The Lions Linebacker Situation
February 7, 2010 on 12:43 am | In Uncategorized |Ty from Lions in Winter, a fellow traveler in the hoisting of the Lions millstone around our necks, is as energetic and informed as any blogger currently devoting their attention to the Lions.

The Lions Are a Weighty Beast of Burden. Is It Bad Form to Use One Cliche In the Service of Another?
Recently, Ty had the good fortune of increasing his exposure by contributing to MLive.com’s “Highlight Reel” blog. After the envy subsided, I read Ty’s compelling argument for the Lions need to utilize one of their few personnel groups (their only one?) that could be remotely construed as an area of strength as a bargaining chip.
This move would comprise of one of the personnel executive’s most common gambits for deal-making. By utilizing an area of strength in a deal, in order to strengthen another personnel group, hypothetically, sacrificing little (hopefully) of the level of performance in the stronger personnel group in the process, the team improves holistically.
Ty does a very good job explaining that Martin Mayhew exhibited a light-on-his-feet ability to negotiate the treacherous waves of the most difficult and under-utilized modes of altering a team’s roster (in the NFL at least), making trades. Ty rightfully commends Mayhew’s ability to trade Roy Williams, and even more improbably turn a player with limited value to the Lions, Cory Redding, to one of value, Julian Peterson (ironically, a player who added to the relative strength of the Lions linebacking corps). He Posits:
Is there another Cory Redding on this roster?
The easy answer is “Yes, Julian Peterson.” Why? He’s now an expensive asset at a position of sudden surplus. With the emergence of DeAndre Levy, the Lions have four “starting” linebackers for their base 4-3 defense. Peterson played well in several games, but was far from a consistent impact performer; he didn’t approach justifying his lofty salary.
However, Julian Peterson is the exact type of player that Schwartz and Mayhew want at OLB: a big, strong, fast outside linebacker, who can generate pass rush off the blitz. If the Lions could wave a magic wand, they’d have a young JP man both OLB positions. No, Peterson still has value in this defense; the trade bait has to be someone else: an undersized, overpaid, underperforming defender with no clear role.
Ernie Sims.
Sims was locked in constant battle with Levy for starting reps and playing time, and has been maddeningly inconsistent throughout his four-year career. He’ll flash breathtaking quickness and incredible hitting ability one week, and a total inability to hit the correct hole or tackle well the next. That reckless, undisciplined play is bad enough when it comes from an otherwise excellent defender – but when it comes from Sims, it’s inexcusable. All that freelancing has generated only 2.5 sacks, 5 passes defensed, and 1 INT in his entire career.
So, if Sims is the bait on the hook, who’s the prey?
This is where I deviate. I think, assuming that Larry Foote (more on that later…) re-signs, that the Lions should do absolutely nothing to diminish DeAndre Levy’s versatility. By committing to Levy as the weakside LB, I believe that the Lions will limit Levy’s ability, using Jim Schwartz’s term, to be a multi-dimensional player.
Levy gives the Lions a player who can play nickel MLB, serve as a starting weakside LB, and gives them someone who seems surpemely adaptable, a rare commodity. By trading Sims, the Lions would be calling upon either Jordan Dizon or Zack Follett, collectively known as the “Pain Train” to step forward and assume a much larger role, which may actually be beyond their capabilities at this point.
The Lions would also hinder their ability to utilize the occasional 3-4 defensive alignment, even though Follett began to earn playing time in those situations, later in the ‘09 season.
Ernie Sims Game Log
Week Solo Ast Total
1 4 1 5
2 4 5 9
weeks 3-5 DNP
6 1 0 1
7 Bye
8 3 4 7
9 2 1 3
weeks 10-13 DNP
14 4 0 4
15 6 2 8
16 4 1 5
17 4 3 7
Sims’ ‘09 performance was less than inspiring, that goes without debate. He was injured throughout the season, and is not entirely a natural fit in the Lions current defensive scheme. Sims is inarguably better suited for the Tampa-2 defensive scheme, which is becoming an endangered species among NFL defenses.
