I've got the crazy notion that the Lions should pick a side of the ball and draft it this year. Within reason of course. If Curry falls to us at 20 (nahgannahapen), take him. But bolster a side of the ball. We are so bad, we can't fix this thing in a year.

With that said, I say go offense. We have CJ and Smith to start with. The defense is so far gone, its crazy. Is it really going to make a difference if we add 1 player to our Defense? And it will prolly just screw up his development.

Draft offense with 1a, b and 33...unless someone really special falls.

Well, we don't have as many needs on offense as we do on defense -- I can't see us going exclusively at either side of the ball. We have too many needs and take the right guys at the right time, as Mayhew's been saying. The defense is so far gone, it's crazy?! Why the hell draft all offense then? It's no doubt we can't fix this in a year, but it will be a lot easier to keep us in games with a strong defense. How many times this year did the Lions get close late, but still no hope was maintained because you knew the defense would cower down? I could see us going offense with the first two picks, but I think that would be it and it would have to be QB and LT.

Aaron Curry ran a 4.54 and 4.57, by the way.

I think the current administration is likely thinking about how to get 5 wins this year and 8 the next, at least that's probably how they should be thinking if they want to stay employed.

So no, they aren't going to "fix it" in one year, but the first goal is not to be a joke and build from there.

Curry would be great, but I don't want to take Defense at 1.

Its a crazy notion to just draft one side of the ball, but I do think you could go a LONG way in fixing our offense by going offense in this years draft and some FA fixes in the next offseason.

I guess wins and losses are the guage, but I'd rather have an offense that is almost there and lose than having a 1 great rookie amongst a bunch of crap and hurt the guys development.

Like I said, if we go QB and LT with the first two picks, I could see it. It's either too early or not necessary to upgrade anything else at that point. For example, I could see:

1) Stafford
20) Beatty
33) James Laurinaitis/Brian Cushing/Ron Brace

and then Canfield or Levitre with the 82nd pick

That gives us on offense:

QB: Culpep/Stanton/Stafford
RB: Smith
FB: Norris/Felton
LT: Beatty
LG: Backus/Levitre
C: Raiola
RG: Peterman/Levitre
RT: Cherilus
TE: Gaines/late round rookie
WR: Johnson, FA, Standeford, etc

I think it's going to be Stafford, LB #20, CB #33, OG 3rd rounder then depth.

I don't think they see any OT or Curry worth the #1 pick. If they can trade down and grab an OT maybe, but that won't happen IMO, especially not when Sanchez is providing an alternative to moving up for Stafford.

Next year they'll still be a top 15 pick (probably top 10). They'll look for an OT and any remaining holes on defense then.

I just can't see a OT this year unless they think Backus can move to guard. they have too many holes to replace an average LT right now.

As far as LBs go, if you aren't going for one with the 1st pick, you can wait and get about the same as you can at 20 later in the draft, so I wouldn't do that. I should say OLBs deep this year, ILB not so deep.

I just see a huge fall off after Jason Smith OT to the 3rd round. Thats kind of an obvious statement, but I don't see that drop off with a OLB.

You have Beatty rated that high?

No, but he may be the best OT on the board at 20 and I can't really see us going OT number 1 and QB at 20 unless Stafford somehow slips to 20. I don't think we are going to take Sanchez or Freeman at 20.

Just from reading and listening, some feel a OT is where you start to build your team. Taking an OT at 1 is not unheard of...and I know you know that, but an OT might right this ship more than we think.

It's not that, I can see us going OT number 1, but I don't see us taking Sanchez or Freeman at 20.

And you know as fans, we just have to sit back and watch. We might take Smith 1 or Curry 1 and CB 1b, OT 33. Who knows. I'd just like to go offense.

I just hope that when they do their evaluations and salary demands of players that they come up with a fairly clear pick at 1.

i don't have a problem with an OT at #1, provided you think he's a complete stud. if he's not amazing I wouldn't take him until next year. not with a decent stop gap already in place here. if both Jason Smith and Stafford are amazing in your eyes, the coin flip goes to QB (harder to fill).

^ Unless the Lions feel Freeman is a stud. Then take Smith at 1 and grab Freeman. You know the guy you posted the stats on. He's climbing...and thats both a good thing and a bad thing.

Like I said someplace, if you have Smith ranked higher overall than the QBs and you don't have Stafford that much higher than Freeman, then go Smith and Freeman later.

Freeman is supposedly a Project Pick that will take a year of sitting out to get ready. We all seem to like the idea of sitting a QB for a year if we take him, so I would rather take that OT (or a defensive player if one steps up and proves to be #1 worthy) that can develop on the field and then grab the QB that looks like he'll be solid but will need some developmental time. Then you park him as your #3 QB for a year and just let him learn.

^ Unless the Lions feel Freeman is a stud. Then take Smith at 1 and grab Freeman. You know the guy you posted the stats on. He's climbing...and thats both a good thing and a bad thing.

Like I said someplace, if you have Smith ranked higher overall than the QBs and you don't have Stafford that much higher than Freeman, then go Smith and Freeman later.

True, but if he's a stud he might not be there at #20 too. SF might take him if KC opts for Sanchez. The Bears and Bucs still don't have a solid QB, not sure either would address that in the first round though.

Very possible, then we wait and look for a qb in next yeard draft or next years FA, or hope that Stanton develops.

I happily defer to all of you on specific players. It's been great reading all the information.

My vote is defense, defense and more defense. We need upgrades on just about every single position on D. That and defense wins games. Teams with good to great defenses and weak offenses do much, much better than the opposite. Every time a team has improved to come out of the gutter it's almost always been because of defense.

I don't disagree about Defense wins games. For me its that we have Smith and CJ on offense and I'd like to help them out with an offensive line.

I was beating the draft defense drum for years, but now that it looks like we have a couple of young gems on offense, I don't want their development to get stumped cuz of ZERO talent on the line.

That is a very good point.

well, we don't need to go all defense. we've got two 1sts, one 2nd, two 3rds.

I would expect 3 of those 5 to be LB, DT, CB.

The other two could be any of these: QB, LT, OG

Then I would expect another CB and a WR taken in the middle rounds.