Post Combine Thoughts

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

1 minute ago, Sllim Pickens said:

If you are out of a play, D Lineman often jog behind the play if there is no chance to catch up to it.  I dont want him sprinting down the field for no reason so he has to come off for a few plays.  I don't think you will find a player in any level that has not done that at some point when they are completely out of a play. 

Sure. Probably true. (Although, with his elite athleticism, I don't really believe that he's completely out of each of those plays.) Out of the few games I watched, I feel like he did it on a number of occasions. Again, a minor thing that'll likely be cleaned up in the NFL.

I also recall KVB running 60 yards after a play to tackle the ball carrier, and how impressive I thought that was. That, to me, is a top-tier motor. I feel like Epenesa is that type of guy. To be clear: Young is clearly a better prospect. I just don't know if Young is better than both Okudah and Epenesa.

[Sllim Pickens]

3 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Sure. Probably true. (Although, with his elite athleticism, I don't really believe that he's completely out of each of those plays.) Out of the few games I watched, I feel like he did it on a number of occasions. Again, a minor thing that'll likely be cleaned up in the NFL.

I also recall KVB running 60 yards after a play to tackle the ball carrier, and how impressive I thought that was. That, to me, is a top-tier motor. I feel like Epenesa is that type of guy. To be clear: Young is clearly a better prospect. I just don't know if Young is better than both Okudah and Epenesa.

If we are guaranteed those two, than great.  I would maybe lean that way too but I dont think that is a real possibility and still not sure about it.  

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

5 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

If we are guaranteed those two, than great.  I would maybe lean that way too but I dont think that is a real possibility and still not sure about it.  

Yeah, that's exactly where I'm at right now.

I still think that my best-case scenario is Young falling to #3. If he doesn't, I'm hoping that we move to #5 and find a way to use those additional resources to move back up for another one of these great prospects.

[LionArkie]

I want to know how OSU didn't get past Clemson with Okudah, Young, Dobbins and company?  How did this not happen!?  Anyways, back to the Lions most exciting time of the year.

[Karnage84]

5 minutes ago, LionArkie said:

I want to know how OSU didn't get past Clemson with Okudah, Young, Dobbins and company?  How did this not happen!?  Anyways, back to the Lions most exciting time of the year.

Trevor "Sunshine" Lawrence

[Sllim Pickens]

1 minute ago, Karnage84 said:

Trevor "Sunshine" Lawrence

And a few questionable calls that really swayed the game.  And to be fair, Clemson has its share of first round talent as well with Simmons, Higgins, Lawrence, Enttiene etc. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Just to be completely clear: the criticism of Young (by me) is pretty much splitting hairs at this point. Elite athleticism, technique and production with a great motor. We'd be lucky to land him.

[LionArkie]

11 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

And a few questionable calls that really swayed the game.  And to be fair, Clemson has its share of first round talent as well with Simmons, Higgins, Lawrence, Enttiene etc. 

That Lawrence kid is ok....

...just joking.  Whoever gets him next year is going to be lucky.  I really like Enttiene as well.  I like Simmons a lot, but he also scares the heck out of me to draft him.

[LionArkie]

9 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Just to be completely clear: the criticism of Young (by me) is pretty much splitting hairs at this point. Elite athleticism, technique and production with a great motor. We'd be lucky to land him.

Absolutely. If we drafted him, I'd be celebrating as much as the next person.

[GetDownandDirty]

Really don’t care if they use their 3rd pick or trade down to get more picks, as long as they spend their 1st three picks on defensive players. A lot of that will have to do with who they may pick up in FA. Defense has to be a priority in this draft. Could care less about getting a running back or another wide receiver. Offensive lineman is also be a need. But watching other teams excel because their defenses is getting old. Take GB for an example. They beefed up their defense & it made a difference seeing Rogers & the offense was sub par. Also SF who’s defense won games for them also. As far as the secondary goes, they will benefit greatly from a pass rush that doesn’t allow QB’s to sit back in the pocket all day long. Pressure causes QB’s to rush & that leads to mistakes and turnovers. For me Defense will lead the Lions back to getting into the playoffs & build confidence.... which ultimately could lead to a Super Bowl. Also, the defense needs to get that “Bad Boys”  type reputation. Mean, arrogant, in your face mentality!!

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

See, I don't really agree. I mean, I'd love to greatly improve the defense, and I feel that we can do that throughout this draft, but I would love to add Jeudy at some point in round 1, or one of the great running backs in rounds 2 or 3. If one of the top 4 OTs fell to round 2 (which won't happen, but bear with me), I'd take them there as well. The thing that matters the most is that we take the right prospect, not a certain position.

[Sllim Pickens]

29 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

See, I don't really agree. I mean, I'd love to greatly improve the defense, and I feel that we can do that throughout this draft, but I would love to add Jeudy at some point in round 1, or one of the great running backs in rounds 2 or 3. If one of the top 4 OTs fell to round 2 (which won't happen, but bear with me), I'd take them there as well. The thing that matters the most is that we take the right prospect, not a certain position.

This is my mentality.  We need to address DE, DT, LB, S and CB in the draft or free agency.  Same with OT, OG, RB, and WR.  I dont really care which order as long as its a good player at each.  I am a big fan of JK Dobbins or Taylor in the 2nd/3rd.  I am also all for Jeudy or Lamb or Ruggs if they drop in 1 and we trade down.  If those guys i really like aren't there, I'd rather draft Gallimore or Uche or Diggs or maybe Jones (OT) if he falls.  

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

A good example of this is the 2014 NFL Draft. With Fairley and Suh, we didn't have an immediate need at DT (although Suh had only 1 year left on his deal), but we know now that taking Donald would've likely been the best decision. It's easy to identify and try to fill immediate holes, but taking the right player is always the best option long term.

[LionArkie]

6 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

A good example of this is the 2014 NFL Draft. With Fairley and Suh, we didn't have an immediate need at DT (although Suh had only 1 year left on his deal), but we know now that taking Donald would've likely been the best decision. It's easy to identify and try to fill immediate holes, but taking the right player is always the best option long term.

I like the BPA approach, but with an asterisk leaning towards some positional groups over others.  I"ll take a bpa on the lines first vs bpa wr/db.  So although I like the bpa, I feel it has to be weighted towards positional groups first, then team needs.  However, team needs can be decided a multitude of ways.  The example you provided goes along with what I'm saying. There was an argument at the time of who was the bpa at that spot.  For me, I'd always go DL>WR>TE. We passed over both and look what we lost out on.  I'm sure there are other examples that go against what I'm saying, but I think my position will work out more times than not. The team needs wasn't necessarily a DT that year, but you had Suh coming up on a contract year and you could get Donald good experience for a year or so with Suh, and it sure wasn't going to hurt the team.

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

11 minutes ago, LionArkie said:

I like the BPA approach, but with an asterisk leaning towards some positional groups over others.  I"ll take a bpa on the lines first vs bpa wr/db.  So although I like the bpa, I feel it has to be weighted towards positional groups first, then team needs.  However, team needs can be decided a multitude of ways.  The example you provided goes along with what I'm saying. There was an argument at the time of who was the bpa at that spot.  For me, I'd always go DL>WR>TE. We passed over both and look what we lost out on.  I'm sure there are other examples that go against what I'm saying, but I think my position will work out more times than not. The team needs wasn't necessarily a DT that year, but you had Suh coming up on a contract year and you could get Donald good experience for a year or so with Suh, and it sure wasn't going to hurt the team.

Definitely. The part in bold is exactly how I feel about WR right now: although we don't necessarily need a WR for next year, landing a great talent to learn from Jones would be big for this team long term.