you guys realistically expecting for Rogers? What round?

WMD
01-30-2008, 03:09 PM
I'd hope for a Round 2 from someone.. but I'd be satisfied with a 3rd Rounder.

TacticaLion
01-30-2008, 03:20 PM
This is pointless.

Any player in any round can succeed in the NFL, but certain players are viewed as better "prospects". The best prospects get drafted highest in the draft and are believed to be better players at the professional level. If a team thought a certain round 1 prospect was going to be incredible, they wouldn't try to wait until round 3 to draft him.

Bottom line: I want a stud MLB. The Combine hasn't happened yet so we don't have a realistic draft board, but, if a MLB emerges to be the best prospect of the group, I want him.

If there isn't a MLB valued as a 1st round pick, of course I don't think we should reach to draft one. But, Connor (for example) is projected to go 22nd overall in Scott Wright's Mock Draft, and, if he stays around that level, I'd want him.

It appears that this all comes down to your views on the prospects... and that's fine. Know that many (including Scott Wright, Mel Kiper and Todd McShay) disagree with your analysis that the LB field is even. Going off their analysis (because I wont pretend to be a professional), I'd rather trade a player we don't need (and that may leave) and draft to improve our defense with 1st-2nd round players.

Yeah, we could wait and draft 20 6th round prospects, and any of them have a "chance" of being successful in the NFL, but I believe that there are better prospects than others in the NFL draft. I want the best prospects at our weakest positions.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-30-2008, 04:12 PM
This is pointless.

Any player in any round can succeed in the NFL, but certain players are viewed as better "prospects". The best prospects get drafted highest in the draft and are believed to be better players at the professional level. If a team thought a certain round 1 prospect was going to be incredible, they wouldn't try to wait until round 3 to draft him.

I'm not talking about a top 10 pick waiting until Round 3. I'm talking about dropping a few spots in a round because you think that player will be availabe a little later. If not you might have another player in my mind. For example, Jon Beason. Everyone had Beason slated to go to Carolina, even the "professionals". They could have used the 14th pick on him. But they decided they had a good chance to get him later based on how the board was looking and they were right that they could get him later in Round 1. I don't plan on Connor dropping a whole round or two. There are other players I like besides Connor and the Lions may like other than Connor and Kiper may llike other than Connor. Connor could be a great player but him being great doesn't mean the Round 2 guy will be bad. Lions had a great chance to pick Connor's identical twin last year in Puz. They didn't. This whole arguement stems from a Millen error last year

Bottom line: I want a stud MLB. The Combine hasn't happened yet so we don't have a realistic draft board, but, if a MLB emerges to be the best prospect of the group, I want him.

One should have emerged already. If he hasn't he isn't a stud "prospect". Stud players are all to be determined and stud prospects should be evident right now. If Millen values Connor more than Roy then he might make the trade

If there isn't a MLB valued as a 1st round pick, of course I don't think we should reach to draft one. But, Connor (for example) is projected to go 22nd overall in Scott Wright's Mock Draft, and, if he stays around that level, I'd want him.

Kiper and Wrights analysis do not matter on actual draft day. Millen and Marinelli don't listen to a thing they say. They are opinions much like yours and mine. I don't consider them professionals either because they watched a little game tape. My position is an opinion. It's not necessarily right. Millen and Marinellis opinion is all that matters. How much do they value Roy. Probably pretty high since Milen used a high 1st on him and he has been extremely productive

It appears that this all comes down to your views on the prospects... and that's fine. Know that many (including Scott Wright, Mel Kiper and Todd McShay) disagree with your analysis that the LB field is even. Going off their analysis (because I wont pretend to be a professional), I'd rather trade a player we don't need (and that may leave) and draft to improve our defense with 1st-2nd round players.

OK. Obviously I think we do need Roy and have backed up my opinion on that. He has proven production and the passing game declined without him. BPA is Roy Williams over Connor. Roy may leave but if we win next year and give him an offer then he won't.

Yeah, we could wait and draft 20 6th round prospects, and any of them have a "chance" of being successful in the NFL, but I believe that there are better prospects than others in the NFL draft. I want the best prospects at our weakest positions.

Thats pretty extreme. I'm talking about waiting a Round to take a LB not pick up a million 6th rounders. Thats totally different. Plus there is a limit to the number of draft picks you can have. I want the best players on the team not the team with the best prospects. The team with the best prospects is the Cubs. The team with the best players are the Yankees. Roy is better than Connors so I want Roy. And if that means "settling" even though we won't know if we settled until 5 years from now, then I'll "settle".

TacticaLion
01-30-2008, 07:30 PM
Plus there is a limit to the number of draft picks you can have. What's the limit?
Roy is better than Connors so I want Roy. And if that means "settling" even though we won't know if we settled until 5 years from now, then I'll "settle".

