LT OR WR With The First Pick

[iced]

Will Sam still be our QB with whatever scrub replaces Long on the O line?

Unless Fisher gets fired, yes.

LT is non-issue.

 

[Ramifications]

Unless Fisher gets fired, yes.

LT is non-issue.

Robinson could do four things.

1) Pro Bowl Guard
2) Pro Bowl RT
3) Jake Long injury insurance (hurt more than Evel Kneivel)
4) LT of the future (set for a decade, and we might not draft this high in a long time)

Robinson's don't grow on trees, we could have had Patterson or Jeffery much later than the type of Boardwalk and Park Place draft real estate Watkins will need to be taken at.

 

[Rams and Gators]

Unless Fisher gets fired, yes.

LT is non-issue.

So ? protecting his blind side doesn't increase his chance of getting hurt?

 

[Ramifications]

I'm still waiting to hear why our receiver's corps doesn't need an upgrade when the friggen tight end led the team in receiving.... and a first round rookie led the team in catches, and he played most of the time out of the slot , running short routes on top of it

It might not have been that way if Bradford had played more than six and a half games. Bailey might be our most complete and overall best WR, but we only saw him like two games as the starter, he looked very promising, and that was with Clemens. Schotty misused Austin early, but when he started to figure out how to use him (IND game most obviously), he started to use him in a more route diverse and effective manner, it was just too late for Bradford to exploit and take advantage of, we know from the past when Sam has the time, he throws a beautiful deep ball. Having time to survey the field could help salvage at least Givens or Quick, if not both. With Austin, Bailey and Cook, that could be plenty. Especially since we discovered Stacy and found the run-centric offense, which Robinson could have been purpose built for in a mad scientist's genetic engineering lab. Remember, with all the handicaps and obstacles, Bradford was pacing for 33 TDs, and should have been pacing for closer to 40 without all the early penalties and drops (young team growing pains, dumb mistakes and yips that wil get ironed out with reps and experience). How many TDs does Bradford need to throw?

Unless we are factoring Bradford to miss half the season (and if the risk is a concern, that all the more points to fortifying the OL), we shouldn't assume 2013's statistically depressed Bradfordless production should be extrapolated into seasons when he is expected to be the QB. If he goes down because the OL gets injured (which they always have throughout Bradford's career, that more than anything has been the main constant during his tenure), can we trust Clemens to leverage and harness Watkins? Shore up the OL, and Bradford can live to fight other battles in future seasons, where there will be other Patterson's and Jeffery's if needed.

 

[BonifayRam]

Will Sam still be our QB with whatever scrub replaces Long on the O line?

That scrub currently now is Sean Hooey. Really think that Sam will resign with a Ram team who can not provide him the needed pocket & protection no matter how many wide outs you bring in. Sam could have a dozen brand new shinny top shelf play-toys in his sandbox to toss to ... won't matter if Sam is not able to spend time to play with them. They just sit in the toy box on the side line. Sam knows it he spoke out to it.....will not matter Sam will have to go elsewhere to a team who can protect & provide him the needed pocket.

I seem to recall much Ram Org. behind the scenes concerns & serious taking in account Long's injury history before his signing. But in the end the Rams Org were OK with the former No. 1 overall pick medically. Many in the NFL felt that @ that time it was somewhat surprising considering Long has dealt with biceps tears, triceps tears, left knee, back and left shoulder injuries & surgeries over the last few seasons.

No telling how much Jake Long can perform @ his past 2013 season performance as this many half dozen or more surgeries & injuries mount. Up til this recent injury Jake's right side was in better shape than his left. Jake has already had more surgeries & injuries than Orlando Pace had when we saw Orlando's rapid decline.....

I sure have some questions #1- Will Jake Long be the same Jake long after tearing his MCL? #2- Will Jake Long be the same Jake long after tearing & surgically repairing that ACL? #3- Will Jake Long be the same same 2013 Jake Long after both #1 & #2 events? How could anyone ignore this & not be concerned?

Now Long has a right MCL/ACL surgical scar to go with Long's right Foot & Ankle surgical scares back in college. Will the Rams Org. continue to pay Jake Long 8 1/2 to 9 1/2 million a season if Jake has ever increasing speed DE issues after 2014? Not likely Rams would likely be looking for a OLT in the 2015 draft wishing they had taken one in 2014 draft. Jake Long played RIGHT OT in 2004 & 2005 moved to OLT in 2006/2007.

I see nothing that special about Sammy Watkins to make me throw away a perfect chance to have Sam Bradford a top talented skilled OL'er playing in front of him at the same time getting a great insurance policy for the all critical OLT position. win win! I would love to have a Hulk strong OL'er like Robinson or smart technician like Matthews over a WR.