That being said, Sims did have several games where he approached 10 tackles and still can be a relentless, nettlesome presence to opposing offense’s.
Ultimately, I believe that it will be difficult for the Lions to obtain anything other than a low-ball offer for Sims, since he is undersized, and considering last season’s injuries, could become an increasingly injury-prone player. The Lions would not be able to maximize his value at this point. Moving Sims would be akin to re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

Denizens of Lions Nation Are Not Surprised to See Another Matt Millen Draft Pick De-Value Exponentially
Meanwhile, having “four starting linebackers”, two of whom are veterans operating on borrowed time, would allow the Lions the luxury of a valuable replacement in the unfortunate event that one of their starters succumbs to injury.
With Larry Foote angrily declaring that the Lions lethargy in providing him with a new deal will force him to consider testing the free agent market, the Lions vaunted “surplus” at the linebacker position could be vanishing before our very eyes.
But now it’s looking like the two parties may be going their separate ways after 2009, which saw the 29-year-old Foote register 99 tackles – the second-highest season total in his career.
Feb. 4, The Detroit News: “We’re just going to free agency and see from there,” said Foote, citing unproductive talks between his agent, Brian Levy, and Lions general manager Martin Mayhew.
“I mean, obviously, I’m not a big priority for them. So that’s just how I’m taking it.”
But Foote, who, including signing bonus, earned $1.5 million in 2009, said he isn’t looking for a huge increase in pay; the main thing he wants is a multiyear deal.
Whether or not Foote re-signs with the Lions will depend mostly on what he can earn in free agency, and what the Lions coaching staff thinks the Detroit native’s role would be, especially considering defensive coordinator Gunther Cunningham’s explicit desire to see Levy manning the middle linebacker spot.
Foote doesn’t necessarily agree that it’s either he or Levy in the middle.
“I mean, I don’t look at it like that. Me and Levy played all year together, practically,” Foote said, noting Levy started eight games at outside linebacker. “You want to stack up enough good linebackers as you can.“
Truer words have never been spoken, Larry. The fiery, pernicicious leadership that Foote posesses, along with his solid performance, all strike me as good reasons for the Lions to extend Foote.
The Lions don’t have the luxury of being able to take risks with their incredibly awful defense. Determining how they can improve their defense, with additional components, not by weakening a vulnerable position group, strikes me as the best plan of attack.
10 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^


I think you’re dead right Steve. I hope Mayhew doesn’t over play his hand and lose Foote over 1 million over three years. He is running the risk of getting cute and losing.
I do have a question on # of tackles though as a statistic. I think its a good starting point to analyzing a LB’s production. The thing I don’t know though is where did the tackles happen? If a lineback had 99 tackles for 2 yard gains, well that’s pretty good. On the other hand if they were 5 or 6 yard gains, I’m not sure you want that guy getting 99 tackles. Do the Lions keep those kinds of stats?
Comment by Mike — February 7, 2010 #
I agree that losing any of the 4 lbs would be a bad deal. Depth plays a huge role in the NFL and to have atleast 4 starting calliber lbs on your roster is an advantage. Plus why not fill your roster with starting talent whereever you can. Both Peterson and Levy are very versatile, we must use them more. These kind of guys need to be on the field every down. And for the comment that if foote had 99 tackles of 5 or 6 yrd gains he is not the kind of tackler we wont. I agree that 5 and 6 yrd gains are not good, but if we have the ability to look at every take to figure out stuff like that, also look at if he doesn’t make that take 5 or 6 yrds down the field, how many extra yrds are picked up. For a last place defense, I will take 99 tackles where ever they come by whoever makes them.
Comment by steve — February 8, 2010 #
Not to go on, but what I meant about peterson and levy is that since they are flexile, use peterson more at de and move levy around. Let him play all 3 lb positions on a regular basis. Play Peterson more often at de if we cant find out this offseason in fa or the draft. He is a beast at de. With his speed and strength, I would actually consider moving him there very often.
