Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
davisblack

ESPN - Lions had 4th worst offseason

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, Karnage84 said:

Comp pick = 3rd round pick next year. We got a 3rd this year. Current picks are better than future picks but we could have used him and paired with Okudah. We'll call that a wash. 

Slay was a disgruntled employee. If you're trying to build a culture in a locker room, you want your leaders to be bought in and supportive. Not someone that is going to cause issues and division within the room. Yes, he was still under contract. It doesn't appear that he was willing to play under that contract. Slay did play well and I'm not arguing against him being a good player just because he's no longer on the team. He has been and in many ways still is. However, he is an aging player with a diminishing skillset that wanted to be paid big money. There aren't going to be a lot of teams wanting to pay top dollar for that kind of player. We were never going to get a Jalen Ramsey type of deal for Slay. 

I also don't put a ton of weight into the Pro Bowl. In many ways it is a popularity contest. I'd put more weight into the All Pro lists. Slay was not on PFF All Pro team or either of the AP's First or Second team All Pro. He did what he did without anything resembling a pass rush. I agree with you there. 

Normally that is true. It's not true in this situation. When ownership publicly states this regime, coming off a 3 win season, needs to make the playoffs not to be fired, a 3rd round pick for the next regime and a season of elite CB play at a reasonable price (to help current regime compete for playoffs) is better than a 3rd this season. 

Slay, like many quality players, was disgruntled because of Patricia's attitude and behavior. If you're trying to build a winning culture in a locker room, you have to know how to manage talented players. Slay was tweeting hints about not being happy in Detroit. He wasn't going full Antonio Brown or anything. 

There is a very large difference between the Ramsey type deal and what the Lions got for Slay. Patricia and Quin got played by Slay and the rest of the NFL and got a very poor return on the investment. 

The Pro Bowl shouldn't hold a ton of weight. It's not an accurate measurement of how good players played. It's an easy metric to use and it get's the message across when I didn't have the energy or giv-a-darn to come up with a better one. The bigger point was Slay was still elite without a pass rush. He's going to be a monster, even as "an aging player", if Philly can help him with a pass rush like Detroit never did. 

Edited by Nnivolcm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Nnivolcm said:

Normally that is true. It's not true in this situation. When ownership publicly states this regime, coming off a 3 win season, needs to make the playoffs not to be fired, a 3rd round pick for the next regime and a season of elite CB play at a reasonable price (to help current regime compete for playoffs) is better than a 3rd this season. 

Slay, like many quality players, was disgruntled because of Patricia's attitude and behavior. If you're trying to build a winning culture in a locker room, you have to know how to manage talented players. Slay was tweeting hints about not being happy in Detroit. He wasn't going full Antonio Brown or anything. 

There is a very large difference between the Ramsey type deal and what the Lions got for Slay. Patricia and Quin got played by Slay and the rest of the NFL and got a very poor return on the investment. 

The Pro Bowl shouldn't hold a ton of weight. It's not an accurate measurement of how good players played. It's an easy metric to use and it get's the message across when I didn't have the energy or giv-a-darn to come up with a better one. The bigger point was Slay was still elite without a pass rush. He's going to be a monster, even as "an aging player", if Philly can help him with a pass rush like Detroit never did. 

They weren't going to be getting Slay to play at his current cost. They were either going to have to pay him or trade him. So you either a) Get Slay on a multi-year contract with a cap hit of $15M this year or b) trade him for what you could get, which is likely somewhat close to what they got for him. He wasn't talking about playing out his contract, he already had sat out some time with two years left on his deal. You weren't going to get Slay on the field without a new deal. 

Ramsey: Arguably is the best CB in the league at age 25 still on his rookie deal (5th year option) as opposed to a near 30 year old Slay wanting similar money. You're going to pay for talent and time. The cost diminishes when either talent, time or both goes down. 

No, Slay wasn't going AB but the Patriots run a tight ship and don't tolerate that kind of thing. Slay still tweeted a lot of negative things related to the Diggs situation which is a no no. Slay has even acknowledged he had a good/better relationship with Patricia in year 2. This really appears to be a situation with an aging player that is being moved a bit too early rather than too late (which is the Patriots MO). He thought he was a cornerstone of the franchise and expected to get paid for past production and instead was not a part of the teams future plans.

