Bernie: Rams still too short of talent

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

Alan

Legend
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
9,765
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colu...cle_d454fcb6-faf7-5f05-854b-439ff55e85cd.html
Greetings. One of my favorite and essential football sites, Pro Football Focus, is out with its annual review of the Rams' personnel.

Not that anyone should be surprised — after all the team went 6-10 last season — but according to PFF the Rams are loaded with "average" starters and key backups.

Moreover, the Rams have more starters and key backups in the "below-average" or "poor" starters categories (combined) than they do at the "elite," "very good" and "good" categories combined.

Of course, this is only PFF's assessment. (Click here to see the chart.) The Rams internally may have different (and better) grades on their players. The same could be said of other independent evaluators — as is always the instance in subjective analyses.

As much as I respect the crew at Pro Football Focus for their excellent and diligent work, I don't agree with all of their opinions. Two quickie examples: I think defensive endRobert Quinn is an elite player — not a "very good" player. I don't see how QB Sam Bradford can receive an "average" grade when he's missed the last 25 regular-season games. Bradford hasn't played in a real game since Oct. 20 of the 2013 season. So how do we know?

Let's take a look at the Pro Football Focus breakdown of Rams' personnel in each category. And I won't relay the names of individual players — and there are 21 of them — on PFF's "unknown" list. They haven't played enough to warrant a legit grade from PFF. Also, PFF did not put grades on players that are eligible for unrestricted free agency such as offensive tackle Joe Barksdale. (And I wish they would have, with the notation by each player that is up for UFA.)


Anyway...

Elite: Defensive tackle Aaron Donald,Punter Johnny Hekker.

Very Good: Defensive end Robert Quinn, long snapper Jake McQuade.

Good: Defensive end Chris Long, DE William Hayes, offensive tackle Jake Long.

Average (Offense): quarterback Sam Bradford, running back Tre Mason, tight end CoryHarkey, tight end Jared Cook, wide receiver Stedman Bailey, WR Brian Quick, offensive lineman Rodger Saffold, running back Benny Cunningham, running back Zac Stacy, centerTim Barnes. Also, kicker Greg Zuerlein.

Average (Defense): Defensive tackle Michael Brockers, middle linebacker JamesLaurinaitis, cornerback E.J. Gaines, cornerback Janoris Jenkins, cornerback TrumaineJohnson, safety T.J. McDonald, safety Rodney McLeod.

Below Average (Offense): wide receiver Tavon Austin, wide receiver Chris Givens.

Below Average (Defense): outside linebacker Alec Ogletree, outside linebacker Jo-Lonn Dunbar, safety Mark Barron, defensive end Eugene Sims.

Poor: Offensive tackle Greg Robinson, center Scott Wells.

According to PFF the Rams have seven players listed as elite, very good, or good. But they have many more, 28, listed as average, below average or poor. And that's disappointing.

OK, some comments from me:

What stings about this from a Rams/STL standpoint is the shortage of above-average to elite players considering the abundance of premium draft picks possessed by GM Les Snead and head coach Jeff Fisher in their three drafts in charge. Between 2012 and 2014 the Rams made five first-round picks, four second-round picks, and four third-round picks.

In the NFL, only Minnesota had more first-rounders (7) over the past three drafts. But among NFL teams the Rams drafted the most players in the first two rounds (9) and first three rounds (13.)

Nearly half of the Rams' 28 selections — 13 — over the past three drafts were made in the first three rounds.

The five first-rounders were Brockers, Ogletree, Austin, Robinson and Donald. Of the five, only Donald is rated above average. And three — Ogletree, Austin and Robinson — are rated below average or worse. That could change for the better as the players gain experience, but for now that's really, really bad.

Of the 13 Rams chosen in the first three rounds, all are classified as no better than average except for Donald.

Not that anyone should wonder why the Rams labor to score points, but just in case ... there's only one "good" category player (Jake Long) on the Rams offense. And even that's debatable. The others are average or lower.

PFF noted that Greg Robinson — the No. 2 overall draft pick in 2014 — was "solid" at left guard but struggled after he was shifted to left tackle. And I think we'd all agree that Robinson will improve. That said, it's never encouraging to see the No. 2 overall pick in the "poor" category, even as a rookie.

