2015 Player Progression

[Faceplant]

Interesting thoughts on Tavon above. I agree with @CoachO in that we should not be against getting TA the ball up the middle (run game). As Coach mentioned, his straight line speed is amazing. If he get to the 2nd level, there is always a chance he goes yard. I expect to see him and Tre/Benny in more 2 back sets this year.

 

[CoachO]

I'm not so much into that. Stacking up on projects at the same position and using high picks to do it at any rate. You were right on Quick, but you could see the development in him easier. It was slow, but Quick had the body to be successful. Austin is the type that has to work on a lot more than Quick. Though, I still think Britt played a huge role in how quickly Quick was coming on before injury.



That's why I never thought he'd be a savior, but you can't really blame anyone in demanding/expecting/wanting far better production from a guy you trade up for, thus missing out on quite the talent left over in the 2nd round. Which is, again, why I wanted Hopkins. Such a steal at the end of the draft. Could have traded down twice in the first and still gotten Ogletree.

We just look at the draft differently. I don't pay any attention to "where they were drafted", as much as I do what can they bring to the table for THIS team?

To me, teams take players they WANT, when they think they have to as not to miss out on them. When they have multiple players rated similarly, its easier to not "reach", but when they have a player they have targeted, they will often take that player sooner than the "experts" think they should.

It all comes down to how they envision that player fitting in, and what the teams expectations are for that player. In the case of a Brian Quick, they obviously did not want to risk losing him. So, they took a "project" sooner than most thought they should. But if this player becomes the player they envisioned, (and the player who showed up in 2014), no one is going to go back and question where he was drafted because it took him into his 3rd year to become that player.

As far as Austin, he wasn't drafted solely to be a WR. His ST contributions were, IMO, the biggest reason they wanted him. And whether or not he has contributed on offense as they envisioned so far, we may never know. But again, IF he develops into a more well rounded WR, especially given this will be his 3rd year, then will it really matter?

 

[A.J. Hicks]

When Cignetti is talking about simplifying the playbook. . . . Across how many positions do you think that will help? Our offensive line obviously has miscues at times. The Quarterbacks? Running backs? Tight Ends?

 

[-X-]

Personally, I think it's disheartening to *have to* simplify the playbook.

 

[yrba1]

Personally, I think it's disheartening to *have to* simplify the playbook.

In the case of learning Schotty's playbook, I don't think so for wide receivers.

 

[shovelpass]

I hope Mason takes a big step this year, he cannot afford a "sophomore slump". Of course there is no telling what the backfield is going to look like throughout the season, but as of right now Mason is "the" guy. Overall I hope he improves in every area of his game, but what worries me most is his ball security, and his propensity to run backwards. I've rewatched some games and that is one thing I've noticed is that he runs backwards on blow plays to try and gain yards, it's a nice effort, but results in a negative play.

 

[-X-]

In the case of learning Schotty's playbook, I don't think so for wide receivers.

That's what I'm talking about though. It's (to me, at least) disheartening that we have players who have trouble with a complex playbook. Now maybe it does mean that it's the OC's preference to have a simplified system, and that's fine. But if it's simply a matter of our players not having the mental capacity to master a complex scheme, and for that reason we need to scale it back, then that kinda bothers me. Martz's playbook was like a Chinese phonebook, yet everybody was smart enough to grasp it and execute it. Now we have quotes from players who are saying things like, "it's like a learning a second language" and we've been drafting players who never even used one (a playbook) before. Makes me question the whole drafting and evaluating process here now.

Not a big deal though. This is clearly going to be for the better.

 

[jrry32]

I think Austin is okay with finding the soft spots in the zones. But he is no where close to having the "quicks" that an Amendola has in terms of changing direction. I have watched them try to run the same type routes in training camp, (arrow, option etc.) that Amendola was so effective running, with nowhere near the same results. In thi spast training camp, even TJ Moe ran those routes better than Austin. Austin is a dynamic and elusive player when he is moving. He has the ability to cut and change direction unlike many, but when he is forced to "settle" in to a pocket of a zone, and STOP, he tends to be limited in his ability to get back up field.