 

[rhinobean]

Don't think the Rams will pick second but if they have to, hope they get a tackle! Best one available!

 

[iced]

It might not have been that way if Bradford had played more than six and a half games. Bailey might be our most complete and overall best WR, but we only saw him like two games as the starter, he looked very promising, and that was with Clemens. Schotty misused Austin early, but when he started to figure out how to use him (IND game most obviously), he started to use him in a more route diverse and effective manner, it was just too late for Bradford to exploit and take advantage of, we know from the past when Sam has the time, he throws a beautiful deep ball. Having time to survey the field could help salvage at least Givens or Quick, if not both. With Austin, Bailey and Cook, that could be plenty. Especially since we discovered Stacy and found the run-centric offense, which Robinson could have been purpose built for in a mad scientist's genetic engineering lab. Remember, with all the handicaps and obstacles, Bradford was pacing for 33 TDs, and should have been pacing for closer to 40 without all the early penalties and drops (young team growing pains, dumb mistakes and yips that wil get ironed out with reps and experience). How many TDs does Bradford need to throw?

Unless we are factoring Bradford to miss half the season (and if the risk is a concern, that all the more points to fortifying the OL), we shouldn't assume 2013's statistically depressed Bradfordless production should be extrapolated into seasons when he is expected to be the QB. If he goes down because the OL gets injured (which they always have throughout Bradford's career, that more than anything has been the main constant during his tenure), can we trust Clemens to leverage and harness Watkins? Shore up the OL, and Bradford can live to fight other battles in future seasons, where there will be other Patterson's and Jeffery's if needed.

I just have a hard time believing we have any receivers on our team that are going threaten teams with good cover corners... Just don't see it happening, and it hasn't. What scares me is 4 games against elite corners guaranteed every season - 2 vs PP, 2 vs Sherman.

when the line was healthier in the first meeting against the seahawks - they actually had a pretty good day.

The reason why we lost that game was mainly clemens.

 

[iced]

oops

 

[iced]

So ? protecting his blind side doesn't increase his chance of getting hurt?

protecting his blind side would decrease the chance of him getting hurt...are you insinuating that Jake Long isn't going to be a ram for the next 3-5 years? cause that's what you draft a player for, especially high..not just for one season, it's to hopefully fill that spot for 5+ years.

 

[tonyl711]

I picked Watkins, because we really need a true #1 WR, OT I think we need depth more than a starter, IMO you get an OT and OG in the second and third rounds, someone coach B can work with for a year or 2 to eventually take over.

 

[Rams and Gators]

protecting his blind side would decrease the chance of him getting hurt...are you insinuating that Jake Long isn't going to be a ram for the next 3-5 years? cause that's what you draft a player for, especially high..not just for one season, it's to hopefully fill that spot for 5+ years.

I genuinely don't know, what I do know is that Jake hasn't played a 16 game season over the last 3 years and he most likely won't play a 16 game season next year. And our current #2 LT is practice squad player Sean Hooey, maybe we're happy with protecting Sam for 14 games a season and leaving it up to luck for 2 games.

 

[iced]

I genuinely don't know, what I do know is that Jake hasn't played a 16 game season over the last 3 years and he most likely won't play a 16 game season next year. And our current #2 LT is practice squad player Sean Hooey, maybe we're happy with protecting Sam for 14 games a season and leaving it up to luck for 2 games.

i'd share your concerns if Long were a skill position, and had multiple injuries to the same area (A'la Danario Alexander) - but the fact is that recovering and getting onto the field is a lot faster for a o-lineman vs other positions...

 

[Ramifications]

I just have a hard time believing we have any receivers on our team that are going threaten teams with good cover corners... Just don't see it happening, and it hasn't. What scares me is 4 games against elite corners guaranteed every season - 2 vs PP, 2 vs Sherman.

when the line was healthier in the first meeting against the seahawks - they actually had a pretty good day.

The reason why we lost that game was mainly clemens.

First of all, in advocating Robinson, I'm not implying Watkins isn't special, I think he is.

But I think Patterson and Jeffery are special, too, and we can get WRs like that in the future more easily than a dominant future LT/guard.

Bradford didn't play in the three of the games against SEA and ARI, so we don't really know how the passing game would have fared. Austin was misused early, and we didn't have Bailey starting for most of the season and I think Cook can be used more effectively. Givens and Quick could be more effective if Bradford had more time to throw. We may differ on that and have to agree to disagree, but IMO it is hard to argue against some of these points. Things like Bradford missed half the season and Bailey only started the last few games are factual statements.

