Trade! Lions acquire Ko Simpson

TSE · Post #1 » by **TSE** » Fri Sep 4, 2009 9:19 pm

Just happened, and for an undisclosed draft pick.

I don't like the move in theory as this is exactly the opposite of what we should be doing, is selling players, not buying. But he's young and has potential, so depending on the pick it might be a good deal for us, hard to know w/o knowing more details.

EDIT: Just realized this is his last year on contract, oh well, here's to hoping he has a good year and we can extend him if he's worth it, otherwise we trade away a small piece of the future for a rental player which is not an appealing notion. He has also only been productive at INTs for 1 year in college and never again in college or the pros FWIW.

Liqourish · Post #2 » by **Liqourish** » Sat Sep 5, 2009 6:44 pm

I like the trade. Simpson has been coming back from an injury but he still has great size and good insticts. Even if he doesn't pan out, we're out a draft pick, which Mayhew has shown he's not opposed to selling and buying.

We have Delmas, Pearsons, Schweigert and Manuel at S, throwing Simpson in there only helps us.

TSE · Post #3 » by **TSE** » Sat Sep 5, 2009 6:50 pm

I saw a rumor on another site that Schweigert is cut, but there is no credible source so it could be somebody just making it up.

Liqourish · Post #4 » by **Liqourish** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 1:46 am

I can't believe Schweigert was cut. unreal.

Post #5 » by **ajaX82** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 1:48 am

Liqourish wrote:I can't believe Schweigert was cut. unreal.

That one really surprised me. Is Kalvin Pearson really better? I mean honestly

Liqourish · Post #6 » by **Liqourish** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 2:23 am

Pearson has done some good things in the past. But I've seen absolutely NOTHING from him recently to suggest that he's worthy of a spot on the roster, let alone over a guy like Stuart Schweigert who really showed up to play every single snap. I have to admit, he was one guy I wasn't worried about getting cut. Unreal.

TSE · Post #7 » by **TSE** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 3:31 am

I actually like Pearson. I feel he's a slightly underrated player. I noticed him botch a couple of plays this preseason though, but I've also seen him show some good instincts and make some smart choices and show some good aggression at times this year and last year. I think his lack of experience shows quite a bit (played a lot of ST in TB) and he might have a chance of developing into a better player for us in the future. I will have to see how he plays this year for a closer look and more confident assessment.

TSE · Post #8 » by **TSE** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 3:33 am

Liqourish wrote:I can't believe Schweigert was cut. unreal.

Well sometimes these things come down to inside info on injury issues, never know when something might be going on behind the scenes that we don't have information on. Unless he's got something funky going on that I don't know about, no way I would have ever cut him when I could cut an unspectacular veteran. My goal is to get rid of those types of players in exchange for younger prospects, at least it is for this particular team at this particular moment in time.

Post #9 » by **Icness** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 2:45 pm

Pearson beat out Schweigert because of special teams play, a requisite for a backup safety. He's a better hitter and tackler too.

Simpson was going to be cut by Buffalo, one of the few teams that the Lions might beat in the win column this year. Don't get too excited. He's just never figured out how to read plays until too late to do anything about it, which wasn't unexpected for a guy who got a 6 on his Wonderlic exam.

Post #10 » by **ajaX82** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 7:00 pm

Icness wrote:Pearson beat out Schweigert because of special teams play, a requisite for a backup safety. He's a better hitter and tackler too.

Simpson was going to be cut by Buffalo, one of the few teams that the Lions might beat in the win column this year. Don't get too excited. He's just never figured out how to read plays until too late to do anything about it, which wasn't unexpected for a guy who got a 6 on his Wonderlic exam.

no way he got a 6 on that? a 6! You gotta be kidding me??

I would have to try to score that badly

TSE · Post #11 » by **TSE** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 7:11 pm

Scoring bad on a Wonderlic test isn't a proof of anything though. What if a guy made a silly mistake and left a gap on one answer and thus answered wrong on every subsequent guess. The point is I don't take things like a report of a 6 on a Wonderlic as certain information that the player is exactly as smart as a 6 would indicate. I'd rather administer my own test in person and have verifiable real information that I can be certain of that I know what it means, rather than something that MAY be taken out of context that COULD be misleading. Or for convenient purposes, I would look at other tests to see if they consistent with that Wonderlic score. But I don't like to knock a guy down based upon an assumption that is tied into a single isolated incident that could have a good reason behind why it looks bad. Maybe he just doesn't believe in the testing method and boycotted the test? All kinds of reasons why he could get a 6 and be smarter than a 6.

