KL2

Geez Murray would be lucky to be drafted at this point. You guys make it seem like he has ZERO upside no skills and is basically crap. Meanwhile Sharpe is sure to hit and become a star. Neither is true.

So signing a bunch of free agents doesn't automatically make you better, competitive or more enjoyable to watch? Huh who would have thunk it? Oh wait

Cause its silly to worry about what happened 20 years ago and 9 GMS ago. If you're gonna be scared about every bust in your franchise history you're never gonna draft anyone

A new league record

In his head now

Hmmmm who to believe out of context random fan blog or places like CBS, Sports Business Daily and the Wall Street Journal? (BTW the quote was traditionally and then he qualified it to say its not a guarantee) None of this is to say it couldn't be Buffalo or Miami but the thinking it has to be one or two teams is wrong.

Let's not link accounts that have been 87 percent wrong

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/2018-nfl-thanksgiving-schedule-how-to-watch-stream-three-great-division-rivalry-games-including-bears-lions-on-cbs/

That AFC rule no longer applies. A few years ago we were bears on CBS. There are a couple games that trade networks each year now.

I don't know if there are words to desribe how bad this post is. It's like its own world, not one based on facts, just like I-already-made-up-my-mind-and-given-up-all-reasonable-thinking anaylsis. "We didn't need to field a decent product during the rebuild." OK, I've asked many a times before about what that accomplishes. The best someone comes up with is that its a quasi-feel good well I like it better than losing 114. That's it. It doesn't make you better in the long run and it doesn't put butts in the seat. All it does is give you a worst draft pick. For example let's look at 2018, The only two guys with better WARs so far are INdia and Horner. I'm not sure I want them more than Mize. But, if we won a few more meanligless games in 2017 likely would have left us with someone other than mize. Seems "fielding a decent product during the rebuild" would have just stunned the rebuild Yes If we had Verlander, Scherzer and JD right now plus the rooks we might be good, or we might not. We also might be better with trout. Or the ghost of Lefty Grove. Those players left/we traded because we hit the pleateau in 2015. We weren't gonna win with them because we had nothing but them and if they stayed around we certaintly we wouldn't have the rookies. And those rookies "We have our hopes hung so high on." That's how it works. You can't just keep running out Jack Morris at some point new players come along. No reason being afraid just because they are rookies. Someone will have to be in the Hall of FAme in 2035. "And we coulda gotta max" No we couldn't have. The way he left he's not coming back. "We could have gotten nick" Nick C WAR 05. Grossman .3 Meadows has .8. Two of those guys make uner $5 million, one makes $20. I'll let you figure it who "We coulda got correa" Correra WAR .6, Baez .7. ANd Baez costs $13 million less. So the three guys you listed would have likely no impact on our current win loss. Then you go on your complete BULL idea of "contempt we have for large numbers" Idea. We are paying Baez more than 20 million and a pitcher that much too. We spent like what $200 million in theoffseason. You're treating like we spent $20. This is just complete and utter whining just to whine, its not fair or reasonable. You might be able to argue they should have spent it better, on other guys or what not but to say we are adverse to large numbers after spending $200 million just makes you look foolish.

Which teams would those be? Give you know, offensive is like at 1968 levels

Who can take a pitch out, to the right field? The candy man can!

And that's my exact point. That's the fool hearty thinking. All those problems I laid out, everything would have to break right for that quote to be true. What's the chances of that? You said maybe to a lot of em. Sure the lions are magically gonna finally turn it around for the first time in 70s. Sure a fast guy is magically gonna make it so he can throw it in the air 20 more yards. Gonna have to explain the physics to me on that one. Its not a matter of guys not getting open on the long ball, its the fact he can't do it. Why are we trying to convince ourself maybe he is OK and then let's waste some more years seeing what he can do longterm still as an average, at best, QB? Great now in 5 years we still don't have a QB, have now wasted these young guys on rookie deals and are right back to square 1. I don't get why that thing you posted is a good thing or reasonable for a 7 year starter. It's like sitting around hoping Jiminez finally figures it out. At some point guys are what they are. Gofff is a fine journeyman starter, might even win you some games if you have a decent team. But, nobody wants to be Iowa in the NFL. That's what Goff is he's Iowa. 8-4. An occasional 10-2 but fall short in the end.

Yeah cause arm strength usually improves after 5 years....

The problem is several fold here: 1. Goff can't throw the ball more than 20 yards. Now we have pieces that are designed to stretch the field, so is he the right QB for us? 2. All of those teams including the Rams with Goff had something going for them, they were really good teams without the QB. Those are hard to come by and the Lions haven't done that in 70 years. Do you expect them to figure it out now? 3. Even if the ones you listed, only one won a superbowl. The goal isn't making the playoffs or winning a couple games. Its about winning the big game. It's really really hard to do that without a top third QB. Do you think its prudent to keep Goff hope you have a good team then realize he can't get you over the hump therefore wasting those prime team years before the group gets dismantled. 4. You're counting on Goff playing like the last quarter, what if he plays like the first quarter? 5. While 27, Goff has been in the league for almost 7 years there is little likelyhood he improves on what he is. Now, you could keep Goff and hope all those things become true or break the lions way or work to find an elite QB which makes everybody around him better. The second one seems slightly easier to find than building a crazy elite team Rob Johnson style.

I like the NFL.com guy first...everyone won!

This post is just stupid as they spent 80 million on another pitcher.

The problem with guys like that is they are so on immediate help and what's needed today and the big picutre isn't seen at all. We saw it last year with us when we didn't take a WR. The same thing happened. All they care about is filling preceived needs today while a team might be thinking two or three seasons down the road.

To be fair, it's hard ot trade up from 3.

The fifth year is overrated. It means you only get maybe $10 million in cap savings for a QB. And with the cap projections the way they aren't that isn't going to matter. And its not like any team minds paying for a good QB. The whole trade up for the fifth year thing works only if you are expecing to be a super bowl conterder in like year 2. Few teams with pick 32-40 are.

Cause Williams is way better and faster. Burks has some boom or bust. Williams if he hits he is Hill. But even if he doesn't he's a guy who can take the top off a defense. Burks could be Brian RObeskie

Not to mention that Thibs by far has the highest ceiling. Whether he gets there, who knows. But, don't make it like Hutch is significantly better. He's got a higher floor for sure, but also a lower ceiling.

I just wanted the a

I get to be GM now

Fans overvalue 2nd round picks. About half never amount to anything. If there is a person you even just a bit like just stay there. Picking up a second rounder to move back 10 spots, often only means you end up to 2 nothings.