Jump to content
Karnage84

Should the Lions trade Stafford?

Recommended Posts

I am back after a bit of an absence. I will preface this by saying that I do not support trading Stafford as I don't believe he is really the team's principal issue. However, I have a friend who is a Bears fan who had put the question out. He was discussing the rebuild strategies of teams with QB's at lower salaries and money invested into other areas and the success they've had. He was of the belief that a team like the Lions is handicapped by Stafford's salary.

Is there any circumstance where you would want to trade Stafford? What kind of compensation would you need in order to be on board with such a trade? What team (s) do you think would be the best fit as a trade partner?

I would prefer to not trade him. However, I think if we had to I would like to see him with the Giants. He'd have the best RB/WR he's ever had along with additional weapons in Shepherd, Engram. Pittsburgh would be another interesting option although it's not really in the Steelers DNA to make that kind of a trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, do not trade Stafford, the cap hit alone would destroy the team. did you see our team yesterday against the panthers. with just Stafford and Golladay... that is a Jv team. we should draft another WR/RB.. I know Kerryon and Marvin were out with injuries but we should be able to find decent replacements either late in the draft(like the saints/Pats/ Packers do) or find Fa's off the street (like said teams do).. we should be building around Stafford not thinking of trading him away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, flyguy1609 said:

No, do not trade Stafford, the cap hit alone would destroy the team. did you see our team yesterday against the panthers. with just Stafford and Golladay... that is a Jv team. we should draft another WR/RB.. I know Kerryon and Marvin were out with injuries but we should be able to find decent replacements either late in the draft(like the saints/Pats/ Packers do) or find Fa's off the street (like said teams do).. we should be building around Stafford not thinking of trading him away.

I'm not on the "trade Stafford" bandwagon, it's just more of an exercise. With that being said, we have rather significant holes at: RG, RT, WR, DE, DT, CB and could also use some help at safety, TE and even RB. I personally view Stafford as a franchise guy. The question really boils down to it (for me anyway), are we able to find guys to fill in those gaps and field a competitive team around a guy like him over the next 2-5 years while he is still in his prime?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. I think that he has proven that he is a franchise QB. 

I am worried about the future of team, however. 

Bob Quinn never did a full, tear-it-down type of rebuild. He hasn't made a lot of big free agent signings, instead opting for depth, and his drafts have been filled thus far with decent if unspectacular players. He hasn't done anything, including hiring a great coach, which has made me think that this team can be anything more than a playoff qualifier in any given year. They seem to be stuck in that range where they aren't one of the worst teams in the league but they also aren't one of the best, which isn't necessarily a good place to be. 

For what it's worth, Stafford's contact situation isn't really handicapping the team. Your choices are either to luck into a good QB in the draft every few years and keep them on cheap rookie contracts (which is not sustainable - it's hard to find good QB's) or pay your guy. Stafford got paid, other QB's are getting paid more. 

Edited by Lions017

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Lions017 said:

No. I think that he has proven that he is a franchise QB. 

I am worried about the future of team, however. 

Bob Quinn never did a full, tear-it-down type of rebuild. He hasn't made a lot of big free agent signings, instead opting for depth, and his drafts have been filled thus far with decent if unspectacular players. He hasn't done anything, including hiring a great coach, which has made me think that this team can be anything more than a playoff qualifier in any given year. They seem to be stuck in that range where they aren't one of the worst teams in the league but they also aren't one of the best, which isn't necessarily a good place to be. 

For what it's worth, Stafford's contact situation isn't really handicapping the team. Your choices are either to luck into a good QB in the draft every few years and keep them on cheap rookie contracts (which is not sustainable - it's hard to find good QB's) or pay your guy. Stafford got paid, other QB's are getting paid more. 

The "cheap rookie QB" strategy is definitely not a sustainable one, which was exactly the point I made in my discussions with my friend on this topic.

I believe Stafford is a franchise QB and my concern is a similar one - will the team be up to snuff while he's still a very able QB. I feel like there's a lot of holes which make this a difficult challenge. I'm not quite confident right now that this will be addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good question. I’m sure it’s one that’s been debated and discussed amongst the powers that be.

The answer, to me, is based on return. 

I don’t believe the Lions will become a powerhouse during Staffords career. I just see to many problem areas and lack the confidence in Quinn and Patricia to accomplish the task given the window of opportunity.

Staffords salary is far less an issue than others on the team. Regardless of the team good players get big salaries. It’s a matter of finding the right balance and having a bit of luck.

So I guess it boils down philosophy. Some may see Quinnand Patricia as the answer while others think a few more years will sort it out.

I think the Lions need to build the team right and I’m not sure they can do that without the infusion of draft capital and cap flexibility trading Stafford would create. 

So, if I got an offer that could significantly improve the Lions in other areas I would move him. I can’t be more specific because it would depend on players involved, draft position of the team making the trade etc. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a yes..

Imo he isn't even trying to profect (sp)his craft.. still staring guys down.. and still takes to long to see it.I'm wondering what the good stuff is....

I've been saying since he been drafted this guy needs a pump fake to create better openings for his accuracy..nope

Move the pocket back farther..nope

I know they cant/won't but I'm personally ready for a change.. he feels like the same guy we drafted iyam..how has he improved 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on what you can get for him. Lions have around 40 million in cap anyways with more coming assuming some cuts from certain veterans. I could see a possible trade with a new staff/total rebuild on the mind. Assuming you trade him you'll basically use all that cap-space on the trade alone so you'll have to cut guys like Wagner/Lang/Quinn just to sign players and field a team. Not the worst idea if you're telling the fans it's a complete rebuild and doing it with new guys. 

