Why The Lions Will Make The Wrong Decision With Stafford

To begin with, I will admit that I do believe in curses. People may say that curses only exist because we believe in them, but it is much more fun to believe that they really do exist.

Now that that's out of the way, I believe that the Lions will make the wrong decision regarding Matthew Stafford's starting role this year, because the city of Detroit is cursed in making similar important decisions to this. The city has at least twice given a textbook example of how a GM should not work, and I believe this trend will continue.

You may ask: Well, what two occasions were these, and how do they affect Stafford? Once you've seen the evidence, you can decide whether I'm just talking because I'm an ignorant fool who doesn't believe he has NFL talent, or if there may be some validity to this quaint little coincidence. Anyway, here are the two scenarios I have memories of...

Scenario 1: It is the year 1987, and the Detroit Tigers are in a heated battle for the AL East with the Toronto Blue Jays and Milwaukee Brewers. Feeling that they need just one more pitcher to  win the division, Bill Lajoie decides that they are simply one pitcher away from winning the division and possibly from winning the world series. So, the Tigers begin talks with the Braves for Doyle Alexander. After multiple trades were denied by either side, a Scout for the Braves saw someone pitching for the Glen Falls Tigers, and suggested his name to make the trade.

Well, the Tigers won the division that year, losing to the underdog Twins in the ALCS. Alexander, in 11 starts for the Tigers, went 9-0 with a 1.53 ERA through the rest of that season. However, that pitcher we traded from Glen Falls was a fellow by the name of John Smoltz, who has currently over 200 wins, 150 saves, a Cy Young award, and 8 All-star appearances.

This is a connection because this has become the main argument against trading prospects for that one player to get a team "over the edge." People always seem to mention, "Well, the Tigers thought they would only need one more player when they traded John Smoltz."

Scenario 2: Let us now move forward to the year 2003, where Pistons GM Joe Dumars is debating which player to draft with the lottery pick that has fallen into his lap. The season had gone pretty well, with a trip to the conference finals, and this looked like it could become the beginning of a dynasty. With the second overall pick, he knows he can basically pick whoever he wants, with the knowledge that Cleveland was bound to pick the high school phenom from Akron, known as LeBron James.

As Dumars mulled his options, who knows what he could've been thinking during these moments. I mean, all the options...

There's the kid from Syracuse who just led his team to a National Championship and had a dominating performance against Texas (Carmelo Anthony, Career Average 24.2 PPG).... The kid from Marquette who just led his team to the Final Four (Dwayne Wade, Career Average 25.2 PPG, one NBA title)... There's this phenom from Georgia Tech (Chris Bosh, Career 22.7 PPG)... There's even this kid from Central Michigan who would certainly be an area favorite (Chris Kaman, 10.3 PPG, 8.3 RPG).

Oh yeah, and there's this kid from Serbia and Montenegro who's supposed to be really good in Europe (Darko Milicic, 5.5 PPG, 4.0 RPG)

I'm sure everyone who's reading this knows who the Pistons picked (if not note that the last guy with the worst career NBA stats has his own paragraph. hmmm...), and forever this will possibly be forever referred to as the worst draft pick ever. Also, it serves as a lesson to all NBA GM's to pick draft picks that they know how to compare, and not to go for the foreign, risky guys (for a "modern-day" reference, see "Ricky Rubio").

Now, to recapitulate my article, the Tigers sent a lesson to GM's that trading away prospects for pitching now is not always a good idea. The Pistons sent a lesson to GM's to draft sure-fire quality players with high draft picks.  I believe the Lions will send a lesson to all GM's to not force its young players into pressure situations until they are ready for them.

I have heard all the arguments for it. "But Peyton Manning started his rookie year, and look at him now." I have four arguments against that. They are:

1. I do not believe Matthew Stafford has the potential Manning had.

2. Although Peyton was and is a terrific QB, he did break the record for most interceptions that year, setting his team back.

3. I want our team to win as much as possible, so that we don't have to keep wasting $$$$$$$ on high draft picks, which are a gamble and usually not worth the money you pay them.

4. You always hear about success stories from rookies who start their first year because it is easy to point to the first year as giving them a success, because they turn it around. (Peyton Manning) You don't see the effects of bad effects a bad rookie year because they stay bad, which makes one doubt whether they would have ever been good to begin with (Joey Harrington) In other words, it is easier to point out hidden success then hidden failure.

And, this is not to mention the curse that Detroit has felt. It does not involve long championship droughts like Boston and Chicago have felt. But it is a curse nonetheless, and GM's who are not wary of it should be very afraid...