Philly: Slay could have a good year this year. It wasn't just about this year but paying a guy big money in their early 30's on a bad contract. Maybe it's all a moot point if Quinn/Patricia don't come back but you can't play not to lose and you can't plan as if you aren't going to be there long term. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ESPN needs something to talk about. Could care less if they think we should be sold to another state. We got rid of a cancer on the team. Thats a win. buh bye slay. Funny now I see him over and over as top corner. With Detroit everyone (not detroit fans) eould say he overrated. 

Share this post


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

They weren't going to be getting Slay to play at his current cost. They were either going to have to pay him or trade him. So you either a) Get Slay on a multi-year contract with a cap hit of $15M this year or b) trade him for what you could get, which is likely somewhat close to what they got for him. He wasn't talking about playing out his contract, he already had sat out some time with two years left on his deal. You weren't going to get Slay on the field without a new deal. 

Ramsey: Arguably is the best CB in the league at age 25 still on his rookie deal (5th year option) as opposed to a near 30 year old Slay wanting similar money. You're going to pay for talent and time. The cost diminishes when either talent, time or both goes down. 

No, Slay wasn't going AB but the Patriots run a tight ship and don't tolerate that kind of thing. Slay still tweeted a lot of negative things related to the Diggs situation which is a no no. Slay has even acknowledged he had a good/better relationship with Patricia in year 2. This really appears to be a situation with an aging player that is being moved a bit too early rather than too late (which is the Patriots MO). He thought he was a cornerstone of the franchise and expected to get paid for past production and instead was not a part of the teams future plans.

Philly: Slay could have a good year this year. It wasn't just about this year but paying a guy big money in their early 30's on a bad contract. Maybe it's all a moot point if Quinn/Patricia don't come back but you can't play not to lose and you can't plan as if you aren't going to be there long term. 

They say the best predictor for the future is the past. Slay has shown his version of a holdout when he's not happy about a contract. He doesn't immediately report to training camps (is this the "time" you're talking about him sitting out? lol) and hints about being unhappy on twitter. He doesn't pull an Antonio Brown and hasn't missed the games that matter. There's nothing but speculation saying things would be different if the Lions retained his rights for 2020. IF Slay had decided to hold out into the regular season in 2020 the Lions would recap the portion of the salary (making the salary saved argument a wash), and if he held out long enough he'd still be under contract in 2011. The Lions had all the leverage and lost. They had options, and IMO they chose about the worst realistic option available.

Ramsey was traded for 2 1st round picks and a 4th IIRC. Slay was traded for a 3rd and 5th. That's a vast difference in the returns on the players. I'm not saying trading Slay should have gotten the return trading Ramsey did, but he certainly should have gotten more than the Lions managed to get. If the value wasn't there, they should have kept him.

What did Patricia and Quinn think Slay was going to tweet when they traded one of his best friends and a defensive captain away for peanuts? They completely botched managing their talent, one of Patricia's primary jobs. 

The Patriots MO is to move on from players too early rather than too late, the Lions MO is to pick up those vets the Pats just moved on from. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Nnivolcm said:

They say the best predictor for the future is the past. Slay has shown his version of a holdout when he's not happy about a contract. He doesn't immediately report to training camps (is this the "time" you're talking about him sitting out? lol) and hints about being unhappy on twitter. He doesn't pull an Antonio Brown and hasn't missed the games that matter. There's nothing but speculation saying things would be different if the Lions retained his rights for 2020. IF Slay had decided to hold out into the regular season in 2020 the Lions would recap the portion of the salary (making the salary saved argument a wash), and if he held out long enough he'd still be under contract in 2011. The Lions had all the leverage and lost. They had options, and IMO they chose about the worst realistic option available.

Ramsey was traded for 2 1st round picks and a 4th IIRC. Slay was traded for a 3rd and 5th. That's a vast difference in the returns on the players. I'm not saying trading Slay should have gotten the return trading Ramsey did, but he certainly should have gotten more than the Lions managed to get. If the value wasn't there, they should have kept him.

What did Patricia and Quinn think Slay was going to tweet when they traded one of his best friends and a defensive captain away for peanuts? They completely botched managing their talent, one of Patricia's primary jobs. 

The Patriots MO is to move on from players too early rather than too late, the Lions MO is to pick up those vets the Pats just moved on from. 

