PDA

View Full Version : With or without Roy? (Two suggestions...)


TacticaLion
01-29-2008, 05:36 PM
MNYM2 and I have been going on and on about needing Roy.

I think that our WR group is fine with CJ, McDonald, Furry and *rookie* (especially without Martz and with a more balanced offense), and would rather trade Roy and use the pick(s) to improve our defense. I think Roy will want to leave after the year and I want compensation for him. (We could also sign another WR in FA.)

MNYM2 thinks that McDonald and Furrey wont perform as #2 WRs without Martz, and that we need to keep Roy and CJ. He also thinks that, if the team is successful (but if Roy's numbers decline), he'll choose to stay with the team when his contract is up.

(Note: These mocks are considering the report from Killer that RB/OT will be addressed in FA.)

MNYM2's Mock:

Keep Roy Williams
Sign Brian Kelly (FA)

Round 1: Talib
Round 2: Lofton (or best Round 2 MLB)

TL's Mock:

Trade Roy Williams (Receive at least a 1st Round Pick)
Sign Brian Kelly (FA)

Round 1a: Talib
Round 1b: Connor (or best MLB after the combine)
Round 2: Cason (or best Cover 2 CB after the combine)
*** Draft WR in rounds 4 or 5 ***

-------------------------------------------------------

Thoughts?

Xiomera
01-29-2008, 05:45 PM
Well I am not looking at the mocks you propose, but I do agree with MNYM2. I have stated in this forum on multiple occasions that Furrey and McDonald cannot be #2 receivers without Martz. They are fine #3 and #4 receivers though.

TacticaLion
01-29-2008, 05:48 PM
Well I am not looking at the mocks you propose, but I do agree with MNYM2. I have stated in this forum on multiple occasions that Furrey and McDonald cannot be #2 receivers without Martz. They are fine #3 and #4 receivers though.Having Roy and CJ is obviously a better WR duo. But, I'd rather build the defense.

Looking at the mocks, which would you choose?

Xiomera
01-29-2008, 05:48 PM
Whether or not I am okay with trading Roy Williams will be entirely dependent on what we get in return. If we get a first round pick, I think I would be OK with that. If we get a team like Washington or Tennessee to trade us their 1st rounder, I would definitely be OK with that.

But to trade Roy for a 2nd rounder . . . no thanks.

TacticaLion
01-29-2008, 05:48 PM
Whether or not I am okay with trading Roy Williams will be entirely dependent on what we get in return. If we get a first round pick, I think I would be OK with that. If we get a team like Washington or Tennessee to trade us their 1st rounder, I would definitely be OK with that.

But to trade Roy for a 2nd rounder . . . no thanks.

Yeah... it would have to be at least a 1st.

Xiomera
01-29-2008, 05:49 PM
Having Roy and CJ is obviously a better WR duo. But, I'd rather build the defense.

Looking at the mocks, which would you choose?

I would pick your mock as it makes us a more well rounded team.

Though the lack of a OT or RB in your solution is concerning.

WMD
01-29-2008, 05:55 PM
I'm up for trading Roy.. but I think it'd be a huge, huge mistake to not take a DE if we end up with two Round 1's.

wingboy2999
01-29-2008, 05:56 PM
We bring in 3 DBs? Why? We are comfortable with Fisher as the Nickel I thought.

no love
01-29-2008, 06:06 PM
I think you have two interesting scenarios. But I have a feeling that Roy is going to leave whether the team performs better or not. So the scenario where you keep Williams is definitely a bad one that is just postponing the inevitable.

How many times do you see a guy who is destined to be demoted, take a pay cut so that he can stay on a team that has a chronically bad front office...

Roy Williams is like any other NFL player and he is going to want to get paid like a number 1. That isn't going to happen on the Lions so he will probably leave through FA after this year. Might as well get something while you can and build a dominant defense.

It would serve the long term interest of the team if they could get a 1st round pick for him.

In terms of a WR, I think a combo of Furrey and McDonald can be a serviceable stop gap as a number 2 and three, obviously you can draft the eventual successor in someone like lavelle hawkins in round 3. All in all, there are a lot of needs and it is smart to start filling those needs with long term solutions as soon as possible. Holding onto expensive stopgaps like Williams will only hinder the progress of an organization.

wingboy2999
01-29-2008, 06:28 PM
I like this guys thinking. It is truly inevitable he is going to leave, might as well get something that will help us.

