Stafford .... Would you trade him for ???

[Yoda 734]

TBF, he did cut his interception rate by a third this season - it's now in a more normal range. So he has shown he can improve his decision making - which is what you would expect he can improve. His throwing is another matter. To me it's harder to see how he will ever turn into a different thrower in terms of accuracy at 27. The critique that the Lions are overpaying him is absolutely fair, but the Lions have overpaid a lot of players they shouldn't have. Can't blame Matthew for taking the money.

He's also has a pretty high ceiling. Whether or not he reaches that, who knows, but that usually comes at a premium. He has leadership skills, he's fairly mobile, has a very strong arm, and has improved his decision making. He's also shown the ability to stay healthy, which is a surprise after his first two seasons. The only real problem he has is accuracy. I really have no idea on the likelihood of him fixing that, but he should be able to improve on it.

[yeahbuddy 10]

He is slow. Not accurate. No pocket presence.

I really don't like the way he grabs his helmet when there is an incomplete pass as if the receiver did something wrong. They might have but a good teammate doesn't show up teammates like that. The receivers could do the same to him but they are more professional, IMO.

Edit... For most, if not all, of his pro career, he's been able to throw to an area and CJ went and got the ball. Now that CJ is getting older, I see more of his lack of accuracy.

But then he just dazzles for a Sunday or a drive and you say why not that same intensity all of the time?

Edited December 30, 2014 by yeahbuddy

[Euphdude 1,069]

I think Stafford gets one more year to see if he can finally turn the corner. Otherwise he might be too expensive in the long run, and the Lions might be better off developing another young QB from the draft.

[Jason_R 167]

I think Stafford gets one more year to see if he can finally turn the corner. Otherwise he might be too expensive in the long run, and the Lions might be better off developing another young QB from the draft.

That's the real question - not who would you trade Stafford for, but when do you pick up another QB in the draft.

I don't know the college ranks at all and don't know what the QB prospects look like outside of the first few, but I wouldn't be upset if the team used a 3rd or 4th round pick this offseason or next on a QB prospect they thought was undervalued.

It's getting a bit late to expect Stafford to turn the corner.

[Euphdude 1,069]

That's the real question - not who would you trade Stafford for, but when do you pick up another QB in the draft.

I don't know the college ranks at all and don't know what the QB prospects look like outside of the first few, but I wouldn't be upset if the team used a 3rd or 4th round pick this offseason or next on a QB prospect they thought was undervalued.

It's getting a bit late to expect Stafford to turn the corner.

I can see the Lions using a 4th or 5th rounder on a QB during the next draft. He wouldn't compete for the starting spot, but the Lions could spend the next couple of seasons grooming him to compete for it.

[T&P_Fan 386]

Trade him for Sanchez...

Some thoughts people have are just something else.

[NYLion 209]

I'm not going to look up contract numbers on the qbs you listed but if we could just get rid of his contract and draft a qb, I'd be happy.

I would give him one more year first though. If he is the SOS same ol Stafford then just let him go.

He's the second coming of Joey Harrington IMO.

Oh good god. Ridiculous.

Anyway, for those who want to replace Stafford, who do you replace him with? Can't come up with an answer?....... That's what I thought.

Outside of the elite QBs which are pretty much Brady, Manning, Brees and Rodgers at this point (although the former 3 probably don't have too many good years left), there aren't many QBs that I would take ahead of Stafford. Probably Luck, Big Ben, Romo and Wilson for sure. Any other good QB is very arguable.

He has his faults and it's frustrating to see him struggle against good teams on the road but the fact of the matter is that he's likely the 2nd best QB the Lions have ever had.

The grass isn't always greener on the other side. If they deal Stafford, they will regret that decision and I guarantee that the Stafford detractors around here will be saying, "If only the Lions had a QB like Stafford again" within a couple of years.

[T&P_Fan 386]

The KC Chiefs WR's, collectively, had ZERO touchdowns this year. But let's put in Kellen Moore.

Ya all got me agreeing with NY Lion.

[NYLion 209]

Ya all got me agreeing with NY Lion.

Sons of bitches.

[Yoda 734]

Oh good god. Ridiculous.

Anyway, for those who want to replace Stafford, who do you replace him with? Can't come up with an answer?....... That's what I thought.

Outside of the elite QBs which are pretty much Brady, Manning, Brees and Rodgers at this point (although the former 3 probably don't have too many good years left), there aren't many QBs that I would take ahead of Stafford. Probably Luck, Big Ben, Romo and Wilson for sure. Any other good QB is very arguable.

He has his faults and it's frustrating to see him struggle against good teams on the road but the fact of the matter is that he's likely the 2nd best QB the Lions have ever had.