In the sentence... "when the line was healthier in the first meeting against the seahawks - they actually had a pretty good day."

The operative phrase there is when the line was healthier.

Unfortunately, that has been far too little in Bardford's career, and not just last year. It has been the biggest leak in the boat on offense.

Wells has been hurt in both seasons, Dahl was hurt last year, Saffold is constantly hurt (we don't know which of them will even be back or might be cap casualties - we will know by the draft, I might rethink this position later, we are getting ahead of ourselves a little, but what else are we going to talk about between now and the free agecny period ). Long is recovering from an ACL/MCL tear and was hurt a lot in MIA, Jones couldn't play as a rookie because he was recovering from a lis franc foot injury, we have no clue what to expect, if anything. I respect your opinion that you are more comfortable with that than our WRs, but you can probably appreciate and understand how others might not share that same level of comfort.

I agree they probably win with Bradford. And that was without Watkins or Robinson. So it still remains an unanswered question if we would have done even better with one of the other... in that game. But over a season, and future seasons, I think we need an infusion of talent, youth and depth on the OL, and Robinson provides that. Watkins improves talent and depth (Givens or Quick become depth instead of starters), but won't represent much of a change in youth, we are ALREADY super young, to a fault, arguably.

 

[Ramifications]

i'd share your concerns if Long were a skill position, and had multiple injuries to the same area (A'la Danario Alexander) - but the fact is that recovering and getting onto the field is a lot faster for a o-lineman vs other positions...

Robinson isn't just a Long insurance policy, he could be a Pro Bowl guard in the interim (and to those who say don't take a guard with 1.4 or whatever, he won't always be that, he could play RT and LT later, too). Dating back to MIA, he has missed time, so while it is better that they are different injuries (unlike DX - and this definitely isn't his first knee or lower leg injury, I think far from it), they are nonetheless injuries that have caused him to miss time. He has had many injuries in his career dating back to Michigan in college, maybe even as a prep (not sure how many missed games, he didn't miss many his first three or so Pro Bowl seasons?), so it might be unrealistic to think he will be a model of health and emerge unscathed for the balance and remainder of his contract. Maybe, but that is a big maybe, and playing the percentages of how the last few years have transpired, that would seem to be the less likely scenario.

 

[iced]

First of all, in advocating Robinson, I'm not implying Watkins isn't special, I think he is.

But I think Patterson and Jeffery are special, too, and we can get WRs like that in the future more easily than a dominant future LT/guard.

Please - this is hindsight. Jeffrey had his knocks well documented - work ethic, showed up 30-40 lbs overweight, etc. The concerns were legit... Patterson hasn't shown much as an actual wide receiver - more like a reggie bush type.

And there's better talent in the 2nd rounders at Guard more than likely vs Receiver

Bradford didn't play in the three of the games against SEA and ARI, so we don't really know how the passing game would have fared. Austin was misused early, and we didn't have Bailey starting for most of the season and I think Cook can be used more effectively. Givens and Quick could be more effective if Bradford had more time to throw. We may differ on that and have to agree to disagree, but IMO it is hard to argue against these points. Things like Bradford missed half the season and Bailey only started the last few games are factual statements.

Bradford played in the opener against arizona - and we did see how the passing game fared. Cook was constantly open, Givens/quick was not.

In the sentence... "when the line was healthier in the first meeting against the seahawks - they actually had a pretty good day."

The operative phrase there is when the line was healthier.

Yep - and it wasn't just Long that was out either. 3/5 or 4/5 of the starting line was out. It's not like it was just tackles - which was the best position on the offensive line this season. Guard was the worst.

Wells has been hurt in both seasons, Dahl was hurt last year, Saffold is constantly hurt (we don't know which of them will even be back or might be cap casualties - we will know by the draft, I might rethink this position later, we are getting ahead of ourselves a little, but what else are we going to talk about between now and the free agecny period ). Long is recovering from an ACL/MCL tear and was hurt a lot in MIA, Jones couldn't play as a rookie because he was recovering from a lis franc foot injury, we have no clue what to expect, if anything. I respect your opinion that you are more comfortable with that than our WRs, but you can probably apprerciate and understand how how others might not share that same level of comfort.

The front office is expecting Jones to be in the mix next summer... Dahl and wells i believe are cap casualties, Saffold may walk. I'm still for signing Alex Mack for Center, let him battle it out with Jones (who could be a guard) and drafting a guard as early as the 2nd. But do I think they're going to spend the #2 overall pick or even a top 10 pick on an offensive lineman because they're afraid Long won't be back? absolutely not, and snead has already literally said as much.