So why is Alec Ogletree rated "below average" here? Let's go to PFF's explanation: "We had Ogletree as below average last year and plenty of people disagreed and I suspect that might be the case again this year. He struggles too much in coverage, though, and for as much as he makes plenty of tackles, he missed 20 this year, the second year in a row he has been in the bottom three for missed tackle amongst 4-3 outside linebackers."

You can quibble over these PFF rankings _ or throw them out completely. It doesn't matter to me. But if you put much stock in these independent Pro Football Focus evaluations, then you'd have to conclude that Snead-Fisher have missed a chance to fully exploit the bonanza of draft picks they had at their disposal over the past three years. There's no doubt that Snead-Fisher have upgraded the Rams roster. They just didn't improve it as much as they should have.

I hope this hasn't been posted already but I didn't see it so...

Unfortunately, I find myself agreeing with most of this.
 

Fatbot

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
1,467
Where's the Madden ratings for comparison?

I'm starting to think PFF is paying kickbacks to writers at this point.
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
Brockers, Quick, Jenkins, Johnson, Austin, Ogletree, McDonald, Robinson, Donald, Zuerlein, Hekker, Gaines, and Mason are all starters.
Givens, Bailey and Joyner are rotational starters.

So that's 16 players in 3 drafts who see a bunch of playing time - over 80% of whom start in actual NFL games.

Sorry, Bernie, if they're not all elite yet.
And sorry, Bernie, that Spagnuolo/Devaney only left us less than half a dozen players.
 

Ky Ram

Pro Bowler
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
1,918
The title should read.

Bernie: I'm too short on talent
That whole rating system seems flawed as hell to me. I can't say there's a whole lot in those ratings I agree with, let alone have any of it influence my school of thought
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,636
I'll never understand why some people take PFF grades, rankings, or subjective analysis as god-given facts. These categories they put players in are purely some guy's (more specifically his name is Gordon McGuinness) opinion people, he doesn't even go by PFF's own grades in these articles.
 

Mikey Ram

Hall of Fame
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
3,397
Name
Mike
Bernie's nick: DEBBY DOWNER..And yeah, I intentionally didn't use blue...It's gotten to the point that I can't stand the guy...(Not that I was ever one of his biggest fans)...
 

Legatron4

Legend
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
9,427
Name
Wes
I think it's funny that PFF rated William Hayes in the top 10 defensive ends last year when he was starting yet he's only "good".
 

Afro Ram

Pro Bowler
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
1,005
That whole rating system seems flawed as hell to me. I can't say there's a whole lot in those ratings I agree with, let alone have any of it influence my school of thought

I agree with everything you said KY. I was just trying to take a shot at Bernie.
 

Ky Ram

Pro Bowler
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
1,918
I agree with everything you said KY. I was just trying to take a shot at Bernie.
Oh we're good, I wasn't takin a shot at you, I just thought the title was pretty absurd so I was attempting to pile on with you.:cool:
 

Athos

Legend
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
5,933
The title should read.

Bernie: I'm too short on talent

Too short. Too fat. And too full of excrement he hasn't been able to shit out in several years. I stopped reading this simpering wind bag years ago now. Can't even read his Cardinals related stuff anymore.
 

Rambitious1

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Feb 4, 2013
Messages
4,446
Name
Tom
http://www.stltoday.com/sports/colu...cle_d454fcb6-faf7-5f05-854b-439ff55e85cd.html
Greetings. One of my favorite and essential football sites, Pro Football Focus, is out with its annual review of the Rams' personnel.

Not that anyone should be surprised — after all the team went 6-10 last season — but according to PFF the Rams are loaded with "average" starters and key backups.

Moreover, the Rams have more starters and key backups in the "below-average" or "poor" starters categories (combined) than they do at the "elite," "very good" and "good" categories combined.

Of course, this is only PFF's assessment. (Click here to see the chart.) The Rams internally may have different (and better) grades on their players. The same could be said of other independent evaluators — as is always the instance in subjective analyses.

