The Lions Den: The Anything Thread

[SimbaWho]

We just gotta hope for something with Blake Griffin by season's end. I want the Nets to get interested.

 

Caris LeVert, Taurean Prince, 1st rdp.

Blake Griffin. 

Quote

 

Khyrie Irving/ Landry Shamet

Spencer Dinwiddie/ Bruce Brown

Kevin Durant/ Wilson Chandler

Blake Griffin/ Nicholas Claxton

DeAndre Jordan/Jarrett Allen.

 

 

I actually think the Nets would be better. An so would the Pistons. Pistons would be a small ball/ guard orientated team who would have to play fast and shoot well. Griffin does slide well into that starting five particularly when looking around the league. Pistons roster shapes out well too.

* D-league

^*^ Two-way contracts (2)

 

Quote

 

PG: Killian Hayes/ Derrick Rose/ Delon Wright ^*^ Saben Lee

SG: Caris LeVert/ Josh Jackson/ *Deividas Sirvydis

SF: Jerami Grant/ Sviatoslav Mykhailiuk/ * Dzanan Musa/ * Saddiq Bey

PF: Taurean Prince/ Sekou Doumbouya/ ^*^ Louis King

😄 Isaiah Stewart/ Mason Plumlee/ Jahlil Okafor

 

 

Start two rookies, sandwich talent in-between them. Still a team that going to compete too well but going forward the team looks younger and will go as the Killian Hayes pick goes. 

Edited November 24, 2020 by SimbaWho

[Sllim Pickens]

18 minutes ago, SimbaWho said:

We just gotta hope for something with Blake Griffin by season's end. I want the Nets to get interested.

 

Caris LeVert, Taurean Prince, 1st rdp.

Blake Griffin. 

 

I actually think the Nets would be better. An so would the Pistons. Pistons would be a small ball/ guard orientated team who would have to play fast and shoot well. Griffin does slide well into that starting five particularly when looking around the league. Pistons roster shapes out well too.

* D-league

^*^ Two-way contracts (2)

 

 

Start two rookies, sandwich talent in-between them. Still a team that going to compete too well but going forward the team looks younger and will go as the Killian Hayes pick goes. 

That Nets deal doesn't work with the contracts.  Still like 7M off and they don't have anyone to throw in to even it out.  If somehow it was made to work, I would want that 1rd pick to be like a 2025 pick because their firsts will be nothing over the next few years.  

My big thing is I want Sekou to get minutes.  He and Hayes are the two highest potential guys we have and they need to improve while playing, not riding the bench.  I just hate the Plumlee and Grant signings because we should have had money available in two years and tear the whole thing down OKC style and then try to build it up but instead we just keep trying to pretend we care about making the 8th seed. 

[SimbaWho]

14 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

That Nets deal doesn't work with the contracts.  Still like 7M off and they don't have anyone to throw in to even it out.  If somehow it was made to work, I would want that 1rd pick to be like a 2025 pick because their firsts will be nothing over the next few years.  

My big thing is I want Sekou to get minutes.  He and Hayes are the two highest potential guys we have and they need to improve while playing, not riding the bench.  I just hate the Plumlee and Grant signings because we should have had money available in two years and tear the whole thing down OKC style and then try to build it up but instead we just keep trying to pretend we care about making the 8th seed. 

Trade can work out still, Nets have room. http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine .

But yeah I understand what you are saying, it's just they went in a different route it seems for right now. Still a bunch of money coming off the books the next two season's for the Pistons so it's not a complete disaster yet. The Plumlee signing is a real head scratcher? It's like he was paid to start some and just... well... wow. lol. We're in trouble if he's starting, and still a lot of money for a very average back up C in a league that has no value at C. 

Looks like they're setting themselves up to develop Hayes with quality talent around him and hope for another top talent that's a UFA/TRADE OPTION/DRAFT PICK to fall into their lap.

Wouldn't of hated not signing anyone to big contracts and playing this shorten season out, looking to dump Blake/Rose either.

I'll be really upset if they just play the season out and don't move either Rose/Griffin. Then I'll really wonder whats going on and throw my hands up. One or two players can change a basketball team, it's not like these other sports where you have to go into 3-6 year rebuilds unless a team is loaded with bad contracts. Pistons aren't particularly loaded with bad contracts. 

Edited November 24, 2020 by SimbaWho

[SimbaWho]

Pretty sure Matt Campbell of Iowa State just won the interview job for Michigan. It'd be his job to lose imo if he wants it.

Luke Fickell

Matt Campbell 

In that order for me, not sure Fickell will defect to Michigan but he's my favorite choice right now. Think Harbaugh plays out the season but it's pretty much an embarrassment paying Harbaugh what they do for the results they get. They have to move on I think just offf principle, money shouldn't be an issue for the University of Michigan. 

Harbaugh will likely get another shot somewhere else and likely do really well there like in Arkansas, South Carolina, Florida State, Texas, USC. IDK. It's just really not working out in Michigan anymore. Which is a shame, not sure what's gone wrong besides maybe never ever really getting that guy at QB during his WHOLE tenure here. I think Ruddock might be the best he's had to work with(which is Harbaughs fault). Just saying he was brought here to bring real talent at QB and beyond not just average QB's in college. 

