PDA

View Full Version : Now who do we take at #2?


Xiomera
03-01-2007, 01:14 PM
With Joe Thomas no longer a viable option (after acquiring Foster), who will we take at #2?

Adrian Peterson is also completely out of the picture with the acquisition of Tatum Bell.

Do we take Gaines Adams? I still see it as a bit of a reach, and a bit of a risk. He reminds me of Kalimba enough to make me uneasy.

Do we draft Calvin Johnson? If we sign Curtis as expected, then it is a overwhelming NO, but if we somehow do not sign him, I think it makes a ton of sense to get the consensus, undisputed #1 player this year.

Do we trade down? Well we surely will try.

And if we do trade down, who do we target? Adams, Anderson, or perhaps . . . LaRon Landry?

Yes folks, I think Landry would be a tremendous pick. We lost our best playmaking DB in Bly. What better way to replace him then by bringing in a top notch playmaking safety? Landry is worthy of a top ten pick after an impressive combine. And we could save money by cutting Kennedy. Bullocks and Landry = Excellent

Thoughts?

mgoblue
03-01-2007, 01:23 PM
I believe in taking the BPA(within reason) and that is without a doubt Calvin Johnson, so thats who imo the Lions should go with.

keylime_5
03-01-2007, 01:23 PM
I think you guys will either take Brady Quinn or move Foster to right guard and still take Joe Thomas as your top 2 options. Adams is not gonna go that high, and a trade down is not that likely because it's really hard to find a suitor for that high of a pick

FloridaFootball
03-01-2007, 01:50 PM
I think Lions will go Gaines Adams now.

Pocket
03-01-2007, 01:52 PM
They need to throw an insane amount of money at some corners, either in FA or through the draft.

detroit4life
03-01-2007, 02:28 PM
i think they'll go DE it seems like they're going to do their best to move down but if not they're going to have to reach for a player

TacticaLion
03-01-2007, 03:04 PM
With Joe Thomas no longer a viable option (after acquiring Foster), who will we take at #2?

Adrian Peterson is also completely out of the picture with the acquisition of Tatum Bell.

Do we take Gaines Adams? I still see it as a bit of a reach, and a bit of a risk. He reminds me of Kalimba enough to make me uneasy.

Do we draft Calvin Johnson? If we sign Curtis as expected, then it is a overwhelming NO, but if we somehow do not sign him, I think it makes a ton of sense to get the consensus, undisputed #1 player this year.

Do we trade down? Well we surely will try.

And if we do trade down, who do we target? Adams, Anderson, or perhaps . . . LaRon Landry?

Yes folks, I think Landry would be a tremendous pick. We lost our best playmaking DB in Bly. What better way to replace him then by bringing in a top notch playmaking safety? Landry is worthy of a top ten pick after an impressive combine. And we could save money by cutting Kennedy. Bullocks and Landry = Excellent

Thoughts?
To this point, I never considered taking Landry in the draft. Now, it sounds like an outstanding idea. Bullocks and Landry would be sick... and, trade Kennedy?

I think that, after this trade, the Lions WILL trade down... 99.99999999% positive. That puts us in a great position for the draft.

If we, for whatever reason, cannot trade down, I think GAdams is the pick. Hands down. Marinelli wants him as another piece to building his defense.

If we trade down far enough, Willis will become the pick.

Pocket
03-01-2007, 04:01 PM
I now want Gaines Adams. Without corners, they need a pass rusher.

detroit4life
03-01-2007, 04:50 PM
im really hoping revis falls to the second or to a late first where we could maybe trade up and take him we need to bring in some young CBs who have potentail to be great starters

Addict
03-01-2007, 05:08 PM
Calvin Johnson, a CB in round two and a QB/linebacker/OT in round three.

At least the RB situation is safe, since we also got Tatum Bell in that trade.

WMD
03-01-2007, 05:44 PM
I still don't think they'll take Calvin Johnson, because that means Roy will leave us the first chance he gets to be the top receiver on another team.. Though Roy does seem to have mental lapses.. i'm not sure how he is in the locker room.. The Team might prefer the Quiet WR over the Outspoken guy.. Maybe they will take CJ after all.

detroit4life
03-01-2007, 05:59 PM
i'd like them to build offense in the draft i'd love to take CJ but id love to trade down get another second and get two or three new defensive starters

JoeMontainya
03-01-2007, 06:37 PM
maybe the Lions are in place to take Quinn now? Also I wouldnt hate on them taking CJ even with there past WR draft problems.

Maybe a trade down?

detroit4life
03-01-2007, 06:44 PM
id rather CJ than kitna but CJ has a huge chance to piss off roy and ruin the chemistry that marinelli is trying to build

Prowler
03-01-2007, 07:10 PM
draft quinn and put him at linebacker

or...
i'm great with gaines

fine with quinn

great with landry-doesn't even matter where we draft him, i don't care if we pay him #2 money he'll be worth it

fine with cj

completely against thomas now unless immediate trade

wingboy2999
03-01-2007, 07:23 PM
We aren't taking anyone at #2....

We better trade down. This could be very very good.

Pocket
03-01-2007, 07:48 PM
Do you guys really think Tatum Bell is good?

It's not hard to be good running in Denver, he won't be as good as we was in Denver here in Detroit.

TacticaLion
03-01-2007, 07:53 PM
Do you guys really think Tatum Bell is good?

It's not hard to be good running in Denver, he won't be as good as we was in Denver here in Detroit.

