PDA

View Full Version : Lions sign Dwight Smith


Scotty D
02-27-2008, 04:11 PM
http://www.rotoworld.com/content/playerpages/playerbreakingnews.asp?sport=NFL&id=275&line=113118&spln=1


Lions signed FS Dwight Smith, formerly of the Vikings, to a two-year, $5 million contract. The deal includes a $350,000 signing bonus.

Didn't see this coming.

My connections from the signing

1. Kennedy is long gone.

2. Gerald Alexander is moving to CB.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-27-2008, 04:15 PM
POSTED 4:24 p.m. EST, February 27, 2008

DWIGHT SMITH TO DETROIT

Cut by the Vikings, safety Dwight Smith will now get to play them twice per year.

A league source tells us that Smith has agreed to terms with the Detroit Lions. He'll sign a two-year, $5 million deal.

Per the source, Smith gets a $350,000 signing bonus, a $300,000 training-camp reporting bonus in 2008, and a 2008 base salary of $1.35 million. Next year, Smith is due to receive a $500,000 roster bonus, a $250,000 reporting bonus, and a base salary of $2.25 million.

The move reunites Smith with head coach Rod Marinelli and defensive coordinator Joe Barry, who were assistants in Tampa when Smith played there.

Yeah I think Kennoy is gone. Dwight Smith was good in Tampa, not so good in Minnesota. He is a true Tampa 2 FS though. Smith should have been the Super Bowl MVP the year Tampa won it. We'll see if he has any left in him. Vikings fans probably won't think too much of him.

detroit4life
02-27-2008, 04:24 PM
i dont think alexander is moving i think they will be rotating bullocks smith and alexander remember bullocks is a questrion mark with his knee this might be a back up plan for that since i know they want kennedy gone

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-27-2008, 04:26 PM
It provides more depth with safeties tha can cover instead of run support safeties like Kennoy.

Who knows we might keep Kennoy and move Alexander to corner. You never know with Millen.

TacticaLion
02-27-2008, 04:58 PM
I think they're playing it safe with Bullocks... letting him sit as long as he has to until he's healed.

If both Smith and Bullocks are healthy, and something drastic happens at CB, I can see them trying Alexander there. I don't think they want to keep him there, though... he was great his rookie year.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-27-2008, 05:03 PM
I think they're playing it safe with Bullocks... letting him sit as long as he has to until he's healed.

If both Smith and Bullocks are healthy, and something drastic happens at CB, I can see them trying Alexander there. I don't think they want to keep him there, though... he was great his rookie year.

I wouldn't say Alexander was great last year. He was decent to above average and progressed as the year went on. I expect more from him this year but it looks like now he has a little competition. Its always good to have depth and competition.

Plus there is the Millen second round curse. I expect Ikaika or Alexander to be on IR early this year. Dont' want to see it but Bailey,Lehman,Cody and Bullocks all were hurt in year 2 of their career severely. Plus Stanton last year since we had 3 second rounders.

detroit4life
02-27-2008, 05:08 PM
haha i like the curse thing never rly picked up on that. I think alexander did a pretty good job last year especially for a rookie and should stay there. It was interesting that in Marinelli's interview about him he even said that Smith has played some corner before too. I think it will be a big rotation if bullocks is healthy and Im sure alexander and smith could both see some time at CB here and there in certain situations. But Depth is a great thing to have and it brings compitition which this team needs

TacticaLion
02-27-2008, 05:10 PM
I wouldn't say Alexander was great last year. He was decent to above average and progressed as the year went on. I expect more from him this year but it looks like now he has a little competition. Its always good to have depth and competition.

Plus there is the Millen second round curse. I expect Ikaika or Alexander to be on IR early this year. Dont' want to see it but Bailey,Lehman,Cody and Bullocks all were hurt in year 2 of their career severely. Plus Stanton last year since we had 3 second rounders.
Alexander was outstanding his rookie year. He was playing next to Kennedy and had a horrible secondary around him (not to mention a weak LB group and an average DLine). Made a lot of big plays and was a leader on and off the field. For a rookie, that's a great year.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-27-2008, 05:34 PM
The key phrase is "for a rookie". Meaning we didn't expect much out of him. He exceeded expectations which is great, but overall his play wasn't great.

