Jump to content

slim pickens

Cory redding traded to Seattle?...

Recommended Posts


It's unbelievable how a thread about the Cory Redding trade so quickly changes into a thread about Stafford.

Is it me or do our linebackers have a much more difficult time because our line is what really sucks? I'm kinda wondering what the rationale for this move was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a) I don't think this trade precludes us from at least talking with Curry still and drafting him IF he agrees to the least contract before the draft.

b) If Curry is out of the picture, Jason Smith and BJ Raji are my two picks.

BTW...If talent=arm strength, Freeman is the most talented QB in this class and JaMarcus Russell is the next MVP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why people like this trade. The Lions got older, lost cap space and gave up a 5th round draft pick. By the time the Lions are a playoff-calibur team Peterson will be too old to help them. Someone please explain how this helps the Lions (btw I'll admit I don't understand the cap ramifications to this deal).

Plus it increases the odds that Darby (a guy I don't like) will have to start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand why people like this trade. The Lions got older, lost cap space and gave up a 5th round draft pick. By the time the Lions are a playoff-calibur team Peterson will be too old to help them. Someone please explain how this helps the Lions (btw I'll admit I don't understand the cap ramifications to this deal).

Plus it increases the odds that Darby (a guy I don't like) will have to start.

They gained a great deal of cap manuverability in the future. By taking a bite on Redding's deal, they acquired Peterson's deal, none of which is now guaranteed by the Lions. They can cut him in future years, and enjoy a great deal of cap savings. That's why you're starting to see more trades this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand why people like this trade. The Lions got older, lost cap space and gave up a 5th round draft pick. By the time the Lions are a playoff-calibur team Peterson will be too old to help them. Someone please explain how this helps the Lions (btw I'll admit I don't understand the cap ramifications to this deal).

Plus it increases the odds that Darby (a guy I don't like) will have to start.

At the risk of getting flamed, I think Mayhew has been a little bit sacrificing the future with band aid type fixes for 2009. Mayhew really only has this season to prove himself, and I think he'd rather have a 6 win season with older guys than a 3 win season with younger guys. Of course, the draft is still to come so there is an opportunity to do both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not a bad move, IMO. We shore up the LB's, which we sorely needed. They still get their potential franchise QB, so Swartz will be true to his "Time to replace Layne" comment. And they can still take a lineman at #20, offensive, or defensive. Best available.

Will Peterson be better than Curry? Probably not, but he's a quality player. A first round type player. But Stafford is better than any QB we could have gotten at 20, and probably through a trade. At least he has potential to be. He has a big arm, anyway. lol.

It increases the odds that they can shore up 3 positions instead of two, though, which I like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1st off...good trade, I've always liked Peterson. I think Cory is a good player and I wish him the best, but he wasn't worth his contract.

To take some of the cap savings talk that has been going on, it's not going to matter much if we don't get a new CBA. But Peterson signed a huge deal (bigger than Redding's) and won't live out the whole thing here, like Cruzer said, he can be cut at anytime without the cap hit...this was the best year to get rid of that monsterous cap hit from Reddings contract, we have ample cap space and aren't looking to spend it. We got a good player and more flexibility in the cap, if we do in fact have one in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They gained a great deal of cap manuverability in the future. By taking a bite on Redding's deal, they acquired Peterson's deal, none of which is now guaranteed by the Lions. They can cut him in future years, and enjoy a great deal of cap savings. That's why you're starting to see more trades this year.

Plus they traded a player who wasn't very good for a player who is very good. That always helps.

Curry #1 and Jerry #20 looks pretty good right now. Hell, finish it off with Ayers at #33! A defense-a-palooza!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Plus they traded a player who wasn't very good for a player who is very good. That always helps.

Curry #1 and Jerry #20 looks pretty good right now. Hell, finish it off with Ayers at #33! A defense-a-palooza!

With Daunte at QB? No way, Jose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Plus they traded a player who wasn't very good for a player who is very good. That always helps.

Curry #1 and Jerry #20 looks pretty good right now. Hell, finish it off with Ayers at #33! A defense-a-palooza!

OLB is the least of our problems now,i dont think we would use the #1 overall pick on an OLB when OT and QB are more glaring weaknesses now that we added Peterson and have Sims at the other end. Sims may not be the greatest but he is still an NFL starter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how every talent evaluator, coach, and gm can say things like "Curry can play MLB in the NFL" and our fans still say things like "Curry is an SLB" or "Drafting a player and moving him right away is stupid"

Anyone else remember Brian Urlacher? You know, one of the greatest LBs of our time. He was a ******* Strong Safety in college. No coach cares WHERE you played in college. Its all about the player, his strengths, and the scheme he is going into.

Although the Peterson trade lessens the chance of Curry it does not eliminate it. Another good point, maybe the LB coach (Schwartz) who hired the LB Coach (Cunningham), and whose protege (Bates) is an LB Coach...wants a good LB corps?

SIMS-CURRY-PETERSON is a great group with Dizon/Lewis/Nece as backups. Draft Hood@#20 and the defense looks pretty caulked up (old but not as leaky)

However, SIMS-MAUALUGA-PETERSON is still a good group if Raji is first off the board. Replace Maualuga with Cushing/Laurinaitis/Beckwith if you wish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently people want to lose games 0-3 rather than actually trying to form an offense.

This trade should mean Stafford is the guy at number 1. Add in an offensive lineman, a middle backer and a defensive tackle in the next three picks and you have a new team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently people want to lose games 0-3 rather than actually trying to form an offense.

This trade should mean Stafford is the guy at number 1. Add in an offensive lineman' date=' a middle backer and a defensive tackle in the next three picks and you have a new team.[/quote']

STRAWMAN!!!!!

