PDA

View Full Version : Question about drafting Willis...


TacticaLion
02-26-2007, 09:01 PM
I've heard some posters say that drafting Willis at #5 is "too high", but drafting him at 7 or later is acceptable. If the coaching staff wants Willis more than any other player on the board, and we trade down with the Cards, that leaves us with higher picks in rounds 2 and 3 than trading down do 7 or 10... which I think is worth it.

I'd much rather them take the player they want and have higher additional picks than have lower additional picks.

Does this make sense?

Notredameleo
02-26-2007, 09:06 PM
All that i know is that Millen really likes Willis, as do I, and number 2 is too high for him to go, but if we trade down to number 5, i believe it will still be a bit of a reach, but we reached for Sims a little bit last year too, but that turned out good. I would love to get him at number five. Him, Quinn, or Johnson..

TacticaLion
02-26-2007, 09:13 PM
All that i know is that Millen really likes Willis, as do I, and number 2 is too high for him to go, but if we trade down to number 5, i believe it will still be a bit of a reach, but we reached for Sims a little bit last year too, but that turned out good. I would love to get him at number five. Him, Quinn, or Johnson..Yep. They wanted Sims... and they took Sims.

Now, they want Willis. Please take him.

DrEvil63
02-26-2007, 09:22 PM
Yep. They wanted Sims... and they took Sims.

Now, they want Willis. Please take him.

I like the way you think. I have been in love with him this whole time.

WMD
02-26-2007, 10:07 PM
I love Patrick Willis.. I think he's the next Ray Lewis.. Wouldn't take him at 2.. I wouldn't be so hot on taking him at 5.. But who says you can't trade down more than once?

lionsfan81
02-26-2007, 10:07 PM
yes it would be a reach, but who really cares. donte whitner was a reach but was it really that bad? and who knows maybe we could trade down twice or something. if its who the lions want, then yes take him and do not worry about if they are picking at #2 or #5. i dont get why willis isnt considered i higher pick anyways, he seems like a perfect MLB without many weaknesses. he should be better than demeco ryans who won DROY i think.

TacticaLion
02-26-2007, 10:23 PM
I love Patrick Willis.. I think he's the next Ray Lewis.. Wouldn't take him at 2.. I wouldn't be so hot on taking him at 5.. But who says you can't trade down more than once?I agree about the "Ray Lewis" comment... which makes me think that he's definately worth taking at #5. If we can get additional picks out of the trade, no pick is too high for a player like him. He will DOMINATE. I want him dominating for us.

Iamcanadian
02-26-2007, 10:35 PM
yes it would be a reach, but who really cares. donte whitner was a reach but was it really that bad? and who knows maybe we could trade down twice or something. if its who the lions want, then yes take him and do not worry about if they are picking at #2 or #5. i dont get why willis isnt considered i higher pick anyways, he seems like a perfect MLB without many weaknesses. he should be better than demeco ryans who won DROY i think.

Willis is a solid pro prospect but he has a major weakness, namely right now he is only a 2 down LB because he has never learned to backpedal into pass coverage. LB's in today's game have to be good not only as a tackler, they must be effective in pass coverage and Willis isn't. A GM will have to analysis Willis during the interview process to see if he has the intellegence to learn how to become good in pass protection. While people might think this is easy for somebody to learn, the fact is that it is extremely difficult to teach this skill to a LB and many, many LB have failed in their attempt.
We will have to depend on Millen's ability to rate his character and intellegence to make such a decision and by now we all know Millen cannot see into a player's character and intellegence in the interview process that's why he drafted Rogers, M. Williams and Harrington.
Because Willis's inability to handle passing situations, he has been generally thought to be in the 20-32 range in the draft. Maybe he has moved up into the 12 to 20 range but that is not yet known. Taking a player with a major weakness at #5 is plain stupid, so we are talking about trading down twice and IMO, it just isn't going to occur and is just wishful thinking with no substance.