I'm judging him compared to other starting safeties based on the term "great". Based on comparing him to starting safeties he wasn't a great player. However, he was above average and did progress. I think he can become a great player. He had 2 ints, 2 sacks and 6 PDs. Solid for a rookie but not spectacular, especially in the pass deflection department with so many passes thrown on our defense. And as far as team leader, how would you know that. You can't tell who is the leader in the locker room.

I'm excited to see how he progresses in year 2. He had Sims on his side most of the time so the weak LB argument doesn't really fly. He did have the number 2 corner on his side which would hurt him, but the safety especially in a Cover 2 is expected to bail out the corner. And I did see Alexander get beat, especially early in the year. For example, the Washington game when Randle El was burning both Stanley Wilson and Alexander. And the Philly game when Curtis beat both Stanley Wilson and Alexander.

bearsfan_51
02-27-2008, 05:37 PM
Why couldn't Smith play cornerback? I think that's just as likely as any other scenario.

Addict
02-27-2008, 05:43 PM
I'm not sure what to make of this move... I'll judge later. On the bright side, at least they're bringing people in on D

TacticaLion
02-27-2008, 07:17 PM
The key phrase is "for a rookie". Meaning we didn't expect much out of him. He exceeded expectations which is great, but overall his play wasn't great.What!? His overall play wasn't great? That's ridiculous. 81 total tackles, 2 sacks, 6 passes defensed (one for an INT by Cody), 2 fumble recoveries and 2 INTs... and started every game last year.

He had a great season.
And as far as team leader, how would you know that. You can't tell who is the leader in the locker room.OK.
ALLEN PARK, Mich. -- NFL rookies aren’t supposed to command the huddle.

They are not supposed to be looked upon as the voice of reason, and they are certainly not supposed to make a fiery defensive coordinator like Joe Barry stand in awe of the manner in which they conduct themselves on and off the field.

Apparently Gerald Alexander defies conventional logic.

“Because of his work ethic, because of his intelligence, and because of the way he goes about his business, he has been very impressive to me,” said Barry.

Safety Gerald Alexander has defied logic by taking over as a leader in his first NFL season.It's OK... I know it's easier to argue against it instead of doing the research yourself.

I'm excited to see how he progresses in year 2. He had Sims on his side most of the time so the weak LB argument doesn't really fly. He did have the number 2 corner on his side which would hurt him, but the safety especially in a Cover 2 is expected to bail out the corner. And I did see Alexander get beat, especially early in the year. For example, the Washington game when Randle El was burning both Stanley Wilson and Alexander. And the Philly game when Curtis beat both Stanley Wilson and Alexander.The weak LB argument doesn't fly? ********. One great player doesn't make up for 2 horrible players. Also, Sims plays WLB... not LOLB or ROLB. His position on the field can changes, whereas Alexander played predominantly on one side.

And, of course he got beat. Everyone gets beat. I watched every game, and Alexander was one of our only consistent performers.

I'm done with the topic. Believe what you want, he had a great year.

wingboy2999
02-27-2008, 07:38 PM
Damn it.... what happens to our Greg "Your My Boy" Blue?!?!?!?

TacticaLion
02-27-2008, 08:16 PM
Damn it.... what happens to our Greg "Your My Boy" Blue?!?!?!?

Kennedy will, most likely, be cut (or traded for a 2028 7th round pick). Blue still has a good chance of making the roster.

detroit4life
02-27-2008, 08:20 PM
just read on mlive that since we're so thin at CB we may keep kennedy. I doubt it IMO but thats what they're saying and since both alexander and smith have experience at CB it could get interesting but either way i think blue could make the roster since if they do keep all 4 of these safeties they probly wont carry 5 cb's

TacticaLion
02-27-2008, 08:29 PM
just read on mlive that since we're so thin at CB we may keep kennedy. I doubt it IMO but thats what they're saying and since both alexander and smith have experience at CB it could get interesting but either way i think blue could make the roster since if they do keep all 4 of these safeties they probly wont carry 5 cb'sMan... that's a lot of money on a backup SS.

