Nastradamus

2017 Offseason and free agency thread

486 posts in this topic

Last season should have put to bed the frankly inane 'Stafford can't win a big game' discussion.  The Lions only were in the position they were in last year because of Stafford, and they probably should have been a 5 or 6 win team.  That speaks well of Matthew, not poorly.

QB salary/contact values are tied to timing in addition to production.

Basically the most recent good QB to sign a contract will get the largest contract whether he is actually the best QB in the league or not.  If Rodgers came up, I'd expect he would make even more than Cousins or Stafford. But he isn't, so he won't.  Not paying Stafford will not somehow free up money for a better QB to come here.

It seems to me the fundamental question is this: what the realistic alternative to signing Stafford?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr.TaterSalad said:

Kurt Cousins set the market, so $30 million it is then.

If it's $30M then so be it.  How do you propose that they find a franchise QB is they deal Stafford? Tank for a franchise QB?  Even that's a longshot when looking at the highly drafted QBs of the last several years.  Stafford isn't perfect but if they deal him, they will likely spend the next 5-10 years looking for the next Stafford.  Just ask Cleveland, NYJ, Buffalo, Houston, Miami to an extent, Oakland for about a decade before they lucked out with Carr, Rams, Tennessee for about a decade before Mariotta, Jacksonville etc.  If you have a really good QB, you do what you can to hold on to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wasnt tater all over connor flipping cook?  what a disaster this team would be if they had that guy as their qb.

the lions are a matt stafford injury away from being 2-14.  this is the team that was losing every game but one with 1 minute left in the game.  without stafford they probably lose all thise games.

the lions finally get a good nfl qb and we proceed to pick nits to say he's not good enough because aaron rogers and tom brady are better.  come on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Buddha said:

wasnt tater all over connor flipping cook?  what a disaster this team would be if they had that guy as their qb.

the lions are a matt stafford injury away from being 2-14.  this is the team that was losing every game but one with 1 minute left in the game.  without stafford they probably lose all thise games.

the lions finally get a good nfl qb and we proceed to pick nits to say he's not good enough because aaron rogers and tom brady are better.  come on.

He was all over Connor Cook but third string QB with questionable character don't make $30 million. We have to a pay a good QB $30 million when we could have had Connor Cook who couldn't even finish ahead of Matt McGoin. Just think of the draft picks. Look at what Denver got for Cutler. They got Orton, Ayers, Smith and Quinn. (That would be the Alphonso Smith who played for the Lions)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Buddha said:

wasnt tater all over connor flipping cook?  what a disaster this team would be if they had that guy as their qb.

the lions are a matt stafford injury away from being 2-14.  this is the team that was losing every game but one with 1 minute left in the game.  without stafford they probably lose all thise games.

the lions finally get a good nfl qb and we proceed to pick nits to say he's not good enough because aaron rogers and tom brady are better.  come on.

The issue isn't that he's not Aaron Rodgers. The issue is the percentage of cap hit that he's taking up versus the value that he's actually giving you. Yes, I was on getting Connor Cook and additional first round picks with him. I was very clear at the time about if Stafford were flipped, I would want multiple first round selections for him. The time for Bob Quinn to rebuild has come and gone as he has made his decision on Stafford and will commit whatever resources necessary to keep him. I'm not going to rehash this argument more than I already have.

I produced the Football Outsiders stats above to show that against the above-average and good defenses in the league, he isn't very good. In either case, we're committed to paying him anything he wants since he's a QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the alternative?

If he is to be so overpaid, why would any other team sign him?  Surely they subscribe to Football Outsiders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can get the defensive line from the 1985 Chicago Bears (in their 1985 form) for Stafford, you do it. Otherwise you pay him.