I agree they probably win with Bradford. And that was without Watkins or Robinson. So it still remains an unanswered question if we would have done even better with one of the other... in that game. But over a season, and future seasons, I think we need an infusion of talent, youth and depth on the OL, and Robinson proveds that. Watkins improves talent and depth (Givens or Quick become depth instead of starters), but they aren't going to change youth much, we are ALREADY super young, to a fault, arguably.

You can still judge Wide receiver play without having the starting qb..And just watching them, they were often on lockdown and very rarely separated.

 

[PressureD41]

OL & DBs should be the focus of this draft. Add a DT & OLB in the mid to late rds. So LT is my choice and twice on Sunday's... Putting Greg Robinson at LG for the 1st year or 2 would be awesome

 

[Ramifications]

Please - this is hindsight. Jeffrey had his knocks well documented - work ethic, showed up 30-40 lbs overweight, etc. The concerns were legit... Patterson hasn't shown much as an actual wide receiver - more like a reggie bush type.

And there's better talent in the 2nd rounders at Guard more than likely vs Receiver


Bradford played in the opener against arizona - and we did see how the passing game fared. Cook was constantly open, Givens/quick was not.



Yep - and it wasn't just Long that was out either. 3/5 or 4/5 of the starting line was out. It's not like it was just tackles - which was the best position on the offensive line this season. Guard was the worst.


The front office is expecting Jones to be in the mix next summer... Dahl and wells i believe are cap casualties, Saffold may walk. I'm still for signing Alex Mack for Center, let him battle it out with Jones (who could be a guard) and drafting a guard as early as the 2nd. But do I think they're going to spend the #2 overall pick or even a top 10 pick on an offensive lineman because they're afraid Long won't be back? absolutely not, and snead has already literally said as much.



You can still judge Wide receiver play without having the starting qb..And just watching them, they were often on lockdown and very rarely separated.

We seem to be talking about two different things. Maybe I could use more rigorous or precise language, but I'm trying to convey that very good WRs can be found in the late first to mid-second, and I used Jeffery and Patterson as examples. You are saying it is hard to know which are good and which aren't. But it still isn't in dispute they are there (I don't think you are denying that with Jeffery, but did with Patterson, I'll return to that). I don't agree we are just as or more likely to find a potential Pro Bowl guard/RT and future LT like Robinson at a comparable point in the draft. As you are less worried about Long's recent injury history, and I am more concerned, unsurprisingly we have different conceptions of how quickly the future might rush into and become the present, as to when Robinson might be pressed into LT duty. It is great that STL has expressed the intent that he fulfills his contract, whether he can or not is uncertain. All we have to go on is that he got hurt and missed time multiple times in MIA, and got hurt in his first season here. He did finish most of the season, which is commendable. But I'm not convinced that he will break the trend and, somewhat counterintuitively, become healthier and not more broken down as he gets older in the next 3-4 years (if he lasts that long?).

You say hindsight, I say revisionist history. NOBODY that I am aware of graded Quick more highly than Jeffery (Randle also a consensus higher grade at the time - STL clearly fell in love with his work out, and said as much, outsmarting themselves from making the scratch pick). Jeffery would have been a better pick. Jenkins went higher than Quick and shortly before. I didn't like him as much as Jeffery? He was more of a one-season wonder, and came out of nowhere guy, as I recall, Jeffery was much more of a known commodity to the draft community, and not all bad (as with most prospects). Stephen Hill went after Quick and before Jeffery, I didn't like him as much. He went to the same school (Georgia Tech) as consensus top 5 WRs Calvin and DT, and he was a freakish physical specimen and athlete (recurring theme here), so you can bet he had my attention. The scheme-related lack of use complicated evaluation, but his hands looked brutal and I thought he looked very akward and clumsy, moving nothing like Calvin or DT.

I liked Jeffery, you didn't. You were more worried about the weight issue, I looked at his body of work, his hands, his plays at his best and the pro day 4.4. Not sure what the moral is here? I don't think it is that you are right and I am wrong when Jeffery did become a Pro Bowler? You are speaking for yourself, I think, but not the consensus, that Jeffery was not a better prospect than Quick, or that others couldn't have spotted he was good because you didn't.

I don't agree with you at all about Patterson, I think he is special. He got worked in increasingly as the season progressed. He had 4 receiving TDs, 3 rushing TDs and 2 return TDs, and was used sparingly (45-469 in just five starts, so you can do the math), if he had been a full time player from the beginning, he could have had 10-12 TDs overall. Who does that as a rookie WR, other than Randy Moss and AJ Green? The dude is Percy Harvin (the jack of all trades, Swiss army knife, multipurpose WR/RB/returner he replaced), but 3" taller and 30 lbs. heavier. We will have to agree to disagree on this, too. I think he will be a top 10 WR in two years, with upside of top 5. Lets revisit his progress in 2014. He could get a QB upgrade in the future, it would be hard to be worse, and could be more productive on that basis.

