Well, LOL…for people who pay attention they know that while we lost starters to injuries last season for long stints, we found players to replace them who played at an NFL level. We started the season barely able to field NFL talent on either side of the ball and ended the season with players who stepped up and played at a decent level. This was esp true at center, DE, CB and WR. The starters are better, but if we are once again the most injured team in the league as we were last season, we are now in a much better position of next man up. Apparently your opinion of injuries are the same with no regard for what that actually means for the team. Outside of Goff, I don’t know of a single position where we would be devastated. Lumping me in with people who mention injuries every year is simply a lazy attempt to disregard the actual facts.
COMPLETELY agree. They could range from a C- group to a B+ group. So hard to say.
I feel like improving the DL is the best way to help them anyway, as well as an obvious area of need…so let’s get that done first.
I’m Guessing we go DE with 2, and DL with 32 (I’d be really happy w/that, and that would help the DBs soooo much. S is probably our most glaring hole. I still expect either a Bandaid FA, and/or a mid-late round borderline project/starter. Hoping for the Defensive equivalent of St Brown.
This statement is just simply not true. Not in any metric. Different teams are #1 based on different outlets and different measurements (whether you count percentage of the cap lost to injury, or simply games lost), but the Lions are not #1 in any metric. You’re just making things up now.
I think we have a different definition of the word “facts.” Every offseason there are fans who think this, and try to portray the Lions as the “team who experienced the most injuries.” There even used to be threads in the past about the turf at Ford Field. And in some years injuries are worse than others, no doubt, but counting “players coming back from injury” as increasing talent is just something I believe to be a fallacy by optimistic fans. Just my opinion, totally cool if you like that strategy.
Wholeheartedly agree! Except if they love Willis and take him 
I’m fine with that… but if not, then yes this 100 percent!
LOL - in my dream scenario, small trade-back…snag willis
then
Trade up, and get Jordan Davis
I don’t write the articles, I just read 'em. Looks like you would would make better use of your time by looking things up rather than to call me a liar.
https://www.si.com/nfl/lions/news/lions-starters-lost-most-games-to-injury-covid-in-2021
Then there’s this…
This metric say’s #3…
And yes, we have a different definition of the word “facts”. I tend to use them, how YOU doing?
Free agency cracks me up every year. We move around all the existing players yet most every team thinks they’ve gotten better.
Well, last year we knew we weren’t, having let how many players walk? Then signing low ball contracts just to try and field a team. I think the funniest would be the Davis deal, where we lost him but got a comp pick and then signed him back at a minimum. Then there’s Agnew, who we replaced with Raymond who had better return yards on punts and more receiving yards and got a comp pick. Then there’s Golladay, who had 521 receiving yards last season, and Raymond had 576 receiving yards…and got a comp pick. Losing Stafford for Goff, well, obviously day 1 this was never going to be an immediate gain.
It was smart to bring back players who had been here, we have like 30 some players signed right now that we can let walk for almost nothing if we can upgrade. Flowers is the last big contract to go away, Brockers next year. I would really like to see Big V restructured, it’s a bad contract.
“Injuries to starters” is the one you’re cherry picking, ok I’m glad you found one. But there are a million metrics to look at, just depends on what you value. In yours the Lions could lose their starting long snapper and starting guard to injury - while the Packers could lose Aaron Rodgers and you’d be all “the Lions were affected by injuries worse than the Packers these are FACTS!!!” No logical person would agree with that take, but if you want to prove something true there are statistical ways to find something to lean on no matter your position.
As I said above, next offseason either you or the next person will be lined up saying “we look better this year than last year, especially once we get all these players back from injury!” Then new players get injured, the cycle continues. For eternity. Why I even try is beyond me lol. Don’t let me yuck in your yum man. It’s the offseason - let the koolaid flow.
Get the bong out, brother!
The Lions had a significant amount of injuries no matter what metric you use.
Sometimes it’s better to admit you’re wrong than to continue to try to reach to support you’re original false claim. It just makes you look more ignorant.
Luke
He gave you three unique sources to back the claim that the Lions had the worst injury luck im the NFL last season. Apparently by one measure you could say 3rd worst injury experience.
Any way you look at it, the Lions injuries far exceeded the norm. We know exceptions tend to return to the norm. We see that every year.
You said there are “a million” metrics. I assume you have one or two metrics you can pull out to show “alternative facts.”
