QB or Not QB-That is is Question

[Karnage84]

33 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

And that's fine.  But you're not trading down and getting substantially enough in return to justify moving pass the blue chip prospects.  And if you move down just far enough to capitalize on a team wanting to move up for Stroud/Young (whoever Houston doesn't take) without jeopardizing missing out on one of the blue chip defensive prospects, you're not going to have future assets to deal to move up for a QB in the future.  Right now, the Lions are projected to pick 13th.  Let's assume they end up picking 12th.  Figure in some natural year-to-year progression, and the Lions are probably picking ~16th in 2024.  That's almost too far for the Lions to move up without giving up SUBSTANTIAL amount of picks.  No team is going to move of Caleb Williams or Drake Maye (or whoever your top QB available) is for a SRP and change.  It's probably going to take multiple FRPs.

No - I would be taking a blue chip guy at #3 in either Carter or Anderson. I might consider a trade down to #5 or #6 if there are teams clamoring to come up and snag Bryce Young or Will Levis (or both). 

I would consider taking a QB at #12 or #13 if someone like Levis is there but I also don't really like him in that spot. 

Bo Nix is starting to make some waves. So let's say that Nix (or insert a similar caliber player) is considered a late 1st - early 2nd, I'd consider trading up to get him with picks 30/31 and secure that 5th year option (or acquire a pick in this range with a trade down from our own pick). 

2024 - There could be several guys in that draft. Caleb Williams, Drake Maye, Anthony Richardson could go back to school, KJ Jefferson could as well, Garrett Shrader is in the mix. 

Trade Up: The Chiefs traded #27, 3rd rounder + 2018 1st to move up to #10 and acquire Patrick Mahomes. 

If we had Jalen Carter + another high level defensive player in 2023 and then gave up a mid 1st + 2nd and some change in order to draft the 2nd or 3rd best QB in the class in the top 10 I'd be ok with that. 

 

[General Tso]

Not exactly the same situation because we haven't been as successful, but I'm getting Jimmy G vs Trey Lance vibes here. If our team will truly have the same talent level as the 9ers next year, that's kind of the situation we'll find ourselves in. 

At the moment, the only QB I think who's worth that top 5 pick is Bryce Young. If by some miracle we have a chance to draft, you just have to go for it. Keep Goff for a year. He doesn't pan out, we start Young. He wins the Super Bowl, that's good too!

[Louis Friend]

9 minutes ago, General Tso said:

Not exactly the same situation because we haven't been as successful, but I'm getting Jimmy G vs Trey Lance vibes here. If our team will truly have the same talent level as the 9ers next year, that's kind of the situation we'll find ourselves in. 

At the moment, the only QB I think who's worth that top 5 pick is Bryce Young. If by some miracle we have a chance to draft, you just have to go for it. Keep Goff for a year. He doesn't pan out, we start Young. He wins the Super Bowl, that's good too!

I like Young and Stroud. TBH, they are the only QBs I take in the first round. 

[Just Want A Title]

Jared Goff and the offense as a whole is pretty productive when we are reasonably healthy.  We still need to better long-term solutions at RG, RB (not sold on D'Andre Swift and WR#3 but Jared Goff is playing pretty well when he stays within himself and has decent weapons.  We have four picks in the top 64.  Brad Holmes should let the draft come to him and take the best players available so that we can win consistently.

[Louis Friend]

Baker Mayfield waived by Panthers. Will love to see guys backtrack from their "Lions wanted Mayfield if available" when Lions don't put in a claim for him. 

[Karnage84]

14 minutes ago, Louis Friend said:

Baker Mayfield waived by Panthers. Will love to see guys backtrack from their "Lions wanted Mayfield if available" when Lions don't put in a claim for him. 

They might not put in a waiver but would be interesting to see if they're on a list of teams for a free agent visit. I have to imagine the 49ers are on the top of that list. 

[Sllim Pickens]

1 hour ago, Karnage84 said:

They might not put in a waiver but would be interesting to see if they're on a list of teams for a free agent visit. I have to imagine the 49ers are on the top of that list. 

Purdy looked better than Mayfield but maybe as a backup. Side note he was one of the guys I liked later last year as a new backup with upside. 

I wouldnt mind claiming him as a backup strictly, just because we have nothing behind Goff but its nothing I would be scrambling to do.  I think its smarter to just sit on the cap space.  

[HashtagFTW]

Honestly, I don't even think about taking a QB in the draft unless it's someone like Spencer Rattler in the mid rounds. We should rock with Goff until he proves we shouldn't unless we have a chance at an upgrade via free agency. Our obvious focus should be defense. Goff is scoring enough points where a good defense would make us a 12+ win team. 

[Nnivolcm]

Brad Holmes has shown he is building the team with a long term mind set. It wouldn't surprise me to see him draft Hendon Hooker because he'll likely be available later due to his injury. Goff is playing well enough there isn't a need to upgrade immediately so the Lions can wait to rehab and develop Hooker. 

[Louis Friend]

2 hours ago, Nnivolcm said:

Brad Holmes has shown he is building the team with a long term mind set. It wouldn't surprise me to see him draft Hendon Hooker because he'll likely be available later due to his injury. Goff is playing well enough there isn't a need to upgrade immediately so the Lions can wait to rehab and develop Hooker. 