Ah well... we'll see.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-27-2008, 10:54 PM
What!? His overall play wasn't great? That's ridiculous. 81 total tackles, 2 sacks, 6 passes defensed (one for an INT by Cody), 2 fumble recoveries and 2 INTs... and started every game last year.

You're gonna have 81 tackles when your passes defensed are so low and our run defense is so weak. I didn't say he had a bad season. I said above average. 2 ints is hardly spectacular for the number of times we were passed on this year. And he fell into the starting role because of the injury to Bullocks. He didn't win the job and he didn't get hurt and played decently. His main competition to take his spot was the guy we picked up from Oakland.

He had a great season.
OK.
It's OK... I know it's easier to argue against it instead of doing the research yourself.

Sorry I didn't look at every article. He's still a rookie.


The weak LB argument doesn't fly? ********. One great player doesn't make up for 2 horrible players. Also, Sims plays WLB... not LOLB or ROLB. His position on the field can changes, whereas Alexander played predominantly on one side.


The safeties move around as well. Its called Strong Safety for a reason.

And, of course he got beat. Everyone gets beat. I watched every game, and Alexander was one of our only consistent performers.

I said Alexander progressed. Early in the season he did get beat deep. It was a big part of the Philly losses(along with poor tackling on Westrbrook) and early in the Washington loss.

I'm done with the topic. Believe what you want, he had a great year.

Alexander was above average, is getting better and has the potential to be great. He'll be great when he has higher passes defensed, more ints and forces teams to pass towards Bullocks/Kennedy.

Bootland27
02-28-2008, 11:14 AM
Alexander didn't have a great year. He had a nice year, a pretty good year.

OJ Atogwe had a great year. 75 Tk, 8 INTs
Bob Sanders had a great year. 96 Tk, 2 INTs, 3 SCKs (DPOY)

Alexander has a ways to go in order to be a pro-bowl caliber player, but can he be great one day? Absolutely.

TacticaLion
02-28-2008, 04:53 PM
Sorry I didn't look at every article. He's still a rookie.Huh? I said he was a leader, you claimed that I didn't know because I wasn't there, and I showed you proof. What does Alexander being a rookie have to do with his leadership last year?

Nothing.

Alexander was above average, is getting better and has the potential to be great. He'll be great when he has higher passes defensed, more ints and forces teams to pass towards Bullocks/Kennedy.Above average? He'll be great when he has higher passes defensed and more INTs? Lets compare:

Bob Sanders: 96 tackles, 3.5 sacks, 6 PDef, 2 INTs, 0 FRecs, 0 TDs

Gerald Alexander: 81 tackles, 2.0 sacks, 6 PDef, 2 INTs, 2 FRecs, 0 TDs

Alexander and Sanders had the same number of passes defensed and INTs... yet he'll be "great" when he has "higher passes defensed" and "more INTs"? Considering that Sanders won the Defensive Player of the Year, I don't quite get the argument.

Alexander had 15 fewer tackles and 1.5 fewer sacks (but 2 more FRecs) than Sanders, the DPoY. That, to me, is a great season.

wingboy2999
02-28-2008, 05:16 PM
Please don't tell me you are actually comparing Bob Sanders to Alexander.

TacticaLion
02-28-2008, 08:56 PM
Please don't tell me you are actually comparing Bob Sanders to Alexander.

I'm comparing Sanders' stats to Alexander (obviously). It was said that Alexander would be considered "great" with more PDefs and more INTs... and I pointed out that he had the same amount as Sanders.

Didn't seem that hard to follow... might just be me.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-28-2008, 09:27 PM
Seriously comparing him to Bob Sanders.