How do you know that Roy is a better player than Connor? Your whole argument is based around the fact that you never know how good a player will turn out to be... yet you somehow know that Roy is better? I disagree... for all the reasons you've given me.

Lions had a great chance to pick Connor's identical twin last year in Puz. They didn't.MLB wasn't as big of a need last year as it is this year. That comment means nothing.

Millen and Marinellis opinion is all that matters. How much do they value Roy. Probably pretty high since Milen used a high 1st on him and he has been extremely productiveYeah... and the fact that Roy is on the trading block. They must value him quite a bit if they're looking to trade him.

Here... from Killer (the Lions insider):
• On the bubble: Roy Williams, Troy Walters and Devale Ellis
• Summary: I believe Williams is going to be used as trade bait leading up to the draft because he'll likely bolt when he becomes a free agent in 2009.

One should have emerged already. If he hasn't he isn't a stud "prospect". Stud players are all to be determined and stud prospects should be evident right now.That's ********... nothing is a lock until after the combine. 40 times and interviews may not mean a lot to you, but they mean a lot to NFL scouts and coaches (especially ours). Do you know why the Lions wanted Stanton? They loved his personality and drive. How'd they know? The interview.

Connor is in the mid-late 1st round range right now, and a great Combine *could* make him a stud prospect. Don't believe me? Do some research on the Combine/draft. Players always rise and fall after the Combine... this year is no different. If Connor puts up incredible numbers and has great interviews, he could easily jump to the 15 range... and that's *stud* positioning for a LB.

OK. Obviously I think we do need Roy and have backed up my opinion on that. He has proven production and the passing game declined without him.I got tired of hearing how the passing game declined without Roy... so I did some research. 3 of the Lions' last 4 opponents were playoff teams, and the Lions averaged 227.75 passing yards over those last 4 games (12th in the NFL). Yes, that's a *decline*, but only a decline from 9th to 12th in the NFL... a decline I'm fine with to improve our defense.

Then, I decided to average the last 3 games against playoff teams. The average yards per game? 265.33. Where would that place them? 4th in the NFL.

So, sure... without Roy (over the last 4 games), our passing numbers declined slightly. But, against playoff teams (in those last 4 games), it improved from 9th to 4th in the NFL. So, we did better without Roy against playoff teams. I'd like to be a playoff team, and those stats suggest we'd do better without Roy in the playoffs.

Fun with stats?

WMD
01-30-2008, 07:56 PM
The Lions aren't looking to trade Roy without a reason.. If they think he's going to leave when he his contract is up, they'd be smart to cut their losses and get what they can for him. It's smart. If they had their choice, I'm sure they'd keep Roy in a Lions uniform for his whole career.

And I think you're putting too much stock into the combine. The workouts are important, they might raise a player above others with a similar skill set, but the combine alone does not make a stud. I would not pick someone who couldn't match a great Combine workout with a great College career. When teams put too much stock into a workout, players like Lofa Tatupu and Anquan Boldin fall to another team.

But of course, there are exceptions to everything..

Xiomera
01-30-2008, 08:17 PM
http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2008/01/answering_emails_16.html


Donnie: How about vilma for shaun rogers straight up?
Tom Kowalski: I think the Lions would be looking for a lot more value than that, assuming Vilma is healthy and, right now, I'm not sure that's true.

Bengals1690
01-30-2008, 08:19 PM
CJ for Rodgers and a 2nd/3rd.

any takers?

WMD
01-30-2008, 08:21 PM
No. just.. No.

Bengals1690
01-30-2008, 08:24 PM
No. just.. No.

O well. It was worth a shot.

Scotty D
01-30-2008, 08:28 PM
http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2008/01/answering_emails_16.html

Wow. Interesting read. IAF is going to be counted on heavily next year. And not at DT.

WMD
01-30-2008, 09:05 PM
Wow. Interesting read. IAF is going to be counted on heavily next year. And not at DT.

I don't buy it. No impact Defensive ends at #15? Derrick Harvey? Philip Merling? Calais Campbell?

Looks like the Lions are already sending out smokescreens through their beat writers... Or Kowalski is just dumb.. or both.. They'd be stupid to not address DE in Free Agency or the Draft... but it's not like we were smart to begin with, so..

Bootland27
01-30-2008, 09:17 PM
I don't buy it. No impact Defensive ends at #15? Derrick Harvey? Philip Merling? Calais Campbell?

Looks like the Lions are already sending out smokescreens through their beat writers... Or Kowalski is just dumb.. or both.. They'd be stupid to not address DE in Free Agency or the Draft... but it's not like we were smart to begin with, so..

Or Matt Millen is just dumb

Xiomera
01-30-2008, 09:19 PM
I don't buy it. No impact Defensive ends at #15? Derrick Harvey? Philip Merling? Calais Campbell?