Although that has been said a ton of times all over this forum.

TacticaLion
01-29-2008, 10:25 PM
We bring in 3 DBs? Why? We are comfortable with Fisher as the Nickel I thought.

Yeah... comfortable with Fisher at nickel. Kelly would start and the two rookies and Bryant (if still on the team) would fight for the remaining spots. Kelly is nearing the end of his career, so I think it's important to draft a solution now and not wait until it's a problem. And, he'd be able to teach the rookies a lot about playing a CB in the Cover 2.

Believe me... I'd rather have too many options at CB than not enough.


Though the lack of a OT or RB in your solution is concerning.
Yeah... I had put a note in the post about RB and OT.

Killer had reported that the Lions would try to find options at RB and OT in FA and go defense throughout the draft... these scenarios were playing on that (and it makes sense). Keep in mind... we'd still have a 3rd round pick left, which could be used on either position (or the position not touched in FA).

Brothgar
01-30-2008, 10:53 PM
I have an alternate strategy

1 Trade Roy (first round pick or 2 second round picks this year) (prospective teams: NFC East not still playing maybe Minnesota Miami)

2. Trade additional first for 2 seconds (prospective Miami or Atlanta) - although the chances of this has lowered a bit after the Senior Bowl.


Round 1
Jeff Otah or best OT

Round 2
(No Rogers trade)
Chris Johnson (RB/KR)
Antoine Cason (or best Cover 2 corner)
Frank Okem (or Best ILB or Quentin Groves)



Round 3

Johnathan Goff (ILB not taken)

Round 4
1. Chevis Jackson CB

Round 5
1. Jordy Nelson

Round 6.
1. Tom Zbikowski or Brian Witherspoon

Round 7
It don't really matter.

Whitebull
01-31-2008, 08:18 AM
LOL, bring in 3 CBs and totally ignore pass-rusher and OT?


Actually, thats a Millen draft if I ever saw one. Good prediction.

wingboy2999
01-31-2008, 08:59 AM
I've actually thought about that as far a making sure we get value for all our picks and don't reach too much.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-31-2008, 03:22 PM
I don't know why its a certainty we are losing Roy Williams. Good teams try to keep their best players. Millen hardly ever drafts well. Do you want to throw away such a rarity of a good Millen drafted player. Heck San Diego even kept Michael Turner this year just in case of injury to LT. On the other side, Atlanta traded Schaub and it ended up they needed him badly. We'll find out how bad we need Roy Williams if he is traded. It either won't matter because someone steps up greatly(huge amount of pressure on Calvin) or its a disaster. Just because a players contract is coming up doesn't mean you have to trade them away.

We win and we offer him a decent contract and Roy could very well stay. If Roy wants to play in Texas, thats great for him but the last team I want to see Roy traded too is the Dallas Cowboys. Lets just solve their one of two glaring weaknesses for them. Dumb move. I wouldn't trade him to any team in the NFC in the 20 spots. Those teams are already good and their biggest holes are receiver (Tampa,Philly,Washington). Houston could use him too but I don't see them giving up a first rounder when they already have Andre Johnson locked up.

Plus I know people hate to use it, there is the franchise tag as a temporary solution(making him ours for the 09 offseason at the very least). That would gurantee Roy for at least one more year or give us next years offseason/draft to work out a trade. By then Calvin should be ready. I don't think he will be ready next year. Thats a ton of pressure and there is just too much change to rely on McDonald and Furrey. McDonald is only signed for this year as well. I'm sure Martz could convince him to come to San Fran easily. The 49ers need receivers and they have money.

Thunder&Lightning
01-31-2008, 03:28 PM
Defense becomes solid and Lions O can stand to lose roy even if he is the biggest playmaker calvin will take over that job quickly.

wingboy2999
01-31-2008, 03:30 PM
Seriously... you are concerned about trading it to Dallas? Newsflash, we aren't running [seriously] with Dallas anytime soon. We have a LONG way to go to get to the top tier in the NFC. And the way we are going to do that is build up our defense. Roy may have to be sacrificed for that to happen. AND AS IT HAS BEEN SAID OVER AND OVER IF HE WANTS OUT EVENTUALLY WE MIGHT AS WELL DO IT BEFORE IT HURTS US It is possible for people to check out on the team. It has been done before, it will happen again.