Come on... you can't honestly say that he "won't be as good as he was in Denver". He could very easily thrive and excel here, considering how dominant the passing offense will be (with Curtis and a year in the system). Kitna - Curtis - RWilliams is sick, and Bell can only thrive from it (and from an improved OLine).

Don't write him off yet... give him a chance to actually put the uniform on.

WMD
03-01-2007, 08:00 PM
I think he'll be good here.. He isn't going to be the feature back and when Kevin Jones comes back, they'll be a great duo.. Tatum has had his fumbling problems though.. he should be a nice addition.

detroit4life
03-01-2007, 08:02 PM
yeah him KJ and calhoun is a skilled group

detroitsports
03-01-2007, 08:49 PM
Come on... you can't honestly say that he "won't be as good as he was in Denver". He could very easily thrive and excel here, considering how dominant the passing offense will be (with Curtis and a year in the system). Kitna - Curtis - RWilliams is sick, and Bell can only thrive from it (and from an improved OLine).

Don't write him off yet... give him a chance to actually put the uniform on.

I find it hard to describe any offense as "sick" when Kitna is the starting QB.

Pocket
03-01-2007, 09:07 PM
Come on... you can't honestly say that he "won't be as good as he was in Denver". He could very easily thrive and excel here, considering how dominant the passing offense will be (with Curtis and a year in the system). Kitna - Curtis - RWilliams is sick, and Bell can only thrive from it (and from an improved OLine).

Don't write him off yet... give him a chance to actually put the uniform on.


Man, I thought you might be one to side with me on this....

Firstly, we thought the WR core was going to be awesome when we had Joey, Mike Williams, Roy Williams and Charles Rogers....

Secondly, have you seen how much better Denver is, at every position than the Lions?

Thirdly, Curtis is not in the system yet.

Fourth, The offensive line is not improved with one new player.



I rest my case.

ChefMike
03-01-2007, 09:21 PM
OK look at this intelligently... the Broncos are a good organization.. they would not give you a Draft pick... Bell... and Foster for just Bly.. they know something that you don't... I think Bell and the Pick is a great pick up I think Foster was a toss in because he looks good on paper.. He will fill in the OL holes you have an help to improve your running game but I think you still need to go after Thomas, he is not a flash pick but he could be a mainstay for the next decade on your line...just think if you had a line when Barry was still dancing around in the backfield ? Yes Defense is needed in your division but so is a STRONG running game. Plus he is a Wisconsin guy.. close to home its a safe pick, it won't back fire on you like a Charles Rogers or a Mike Williams.. I know Charles Rogers was a MSU guy but...he was not as big of a blow up as a Ryan Leaf or Heath Shuler etc.. because he was a hometown guy...

TacticaLion
03-01-2007, 09:57 PM
Man, I thought you might be one to side with me on this....

Firstly, we thought the WR core was going to be awesome when we had Joey, Mike Williams, Roy Williams and Charles Rogers....

Secondly, have you seen how much better Denver is, at every position than the Lions?

Thirdly, Curtis is not in the system yet.

Fourth, The offensive line is not improved with one new player.



I rest my case.

I un-rest your case.

We thought the WR core would be awesome with those players (as did the rest of the NFL) because of what they did in college/on paper. We saw offensive success last year with Kitna, Williams and Furrey... in the first year of Mike Martz offense and with a horrible OLine. This isn't just "Hey, these guys did well in college..."... it's "Hey, they've already played well together and showed it can work". Big difference.

Your comment about Denver being incredibly better than us doesn't make too much sense to me. So... they were better... why does that mean that Bell can't succeed here? That isn't a good reason.

Your comment about Curtis... does that mean that, once Curtis is officially signed, your opinion of this situation will change? I doubt that you feel Bell will be a better back because of Curtis alone. I feel Bell will be a better back playing in a dominant passing offense... much like Addai is in Indy. If they've gotta respect the pass, it's much harder to clamp on the run.

Fourth... how the HELL is the OLine not improved with one player?! Are you KIDDING me!? So, if we got Orlando Pace, and moved Backus to RT, our OLine wouldn't be improved? I think it would be. I also think that George Foster is a better OT than our other OTs combined (besides Backus). So, yes... I feel that a healthy Foster will improve our OLine. I also know that, if we aquire another OLinemen (or draft another) and that player is better than what we have, our line will improve more.

It's science.

Don't rest cases.

FloridaFootball
03-02-2007, 07:51 AM
The Lions best scenario is trade with the cardinals

Detroit gives - 2nd overall choice
Cardinals give - 5th overall choice, 3rd rounder, 4th rounder

This gives the cardinals who they really need in Joe Thomas and the Lions can trade down and still get the best DE available along with acquiring good amount of picks.

detroit4life
03-02-2007, 08:11 AM
no i think best case scenario is we get the 5th pick their second round and mayb a later pick

Xiomera
03-02-2007, 08:56 AM
I would take Arizona's first, second, and a future pick (first or second?).

It may be a bit of an under sell, but both DE's are gonna be on the board to choose from whether we are picking at 2 or 5. There is no point is demanding equal value if we are getting a player we truly want and can avoid reaching for him (while adding picks). That's as good as Detroit could hope for.

TacticaLion
03-02-2007, 08:58 AM
I would take Arizona's first, second, and a future pick (first or second?).

It may be a bit of an under sell, but both DE's are gonna be on the board to choose from whether we are picking at 2 or 5. There is no point is demanding equal value if we are getting a player we truly want and can avoid reaching for him (while adding picks). That's as good as Detroit could hope for.