Looks like the Lions are already sending out smokescreens through their beat writers... Or Kowalski is just dumb.. or both.. They'd be stupid to not address DE in Free Agency or the Draft... but it's not like we were smart to begin with, so..

Truth of the matter is that rookie DE's cannot be counted on to make immediate impacts. The Dwight Freeney's and Jevon Kearse's of the world are rare. I think that is what Kowalski is getting at.

Scotty D
01-30-2008, 09:26 PM
I don't buy it. No impact Defensive ends at #15? Derrick Harvey? Philip Merling? Calais Campbell?

Looks like the Lions are already sending out smokescreens through their beat writers... Or Kowalski is just dumb.. or both.. They'd be stupid to not address DE in Free Agency or the Draft... but it's not like we were smart to begin with, so..

I mean. IAF is probably going to contribute more than those guys next year. He has had a year or work in our system. Just doesn't have the playing time. I mean the biggest knock on this guy was how raw he was. He has all the physical tools. But I mean he's basically almost same prospect as those guys.

Xiomera
01-30-2008, 09:28 PM
I would rather get a DT to rotate with Rogers that has good pass rush abilities. Use Rogers on 1st and 2nd down, spell him with a pass rush DT on passing downs.

TacticaLion
01-30-2008, 09:57 PM
And I think you're putting too much stock into the combine. The workouts are important, they might raise a player above others with a similar skill set, but the combine alone does not make a stud. I would not pick someone who couldn't match a great Combine workout with a great College career. When teams put too much stock into a workout, players like Lofa Tatupu and Anquan Boldin fall to another team.

But of course, there are exceptions to everything..

Too much stock into the combine? I've only said that players rise and fall on draft boards after the combine and that prospect rankings aren't complete until after it happens. That's a fact of football...

The combine may not always make a stud, but the combine can push someone from "great prospect" to "stud". For example: if Connor is incredible in position drills, runs a 4.40 and benches 35 times, do you really think he wouldn't be considered a top 10 player in the draft? He had a great college career and is said to be one of the best linebackers from Linebacker-U. Those numbers, paired with his college career, could push him far up the draft boards.

wingboy2999
01-30-2008, 10:52 PM
CJ for Rodgers and a 2nd/3rd.

any takers?

It's friggin ROGERS. And what the hell? NO.

wingboy2999
01-30-2008, 10:53 PM
O well. It was worth a shot.

Not really.

TacticaLion
01-30-2008, 11:54 PM
From Scott Wright:

Dan Connor

Strengths:
Above average athleticism...Reliable tackler...Will deliver the big hit...Physical and aggressive...Adequate timed speed...Has sideline-to-sideline range...Does a solid job in coverage...Smart with excellent awareness and instincts...Versatile...A hard worker and leader...Intense and competitive with a non-stop motor...Tough...Has a lot of experience against top competition...Productive...Great program pedigree.

Weaknesses:
A tad undersized and needs to bulk up...He will have to get stronger...Has trouble taking on blockers head-to-head...Isn't stout at the point...Lacks fluid hips to turn and run in man coverage....A little rigid and mechanical...Minor character concerns.

I've been researching the character concerns and haven't found anything online... if anyone knows what happened, let me know.

If nothing changes from now until the draft, I want Connor to be the pick.

619
01-30-2008, 11:57 PM
I dont know but I think thats a bit too early for Connor unless he really opens some eyes at the combine.

WMD
01-31-2008, 12:59 AM
I dont know but I think thats a bit too early for Connor unless he really opens some eyes at the combine.

Yeah.. Well, I don't pay you to think, hot lips. In fact, I don't pay you at all.

619
01-31-2008, 01:04 AM
Yeah.. Well, I don't pay you to think, hot lips. In fact, I don't pay you at all.

You pay?! Just playin ..

TacticaLion
01-31-2008, 01:21 AM
I dont know but I think thats a bit too early for Connor unless he really opens some eyes at the combine.

Many also thought 6-10 range was too high for Willis... but, after seeing the player he is in the NFL, I think we could've taken him at 2.

Brothgar
01-31-2008, 01:41 AM
Yeah.. Well, I don't pay you to think, hot lips. In fact, I don't pay you at all.

Hot lips? that's what I call your mom.

Brothgar
01-31-2008, 01:45 AM
Many also thought 6-10 range was too high for Willis... but, after seeing the player he is in the NFL, I think we could've taken him at 2.

Some thought that 58 was too high for Ikaika Alama-Francis and they were right.

WMD
01-31-2008, 01:48 AM
Hot lips? that's what I call your mom.

Your mom loves it when I call her Donkey Lips.

Brothgar
01-31-2008, 01:54 AM
Your mom loves it when I call her Donkey Lips.


http://www.missmyshows.com/images/saluteyourshortsuu9.png



http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e21/mayday22jack/Donkeylips.jpg

I never found donkey lips so appealing but to each his own.