Will he improve? I would like to think he could. But his explosiveness is more in his straight line speed, not necessarily his change of direction and "stop and start". When at top speed, his cutting and juking ability is incredible. But IMO, he just doesn't have the same explosiveness as Amendola, Edelman and Welker in close quarters. Not to mention, he doesn't have anywhere close to same consistent hands that the others possess.

Gotta disagree. I've seen what Austin can do with the ball in his hands. He can change directions and stop/start with ease. I think the more likely reason why he didn't look as good is because he was thinking his way through the routes. When you're thinking, you're not going to run the routes with the same type of speed and explosiveness. That's the big thing Quick changed in his third year. He wasn't in his own head because he was finally comfortable with the route tree and the offense. Austin just has to get to that comfort and confidence level that he's out of his own head.

 

[jrry32]

Personally, I think it's disheartening to *have to* simplify the playbook.

I don't think so. The game of football is changing and evolving. Rookies are making a bigger impact than they have in the past because teams are simplifying their verbiage and playbooks to allow them to contribute early on. Don't know why we wouldn't want to do that. Hell, Peyton Manning and the Colts were known for having one of the NFL's simplest playbooks for a very long time. Their offense wasn't built around complexity. It was built around execution.

 

[Athos]

That's what I'm talking about though. It's (to me, at least) disheartening that we have players who have trouble with a complex playbook. Now maybe it does mean that it's the OC's preference to have a simplified system, and that's fine. But if it's simply a matter of our players not having the mental capacity to master a complex scheme, and for that reason we need to scale it back, then that kinda bothers me. Martz's playbook was like a Chinese phonebook, yet everybody was smart enough to grasp it and execute it. Now we have quotes from players who are saying things like, "it's like a learning a second language" and we've been drafting players who never even used one (a playbook) before. Makes me question the whole drafting and evaluating process here now.

Not a big deal though. This is clearly going to be for the better.

And yet, you get players from the Jets who absolutely loathe Shotty's overly convoluted playbook and requirements for WRs. I think there's a middle ground. Players not getting, but also Shotty's system just NOT being friendly to young players, particularly WRs.

 

[-X-]

And yet, you get players from the Jets who absolutely loathe Shotty's overly convoluted playbook and requirements for WRs. I think there's a middle ground. Players not getting, but also Shotty's system just NOT being friendly to young players, particularly WRs.

Well then he's certainly going to the wrong place to work. Not a lot of elder statesmen in college, eh?

 

[PressureD41]

I hate to say it. But all the players that you are talking about on offense and in a round about way the defensive players also. All of their progression as a professional and seeing if they are going to be good players in the NFL rely on Sam Bradford being healthy and getting these guys the ball in the right places and having the leader on the team that when it comes to crunch time can get the extra 3 wins that we need to make the playoffs. We are a 7-9 or 8-8 team with backup QB's that are not very good. If we have a healthy Bradford that can score points it will make an already good defense even that much better. Please SAM stay healthy I can't watch another year of Clemons, Hill, and Davis.

AMEN BROTHER, UNLEASH SAM 2015

 

[RamsOfCastamere]

I think Michael Brockers can take that next step to being a top ten run stuffing DT if he can make it through the preseason with healthy ankles. He is very active in the middle and rarely gets pushed back. He can stand up almost any G and C the Rams play.

I know he's been injured but Brockers has been disappointing so far. He's a solid starter, but in the first round you are drafted with the expectation to be a perennial Pro Bowler at least. He's made some nice plays but I expected more. The bright side is his age and I hope he hasn't plateaued.

 

[jrry32]

I know he's been injured but Brockers has been disappointing so far. He's a solid starter, but in the first round you are drafted with the expectation to be a perennial Pro Bowler at least. He's made some nice plays but I expected more. The bright side is his age and I hope he hasn't plateaued.

