Once-in-a-lifetime prospect? Scouts break down Clowney

[jrry32]

Couldn't you also use all of FA and the rest of the draft to acquire a rotational DE?

I feel like I shouldn't even bother with this question but I will, if you think all we're drafting Clowney to be is a rotational DE, then you should bow out of the discussion right now.

Go back and apply your logic in 2011. We used our 1st round pick on a "rotational" DE named Quinn. We're regretting that move, aren't we?

no there isn't, IMO it means he is a once in a decade player, you draft him with that in mind don't you? you draft him because you think he is a once in a decade player.

Yea, there is. Frankly, though, I don't care. Call him whatever you want. He's a rare athletic specimen. The type of one at DE that you see maybe once every 5 to 10 years.

 

[jrry32]

So we want a defensive line like a vault door and an offensive line like a turnstile?

Ok.

Let me ask you this. Does this look like a turnstile offensive line to you?
LT: Jake Long
LG: David Yankey(2nd round pick)
C: Tim Barnes or Barrett Jones
RG: Rodger Saffold
RT: Joe Barksdale

And yet we could still come away with this OL AND Clowney.

how is that ridiculous? to think that fixing the Oline which is an area of need over fixing the Dline which is already one of the leagues best?

The ridiculousness is the idea that we only have one pick to use to do that. We have free agency to plug holes. Then we have 7 rounds of picks...with 2 picks in the first round to spend on players. To pass up a ridiculous talent to grab a need is about as short-sighted of a move as you can make. As someone else said in another thread, it's what the Cardinals did back in 2007 when they took Levi Brown over Adrian Peterson.

 

[jjab360]

no there isn't, IMO it means he is a once in a decade player, you draft him with that in mind don't you? you draft him because you think he is a once in a decade player.

Yes there is. When you say that someone is a once in a decade prospect you are comparing them to other players before they were in the league.

 

[jjab360]

Couldn't you also use all of FA and the rest of the draft to acquire a rotational DE?

Sure you could. But could you draft the consensus best prospect in the draft somewhere other than with our top pick? No, not really.

 

[fearsomefour]

I see him being more productive on the outside than Long, where I think Long isn't a blow you away with speed kinda guy makes up for in brute strength, all those pressure's Long gets at DE might turn into sacks at the DT position, IMO

Really the key vs pocket passers is being able to off blocks as Quinn and Clowney would have QBs stepping up all the time.

 

[jrry32]

If you take Clowney then you don't take an elite player at another position, you want to address the O line in the draft and FA then to some extent you have to neglect addressing one of the worst pass Ds ever. Or maybe it was just a Ridiculous statement and we should take a rotational DE at #2.

How quickly people have forgotten.

We drafted this #42 after a year in which our RDE had 10.5 sacks and 6 FFs and our LDE had 8.5 sacks and led the NFL in pressuring the QB. This #42 was a rotational DE in his first year. DO YOU REGRET THIS PICK?

I feel like this must be said. YOU ARE NOT DRAFTING FOR 2014! YOU ARE DRAFTING FOR THE NEXT 5-10 YEARS!!!!!

The VAST majority of rookies aren't ready to be top starters their rookie years. It's pretty rare. Most guys are inconsistent. When you truly see them start to become top tier players(if they're going to be that) are years 2 through 4 for most positions. This idea that we should be drafting to plug holes in 2014 is such a short-sighted plan. It is not strategic planning. IT IS INSTANT GRATIFICATION. And that's not what the draft is for. Because your rookies may not be ready to start or may not be ready to be impact players(quality starters) in 2014. And lets say, like Robert Quinn, they're ready to be a dominant player in 2016. WHO HERE KNOWS WHAT OUR NEEDS WILL BE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

 

[tonyl711]

Yes there is. When you say that someone is a once in a decade prospect you are comparing them to other players before they were in the league.

wrong, you are saying they will be all that at the next level

 

[jrry32]

wrong, you are saying they will be all that at the next level

No, you're wrong. And you're arguing semantics. A prospect is a PROSPECTive player. It is how you refer to a player before he gets drafted. And you compare prospects to other prospects.