This is only to help ease their transition from the Caldwell era into the Patricia era. They've brought in players that know their scheme and coaching style that will buy in and help players around them buy in. They are known commodities that have worked and will likely work out in this scenario who also happen to fill pressing needs. 

The Lions didn't need or want the Slay saga to be a distraction in the off season and during the season. If he held out, that's all we would be talking about. If he was around and playing out his contract but being vocal on twitter, that's all we would be talking about. It's an important season for this FO. Slay was clearly not a part of their plans and they chose to move on sooner rather than later to avoid those distractions and to build the roster with an eye towards the future. 

As for the defensive captain Diggs, he was playing poorly and missed games. Throw in the conflict with the coaching staff and it's no wonder that they shipped him out for nothing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Karnage84 said:

This is only to help ease their transition from the Caldwell era into the Patricia era. They've brought in players that know their scheme and coaching style that will buy in and help players around them buy in. They are known commodities that have worked and will likely work out in this scenario who also happen to fill pressing needs. 

The Lions didn't need or want the Slay saga to be a distraction in the off season and during the season. If he held out, that's all we would be talking about. If he was around and playing out his contract but being vocal on twitter, that's all we would be talking about. It's an important season for this FO. Slay was clearly not a part of their plans and they chose to move on sooner rather than later to avoid those distractions and to build the roster with an eye towards the future. 

As for the defensive captain Diggs, he was playing poorly and missed games. Throw in the conflict with the coaching staff and it's no wonder that they shipped him out for nothing. 

Other, more successful and better ran teams, constantly find ways to manage players being far more distracting than Slay had been. Patricia really showing his short comings if Slay missing some training camp and hinting about being unhappy on twitter was beyond his ability to handle. 

Diggs was playing hurt. Seattle allowed him to heal and suddenly he's a reasonably priced play maker again. Crazy how some teams are able to get the most out of their talented players, and others trade them away for next to nothing. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Nnivolcm said:

They say the best predictor for the future is the past. Slay has shown his version of a holdout when he's not happy about a contract. He doesn't immediately report to training camps (is this the "time" you're talking about him sitting out? lol) and hints about being unhappy on twitter. He doesn't pull an Antonio Brown and hasn't missed the games that matter. There's nothing but speculation saying things would be different if the Lions retained his rights for 2020. IF Slay had decided to hold out into the regular season in 2020 the Lions would recap the portion of the salary (making the salary saved argument a wash), and if he held out long enough he'd still be under contract in 2011. The Lions had all the leverage and lost. They had options, and IMO they chose about the worst realistic option available.

Ramsey was traded for 2 1st round picks and a 4th IIRC. Slay was traded for a 3rd and 5th. That's a vast difference in the returns on the players. I'm not saying trading Slay should have gotten the return trading Ramsey did, but he certainly should have gotten more than the Lions managed to get. If the value wasn't there, they should have kept him.

What did Patricia and Quinn think Slay was going to tweet when they traded one of his best friends and a defensive captain away for peanuts? They completely botched managing their talent, one of Patricia's primary jobs. 

The Patriots MO is to move on from players too early rather than too late, the Lions MO is to pick up those vets the Pats just moved on from. 

I felt that Slay was going to go for a 3rd all along.  I was hopeful for a 2nd, but felt an almost 30 year old vocal, anti-Lion management wasn't going to get much back in return.  I think Slay had as much to do with the Lions only getting a 3rd as MPBQ did.  I agree though, the Lions pretty much botched the returned value, but it was a team effort in doing so.

I still like Slay, Trufant, Okudah far better in the backfield then what we have now. However, there is no way in knowing if the Lions would have grabbed Trufant if Slay stayed.  I do believe the backfield for the future is set up nicely on paper, but I also thought that about the DLine last year.

Share this post


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

I felt that Slay was going to go for a 3rd all along.  I was hopeful for a 2nd, but felt an almost 30 year old vocal, anti-Lion management wasn't going to get much back in return.  I think Slay had as much to do with the Lions only getting a 3rd as MPBQ did.  I agree though, the Lions pretty much botched the returned value, but it was a team effort in doing so.

I still like Slay, Trufant, Okudah far better in the backfield then what we have now. However, there is no way in knowing if the Lions would have grabbed Trufant if Slay stayed.  I do believe the backfield for the future is set up nicely on paper, but I also thought that about the DLine last year.