As much as I respect the crew at Pro Football Focus for their excellent and diligent work, I don't agree with all of their opinions. Two quickie examples: I think defensive endRobert Quinn is an elite player — not a "very good" player. I don't see how QB Sam Bradford can receive an "average" grade when he's missed the last 25 regular-season games. Bradford hasn't played in a real game since Oct. 20 of the 2013 season. So how do we know?

Let's take a look at the Pro Football Focus breakdown of Rams' personnel in each category. And I won't relay the names of individual players — and there are 21 of them — on PFF's "unknown" list. They haven't played enough to warrant a legit grade from PFF. Also, PFF did not put grades on players that are eligible for unrestricted free agency such as offensive tackle Joe Barksdale. (And I wish they would have, with the notation by each player that is up for UFA.)


Anyway...

Elite: Defensive tackle Aaron Donald,Punter Johnny Hekker.

Very Good: Defensive end Robert Quinn, long snapper Jake McQuade.

Good: Defensive end Chris Long, DE William Hayes, offensive tackle Jake Long.

Average (Offense): quarterback Sam Bradford, running back Tre Mason, tight end CoryHarkey, tight end Jared Cook, wide receiver Stedman Bailey, WR Brian Quick, offensive lineman Rodger Saffold, running back Benny Cunningham, running back Zac Stacy, centerTim Barnes. Also, kicker Greg Zuerlein.

Average (Defense): Defensive tackle Michael Brockers, middle linebacker JamesLaurinaitis, cornerback E.J. Gaines, cornerback Janoris Jenkins, cornerback TrumaineJohnson, safety T.J. McDonald, safety Rodney McLeod.

Below Average (Offense): wide receiver Tavon Austin, wide receiver Chris Givens.

Below Average (Defense): outside linebacker Alec Ogletree, outside linebacker Jo-Lonn Dunbar, safety Mark Barron, defensive end Eugene Sims.

Poor: Offensive tackle Greg Robinson, center Scott Wells.

According to PFF the Rams have seven players listed as elite, very good, or good. But they have many more, 28, listed as average, below average or poor. And that's disappointing.

OK, some comments from me:

What stings about this from a Rams/STL standpoint is the shortage of above-average to elite players considering the abundance of premium draft picks possessed by GM Les Snead and head coach Jeff Fisher in their three drafts in charge. Between 2012 and 2014 the Rams made five first-round picks, four second-round picks, and four third-round picks.

In the NFL, only Minnesota had more first-rounders (7) over the past three drafts. But among NFL teams the Rams drafted the most players in the first two rounds (9) and first three rounds (13.)

Nearly half of the Rams' 28 selections — 13 — over the past three drafts were made in the first three rounds.

The five first-rounders were Brockers, Ogletree, Austin, Robinson and Donald. Of the five, only Donald is rated above average. And three — Ogletree, Austin and Robinson — are rated below average or worse. That could change for the better as the players gain experience, but for now that's really, really bad.

Of the 13 Rams chosen in the first three rounds, all are classified as no better than average except for Donald.

Not that anyone should wonder why the Rams labor to score points, but just in case ... there's only one "good" category player (Jake Long) on the Rams offense. And even that's debatable. The others are average or lower.

PFF noted that Greg Robinson — the No. 2 overall draft pick in 2014 — was "solid" at left guard but struggled after he was shifted to left tackle. And I think we'd all agree that Robinson will improve. That said, it's never encouraging to see the No. 2 overall pick in the "poor" category, even as a rookie.

So why is Alec Ogletree rated "below average" here? Let's go to PFF's explanation: "We had Ogletree as below average last year and plenty of people disagreed and I suspect that might be the case again this year. He struggles too much in coverage, though, and for as much as he makes plenty of tackles, he missed 20 this year, the second year in a row he has been in the bottom three for missed tackle amongst 4-3 outside linebackers."

You can quibble over these PFF rankings _ or throw them out completely. It doesn't matter to me. But if you put much stock in these independent Pro Football Focus evaluations, then you'd have to conclude that Snead-Fisher have missed a chance to fully exploit the bonanza of draft picks they had at their disposal over the past three years. There's no doubt that Snead-Fisher have upgraded the Rams roster. They just didn't improve it as much as they should have.

