Detroit Lions Mailbag: O-line concerns, WR as BPA, trading down potential and more

Don’t look now, but the first round of the NFL draft is in two weeks from today. What better time to see what’s on your mind? The mailbox was stuffed with quality questions this week, so I had to break this thing into two parts.

Q: Are you as concerned about the offensive line as I am? …How do you see them addressing the line between now and training camp? — Michael Martini

Justin: Is there a way to measure levels of concern? No matter, I can safely say the answer is no. To be clear, there are short-term and long-term issues with the group. They've been laid out clearly in a number of things I've written, including a still-to-be-published, pre-draft outlook on the unit.

The biggest problems are along the interior. Graham Glasgow is nearing the end of his career and coming off a down year. And there's still a level of unknown with Christian Mahogany despite two really good starts as a rookie.

But you're talking about a group that was viewed as a top-five unit by multiple outlets at the end of last season. At worst, it's a top-10 group this year. Obviously, we're talking at full-strength. Take away Penei Sewell and Frank Ragnow, and it's a different story.

Your inflated concern is symptomatic of Lions fans not being used to having things as good as they've been. Even without a Super Bowl appearance, you're in a golden era of success by this franchise's standards. And the offensive line has played a huge role in that success. Heck, going into last season, they were considered by many as the best line in the game.

Of course, there's nowhere to go but down when you’re at the top. However, that doesn't mean things are abruptly bad or teetering on collapse. Sewell remains one of the best linemen in the game. Ragnow is a multi-time All-Pro. Taylor Decker is still a solid blindside blocker. There are plenty of worse starters in the league than Glasgow. And if Mahogany is 80% of the player he looked to be in those starts last year, the loss of Kevin Zeitler won't sting all that much. Plus, at 35 years old, he was always a stopgap.

Even the team's depth is solid, respectively. The Lions have multiple backups who have started games and been effective, including Dan Skipper, Jamarco Jones, Kayode Awosika and Netane Muti.

The wild card is Giovanni Manu. I'm not going to guarantee you he's going to smoothly develop into Decker's replacement. Still, there's no denying the physical attributes give way to that optimistic ceiling. Patience will be required to see if the team has discovered the next Jordan Mailata.

Between now and training camp, there's still the draft. That's a great spot to find a long-term replacement for Glasgow, even if that potential addition doesn’t unseat the veteran from his starting role on Day 1.

It would be disappointing if they didn't land a starting-caliber guard in the event, but not devastating. There's always next offseason, and we've seen rookies have plug-and-play success at that position in recent years, including Dominick Puni and Jackson Powers-Johnson last season.

Q: What’s your opinion of what they really think of Hendon Hooker? Can’t help but think they don’t truly believe he is developing as expected. — Bill Bulger

Justin: I don't think the developmental plan has deviated much outside expectations. Hear me out.

As a rookie, the focus was always going to be rehab and getting Hooker's legs back under him after he tore his ACL during his final college season. From there, the team needed to rebuild his throwing mechanics from the ground up. That takes time, and the process was stifled a bit by a dislocated finger, which hurt his accuracy and confidence through the early stages of the offseason program last year.

Hooker ultimately did what the team wanted, consistently improving through training camp to unseat Nate Sudfeld for the backup job. The decision to bring in Teddy Bridgewater for the playoffs, by all accounts, was a long-term plan. I get it. It's an insurance upgrade at a critical juncture. The Lions had Super Bowl aspirations. It’s just easier to trust an experienced veteran.

Now, Kyle Allen has been brought on board. I went over this in another piece, but the veteran's contract carries just $100,000 in guarantees. That tells me the expectation remains this is Hooker's job. Still, the team wants to push him. They should. That's how young players get better. I don't understand why anyone would think he shouldn't have to earn it.

In the end, some of the outside expectations for Hooker were probably too lofty. I've always viewed the pick as an opportunity to get a capable backup on a cheap deal. Instead of paying a top veteran backup $6-8 million, the Lions have a young player under contract for less than a quarter of that cap hit.

Obviously, you hope every draft pick develops into a bit more, whether into a starter or a trade chip, but that's an uncommon outcome for a QB selected that late in the draft. For every Russell Wilson in the third round, there are a dozen guys who never rise above being a backup, such as Kellen Mond, Kyle Trask, Matt Corrall, Davis Mills, Will Grier, Davis Webb, Cody Kessler and Garrett Grayson, to name a few from the past several years.

Q: Was the Lions' decision not to bring back Za’Darius Smith on a pretty reasonable contract really a matter of salary cap management? Or was it due to his on-field performance? — Jonathan Schulz

Justin: Financials were the driving factor in the decision. Here's what Brad Holmes had to say on the matter at the league meetings last week.

"We couldn't afford it is the bottom line," Holmes said. "That was my communication with him, and he understood that. Again, that's an expensive position. …Look, he played some good snaps for us and he made plays for us when we acquired him, so we would have loved to been able to keep him. We just weren't able to."

Now, you say it was a reasonable number, but $11 million isn't pocket change. Marcus Davenport is being paid less than a quarter of that. The difference will go toward re-signing key pieces like Aidan Hutchinson and Kerby Joseph.

Q: I think we struggled last year in special team coverage. I think some of our signings addressed that. What else needs to be done? — Scott Flegel

Justin: I’m not sure I agree with your assessment.

Let’s start with punts. The Lions set an NFL record for net punting average, which factors in return yards and touchbacks. There’s no question Jack Fox is excellent at what he does. Regardless, you don’t rewrite the record books without outstanding and consistent coverage units.

