1. 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.

The Rams Need to Get A "Go To" WR More Than Any Other Position

Discussion in 'RAMS - NFL TALK' started by bluecollarram, Feb 16, 2014.

  1. mr.stlouis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    4,659
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    Yes, we dominated SEA early on and got dominated in their house, dominated in ARZ, and dominated twice by SF. That means we played two out of six games well against our division. You picked the one cherry off the cake.

    The think with Watkins is he plays much bigger than what he is. Thats a trait only Bailey has out of our whole WR core. Like you said, Watkins has better ball skills and hands than Givens and is about as fast. Givens catches the ball when he's open and is below average in traffic. It's part of the reason why Cook and Austin can be bracketed easily. It's not good enough!

    Speaking of not good enough, there isn't an OG worthy of even a top 12 pick. We have tackles and need to work on our depth. You don't pick a depth guy at #2. The second round is where you target OG's this year unless you wanna trade #13 and then draft one there. It's about value. Watkins is worth a 5-7 range pick. If we didn't have Long then I'd agree about drafting OL in the top 10.

    I'm not wrong about SF, either. They you in the middle until you make them pay on the edge, which is still a big challenge. The only WO we have to pick up some tough yards is Bailey. That's ONE guy. Watkins is a much better fit and need.
     
    #41
  2. CGI_Ram Hamburger Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2010
    Messages:
    15,571
    Likes Received:
    4,034

    Mathews durable bloodlines are a mega appeal to me. Feels like a safer pick.
     
    #42
  3. F. Mulder Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    683
    Likes Received:
    152
    I agree about the moving back. I don't care if it is one or two trades but if they can end up around 6-10 then to me that is a much greater value for some of the players we have been discussing as well as obviously picking up some additional high picks. With that said, same as last year, if they have a particular player they MUST have above all else (like their feelings about Austin) then they are less likely to trade or trade down below 4(?)
     
    #43
  4. mr.stlouis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    4,659
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    Or you could just draft an actual OG in the second round and Lewan at 13/after trade down. We aren't getting a Watkins anywhere.

    Evans is pretty good, Givens is just as good in his own way.

    Lee=Quick
     
    #44
  5. EliteRam New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2014
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    2
    Seahawks just won a Super Bowl without a "go-to" WR. Having good "#2ish" WRs that rarely drop passes is better than having a dominant #1 who will demand a lot of money.
     
    #45
    LesBaker and Memphis Ram like this.
  6. Rams and Gators Well-Known Member Pit Boss

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    4,828
    Likes Received:
    3,078
    Who do you start at LT in game 1? I'm not saying you should use a top 10 pick just because your LT has shown an inability to stay healthy, and is coming off a massive injury, I'm just curious who you'd go with?
     
    #46
  7. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    Long should be ready by that point. If he isn't, then hopefully we resigned Saffold. If we didn't, then Barksdale or whoever we draft later on at Tackle.

    As opposed to the issue where if we draft an OT first, then Long comes back, and we have too much talent at T and not enough in other places.
     
    #47
  8. mr.stlouis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    4,659
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    You go with your starter. Jake Long is who you start and draft a depth guy like Lewan. Our coaches have said Jake will ready for the start of next year so why should I doubt them?

    We're paying him the big bucks so why draft a replacement? He got hurt, he's not dead.

    Saffold isn't gone yet and neither is Wells. Those could be two starters right there. IDK about Dahl...
     
    #48
  9. jjab360 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,849
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    There isn't an OG in this draft with nearly Robinson's combination of power, athleticism, and versatility. He's one of the most physically dominant OL prospects I've seen since I started following the NFL draft. I wouldn't pass up on that for a Sammy Watkins, personally.
     
    #49
    Memphis Ram and ReddingRam like this.
  10. Rams and Gators Well-Known Member Pit Boss

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    4,828
    Likes Received:
    3,078
    There's a chance Long is back, but I'd guess there's a higher chance that he isn't. When was the last time Saffold finished a game he started playing OT? Can Joe B play LT? He played 2 in 2012 and we only gave up 5 sacks over the two games, I suppose we could get lucky and end up with a David Bakhtiari, are we happy taking that chance?
     