I think I was screaming this concept a few pages back... and people kept telling me I was stupid for it.

Xiomera
03-02-2007, 09:02 AM
I think I was screaming this concept a few pages back... and people kept telling me I was stupid for it.

I think they might have been screaming because you wanted Willis at 5. Because that is still a reach (though its less of one after the combine).

Xiomera
03-02-2007, 09:19 AM
http://www.mlive.com/lions/weblog/index.ssf?/mtlogs/mlive_lions/archives/2007_03.html#241729

Right now, the odds of the Lions moving down to Arizona's pick at No. 5 are very strong. The Cardinals want Thomas to begin rebuilding that line and the Lions have no fear that the guy they really want -- Gaines Adams -- won't still be there. (The Lions were thrilled when Thomas, Johnson and Peterson turned in eye-popping performances at the combine -- it greatly increased the value of their No. 2 pick).

It's even possible the Lions could move down twice because Cleveland (No. 3) and Tampa Bay (No. 4) have other guys they want to target. Regardless, the Lions are extremely likely to trade down now, which means Millen will likely use his increased ammunition to move back up into the bottom of the first round.

ds8582
03-02-2007, 09:29 AM
If gaines adams is who they want, how far can they trade down to get him???

Prowler
03-02-2007, 11:40 AM
i think foster will be good enough. offensive line play is always a bit erratic no matter who you have. even the steelers seemed a little bit down this year. they just need to regroup and learn how to gel a bit more and stop making dumb penalties. we're not in the same boat as the cardinal's line. i personally feel better with middle to late round hungry players on the line. the top picks should be for elite top defenders only. or can't miss offensive talent if available. there's always going to be some 6'6" 330lbs mammoth who either gets it or doesn't get it who'll be around in free agency or later rounds for teams to take a shot at.

no dumb penalties, smarter play calling/qb decision-making, more time working together will be good enough for me.

take gaines, landry, willis any pick, aslong as we get the player(two of them would be awesome)

*i wouldn't go past pick 5 in trading down, since washington might grab gaines

jbombul
03-02-2007, 11:50 AM
If gaines adams is who they want, how far can they trade down to get him???

probably not past 6, gaines adams would get selected by washington

detroit4life
03-02-2007, 01:28 PM
yea but if we had a chance to move down again i'd take it with anderson and charles johnson still likely being there after 6

TacticaLion
03-02-2007, 01:49 PM
Their targets? Mississippi middle linebacker Patrick Willis or Michigan State quarterback Drew Stanton. The Lions were raving about these two players after the combine and not just because they worked out well but because they know them extremely well as players and people.
YES! WILLIS! YEEEEESSSSS!

GIVE ME WILLIS!

Pocket
03-02-2007, 02:06 PM
I un-rest your case.

We thought the WR core would be awesome with those players (as did the rest of the NFL) because of what they did in college/on paper. We saw offensive success last year with Kitna, Williams and Furrey... in the first year of Mike Martz offense and with a horrible OLine. This isn't just "Hey, these guys did well in college..."... it's "Hey, they've already played well together and showed it can work". Big difference.

Your comment about Denver being incredibly better than us doesn't make too much sense to me. So... they were better... why does that mean that Bell can't succeed here? That isn't a good reason.

Your comment about Curtis... does that mean that, once Curtis is officially signed, your opinion of this situation will change? I doubt that you feel Bell will be a better back because of Curtis alone. I feel Bell will be a better back playing in a dominant passing offense... much like Addai is in Indy. If they've gotta respect the pass, it's much harder to clamp on the run.

Fourth... how the HELL is the OLine not improved with one player?! Are you KIDDING me!? So, if we got Orlando Pace, and moved Backus to RT, our OLine wouldn't be improved? I think it would be. I also think that George Foster is a better OT than our other OTs combined (besides Backus). So, yes... I feel that a healthy Foster will improve our OLine. I also know that, if we aquire another OLinemen (or draft another) and that player is better than what we have, our line will improve more.

It's science.

Don't rest cases.


You can't say something about Orlando Pace, when we added George Foster. Obviously ORLANDO PACE (the best T in the league) would help the offensive line. A guy named George Foster does not improve it.

Denver is a much better organization, therefore, they have better players, better coaches.... the whole nine yards. So, therefore, Tatum Bell was running with....

a) A much better offensive Line than we have.
b) A much better blocking scheme than we have.
c) A much better running offensive scheme than ours.
d) Much better blocking WR's.
e) Learning from a better RB coach.
f) Having depth at the position

You get the idea.


Your first argument contradicts a lot of the rest of yours... You are saying that since we've seen Bell contribute to Denver's offense, that he will contribute to Detroit's. Does that make sense, after everything I just listed?

The Curtis thing. You argued that the addition of Curtis would improve the offense, therefore helping out the same side of the ball that Bell plays on. I merely pointed out that Curtis is not on the team. You can not just assume that we will sign him. If we sign him, fine.

And your comment about Addai in Indy. lol.... Indy just won the superbowl, don't compare the Lions to Indy.

I'm not saying Tatum Bell is not going to run for some yards, and do half way decent, but I am saying that Bell will NOT run for 1,000 yards next season.




Anyway, what do the Lions have now, 4 5th rounders? Man, I surely hope we can move up at some point with those picks and add some players in the 3rd or 4th.

TacticaLion
03-02-2007, 02:19 PM
You can't say something about Orlando Pace, when we added George Foster. Obviously ORLANDO PACE (the best T in the league) would help the offensive line. A guy named George Foster does not improve it.