Read my quote. More passes defensed, higher ints(because he is a free safety unlike Sanders) and forces teams to throw at Bullocks/Kennedy. Teams game plan for Sanders because he is great. Teams don't throw at Sanders because he is great, thus lower passes defensed. Sanders is a missile and great in run support. Alexander is a ballhawk with some potential but did miss a lot of tackles this year and gave up a lot of completions. Watch the Dallas game(Marion Barber td), watch the Eagles game, watch the Redskins game, watch the second Minni game. Alexander did have a great game vs Minni in Week 2 but other than that game nothing "great"

Detroit was throw on 200 more times than Indy was thrown on. Therefore, Alexander should have way more passes defensed and picks. That tells me teams aren't gameplanning around Gerlald Alexander. In fact, it tells me teams are picking on our secondary, rookie Alexander included. Alexander is a free safety who doesn't help out as much in run support as Bob Sanders does. So Alexander should have more passes defensed and that means the tackles come from allowing completions/plus bad run defense by our front 7. Bob Sanders is a difference maker. Hopefully one day Alexander becomes one, but so far he is only an above average player who exceeded his rookie expectations.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=teampass&sort=att&pos=def&league=nfl&season=2&year=2007

Bootland27
02-28-2008, 09:53 PM
Seriously comparing him to Bob Sanders.

Read my quote. More passes defensed, higher ints(because he is a free safety unlike Sanders) and forces teams to throw at Bullocks/Kennedy. Teams game plan for Sanders because he is great. Teams don't throw at Sanders because he is great, thus lower passes defensed. Sanders is a missile and great in run support. Alexander is a ballhawk with some potential but did miss a lot of tackles this year and gave up a lot of completions. Watch the Dallas game(Marion Barber td), watch the Eagles game, watch the Redskins game, watch the second Minni game. Alexander did have a great game vs Minni in Week 2 but other than that game nothing "great"

Detroit was throw on 200 more times than Indy was thrown on. Therefore, Alexander should have way more passes defensed and picks. That tells me teams aren't gameplanning around Gerlald Alexander. In fact, it tells me teams are picking on our secondary, rookie Alexander included. Alexander is a free safety who doesn't help out as much in run support as Bob Sanders does. So Alexander should have more passes defensed and that means the tackles come from allowing completions/plus bad run defense by our front 7. Bob Sanders is a difference maker. Hopefully one day Alexander becomes one, but so far he is only an above average player who exceeded his rookie expectations.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=teampass&sort=att&pos=def&league=nfl&season=2&year=2007

To take it a step further, Sanders plays closer to the LOS way more often than Alexander. Sanders is a versatile safety who can roam in CF as well as play close to LOS to defend against the run.

Not to mention the Time of Possession battle that we lost more often than not.

Take off the homer glasses, TL

TacticaLion
02-28-2008, 09:55 PM
To take it a step further, Sanders plays closer to the LOS way more often than Alexander. Sanders is a versatile safety who can roam in CF as well as play close to LOS to defend against the run.

Not to mention the Time of Possession battle that we lost more often than not.

Take off the homer glasses, TLHA! Sanders can "roam" because he has a solid defense behind him. Alexander, who is great in run support, couldn't because the CBs were too busy getting beat down the field.

Homer glasses? I'm just saying that Alexander had a great season. The numbers speak for themselves.


Seriously comparing him to Bob Sanders.

Read my quote. More passes defensed, higher ints(because he is a free safety unlike Sanders) and forces teams to throw at Bullocks/Kennedy. Teams game plan for Sanders because he is great. Teams don't throw at Sanders because he is great, thus lower passes defensed. Sanders is a missile and great in run support. Alexander is a ballhawk with some potential but did miss a lot of tackles this year and gave up a lot of completions. Watch the Dallas game(Marion Barber td), watch the Eagles game, watch the Redskins game, watch the second Minni game. Alexander did have a great game vs Minni in Week 2 but other than that game nothing "great"

Detroit was throw on 200 more times than Indy was thrown on. Therefore, Alexander should have way more passes defensed and picks. That tells me teams aren't gameplanning around Gerlald Alexander. In fact, it tells me teams are picking on our secondary, rookie Alexander included. Alexander is a free safety who doesn't help out as much in run support as Bob Sanders does. So Alexander should have more passes defensed and that means the tackles come from allowing completions/plus bad run defense by our front 7. Bob Sanders is a difference maker. Hopefully one day Alexander becomes one, but so far he is only an above average player who exceeded his rookie expectations.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=teampass&sort=att&pos=def&league=nfl&season=2&year=2007

Whether you like it or not (I don't, really), players in the NFL are judged on stats and stats alone. Regardless of the reasons, Alexander's numbers are close to Sanders' numbers. Do I think Alexander is as good as Sanders? Not even close. Regardless, he was 15 tackles and 1.5 sacks short of duplicating his 2007 DPoY success... that, in itself, is impressive.

