Not Hard To Evaluate How Good Watkins Is And We Need Him

[ausmurp]

Okay, so I was thinking about how hard it can be to evaluate players in the draft. But then I remembered DeAndre Hopkins, from last years draft. I thought about him and how good he actually was as a rookie:

52 catches for 802 yds and 2 tds.

Well anybody who follows college football knows Watkins was and is better than Hopkins. People were way more excited about Watkins coming out the next year at the time Hopkins was drafted. So we know for near fact Watkins is capable of producing better numbers as a rookie and having a better career. He's very likely to do something like this:

70 catches for 980 yds and 5 tds.

Anyway, we know Watkins is better and we know Hopkins was pretty good (I'd rather have taken him then Tavon personally and avoided the trade we did). So if this can be seen as fact, does this indeed make Watkins worth the 2nd pick to anyone? It does to me. I was leaning against taking him but with Lewan looking as good as he did at the combine, I'd now like to go 2. Watkinds, 13. Lewan.

I guess what I'm asking is, hypothetically if we draft Watkins at 2nd pick what would he have to do in his rookie season to prove to you he was worth it? If he does anything better than Hopkins stats from last year, I'm satisfied personally...

 

[Rams and Gators]

Exactly why I want Marqise Lee, Robert Woods was considered a top 10 pick prior to the emergence of Lee, Woods' rookie season he puts up 587 yards and 3 TDs with a combination of EJ Manuel, Thaddeus Lewis and Jeff Tuel as his QB, imagine what Lee can do with Bradford.

 

[Selassie I]

All NFL rookie receivers take time to fully develop. 2 - 3 years can be almost the expected time for most of them. The elite ones may hit their stride sooner, but even the elite have much to learn in year one.

I would expect Watkins to be in the elite type category. He's going to take some bumps in year #1, but I see him stressing defenses right away... and that stress will help the entire offense improve from day 1.

 

[jjab360]

Well anybody who follows college football knows Watkins was and is better than Hopkins. People were way more excited about Watkins coming out the next year at the time Hopkins was drafted. So we know for near fact Watkins is capable of producing better numbers as a rookie and having a better career. He's very likely to do something like this:

Well, statistically, Watkins was far outproduced by Hopkins in 2012, and even his 2013 season didn't quite match up with Hopkins' 2012 season. Statistically. We all know Watkins is quicker and faster, but there's a number of other factors that go into a receiver's success, they depend on the rest of the team probably moreso than any position other than QB. So no, I wouldn't say it was a near fact that Watkins is going to outproduce Hopkins his rookie year, no matter how excited people are.

Even if he did slightly outproduce Hopkins, I'm not taking him over someone who's going to dominate the LOS battle like these top tier linemen. I think he'd have to be a truly elite receiver prospect for me to consider that option, especially at the 2nd overall pick.

 

[BonifayRam]

Agree..he looks real good....yes we need him like we need two starting OG's a CB, swing OT and a safety... but at what cost?

A #2 overall ?

 

[tonyl711]

Agree..he looks real good....yes we need him like we need two starting OG's a CB, swing OT and a safety... but at what cost?

A #2 overall ?

we wont be picking at#2, think more along the lines of 4th or 6th IMO, I think Snead will pull off a couple trades in the first couple rounds.

 

[RamsJunkie]

yeah I'm reallying hoping for a trade down to 4 and clowney still being there so we can trade down again to 6. still gonna get a blue chip player there and maybe get 3 or so more premium picks. My favorite senario is getting the browns 4th, 26th, and 2nd rounder then getting atlantas 6th and 2nd and 3rd rounder.

 

[laramsoriginal]

yeah I'm reallying hoping for a trade down to 4 and clowney still being there so we can trade down again to 6. still gonna get a blue chip player there and maybe get 3 or so more premium picks. My favorite senario is getting the browns 4th, 26th, and 2nd rounder then getting atlantas 6th and 2nd and 3rd rounder.

Yeah that will never happen but I agree that scenario would be amazing lol

 

[Faceplant]

Holy crap. I think Sammy Watkins needs his own forum at this point......

Personally, I would be really irritated if we took Watkins at #2 OR at #4. I just don't see him as a guy that will come in and justify that pick. I just don't. If we had a different offensive philosophy...maybe, but we don't. OL help will pay dividends immediately with this offense as I see it. Not only in the run game, but in the down field passing game. Lets just see what Ausin, Bailey and the rest are capable of when they have run support and a QB who has more than a few seconds to let routes develop.

 

[Username]

The difference is we got to see Hopkins used as a pure wideout. He ran every route in the book, and ran them well. We get to see Sammy primarily in the vertical passing game, out of the backfield, in the screen game, in the return game, etc.

That's not a knock on him, and I'm not saying he can't be a pure wideout. I'm just saying it's a reason (to me) that he's tougher to evaluate for.

I don't think anyone here thinks Hopkins has Watkins ceiling though. He's explosive. That's one thing that can't be denied.

 

[RamFan503]

Holy crap. I think Sammy Watkins needs his own forum at this point......

Personally, I would be really irritated if we took Watkins at #2 OR at #4. I just don't see him as a guy that will come in and justify that pick. I just don't. If we had a different offensive philosophy...maybe, but we don't. OL help will pay dividends immediately with this offense as I see it. Not only in the run game, but in the down field passing game. Lets just see what Ausin, Bailey and the rest are capable of when they have run support and a QB who has more than a few seconds to let routes develop.

