Cards @ Lions

Piston Pete · Post #21 » by **Piston Pete** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:11 pm

Well as of right now (12/21/09), we have the 2nd pick in the draft with only 2 weeks to play in the season. So it seems as though either Suh or Berry will be the pick...unless we blow it and win one of these last two games....

Liqourish · Post #22 » by **Liqourish** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 6:32 pm

Either one them (hopefully Suh first) would be ideal for our team.

Piston Pete · Post #23 » by **Piston Pete** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 8:26 pm

Stinks that Locker (Washington) has decided to stay in school for another year.....really hope St. Louis falls in love with one of the QBs (Bradford, Clausen, Tebow, etc.)

Liqourish · Post #24 » by **Liqourish** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 8:50 pm

Word is they like Clausen. Let's hope they fall in love with him in the combine.

Post #25 » by **ajaX82** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 9:49 pm

Liqourish wrote:Word is they like Clausen. Let's hope they fall in love with him in the combine.

Lets hope so.

Remember they drafted DL the last few years in Carriker and Long, and O-line last year with Smith. They might really want to go towards a skill player....St. Louis ahead of us is the best option

TSE · Post #26 » by **TSE** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 10:20 pm

Bartender wrote:We won't get Suh and Berry. Impossible and an idiotic GM move. We need every pick we can get and we can't get rid of the talent we already have on this team.

Only way I'd give up picks is if we are getting an already proven player.

I would give up picks from the 3rd - 7th round and future picks for players like Willis McGahee and Carolina's Steve Smith.

Wow, that's exactly what we shouldn't do. We need young and cheap guys, not old vets that have little time left and not enough time to make it through our full transition to elite status. By the time we hit that, we lose the value of the players and the future value of the picks. That's not how you GM a winner. That's how Mayhew has been doing things, and that's why we only have 2 wins this year. We need to formulate a solution to our inability to win games, and that calls for a MASSIVE reorganization of our roster, and we can't take on old vets, we have to purge them!

TSE · Post #27 » by **TSE** » Mon Dec 21, 2009 10:26 pm

Piston Pete wrote:Highly doubtful we can get BOTH Berry and Suh.

The only way we do is:

1) We package a ton of picks together, likely including picks from next season's draft as well. Not going to happen, we have too many holes to fill to consider this...

2) Trade CJ for a team's 1st rounder, plus some....again, highly unlikely.

Well of course it is highly doubtful. That's not a very earth-shattering observation.

And actually, the ONE way that I would want Berry is not similar to either of those scenarios. I wouldn't trade CJ for him or future picks, yet I can see a way to obtain him. You have to look at the big picture and consider all options and how everything inter-relates. It doesn't work to establish your point that well when you claim only 2 possible ways to skin a cat, when there are in fact 3 or 4.

Berry is young and has upside, lots of it. Those players are GREAT to have. We have a team full of guys that are not like that. We have arguably more expendable players on our team than any other team. So your logic doesn't make sense to me on how we are obstructed from acquiring Berry when the roster spots you don't want to give up are guys that I consider to be of little to no value. There are easily 40 guys on this team that I think less of than at least one other GM. And when you have a perspective like that, things can move around. Maybe you wouidn't agree with what players are given up, but I do, and that's the way I'm looking at getting him. Through purging guys that you and Mayhew like that I don't like.

Piston Pete · Post #28 » by **Piston Pete** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 12:27 am

How else do we get both Suh and Berry without

1) trading CJ
2) trading away multiple picks to get back high enough to get the other (whoever we don't draft with our own pick)?

No way is ANY team giving us another high 1st round pick for any combination of Sims, Peterson, Backus, Dom, Kevin Smith, Jordan Dizon, Brandon Pettigrew, etc....

Bartender · Post #29 » by **Bartender** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 1:34 am

Why do you wanna get rid of CJ so bad? That is the worst thing we could do for our team.

TSE · Post #30 » by **TSE** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:03 am

Piston Pete wrote:How else do we get both Suh and Berry without

1) trading CJ
2) trading away multiple picks to get back high enough to get the other (whoever we don't draft with our own pick)?

No way is ANY team giving us another high 1st round pick for any combination of Sims, Peterson, Backus, Dom, Kevin Smith, Jordan Dizon, Brandon Pettigrew, etc....

3) We could trade a collection of current players. That's convenient if you don't agree that all of those players are enough but I disagree. How could they not want that? Pettigrew was a 20 pick and you are adding 5 guys that are worth a roster spot. If they can't use that many bodies, then those bodies could be traded for draft material then packaged with Pettigrew. That amount is plenty enough to get Berry from the collection of those guys!

4) Deal Stafford for him. We could offer to teams on the clock that need a QB. Although I wouldn't blame a team if they asked for more than Stafford for Berry after Stafford's first season of unspectacular play. I mean awful play. Let's call it for what it was. Doesn't mean Stafford can't be good, but if I can deal him for close to his value then I'm taking it and getting a new franchise QB. I won't vouch for Stafford until I am convinced I can't find a better QB prospect.

TSE · Post #31 » by **TSE** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:10 am

Bartender wrote:Why do you wanna get rid of CJ so bad? That is the worst thing we could do for our team.

Ok mister 0-16 and 2-12. Keeping CJ has really worked out so far. CJ is not a good player for us to have until we get the rest of our act together. Until then, he's DEPRECIATING and we aren't turning the expiration of his play-making ability into profits. That's like buying a 2010 new car, but then only driving it once on the weekend to go to the grocery store and back and then waiting 20 years for it to depreciate to next to nothing. If you don't have a place to go and can't figure out how to read a map, then put that car in the bank and let it invest over time and actually grow value, not lower on value.