Comment by steve — February 8, 2010 #
Mike, there are metrics out there to analyze such things. The Football Prospectus uses several interesting stats utilizing what you are touching upon…try Football Outsiders website, too. They are linked on my blog roll.
Steve you mention one thing I neglected, focusing upon Julian Peterson as a pass rusher. That is kind of part of their 3-4 alignment, or starting in a 3-4, then having Peterson drop his hand on the hand on the ground, or blitz.
Levy’s day is coming, I do like that he can give them versatility, yet, likely still start.
Mike does have a good point, but so do you Steve. You’d much rather have your linebackers siphoning up tackles than have a safety or cornerback having higher tackle numbers, as an indication of plays getting to the 3rd level of the defense.
This will be an interesting situation to watch.
Comment by Steve — February 8, 2010 #
Nice ideas, but what about swapping picks with the Chiefs, for Glen Dorsey and taking Berry or trade back again with the 49ers and get more picks and take Iupati and have extra picks in the 1st or 2nd and 3rd rounds. Fill more holes without making anymore.
Comment by Joseph Fisher — February 8, 2010 #
I too think its way past time to move Sims, if we could get even a 3rd rounder or a project like Dorsey for him I’d jump at it…but then again I think it would be a good thing to see if Tampa Bay has any interest in trading their first pick (#3) for CJ, then we would have a lot of ammo to either move around for more picks or simply take Suh/McCoy/Berry and finally begin to build an imposing defense…
Comment by Dave — February 9, 2010 #
Joseph–I don’t think that the Lions will find willing partners to trade up. Most likely, if someone wants to move up, it is because they want Suh, and believe that the Rams aren’t going to select Suh, who obviously wouldn’t get past the Lions, even if Mike Mayock rates McCoy higher, thus far.
Dorsey, who has yet to meet his potential, would be added at a considerable risk, and doesn’t exactly meet the model of a Lions defensive tackle (apparently, neither does Suh, entirely)
If they can pull off adding Dorsey, trading down to Iupati etc., please by all means, remind me that I am a wrong dumbass. It would take a perfect world scenario, for sure.
Dave, please explain your justification for moving CJ? I don’t want to see him moved, he would be an incredibly difficult piece to replace. His being moved would likely be a result of his vehement behest, and that would be a real shame.
Interesting points, both of you!
Comment by Steve — February 9, 2010 #
Steve–
Nice write-up!
One of the reasons I advocate moving Sims is that, like Foote and Peterson, he’s not a long-term fit here . . . but unlike Foote and Peterson, Sims might actually have value to another franchise.
Unfortunately, our ’surplus’ is going to disappear no matter what happens. Even if Foote is brought, he’s already a two-down-only guy. Peterson’s skills have already diminished, and he’s not worth the money he’s making. After this season, our linebacking corps will likely consist of Levy, Dizon, and Follett . . .
Might as well deal from our “surplus” while it still exists.
Peace
Ty
Comment by ty@thelionsinwinter — February 10, 2010 #
Ty–
I respectfully acknowledge your opinion, especially given my past view of DE Michael Johnson as last season’s top overall pick(in a mock draft) and my complete lack of willingness to consider the Saints as legit Super Bowl contenders, after they stomped the Lions in week 1. I am often wrong.
In this case, I see Sims’ value outside of the organization as negligible, and you may be right, the Lions may be stuck with an especially weak LB corps after this season, if things play out as you suggest.
Still, if Sims and Foote leave this off-season, regardless of the potential return for Sims (optimistically a 3rd round pick?) there defense will be no closer to getting better, that’s for sure.
Comment by Steve — February 10, 2010 #
[...] Rob Rockitt wrote a very interesting post today. Here’s a quick excerpt:After the envy subsided, I read Ty’s compelling argument for the Lions need to utilize one of their few personnel groups (their only one?) that could be remotely construed as an area of strength as a bargaining chip. … [...]
Pingback by Detroit Lions Weblog » The Lions Linebacker Situation | NFL Topics Blog — March 1, 2010 #