I've thought the same. Could get Hooker in the second, sit him behind Goff, let him get healthy and learn the game. Put him out there is two years. The issue for some, is in two years, he'll be 27/28 yrs old as basically a rookie. I'm okay with that as of right now, while building up a defense.

[Sllim Pickens]

12 hours ago, Louis Friend said:

I've thought the same. Could get Hooker in the second, sit him behind Goff, let him get healthy and learn the game. Put him out there is two years. The issue for some, is in two years, he'll be 27/28 yrs old as basically a rookie. I'm okay with that as of right now, while building up a defense.

I don't know if I love this idea tbh.  If it is truly two years out why not try and win now by adding a defensive player or another OG in round 2 and worry about QB in 2 years.  Or draft a later round pick who can be a backup next year and maybe develop some.  We do have a good team, and if the young guys keep developing and we add a 5 more top 75 draft picks, we should honestly be competing next year for the division which means we are in the hunt to win a SB.  If they think Hooker can be back next year and likely win the job the following year, maybe worth doing, but I'd probably rather have at least someone who can back up Goff this year with likely a later pick. 

The other option is to draft someone we feel can and should play now over Goff.  Or at least push him and start year 2 like a Stroud or Young.  The intent there is that those guys would be expected to do the things Goff can't or struggles with and would make us better now to go with the solid team we are building.  It would be one less significant piece elsewhere but the thought process is that the bump in QB play would be of greater value than the bump at DT or CB.  

I think the tougher decision will be if one of the QBs is on the board for us if picking 4, with Anderson and Carter also gone, would you trade back and take more future pick ammo, draft the QB, or pass on the QB and take someone else at 4?  I currently would lean towards trading down but would also be good with one of the QBs.  I'd lean to trade down and get a kings ransom for a QB and if the offers arent good enough just take the QB. 

[Just Want A Title]

14 hours ago, Louis Friend said:

I've thought the same. Could get Hooker in the second, sit him behind Goff, let him get healthy and learn the game. Put him out there is two years. The issue for some, is in two years, he'll be 27/28 yrs old as basically a rookie. I'm okay with that as of right now, while building up a defense.

I am not really big spending a second-round pick on someone who will essentially be a 27-year old rookie.  In fact, I would be more open to drafting Anthony Richardson.  His physical tools are off-the-charts and he is a lot younger.  My guess is that he doesn't make it past the Colts if he is on the board when they pick.

[LionArkie]

If Goff wasn't so helter skelter, this would be a lot easier to decide. When he's on, you definitely can win with him. But when he is off...
Personally, I think I would rather put talent on the field for the first 2 - 3 rounds of this years draft vs waiting 2 years. That one extra player could mean the difference between playoffs or not. Grab a development guy a little later for both a backup and to attempt to develop 2 years down the road.

23 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I don't know if I love this idea tbh.  If it is truly two years out why not try and win now by adding a defensive player or another OG in round 2 and worry about QB in 2 years.  Or draft a later round pick who can be a backup next year and maybe develop some.  We do have a good team, and if the young guys keep developing and we add a 5 more top 75 draft picks, we should honestly be competing next year for the division which means we are in the hunt to win a SB.  If they think Hooker can be back next year and likely win the job the following year, maybe worth doing, but I'd probably rather have at least someone who can back up Goff this year with likely a later pick. 

The other option is to draft someone we feel can and should play now over Goff.  Or at least push him and start year 2 like a Stroud or Young.  The intent there is that those guys would be expected to do the things Goff can't or struggles with and would make us better now to go with the solid team we are building.  It would be one less significant piece elsewhere but the thought process is that the bump in QB play would be of greater value than the bump at DT or CB.  

I think the tougher decision will be if one of the QBs is on the board for us if picking 4, with Anderson and Carter also gone, would you trade back and take more future pick ammo, draft the QB, or pass on the QB and take someone else at 4?  I currently would lean towards trading down but would also be good with one of the QBs.  I'd lean to trade down and get a kings ransom for a QB and if the offers arent good enough just take the QB. 

 

23 minutes ago, Sllim Pickens said:

I think the tougher decision will be if one of the QBs is on the board for us if picking 4, with Anderson and Carter also gone, would you trade back and take more future pick ammo, draft the QB, or pass on the QB and take someone else at 4?  I currently would lean towards trading down but would also be good with one of the QBs.  I'd lean to trade down and get a kings ransom for a QB and if the offers arent good enough just take the QB. 

I could probably get on board with this. When you fully realize your one qb away, you could have the ammo to move up and get your guy. If you decide you don't need him, you still have ammo to give you options.

[Karnage84]

17 hours ago, Louis Friend said:

I've thought the same. Could get Hooker in the second, sit him behind Goff, let him get healthy and learn the game. Put him out there is two years. The issue for some, is in two years, he'll be 27/28 yrs old as basically a rookie. I'm okay with that as of right now, while building up a defense.

This is the biggest problem in itself for me. You're basically getting a guy that's 2 years younger than Goff with zero starting experience. 

[Karnage84]

Just watching NFL Stock Exchange. Food for thought.

CJ Stroud has a 38 passer rating when under pressure, ranked for 133rd in FBS. 

I know that we have a pretty solid OL but that's definitely a bit concerning.