TacticaLion
01-31-2008, 02:09 AM
Some thought that 58 was too high for Ikaika Alama-Francis and they were right.

Actually, a few sources had IAF as a mid-2nd round pick. His biggest weakness was that he was a raw player, but had the talent to be a star.

He'll have more playing time next year and we'll see which was more accurate.

Brothgar
01-31-2008, 02:12 AM
Actually, a few sources had IAF as a mid-2nd round pick. His biggest weakness was that he was a raw player, but had the talent to be a star.

He'll have more playing time next year and we'll see which was more accurate.

I don't know why I said that because I was/am a proponent of not drafting a DE and believing in IAF I guess I like playing devils advocate.

M.O.T.H.
01-31-2008, 02:21 AM
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e21/mayday22jack/Donkeylips.jpg

I never found donkey lips so appealing but to each his own.

You slap a mustache on that pic and you have Officer Farva. Gorgeous, just gorgeous.

Xiomera
01-31-2008, 07:42 AM
From Scott Wright:

Dan Connor

Strengths:
Above average athleticism...Reliable tackler...Will deliver the big hit...Physical and aggressive...Adequate timed speed...Has sideline-to-sideline range...Does a solid job in coverage...Smart with excellent awareness and instincts...Versatile...A hard worker and leader...Intense and competitive with a non-stop motor...Tough...Has a lot of experience against top competition...Productive...Great program pedigree.

Weaknesses:
A tad undersized and needs to bulk up...He will have to get stronger...Has trouble taking on blockers head-to-head...Isn't stout at the point...Lacks fluid hips to turn and run in man coverage....A little rigid and mechanical...Minor character concerns.

I've been researching the character concerns and haven't found anything online... if anyone knows what happened, let me know.

If nothing changes from now until the draft, I want Connor to be the pick.

Also of note . . . Scott now has him listed as an ILB in his scouting reports . . . that is new.

Erin Henderson is listed as an OLB . . . hmm

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-31-2008, 08:38 AM
What's the limit?
I was wrong on that there is no limit. But we would have to be able to sign every within the rookie pool.


How do you know that Roy is a better player than Connor? Your whole argument is based around the fact that you never know how good a player will turn out to be... yet you somehow know that Roy is better? I disagree... for all the reasons you've given me.

Roy has proven himself in the NFL. Plus using your argument, Roy was chosen higher in the draft than Connor ever would be, so Roy should be the better player. Thats your prospect logic. Connor has not proven enough to get rid of someone who has. Therefore, right now when making a decision on the two, Roy is better.

MLB wasn't as big of a need last year as it is this year. That comment means nothing.

Why was everyone clammering for Willis and David Harris. It means something because Poz was prospect and we chose to trade down.

Yeah... and the fact that Roy is on the trading block. They must value him quite a bit if they're looking to trade him.

Marinelli has said he expects every player under contract to be here next year. Killer has nothing to talk about.

Here... from Killer (the Lions insider):


That's ********... nothing is a lock until after the combine. 40 times and interviews may not mean a lot to you, but they mean a lot to NFL scouts and coaches (especially ours). Do you know why the Lions wanted Stanton? They loved his personality and drive. How'd they know? The interview.

I'll look up Marinellis quotes about the combine from last year. Basically in a nut shell, an incredible amount of his decision is based on the game tape. Combine just confirms things.

Connor is in the mid-late 1st round range right now, and a great Combine *could* make him a stud prospect. Don't believe me? Do some research on the Combine/draft. Players always rise and fall after the Combine... this year is no different. If Connor puts up incredible numbers and has great interviews, he could easily jump to the 15 range... and that's *stud* positioning for a LB.

Players rise and fall on these message boards. You don't know how the NFL boards look.

I got tired of hearing how the passing game declined without Roy... so I did some research. 3 of the Lions' last 4 opponents were playoff teams, and the Lions averaged 227.75 passing yards over those last 4 games (12th in the NFL). Yes, that's a *decline*, but only a decline from 9th to 12th in the NFL... a decline I'm fine with to improve our defense.

Then, I decided to average the last 3 games against playoff teams. The average yards per game? 265.33. Where would that place them? 4th in the NFL.

Hahaha unbelievable. The San Diego and Green Bay game were filled with garbage time passing. They were terrible offensive performances Look at the San Diego game.

Run,Run,Incomplete(intended for Calvin)
Run, Intercepted(intended for Calvin)
Inc,9 yards to Ownens, Incomplete(intended for McDonald)
McDonald 13,Cason 4,Furrey for 7, Intercepted(intended for McDonald)
Intecepted(intended for KJ)
Run,Run,McDonald7,Run,Middleton 8,Run,Run,Middleton,CJ,Furrey,TD Middleton

We had 1 3 and out, 3 ints and 1 very short drive before our TD after the game was already 27-0. That is terrible. Don't look at the numbers look at the play by play.