Denver is a much better organization, therefore, they have better players, better coaches.... the whole nine yards. So, therefore, Tatum Bell was running with....

a) A much better offensive Line than we have.
b) A much better blocking scheme than we have.
c) A much better running offensive scheme than ours.
d) Much better blocking WR's.
e) Learning from a better RB coach.
f) Having depth at the position

You get the idea.


Your first argument contradicts a lot of the rest of yours... You are saying that since we've seen Bell contribute to Denver's offense, that he will contribute to Detroit's. Does that make sense, after everything I just listed?

The Curtis thing. You argued that the addition of Curtis would improve the offense, therefore helping out the same side of the ball that Bell plays on. I merely pointed out that Curtis is not on the team. You can not just assume that we will sign him. If we sign him, fine.

And your comment about Addai in Indy. lol.... Indy just won the superbowl, don't compare the Lions to Indy.

I'm not saying Tatum Bell is not going to run for some yards, and do half way decent, but I am saying that Bell will NOT run for 1,000 yards next season.




Anyway, what do the Lions have now, 4 5th rounders? Man, I surely hope we can move up at some point with those picks and add some players in the 3rd or 4th.
First, you said this:
Fourth, The offensive line is not improved with one new player. You never said that the "oline is not improved with Foster", you said that the "oline is not improved with one new player". If you would've argued that Foster wasn't the answer, I could've seen your point. But, you argued against one new player in general.

Your also missing the point about Detroits' offense. The Lions, with Curtis, may have one of the top passing attacks in the NFL. RWilliams-Curtis-Furrey (with Martz) is incredible... and will only improve from last year (with an improved Oline and Curtis).

I could care less how incredible you think Denver's organization is... it doesn't mean that Bell can't succeed in Detroit. Regardless of what you say, that isn't a reason.

I wasn't comparing the Colts to the Lions, I was comparing the Colts offense to the Lions offense, and how the Colts running game thrives off of Manning's passing brilliance. If the Lions passing attack is as lethal as it should be next year, Bell will have a fairly easy time running the ball next year.

Pocket
03-02-2007, 02:31 PM
First, you said this:
You never said that the "oline is not improved with Foster", you said that the "oline is not improved with one new player". If you would've argued that Foster wasn't the answer, I could've seen your point. But, you argued against one new player in general.
You didn't get the implication? Last time I checked, they acquired Foster.
Your also missing the point about Detroits' offense. The Lions, with Curtis, may have one of the top passing attacks in the NFL. RWilliams-Curtis-Furrey (with Martz) is incredible... and will only improve from last year (with an improved Oline and Curtis).

It's incredible on paper.

I could care less how incredible you think Denver's organization is... it doesn't mean that Bell can't succeed in Detroit. Regardless of what you say, that isn't a reason.

I didn't say he wouldn't succeed. You guys (not just you Tact) are acting like Bell is gonna step in and be sweet. You have to look at the history of Denver (recently)

I wasn't comparing the Colts to the Lions, I was comparing the Colts offense to the Lions offense, and how the Colts running game thrives off of Manning's passing brilliance. If the Lions passing attack is as lethal as it should be next year, Bell will have a fairly easy time running the ball next year.


Read this from FA's Webpage...

" Since Shanahan took over as Broncos coach in 1995, the Denver running game has been both overpowering and shifty. From Terrell Davis, who won a Super Bowl MVP in January 1998 and then a league MVP award the following season when he rushed for 2,000 yards, through Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Clinton Portis, and now Reuben Droughns--with perhaps some Quentin Griffin, Garrison Hearst and, eventually, Tatum Bell thrown in--the Broncos' ground express just doesn't slow down.

In each year but one, the Broncos have had a back rush for at least 1,100 yards. In 2001, with Davis battling injuries and gaining 701 yards, Anderson added 678. In addition to Davis' 2,008 yards in '98, Portis went for 1,591 and 1,508 in his two seasons as the primary back.

Anderson was the league's top offensive rookie in 2000 with 1,487 yards. Gary got his 1,159 in1999 despite being inactive for the first four games on the schedule."


Seriously man, that is a resume' that the Lions don't even compare to. Bell won't get 1,000 yards in the coming season.

TacticaLion
03-02-2007, 02:38 PM
Read this from FA's Webpage...

" Since Shanahan took over as Broncos coach in 1995, the Denver running game has been both overpowering and shifty. From Terrell Davis, who won a Super Bowl MVP in January 1998 and then a league MVP award the following season when he rushed for 2,000 yards, through Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Clinton Portis, and now Reuben Droughns--with perhaps some Quentin Griffin, Garrison Hearst and, eventually, Tatum Bell thrown in--the Broncos' ground express just doesn't slow down.

In each year but one, the Broncos have had a back rush for at least 1,100 yards. In 2001, with Davis battling injuries and gaining 701 yards, Anderson added 678. In addition to Davis' 2,008 yards in '98, Portis went for 1,591 and 1,508 in his two seasons as the primary back.

Anderson was the league's top offensive rookie in 2000 with 1,487 yards. Gary got his 1,159 in1999 despite being inactive for the first four games on the schedule."


Seriously man, that is a resume' that the Lions don't even compare to. Bell won't get 1,000 yards in the coming season.

It doesn't matter what happened in the past. If KJones is out the entire season, it's definately likely that Bell rushes for 1,000. To say that he won't or can't is ridiculous.

Pocket
03-02-2007, 03:26 PM
KJ won't be out the entire season.

It does matter what happened in the past when it happens this many times.