TacticaLion
02-26-2007, 10:48 PM
Willis is a solid pro prospect but he has a major weakness, namely right now he is only a 2 down LB because he has never learned to backpedal into pass coverage. LB's in today's game have to be good not only as a tackler, they must be effective in pass coverage and Willis isn't. A GM will have to analysis Willis during the interview process to see if he has the intellegence to learn how to become good in pass protection. While people might think this is easy for somebody to learn, the fact is that it is extremely difficult to teach this skill to a LB and many, many LB have failed in their attempt.
We will have to depend on Millen's ability to rate his character and intellegence to make such a decision and by now we all know Millen cannot see into a player's character and intellegence in the interview process that's why he drafted Rogers, M. Williams and Harrington.
Because Willis's inability to handle passing situations, he has been generally thought to be in the 20-32 range in the draft. Maybe he has moved up into the 12 to 20 range but that is not yet known. Taking a player with a major weakness at #5 is plain stupid, so we are talking about trading down twice and IMO, it just isn't going to occur and is just wishful thinking with no substance.Scott Wright seems to think that PWillis "moves well and is adequate in coverage". He was also said to be one of the best LBs in coverage during the Senior Bowl. So, if he's an outstanding tackler, a great blitzer, has great instincts, is tough and the leader of his team... but is ONLY "adequate in coverage"... i'll take him at #5 anyday.

You list CRog, MWilliams and Harrington... but leave out SRogers, CRedding, RWilliams, DBullocks, JBackus, DRaiola, ESims, KJones... and I can keep going. These are players that were drafted by Millen... but you ignore this. You look at the failures. Harrington couldn't succeed without an OLine and a team that didnt want to win, and CRog suffered the collarbone injuries and sustained the suspension for drug use. The ONLY one you have a case for is MWilliams, and he's still on the roster.

Canadian... stop posting these unreasonably negative posts that bash the Lions, Millen and our draft prospects. You're one of those "fans" that wants the Lions to fail so you can sit back and say "I told you so". Get over it. Be a real fan and give a reasonable perspective, or dont post.

lionsfan81
02-26-2007, 11:32 PM
Willis is a solid pro prospect but he has a major weakness, namely right now he is only a 2 down LB because he has never learned to backpedal into pass coverage. LB's in today's game have to be good not only as a tackler, they must be effective in pass coverage and Willis isn't. A GM will have to analysis Willis during the interview process to see if he has the intellegence to learn how to become good in pass protection. While people might think this is easy for somebody to learn, the fact is that it is extremely difficult to teach this skill to a LB and many, many LB have failed in their attempt.
We will have to depend on Millen's ability to rate his character and intellegence to make such a decision and by now we all know Millen cannot see into a player's character and intellegence in the interview process that's why he drafted Rogers, M. Williams and Harrington.
Because Willis's inability to handle passing situations, he has been generally thought to be in the 20-32 range in the draft. Maybe he has moved up into the 12 to 20 range but that is not yet known. Taking a player with a major weakness at #5 is plain stupid, so we are talking about trading down twice and IMO, it just isn't going to occur and is just wishful thinking with no substance.

yes millen has failed, but i know millen never interviewed m. williams and im 90% sure he never interviewed harrington too. i know teams dont interview players all the time, the broncos didn't interview jay cutler. Millen has had quite a few successes too, as tactalion stated. Yes millen has missed more than he has succeeded at drafting but i think one of the key additions is marinelli. Marinelli knows how to evaluate college players, by interviewing and finding out what their character is and by watching film, so that way he knows he is not getting a workout warrior. He got us ernie sims and daniel bullocks and with him helping millen, i trust millen much more with this draft. If Marinelli wants Thomas or if Marinelli wants Willis, i want who marinelli wants.

wingboy2999
02-27-2007, 12:18 AM
You try and list all the players that he has done well in draft but there is a big difference. Charles Rogers.... Mike Williams... Joey Harrington. Those guys were all hailed as GREAT players, can't miss players..... and they completely missed. Millen is 1 for 4 in the past 4 years with his top draft choices. That is what he is judged on and it is fair.

Charles Rogers is on his way out if not totally out for his own damn fault. He slacked off, got injured (yeah, freak injuries) but the drugs were bad and he reportedly ran around a 4.7 for the Chiefs. Friggin' horrible.

Harrington was only bad because of the OL and the team around him? Come on... we tried to give him weapons but he himself was just not great. He was shown to be a product of his system in college.

