Pryor or Evans at 13

  • 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.

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
Assuming we draft Robinson with our first choice, these two are realistic options at 13.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
I think Pryor is more likely to be there, I would probably lean Evans because he is the better player in my opinion.
 

DR RAM

Rams Lifer
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
12,111
Name
Rambeau
Assuming we draft Robinson with our first choice, these two are realistic options at 13.
And there is where you get me, but I wouldn't just say Pryor, I'd say, top rated secondary player.

I'm warming up to Evans at that spot. I think he has prototype #1 ability, but the Rams might think a top guy in the secondary is VBPA. I'd like to take either one a little lower if I could, and I like options for both position in the second round, who I view as starting players.
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #5
And there is where you get me, but I wouldn't just say Pryor, I'd say, top rated secondary player.

I'm warming up to Evans at that spot. I think he has prototype #1 ability, but the Rams might think a top guy in the secondary is VBPA. I'd like to take either one a little lower if I could, and I like options for both position in the second round, who I view as starting players.

So you say Gilbert or the other CB could be the choice. I don't know much about them besides they're pretty close in overall talent but one is more athletic. I'm hoping we get Verner so it makes that choice easy.
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,636
I'm not even sure Pryor or HHCD for that matter aren't on the same level as some of the 2nd/3rd round options like Jimmie Ward, Deone Buchanon, and Lamarcus Joyner.
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
And there is where you get me, but I wouldn't just say Pryor, I'd say, top rated secondary player.

I'm warming up to Evans at that spot. I think he has prototype #1 ability, but the Rams might think a top guy in the secondary is VBPA. I'd like to take either one a little lower if I could, and I like options for both position in the second round, who I view as starting players.

Thing is Pryor lays the word and is a ball hawk. Him and McD lined up together will have RB's cringing when they hit the hole. If the Rams's D is know for being super tough and dirty, he's perfect. That's why I want him.

May as well stick with Givens if we can't land Watkins. We need a straight up #1 or nothing. We have a big bodied question mark in Quick. I say we should let that play out.
 

DR RAM

Rams Lifer
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
12,111
Name
Rambeau
So you say Gilbert or the other CB could be the choice. I don't know much about them besides they're pretty close in overall talent but one is more athletic. I'm hoping we get Verner so it makes that choice easy.
Could be is the operative word. I know that we are checking out almost every player projected in that range. To me that is not a smokescreen, but a legitimate interest in the secondary in the middle of the first round.
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #9
I'm not even sure Pryor or HHCD for that matter aren't on the same level as some of the 2nd/3rd round options like Jimmie Ward, Deone Buchanon, and Lamarcus Joyner.

Tough call... IDK either.

We got McD in the third and I like him as well as Reid who went in the first. That's whyi don't like going S or RB in the first unless it's obvious they're above the rest.
 

tonyl711

Starter
Joined
Jul 22, 2013
Messages
863
all depends on who is still there, I don't think we we WR unless its Watkins with our first pick, but Evans wouldn't be a bad pick, don't think he will last till 13 though. wouldn't rule out trading up or down with this pick. one things for sure, we should get 2 pretty damn good players with those 2 picks.
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #12
I'm not even sure Pryor or HHCD for that matter aren't on the same level as some of the 2nd/3rd round options like Jimmie Ward, Deone Buchanon, and Lamarcus Joyner.

Even if Ward has close to the same ball skills, he isn't near as physical.

Quick is very similiar to Evans, physically. Getting a "big" WR is not a necessity.
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,636
Even if Ward has close to the same ball skills, he isn't near as physical.

Quick is very similiar to Evans, physically. Getting a "big" WR is not a necessity.
Quick might be close to Evans as far as measurables go, but ball skills and physicality aren't even close. Quick looks like a fish out of water every time he steps onto the field, he's never been able to make the plays a big WR like Evans is able to make consistently, not even when he was going up against Division II competition. Some guys just don't have the instincts for the position, and Quick, unfortunately, looks like one of those guys, imo.
 
Last edited:

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,212
Name
Tim
Quick might be close to Evans as far as measurable go, but ball skills and physicality aren't even close. Quick looks like a fish out of water every time he steps onto the field, he's never been able to make the plays a big WR like Evans is able to make consistently, not even when he was going up against Division II competition. Some guys just don't have the instincts for the position, and Quick, unfortunately, looks like one of those guys, imo.
I definitely would not go that far on the evaluation of Quick he has had a few plays that show his potential. A couple of end zone plays and most memorable for me in 2012 when he threw the SF db to the ground and scored a TD from about 25 or 30 yards out.