I don't think you are advocating this, but it is hard to make possible decade long impact decisions based on how Cook or Austin did in the first game. Cook never had as good a game the rest of the season, really not even close. Austin was in his first professional game, so no, he didn't set the league on fire game one. Again, Austin was misused. Would you agree that there were a lot of complaints about Schotty's unimaginitive use of Austin for much of the first half of the season? Would you agree that if you run one yard and squat routes into the middle and teeth of the defense, it makes it hard to be open?

Yes, the OL has had lots of injuries every year Bradford has been here, not just in 2013, and there have been injuries inside and outside. If guard was the worst position, Robinson could be a Pro Bowler there, until we might need him at RT or LT, which again, we just differ on the liklihood of it happening in the next few years, lets just agree to disagree on that. There isn't anything that can be said to change the fact that Long has been injured and missed multiple games multiple times in MIA, and he is getting older. I'm concerned more than you, that is just how it is.

I'm not assuming we get Mack (if we do, I may well rethink this position, like if we get Saffold, but I don't think so, the idea of a potentially dominant OL has become more appealiing to me as I have thought about it more), or what guards we might get in the second (won't be as good as Robinson) or Jones will be a stud, or even a starter. But I didn't scout him at Alabama. Others could weigh in here. Even if he does start, but at center, it could still leave a hole at guard. Its hard to tell from the context what you think i meant, but I'm not saying I think Long will NEVER be back, just that it could be overly optimistic to count on him to not miss games in the next few years, based on his recent history. Already addressed, but I would expect Snead to say as much, but Long still needs to do it, and we don't know if his body will hold up, regardless of what Snead says.

The context of the WR comment at the end was the SEA game. Not sure if you referred to that specifically, or the entire season in general? For one thing, I don't have coaches film where you can see the whole field, and not sure if you do? If you are talking about SEA, they locked down and prevented separation of a lot of WRs. Not that surprising that Austin wasn't getting open by a couple car lengths , especially given he is a rookie. None of this accounts for the fact that Bailey didn't start much of the season, and IMO (which could be different here as it was with Jeffery and Patterson) has star potential (Ward/Mason/Jennings). We have addressed it, but just a recap, bad usage predictably leads to bad results. You probably liked how Austin was used in IND, he was used more creatively, he got separation, and had one of the better games I've ever seen a Rams rookie WR have. Cook can be used better. Maybe Austin and Bailey will be even better in year two? And if the three of them are used better by Schotty, and are able to stress the defense more, that could create more space to operate in for Quick and Givens, and they will have more separation.

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, you share your points, I share mine, the thread can perhaps pick and choose from the pros and cons of our respective points. Like you, you aren't going to say you agree with a point of mine when you don't, I'm the same. We just seem to see a lot of things differently, which is good in some ways. It would be a nightmarish mssg board/site if we always agreed (nothing but posts saying, you are exactly right, just what I was thinking), like that original Twilight Zone episode where a small time gangster is shot dead, and wakes up in this magical place where everything he wishes comes true. At first he is enraptured, but quickly becomes bored with always winning at gambling or the like, there is no challenge. He tells his afterlife host/guide Sebastian Cabot, immaculately dressed in white, I think I'm in the wrong place. Can you send me, you know, to that other place, down there? Cabot lets out a maniacally evil laugh, and states that, this is the other place.

 

[mr.stlouis]

Heck I'd rather have Clowney with our first pick, too. We could get Lewan and 13 win twice. LT is my third option, not even my second. It's times like this I'm glad Fisher's track record doesn't show him locking a T.

 

[Ramifications]

Heck I'd rather have Clowney with our first pick, too. We could get Lewan and 13 win twice. LT is my third option, not even my second. It's times like this I'm glad Fisher's track record doesn't show him locking a T.

I could have done a none of the above option.

What are your first two options, QB and DE?

My sense from the other thread is Clowney is not as popular as LT or WR, not sure if otherwise Clowney voters would be unevenly distributed or represented in the two choices? In the earlier poll, when the LTs were listed separately, they divided positional votes, and Watkins won by a fairly large margin. I suspected doing it this way might lead to a positional reversal, and so far at least, this has been confirmed. But it could be early, and the ratio could perhaps still change.

 

[Ramifications]

Oops, mr.stl...

Guess that should have been DE, WR, LT for you?