Right now you’re needlessly digging in on your point.
Everybody knows injuries will happen every year, but even to a casual observer, such as myself, it’s obvious last year was exceptionally bad.
This is a discussion board. We all learn from others. In general, people do overstate the increase in value from returning players. That truth does not negate the idea that the Lions should have better injury luck this year.
Reversion to the mean stuff. And the reserve players on the roster now have NFL experience.
I think it’s completely reasonable to say the Lions will be better this year due to returning players — more so than in most years.
Do you have external information to support your claim?
I think both things are true. And the things with message boards, often times people need to take one avenue or the other and dig in. If I’m appearing to dig in, then it’s only a defensive move, and not a reflection on my true position. Yes, the Lions will potentially have better injury luck, that can be totally true. But the premise that “returning players will make the team better” has proven to be a mostly optimistic fan fallacy from the reading I’ve done. I admit, it was a section in a book about MLB analytics where I read this (I know analytics generally get eye rolls on this board and are viewed as witchcraft), but it showed that players who do come back from injury are often so much a wild card, that you have to assume they’ll come back at less than 100% previous production. For example - the Lions get back Okudah and Okwara. Awesome, they’re getting a starting corner and a 10 sack DE right? Hopefully, but more realistically they’re getting back a nickel back (not the band thankfully) and a 6 sack DE. That’s not a projection of them personally, just statistically speaking, players coming back from season ending injuries are going to come back with less production. It’s also why players coming back from injuries are often times signed to 1 year “prove it” deals in FA. The Lions signed Tyrell Williams to just such a deal last year, coming off injury, and they got like 1 game out of him. Everyone on here was talking about him having a thousand yard season last year. It’s a common mistake among fans to count on “returning from injury players” to out-produce realistic expectations.
Anyway, my point was that I think overly relying on the players coming back from injury shouldn’t increase the win total by that much. Between new players getting injured, and decreased production from the returning players - I estimated it was worth an additional one to three wins. That felt fair and reasonable, and still does. If anyone thinks that’s too low, feel free to share how many more wins you think is reasonable.
Gotta love message boards, where men with fragile egos need to name call in order to feel better about their intelligence level.
Well, you can man up and admit you’re wrong and that calling me a liar was wrong, OR, you can reply to me like you just did.
“you’d be all “the Lions were affected by injuries worse than the Packers these are FACTS!!!” No logical person would agree with that take.”
As if that wasn’t enough you continue to make assumptions about me and then make MORE false statements about me. Not sure what your end game is but being a liar and attacking fellow fans because your comments have been proven false is pretty entertaining. You told me that the “Lions are not #1 in any metric.”, but, wait for it…when I proved you wrong it’s “cherry picking.” I don’t know that I’ve ever seen anyone so eloquently support their false claim and denial. Well done.
I would also add Covid wins to the list, but I suppose that hits both competing teams last season was the luck of the draw each week. Lost Goff e.g. in the Atlanta game we could have won, but could have lost others as well.
Interestingly enough, the Lions ranked as one of the best teams in BUS score (banged up score, and no I didn’t know this was a think until recently) for the first half of the season. It wasn’t until the 2nd half of the season that they started really losing a ton of players to covid/injuries… which also coincides with their team improving and winning. So to summarize - when the Lions were healthier they were losing constantly. When they started battling injuries, they started winning. Maybe all of this means nothing and people are arguing over meaningless shit because that makes no sense LOL.
Either way people are trying to go the name calling and mud slinging route, getting triggered, it’s just time to move on.
Loses early in season were → the only WRs that knew the playbook, Ragnow, etc.
Late in the season, the injuries were…backup to the backup’s backup at CB…shit like that.
So basically, not all injuries are created equally.
So it’s ok for you to call someone a liar and get proven wrong.
But when I correctly point out that you are being ignorant, I’m in the wrong? Would it have been better for your ego if I called you uninformed?
He tells me that “by any metric” I’m just making things up, and then calls it “cherry picking” when I prove him wrong. LOL, and then say’s we have “fragile ego’s”? Wow.
The Lions were not in the top 3 in either total games missed due to injuries, percentage of cap used on injured players, or in total players on injured reserve. So is it my turn to puff my chest and call you names now? Crow about how “right” I am? Gotta take a break from the board for a bit. Awesome place overall, but sometimes the toxic masculinity in here can be too much.