More thoughts on the Draft
May 2, 2007 on 3:38 pm | In Uncategorized |So many observers have liked the players that the Lions selected on Saturday, that I have been mildly surprised. Rick Gosselin from the Dallas Morning News , one of the pre-eminent draftniks and among the countries best football writers, gave the Lions an A grade. Lions insider Mike Fowler was very positive during a recent radio interview on the “Huge Show” out of Grand Rapids, Michigan. Fowler believes that QB Drew Stanton will potentially be a Pro Bowl-quality QB and thinks that Stanton was the second best QB available in this years draft.
Peter King from Sports Illustrated has also been very supportive. The Lions do deserve to be congratulated for taking the best player available in the draft, in spite of their recent first round history in drafting skill players. When Matt Millen was unable to receive a suitable trade package for trading down in the first round, he really had no choice but to select Calvin Johnson.
Many Lions fans were enamored of OT Joe Thomas, who would have helped in an area of personnel need and Thomas possesses an unimpeachable character, but the Lions felt that they would have been reaching a bit drafting Thomas at #2 and would have had to decided immediately upon the future of mediocre, but dependable(and costly), OT Jeff Backus. Furthermore, the recent acquisition of OT George Foster made it a certainty that the Lions were unlikely to draft Thomas.
I was recently critical of the selection of Stanton by comparing him to former Lions QB Mike McMahon. Although I am still not particularly fond of the pick, I realize that the Lions viewed next year’s draft as being light on QB’s and they knew that they were going to have to move Josh McCown, irregardless of whether or not they chose to draft a QB in ‘07. Stanton will benefit from the tutelage of Mike Martz for at least one season. That in itself makes the Stanton pick more valuable, than what I had decided upon cursory analysis.
8 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
irregardless of whether or not they chose to draft a QB in ‘07.
Its regardless, irregardless isn’t a word.
Comment by Trevor — May 2, 2007 #
From Webster’s:
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Irregardless
irregardless
One entry found for irregardless.
Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: “ir-i-’gärd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that “there is no such word.” There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.
Comment by joe stanter — May 2, 2007 #
You have a strong analysis, but I take issue with the comment about the QB class in next year’s draft. Brian Brohm is a better pro prospect than anybody in this draft, even Russell. Chad Henne and Andre Woodson are both more accomplished than Drew Stanton. They both throw better balls that he does, as well. Hopefully he works out, but there are some guys coming out next year that would have been nice to have.
Comment by Father Figure — May 2, 2007 #
Agreed about Brohm and Henne, among others. Apparently, the Lions either don’t believe they will be drafting that high or really wanted to get a young QB so that he has as much time as possible with Martz, especially with the trade of McCown. I think John David Booty will also have a decent NFL future, too. I am little paranoid that if, or when, the Lions struggle that the Lions may consider throwing Stanton to the wolves, especially if it is a popular move with the fans. I think Stanton is at least a year, more likely two, from being ready to play.
Comment by Steve — May 4, 2007 #
I agree that the Lions had to grab Johnson under the circumstances. A smart move with Martz around. Our take:
http://www.rotorob.com/football/nfl-draft-recap-calvin-johnson/
Comment by RotoRob — May 7, 2007 #
Here is the problem with taking Stanton for Martz to play with, Martz will be a head coach somewhere next year and we will have a new coordinator and a new offensive system. To me that is not the way to bring up a new qb prospect.
As soon as he learns this complicated system, we’ll change to something else. Plus Martz is totally reworking Drew’s mechanics, something else the new coordinator might not like and change back when he gets here.
Plus Stanton stinks. In todays college football, with 600 or so bowl games, he did not once take MSU to a bowl game!!! He had 3 gimme wins every year, all he needed from a mediocre Big 10 was 3 more and he couldn’t get the job done.You can say what you will about the rest of his team not being any good, however last time I checked the Lion roster wasn’t exactly filled with pro bowl players.
Comment by T Rick — May 8, 2007 #
Nice site RotoRob. Lions fans are a paranoid and fatalistic lot. We have legitimate reasoning for experiencing buyer’s remorse when it comes to selecting skill players in the top 10. With that in mind, if Johnson is as good as advertised, the Lions offense will be lethal next year, especially, if OT George Foster and Edwin Mulitalo are the upgrades they appear to be over the likes of Ross Verba, Rex Tucker, and Rich DeMulling.
Comment by Steve — May 8, 2007 #
T Rick–I believe that it is essential that Stanton gets de-constructed as a player, if he is going to be a future contributor at all. I have read that some scouts believed that he had the mechanics and footwork of a high school sophomore and that their is some belief among scouts that the yahoo’s who consisted of the Sparty coaching staff during Stanton’s career should have been canned just for squandering Stanton’s talent alone.
Martz has a proven track record of developing QB’s in this league. I think that with patience, if Stanton is up to the challenge, the Lions may eventually reap benefits from Stanton. The unfortunate reality is that they had more immediate needs for their second round draft pick, in my opinion.
I do think that the Lions will promote from within, or find another Ernie Zampese/Air Coryell protege to assume the helm if Martz should happen to leave. As time marches on, I think it is a lot less likely than many experts believe that their is actually a desire for the eccentric Martz on the available coaching market.
In regards to Stanton, his collegiate performance is undefendable. I compared him to Mike McMahon for a reason, even if the comparison was a reach. I think that Stanton has the ability to surpass Dan Orlovsky, but it is highly questionable whether or not that will translate to legitimate NFL talent or not.
Comment by Steve — May 8, 2007 #