How many first rounders actually become that? Expectations are expectations...the better question is...are they realistic? When 40% to 45% of first rounders are typically busts, is it realistic to expect a first rounder to be "a perennial Pro Bowler at least" or should we simply be happy that we got a quality "glue" player on our DL?

In fact, this article says that only 17% of first rounders went to multiple Pro Bowls over a decade:
http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-04-22/nfl-draft-2012-first-round-disappointments

DTs are right around that figure at 18.1%. So is it realistic to expect Brockers to be something that less than 20% of first round DTs actually accomplish?

 

[lockdnram21]

Just wanted to get everyone's thoughts on who they think will break out for the Rams in 2015. Who will disappoint? Who's breakout will be most significant? How much will these players improve?



My opinion/prediction:

Greg Robinson: I'm tempering expectations. Most of his "whiffs" in 2014 where rushers got big hits on the QB were mental errors or lapses in technique. The athletic talent is undeniable, but I'd pump the breaks on people hoping for the next Pace. I expect him to be an average to slightly above average LT in 2015.

Tavon Austin: Imo it all has to do with the system and the way Tavon is used. I hope that Fish and Co. realize how electric he can be when given 1 on 1 matchups on the outside, stop running him between the tackles, and try designing pick plays for him. Imo we'll see a slightly improved version of 2013 Tavon, which is better than 2014 Tavon.

Stedman Bailey: Our offseason moves at WR will have a big impact on Steddy's role. If we stick with Britt, Quick, & Co. Steddy will likely start week 1 and imo never relinquish his spot. Looked great near the end of 2013 and 2014 and just needs more snaps. Imo he's a candidate for 50 balls, 600+ yards, and 4+ TDs if he starts.

Tre Mason: Idk if Tre's ceiling is much higher than what we saw in 2014, but that ain't a bad thing. He can still improve his pass blocking and if we improve our interior OL he will be more productive in general. If he still gets 60%+ of the carries over 16 I think he gets 1,000 yards easy.

Barrett Jones: Idk, not hugely optimistic. Imo Barnes (if resigned) may still beat him out and coaches are high on Rhaney. Not expecting him to start and if he does, expecting him as more of a 1-2 year stop gap. Anything more will impress me.

EJ Gaines: If he didn't already break out in 2014, 2015 is the year. He has great instincts, plays through the whistle, and tackles very well. Imo could be a dark horse Pro Bowl candidate.

Janoris Jenkins: More of the same in 2015, with slightly fewer blunders hopefully. Should play well enough to warrant a second contract with the Rams.

Alec Ogletree: Idk if he'll ever be dominant like a Wagner or David, but what we saw in the back half of 2014 was what a consistent Ogletree could do. Still needs to work on shedding blocks, high tackles, and blown assignments, but should take a small step forward in 2015.

TJ McDonald: 2014 was his break out. Imo he's near his ceiling, but he's a solid enough player. Great around the LOS and imposes his will on ball carriers.

Lamarcus Joyner: Idk what to expect. Suffered from injuries and was never able to get a string of games going in 2014. If he can stay healthy I can see him getting snaps at nickel and possibly playing a similar role as Barron. Joyner breaking out would be huge for this team.

I agree with everything except Bailey and Gaines. Don't think Bailey will start over Quick and Britt if there both healthy Still don't see him any higher then 4th receiver unless he takes Tavon snaps. Quick and Britt are our top wr and think Quick will truly breakout this year. EJ Gaines was a great pick but don't think he will be pro bowl worthy. He's a good #2 or #3 cb

 

[Jorgeh0605]

How many first rounders actually become that? Expectations are expectations...the better question is...are they realistic? When 40% to 45% of first rounders are typically busts, is it realistic to expect a first rounder to be "a perennial Pro Bowler at least" or should we simply be happy that we got a quality "glue" player on our DL?

In fact, this article says that only 17% of first rounders went to multiple Pro Bowls over a decade:
http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-04-22/nfl-draft-2012-first-round-disappointments

DTs are right around that figure at 18.1%. So is it realistic to expect Brockers to be something that less than 20% of first round DTs actually accomplish?

