1984Echoes

I'm not thinking about Anderson... at all.

Then we better hope we have the FO that can identify the next Mahomes rather than the next Ware. If Holmes drafts Anthony Richardson, I am certainly hoping for that first QB rather than the latter... But that's just me (or maybe not just me...).

I could live with this mock draft: https://lionswire.usatoday.com/lists/lions-post-combine-mock-draft-detroit-projections/ #6 Chris Gonzalez, CB #18 Keion White, DT 2nd Trenton Simpson, LB 2nd Hooker, QB 3rd Charbonnet, RB.

That's why I want to draft Hooker in the 2nd. IMO, he's a CYA QB. He may or may not be better than Goff. In two years he'll be 27? If he IS better than Goff, then you can let Goff go and ride Hooker for a few years. Or search for an even better QB if you don't believe in Hooker as the starter, or in Goff. At the very least, he should be a pretty high end backup for the next 4 years, aside from his redshirt year in 2023 due to the ACL. He comes at a cheaper cost (2nd-ish.. maybe 3rd? instead of the #6...). He has some high end ability. Which makes him a really good backup or, if he's better, a possible starter.

And nobody's (well at least I'm not) suggesting drafting a QB because of "cap space". The issue is if the Lions brass feels they have a unique opportunity (high draft pick at #6, and if we continue to improve like we think we should, we may not see that opportunity again for 5+ years? More or less?) to draft a QB for the future. And if they are sold on one of Stroud/ Levis/ or Richardson as that QB. And if Goff is the right QB for the next 5 years. Cap space is just icing on the cake. It's not the reason to draft one of these QB's. My preference is to NOT draft one of these QB's. I'm just arguing the logic... and the way you are arguing it seems almost as if you are arguing that it would be BAD to draft a new QB because of the cap space issue. Which is not true at all. I don't get why you are arguing over this. The argument should be about whether Levis/ Stroud/ Richardson are better than Goff, now, and 5 years in the future. Who cares about the cap? We get a cap space advantage if we draft a rookie QB to take over for Goff. Period. But that is NOT what the argument for drafting/ not drafting a QB at #6 should be about. IMO.

That's the point of the whole discussion. The Lions drafting a QB. Which makes your point completely moot.

But it's the Jets...

So why even comment on that since it's off the table?

I'm trying to follow this logic and I'm having difficulty... I'm going to apply my own logic: Drafted QB at #6 (Levis or Richardson or Stroud... take your pick...), roughly $6 mill in 2023 plus Goff's $30 mill = 2023 = $36 mill in QB cap. Trade Goff after the 2023 season for two 1sts from the Jets. What is his cap hit if we trade him? I'm going to ignore that just for a moment... 2024 = $8 mill for our #6 QB (starter) and a backup QB at $4 mill? = $12 mill in cap for QB? 2025 = $10 mill for our #6 QB (starter) and a backup QB at $4 mill? = $14 mill in cap for QB? 2026 = $15 mill for our #6 QB (starter) and a backup QB at $4 mill? = $19 mill in cap for QB? 2027 = $20 mill for our #6 QB (starter) and a backup QB at $4 mill? = $24 mill in cap for QB? 2028 = (if we signed our #6 QB to an extension because we really LIKE him...)? For the next 5 years we are covered, relatively inexpensively compared to the rest of the league, with Goff and then our #6 draft pick QB... Plus we get two extra 1sts out of that... What was the problem again...?

But dude... That's what all the cool kids are doing...

I want (12) 1st round draft picks in 2023.

I wouldn't mind Charbonnet in the 2nd or 3rd... bigger and stronger.

I agree... That's just... hurtful.

We just need... The Raiders, Falcons & Panthers to be convinced of the value of Will Levis at #6 so there ends up being a bidding war for the rights to draft him...

I don't think it's crazy. I just think once he gets a steady diet of MLB pitching, that he'll start to struggle. That still doesn't state that he'd be a worse option than Baddoo or Carpenter... he wouldn't be. But to me, taht WOULD make the argument that I want him getting 5 PA's per game at AAA so he can see close-to-MLB breaking pitches/ offspeed, etc. It's the same reason Tork! may need to start out at AAA. Less stress, lots of playing time. I didn't mean to throw Tork! in there... but he has yet to solve MLB pitching so... until that light bulb turns on... I'd force him to stay at AAA. Which also says it might force him to take a closer look at his swing... which he's been heavily opposed to (adjustments, etc...). Parker needs a steady dose of offspeed/ breaking balls... Tork! needs to fix his swing. Whether he wants to or not. PS: Two birds with one stone.

That's the big "Retire Early?" question...

Flyers take the lead 2-1... Little did we know that the Wings are now targeting Bedard...

I'm thinking though... That Parker could still use some time at AAA. This is the 1st week or so of Spring Training games... not the same as facing the usual MLB pitching gauntlet at all...

They still got... and Yzerman knows this... things to fix. Or positions to get better players at... Same thing.

That should be 79. $36K (rough #'s here...) per year at 67-68-69, at 70 it's $48K/ year so it would take 9 years at $12K/ year advantage to catch up the the $108K already received 3 years earlier retiring at 67... At 62 years retirement = $24K/ year * 8 years = $192K head start but at 70 it's also $24K/ year catch up so 8 years = 78. But receiving/ investing early (if one has the ability to do so) would change those numbers of course...

Or... Holmes selects someone in the 2nd/ 3rd/ 5th/ or 6th that no one was talking about and he turns into a good back for us...

Good start to this game... Husso's in net. And the Wings took a 1-0 lead on the Flyers with a Perron goal...

What that also says is that he and his camp won't be able to talk themselves into a top 6 selection... they'll be weighed down in comparison to all the other crazy athletes and their crazy numbers... He might still go top 10... but now there would seem to be a greater chance that he could drift to #18. That also says... with the Panthers hot for trading up, that if we're in the right spot for a Panthers trade, and Holmes would rather take a big Panthers trade package than select, Murphy for example at #6... then selecting at #9 probably gets him his pick of the top CB that he's interested in... But I'm just speculatin'... And I still want Gonzalez over all the other CB's... He's my #1 guy there...

I'm locked in on Hendon Hooker in the 2nd round...

Damn... I didn't realize Kyler Murray is exactly the same size at 5' 10" and 205 #'s. And went 1-1. I'll take back what I said. I guess smallish QB's are now in. If they have the "IT" factor that is. So... Bryce Young & Richardson now going 1 and 2. Stroud in the top 5, I believe... maybe? Should be? And Levis the open question mark as to exactly where he goes... Things are looking up for (A) A premium defensive player dropping to #6. (B) A potential trade down with the Cardinals. Or (C) What Would Holmes Do? Draft Richardson? Robinson? Best D'Lineman? Best CB? Trade up/ trade down? Seems like every single potential option is on the menu for pick #6 this draft... methinks.