It's in the Lions best interest to maximize the return on the asset. It doesn't serve Slay's interests at all to maximize those returns for the team he's trying to leave. I still think all things considered, Slay was using what little leverage he had to get what he wanted, and he managed to be remain reasonably professional while doing so.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Nnivolcm said:

It's in the Lions best interest to maximize the return on the asset. It doesn't serve Slay's interests at all to maximize those returns for the team he's trying to leave. I still think all things considered, Slay was using what little leverage he had to get what he wanted, and he managed to be remain reasonably professional while doing so.

Totally agree with this. Slay didn't act perfectly, but I don't hold that against him. I think he is being made to look worse than what he really was here.  Did he act like a prima donna? Yes, but isn't that expected from a cb to some degree, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, NFL_Fan said:

ESPN needs something to talk about. Could care less if they think we should be sold to another state. We got rid of a cancer on the team. Thats a win. buh bye slay. Funny now I see him over and over as top corner. With Detroit everyone (not detroit fans) eould say he overrated. 

As a Packers' fan, the Lions draft went about as ideally as I'd like to see.  In a perfect world, the Lions would have been able to move down with either Miami or LA Chargers and acquire a few more draft picks.  Realistically speaking, I don't think there were any franchise-altering players on the board after Joe Burrow went to Cincinnati and Chase Young to Washington.  I've never been a huge fan of taking RBs early on Day 2, let alone on Day 1.  Swift is a plug 'n play at RB, but given that they took a RB in R2 back in 2018 seems like a poor use of resources even with Johnson's injury concerns.  YGM probably would have been my BPA at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

As a Packers' fan, the Lions draft went about as ideally as I'd like to see.  In a perfect world, the Lions would have been able to move down with either Miami or LA Chargers and acquire a few more draft picks.  Realistically speaking, I don't think there were any franchise-altering players on the board after Joe Burrow went to Cincinnati and Chase Young to Washington.  I've never been a huge fan of taking RBs early on Day 2, let alone on Day 1.  Swift is a plug 'n play at RB, but given that they took a RB in R2 back in 2018 seems like a poor use of resources even with Johnson's injury concerns.  YGM probably would have been my BPA at that point.

I think a lot of us wanted Epenesa at that point as he really fits this defense better than YGM.  I agree there are better ways to use resources but also I dont feel like you can make decisions off previous drafts (unless you are thinking about drafting a TE in the top 10).  Yes we drafted KJ a couple years ago but the run game has been a huge issue still.  We cant control the clock, our D gets tired and we fall apart in the fourth quarter.  Having a legit ground game is necessary, and it sucks to spend high picks on it, but its something we still needed.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

As a Packers' fan, the Lions draft went about as ideally as I'd like to see.  In a perfect world, the Lions would have been able to move down with either Miami or LA Chargers and acquire a few more draft picks.  Realistically speaking, I don't think there were any franchise-altering players on the board after Joe Burrow went to Cincinnati and Chase Young to Washington.  I've never been a huge fan of taking RBs early on Day 2, let alone on Day 1.  Swift is a plug 'n play at RB, but given that they took a RB in R2 back in 2018 seems like a poor use of resources even with Johnson's injury concerns.  YGM probably would have been my BPA at that point.

I appreciate you coming in and sharing an outside perspective. It's always fun to see how things are perceived outside of our bubble.

People keep talking about the Swift pick and that we have Kerryon on the roster. He's a great RB when healthy but that has been the consistent issue for us each and every year. When he goes down, there has been a lot of nothing except question marks behind him. Scarborough played well for us but he hasn't even played a full season with us and has his own injury concerns. Swift gives them a different back who can be played as part of a RBBC. 

It would have been nice to trade down but it appears there weren't any takers. 

What were your thoughts on the Packers picks of Love and Dillon? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2020 at 11:30 AM, SteelKing728 said:

Do you guys have an opt out thread?

Things ain't looking too hot right now.

We have only had one guy, John Atkins who is a bubble player, opt out so far. 

I don't suspect that he is going to do this but we do have to consider the fact that Stafford could opt out. With a newborn baby and a wife who has only recently recovered from brain surgery, I have to imagine they are looking at things long term. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...