OMG thank you for this! I wholeheartedly think that expectations for 1st round draft picks are too unrealistic. A "solid" player should be a mark in the win column regardless of when they were drafted. Brockers isn't setting the league on fire, and at this point will never do so. His job now is to help Donald set the league on fire, which he has done pretty well. A team isn't made up of 53 playmakers, having to have guys in supporting roles doing their job consistently.

 

[jrry32]

OMG thank you for this! I wholeheartedly think that expectations for 1st round draft picks are too unrealistic. A "solid" player should be a mark in the win column regardless of when they were drafted. Brockers isn't setting the league on fire, and at this point will never do so. His job now is to help Donald set the league on fire, which he has done pretty well. A team isn't made up of 53 playmakers, having to have guys in supporting roles doing their job consistently.

Exactly. For every Quinn and Donald, you need a Laurinaitis and a Brockers...a solid, reliable player that will do the dirty work.

 

[lordbannon]

Just wanted to get everyone's thoughts on who they think will break out for the Rams in 2015. Who will disappoint? Who's breakout will be most significant? How much will these players improve?

Greg Robinson: Still early. I have my hopes, but think he'll still be coming along in 2015. Still has all the athleticism in the world, but thats a lot to put on him

Tavon Austin: I don't know. When I see him in action, I feel like theres nothing holding him back but him (and Shotty). But I could be missing something. I could count the number of legit routes he ran last year on two hands. Even if its just a decoy, make him run deep!

Stedman Bailey: If he doesn't need to be the #1, I have high hopes. If Quick keeps developing, Bailey will put a hurt on the league

Tre Mason: Am I the only person who thinks that Mason w/ Stacy is the combination we need? Has a lot going for him, but doesnt move the pile. Bam Bam has good moves, but Mason is more complete, and Stacy has shown more with brute force, the way he moves those legs..... I'm good with all 3.

Barrett Jones: Get on the field then we'll talk. I expect nothing at this point. I would love to be proven wrong

EJ Gaines: I feel like he played over his head last year, but I didnt see him in college like the locals did. I'm going to hope for an encore next year, but not rely on it.

Janoris Jenkins: Love the chutzpah, don't love the burn marks. Don't know the scheme, but if the breakdowns were in communication, and not JJ just letting guys run free, I can stay hopeful. Always loved the talent, but you just can't let guys get away with it. I do love the splash play, but you have to know when to hold it and when to fold it.

Alec Ogletree: I have no complaints once he hit his stride. Two years, two defenses for someone already changing position? I thought he did great once he figured things out. Don't change his role again!

TJ McDonald: The system is made for him. Do your thing. If year three flies by with him still not making a splash...well, we have two other guys cut from the same cloth.

Lamarcus Joyner: No idea. Didnt see enough to make a snap decision, but I won't deny the talent he showed in college. I'd rather he never saw the field, because that means all the other Js (JJ, TJ, EJ) are both healthy and doing their thing with gusto.

 

[RamsOfCastamere]

How many first rounders actually become that? Expectations are expectations...the better question is...are they realistic? When 40% to 45% of first rounders are typically busts, is it realistic to expect a first rounder to be "a perennial Pro Bowler at least" or should we simply be happy that we got a quality "glue" player on our DL?

In fact, this article says that only 17% of first rounders went to multiple Pro Bowls over a decade:
http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-04-22/nfl-draft-2012-first-round-disappointments

DTs are right around that figure at 18.1%. So is it realistic to expect Brockers to be something that less than 20% of first round DTs actually accomplish?

I'm selfish and I hope we strike gold with our picks. It's like buying a scratch ticket - you don't expect to win, but feel disappointed if you don't. Let's say Brockers is a $20 prize. That's awesome considering you payed $5, but the $100K prize will always be coveted.

It's unrealistic, I know, and you can't field a team with 22 Pro Bowlers; however, a team of avg starters do not make the playoffs. We all would be disappointed if the O-line, with whoever is starting, does not improve next year.