If Roy gets pissed and we franchise him he will:
- Slack off as far as effort he puts
- Hold out for a trade

Both of which are going to absolutely screw us in terms of trade value. So, in closing, we are not going to challenge for the NFC title anytime soon. And if we have to, we should avoid the inevitable of a pissed off Roy.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-31-2008, 03:55 PM
Seriously... you are concerned about trading it to Dallas? Newsflash, we aren't running [seriously] with Dallas anytime soon. We have a LONG way to go to get to the top tier in the NFC. And the way we are going to do that is build up our defense. Roy may have to be sacrificed for that to happen. AND AS IT HAS BEEN SAID OVER AND OVER IF HE WANTS OUT EVENTUALLY WE MIGHT AS WELL DO IT BEFORE IT HURTS US It is possible for people to check out on the team. It has been done before, it will happen again.

If Roy gets pissed and we franchise him he will:
- Slack off as far as effort he puts
- Hold out for a trade

Both of which are going to absolutely screw us in terms of trade value. So, in closing, we are not going to challenge for the NFC title anytime soon. And if we have to, we should avoid the inevitable of a pissed off Roy.

Dallas has a young D and Romo locked up. They'll be good for awhile if they have TO and Roy Williams and Barber and Witten and that D. They'll pretty much be set for when TO leaves. I wasn't talking only about next year competing with Dallas. I was talking on your time table of a couple of years.

Did Briggs slack off? How about Samuels? No. They still receive a lot of money for a franchise tag. Slacking off shows their lack of character and diminishes his own value and money he will receive from his contract. And it won't diminish our trade value. Franchise tag means two 1st rounders or you can work out a trade. It gives us more time to try to sign Roy, see what we have in Calvin and try to fill our holes on defense. Pretty much a whole offeason in 09. We franchise him in 09 and trade him on draft day next year if Calvin is ready. Branch was unhappy and holding out for New England and they got a first for him in September. Roy is better than Branch. Teams unhappy with the way the draft went, that need a receiver could give up a 1st for Roy in 09. And trading Roy is a last resort assuming we didn't win next year because if we win we have a chance to resign him. We franchised both Backus and Redding and signed them in July. It just buys more time. And if that is the case that we are terrible next year, Millen has run out of scape goats(unless he turns on Marinelli amd Skippy and Dippy at OCs).

wingboy2999
01-31-2008, 03:59 PM
Yeah, you can use the Branch example but then Randy Moss went for a 4th. So it depends on who is trading who. And I'd put a lot higher odds on us getting fleeced in a trade then NE.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
01-31-2008, 04:04 PM
Yeah, you can use the Branch example but then Randy Moss went for a 4th. So it depends on who is trading who. And I'd put a lot higher odds on us getting fleeced in a trade then NE.

Randy Moss had a season of loafing. In Roy's scenario, next year is a contract year so maximum effort by him and maximum production. The franchise tag would be put in place in February and if Roy comes out incredibly unhappy, he would be traded in April. He wouldn't play a down.

Plus Al Davis is a bigger moron than Millen.

Brothgar
01-31-2008, 04:07 PM
LOL, bring in 3 CBs and totally ignore pass-rusher and OT?


Actually, thats a Millen draft if I ever saw one. Good prediction.

Did you miss the first round pick? Last I checked Jeff Otah is a OT and a damn good one. Pass rushing DE isn't as big of a need as you think. IMO IAF will be good enough and there won't be value for a pass rushing DE late in the 2nd round.

3 CBs yeah 2 are great for the scheme and the last one is a beast return man. That is picked up in the 6th round and would be good for if for some reason we end up relying on Chris Johnson for a bigger portion of the running game (I'm assuming TJ Duckett will be back).

Whitebull
02-01-2008, 09:03 AM
Heck San Diego even kept Michael Turner this year just in case of injury to LT. On the other side, Atlanta traded Schaub and it ended up they needed him badly. We'll find out how bad we need Roy Williams if he is traded.

QB and RB are far different than WR. Trading Roy for defense/Ot is a much more efficient use of resources. Having Roy AND Calvin, with a guy like Kitna and an average OL just isn't any good.

Did you miss the first round pick?

I was responding to the original post, I don't know what you're talking about.

However, I find it ******* HILARIOUS that so many people say we'll be fine at DE with IAF, White, Corey Smith and DeVries. What a ******* JOKE. Just like we were fine with Bailey/Lehman/Lenon, and fine with Bryant/Wilson/Smith? Obviously we can only fill so many needs, I'll give you that, but pass-rusher is a position that makes the whole defense better. CB and MLB will only cover certain areas of the field. Our pass-rush was a joke last year.

