How will the Rams replace Sammy Watkins? It's complicated

  • 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.

nighttrain

Legend
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
9,216
Alden Gonzalez
ESPN Staff Writer

LOS ANGELES -- It's 797 snaps. That's the number Sammy Watkins was projected to play in 2017 before he, like most starters, sat out the regular-season finale. The Los Angeles Rams now have to replace those snaps. But it isn't really about the raw number; it's about the type of receiver those snaps came from -- a respected, explosive, playmaking vertical threat who can take the top off coverages and open the middle of the field for others.

Watkins provided that for a Rams team that became the first in the Super Bowl era to go from last to first in scoring from one season to the next. He made only 39 catches for 593 yards, but he caught eight touchdown passes, seven of them on plays inside the red zone, and he consistently created separation that helped free fellow receivers such as Robert Woods and Cooper Kupp.

The Rams valued the skill set so much that they were strongly considering utilizing the franchise tag on Watkins before giving it to safety Lamarcus Joyner. Now Watkins is gone, joining the Kansas City Chiefs with a three-year, $48 million contract that was representative of his robust market -- and the Rams are scrambling for ways to replace what he provided.

"It’s going to be hard," head coach Sean McVay said, "and that’s something that we’re trying to figure out now. I don’t necessarily think you do that with one player; I think it’ll be kind of by committee."

Below is a look at what that committee might look like.


Josh Reynolds (or Mike Thomas): The Rams have two promising -- albeit raw and unproven -- vertical threats on their roster. There's the 6-foot-3, 191-pound Reynolds, a fourth-round pick out of Texas A&M in last year's draft. And there's the 6-foot-1, 200-pound Thomas, taken in the sixth round in 2016. Thomas opened some eyes during last year's offseason workouts, but then he missed time in training camp, was handed a four-game suspension and faded into the background. Reynolds is the favorite here. He impressed throughout the summer, then replaced Woods while he spent three weeks rehabbing a shoulder injury and performed well. But the jury is still out on whether Reynolds can consistently win one-on-one matchups and dictate coverages. "He’s demonstrated flashes," McVay said. "In terms of being in a vertical role, I think that remains to be seen."

The tight ends: No team ran more three-receiver sets than the Rams last season. They went to them almost exclusively because they liked the trio of Watkins, Woods and Kupp, but also because their young tight ends hadn't developed enough to be on the field together. McVay is hoping that changes this season. Tyler Higbee, heading into his third NFL season, and Gerald Everett, heading into his second, are both athletic tight ends who can stretch the deep middle of the field. McVay might be able to use them together more often to potentially keep safeties honest, with hopes that one of them can take on a role similar to the one Jordan Reed filled on the Washington Redskins when McVay was offensive coordinator there. But that is a tough ask. Higbee, on the field most often last year, hauled in 36 of 74 targets for 380 yards in his first two seasons. Everett caught 16 of 32 targets for 244 yards as a rookie.

Tavon Austin (or Pharoh Cooper): The Rams' dire straits without Watkins were illustrated perfectly by Thursday's surprising decision to keep Austin with a restructured contract. They're trying, once again, that they can find an actual role for the 5-foot-8 speedster who has had a hard time fitting into the offense since being the No. 8 overall pick in 2013. The Rams went into last offseason hoping Austin could develop into that vertical threat, but that became unnecessary when Watkins was acquired. Now they're simply going to give him a chance to compete for snaps at receiver. Cooper brings a similar skill set, mainly as someone who is best utilized coming in motion and getting the ball behind the line of scrimmage. But his main role is to return punts and kickoffs, which made him a Pro Bowl selection last year.

Someone else: The best receiver remaining might be Terrelle Pryor, and the Rams have reportedly shown interest in him. Pryor had a poor season in Washington last year, which was cut short by ankle surgery, but he still has the ability to be a big-play, 1,000-yard receiver. There's also Michael Crabtree, the 30-year-old who was recently released by the Oakland Raiders. Mike Wallace is another, cheaper option. If the Rams seek tight-end upgrades, a couple of potential options remain in Eric Ebron and Martellus Bennett. Restructuring Austin's contract -- which created $3 million in non-guaranteed, reachable incentives that must count toward the salary cap on the front end -- has them at just under $30 million once you factor in signing their draft picks. But the Rams still need run-stuffers and edge rushers, and they have a hole at center. Oh, and there's also the Aaron Donald situation.
 

shaunpinney

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Messages
4,805
I think we'll be ok without Watkins. I would have loved to see him stay, but he's not here now. I'd like us to stay away from Pryor. If we can get Tavon's head sorted (IMO - I think a lot of his issues last season (Dropped / Muffed punts) were mental issues post surgery) I think he could be a definite scary prospect on the outside.