Take a look at the entire teams rushing total and get back to me.

1129 yards for the team.



Again, I am looking forward to the game that both of these guys can play together, because in today's NFL you need 2 legit starters. It just won't happen unless the Lions make SIGNIFICANT changes to the scheme and the line.

Prowler
03-02-2007, 03:35 PM
hopefully bell doesn't get more than 400 yards because kj is back and healthy and consistantly productive, some big ifs.

also, 1) broncos can plug and chug rbs until the end of time for some reason and still get 1,000+ yards

2) defenses will key on roy, curtis, furrey, and mike if he acts right which would make it a heck of a lot easier for tatum to run and use his killer speed, even if kj is back he'll still get 8-12 carries+momentum time if he's on a roll.

these are both true, i have no idea what you guys are disagreeing about...

Pocket
03-02-2007, 03:42 PM
All I am saying is that when a RB leaves Denver with good stats, you should take off about 350-400 yards when you send him to a team like the Lions.

kris k
03-06-2007, 12:23 AM
Hi guys

I'm a Cardinal fan and I've been reading your guy's thoughts about what to do with your 2nd pick because your team and my team seem to come up in a lot of trade discussions.

But I have a question why do you think the Cards would fosterthe idea of trading up for player you dont need. Your set at LTand RT so you'd really be hurting yourself if you drafted Thomas with all that money you would be paying for two LT's. Also the Browns seem to have their sights set on Adrian Peterson and Brady Quinn. Tampa is pretty much in love with Calvin Johnson.

I'd also like to add becuase i found it quite intresting that the detroit lions sent several officials to see the pro day of Brady Quinn. Thats quite alot of attention for a team not intrested in a QB dont you think?

WMD
03-06-2007, 12:56 AM
I'd also like to add becuase i found it quite intresting that the detroit lions sent several officials to see the pro day of Brady Quinn. Thats quite alot of attention for a team not intrested in a QB dont you think?

Considerig Mike Martz said (I think) at the Senior Bowl, that the Lions weren't interested in picking a Quarterback.. I'm sure the front office wants to do everything they can to make it at least look like they want one.

thule
03-06-2007, 01:01 AM
I didn't see this mentioned...However I believe it was on kffl but said that the Lions are completely sold on keeping Bell and they would keep him out on the trading block to see what his value is. IDK if that hints anything tho...being that Calhoun and KJ are both young...but hey its worth mentioning.

Addict
03-06-2007, 07:36 AM
Considerig Mike Martz said (I think) at the Senior Bowl, that the Lions weren't interested in picking a Quarterback.. I'm sure the front office wants to do everything they can to make it at least look like they want one.

but.. they do want Stanton.

Xiomera
03-06-2007, 07:44 AM
Hi guys

I'm a Cardinal fan and I've been reading your guy's thoughts about what to do with your 2nd pick because your team and my team seem to come up in a lot of trade discussions.

But I have a question why do you think the Cards would fosterthe idea of trading up for player you dont need. Your set at LTand RT so you'd really be hurting yourself if you drafted Thomas with all that money you would be paying for two LT's. Also the Browns seem to have their sights set on Adrian Peterson and Brady Quinn. Tampa is pretty much in love with Calvin Johnson.

I'd also like to add becuase i found it quite intresting that the detroit lions sent several officials to see the pro day of Brady Quinn. Thats quite alot of attention for a team not intrested in a QB dont you think?

:rolleyes:

Addict
03-06-2007, 11:22 AM
Hi guys

I'm a Cardinal fan and I've been reading your guy's thoughts about what to do with your 2nd pick because your team and my team seem to come up in a lot of trade discussions.

But I have a question why do you think the Cards would fosterthe idea of trading up for player you dont need. Your set at LTand RT so you'd really be hurting yourself if you drafted Thomas with all that money you would be paying for two LT's. Also the Browns seem to have their sights set on Adrian Peterson and Brady Quinn. Tampa is pretty much in love with Calvin Johnson.

I'd also like to add becuase i found it quite intresting that the detroit lions sent several officials to see the pro day of Brady Quinn. Thats quite alot of attention for a team not intrested in a QB dont you think?

I don't think you could rule out Cleveland and/or Tampa to take Joe Thomas. What you post insinuates is that you guys don't need to trade up, but there's only a slight chance Thomas falls past the Browns and the Bucs (even though the bucs would DEFINATELY take CJ if available).

Really, if the Cards REALLY want Joe Thomas, they had better trade up and make damn sure he can't become a surprise pick by either browns or bucs.

JoeMontainya
03-06-2007, 11:27 AM
The Browns are going to take Quinn or Peterson, right now it seems were leaning towards Quinn after his pro day, Crennell praised him and is having a private workout. Ryan Tucker is coming back to play RT for us, and Kevein Shaffer did well, our new OL coach said Shaffer will stay there.

Addict
03-06-2007, 12:03 PM
The Browns are going to take Quinn or Peterson, right now it seems were leaning towards Quinn after his pro day, Crennell praised him and is having a private workout. Ryan Tucker is coming back to play RT for us, and Kevein Shaffer did well, our new OL coach said Shaffer will stay there.

Bottom line: you're not sure. You can't be. They may very well take Joe Thomas, after all, if they really want to give Frye a shot, they'd have to get him some protection.

And your line collapsed last year when bentley went down. You're picking third in the draft for a reason.

WMD
03-06-2007, 05:41 PM
Nobody is sure about anything in the draft. It's all a big game, teams try to trick others into thinking they want a player.. Teams praise a player highly hoping they get picked so a player they want falls to them... It's all a big game I tells ya... All smokescreens!

