2011/12 Draft Prospects

Post #21 » by **ajaX82** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 4:16 am

kellmellus50 wrote:I see the Lions drafting a WR with their first pick of the draft they need to replace Nate burleson.
This is a no brainer offensive line will have to wait till the 2-3 rounds.

Right....

By far our biggest need is OL. I wouldn't complain if the first 4 picks were that

kellmellus50 · Post #22 » by **kellmellus50** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:39 pm

The #1 pick you have to get an impact player on offence or defence ,OL are not impact players you can get quality OL in later rounds.I'am just telling you the facts the lions will not pick and OL with the first pick that would be crazy.
You heard it from me first and after the lion pick a WR i will be saying i told you so.
Nate burleson , this is going to be his last year to play for the lions we need a impact replacement player at #1 pick.

TSE · Post #23 » by **TSE** » Sat Oct 15, 2011 6:10 pm

Well you know me I've been wanting to trade him for a while, so that we have extra draft material to play with. We need to make some exchanges or we are going to lose out on some bonus deals, this game is all about proper leverage.

kellmellus50 · Post #24 » by **kellmellus50** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 1:21 am

TSE wrote:Well you know me I've been wanting to trade him for a while, so that we have extra draft material to play with. We need to make some exchanges or we are going to lose out on some bonus deals, this game is all about proper leverage.

I agree trade burleson for a late pick after the season maybe his value will go up .

It was brought to rookie receiver Titus Young's attention Friday he is one of 11 receivers in the NFL with at least 14 catches and no drops through five games.

That didn't really do it for him.

"That's a good stat, but I'd rather score touchdowns," he said.

Titus Demetrius Young — aka TD Young — has yet to cross the goal line for the Li

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20111015/SPO ... z1au4ZkQdf

Post #25 » by **ajaX82** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:12 pm

kellmellus50 wrote:The #1 pick you have to get an impact player on offence or defence ,OL are not impact players you can get quality OL in later rounds.I'am just telling you the facts the lions will not pick and OL with the first pick that would be crazy.
You heard it from me first and after the lion pick a WR i will be saying i told you so.
Nate burleson , this is going to be his last year to play for the lions we need a impact replacement player at #1 pick.

Just like Prince Amukamara was not going to last until 13 right? Claiming the OL picks can't be impact players just about sums up this conversation.

kellmellus50 · Post #26 » by **kellmellus50** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 3:36 pm

ajaX82 wrote:
kellmellus50 wrote:The #1 pick you have to get an impact player on offence or defence ,OL are not impact players you can get quality OL in later rounds.I'am just telling you the facts the lions will not pick and OL with the first pick that would be crazy.
You heard it from me first and after the lion pick a WR i will be saying i told you so.
Nate burleson , this is going to be his last year to play for the lions we need a impact replacement player at #1 pick.

Just like Prince Amukamara was not going to last until 13 right? Claiming the OL picks can't be impact players just about sums up this conversation.

Ok Ajax prove what you saying....... name 1 offensive lineman play that has won a game for the team in the NFL this season Hmmm...........Now you get my point.

TSE · Post #27 » by **TSE** » Sun Oct 16, 2011 5:02 pm

I too believe OL players are overrated. That's not because I don't highly value the OL like everybody else, but it takes 5 men to make an OL, and an individual OL player is too small of a proportion of value to the unit as compared to other players like a Barry Sanders or a CJ can be to their groups where you can get away with relying on one star for the group to be effective. I did an interesting exercise in another forum where i asked people to put a ranking from 1-10 on the importance of each player i.e. LT1 RB1 RB2 WR1 WR2 etc. And I felt that people would escalate the LT1 and RT1 positions higher than they logically deserved to be by 1-2 pts too many when compared to the top RB/WR/QB spots etc. (Gs and Cs too scored a tad too high) The OL individual players were the most overrated and not any other positional group or depth level for those groups had any funky scores imo. I'll take a Barry or CJ or a Peyton before I would take the best LT.

Getting a full group of good OL players just takes careful planning and attention and you should draft them in the first round when the cards line up right where the value is a good one. I would love a first round LT in the next draft, but right now we are looking like we only have one pick that could end up being close to 30, and we have lots of positions that would be nice to add a first rounder, and all options need to be considered. It's a lot of competition for LT to win out. At least though next year looks to have a good sum of LT prospects, so it could work out though that the last of the prime group could still be available, but I would rather not bank on it and get extra firsts anyhow.

Piston Pete · Post #28 » by **Piston Pete** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:05 am

The one scenario that comes to mind - mostly because it was brought up in another thread in here - was when we traded our future 1st rounder for Pat Swilling. Our 1st rounder ended up being OT Willie Roaf - a difference-making OT.

True, O-linemen won't score touchdowns or accumulate stats other than sacks given up or false start counts....but a good offensive line helps the skill position guys score and keeps them healthy. Remember the "if Barry had Dallas' offensive line" days?