The grass isn't always greener on the other side. If they deal Stafford, they will regret that decision and I guarantee that the Stafford detractors around here will be saying, "If only the Lions had a QB like Stafford again" within a couple of years.

This is pretty much where I am.

[NYLion 209]

Palmer - (If healthy, obviously) Yes

Matt Ryan - Yes

Flacco - Yes (Borderline)

Orton - No

Newton - Yes

Cutler - No

Dalton - No

Shaw - No

Romo - Yes

Peyton Manning - Yes

Rodgers - Yes

Keenum - No

Luck - Yes

Bortles - No

Smith - No

Tannehill - No

Bridgewater - Possibly (No if tomorrow, yes to build around for the future)

Brady - Yes

Brees - Yes

Manning Eli - No

Smith - No

Carr - Possibly (Same as Bridgewater)

Sanchez - No

Big Ben - Yes

Rivers - Yes

Kapernick - Yes

Russell Wilson - Yes

Hill - No

McCown - No

Whitehurst - No

McCoy - No

My list has 13 obvious "yes" and three toss ups. You really would need to qualify what you mean by trade, my list would change considerably taking age into account.

You have an interesting definition of obvious.

Palmer, Ryan, Flacco, Newton and Kaepernick are obvious? Even Wilson I would have to question considering he was placed in a perfect position to succeed although I do love the Wilson "intangibles".

Even Romo wasn't really an "obvious" until this season. Pretty similar QB to Stafford actually. It's no wonder that Romo has taken off this season behind an elite offensive line, who knew?

Carr possibly? Meh, i don't really see anything special in him.

I do like Bridgewater though. I think the Vikings got a good one in him unfortunately.

Edited December 30, 2014 by NYLion

[Gehringer_2 2,613]

Oh good god. Ridiculous.

Anyway, for those who want to replace Stafford, who do you replace him with? Can't come up with an answer?....... That's what I thought.

Outside of the elite QBs which are pretty much Brady, Manning, Brees and Rodgers at this point (although the former 3 probably don't have too many good years left), there aren't many QBs that I would take ahead of Stafford. Probably Luck, Big Ben, Romo and Wilson for sure. Any other good QB is very arguable.

He has his faults and it's frustrating to see him struggle against good teams on the road but the fact of the matter is that he's likely the 2nd best QB the Lions have ever had.

The grass isn't always greener on the other side. If they deal Stafford, they will regret that decision and I guarantee that the Stafford detractors around here will be saying, "If only the Lions had a QB like Stafford again" within a couple of years.

the best scenario it the Bledsoe->Brady one. You have a decent QB but you are on the lookout for a diamond in the rough each draft. I think I if I were a GM I would bring in a 'toolsy' 4th-6th round pick every couple of yrs as a development project at the position instead of reserving the BU QB roles exclusively for retreads. I don't recall the Lions having picked any QB talent in the draft since Stafford. Of course part of that is having given up so many picks as well.

[cruzer1 178]

You can't trade Stafford, so this question is meaningless.

[Jason_R 167]

Oh good god. Ridiculous.

Anyway, for those who want to replace Stafford, who do you replace him with? Can't come up with an answer?....... That's what I thought.

Outside of the elite QBs which are pretty much Brady, Manning, Brees and Rodgers at this point (although the former 3 probably don't have too many good years left), there aren't many QBs that I would take ahead of Stafford. Probably Luck, Big Ben, Romo and Wilson for sure. Any other good QB is very arguable.

He has his faults and it's frustrating to see him struggle against good teams on the road but the fact of the matter is that he's likely the 2nd best QB the Lions have ever had.

The grass isn't always greener on the other side. If they deal Stafford, they will regret that decision and I guarantee that the Stafford detractors around here will be saying, "If only the Lions had a QB like Stafford again" within a couple of years.

Nobody is dealing Stafford.

Is he good enough that the Lions should forego taking a QB in the draft if that QB is the best available player? If a Russell Wilson (pick #75) is available when the Lions pick at #54 (Ryan Broyles), should the team say, "We need to get Matt Stafford some more weapons; this pick is going WR"?

I'm not trying to re-draft, just saying that I doubt it ever occurred to the team to pick Wilson because they see Stafford as a "franchise QB". That term should only really be used for about five players though: Brady, Brees, Manning, Rodgers, Wilson.

Edited December 30, 2014 by Jason_R

[sabretooth 267]

Oh good god. Ridiculous.

Anyway, for those who want to replace Stafford, who do you replace him with? Can't come up with an answer?....... That's what I thought.

Outside of the elite QBs which are pretty much Brady, Manning, Brees and Rodgers at this point (although the former 3 probably don't have too many good years left), there aren't many QBs that I would take ahead of Stafford. Probably Luck, Big Ben, Romo and Wilson for sure. Any other good QB is very arguable.

