Based on my post yesterday, and my other posts, you may wonder where I stand this season regarding the draft. Well, here it is:
For The Record: Especially because of all the holes the Lions have, I would say damn anything else and go for the #1 player on my board at #1 as long as he signs a reasonable contract before the draft. If he balks a bit, move to #2 and see if that motivates him.
I'd then go BPA all the way down the draft this year. Honestly, at how many positions are the Lions so set that having "need" is a worry???
Just threw out the salary thing as an added zest to a different kind of argument than him vs him, contract vs contract value for them instead... Like I said yesterday, if you're okay with the contract, you're okay with whatever selection you make.
BPA to me isn't just top player at his position, but one who I am convinced will make the most impact at the NFL level right now of all the players left in the draft. So at #1 overall, I'd take the #1 guy on my board. At #20, whoever is the highest name not crossed out. Repeat.
Honestly ask yourself this question, and you will best see how I would make the selection:
If I knew I had the #1 pick in the draft, but didn't know which team I was drafting for, who would I take? (this eliminates needs, scheme, everything but the player and his position)
My Answer: Stafford would ride the pine on many teams. No. Smith and Monroe would be a marginal upgrade at best for about half the teams, and may not start for others. No. Orapko? You're kidding, right? Curry... he can play all three positions, and even played at nickle-back in college, so he can line up at LB, put him on the line, cover a LB. Rush him or drop him into coverage. And, with his skill set there isn't a team in the league -- from the Steelers to the Pats on the top echelon's of defenses that he wouldn't be able to make an immediate impact on.