 

[tonyl711]

Let me ask you this. Does this look like a turnstile offensive line to you?
LT: Jake Long
LG: David Yankey(2nd round pick)
C: Tim Barnes or Barrett Jones
RG: Rodger Saffold
RT: Joe Barksdale

And yet we could still come away with this OL AND Clowney.



The ridiculousness is the idea that we only have one pick to use to do that. We have free agency to plug holes. Then we have 7 rounds of picks...with 2 picks in the first round to spend on players. To pass up a ridiculous talent to grab a need is about as short-sighted of a move as you can make. As someone else said in another thread, it's what the Cardinals did back in 2007 when they took Levi Brown over Adrian Peterson.

I would say its shortsighted to take a player you don't need, instead of shoring up an Oline that does need it,

 

[MerlinJones]

I feel like I shouldn't even bother with this question but I will, if you think all we're drafting Clowney to be is a rotational DE, then you should bow out of the discussion right now.

Go back and apply your logic in 2011. We used our 1st round pick on a "rotational" DE named Quinn. We're regretting that move, aren't we?



Yea, there is. Frankly, though, I don't care. Call him whatever you want. He's a rare athletic specimen. The type of one at DE that you see maybe once every 5 to 10 years.

Not sure why you bothered with my question if my thinking is so faulty, but since you did I'll respond.
Also, thanks for letting me know when you think I should drop out of a discussion. I'll be sure keep that in mind.

So remind me, in 2011 did the Rams already have an elite (in my opinion currently the NFL's best) pass rushing DE on the roster? I don't regret bolstering an area of need at the time at all.

The more you guys dance around singing hosannas about Clowney pulling the Rams D-line up from the depths of the top five the less I want to hear it.

 

[jrry32]

I would say its shortsighted to take a player you don't need, instead of shoring up an Oline that does need it,

I would say tell me what our needs will be in 2016. I would also say by your logic, Robert Quinn is a bad pick.

 

[tonyl711]

No, you're wrong. And you're arguing semantics. A prospect is a PROSPECTive player. It is how you refer to a player before he gets drafted. And you compare prospects to other prospects.

so you are saying you draft them hoping that the hype is real? not real smart IMO.

 

[tonyl711]

I would say tell me what our needs will be in 2016. I would also say by your logic, Robert Quinn is a bad pick.

How did you come up with me saying Quinn was a bad pick?

 

[jrry32]

Not sure why you bothered with my question if my thinking is so faulty, but since you did I'll respond.
Also, thanks for letting me know when you think I should drop out of a discussion. I'll be sure keep that in mind.

So remind me, in 2011 did the Rams already have an elite (in my opinion currently the NFL's best) pass rushing DE on the roster? I don't regret bolstering an area of need at the time at all.

The more you guys dance around singing hosannas about Clowney pulling the Rams D-line up from the depths of the top five the less I want to hear it.

So you can only play one DE at a time? In 2010, the Rams had a DE that was a former top 2 pick that was the second best DE in the NFL at pressuring the QB. They had another DE that recorded 10.5 sacks. And yet they still had the audacity to draft a rotational DE.

You can't move the goal-posts(or revise history as you just did). They drafted a rotational DE with a 1st round pick when it appeared they had two set and proven starters at DE coming off strong years.

Well, I'll keep singing. And while you argue against those songs, keep in mind what parts of your argument would also apply to the Robert Quinn selection.

 

[jrry32]

How did you come up with me saying Quinn was a bad pick?

Because you're talking about the same circumstances that existed back then. We NEEDED OLs and WRs back then. We took a rotational DE. The need picks would have been Mike Pouncey or Nate Solder or Jon Baldwin.

I don't think you know what shortsighted means if you're looking at what we need in the present.

so you are saying you draft them hoping that the hype is real? not real smart IMO.

That's not at all what I was saying. It's actually a strawman fallacy because it has nothing to do with what I was saying.

What I will tell you is that I've seen every game Clowney played in college. So no, I'm not HOPING anything. I've evaluated him and feel quite comfortable in my evaluation.