Mythos
03-06-2007, 05:45 PM
With the Bucs signing a Petitgout, could the Lions draft CJ second and force Tampa's hand?

detroit4life
03-06-2007, 05:53 PM
i dont see them taking CJ becuase of roy if it pisses roy off and makes him want out we are basically at the same position that we were in before getting CJ. sure Cj might end up better than roy but not by that much. I'd rather have an impact defensive player and roy then just CJ

Mythos
03-06-2007, 05:56 PM
I was thinking taking CJ to force Tampa to trade with us. Tampa doesn't seem to have a need for any of the other top prospects ... too many QBs as it stands now, no AD as they have Cadillac, Petitgout and Trueblood at tackle.

It reminds me of what San Diego did with Eli. Take the player that another team seems to really covet.

WMD
03-06-2007, 07:11 PM
i dont see them taking CJ becuase of roy if it pisses roy off and makes him want out we are basically at the same position that we were in before getting CJ. sure Cj might end up better than roy but not by that much. I'd rather have an impact defensive player and roy then just CJ

I just don't see what the difference is between drafting Mike Williams 2 years ago, and draftin Calvin Johnson this year. They obviously weren't worried about pissing Roy off when they picked Mike.

detroit4life
03-06-2007, 07:19 PM
the difference is the offense. Roy has been told for the past year now that he was going to be the "holt" of this offense. He has in turn worked very hard to accomplish what the coaches want of him. He now is a pro bowler where as when they drafted BMW he was a one year pro. At that time as weel Crog was on this team and so roy wasnt already considered the go to guy. Now its different. CJ is such a good prospect that if he got drafted roy would no longer be viewed as the "holt" of this offense CJ would. so there is actually quite a difference between the two situations

Iamcanadian
03-07-2007, 07:01 AM
the difference is the offense. Roy has been told for the past year now that he was going to be the "holt" of this offense. He has in turn worked very hard to accomplish what the coaches want of him. He now is a pro bowler where as when they drafted BMW he was a one year pro. At that time as weel Crog was on this team and so roy wasnt already considered the go to guy. Now its different. CJ is such a good prospect that if he got drafted roy would no longer be viewed as the "holt" of this offense CJ would. so there is actually quite a difference between the two situations

I don't think Detroit will care what Williams thinks, if Martz recommends Johnson and Millen agrees, then they'll draft Johnson not that I'm expecting it to happen though. Martz will simply remind Roy that Issac Bruce played with Holt and that combination was great for years. It allowed them both to be covered one on one instead of a steady diet of double teams. I happen to think Roy would love Johnson opposite him. In Martz's offense, there are more than enough passes for 2 WR's to be very happy.

TacticaLion
03-07-2007, 10:29 AM
I don't think Detroit will care what Williams thinks, if Martz recommends Johnson and Millen agrees, then they'll draft Johnson not that I'm expecting it to happen though. Martz will simply remind Roy that Issac Bruce played with Holt and that combination was great for years. It allowed them both to be covered one on one instead of a steady diet of double teams. I happen to think Roy would love Johnson opposite him. In Martz's offense, there are more than enough passes for 2 WR's to be very happy.To me, its this: we've got other needs... why not fill them? And, if spending the pick on a WR will piss our current star WR off, why do it?

It COULD piss him off... because now he is that star and will have to become the #2. I dunno if Roy is like that, but a lot of players are.

JoeMontainya
03-07-2007, 12:02 PM
Its now being rumored the Lions might want Brady Quinn at #2 since they have addressed alot of there FA needs. What do you guys think.

TacticaLion
03-07-2007, 12:55 PM
Its now being rumored the Lions might want Brady Quinn at #2 since they have addressed alot of there FA needs. What do you guys think.Rumored? From where? When? Sources?

I can say that, if the Lions want a QB, they'll probably target Stanton in round 2. That way, they can grab other players (and trade down), fill other needs and STILL get the QB they want.

If this is a HUGE smokescreen, and they actually want Quinn, they've done a great job selling it. They COULD trade down and still probably grab Quinn at 5 or 6.

I hope not.

Jagonsucker
03-07-2007, 07:41 PM
Lions need to trade down and get Willis. Why draft Quinn when Detroit staff really wants Stanton? They could still draft Adams to replace Edwards but i doubt it. And They won't draft CJ when we already have a legit number 1 and (depending on if Curtis signs) number 2 and a good slot reciever in Furrey. The only pick they could make is Joe Thomas at number 2 but thats a lot of money spent on the o-line. So trading down makes the most sense.

TacticaLion
03-07-2007, 07:48 PM
Lions need to trade down and get Willis. Why draft Quinn when Detroit staff really wants Stanton? They could still draft Adams to replace Edwards but i doubt it. And They won't draft CJ when we already have a legit number 1 and (depending on if Curtis signs) number 2 and a good slot reciever in Furrey. The only pick they could make is Joe Thomas at number 2 but thats a lot of money spent on the o-line. So trading down makes the most sense.I agree 100%. IF I could project the Lions' (management) ideal draft (using the hints and reports), it would be this:

(Trade down from #2 to somewhere later...)
Rd1: Patrick Willis
Rd2: Drew Stanton
Rd2: ***Best CB Available***
Rd3: Dan Bazuin

They've spoken highly of each of these players, and they fall in different rounds. Each fills a need, so it all makes sense (to me)...

Mythos
03-08-2007, 05:52 AM
Its now being rumored the Lions might want Brady Quinn at #2 since they have addressed alot of there FA needs. What do you guys think.