He has his faults and it's frustrating to see him struggle against good teams on the road but the fact of the matter is that he's likely the 2nd best QB the Lions have ever had.

The grass isn't always greener on the other side. If they deal Stafford, they will regret that decision and I guarantee that the Stafford detractors around here will be saying, "If only the Lions had a QB like Stafford again" within a couple of years.

Yes, absolutely. Stafford is a kid (I'm 44, I'll admit it) with a big arm and flashes of brilliance...but despite some accuracy issues he's still an above average QB with a higher ceiling...probably won't become an "elite" QB but he could be in the next tier, certainly good enough to help the Lions win a majority of their games (if the rest of the roster is up to par) and certainly good enough to win playoff games and a SB.

Giving up on Stafford would be an enormous mistake.

[NYLion 209]

Nobody is dealing Stafford.

Is he good enough that the Lions should forego taking a QB in the draft if that QB is the best available player? If a Russell Wilson (pick #75) is available when the Lions pick at #54 (Ryan Broyles), should the team say, "We need to get Matt Stafford some more weapons; this pick is going WR"?

I'm not trying to re-draft, just saying that I doubt it ever occurred to the team to pick Wilson because they see Stafford as a "franchise QB". That term should only really be used for about five players though.

I only brought up trade based on the premise of the thread.

If they see a QB they like in the middle rounds 3-5 then go for it but Stafford is still their guy until proven otherwise.

I don't think he's a franchise QB either but he's a good QB and certainly the best option the Lions have currently.

I also think he's capable of leading them to a Superbowl eventually with the right personnel around him. Give him a good offensive line like Romo has and he'll be a better player for it.

Edited December 30, 2014 by NYLion

[T&P_Fan 386]

Also, anyone who would take Kaepernick over Stafford has never watched Kaepernick play.

[cruzer1 178]

Stafford is a great comeback QB. He's very similar to Elway. He doesn't have the feet, but has a similar arm.

[Yoda 734]

I'm just hoping for Manning, Brees, Rodgers, and Brady to break their legs so Stafford can be the best.

[John_Brian_K 262]

Clearly you never watched Joey play, or you couldn't even attempt to make that comparison. My god.

Clearly.

[sabretooth 267]

I forgot to get in on the Joey H/Stafford comparison by the OP......bwhahahahahahahaha

[John_Brian_K 262]

He has regressed this year big time. He looked pretty bad last week and is missing WR's all over the place. I have been a huge supporter of his, but I was expecting a little more this year. The 'new offense' line can only be used so many times. Everyone on the offense should be on the same page by now. The OL has not done him any favors...going from a great squad last year to the crapola we have seen this year, but he still needs to be better.

Would I trade him for Manning or Brady or Brees ...no because they are all old. I would take Luck, Rodgers and maybe Rivers right now for sure. Most of the others I would pass on...there would probably be about 4-5 on the bubble IMO.

Even though he has been bad this year I would still rather have him for now and the future than most of the QB's in the league when you take age into account.

[RatkoVarda 328]

Peyton Manning at age 26 threw for 4200 yards, 27 TD, 19 INT, and a 66.3 completion percentage. He was 0-3 in the playoffs.

Don't forget about John "he can't win the big one" Elway, who lost his first 3 Super Bowls, not winning one until his 9th playoff appearance. Stafford will never be in Elway's class, but if Flacco can win a Super Bowl, Stafford can too.

[Nastradamus 271]

The Stafford hate is baffling to me. Unless he throws for 5,000 yards, 40 TDs and wins a SB every year people will say get rid of him. We've been terrible for over a decade and he's now lead us to the playoffs twice in 4 years while putting up some very impressive numbers. He's often had very little to work with too(less than any good QB according to 538.com).

Sign him to an extension within a week of our season ending, period.

[Nastradamus 271]

He has regressed this year big time. He looked pretty bad last week and is missing WR's all over the place. I have been a huge supporter of his, but I was expecting a little more this year. The 'new offense' line can only be used so many times. Everyone on the offense should be on the same page by now. The OL has not done him any favors...going from a great squad last year to the crapola we have seen this year, but he still needs to be better.

Would I trade him for Manning or Brady or Brees ...no because they are all old. I would take Luck, Rodgers and maybe Rivers right now for sure. Most of the others I would pass on...there would probably be about 4-5 on the bubble IMO.

Even though he has been bad this year I would still rather have him for now and the future than most of the QB's in the league when you take age into account.

When you can't ever step into a throw, you can't be at your best in terms of accuracy. Stafford is never going to have Brady's accuracy, but he has plenty to get by. He's shown us that moving the ball up the field is typically not an issue for him and now he's cut out the INTs even more.

Not only was the OL a disaster, but our run game was 27th. I don't think there was much more he could have done.