Pauline: Rams Actively Shopping #2 Pick in the Draft

  • 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.

MerlinJones

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
1,020
Although Pead has not shown much we still have no clue why his role has not been bigger he is still on the roster and could turn out ok. Quick has been exactly what was expected, guy from a small school with good talent and not much experience in a pro style offense and a huge learning curve. By all accounts from the organization he has progressed and done everything they have asked of him. He got to play with Bradford for 6+ games in 2013 and in 2 years has been targeted 6 times in a game once. Expecting him to produce more than he has is short sighted.

Considering where the were selected I don't think it's unfair to say they have greatly underperformed.

While the jury may still be out on both (I guess), they do show that Fisher and Snead can pick potential busts just like everybody else.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
5,808
Although Pead has not shown much we still have no clue why his role has not been bigger he is still on the roster and could turn out ok. Quick has been exactly what was expected, guy from a small school with good talent and not much experience in a pro style offense and a huge learning curve. By all accounts from the organization he has progressed and done everything they have asked of him. He got to play with Bradford for 6+ games in 2013 and in 2 years has been targeted 6 times in a game once. Expecting him to produce more than he has is short sighted.

Quick is what he is, a massive disappointment who still has time to show he may not be a complete bust.
 

laramsoriginal

Starter
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
604
Although Pead has not shown much we still have no clue why his role has not been bigger he is still on the roster and could turn out ok. Quick has been exactly what was expected, guy from a small school with good talent and not much experience in a pro style offense and a huge learning curve. By all accounts from the organization he has progressed and done everything they have asked of him. He got to play with Bradford for 6+ games in 2013 and in 2 years has been targeted 6 times in a game once. Expecting him to produce more than he has is short sighted.

Agree. I do believe Quick has a breakout year in 2014
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,212
Name
Tim
IMO Basing your expectations on where a player is selected is good way to be disappointed. Expecting anything more from Quick than what he has done is just unrealistic.
 

MerlinJones

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
1,020
So we should just expect every player, regardless of draft position, to be mediocre so that we won't be disappointed if they underwhelm?

Quick has had more than his fair share of drops of balls thrown directly to him. Is it unrealistic to expect an NFL level receiver to be able to catch the ball when it hits him in the hands?
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
I am just not sure that someone will give us the best return until they see what Houston is going to do.

If they are going to offer us several different packages to choose from depending on who gets selected first, then shop away.
Except of course without a solid deal in place there is always the risk someone steps ahead of you at the last moment and you end up on the outside .

IMO the Rams want certitude more than optimal return and so do most of those interested so I stand by my prediction the pick is traded in advance of the day of the draft by as much as a week.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,212
Name
Tim
So we should just expect every player, regardless of draft position, to be mediocre so that we won't be disappointed if they underwhelm?

Quick has had more than his fair share of drops of balls thrown directly to him. Is it unrealistic to expect an NFL level receiver to be able to catch the ball when it hits him in the hands?

It is unrealistic to expect all players to progress at the same rate or that they all start their learning curve from the same place. A guy coming from Appalachian State is going to take longer to adjust than a guy coming from a Division 1 program. The draft position is on the evaluators and team the players have no control over that.

Quick had 2 drops in 2013.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
5,808
IMO Basing your expectations on where a player is selected is good way to be disappointed. Expecting anything more from Quick than what he has done is just unrealistic.

I think that's exactly how you should set your expectations, If I draft a player in the 1st round I expect him to be better than a player I draft in the 7th round.

Why is it unrealistic...I know because he was a small school guy. Because he didn't have much experience at WR etc etc. Fact of the matter is we needed a WR when we drafted him, not 3 years (if ever) after we drafted him. Players were taken after him who I would bet that Quick never matches their second season let alone the rest of their careers.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,212
Name
Tim
I think that's exactly how you should set your expectations, If I draft a player in the 1st round I expect him to be better than a player I draft in the 7th round.

Why is it unrealistic...I know because he was a small school guy. Because he didn't have much experience at WR etc etc. Fact of the matter is we needed a WR when we drafted him, not 3 years (if ever) after we drafted him. Players were taken after him who I would bet that Quick never matches their second season let alone the rest of their careers.
Most WRs do not reach their potential in the NFL in the first year, those that do are far and few between. There are far more that get it by the third year and he most likely would have had better numbers with Bradford playing the whole year in 2013.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
5,808
Most WRs do not reach their potential in the NFL in the first year, those that do are far and few between. There are far more that get it by the third year and he most likely would have had better numbers with Bradford playing the whole year in 2013.