So, sure... without Roy (over the last 4 games), our passing numbers declined slightly. But, against playoff teams (in those last 4 games), it improved from 9th to 4th in the NFL. So, we did better without Roy against playoff teams. I'd like to be a playoff team, and those stats suggest we'd do better without Roy in the playoffs.



Fun with stats?

It didn't. You had fun with garbage stats. Our offense was terrible before the backups came in for SD and Green Bay.

619
01-31-2008, 09:30 AM
Many also thought 6-10 range was too high for Willis... but, after seeing the player he is in the NFL, I think we could've taken him at 2.

Please dont even start with these analogies. There is better value at #15 than Connor who I wouldnt even consider an elite MLB prospect to warrant such a selection. You can address the position later on in the first day.

Billingsley26
01-31-2008, 10:42 AM
Please dont even start with these analogies. There is better value at #15 than Connor who I wouldnt even consider an elite MLB prospect to warrant such a selection. You can address the position later on in the first day.

so if connor isnt an elite MLB prospect, then who is in this class? to me, connor is head and shoulders above any other MLB this year.

wingboy2999
01-31-2008, 12:22 PM
I don't even know if he is head and shoulders above. But if he is the top LB, I don't even know it is worth it at 15.

TacticaLion
01-31-2008, 12:42 PM
It didn't. You had fun with garbage stats. Our offense was terrible before the backups came in for SD and Green Bay.Wait...

Hahaha unbelievable. The San Diego and Green Bay game were filled with garbage time passing.
What!? That was YOUR argument, not mine. I'm not the one that claimed that our passing offense declined without Roy... you are. You made the statement, I showed that it was ********, and now you'll just dismiss it as "garbage stats"? Ridiculous. Either research a bold statement before you make one or don't make one at all.

And, garbage time? Roy's biggest offensive performance of the season was week 3 against the Eagles... a game filled with garbage time.

Without that game, Roy had fewer receptions and fewer receiving yards than Shaun McDonald through the first 12 games. Love those garbage stats.

Roy had 50 or fewer receiving yards in 6 of his 12 games, and led the team in receiving yards in only 4 of his 12 games. Shaun McDonald led the team in receiving yards in 6 games this season, 4 when Roy wasn't injured. If that's what Roy gives us, we don't need it.

Don't look at the numbers look at the play by play.Are you serious? This whole time, you've been saying how the "passing game declined without Roy", but, when I show you how it wasn't a big decline, you pull that out? Wow. Can't play both sides of it, man... can't use numbers and, when they kill you, look at the play by play. Roy's impact on the passing game isn't nearly as big as you claim it is... and I've backed my argument up.

Plus using your argument, Roy was chosen higher in the draft than Connor ever would be, so Roy should be the better player. Thats your prospect logic. Connor has not proven enough to get rid of someone who has. Therefore, right now when making a decision on the two, Roy is better.********! I never once said that a player picked higher than another player will be the better player in the NFL. Never. I've only said, time and time again, that a better prospect has a better chance to succeed in the NFL... which is a fact of the draft. Ask IAC: something like 30% of QBs drafted in round 1 succeed in the NFL, whereas 8% of QBs drafted in round 2 succeed. (Those aren't the exact numbers, but the drop-off is drastic.)

When you know you've got nothing, go ahead and make something up. Next time, try to stick to things I actually said.


Why was everyone clammering for Willis and David Harris. It means something because Poz was prospect and we chose to trade down.Then, you said this:
Players rise and fall on these message boards. You don't know how the NFL boards look.
Wow... which is it? If we "don't know how the NFL boards look", why would it matter that "everyone was clammering for Willis and David Harris"? It doesn't. Once again, you can't have it both ways. What we say and want on these boards doesn't mean much when it comes to the draft. We can get some "insight" on the mentality of the draft from Killer and other sources, but, us (me) wanting Willis does NOT mean that MLB was high on our draft board last year.

Jesus... all the contradictions.

I'll look up Marinellis quotes about the combine from last year. Basically in a nut shell, an incredible amount of his decision is based on the game tape. Combine just confirms things.Actually, Marinelli wants players that have a passion for the game and good character... which he determines from the combine interviews. Of course game tape is a big factor (it always is), but Marinelli wants to talk to the player and see how much he loves the game. If there's a player that stands out, he'll take him over another that didn't. Does a bit more than confirms things.

so if connor isnt an elite MLB prospect, then who is in this class? to me, connor is head and shoulders above any other MLB this year.Exactly... and he is. Connor at 15 would be a great draft.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-31-2008, 01:21 PM
[QUOTE=TacticaLion;870837]Wait...