TacticaLion
02-01-2008, 09:24 AM
QB and RB are far different than WR. Trading Roy for defense/Ot is a much more efficient use of resources. Having Roy AND Calvin, with a guy like Kitna and an average OL just isn't any good.



I was responding to the original post, I don't know what you're talking about.

However, I find it ******* HILARIOUS that so many people say we'll be fine at DE with IAF, White, Corey Smith and DeVries. What a ******* JOKE. Just like we were fine with Bailey/Lehman/Lenon, and fine with Bryant/Wilson/Smith? Obviously we can only fill so many needs, I'll give you that, but pass-rusher is a position that makes the whole defense better. CB and MLB will only cover certain areas of the field. Our pass-rush was a joke last year.I find your post to be hilarious, to be honest.

You started by stating the difference between WR and RB/QB... and you're right. But... you moved from that argument to our current DE situation and compared it to our LB and CB situations. As you said about WR and RB/QB, DE, LB and CB are also very different.

You may think that our pass-rush was a joke last year (it seemed that way at times), but our defense was tied for 9th in the NFL in sacks. 9th in the NFL in anything isn't horrible... especially considering how poor our last 8 games were.

What was our pass defense ranked? 31st. Rush defense? 23rd. Toss in the fact that White, Redding and Edwards all experienced injuries and 9th looks pretty good.

Knowing as much as you know about the draft, you'd also know that a pure pass-rushing DE can be found in the mid-late rounds. Most defenses are weakened without run support from their DEs, but a Cover 2 can do without it... which is why these players fall.

Our DE group actually looks pretty good... DeVries had a great year with limited playing time and Smith did some great things. They thought IAF was worth a 2nd round pick and Marinelli is known to develop DLinemen... lets see how he turns out before we label his direction a "joke".

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-01-2008, 11:55 AM
I was responding to the original post, I don't know what you're talking about.

However, I find it ******* HILARIOUS that so many people say we'll be fine at DE with IAF, White, Corey Smith and DeVries. What a ******* JOKE. Just like we were fine with Bailey/Lehman/Lenon, and fine with Bryant/Wilson/Smith? Obviously we can only fill so many needs, I'll give you that, but pass-rusher is a position that makes the whole defense better. CB and MLB will only cover certain areas of the field. Our pass-rush was a joke last year.[/QUOTE]

QB and RB are far different than WR. Trading Roy for defense/Ot is a much more efficient use of resources. Having Roy AND Calvin, with a guy like Kitna and an average OL just isn't any good.

You can look at this on the other side of the coin. You see Kitna and believe that it hinders Roy and Calvin. I see Roy and Calvin and see that maximizing Kitna's production. We have an average QB so we need better receivers to compensate for that. If we had a good QB, I would settle for Calvin,McDonald and Furrey but we don't The O-line must improve and we can do that while keeping Roy and Calvin. Indy has Peyton,Harrison,Wayne,Freeney,Bob Sanders all under large contracts. There is room for Roy and Calvin. We just have to draft better.

And as far as D-line, I agree with Tactica. The first half of the season was great and we did presure the QB. However, the 2nd half of the season was not so great and we didn't pressure the QB as consistently. I think these guys have the ability. I know Rogers does when he wants too, White disappeared only after his injury, DeVries overachieved and that is a result of Marinelli and Ikaika has potential. We used a 2nd on him. What do you want to do. Use another day 1 pick or sign a high priced free agent.

TacticaLion
02-01-2008, 12:07 PM
Yeah... to add on what MNYM2 said... a 2nd round pick was spent on IAF and Marinelli believes in him. Why would they use another high pick on a DE? White is starting at RDE (which just leaves LDE open)... spending a 1st on a DE would push IAF out of the lineup.

IAF would be a wasted pick at that point, and they don't think he is.

wingboy2999
02-01-2008, 01:23 PM
And as far as D-line, I agree with Tactica.

o....m.....g

WMD
02-01-2008, 02:50 PM
And as far as D-line, I agree with Tactica.

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/sky-is-falling.jpg

TacticaLion
02-01-2008, 02:55 PM
I can show you the world...

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-02-2008, 12:20 PM
Haha I don't disagree with everything. I'm just very opposed to trading away Roy and Rogers, especially this offseason.