1. 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.

How Good Is Sammy Watkins?

Discussion in 'RAMS - NFL TALK' started by RFIP, Jan 3, 2014.

  1. jap

    jap Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,223
    Credit:
    $3,355,604.59
    That's a very reasonable approach.
  2. blackbart

    blackbart Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,253
    Credit:
    $2,358,150.98
    Name:
    Tim
    CBS has him ranked second and you know the whole SC connection. I would not pick him I want Pryor
  3. max

    max Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,754
    Credit:
    $4,059,757.53
    Name:
    max
    Allow me to clarify. I oversimplified by saying immediate impact. It's more about time to impact. Drafting a player who doesn't help you until his rookie contract is just about up is a bad investment. I expect a first round player to start immediately and be very productive by his 2nd season.

    That's why I'm so disappointed in the Quick pick. Drafting a guy at #33 overall and getting vitally nada from him in 2 years is a huge mismanagement of a high pick.

    I think we all expect Snead to trade the #2 pick as he's been broadcasting. If that's the case, then Clowney and Bridgewater are out of the running. And I'm happy with that. If we take either Matthews or Watkins and plug them in from day one, then that fits my way of thinking as getting the best time to impact player.
    2 people like this.
  4. Alan

    Alan Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,831
    Credit:
    $2,207,931.68
    Yeah, I've been saying virtually the same thing for years now max. I agree completely obviously. It's gotten worse with the shorter rookie contracts under the new CBA.
  5. jrry32

    jrry32 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,192
    Credit:
    $4,297,331.58
    I'm totally cool with that. As I said, if we trade down, I think Matthews or Watkins would be our top 2 targets. I just prefer Matthews over Watkins.
  6. max

    max Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,754
    Credit:
    $4,059,757.53
    Name:
    max
    Yeah, Al. And I think Snead and Fisher see it the same way. There is no way they would have taken Quick if they thought he'd take 3 years to produce. Whatever they said about expecting him to take a few years to be another VJackson is covering their ass for blundering the pick. And they blundered the Pead pick for actually the same reason, mental acuity. Neither Quick nor Pead have the mental acuity of Bailey or Stacey. So I think Snead has learned from his rookie draft mistakes.

    One big reason why I'm good with picking Matthews is that I know he is mentally sharp. He will produce at a high level right out of the gate. And I think Watkins is mentally sharp as well.
  7. jrry32

    jrry32 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,192
    Credit:
    $4,297,331.58
    Matthews is football brilliant imo. You can see it with the way he plays.
  8. max

    max Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,754
    Credit:
    $4,059,757.53
    Name:
    max
    I'm cool with your preference as well.

    So where do you think the sweet spot is for those 2 guys? My guess is the sweet spot is where Matthews may be gone but Watkins should be there. Somewhere around 5 or 6? At the sweet spot you take Matthews if he's still there and Watkins if he's not.
  9. jrry32

    jrry32 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,192
    Credit:
    $4,297,331.58
    I think Matthews will make it to #6 unless there's a trade up. If we swap with Atlanta, we get him. If we swap with Tampa Bay at #7, I think Atlanta takes him. In that case, I'd take Watkins.
  10. jap

    jap Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,223
    Credit:
    $3,355,604.59
    I suppose the Horns could nab Matthews at #2, then trade up to #5 to get Watkins if those are the guys they want.
  11. PhxRam

    PhxRam The Estimated Prophet

    Messages:
    4,607
    Credit:
    $7,201,613.47
    Name:
    Bob
    I am still baffled at the position that they picked him. Did you or anyone you know even have him mocked higher than a 4-5th round?
  12. jap

    jap Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,223
    Credit:
    $3,355,604.59
    I'm sure they realized he was a project coming in. However, I doubt they expected Sam to go in Week Seven. Quick was starting to come on and may have been ready by season's end with a healthy Sam.
    2 people like this.
  13. blackbart

    blackbart Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,253
    Credit:
    $2,358,150.98
    Name:
    Tim
    I find it interesting that some think a player coming from college has a better chance of learning a new offense and producing better than a guy going into his 3rd year with said offense. Bradford is not going to be having a camp with his WRs and practicing this off season, so any chance at learning the new guys game will not be there. In fact Bradford may not be ready for camp and probably won't play the whole preseason. The chances that Watkins comes in and produces with this team next year are slim to none.

    Protecting your QB is the first priority of any offensive scheme (except maybe Martz) The Oline has got to be the base for anything the offense does and it is in shambles. Free Agency is a chance to start re-building but only if Saffold is the FA you are bringing back and he is playing OG.

    The guy Watkins would presumably be replacing had 2 drops last year so you can quit using that as part of the reason for drafting a WR.

    Football is won and lost in the trenches the Rams have a problem there on the Oline if they don't fix it Bradford may not play for the full year. I have seen enough of this team playing with a back up QB
  14. PhxRam

    PhxRam The Estimated Prophet

    Messages:
    4,607
    Credit:
    $7,201,613.47
    Name:
    Bob
    Yeah they knew he was a project. A project who very well could pan out.

    But i guess my point is that you could have gotten this project three rounds later.
  15. max

    max Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,754
    Credit:
    $4,059,757.53
    Name:
    max
    Makes sense. Snead wants a 2015 first rounder, trading down from #2 to #6 gets that plus a 2nd rounder this year according to the trade value chart.
  16. Alan

    Alan Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,831
    Credit:
    $2,207,931.68
    If I remember correctly, there were other teams sniffing around him. He wasn't an unknown quantity to any of the other teams. There were other teams who had him in for a private workout I believe. I don't blame them for where they drafted him because I think other teams would have too. What I blame them for is drafting a project when we had nothing at WR. If you have a good WR already on your roster then you can more easily afford to spend the extra time on him.
  17. CGI_Ram

    CGI_Ram Hamburger Connoisseur

    Messages:
    14,126
    Credit:
    $2,624,297.76
    Name:
    Burger man
    SOLD!

    Sounds good.
  18. blackbart

    blackbart Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,253
    Credit:
    $2,358,150.98
    Name:
    Tim
    They probably expected him to play his second year with Bradford at QB not KC:nau:
  19. PhxRam

    PhxRam The Estimated Prophet

    Messages:
    4,607
    Credit:
    $7,201,613.47
    Name:
    Bob
    Well Houston might very well dictate what we receive in any potential trade.
  20. jrry32

    jrry32 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,192
    Credit:
    $4,297,331.58
    I know people that did but I still went on an absolute tirade when it was reported on twitter.

    Possibly. But I think they'll hold onto their picks.