What!? That was YOUR argument, not mine. I'm not the one that claimed that our passing offense declined without Roy... you are. You made the statement, I showed that it was ********, and now you'll just dismiss it as "garbage stats"? Ridiculous. Either research a bold statement before you make one or don't make one at all.

I never said anything about Passing YPG. I was going on what I saw in the games. I said it declined, which it did in the San Diego game and the Green Bay game , we had our two out of three worst performances of the year, passing the football. And the KC game we only had 100 some yards but we won because of our running game and good D in the first half for once. The other poor game was Washington, who had a great game plan and some pretty good safeties. McDonald did nothing in either game until the backups came in. Why because Roy Williams wasn' there to take on the brunt of the coverage and Calvin isn't good enough to carry us yet.

And, garbage time? Roy's biggest offensive performance of the season was week 3 against the Eagles... a game filled with garbage time.

Most of Roys output was in the first half in the Philly game against starters unlike McDonald(against GB and SD). Roy had over 150 yards in the first half on two big catches and 1 or 2 smaller catches. 1 down 7-0 that ended up in td drive and the 90 yards play that cut the score to 35-21. If Roy's td was garbage in that first half against Philly starters, then McDonalds td to cut it to 35-14 against Philly is garbage as well. And Philly played their starters more than Green Bay or San Diego because it was early in the season. Both GB and SD had playoff spots locked up and rested their starters. GB didn't play Kampman, Pickett or Woodson.

Without that game, Roy had fewer receptions and fewer receiving yards than Shaun McDonald through the first 12 games. Love those garbage stats.


Why is that? Roll coverage to Roy, McDonald benefits from being left one on one. When there is no Roy, McDonald struggled.

Roy had 50 or fewer receiving yards in 6 of his 12 games, and led the team in receiving yards in only 4 of his 12 games. Shaun McDonald led the team in receiving yards in 6 games this season, 4 when Roy wasn't injured. If that's what Roy gives us, we don't need it.

Yes we do because teams don't worry about McDonald. They worry about covering Roy Williams which opens up things for everyone else. Its like Wes Welker and Randy Moss in New England.



Are you serious? This whole time, you've been saying how the "passing game declined without Roy", but, when I show you how it wasn't a big decline, you pull that out? Wow. Can't play both sides of it, man... can't use numbers and, when they kill you, look at the play by play. Roy's impact on the passing game isn't nearly as big as you claim it is... and I've backed my argument up.

I never said YPG. Where did I pull out stats like that? Turnovers increased and we were out of games by half time because we went 3 and out or got intercepted. McDonald was the intended receiver on two ints in those games(SD and GB). McDonald was the intended receiver for two ints in the Giants game. McDonald fumbled on the worst call of the year on the reverse by Martz in the Arizona game(score 17-7, we are driving, Arizon drives up 24-7, game over).

********! I never once said that a player picked higher than another player will be the better player in the NFL. Never. I've only said, time and time again, that a better prospect has a better chance to succeed in the NFL... which is a fact of the draft. Ask IAC: something like 30% of QBs drafted in round 1 succeed in the NFL, whereas 8% of QBs drafted in round 2 succeed. (Those aren't the exact numbers, but the drop-off is drastic.)

Yes they have a chance to be better. Well we already know Roy is good. I'm 100% sure. We aren't takinga chance with Roy. With Connor theres a chance he is good and theres a chance a second rounder is good too. I'm not getting rid of Roy because of a few % points probablilty of success by Connor over a 2nd Rounder.

When you know you've got nothing, go ahead and make something up. Next time, try to stick to things I actually said.

I've got plenty and I've backed it up pretty well. We've written a book with this argument. Both have valid points.

Then, you said this:

Wow... which is it? If we "don't know how the NFL boards look", why would it matter that "everyone was clammering for Willis and David Harris"? It doesn't. Once again, you can't have it both ways. What we say and want on these boards doesn't mean much when it comes to the draft. We can get some "insight" on the mentality of the draft from Killer and other sources, but, us (me) wanting Willis does NOT mean that MLB was high on our draft board last year.

Well I guess the draft does dicate that MLB wasn't a need since we didn't pick one. This year it is a need but not one worth getting rid of Roy. Our starting MLB from last year is still on our roster.

Jesus... all the contradictions.

Actually, Marinelli wants players that have a passion for the game and good character... which he determines from the combine interviews. Of course game tape is a big factor (it always is), but Marinelli wants to talk to the player and see how much he loves the game. If there's a player that stands out, he'll take him over another that didn't. Does a bit more than confirms things.

I agree with that. The combine breaks ties for similar players. I said that earlier. It doesn't drastically change things though.

Exactly... and he is. Connor at 15 would be a great draft.

Some feel he is. Some feel he isn't. We'll find out soon I guess.

TacticaLion
02-01-2008, 12:58 PM
There's a lot of talk about Rogers going to Miami. Parcells is, supposedly, in love with him.