 

[tonyl711]

Because you're talking about the same circumstances that existed back then. We NEEDED OLs and WRs back then. We took a rotational DE. The need picks would have been Mike Pouncey or Nate Solder or Jon Baldwin.

I don't think you know what shortsighted means if you're looking at what we need in the present.



That's not at all what I was saying. It's actually a strawman fallacy because it has nothing to do with what I was saying.

What I will tell you is that I've seen every game Clowney played in college. So no, I'm not HOPING anything. I've evaluated him and feel quite comfortable in my evaluation.

that's fair, and ive watched the Rams Dline every game and don't think they need him. we disagree, oh well, not like either of us will be getting a call from the Rams on draft day looking for advice.

 

[BigRamFan]

How quickly people have forgotten.

We drafted this #42 after a year in which our RDE had 10.5 sacks and 6 FFs and our LDE had 8.5 sacks and led the NFL in pressuring the QB. This #42 was a rotational DE in his first year. DO YOU REGRET THIS PICK?

I feel like this must be said. YOU ARE NOT DRAFTING FOR 2014! YOU ARE DRAFTING FOR THE NEXT 5-10 YEARS!!!!!

The VAST majority of rookies aren't ready to be top starters their rookie years. It's pretty rare. Most guys are inconsistent. When you truly see them start to become top tier players(if they're going to be that) are years 2 through 4 for most positions. This idea that we should be drafting to plug holes in 2014 is such a short-sighted plan. It is not strategic planning. IT IS INSTANT GRATIFICATION. And that's not what the draft is for. Because your rookies may not be ready to start or may not be ready to be impact players(quality starters) in 2014. And lets say, like Robert Quinn, they're ready to be a dominant player in 2016. WHO HERE KNOWS WHAT OUR NEEDS WILL BE AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

Maybe a little off topic but DANG! that is one good looking uniform!

 

[jrry32]

that's fair, and ive watched the Rams Dline every game and don't think they need him. we disagree, oh well, not like either of us will be getting a call from the Rams on draft day looking for advice.

That's the difference. I don't care if they need him. I don't believe in drafting solely for need. Because we have no idea what we will or won't need in 2-3 years when most rookies are hitting their stride.

Everyone remember the CB situation after the 2010 season? Speaking for myself, I didn't think it was a need. We had a young CB in Bradley Fletcher that played well in 2010 and a 28 year old CB coming off his best season as a pro in Bartell. We also had a former 3rd round pick in Murphy and some depth behind him.

Then Bartell breaks his neck in Week 1(never is the same again) of 2011, Fletcher tears his ACL after the 4th game, Murphy breaks his ankle in training camp and suddenly we're picking guys up off the street to play CB for us AND we're talking about CB as a major need going into the 2012 draft.

Things change...quickly.

 

[jjab360]

I would say its shortsighted to take a player you don't need, instead of shoring up an Oline that does need it,

In that case, I would say you don't actually know what shortsighted means, lol.

 

[tonyl711]

That's the difference. I don't care if they need him. I don't believe in drafting solely for need. Because we have no idea what we will or won't need in 2-3 years when most rookies are hitting their stride.

Everyone remember the CB situation after the 2010 season? Speaking for myself, I didn't think it was a need. We had a young CB in Bradley Fletcher that played well in 2010 and a 28 year old CB coming off his best season as a pro in Bartell. We also had a former 3rd round pick in Murphy and some depth behind him.

Then Bartell breaks his neck in Week 1(never is the same again) of 2011, Fletcher tears his ACL after the 4th game, Murphy breaks his ankle in training camp and suddenly we're picking guys up off the street to play CB for us AND we're talking about CB as a major need going into the 2012 draft.

Things change...quickly.

so you are saying we should draft with "what if" in mind instead of filling holes we "know" are needed now? im not looking to 2016 if your willing to wait that long to win that you, me I want to improve what needs improvement now, looking at next year winning. I mean really what player on any team is guaranteed not to get hurt? so why not just take all WRs since they might get hurt?