With kickoffs, the Lions weren’t nearly as good, not that they covered all that many kicks. The team ranked in the top five in touchback percentage, recognizing that the risk outweighed the reward in the new format. The average return across the league saw the ball coming out to the 28-yard line.

Your perceptions of struggles are likely inflated by one game, Dallas, where the Lions allowed first-team All-Pro return man KaVontae Turpin to bring four back for 194 yards. In the other 16 games, returners averaged 27.7 yards, which was essentially the league average.

Can that number improve? Absolutely. And the Lions will look to tighten up with touchbacks being adjusted to come out to the 35-yard line next season.

Getting healthy should help. There were trickle-down losses for the coverage groups after some injuries, particularly Derrick Barnes and Malcolm Rodriguez. The re-signings of Ezekiel Turner and Anthony Pittman should be beneficial, as will the addition of linebacker Grant Stuard via free agency. That’s some experienced and proven production with those groups.

Q: With so few players likely to have a first-round grade, and the prohibitive cost to move up high enough to get one, is it a near certainty Holmes moves down to reload on picks between rounds 2-4? — Grant Cook

Justin: I'm not sure whose grading we're referencing. Every team values prospects differently, and even if the average comes out to 15-20, there's nothing to say your first-round-graded players will all be off the board by the end of Thursday night. The Lions had a first-round grade on Brian Branch a couple of years back and were able to get him 45th overall.

As for the cost of moving up being prohibitive, that's not necessarily true, either. Attaching a second-rounder to pick No. 28 should allow the Lions to climb around 10 spots. A third-rounder, closer to five.

I've said it previously and haven't changed my stance; Moving up is more likely than trading back. There are too many unknown variables that won't crystallize until closer to Detroit being on the clock, but given the depth chart's construction heading into the event, we're more likely to see the Lions go after a specific target than accumulate picks for a roster that's already fairly crowded.

Q: Something I don't get is that successful teams seem to have worse draft picks and a more difficult schedule. When a team is out of the playoff picture, is there a benefit to winning? — Nils Hellbach

Justin: You’re entering into the debate about tanking.

Obviously, on paper, there’s a greater benefit to having the best possible draft pick and playing an easier schedule. But that’s ignoring human elements.

First, every coach and player is competitive. They wouldn’t have reached this level if they weren’t. On top of that, most are playing for their jobs or their next contracts. Giving anything less than their all is detrimental to their future employment and earning potential.

Then, there’s the concept of culture. The acceptance of losing, even briefly, is detrimental to the mindset of a franchise.

The NHL and NBA have moved to a draft lottery system to curb tanking. There isn’t any momentum pushing the NFL in that direction, but we know the league can be reactive to negative perceptions, so I wouldn’t rule it out in the future.

Q: Brad Holmes and the Lions seemingly have a "Best Player Available" mentality in the draft, as opposed to drafting for need. With that in mind, how surprising or unsurprising would it be if Holmes drafts a wide receiver like Tetairoa McMillan or Matthew Golden in the first round, if the opportunity arises? — Andrew Keck

Justin: Most general managers would tell you they employ a BPA strategy in the draft. It’s not unique to Holmes. Given how quickly rosters turn over, it's good business to let talent dictate your selection process.

That doesn't mean need doesn't enter the equation. In an ideal world, you're able to marry value and need, like the Lions did last season when they traded up for Terrion Arnold. They needed a cornerback and saw an opportunity to climb a few spots to secure the top one on their board.

Need can also come into play as a tie-breaker. When you're on the clock and have two players graded similarly, it's not unusual to lean toward the one who has a clearer path to immediate playing time.

Looking at the team's current situation, at what position could they land a sure-fire starter at the back end of the first round? You could make a strong argument that there's not a single job a rookie could be handed. There are spots where they could compete and win the job, including defensive end and guard. Still, it's far from given that a rookie would immediately unseat Glasgow or Davenport. Maybe a newcomer takes over by the end of the season or in 2026, which is why we continually emphasize these prospects are four-year investments.

Given what we know about the depth chart and some of the team's needs beyond this season, I can't dismiss a receiver in the first round. I wouldn't call it likely because I don't see value being available at 28. However, if someone like Golden or Emeka Egbuka is still on the board, I won't rule it out.

That might not be the preferred outcome of the fan base. Regardless, you'd rather have a receiver the team loves for the next four or more years than an edge rusher or guard Holmes doesn't view as highly as the mock drafts we're consuming.

Q: Do you think Jameson Williams will be more like a Roy Williams (drafted by us, looks good, ultimately traded away) or a Herman Moore, (drafted by us, slow rise to stardom, plays out a great career with the Lions)? — Kevin Katz

Justin: Holmes' comments about the team not currently pursuing a long-term extension with Williams would point to the Roy Williams scenario as the more likely outcome, but a lot can change in a year.

Given the steady progress Williams has made, I'm not going to say the charismatic and speedy receiver can't transform into a priority for the front office.

It won't be easy to fit another receiver under the cap at the market rate after Amon-Ra St. Brown's extension last offseason. Williams is tracking toward a deal that will pay him close to $30 million per season, the going rate for a high-end No. 2.

Given all the other high-dollar extensions the Lions have recently signed and are still looking to get done, Holmes' comments feel intentional, like he's warning the fan base of a possible (likely?) outcome. And if they don't feel they can afford Williams, a trade could bring back a quality draft pick. It probably won't be a first-rounder like the returns for Tyreek Hill, A.J. Brown or Davante Adams (to the Raiders), but a second feels realistic.