1) I dislike Stafford, he's the 6th best player in this draft. His arm strength is overrated (not as good as Freeman's) and his intangibles are widely panned.

2) I like value, the OTs will come for much less than any QB drafted #1 overall and Curry would come for about $30 mil less. Matt Ryan got Brady-like money...no way Stafford deserves that.

Now that Mayock is on his anti-stafford tour, get ready to defend your indefensible POV even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sims is pretty darn good.

I agree but people around here dont like him too much so i downplay what i think of him to avoid arguments because I can see their side.

Even if curry can play MLB, i doubt we trade one of our best defenders to get a LB if we were going to draft one at #1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
STRAWMAN!!!!!

1) I dislike Stafford, he's the 6th best player in this draft. His arm strength is overrated (not as good as Freeman's) and his intangibles are widely panned.

If he is really the sixth best player in this draft, than he is worth the number one pick as a QB.

His arm is better than Freeman's and his intangibles are vastly overlooked. Look at his performance last year (in the SEC, and the worst offensive line in the conference), along with the fact he is 3-0 in Bowls and as a resume of numerous game winning drives. The guy is the real deal.

2) I like value, the OTs will come for much less than any QB drafted #1 overall and Curry would come for about $30 mil less. Matt Ryan got Brady-like money...no way Stafford deserves that.

Many people didn't think Matt Ryan deserved the money he got last year. You like value, fine. The value comes in getting a franchise QB. If Stafford plays up to his ability, which is an if that comes with any player, than he will be worth his contract.

Also the key to a football team is not to get the best value from their players - its to win. I'm in a political field, its my job to create election strategy. In politics, you always work towards your strengths - if you are running a Republican campaign in Alabama, you are going to try your best to win over conservatives before even thinking about swing voters. On the Detroit Lions, the best pieces of a long term franchise are strongly on the offense in Calvin Johnson and Kevin Smith. A QB like Stafford would give you a Manning-Harrison-James like trio, a Ryan-White-Turner like trio.

Now that Mayock is on his anti-stafford tour, get ready to defend your indefensible POV even more.

LOL indefensible. Its never indefensible to suggest that a team with no franchise QB should draft...a franchise QB. In fact they even made a nice gold colored rule for just such an occasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Find me one scout, anyone who looks at Freeman throwing the ball and Stafford throwing the ball and says Stafford has the better arm strength. That's a complete fallacy.

Matt Ryan didn't deserve the money he got last year. No one deserves Brady/Manning money without doing anything on the field. However, Ryan lived up to the billing, I'm not going to take the polar opposite of Ryan and guarantee that he is just as sure of a thing. Stafford is much more comparable to JaMarcus Russell than Matt Ryan.

Your last point precludes that Stafford is a sure-fire franchise QB. You, Cruz and Mel Kiper are the only three people on the planet who think Stafford is bust-proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently people want to lose games 0-3 rather than actually trying to form an offense.

This trade should mean Stafford is the guy at number 1. Add in an offensive lineman' date=' a middle backer and a defensive tackle in the next three picks and you have a new team.[/quote']

Guaranteed. Throw away the keys. Lock it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Find me one scout, anyone who looks at Freeman throwing the ball and Stafford throwing the ball and says Stafford has the better arm strength. That's a complete fallacy.

Stafford having the best arm is a fairly common place belief by anyone following the draft.

Matt Ryan didn't deserve the money he got last year. No one deserves Brady/Manning money without doing anything on the field. However, Ryan lived up to the billing, I'm not going to take the polar opposite of Ryan and guarantee that he is just as sure of a thing. Stafford is much more comparable to JaMarcus Russell than Matt Ryan.

In what way is Stafford at all a polar opposite of Ryan? Having a bigger, more talented arm does not make you polar opoosites. Production wise they are actually quite similar.

Your last point precludes that Stafford is a sure-fire franchise QB. You, Cruz and Mel Kiper are the only three people on the planet who think Stafford is bust-proof.

Being right and being popular are not the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, I love Mayock, but I'd love to go through the tape where he's ripping on Stafford. Show me...I'll show you plenty of dropped passes, and many occasions where he's getting away from the pass rush to pull off an impressive play. As for stinkers, the Florida game was a stinker for their whole team, and Stafford was bad in that game. Florida made other people look bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stafford having the best arm is a fairly common place belief by anyone following the draft.
Being right and being popular are not the same.

Thank you for answering yourself there.

As for Ryan vs. Stafford. Ryan was known for having all the intangibles and was widely touted as a great QB (but a bad thrower). Stafford is known for having questionable intangibles (spottiest play from a #1 QB prospect I've ever seen) and is a great thrower (but an average QB)

That's the scouting report. Continue to live in your "Stafford ist das Ubermench" fantasy land all you want. Best QB in a bad year is nothing special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the risk of getting flamed, I think Mayhew has been a little bit sacrificing the future with band aid type fixes for 2009. Mayhew really only has this season to prove himself, and I think he'd rather have a 6 win season with older guys than a 3 win season with younger guys. Of course, the draft is still to come so there is an opportunity to do both.

With younger guys? The only trade he's made that made us older was this one. And I'm pretty sure Peterson's talent and insanely nice unguaranteed contract more than makes up for the two years we lost in age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for answering yourself there.

As for Ryan vs. Stafford. Ryan was known for having all the intangibles and was widely touted as a great QB (but a bad thrower). Stafford is known for having questionable intangibles (spottiest play from a #1 QB prospect I've ever seen) and is a great thrower (but an average QB)

That's the scouting report. Continue to live in your "Stafford ist das Ubermench" fantasy land all you want. Best QB in a bad year is nothing special.

Fantasy land? Stafford will likely go #1, and that's a fact. Your credentials (as far as being correct with any of your posts) are considerably underwhelming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...