Lionlifer · Post #29 » by **Lionlifer** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:39 pm

kellmellus50 wrote:
ajaX82 wrote:
kellmellus50 wrote:The #1 pick you have to get an impact player on offence or defence ,OL are not impact players you can get quality OL in later rounds.I'am just telling you the facts the lions will not pick and OL with the first pick that would be crazy.
You heard it from me first and after the lion pick a WR i will be saying i told you so.
Nate burleson , this is going to be his last year to play for the lions we need a impact replacement player at #1 pick.

Just like Prince Amukamara was not going to last until 13 right? Claiming the OL picks can't be impact players just about sums up this conversation.

Ok Ajax prove what you saying....... name 1 offensive lineman play that has won a game for the team in the NFL this season Hmmm...........Now you get my point.

Thats easy, any lineman that held off a defensive player long enough for the QB to throw a touchdown... On any given Sunday, there are probably over 70 lineman who "won" the game by directly contributing to the winning play.

kellmellus50 · Post #30 » by **kellmellus50** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 5:33 pm

LOL are you kidding me !!! the QB and Reciever did not win the game it was the OL.I have heard enough on this subject ,some people never learn .Even if the lineman did not hold the defence the QB can roll out and still compete the pass so it don't matter a whole lot what the OL does.

Piston Pete · Post #31 » by **Piston Pete** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:19 pm

kellmellus50 wrote:LOL are you kidding me !!! the QB and Reciever did not win the game it was the OL.I have heard enough on this subject ,some people never learn .Even if the lineman did not hold the defence the QB can roll out and still compete the pass so it don't matter a whole lot what the OL does.

Post #32 » by **ajaX82** » Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:57 am

Yeah I think I'll just have to concede this argument with ya kell....

What are the odds you guys think Tulloch walks and we end up looking for a linebacker?

TSE · Post #33 » by **TSE** » Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:25 am

Piston Pete wrote:The one scenario that comes to mind - mostly because it was brought up in another thread in here - was when we traded our future 1st rounder for Pat Swilling. Our 1st rounder ended up being OT Willie Roaf - a difference-making OT.

True, O-linemen won't score touchdowns or accumulate stats other than sacks given up or false start counts....but a good offensive line helps the skill position guys score and keeps them healthy. Remember the "if Barry had Dallas' offensive line" days?

Not sure if this comment was sent towards me, but Willie Roaf and Swilling have nothing to do with what I was saying. And I have no idea what point you are trying to get at with the 2nd paragraph as that doesn't seem to fit in with any of my comments as well.

Piston Pete · Post #34 » by **Piston Pete** » Tue Oct 18, 2011 11:37 am

I was trying to make the point that, as crazy as it sounds, having a good offensive line does make a difference.

Lionlifer · Post #35 » by **Lionlifer** » Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:46 pm

<- This is my speechless face, that is all.

TSE · Post #36 » by **TSE** » Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:53 am

Piston Pete wrote:I was trying to make the point that, as crazy as it sounds, having a good offensive line does make a difference.

Who would disagree with that? I don't see what you wrote as having that agenda, you could have just said this sentence then. Instead you seemed to try to connect some sentiments to my post that weren't relevant or compatible in any way. So you lost me on that one, sorry.

Piston Pete · Post #37 » by **Piston Pete** » Wed Nov 2, 2011 2:20 pm

I say we need to take OL with at least 2 or our first 3 picks.

I'd target C Brewster (Ohio State) and either an OT or OG (best available) and get a 3rd (OT or OG, whichever we didn't draft) via free agency. We need to build quality depth in our OL. Let the rookies sit a year and learn the ropes, then replace Riaola and Peterman the following year.

TSE · Post #38 » by **TSE** » Wed Nov 2, 2011 11:53 pm

The #1 guy I picked from first time we talked about was Matt Kalil, but now I'm seeing him in top 5 in every mock, that sucks cause that's my #1 target. Well I mean Andrew Luck sounds good too, but you guys don't wanna hear that so I won't mention that often or very seriously, and 2 years ago was the time to start building future draft pick equity to be able to get lucky and nab him, so that ship has sailed and that's probably the last you'll hear from me on the subject.

Piston Pete · Post #39 » by **Piston Pete** » Tue Nov 15, 2011 9:22 pm

Wondering if we wouldn't be better-served if we used the money it would take to extend Avril on OG Nicks (N.O.) instead. Then we could look to get a C in the 1st or 2nd round to sit behind Raiola for a season.....

1st - C or LT
2nd - C or LT
3-7 - Best available to add depth across the roster.

O-line next season:

Backus / rookie
Nicks
Riaola / rookie
Sims
Cherilus

then the following season, let Backus and Riaola walk:

2nd year rookie
Nicks
2nd year rookie
Sims
Cherilus

Lionlifer · Post #40 » by **Lionlifer** » Tue Nov 15, 2011 11:39 pm

Piston Pete wrote:Wondering if we wouldn't be better-served if we used the money it would take to extend Avril on OG Nicks (N.O.) instead.

I think it all comes down to how much he wants. I don't think he's ever going to be an all star, but he should be a VERY good player for years to come.

DE v. OG, decisions decisions. OL v. DL.. But then again, we could just have Stafford roll out of the pocket and give Avril the money.....