If you want to look past stats, Sanders also had a much better supporting cast (and an offense that held the ball a lot longer than Detroit's offense). It's a lot easier to play as a Cover 2 safety when the CBs/MLBer are solid players that fit the system. Detroit lacked both.

Tom Brady had an outstanding offensive line and great receivers last year, but was given the credit for the incredible season. He had at LEAST 5 seconds in the pocket to find and hit an open receiver... and was named the league MVP. Is Tom Brady a great player? Yes. Does having an incredible OLine/great receivers help? Of course. In the Super Bowl, one of the only games that Brady felt consistent pressure, the Giants made him look human.

What am I getting at? Players in the NFL are graded on stats... not situations. Alexander put up some great numbers (without a supporting cast) and, any way you look at it, had a great season.

Bootland27
02-28-2008, 10:13 PM
HA! Sanders can "roam" because he has a solid defense behind him. Alexander, who is great in run support, couldn't because the CBs were too busy getting beat down the field.

Homer glasses? I'm just saying that Alexander had a great season. The numbers speak for themselves.

Uhhh...Its more like Sanders makes everyone around him better. Want Proof????? Watch the 2006-07 playoffs and compare it to the reg. season. The difference is night and day.

Alexander is great in run support???? Did you watch games against Philly, Wash, SD like MYNM said???? Several missed tackles (something Sanders or any other great safties don't do very often)

TacticaLion
02-28-2008, 10:25 PM
Uhhh...Its more like Sanders makes everyone around him better. Want Proof????? Watch the 2006-07 playoffs and compare it to the reg. season. The difference is night and day.

Yeah... right... by roaming the field, Sanders makes everyone around him great. The defense can afford to let one of their Cover 2 safeties roam because he makes them better...not because they make it possible.

Keep thinking that.

It couldn't be that they have great Cover 2 CBs, a MLB that fits the scheme and a stud FS (and a pass-rush)... it's that Sanders roams the field.

Good one.

wingboy2999
02-28-2008, 10:36 PM
I'm comparing Sanders' stats to Alexander (obviously). It was said that Alexander would be considered "great" with more PDefs and more INTs... and I pointed out that he had the same amount as Sanders.

Didn't seem that hard to follow... might just be me.

Well that is just dumb.

Bootland27
02-28-2008, 10:38 PM
Yeah... right... by roaming the field, Sanders makes everyone around him great. The defense can afford to let one of their Cover 2 safeties roam because he makes them better...not because they make it possible.

Keep thinking that.

It couldn't be that they have great Cover 2 CBs, a MLB that fits the scheme and a stud FS (and a pass-rush)... it's that Sanders roams the field.

Good one.

His presence alone makes everyone around him better, regardless of what he is asked to do. Where were all those great players in that defense when they were getting lit up w/o him in the regular season??? You can keep barkin all you want, He has solidified his status as an All-pro based on the impact he had in playoffs 2 seasons ago.

I'm done for the night

wingboy2999
02-28-2008, 10:46 PM
Yeah... right... by roaming the field, Sanders makes everyone around him great. The defense can afford to let one of their Cover 2 safeties roam because he makes them better...not because they make it possible.

Keep thinking that.

It couldn't be that they have great Cover 2 CBs, a MLB that fits the scheme and a stud FS (and a pass-rush)... it's that Sanders roams the field.

Good one.

Yes... they have great cover 2 CBs. Wait... oh no they don't. Kelvin Hayden was in his 3rd season before thrust into his starting role. He started a grand total of 1 game before last season. You can not call him great. Marlin Jackson was not a full time starter until this year too. Again... you can not call him great in their first year of service. You have to go above and beyond to be "great".