MLive.com's Tom Kowalski reports that the Lions will continue to actively shop DT Shaun Rogers. He believes, though, that the Lions will not cut Rogers. So if the Dolphins really do want to go hard after Rogers, they're going to have to be willing to offer up a player or two. This is because Kowalski reports that the Lions are not looking for picks in return. Instead, they are looking for a proven NFL player who can fill one of their defensive holes immediately. If you ask me, that really only means one of two players for Miami: Jason Taylor or Zach Thomas.

The reason I bring all this up, though, is because of the following interesting quote from Kowalski:
"Bill Parcells absolutely loves Shaun Rogers. The last few years we've talked to him on the conference calls before the Lions played the Cowboys, he has just gushed about the guy. Now obviously there's some strikes against Rogers. He's been overweight, he's had knee problems and the strike for the drug thing, but all it takes is one guy to say 'I can turn this guy around. What a force he's going to be. He's the missing piece to our defense.' That's what you really need."

Very interesting.

I wonder if Parcells still feels this way. If so, you can bet the Dolphins will be sniffing around this immense talent that would help fill one of Miami's most pressing needs.They basically narrowed it down to two players: Taylor and Thomas.

As great as Thomas is, I can't see us trading for him. He's a) old... b) has a huge injury history... and, c) doesn't fit the scheme.

Taylor is a different story. Sure, he's older... but rotating him with IAF would keep both fresh and give IAF plenty of playing time. It would also be a great addition to our DLine.

Thoughts?

wingboy2999
02-01-2008, 01:26 PM
Yeah, we'd fill out defensive holes.... but with a 34 or 35 year old? I don't know.... That is OLD.

TacticaLion
02-01-2008, 02:54 PM
Yeah, we'd fill out defensive holes.... but with a 34 or 35 year old? I don't know.... That is OLD.

Nah... we wouldn't get both. If we took Taylor, he'd give us another few years of solid production and would most definitely draw attention from the opposing offense.

Brothgar
02-01-2008, 03:17 PM
Yeah, we'd fill out defensive holes.... but with a 34 or 35 year old? I don't know.... That is OLD.

I agree if you are a proponent for trading Roy for the reason that he is likely to leave next season I can't see you being in favor of trading Rogers for Taylor or Thomas when they would likely retire at the end of the season.

TacticaLion
02-01-2008, 03:48 PM
I agree if you are a proponent for trading Roy for the reason that he is likely to leave next season I can't see you being in favor of trading Rogers for Taylor or Thomas when they would likely retire at the end of the season.

I definitely don't think Taylor would retire at the end of the season. He can still play in this league... just needs the drive.

Another thing about Taylor: he'd help a young, raw player like IAF in his development. By the time Taylor left, IAF would be ready to take over.

wingboy2999
02-02-2008, 03:14 PM
Nah... we wouldn't get both. If we took Taylor, he'd give us another few years of solid production and would most definitely draw attention from the opposing offense.

I said "Or".

TacticaLion
02-02-2008, 05:34 PM
I said "Or".

Or, to me, showed that they're a different age. "A 34 (Taylor) or 35 (Thomas) year old...". No biggie.

doingthisinsteadofwork
02-02-2008, 07:05 PM
so if connor isnt an elite MLB prospect, then who is in this class? to me, connor is head and shoulders above any other MLB this year.
just because Connor may be best MLB in his class doesnt make him an elite MLB prospect.

TacticaLion
02-02-2008, 09:22 PM
just because Connor may be best MLB in his class doesnt make him an elite MLB prospect.True.

That being said, do you think he is an "elite" prospect?

LonghornsLegend
02-02-2008, 09:40 PM
I dont understand why you would want Taylor and his two good years left, what happens if you guys dont make a playoff run in that amount of time, wouldnt you rather try to get an early 3rd for rogers and have a guy still be with the team in 5 years?

Xiomera
02-02-2008, 09:42 PM
I dont understand why you would want Taylor and his two good years left, what happens if you guys dont make a playoff run in that amount of time, wouldnt you rather try to get an early 3rd for rogers and have a guy still be with the team in 5 years?

Absolutely not . . . Lions fans have no confidence in Millen's ability to effectively use a 3rd rounder.

Scotty D
02-02-2008, 09:45 PM
That does make sense I guess.

Couple years of Jason Taylor > a Millen drafted 3rd rounder

You think Jason Taylor is going to be happy about playing for the Lions?

TacticaLion
02-02-2008, 09:47 PM
I dont understand why you would want Taylor and his two good years left, what happens if you guys dont make a playoff run in that amount of time, wouldnt you rather try to get an early 3rd for rogers and have a guy still be with the team in 5 years?Well, you can't (as a team) not make a move because you don't have confidence in your roster unless you're in a "rebuilding" phase. The management doesn't think we are.