Funny.

Yeah Face - I just don't see the huge potential there but who am I. If we take him I'll hope for the best but I am so freaking tired of things like 1st and goal at the 2 and getting three or ZERO points out of it. I am also tired of watching a passing game where the QB can almost never take more than a three step drop.

 

[iced]

Holy crap. I think Sammy Watkins needs his own forum at this point......

Personally, I would be really irritated if we took Watkins at #2 OR at #4. I just don't see him as a guy that will come in and justify that pick. I just don't. If we had a different offensive philosophy...maybe, but we don't. OL help will pay dividends immediately with this offense as I see it. Not only in the run game, but in the down field passing game. Lets just see what Ausin, Bailey and the rest are capable of when they have run support and a QB who has more than a few seconds to let routes develop.

What philosophy? Basic football? Cause last I checked we don't have any receivers that easily win man to man coverage - a Must for any starting receiver in the NFL...

Is it because you believe we're run first? Because we're not - we passed with bradford a hell lot more than ran it. Stacy only averaged 16 carries in those games with Bradford, which would put him in the middle of the league average.

People say the QB needs time for the routes to develop - given how the Rams were 7th best at keeping the qb upright, evidence indicate otherwise...especially since our #1 WR couldn't even get a touchdown (all season) (only team in the league who's #1 couldn't do it) and our ROOKIE Wide Receiver led receivers in catches.... You can give Bradford all day back there with those receivers - still not going to teach them how to separate or get open

 

[mr.stlouis]

What philosophy? Basic football? Cause last I checked we don't have any receivers that easily win man to man coverage - a Must for any starting receiver in the NFL...

Is it because you believe we're run first? Because we're not - we passed with bradford a hell lot more than ran it. Stacy only averaged 16 carries in those games with Bradford, which would put him in the middle of the league average.

People say the QB needs time for the routes to develop - given how the Rams were 7th best at keeping the qb upright, evidence indicate otherwise...especially since our #1 WR couldn't even get a touchdown (all season) (only team in the league who's #1 couldn't do it) and our ROOKIE Wide Receiver led receivers in catches.... You can give Bradford all day back there with those receivers - still not going to teach them how to separate or get open

Yes, I can't help but to feel irritated with Givens and Quick last year. Those two alone justify drafting Watkins in the top 5.

 

[laramsoriginal]

Watkins would not solve the problems the rams have on offense. If you believe the OL is good heading into the season then I don't know what to tell you.

 

[iced]

Yes, I can't help but to feel irritated with Givens and Quick last year. Those two alone justify drafting Watkins in the top 5.

Exactly. I read in a different post that Memphis Ram said Givens didn't crack 700 yards because Bradford missed time this year - okay fine, what about the core last year? Still didn't have a 700 yard receiver.

Sad thing is the Rams haven't had a receiver break over 700 yards since 2008 (Torry Holt almost hit 800)... This team hasn't had a legit receiver since then...and hilarity but sadness has ensued since , time and time again...Even Donnie Avery technically outproduced Givens 2 years in a row now, but he also just needed more time right?

 

[iced]

Watkins would not solve the problems the rams have on offense. If you believe the OL is good heading into the season then I don't know what to tell you.

Rams sacks allowed - 7th best.

Rams leader in Receiving yards - Tight End.

Yea, which one is brutal again?

 

[F. Mulder]

The issue for me continues to be where and who are selected at their respective draft slots. IF the Rams end up at #2 (which they won't) I want someone more than a solid starter. You basically have the pick of the entire draft; solid players can be picked throughout the first few rounds.

However, a trade down picking up 1-? additional picks provides you better value and flexibility to pick several potential great players with the fallback of at least improving your roster with good young players and/or filling current or future holes.

If Watkins/Clowney/Robinson?Mathews are the #2 pick I expect them to be stars. Now if any of them (or anyone else) is picked lower in the first and coupled with additional picks then I will be the first applauding. Sammy Watkins at 4-6 with extra picks---hell yes. Ditto for Robinson, Mathews, Clowney, Mack. But at #2 I'm hoping for more We have a solid roster with a few holes left but what separates 8-8 type teams from 10-6 type teams often comes down to a special play here and there throughout the season. That's why I can live with Austin not being Torry Holt II because he is able to change a game with 1-2 special plays. Same with Quinn on Defense.

 

[iced]

We have a solid roster with a few holes left but what separates 8-8 type teams from 10-6 type teams often comes down to a special play here and there throughout the season. That's why I can live with Austin not being Torry Holt II because he is able to change a game with 1-2 special plays. Same with Quinn on Defense.

It goes both ways. I seem to remember a 80 yard touchdown to Isaac Bruce that sealed us a ring.....

 

[DR RAM]

I'd be a lot higher on Watkins if I saw him compete 100% at the combine, but he competes on tape...soo. Not at #2 like him though.

 

[F. Mulder]

It goes both ways. I seem to remember a 80 yard touchdown to Isaac Bruce that sealed us a ring.....

I'm a little confused. Bruce is a HOF type WR because he was BOTH a consistent top-performing WR AND was a playmaker. I don't see Austin able to challenge the consistency numbers guys like Bruce and Holt produced every season but he obviously can contribute overall and still change a game with 1-2 plays even if he is quiet in a particular game. He is always dangerous.