It would be a very difficult choice between Pryor and Evans. I don't think Evans will be there at 13. I think Pryor is at a position of more need. I think they both played above average in college and against similar levels of competition.

I think Pryor brings more benefit to the team as a whole so I guess he would be my choice
 

mr.stlouis

Legend
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
6,454
Name
Main Hook
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #15
Quick might be close to Evans as far as measurables go, but ball skills and physicality aren't even close. Quick looks like a fish out of water every time he steps onto the field, he's never been able to make the plays a big WR like Evans is able to make consistently, not even when he was going up against Division II competition. Some guys just don't have the instincts for the position, and Quick, unfortunately, looks like one of those guys, imo.

Quick has had some really good and really bad moments. Most of all he hasnt had many balls go his way. I remember at one point last year I was racking my brain on why we didn't target him more. Heck we all were. Fact of the matter is Schisher didn't target ANY 1 WR in an obvious way. So I guess it stands to reason we should go OL and defense early because we won't utilize the WR'ing weapons we have.

Only player we target for touches is Zac Stacy...

Honestly it kinda ticks me off.
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,636
I definitely would not go that far on the evaluation of Quick he has had a few plays that show his potential. A couple of end zone plays and most memorable for me in 2012 when he threw the SF db to the ground and scored a TD from about 25 or 30 yards out.

It would be a very difficult choice between Pryor and Evans. I don't think Evans will be there at 13. I think Pryor is at a position of more need. I think they both played above average in college and against similar levels of competition.

I think Pryor brings more benefit to the team as a whole so I guess he would be my choice
I have Evans in my top 10 and Pryor between the last quarter of the first and the top of the second, so I can't really agree with you there.

I do view S as more of a need, but I think it would be in our best interest to get a veteran at the position and not another inexperienced player. Fisher recently said in an interview that youth and inexperience at S was what held our defense back the most last year.
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,636
Quick has had some really good and really bad moments. Most of all he hasnt had many balls go his way. I remember at one point last year I was racking my brain on why we didn't target him more. Heck we all were. Fact of the matter is Schisher didn't target ANY 1 WR in an obvious way. So I guess it stands to reason we should go OL and defense early because we won't utilize the WR'ing weapons we have.

Only player we target for touches is Zac Stacy...

Honestly it kinda ticks me off.
I just really haven't liked what I've seen from Quick, it's night and day when I compare him to someone like Stedman Bailey. Bailey didn't get a lot of targets early in the year, but when he did get in the game, he always seemed completely composed, caught everything that came his way, and showed a lot of toughness for not going down on the first hit and getting the extra YAC. One guy seemed like he belongs there, and the other just doesn't, imo. Maybe I'm not being fair to Quick, but he always disappoints in crucial moments and his movements just seem so awkward to me from how he mistimes his jumps, the way he falls, how he sometimes can't locate the ball in the air, and sometimes doesn't even know what play is being run. I can get over the occasional concentration drop that get most fans up in arms, but some of these flaws are just natural instincts that Quick seems to lack and that can't be taught.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,212
Name
Tim
I have Evans in my top 10 and Pryor between the last quarter of the first and the top of the second, so I can't really agree with you there.

I do view S as more of a need, but I think it would be in our best interest to get a veteran at the position and not another inexperienced player. Fisher recently said in an interview that youth and inexperience at S was what held our defense back the most last year.

I'm not sure which part you don't agree with since I said Evans would probably be gone by 13 and you have him in your top ten. And you view S as more a position of need It sounds like we agree on most of the points I made??? What are you splitting hairs about? Taking someone else at 13 since Evans will be gone and Pryor won't be of value yet?? That was not the premise of the OP.
 

jjab360

Legend
Joined
Jan 21, 2013
Messages
6,636
I'm not sure which part you don't agree with since I said Evans would probably be gone by 13 and you have him in your top ten. And you view S as more a position of need It sounds like we agree on most of the points I made??? What are you splitting hairs about? Taking someone else at 13 since Evans will be gone and Pryor won't be of value yet?? That was not the premise of the OP.
blackbart said:
I think Pryor brings more benefit to the team as a whole so I guess he would be my choice
This is what I disagree with.