That being said, if our defense had an incredible pass rush, the entire unit would be better. They finished the season horribly but still ended up 3rd in the NFL in takeaways. Add Taylor, some young, talented CBs and a good MLB and they'd be solid. Kinda scary, actually.

Also, Taylor is a veteran. It would be nice to have a player of his level mentoring our young DEs (IAF, Smith). After 2 years, if he retires, one of those players should be able to step in.

You think Jason Taylor is going to be happy about playing for the Lions?7-9 is better than 1-15.

WMD
02-03-2008, 12:03 AM
I was thinking about calling Matt Millen and telling him to let me run this draft.

TacticaLion
02-03-2008, 12:05 AM
I was thinking about calling Matt Millen and telling him to let me run this draft.

Can you really draft little Asian females wearing orange flower outfits?

What was her 40 time?

reinar
02-07-2008, 10:32 PM
everyone said that Patrick Willis wasnt worth the #2, but look at what he did, on a horrible defense. if we had taken him then, or taken any trade that moved us down to the 8 range, and been happy with it. we would have filled the void at MLB, and probably had made the playoffs.

Iamcanadian
02-07-2008, 10:48 PM
everyone said that Patrick Willis wasnt worth the #2, but look at what he did, on a horrible defense. if we had taken him then, or taken any trade that moved us down to the 8 range, and been happy with it. we would have filled the void at MLB, and probably had made the playoffs.

The last 2 defensive rookies of the year have been LB's playing on terrible teams. Willis and Ryan. It's easy to look good on a defense that has little else but will either of these guys be elite on a good football team, no, they have a long way to go before we'll get an idea of their potential. It is simular to Sims with us. He puts up huge tackle #'s on a weak defense, did he lead us to the playoffs or are those tackle #'s more a result of poor play everywhere else.

Kid_Ego
02-07-2008, 11:19 PM
Willis is going to be a stud on any defense!!!!!! the dude is awesome. Inflated stats maybe but he freaking had almost 200 tackles. Im a viking fan we have pretty good LBs Greenway had like 110 tackles and im thinking he did quite well. Hawk had simular numbers and he looks very good to me. What would Willis of done on the Lions two words my man

Lewis Urlacher

TacticaLion
02-08-2008, 12:14 AM
Some people look at a lack of stats and question a player's ability.

Some people look at great stats and question a player's supporting cast.

You can never win. Regardless, Willis is a great talent and just makes plays. It's not like they ran the ball directly into him for 10+ tackles per game... he was all over the field making plays... all year.

I think, at this point, I'd rather have Willis-Sims and Roy Williams-Furrey-McDonald than Lenon-Sims and CJ-Furrey-McDonald.

Addict
02-08-2008, 11:22 AM
wow... hindsight really is 20/20... we're not gonna get Willis, because San Francisco even though a bad team isn't insane. The only team crazy enough to trade away talent like that, unfortunately, is the Lions. So let's stop discussing what ifs regarding Willis, it's not making sense.

TacticaLion
02-08-2008, 11:29 AM
wow... hindsight really is 20/20... we're not gonna get Willis, because San Francisco even though a bad team isn't insane. The only team crazy enough to trade away talent like that, unfortunately, is the Lions. So let's stop discussing what ifs regarding Willis, it's not making sense.

We were talking about the past draft, ninja... that's allowed, right!?

Right!? RIGHT, SIR!?

Addict
02-08-2008, 11:34 AM
We were talking about the past draft, ninja... that's allowed, right!?

Right!? RIGHT, SIR!?

hehe, just saying, it would have been insane to get willis at two... now you could argue we could have traded down, but with a great linebacking crop coming up the next two years ('09 with Maualuga and Laurinatis (sp?) is gonna be HUGE) and no real idea of what CJ is about (yet) I think we should hold off on conclusions.

Imagine us getting a wheeler/lofton/mayo this year and a Maualuga/Laurinatis (again, sp?) next year.... we'd have... the blue bashing bros. (can't believe how incredibly stupid that sounds.

TacticaLion
02-08-2008, 11:50 AM
hehe, just saying, it would have been insane to get willis at two... now you could argue we could have traded down, but with a great linebacking crop coming up the next two years ('09 with Maualuga and Laurinatis (sp?) is gonna be HUGE) and no real idea of what CJ is about (yet) I think we should hold off on conclusions.

Imagine us getting a wheeler/lofton/mayo this year and a Maualuga/Laurinatis (again, sp?) next year.... we'd have... the blue bashing bros. (can't believe how incredibly stupid that sounds.

If we take a MLB early this year, I doubt we take one early next year.

Addict
02-08-2008, 11:54 AM
If we take a MLB early this year, I doubt we take one early next year.

they're better next year... but we need one so badly I doubt it's gonna go without attention.

Darn it sucks to suck.