A stud FS? Who? Antoine Bethea? Dude started 13 games and 65 total tackles with 8 pass defensed and 4 ints. That is not stud numbers.

You need to check your use of adjective there man.

TacticaLion
02-28-2008, 11:36 PM
Yes... they have great cover 2 CBs. Wait... oh no they don't. Kelvin Hayden was in his 3rd season before thrust into his starting role. He started a grand total of 1 game before last season. You can not call him great. Marlin Jackson was not a full time starter until this year too. Again... you can not call him great in their first year of service. You have to go above and beyond to be "great".

A stud FS? Who? Antoine Bethea? Dude started 13 games and 65 total tackles with 8 pass defensed and 4 ints. That is not stud numbers.

You need to check your use of adjective there man.

Are you serious?! Hayden (a 2nd round pick) and Jackson (a 1st round pick) are great Cover 2 CBs. Their starts mean absolutely nothing... the Colts had two other experienced CBs ahead of them on the depth chart and did it right: gave them time to develop.

Bethea is an outstanding safety. 4 INTs and 8 PDefs... 2 more of each than Bob Sanders with two fewer games played. It's OK... I don't expect you to see it that way.

you can not call him great in their first year of service.Really? What about Adrian Peterson? "First year of service"... would you consider him great? Your "first year of service" argument is horrible.

Stick to "your mom" jokes, Wing... at least you know something about those.

Maybe Next Year Millen2
02-29-2008, 08:37 AM
Bethea is an outstanding safety. 4 INTs and 8 PDefs... 2 more of each than Bob Sanders with two fewer games played. It's OK... I don't expect you to see it that way.

Behthea is a good safety but not outstanding. And the Colts defense is absolute crap without Sanders in the lineup. 2006 regular seasons says it all. Sanders does make the Colts D better. It doesn't matter who your supporting cast is. If your a great player, you'll make a ton of plays. Besides the first Minni game, Alexander didnt' make a ton of plays. Stats are incredbily flawed especially when comparing a rookie free safety on a secondary that gets thrown on a ton and a Colts Strong Safety who gets gameplanned around. If Alexander was great he would have made a difference and our secondary wouldn't be the worst in the league.

Alexander and Bullocks compare to KCs safeties. Solid young safeties with a ton of promise.

wingboy2999
02-29-2008, 09:35 AM
Are you serious?! Hayden (a 2nd round pick) and Jackson (a 1st round pick) are great Cover 2 CBs. Their starts mean absolutely nothing... the Colts had two other experienced CBs ahead of them on the depth chart and did it right: gave them time to develop.

Bethea is an outstanding safety. 4 INTs and 8 PDefs... 2 more of each than Bob Sanders with two fewer games played. It's OK... I don't expect you to see it that way.

Really? What about Adrian Peterson? "First year of service"... would you consider him great? Your "first year of service" argument is horrible.

Stick to "your mom" jokes, Wing... at least you know something about those.

No, I do know what I am talking about. You are the one who is coming across as stupid. If people went "Who would you rather have... Bob Sanders or Gerald Alexander?" people would start laughing at you because the comparison is dumb. Some people would even go "Who is Gerald Alexander?" So just stop. You are the only one who is trying to compare Alexander. EVERYONE else thinks you are nuts. WE LIKE HIM! WE ARE FANS OF THE DAMN TEAM BUT WE DON'T THINK HE IS IN HIS LEAGUE! You really really really need to take off your homer glasses. I will defend my teams to the death but when something is dumb... it is dumb.

And like I said... you really gotta check your adjectives. Yes, there can be great players in their first year of service. But sorry, I reserve the term great for people that are just that. Look up the word, it is for things that are far and away the best. You can't talk about Alexander like that yet. Yet... it remains to be seen if he gets better but not right now.

He's good but he is not great and can not be mentioned in Bob Sanders area yet. If he was THAT good... why didn't he win Defensive Rookie Of The Year? Did he get any votes....?