I hope this hasn't been posted already but I didn't see it so...

Unfortunately, I find myself agreeing with most of this.

I don't.
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
Our team was every bit as good as ARZ's last year. The difference was we lost Bradford in preseason rather than regular season.
 

thirteen28

I like pizza.
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
8,324
Name
Erik
Rating Quinn as less than an elite DE is a joke in and of itself. I bet if you ask any LT in the league right now, they would rate Quinn as elite.

Some of these PFF ratings are ridiculous. And Bernie is being lazy by relying on them.
 

Alan

Legend
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
9,765
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #18
Most of the comments that disagree with Bernie's take have no specifics. Like our other thread that talks about PFF's ratings (PFF's 2015 Depth Charts Ratings: St. Louis Rams), Bernie is just making comments about what PFF is saying. Pretty much the exact same thing we as posters did in that thread.

Do some only read a few words and miss statements like these two:

"You can quibble over these PFF rankings _ or throw them out completely."

"There's no doubt that Snead-Fisher have upgraded the Rams roster. They just didn't improve it as much as they should have. "

-X- mentioning that most of our new brain trusts picks are now starters while also noting that they started out with almost no worthy starters:
Brockers, Quick, Jenkins, Johnson, Austin, Ogletree, McDonald, Robinson, Donald, Zuerlein, Hekker, Gaines, and Mason are all starters.
Givens, Bailey and Joyner are rotational starters.

So that's 16 players in 3 drafts who see a bunch of playing time - over 80% of whom start in actual NFL games.

Sorry, Bernie, if they're not all elite yet.
And sorry, Bernie, that Spagnuolo/Devaney only left us less than half a dozen players.
All true -X- but saying that most of their top picks are starters when they replaced players that were poor/abysmal starters is saying what? As Bernie said, did they do enough with the plethora of high picks they had. I'd give a resounding no to that question. Do you think they did enough with what they were given?

Forget about the number of "elite" players we drafted, I'd be really happy with a few more "very good" starters. I see none on the horizon. It's to early to judge players we've just drafted but barring the light suddenly coming on for most of them, who do you see as trending towards elite or very good of these players: Brockers, Quick, Jenkins, Johnson, Austin, Ogletree, McDonald, Robinson, Zuerlein, Gaines, and Mason? I'm not talking about players with "potential" because that is a tired overworked phrase that is meaningless in this context. Maybe Quick? :cautious:


Legatron4 not taking into consideration some crucial details:
I think it's funny that PFF rated William Hayes in the top 10 defensive ends last year when he was starting yet he's only "good".
I find it logical considering that he's only a situational backup behind a player who is also only a "good starter" using their metrics. Unless you think Chris is an elite player then the fact that they gave them both the same rating is solely due to his high level of play while subbing for Chris and a ringing tribute to the play of Hayes during his short stint as a starter. He's still just a backup though. How can anyone call a backup a very good or elite player regardless of how well he did in limited action. What would your grade have been of Austin Davis had he been injured after the third or fourth game he started? A "very good" starter?



 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
All true -X- but saying that most of their top picks are starters when they replaced players that were poor/abysmal starters is saying what? As Bernie said, did they do enough with the plethora of high picks they had. I'd give a resounding no to that question. Do you think they did enough with what they were given?
I'd say so. The flip side of that coin is to ask how they could have done it better without the gift of seeing into the future. Fisher admittedly goofed on the Quick/Wagner situation where they were trying to make the most of all of their picks to fill a roster nearly completely devoid of talent. Had they known in advance that Wagner was *going to be* a better long-term solution, I'm sure Fisher wouldn't have tried to screw around with the picks and just took him. Same thing with Tavon and (pick your receiver). The bottom line, for me, is that I find it completely unfair to judge Fisher and Snead's decisions on filling the roster after the fact. None of these "experts" had an issue with the way they were drafting then, because they constantly received high marks. But now it's an issue because we can see how other players measure up to who they selected instead.

It's a tired exercise that I find futile by its very nature.