Or... can Rath bulk up Reynolds by 20 or lbs without losing his speed? I seem to remember the guy fought for every ball thrown his way in college...

The good thing with our WRs, they'll be training opposite Talib, Peters and NRC, they're going to have to raise their game if the want to play on game day...
 

Boston Ram

Hall of Fame
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Messages
3,565
Our offense is predicated on running good routes and finding the soft spots. You don’t need a guy who takes the top off. The offense is very similar to what NE runs. Brady has had a pretty good career without a major deep threat guy. A Watkins type don’t hurt, (see Randy Moss) but not essential.

Another TE that can step in and start would go along way IMO
 

shaunpinney

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Messages
4,805
Our offense is predicated on running good routes and finding the soft spots. You don’t need a guy who takes the top off. The offense is very similar to what NE runs. Brady has had a pretty good career without a major deep threat guy. A Watkins type don’t hurt, (see Randy Moss) but not essential.

Another TE that can step in and start would go along way IMO

Brady may not have had deep threat WRs, but he's had some of the best TEs a QB could ask for
 

dieterbrock

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 3, 2013
Messages
23,151
I don’t think the Rams are better off without Watkins, they aren’t. But I think they are well equipped to handle that loss more than other spots in the top scoring team from last year
 

Kevin

Pro Bowler
Joined
Sep 8, 2014
Messages
1,382
The author is coming form the premise that one person on the roster now or later will have to replace Watkins production. I don't think that's how the Rams are going to go about it. Expect more targets for Woods and Kupp, expect Everett to step up and be more involved in the passing offense and whoever takes over for Watkins will get his share of the action. It's true we have to replace all of Watkins' snaps, but the more important question is who picks up the slack in targets, especially in the red zone. I believe Kupp was tied for the lead in most red zone targets last season. I would rather have Watkins than not have him, but I think we will be OK without him and without signing one of the big name FAs.
 

LACHAMP46

A snazzy title
Joined
Jul 21, 2013
Messages
11,735
Draft....no reason to increase our cap while Donald and others need new deals.

I think a speedster can be found in the 4th and 6th rounds....not sure on his character....I'd grab that kid outta Florida...Callaway...

Oh yeah, Mike Thomas OVER Reynolds....ATM....things could change tho
 

The Ramowl

Starter
Joined
Oct 14, 2014
Messages
706
If you want to be a perennial winning team, you need to be able to handle these situations because bad teams will constantly try and steal your flashy players by throwing a lot of money at them.

NE has been succesful all these years because they handle that exceptionally well.
We don't necessarily need to replace Watkins, we need our offense to be adaptable so that we keep being good without that specific player. Do you think losing Amendola creates a hole in the Patriots offense ? I don't, they'll just plug some other guys, adapt the system to the roster they have, and go on to win another 13 games.
 

Boston Ram

Hall of Fame
Joined
Mar 1, 2013
Messages
3,565
Brady may not have had deep threat WRs, but he's had some of the best TEs a QB could ask for

Not really, just Gronk. I also mentioned in my post I would be more comfortable if we could snag another TE. The point of my post is not having a deep threat is not the end all be all, New England has proven that. Watkins would of been nice to keep, but our offense is not solely dependent on a deep threat receiver.
 

kurtfaulk

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
16,055
.

put me down for mike thomas. he passes the eye test. hopefully all his nerves are gone and he can catch a ball without thinking about it.

.
 

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
22,026
Notice McVay said, "as for being a deep threat, that remains to be seen", referring to Reynolds. Josh isn't fast enough IMO.
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,147
Not really, just Gronk. I also mentioned in my post I would be more comfortable if we could snag another TE. The point of my post is not having a deep threat is not the end all be all, New England has proven that. Watkins would of been nice to keep, but our offense is not solely dependent on a deep threat receiver.
It's about scheme, I agree.
Hell, Hogan had a bunch of big plays for them this year.
How many times does Brady throw an 8 yard pass that goes for 25 yards because of design and execution? A lot.
 

shaunpinney

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 20, 2012
Messages
4,805
Not really, just Gronk. I also mentioned in my post I would be more comfortable if we could snag another TE. The point of my post is not having a deep threat is not the end all be all, New England has proven that. Watkins would of been nice to keep, but our offense is not solely dependent on a deep threat receiver.