Post #12 » by **ajaX82** » Tue Sep 8, 2009 10:47 pm

TSE wrote:Scoring bad on a Wonderlic test isn't a proof of anything though. What if a guy made a silly mistake and left a gap on one answer and thus answered wrong on every subsequent guess. The point is I don't take things like a report of a 6 on a Wonderlic as certain information that the player is exactly as smart as a 6 would indicate. I'd rather administer my own test in person and have verifiable real information that I can be certain of that I know what it means, rather than something that MAY be taken out of context that COULD be misleading. Or for convenient purposes, I would look at other tests to see if they consistent with that Wonderlic score. But I don't like to knock a guy down based upon an assumption that is tied into a single isolated incident that could have a good reason behind why it looks bad. Maybe he just doesn't believe in the testing method and boycotted the test? All kinds of reasons why he could get a 6 and be smarter than a 6.

I get your general point and agree; alot of standardized tests don't really test what they mean too. They show more how good you are at filling in bubbles with a number two pencil. The LSAT has lots of tricky logic games, but when would i use that as a lawyer? Never. Just like with the Wonderlic....its pretty tough to sit here and say that's a good measure of how a player makes decisions on the field.

But doing badly isnt a good thing. An atrocious score is probably that way for a reason. And what NFL hopeful would boycott a freakin test to get in that teams evaluate? That would be like boycotting the 40 and running slow on purpose because its not an accurate measure of game speed (which it really isnt). No one would do that.

You cant read too much into the score, very true. Or read much at all from it. But if i am an NFL GM, a 6 on the test does raise red flags, flawed methods or not

TSE · Post #13 » by **TSE** » Wed Sep 9, 2009 4:57 am

ajaX82 wrote:
TSE wrote:Scoring bad on a Wonderlic test isn't a proof of anything though. What if a guy made a silly mistake and left a gap on one answer and thus answered wrong on every subsequent guess. The point is I don't take things like a report of a 6 on a Wonderlic as certain information that the player is exactly as smart as a 6 would indicate. I'd rather administer my own test in person and have verifiable real information that I can be certain of that I know what it means, rather than something that MAY be taken out of context that COULD be misleading. Or for convenient purposes, I would look at other tests to see if they consistent with that Wonderlic score. But I don't like to knock a guy down based upon an assumption that is tied into a single isolated incident that could have a good reason behind why it looks bad. Maybe he just doesn't believe in the testing method and boycotted the test? All kinds of reasons why he could get a 6 and be smarter than a 6.

I get your general point and agree; alot of standardized tests don't really test what they mean too. They show more how good you are at filling in bubbles with a number two pencil. The LSAT has lots of tricky logic games, but when would i use that as a lawyer? Never. Just like with the Wonderlic....its pretty tough to sit here and say that's a good measure of how a player makes decisions on the field.

But doing badly isnt a good thing. An atrocious score is probably that way for a reason. And what NFL hopeful would boycott a freakin test to get in that teams evaluate? That would be like boycotting the 40 and running slow on purpose because its not an accurate measure of game speed (which it really isnt). No one would do that.

You cant read too much into the score, very true. Or read much at all from it. But if i am an NFL GM, a 6 on the test does raise red flags, flawed methods or not

Well I can't speak for him, but I have boycotted a test before. It was for a job that paid $95k in the first year. They wanted me to take a long grueling test which I thought was ridiculous and ineffective and irrelevant to the situation so i told them exactly what I thought of their test and gave them my rationale for why I wasn't going to jump through that hoop. I told them why I thought they should do the right thing and hire me (based upon our previous conversations) and that if they needed this test from me to convince them on why they should hire me, then I wasn't interested in the opportunity.

They ended up giving me the job, and no I never ended up taking the test at any point. In fact, about 6 months later on they ended up telling me the fact that I boldly refused the test so confidently just made them want to hire me even more.

That's also not the only time I have boycotted a test, I did so in school as well, and took a punishing grade as a result, but that's another story.