Anyway, the article about the sides being far apart is obviously a plant from Stafford’s agent. No reason to hyperventilate about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

What is the alternative?

superbowl.jpg

To be sure, this isn't the norm and far less teams have success building their Super Bowl winning team in this manner. There are probably 3 franchises in the last 20 years who you can legitimately say were Super Bowl winners because of their defense. You asked for the alternative though and that is to keep drafting top-tier defensive talent, get yourself a QB who can game manage well enough to win and hope you repeat what Elway did with the Broncos.

I'm not even calling for the Lions to do it this way since I know Quinn's going to pay him whatever it takes to keep him here, be it $28, $30, $32, $35 million per season. If Stafford is only thinking of himself in the contract negotiations, he's likely taking this franchise for a financial ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3?  I can only think of two in this century that won primarily because of their defense with a game manager at QB.  The 2000 Ravens and the 2016 Broncos.  Those also happen to be two of the best defenses of all time so you need to build an all time great defense to compensate for average QB play to compete for super bowls.

Stafford isn't only thinking of himself with those numbers, he's merely maximizing his market value as any NFL player would.  It's up to the Lions to build a good team around him, not him.

Again, if they deal Stafford, they could very well spend the next decade looking for the next Stafford.  As I mentioned in my earlier post, just about half the league has been looking for a franchise QB for years.  Accumulating 1st rounders is nice but finding a franchise QB is very hit or miss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the alternative is the trade Stafford to have an all time defense?

Will trading him achieve that end?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way you get enough value in return for trading Stafford. Sign him.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

So the alternative is the trade Stafford to have an all time defense?

Will trading him achieve that end?

Don't forget signing a hall of fame QB for $100 million coming off a neck injury in which he missed an entire season. Good teams don't pay up for QB's. 

Lets not forget Denver got nothing for Cutler and didn't win a Super Bowl until they paid up for Manning. 

Denver also had the 4th ranked defense last year and still missed the playoffs. I wonder what would have happened if they had a better QB?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

denver would trade you a ton of assets for matt stafford.  and then denver would be really good again.

and detroit would suck.  again.

the lions dont need to trade their best player in order to win, they need to draft better players at other positions to help him win.  thats what good teams do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting discussion, because there is zero chance the lions trade Stanford. 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ESPN insider put out a list of 25 potential breakout candidates and Killebrew made the list and Dwayne Washington made honorable mention. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RandyMarsh said:

ESPN insider put out a list of 25 potential breakout candidates and Killebrew made the list and Dwayne Washington made honorable mention. 

killebrew maybe.  washington no way.  he might not make the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Buddha said:

killebrew maybe.  washington no way.  he might not make the team.

If he does we're set though, lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kenny Golladay looking like the real deal.  Two touchdowns already for the Lions in the first half against the Colts.  Making big plays, not ordinary ones.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My first thought from this: Asiata sucks really bad and there's no reason for him to be on the roster ahead of Washington, Zenner, or anyone really

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I guess everyone was right and Golladay was an awful pick, right?

Only 2 TD's in his first game, while he was been playing exceptionally well in camp too.  Looks like a fantastic pick by Quinn.  

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Golladay made plays today, not just easy catches. Good for him.

OL did not look like a dumpster fire. But I’m not sure there are any positive signs to take from the running game.

And if Kerry Hyder misses any significant amount of time, as looks possible, then uh oh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We’ve seen plenty of preseason heroes over the years, so won't know for sure about Golladay until it’s for real. Made some nice adjustments on the ball though.

Hyder out for the year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, T&P_Fan said:

So I guess everyone was right and Golladay was an awful pick, right?

Only 2 TD's in his first game, while he was been playing exceptionally well in camp too.  Looks like a fantastic pick by Quinn.  

 

A terrible 3rd round pick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colts have a bottom 5 roster and bottom 1 without Luck. They are awful. But an encouraging start aside from Hyder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      95,290
    • Total Posts
      2,687,721
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      6,451
    • Most Online
      590

    Newest Member
    pawlaser
    Joined
  • Who's Online (See full list)