The dirtbag that was Hernandez wasn't a shabby football player, but agree with you NOT having a deep threat isn't the end all of it. Brady's go to guys have always been Edelman and Gronk, then it's whoever else is there, NE haven't been known for having Alpha WRs.
 

NJRamsFan

Please Delete
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
3,801
IMO Sammy Watkins made 2 very big contributions to the Rams offense. He was the guy we could count on to win early and often in the Red Zone. It was huge for our offense to finally have a guy we could call a simple quick slant for in the red zone and know he was going to beat his man off the ball. The second contribution he made, which may be the greater of the 2 was drawing coverage and allowing Robert Woods to eat. I don't think woods will ever be that sure fire 1 that can win often when the coverage is drawn towards him, however in the WR2 spot he can produce like a 1 if that makes sense.

We need someone to stretch the field to allow woods/cupp to eat.

honorable mention : watkins was a very willing blocker and that will be missed.
 

VeteranRamFan

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Camp Reporter
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Messages
2,126
Name
Dale
I think Reynolds can be the guy. Watched him in camp last year and he quickly became my new favorite receiver.

Now, can he expand on what little he did last year? That will be the key.
 

MrRiceGuyRJ

Let's Make the Rams Great Again
Joined
Apr 28, 2017
Messages
514
Name
RJ
I don't think we have anyone that can replace Watkins or have anyone that demands the defenses to focus on him. His mere presence will be missed, not to mention anytime he touches the ball, there's a good chance it'll turn into points.

If we use what we have in house, here's a couple thoughts based on my eye test:
  • Reynolds has great hands like Watkins, but doesn't have the quickness and speed to stretch the field
  • Tavon has the speed and quickness to get separation and stretch the field, but doesn't have reliable hands (maybe that can be coached)
  • Cooper might be our closest compromise in regards to quickness and speed. He can catch, but not a possessive receiver nor has the catching radius of someone like Watkins
 

FrantikRam

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Oct 16, 2013
Messages
4,754
Our offense is predicated on running good routes and finding the soft spots. You don’t need a guy who takes the top off. The offense is very similar to what NE runs. Brady has had a pretty good career without a major deep threat guy. A Watkins type don’t hurt, (see Randy Moss) but not essential.

Another TE that can step in and start would go along way IMO


I agree.

Plus, people forget that Woods and Kupp caught a TON of deep passes last year. The real place we need to replace Sammy is the redzone, and I think Everett will do that.
 

Mackeyser

Supernovas are where gold forms; the only place.
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
14,207
Name
Mack
IMO Sammy Watkins made 2 very big contributions to the Rams offense. He was the guy we could count on to win early and often in the Red Zone. It was huge for our offense to finally have a guy we could call a simple quick slant for in the red zone and know he was going to beat his man off the ball. The second contribution he made, which may be the greater of the 2 was drawing coverage and allowing Robert Woods to eat. I don't think woods will ever be that sure fire 1 that can win often when the coverage is drawn towards him, however in the WR2 spot he can produce like a 1 if that makes sense.

We need someone to stretch the field to allow woods/cupp to eat.

honorable mention : watkins was a very willing blocker and that will be missed.

I agree with you with one correction: Woods drew the #1 CB 41% of the time, third in the NFL. Watkins was not in the top 10. So the idea that Watkins was drawing the #1 so that Woods could feast on a steady diet of #2s is just factually incorrect. Watkins was absolutely a very good blocker.
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,975
Name
mojo
It'll be interesting to see how some of our own offensive guys progress under McVay. Other than Benny Cunningham none of our offensive players got better under the Fisher tree.
 

NJRamsFan

Please Delete
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
3,801
I agree with you with one correction: Woods drew the #1 CB 41% of the time, third in the NFL. Watkins was not in the top 10. So the idea that Watkins was drawing the #1 so that Woods could feast on a steady diet of #2s is just factually incorrect. Watkins was absolutely a very good blocker.
Wow that statistic is surprising to me...I’ll admit my op was based off of assumption in regards to the coverage. been a bit out of the loop as far as sports go. Work has been kicking my ass. But I’ll get back...thanks for the info Mack...you might have just bumped up woods in my mind