    #50
  11. Rams and Gators Well-Known Member Pit Boss

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    4,828
    Likes Received:
    3,078
    Didn't they also say they believe in Brian Quick? Why doubt that?
     
    #51
  12. mr.stlouis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    4,659
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    Why settle? We could have it all.

    Seattle got beat by ARZ down the stretch, too. I know this is obvious but they don't play against their own secondary. We play against it! Ours secondary isn't even close to theirs. They can get away from passing the ball when Lynch is rolling and can rely on their defense. They didn't need a #1 to do it. We need a #1 because they'll target our running game, again, and we'll be sunk... AGAIN! Why do we wanna repeat the same mistakes?
     
    #52
  13. mr.stlouis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    4,659
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    Well I'd hope they'd not write him off in his second year. Why would they say they didn't is the better question. I'm sure they beleive in all their players.

    I'm not saying cut Quick, I just want to pair Sammy with him.
     
    #53
  14. tonyl711 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2013
    Messages:
    481
    Likes Received:
    185
    the seahawks won because of their defense, if they don't have a top 2 defense the need for scoring more points comes into play, and then you do need a #1 WR, do you think that offense would have gotten them to a SB with a #12 defense? not very likely.
     
    #54
  15. mr.stlouis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    4,659
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    Robinson would get chewed up but the fleet of foot DE in this division. We can draft an actual guard, with power, in the second round. Honestly Saffold is irreplaceable for us. Robinson will not do it in his first year. We need a couple guys... after Watkins.

    You know Barks actually did pretty good at LT when given the chance.

    At the end of the day, Clowney or Watkins will be our pick. Fisher likes playmakers and DL'man I the first round.
     
    #55
  16. jjab360 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2013
    Messages:
    2,849
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    You seem to be forgetting that our no.1 mistake was entering the season in a pass-first, spread offense in an attempt to get all of our young receivers on the field at the same time. We started the season in a hole because of that, and were never able to recover. I suppose that's why I don't view receiver as a big of a need as the OP does, we need to focus on what worked well for us and that was a run-first, ball control offense. Like Gregg Williams said, accentuate your strengths, hide your weaknesses.
     
    #56
  17. Rams and Gators Well-Known Member Pit Boss

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2013
    Messages:
    4,828
    Likes Received:
    3,078
    Cutting or not you're giving up on someone if you draft Watkins, if they really do believe in Quick then they won't draft Watkins.

    As for Long being healthy game 1 I pray that he is because if not there's going to be a whole forum of people over at the PD celebrating the end of the Bradford Era.
     
    #57
  18. MFaulk107 The Realness

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2013
    Messages:
    383
    Likes Received:
    137
    I also don't understand why people think we need a "#1" receiver.
    This is a huge year for every one on this team, it's time for everyone to step up!
    Either a receiver will emerge as our number 1, or we will be elite, even with out a #1!
    The focus needs to be on the line so Bradford is safe, and we need great to elite DBs.
     
    #58
    ReddingRam likes this.
  19. Boffo97 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2014
    Messages:
    2,813
    Likes Received:
    1,558
    I would personally think they'd be giving up on Pettis rather than Quick if they draft Watkins.

    And Pettis has had more time than anyone else to show he has something and really has not done so.
     
    #59
  20. mr.stlouis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2011
    Messages:
    4,659
    Likes Received:
    1,885
    So if Fisher doesnt draft OL high and we're not getting Watkins then that narrows it down to...

    We pick Clowney
    We stock pile a bunch of blue chip picks but no one "elite".

    Honestly, im starting to think Clowney alone is good enough for a blockbuster trade. The guy is undeniably incredible on film. He's like the Calvin Johnson of DE's coming out. I don't know how you pass on him unless you're getting a big trade proposal. He makes OT's look foolish, guards are even slower. Our defense would be so incredible...
     
    #60