I think Quinn is the least likely senario. Among other reasons, I think Martz wants all the credit for developing a Pro-Bowl QB from nowhere. If Quinn is successful, I think it will be all Weiss, Weiss, weiss.....

If the Lions pick at #2, I think it will be J. Thomas. Before this week, I'd say there's no way there's no way we could sink that much coin in the o-line, but after watching what's happened in FA I don't think we'd even be in the top 5 in $$. Another team's backup isn't the ideal solution at RT. I don't think there's anything wrong with depth at a critical position--imagine what would happen to the offense if Backus got hurt.

Xiomera
03-08-2007, 07:50 AM
I am pretty convinced that Stanton will be taken by Detroit #34 overall (if Baltimore doesn't snag him at 29, that is).

And I won't mind. I recognize our need for a QB of the future, and I prefer Stanton to all other QB's in this draft.

TacticaLion
03-08-2007, 11:03 AM
I am pretty convinced that Stanton will be taken by Detroit #34 overall (if Baltimore doesn't snag him at 29, that is).

And I won't mind. I recognize our need for a QB of the future, and I prefer Stanton to all other QB's in this draft.I agree with that... and it's slightly hypocritical of me.

I've been saying this entire time that Kitna is our starter and that McCown/Orlovsky will be able to play when he's done... and that I DO NOT WANT TO DRAFT A QB (Quinn)! I think i'm fine with Stanton (I actually want us to take him) because he's a great prospect and that frees up our first round pick.

It would be nice seeing Stanton, McCown and Orlovsky competing for a starting job when Kitna leaves (if they all make the roster... which they probably wont).

And, on that note, if we draft Stanton, which gets cut? My vote is McCown.

Mythos
03-08-2007, 05:50 PM
I am pretty convinced that Stanton will be taken by Detroit #34 overall (if Baltimore doesn't snag him at 29, that is).

And I won't mind. I recognize our need for a QB of the future, and I prefer Stanton to all other QB's in this draft.

I think we'll have our pick of QBs in next years draft. I'd pass on Stanton.

Mythos
03-08-2007, 06:00 PM
QB's late rd. 1 - round 2. I'd take Brees, but want no part of these odds,

'95: 2_45 Todd Collins, 2_60 Kordell Stewart
'96: 2_42 Tony Banks
'97: 1_26 Jim Druckenmiller, 2_42 Jake Plummer
'98: 2_60 Charlie Batch
'99: 2_50 Shaun King
'00: 1_18 Chad Pennington
'01: 2_32 Drew Brees, 2_53 Quincy Carter, 2_59 Marques Tuiasosopo
'02: 1_32 Patrick Ramsey
'03: 1_19 Kyle Boller, 1_22 Rex Groossman
'04: 1_22 J.P. Losman

Go Blue
03-08-2007, 06:09 PM
Do you guys think that a team would trade a second rounder and a couple of those fifths for a 1st rounder? Say we trade with Zona and pick and extra second rounder.. the draft would look like this

1a 5.Gaines Adams
1b (10-15) Patrick Willis
2 Drew Stanton
3 best DB


Or would you keep the two 2nd round picks? Take Stanton and maybe Hughes??

detroit4life
03-08-2007, 06:13 PM
i dont think you should look at the past like that Stanton is a very gifted guy the only thing holding back right now is some inconsistency which he suffered on a terrible MSU team. With the talent he has and Martz teaching him he could be a great starter

detroit4life
03-08-2007, 06:15 PM
Do you guys think that a team would trade a second rounder and a couple of those fifths for a 1st rounder? Say we trade with Zona and pick and extra second rounder.. the draft would look like this

1a 5.Gaines Adams
1b (10-15) Patrick Willis
2 Drew Stanton
3 best DB


Or would you keep the two 2nd round picks? Take Stanton and maybe Hughes??

i dont see us being able to move up early enough in the first to get willis with a second and some 5th rounders. If we put our 4th and some 5ths maybe but i'd think we'd have to give up our third round pick. But if we were able to come away with asams willis and stanton or a CB that'd be amazing

Mythos
03-08-2007, 06:57 PM
i dont think you should look at the past like that Stanton is a very gifted guy the only thing holding back right now is some inconsistency which he suffered on a terrible MSU team. With the talent he has and Martz teaching him he could be a great starter

If we take him, I hope you're right.

Mythos
03-08-2007, 07:04 PM
[QUOTE=Go Blue;201918]Do you guys think that a team would trade a second rounder and a couple of those fifths for a 1st rounder? Say we trade with Zona and pick and extra second rounder.. the draft would look like this

1a 5.Gaines Adams
1b (10-15) Patrick Willis
2 Drew Stanton
3 best DB

I think it's gotta be 8 or 9 to be sure about Willis.
10-Atlanta, I think they cut Hartwell. He's been a waste of money regardless
12-Buffalo, lost Fletcher
14-Carolina, I think Morgan is done and they lost Witherspoon last year. I can't see any way Willis gets past this point.

detroit4life
03-08-2007, 07:24 PM
atlanta could very well go WR or a sefety
Buffalo i see going RB but he could be a possibility
carolina i think he could go there as well but also have other needs in WR and TE

all three are possibilities but i deffinitly see a way that he falls past 14

Go Blue
03-08-2007, 08:10 PM
i dont see us being able to move up early enough in the first to get willis with a second and some 5th rounders. If we put our 4th and some 5ths maybe but i'd think we'd have to give up our third round pick. But if we were able to come away with asams willis and stanton or a CB that'd be amazingId give up the fourth to have a draft like that!! I think we would address all the area of need with that draft.