Edited November 28, 2020 by SimbaWho

[SimbaWho]

State bro already has two better wins that Harbaugh in year 1. Sheesh. 

[MortexLion]

I have a feeling we are going to see if Stafford really wants to still be a Detroit Lion or not in the next 5 games...Anyone else?

[Sllim Pickens]

28 minutes ago, MortexLion said:

I have a feeling we are going to see if Stafford really wants to still be a Detroit Lion or not in the next 5 games...Anyone else?

I'm kind of hoping he just plays well but we lose so his trade value goes up.  I love him for what he has done in a Lions uniform stat wise, but honestly he has never been a winner.  Not here, not at Georgia.  I just think he has been Lionized and isnt the right personality to lead this team anymore.  I think his voice has gone stale and he needs to find a new home with a good coach and team so he can have a chance to prove what he can be.  I hope we start from scratch, sort of like the Dolphins did. 

[MortexLion]

Not gunna lie Stafford in a 49er's uniform would look pretty good..plus its my second favorite team. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

26 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I'm kind of hoping he just plays well but we lose so his trade value goes up.  I love him for what he has done in a Lions uniform stat wise, but honestly he has never been a winner.  Not here, not at Georgia.  I just think he has been Lionized and isnt the right personality to lead this team anymore.  I think his voice has gone stale and he needs to find a new home with a good coach and team so he can have a chance to prove what he can be.  I hope we start from scratch, sort of like the Dolphins did. 

I completely disagree. (And I really wanted to agree. I did until I reached the bold.)

We as fans have (rightfully) criticized everything about the leadership within this organization: the GMs have ranged from mediocre to downright awful and the coaches have been average at best. We've criticized the poor offensive lines, the invisible running games and the abysmal defenses.

None of that is on Stafford. All this guy has done over the last 11+ years is show up each and every week and perform at a consistently high level. He's absolutely the right player, person and personality to lead this team, and can absolutely be a "winner" with a legitimate team around him.

(Now, if he wanted a change of scenery for himself: absolutely. Let him pick the team and make the trade happen. If he wanted to stay in Detroit: perfect. He's a franchise QB.)

[Sllim Pickens]

1 hour ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

I completely disagree. (And I really wanted to agree. I did until I reached the bold.)

We as fans have (rightfully) criticized everything about the leadership within this organization: the GMs have ranged from mediocre to downright awful and the coaches have been average at best. We've criticized the poor offensive lines, the invisible running games and the abysmal defenses.

None of that is on Stafford. All this guy has done over the last 11+ years is show up each and every week and perform at a consistently high level. He's absolutely the right player, person and personality to lead this team, and can absolutely be a "winner" with a legitimate team around him.

(Now, if he wanted a change of scenery for himself: absolutely. Let him pick the team and make the trade happen. If he wanted to stay in Detroit: perfect. He's a franchise QB.)

I agree, that’s why I love him, but he has never seemed to just put the team on his back and won. He has in some games but not consistent and not in the playoffs.  I love what he has done here.  I don’t blame him for the Lions failures, but he can’t overcome a bad roster or coach and win like Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning etc.  I know he isn’t an all time great. Well outside of Detroit anyways.  And since you need to be an all time great to win here it seems he needs to go somewhere with a coach and team where he can help his legacy. 

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

10 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I agree, that’s why I love him, but he has never seemed to just put the team on his back and won. He has in some games but not consistent and not in the playoffs.  I love what he has done here.  I don’t blame him for the Lions failures, but he can’t overcome a bad roster or coach and win like Aaron Rodgers, Peyton Manning etc.  I know he isn’t an all time great. Well outside of Detroit anyways.  And since you need to be an all time great to win here it seems he needs to go somewhere with a coach and team where he can help his legacy. 

See, although I largely agree, Aaron Rodgers - one of the best QBs in NFL history - has played in only one Super Bowl during his 11 year career. One. He has always had some pretty good WRs, his OLine is strong, and his defenses have had their moments.

Winning in this league is just really, really hard. Doing it with bad GMs and mediocre coaches is even harder. Stafford isn't one of the best QBs in NFL history, but he's really good. Really, really good. The type of player that any legitimate franchise can win with. If he wants to be here, I hope we're able to finally put a team around him.

[Sllim Pickens]

9 hours ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

See, although I largely agree, Aaron Rodgers - one of the best QBs in NFL history - has played in only one Super Bowl during his 11 year career. One. He has always had some pretty good WRs, his OLine is strong, and his defenses have had their moments.

Winning in this league is just really, really hard. Doing it with bad GMs and mediocre coaches is even harder. Stafford isn't one of the best QBs in NFL history, but he's really good. Really, really good. The type of player that any legitimate franchise can win with. If he wants to be here, I hope we're able to finally put a team around him.