BMW.... well, I think he should get playing time and they stop being so anal about his playing weight. Like he said, they knew he was that big before they drafted him and he was always that big. Thier fault. Millen's mess up.

wingboy2999
02-27-2007, 12:19 AM
And as far as Wills, I don't want to touch him at #2.... probably not at #5 but if we fall further... go for it.

Addict
02-27-2007, 03:16 AM
Please don't tell me you'd actually spend a second overall pick on a linebacker who bench pressed a (position-wise) pathetic 22 times?

Notredameleo
02-27-2007, 07:31 AM
People look too much into the combine, the only thing that matters at the comabine is the position drills, which he excelled in, and maybe the forty time, which was 4.47. I wouldn't touch him at number two either, but maybe at number five.

asmitty45
02-27-2007, 09:07 AM
I dont care how many times he bench presses anything, he had 137 tackles last year and 122 the year before, to go with 6 sacks and 20 TFL. He's a leader and would be a fantastic addition to our team, im all in favor of drafting him wherever we have to.

TacticaLion
02-27-2007, 09:29 AM
Thank you Notredame/asmitty... saved me the trouble from typing it again (although I will).

So, hey Addict. You probably think Antwan Barnes should be a top-5 pick, right? I mean, lets be honest... he benched 31 times! Forget overall talent... and instincts... and leadership... and playmaking ability... hell... he benched 31 TIMES! We should take him at #2, right? Willis will probably fall to the late rounds anyway.

Get over it. The player Willis is means more than how many times he benched.

detknowitall
02-27-2007, 11:20 AM
People will disagree with me but I say Willis is valued in the 10-12 range

Addict
02-27-2007, 12:17 PM
Thank you Notredame/asmitty... saved me the trouble from typing it again (although I will).

So, hey Addict. You probably think Antwan Barnes should be a top-5 pick, right? I mean, lets be honest... he benched 31 times! Forget overall talent... and instincts... and leadership... and playmaking ability... hell... he benched 31 TIMES! We should take him at #2, right? Willis will probably fall to the late rounds anyway.

Get over it. The player Willis is means more than how many times he benched.

I love it when people assign opinions to me. [/sarcasm]

All I was saying is that #2 would be rediculous (and I'll even be charitable and admit I didn't say it very well). Willis is no Brian Urlacher, so if we want him there is no need to stay at number two, hell we could trade down all the way to number 10 and still get the guy AND collect a good amount of picks and players.
To be sure, we trade down with Arizona first, to number five, then with the Dolphins, get some picks and players, draft Willis @9.
Arizona gets Thomas, Dolphins get Quinn (or whoever the hell they like at number five) and we get Willis plus god knows how much. And then we're all happy campers.

TacticaLion
02-27-2007, 12:34 PM
I love it when people assign opinions to me. [/sarcasm]

All I was saying is that #2 would be rediculous (and I'll even be charitable and admit I didn't say it very well). Willis is no Brian Urlacher, so if we want him there is no need to stay at number two, hell we could trade down all the way to number 10 and still get the guy AND collect a good amount of picks and players.
To be sure, we trade down with Arizona first, to number five, then with the Dolphins, get some picks and players, draft Willis @9.
Arizona gets Thomas, Dolphins get Quinn (or whoever the hell they like at number five) and we get Willis plus god knows how much. And then we're all happy campers.Thats the thing, though. IF we trade down with the Cards, what happens if Miami wont trade with us? Is Willis worth it at #5? My answer: absolutely. We've got the extra picks, now take the player we want.

Believe me... if it was THAT easy to trade down... TWICE... we should do it. But, if we only get one trade, Willis is still the pick.

(Note: He may not be "Brian Urlacher", but why can't he be better? It's possible that he will be.)

Addict
02-27-2007, 12:47 PM
Thats the thing, though. IF we trade down with the Cards, what happens if Miami wont trade with us? Is Willis worth it at #5? My answer: absolutely. We've got the extra picks, now take the player we want.

Believe me... if it was THAT easy to trade down... TWICE... we should do it. But, if we only get one trade, Willis is still the pick.

(Note: He may not be "Brian Urlacher", but why can't he be better? It's possible that he will be.)