I think that fact is misused. True WRs don't typically reach their potential in the first two years. But typically a WR who shows well in their first two years will show well in their third year, players who show next to nothing in their first two years don't just become Calvin Johnson because it's their third year.

He may have had better numbers with Bradford, but I don't think he'd have the much better numbers that would justify his draft position.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,212
Name
Tim
I think that fact is misused. True WRs don't typically reach their potential in the first two years. But typically a WR who shows well in their first two years will show well in their third year, players who show next to nothing in their first two years don't just become Calvin Johnson because it's their third year.

He may have had better numbers with Bradford, but I don't think he'd have the much better numbers that would justify his draft position.

OK I'm not going to try to convince you
 

MerlinJones

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
1,020
It is unrealistic to expect all players to progress at the same rate or that they all start their learning curve from the same place. A guy coming from Appalachian State is going to take longer to adjust than a guy coming from a Division 1 program. The draft position is on the evaluators and team the players have no control over that.

Quick had 2 drops in 2013.

You are absolutely right about the drops. I don't know what I was thinking.

I guess two drops to go along with eighteen receptions isn't so bad.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,212
Name
Tim
You are absolutely right about the drops. I don't know what I was thinking.

I guess two drops to go along with eighteen receptions isn't so bad.
I just think it is difficult to know how much he progressed when Bradford was not there for 9 plus games. They worked together all off season, though OTAs and Camp, preseason and the first few games and then just as Quick was starting to get more PT Bradford is out and KC who apparently does not have the confidence to throw the ball 20+ yards down field is in there for the rest of the year.

I am hopeful that Bradford is healthy enough to work with all the receivers again this summer. The WR crew is all still very young, having another year in the same offense and working with Bradford on timing should make a big difference for everyone. Will Quick be Megatron, never will he be a good asset we will have to wait to see but I think he has shown flashes of what could be a solid NFL WR.
 

RamFan503

Grill and Brew Master
Moderator
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
33,812
Name
Stu
I still think Quick has the tools and will show more on the receiving side this season. He does everything else quite well and I saw him get open several times while KC never even looked his way. That to me is on the QB for being incapable of making that throw. Quick doesn't have the drops like some want to say. He is very raw and I don't honestly know if the light will ever turn on. It seemed like he was heading for the switch though when Sam went down.

Either way - I think we would all expect more out of a receiver taken 33rd overall. But who didn't expect more out of our offense PERIOD? We finally saw a running game begin to show. But our passing game was never anything I would consider threatening. Every now and then a big play but absolutely no consistency and IMO VERY questionable play calling for the skill set we had on the field almost all season.

Let's solidify the pocket and the run game and the pass will open up. I'm thinking Sted replaces Givens in the starting role, Quick becomes the starter on the other side, and Austin is used in various positions on the field. Givens will see his opportunities but I doubt he will be on the field as much. Pettis will be brought in for his size, hands, and smarts. And Cook will see some more seam routes.

I do think we have the talented pass catchers we need. Do we have the game plan to help them succeed. I sure hope to see a better game being called by Schotty this season. Other teams are doing it with far less talent IMO.
 

Yamahopper

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,838
It is unrealistic to expect all players to progress at the same rate or that they all start their learning curve from the same place. A guy coming from Appalachian State is going to take longer to adjust than a guy coming from a Division 1 program. The draft position is on the evaluators and team the players have no control over that.

Quick had 2 drops in 2013.
Does that count the one Bradford put between his shoulder blades when he missed another hot read?
Honestly he has the talent to be a top ten WR. He's just got to get the technical part down. This could be the year the light bulb comes on.
 

OnceARam

Hall of Fame
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Messages
3,332
Meh, I'd rather accrue the best talent possible. Demoff will figure a way to make it work. If Clowney is a better talent than the other options at #2(I think so), give me him.

I respect your opinion. I would rather trade down and take LT Matthews. Then add to our overall talent with the additional picks.

I know you like Clowney. I do too. I just think there is a chance - a small chance - that the guy isn't going to pan out. I would rather mitigate that risk with the trade down scenario.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
I respect your opinion. I would rather trade down and take LT Matthews. Then add to our overall talent with the additional picks.

I know you like Clowney. I do too. I just think there is a chance - a small chance - that the guy isn't going to pan out. I would rather mitigate that risk with the trade down scenario.

That's a different discussion. I've said many times that I favor a trade down...I was basing this discussion more on if we don't get a decent offer.
 

OnceARam

Hall of Fame
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Messages
3,332
That's a different discussion. I've said many times that I favor a trade down...I was basing this discussion more on if we don't get a decent offer.

I see. I can't keep up with everything you've said. ;)