If Bob Quinn is here trading him, no way. Just do whatever, but trade him, it's not worth it to trade him, field a terrible team, and then let the guy that built said terrible team attempt to rebuild it again with no building blocks to even start just money/draft capital. (Which really he's always had, just doesn't use money right)

Edited by SimbaWho

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, SimbaWho said:

Depends on what you can get for him. Lions have around 40 million in cap anyways with more coming assuming some cuts from certain veterans. I could see a possible trade with a new staff/total rebuild on the mind. Assuming you trade him you'll basically use all that cap-space on the trade alone so you'll have to cut guys like Wagner/Lang/Quinn just to sign players and field a team. Not the worst idea if you're telling the fans it's a complete rebuild and doing it with new guys. 

If Bob Quinn is here trading him, no way. Just do whatever, but trade him, it's not worth it to trade him, field a terrible team, and then let the guy that built said terrible team attempt to rebuild it again with no building blocks to even start just money/draft capital. (Which really he's always had, just doesn't use money right)

If Lang and Quinn aren’t backthat adds significant room to the cap as well.

Share this post


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

Depends on what you can get for him. Lions have around 40 million in cap anyways with more coming assuming some cuts from certain veterans. I could see a possible trade with a new staff/total rebuild on the mind. Assuming you trade him you'll basically use all that cap-space on the trade alone so you'll have to cut guys like Wagner/Lang/Quinn just to sign players and field a team. Not the worst idea if you're telling the fans it's a complete rebuild and doing it with new guys. 

If Bob Quinn is here trading him, no way. Just do whatever, but trade him, it's not worth it to trade him, field a terrible team, and then let the guy that built said terrible team attempt to rebuild it again with no building blocks to even start just money/draft capital. (Which really he's always had, just doesn't use money right)

This isn't a hard and fast strategy but this is one way that things could boil down if they decided to go this route

- Trade Stafford

- Restructure Slay

- Extend Marvin Jones (we need to keep our reliable WR's and build on that)

- Extend Snacks (he's been a solid addition and someone to build on)

-  Cut Wagner, Lang and Quin

This would leave us with $70M in cap space (according to Over The Cap)

Using the Jay Cutler trade as a blueprint, a trade for Stafford would likely look like: 2019 1st, 2019 3rd, 2020 1st + a player

Edited by Karnage84
OTC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Im not in favor of trading our best player, whom is in his prime and just so happens to play the most important position in football. His deal will look like a bargain in a few years if this oline develops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it comes down to coaching and drafting.  We cant afford to have second round picks be absolutely awful.  We need a couple late round picks to step up and be decent starters, and we need the guys we do pay to perform.  We are getting some of that, but the guys we are paying (Lang, Wagner, Ansah) are not performing.  We can win sith Stafford.  He is a good enough QB, but we need offensive coaches that run the ball consistently (we are 4-1 when we try to run the ball, 0-fer when we give up after 12 carries.  We also need to make sure we spend the cap money we do have intelligently.  That doesn't mean don't give a player big money, just make sure its the right player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Karnage84 said:

This isn't a hard and fast strategy but this is one way that things could boil down if they decided to go this route

- Trade Stafford

- Restructure Slay

- Extend Marvin Jones (we need to keep our reliable WR's and build on that)

- Extend Snacks (he's been a solid addition and someone to build on)

-  Cut Wagner, Lang and Quin

This would leave us with $70M in cap space (according to Over The Cap)

Using the Jay Cutler trade as a blueprint, a trade for Stafford would likely look like: 2019 1st, 2019 3rd, 2020 1st + a player

You're not.getting the Jay deal for Stafford.  Jay was a 26 yo coming off of a probowl season and was widely considered the best young qb in football at the time. Stafford is 30 yo has shown hes a very good qb who is great at coming back in the 4th qtr.  He is a franchise guy, but not.one of the real elites.  It would be a lot closer to the Alex Smith deal than the Jay Cutler deal, my guess would be a 1st and a 3rd would be his value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

You're not.getting the Jay deal for Stafford.  Jay was a 26 yo coming off of a probowl season and was widely considered the best young qb in football at the time. Stafford is 30 yo has shown hes a very good qb who is great at coming back in the 4th qtr.  He is a franchise guy, but not.one of the real elites.  It would be a lot closer to the Alex Smith deal than the Jay Cutler deal, my guess would be a 1st and a 3rd would be his value.

While I don’t think the return will be what the Broncos received for Cutler I believe that’s because it’s a different market. Stafford would certainly garner the same or greater compensation everything else being equal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, diehardlionfan said:

While I don’t think the return will be what the Broncos received for Cutler I believe that’s because it’s a different market. Stafford would certainly garner the same or greater compensation everything else being equal. 

 No, not even close.  The Bears thought they were trading for John Elway just entering his prime.  Everyone thought the Bears were getting the next elite QB.  Nobody is going to confuse Stafford for Elway.  The book is out on what Stafford is and what he isnt.  The Broncos were able to capitalize on hope and belief, the Lions would have no such advantage.

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



×