Well wether or not ANY team between 6 and 10 will want to trade with us depends entirely who are left on the board, but there's bound to be someone willing to make a deal (maybe not one entirely fair according to the trade value chart, but still) there is absolutely no need to reach for Willis at number 5, since teams picking up to 10 don't really have a HUGE need @linebacker, we'd just have to stay in front of the Rams.

Mythos
03-02-2007, 10:58 PM
There's definitely a gaping hole at middle linebacker, but watching the games last year I thought the defense's biggest problem was getting off the field on third down. I don't know the numbers, but teams seemed to convert a ridiculous number of third-and-longs. Pressure from the DEs was nonexistent and they'd hit whoever McGraw was guarding. In addition to replacing Bly, I think they have to get a nickel corner.

detroit4life
03-03-2007, 12:06 AM
DE and CB are pretty big needs right now we've lost both our starting DE's with hall and redding moving to the inside. Im not sol don kalimba being an everydown DE so we may need to draft two DE's in this draft and plan on both being starters unless we sign one thru FA. In addition wee need to address CB day one as well as a replacement to Bly. If we move down past 5 i'd be fine with Willis but if we are at 5 which i think we will be i say go DE we need two at this moment where as at MLB wort comes to worst Lehman and Lenon battle for MLB with if Lehman is healthy he'll win that job the job we drafted him for remember. He was drafted as our future MLB and it may very well end up that way. But if we're in a posistion where a top DE isn't available then i'd love to take Willis since he will be a great player

ironman4579
03-03-2007, 05:08 AM
Anyone think there's a chance the Lions might take Gaines Adams in the first and then a guy like David Harris in the second?

TacticaLion
03-03-2007, 08:15 AM
Anyone think there's a chance the Lions might take Gaines Adams in the first and then a guy like David Harris in the second?I was thinking about Harris... but, if they wanted to fill both of those positions, I think they'd go Willis in round 1 and Bazuin in round 3. They love both of those players, and that would give us a free 2nd round pick.

If they took Adams, i'd like to see Harris.

Mythos
03-03-2007, 09:21 AM
Yep. They wanted Sims... and they took Sims.

Now, they want Willis. Please take him.


Did you get to see a lot of Willis' games on TV? I saw bits during the senior bowl, but not enought to form a strong opinion.

I saw quite a bit of Adams and he defintely didn't affect games like Peppers and Mario did. My fear is that we get stuck at 2 due to "trade value" and end up turning in his card.

TacticaLion
03-03-2007, 12:36 PM
Did you get to see a lot of Willis' games on TV? I saw bits during the senior bowl, but not enought to form a strong opinion.

I saw quite a bit of Adams and he defintely didn't affect games like Peppers and Mario did. My fear is that we get stuck at 2 due to "trade value" and end up turning in his card.I don't think the coaches will have that perspective. They wont feel "stuck"... they'll draft the best player available that fits what they want for the team.

Addict
03-03-2007, 12:43 PM
I don't think the coaches will have that perspective. They wont feel "stuck"... they'll draft the best player available that fits what they want for the team.

I think the guy ment that it's going to be hard to trade down so that Willis won't be a reach (and I know what a fan you are, but top 5 is a reach for Willis) and at the same time respecting the trade value chart. They'll have to accept a few deals in which they, trade value chart-wise, lose a little.

Mythos
03-03-2007, 03:33 PM
I think the guy ment that it's going to be hard to trade down so that Willis won't be a reach (and I know what a fan you are, but top 5 is a reach for Willis) and at the same time respecting the trade value chart. They'll have to accept a few deals in which they, trade value chart-wise, lose a little.

Exactly. My first choice would be to trade down, but I'd be suprised if Arizona offered more than a third rounder. If Detroit actually picks at #2, I think Adams/Willis/Landry are all reaches at that spot. Plus at this point in the offseason we're down two starters. Detroit has to bag multiple starters on day 1 and I think the best way to do that is the extra picks.

Aard
03-03-2007, 04:02 PM
If Arizona wants JT at 1.02 and offers their 1st and 2nd round picks and either a Day Two pick or a 2008 pick, we should take it. We will still get Gaines Adams at 1.05, we gain an extra top-40 pick, plus whatever else we can squeeze out of the Cards.