Your standards of winning are higher than I am talking here.  How many NFC North Championships have we won with Stafford?  None.  How many playoff games have we won with Stafford?  None. I am not even talking about Super Bowls.  I get that getting to the top of the mountain is really hard, but I just don't feel like Stafford has that personality that rallies the troops.  I dont think he is good enough to overcome a bad roster for a whole season.  I think he may have had it in him at one point, but the early injuries and constant coaching changes and constant bad teams and constant bad running games etc have Lionized him.  

As for Rodgers, he hasn't always had good lines, he hasn't always had good coaches, he hasn't always had good running games or defenses, and they still are in the running for NFC North Championships and playoffs every year.  He has missed the playoffs 3 years of his 12 years he has been playing and is on pace to go again. Andrew Luck took a 2 win team and went 11-5 three straight years. Drew Brees is in the playoff hunt almost every year he has been in New Orleans.  I get that none of the situations are identical and that those QBs are considered some of the best to play the position, but I am saying Stafford is not.  Stafford is good enough to keep his team from getting elite players but not good enough or the right fit to make them elevate their play.  

All that being said, I am not mad at all if he is here next year.  I still love him and agree that a good team can win with him.  I just struggle to have faith in this organization to get it right with him and think its time for a fresh start.    

[TL-TwoWinsAway]

Well, in fairness, that 2-14 team that Luck took over was 10-6 the year before. They literally didn't have a QB. (Yes, Luck was good, but it wasn't a typical 2-14 team.)

I think there's an interesting conversation to be had here. You criticized Stafford for not carrying a team, yet have Rodgers - one of the best QBs in NFL history - a bunch of excuses as to why he couldn't carry the Packers to more than one Super Bowl in 11 seasons. Carrying teams is hard, even for the elite. Stafford isn't elite.

Do the Patriots have a dynasty with Brady but without Belichick? Or vice versa? Or was it the combination of both that made them that successful?

Semi-related note: do you think it's better for the franchise if we lose our remaining games?

[LionArkie]

38 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Well, in fairness, that 2-14 team that Luck took over was 10-6 the year before. They literally didn't have a QB. (Yes, Luck was good, but it wasn't a typical 2-14 team.)

I think there's an interesting conversation to be had here. You criticized Stafford for not carrying a team, yet have Rodgers - one of the best QBs in NFL history - a bunch of excuses as to why he couldn't carry the Packers to more than one Super Bowl in 11 seasons. Carrying teams is hard, even for the elite. Stafford isn't elite.

Do the Patriots have a dynasty with Brady but without Belichick? Or vice versa? Or was it the combination of both that made them that successful?

Semi-related note: do you think it's better for the franchise if we lose our remaining games?

Not directed at me, but I will answer with yes and no.  yes if we can get a shot at Lawrence or Fields. Yes to improve the roster. No, because this team has got to learn how to win. Detroit hasn't known how to do this consistently since the Fontes era. By consistently I mean over a 3 year stretch. If we could start doing this with the remainder of this year, it would be a huge jump start for the incoming coach.  I think this is worth more than a high draft pick. This team has got to believe in itself and hasn't had a reason to for over a decade.

[Sllim Pickens]

39 minutes ago, TL-TwoWinsAway said:

Well, in fairness, that 2-14 team that Luck took over was 10-6 the year before. They literally didn't have a QB. (Yes, Luck was good, but it wasn't a typical 2-14 team.)

I think there's an interesting conversation to be had here. You criticized Stafford for not carrying a team, yet have Rodgers - one of the best QBs in NFL history - a bunch of excuses as to why he couldn't carry the Packers to more than one Super Bowl in 11 seasons. Carrying teams is hard, even for the elite. Stafford isn't elite.

Do the Patriots have a dynasty with Brady but without Belichick? Or vice versa? Or was it the combination of both that made them that successful?

Semi-related note: do you think it's better for the franchise if we lose our remaining games?

That 10-6 team had Manning.  They didnt have a QB and were trash.  A lot of teams don't have great QBs and can still compete.  Pittsburgh and New Orleans did it last year. SF went to the SB with Jimmy G.  The Vikings are winning playoff games with Kirk Cousins. 

I am not making excuses for Rodgers.  I am saying that even though he hasn't had great teams and great coaches, he is still in contention.  As we have both stated, winning a SB is hard to do.  But I would gladly take the Lions being in the Packers situation and having a chance each year and being a playoff regular with only one Super Bowl.  Being a winner to me isnt just SBs as I have stated, its winning your division and playoff games.  You have to start with the division, start small and focus small and you wint he division and we are in a good spot to compete for championships. 

The Patriots are not a Dynasty without BB.  I think they do ok without Brady. This is another discussion but I feel the greatest coach of all time is the reason for the winning, Brady was a very good system guy that didn't lose them games (although should have in his first playoffs with that fumble).  

I think its better for our team to lose the rest of our games unless there is serious growth from young players causing us to win.  I would say if we can end up top 2, then yes it would easily be beneficial but outside of the two QBs and maybe Sewell, there are no prospects at the top worth losing for.  If Okudah, Hockenson, Cephus, Tavai, AO, Penisini, J Okwara, Swift etc improve and we win games, thats better for a quick turnaround IMO.  The odds of that happening with our pass rush and current staff is slim so I would lean towards it will be more beneficial to draft higher in each round.