There are ways to manipulate the system such that you can achieve profits from general transactions, and it's from the accumulation of those profits, and only those profits, that a team can turn into elite status.

Piston Pete · Post #32 » by **Piston Pete** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:25 am

TSE, your way off IMO.

Your #3) There is absolutely NO WAY some team gives us their top-5 pick for a collection of players from a dreadful team like the Lions. Would you deal our #2 pick for 7 players from the Rams?? Keep in mind, Steven Jackson is out - as he would be their version of trading CJ.

Your #4) There is NO WAY we deal Stafford, last draft's #1 overall selection and the player we have tabbed as our "franchise QB" for the now and forseeable future...

TSE · Post #33 » by **TSE** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:36 am

You've lost your mind. First of all, they aren't trading for 7 players, they probably can't conveniently take on all 7 players, so some of them might need to be converted to other currency. But it's plenty currency. Pettigrew makes up most of the value if they value him as a 20 overall player. Do you like Pettigrew? Well we aren't trading Pettigrew to a team that thinks his stock is lower now, we are looking for teams that view him favorably. And those other players combined represent a lot of value in parts, it would be easy to convert that list of players into Berry with PLENTY left over.

And my number 4 is not saying we will trade Stafford, I'd bet any money we won't! I'm just saying we should. Although that's from my perspective coming in as the new GM. It would be easier for me to trade Stafford than it is for Mayhew cause that would be more embarrassing to him and the franchise to speak so highly of him only to do a 360 later.

Piston Pete · Post #34 » by **Piston Pete** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:39 am

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. IMO, NO WAY does a team give us a top 5 pick (likely would have to be top 3 or 4 for Berry) for Pettigrew, Sims, others....

Liqourish · Post #35 » by **Liqourish** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:41 am

Well I have TSE blocked, so luckily for me, I can't see his posts. But from Piston Petes posts, I would deifnitely try to trade Sims, as he doesn't fit in the new 4-3 defense. Pettigrew, CJ, Stafford, etc would be off limits.

Piston Pete · Post #36 » by **Piston Pete** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 2:57 am

Seriously though, we'd be lucky to get a 2nd rounder for Sims....I'm not opposed to dealing him, but I question whether we'd be better off with him or a 2nd rounder.

TSE · Post #37 » by **TSE** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:02 am

Piston Pete wrote:I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. IMO, NO WAY does a team give us a top 5 pick (likely would have to be top 3 or 4 for Berry) for Pettigrew, Sims, others....

But it doesn't make any sense.

How about our entire team other than CJ or Stafford. So 51 guys for Berry. And whatever guys they can't use, they can trade to other teams for picks or what not.

So how much would it take to get Berry then IN YOUR opinion. I already am satisfied with my opinion that we have lots of packages that might work out for a trade for him, but since you are the one that undervalues our players more than I do, then list the price.

How many of our 51 guys can we keep and still get Berry?

Post #38 » by **ajaX82** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:08 am

Liqourish wrote:Well I have TSE blocked, so luckily for me, I can't see his posts. But from Piston Petes posts, I would deifnitely try to trade Sims, as he doesn't fit in the new 4-3 defense. Pettigrew, CJ, Stafford, etc would be off limits.

Im just ignoring the other silliness going on above me. Though i will say i would entertain the thought of trading CJ if the offer was right...but i would want one more year of Stafford to CJ before i committed to trading him.

Sims i would be offering to any and everyone. He actually could have some value and could bring in some decent picks and seeing as we actually have some LB's, i would trade him in a heartbeat

Piston Pete · Post #39 » by **Piston Pete** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:17 am

TSE wrote:
Piston Pete wrote:I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. IMO, NO WAY does a team give us a top 5 pick (likely would have to be top 3 or 4 for Berry) for Pettigrew, Sims, others....

But it doesn't make any sense.

How about our entire team other than CJ or Stafford. So 51 guys for Berry. And whatever guys they can't use, they can trade to other teams for picks or what not.

So how much would it take to get Berry then IN YOUR opinion. I already am satisfied with my opinion that we have lots of packages that might work out for a trade for him, but since you are the one that undervalues our players more than I do, then list the price.

How many of our 51 guys can we keep and still get Berry?

Yeah, a realistic option would be to trade everyone other than CJ and Stafford for Berry. You're right! Although it would be ultra-sweet if a team only wanted 30-35 of our players for Berry. I mean seriously, depth is seriously over-rated.

In reality, the only way we get back into the top 5 is trading CJ (maybe a team gives us an additional pick or two...) or trading multiple picks (from this draft as well as possibly future drafts). Either way, its most likely not worth it. I'd rather keep CJ (or the multiple picks) and look to draft another safety later in the draft, or get one via free agency.

TSE · Post #40 » by **TSE** » Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:20 am

ajaX82 wrote:but i would want one more year of Stafford to CJ before i committed to trading him.

Well if you wait one more year and Stafford ends up sucking, then you can't get the haul that you can get today. The best trades a team can possibly do are the ones that are done before a player takes a major hit to his value. If you buy a new car and want to trade it, do it before you buy it and drive it off the lot. Don't take it to your neighbor's house and try to get full value then, it's too late then. Either we should do the trade now, or we should stick with what we have and hope for the best.

Also, not only does Stafford's trade value go bust if he doesn't pick it up by next year, but CJ will have one less year on his contract and one less year of youth, diminishing the haul we get for him. I am very interested in trading CJ next year, but if I flash-forward to one year from now, then I have less inclination to trade him and more inclination to keep him.