Scotty D
03-08-2007, 09:17 PM
If we trade down I think we have to consider Adam Carriker.

Xiomera
03-08-2007, 09:32 PM
If we trade down I think we have to consider Adam Carriker.

Agreed, Carriker is a great prospect. I like him more than Anderson at this point.

detroit4life
03-08-2007, 09:33 PM
still he doesnt really fit a typical cover two DE he's a good DE but im not sure hes a the pure pass rusher that we are really looking for

wingboy2999
03-08-2007, 11:33 PM
If we trade down I think we have to consider Adam Carriker.

Well, it seems to be if we trade down we want Willis... and according to Tacti, at all costs.

TacticaLion
03-09-2007, 09:21 AM
Well, it seems to be if we trade down we want Willis... and according to Tacti, at all costs.BAH! Why all the hate?! Although... yes, it's true.

As said, I don't think Carriker will fit the Cover 2 as well as other players would. Bazuin can fill that need, and we could use the first round pick differently. I like our DEs next year... Rookie-White-Edwards. There's a lot of talk about White and how good of a pick-up it was for us... cant wait to see him perform.

Mythos
03-09-2007, 07:51 PM
I'd be suprised if Carriker or Anderson weren't higher than Adams on some teams boards.

Iamcanadian
03-10-2007, 09:40 AM
I'd be suprised if Carriker or Anderson weren't higher than Adams on some teams boards.

I think Adams is the only solid Cover 2 DE at the top of the draft. Each scheme in todays game suits a certain type of player, they are not interchangable. A cover 2 defense doesn't blitz, it depends on its DE's and at least 1 DT to put extreme pressure on the passer, it sacrifices a bit in run defense to eliminate the deep pass and even the intermediate pass. A DE like Feeney, Alex Brown or Rice who can put extreme pressure on the passer but are mediocre against the run are ideal types for a cover 2. If a cover 2 defense cannot apply enough of a pass rush, the whole defense completely breaks down. Anderson and Carriker are not that type of DE, they are more rounded, being able to stop the run and rush the passer on occassion especially on teams that will assist their pass rush by blitzing. A DE in a cover 2 gets no help from a blitzer, he must be able to rush the passer without any help and these guys tend to be smaller, quicker, faster types who can give fits to an OT. That's why Indy's run defense isn't that great, they sacrifice run defense to stop the pass. Chicago defense is a lot better than Indy because they have supurb LBer's to go along with their excellent cover 2 DL.
Neither Anderson nor Carriker have the type of speed necessary to play in a cover 2 defense. They are not pure pass rushers like Gaines Adams is.

While a MLB is a huge need for Detroit as obviously we are very weak at that position, the cover 2 defense starts with great pass rushing DE's, without those, the cover 2 becomes a very mediocre scheme. Willis is a nice player but he isn't going to be the center piece of any cover 2 defense while Gaines Adams offers us that hope. If we can pick up Willis late round 1 simular to the way we got KJ, I'm all for it, but right now our defense needs Adams badly and without a great pass rushing DE, we will remain as one of the worst defenses in the NFL.
You build a cover 2 defense from the DL out not the other way around.
__________________

TacticaLion
03-10-2007, 09:49 AM
I think Adams is the only solid Cover 2 DE at the top of the draft. Each scheme in todays game suits a certain type of player, they are not interchangable. A cover 2 defense doesn't blitz, it depends on its DE's and at least 1 DT to put extreme pressure on the passer, it sacrifices a bit in run defense to eliminate the deep pass and even the intermediate pass. A DE like Feeney, Alex Brown or Rice who can put extreme pressure on the passer but are mediocre against the run are ideal types for a cover 2. If a cover 2 defense cannot apply enough of a pass rush, the whole defense completely breaks down. Anderson and Carriker are not that type of DE, they are more rounded, being able to stop the run and rush the passer on occassion especially on teams that will assist their pass rush by blitzing. A DE in a cover 2 gets no help from a blitzer, he must be able to rush the passer without any help and these guys tend to be smaller, quicker, faster types who can give fits to an OT. That's why Indy's run defense isn't that great, they sacrifice run defense to stop the pass. Chicago defense is a lot better than Indy because they have supurb LBer's to go along with their excellent cover 2 DL.
Neither Anderson nor Carriker have the type of speed necessary to play in a cover 2 defense. They are not pure pass rushers like Gaines Adams is.

While a MLB is a huge need for Detroit as obviously we are very weak at that position, the cover 2 defense starts with great pass rushing DE's, without those, the cover 2 becomes a very mediocre scheme. Willis is a nice player but he isn't going to be the center piece of any cover 2 defense while Gaines Adams offers us that hope. If we can pick up Willis late round 1 simular to the way we got KJ, I'm all for it, but right now our defense needs Adams badly and without a great pass rushing DE, we will remain as one of the worst defenses in the NFL.
You build a cover 2 defense from the DL out not the other way around.
__________________Solid explanation.

I can agree that you build the cover 2 from the DL out, but I think what he have on the DL (White - Redding - Rogers - Edwards) is actually a solid line. What we have at MLB (-------) scares me. I think Willis will dominate, and, if we could add a 2nd or 3rd round pass-rusher to the equation, our DL would be all set.

I hate seeing a hole in the middle of our defense. Willis is a stud... and the type of player that will lead his defense for years to come (Urlacher/Ray Lewis type).