Why Evans doesn't fit.

[jrry32]

I don't want Lee. Doesn't have good hands. Keenan Allen wasn't similar to Lee at all. Don't think Lee has #1 WR ability in the NFL.

 

[Sum1]

He doesn't have anyone to throw jump balls to.

And he threw one here to Cook in the preseason:

IMO, if we had a WR that could be relied upon to catch those sort of balls, Bradford would throw them.

Ive already stated that is a valid point...but I still disagree. You guys are largely overstating this "throwing to tight spaces to Lloyd and Amendola". I mean, the detractors would say he threw to Amendola because he's captain checkdown. Amendola has a knack for getting open, thats what Bradford liked about him.

Though Quick needs to bring more to the table I also think it is a bit dismissive to suggest a jump ball shouldn't be thrown his way.

 

[jrry32]

Ive already stated that is a valid point...but I still disagree. You guys are largely overstating this "throwing to tight spaces to Lloyd and Amendola". I mean, the detractors would say he threw to Amendola because he's captain checkdown. Amendola has a knack for getting open, thats what Bradford liked about him.

Though Quick needs to bring more to the table I also think it is a bit dismissive to suggest a jump ball shouldn't be thrown his way.

And we've seen Bradford throw jump balls Quick's way.

 

[Sum1]

And we've seen Bradford throw jump balls Quick's way.

Yeah, hes seen a heck of a lot of targets, hasn't he?

Hes a developmental prospect, we all knew that.

 

[jrry32]

Yeah, hes seen a heck of a lot of targets, hasn't he?

Hes a developmental prospect, we all knew that.

That's Quick's doing. Guy still was missing sight adjustments and hot reads last year.

 

[Sum1]

That's Quick's doing. Guy still was missing sight adjustments and hot reads last year.

You want to use the one or two jump balls as a basis that Bradford doesn't have a big target (when in reality he has 2)...but really just dismissing the one we knew wasn't going to put it all together right away.

I've made my points on the subject...we can agree to disagree.

 

[jrry32]

You want to use the one or two jump balls as a basis that Bradford doesn't have a big target (when in reality he has 2)...but really just dismissing the one we knew wasn't going to put it all together right away.

I've made my points on the subject...we can agree to disagree.

I could easily pull up more but there's really no point in it. The point I'm making is that Bradford hasn't had a Calvin Johnson/AJ Green/Andre Johnson/Larry Fitzgerald/Alshon Jeffery throw it up and let him get it type target to throw to yet so we don't know how he'd utilize one.

 

[iced]

You want to use the one or two jump balls as a basis that Bradford doesn't have a big target (when in reality he has 2)...but really just dismissing the one we knew wasn't going to put it all together right away.

I've made my points on the subject...we can agree to disagree.

I can't count on Quick as a reliable redzone target as much as I count on Givens as a #1 WR..

now if Quick could perform period, let alone before garbage time...

 

[blackbart]

DX got a few jump balls thrown his way.

There is no way to evaluate what happened with rookies and second year WRs last year when Bradford played less than half a season and with the changes in philosophy and RBs in the few games he did play.

At best you can say they were all inconsistent and did not have enough of a sample size for evaluation.

Do over

 

[Sum1]

I can't count on Quick as a reliable redzone target as much as I count on Givens as a #1 WR..

now if Quick could perform period, let alone before garbage time...

That's fine...it is also a totally different subject than what we are discussing.

If you want to dismiss Quick as a big bodied receiver simply because he hasn't developed yet then we might as well dismiss every player in the draft because we have no idea what these guys are going to do once drafted either. Again, with Quick everyone knew he wasn't going to jump in and produce right away. I also believe he needs to show something this season before we can really start to critique what kind of player he is.

 

[Sum1]

DX got a few jump balls thrown his way.

There is no way to evaluate what happened with rookies and second year WRs last year when Bradford played less than half a season and with the changes in philosophy and RBs in the few games he did play.

At best you can say they were all inconsistent and did not have enough of a sample size for evaluation.

Do over

Again, a few? Alex Barron had a few pancakes. Craig Dahl had a few INTs. Damione Lewis had a few sacks.

Hey, if the Rams draft Mike Evans and all of the sudden Bradford is throwing jump balls his way and we're winning games...HELL YEAH!

IMO...a receiver that runs good routes and gets the YAC is a much better fit for what Bradford has proven he likes to throw to do.


jrry, I'd take anyone of those guys. I don't think Mike Evans is in that category. In fact, I'm not even sure you can say his game resembles everyone of those players, production potential aside. I could list a bunch of All Pros and stick Watikins name next to it and make the same point.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Question for you Memphis(half my family comes from there btw)...If the Rams grab either Robinson or Matthews with their first pick...then our #13 pick comes around and one of those two OT's is still there do you see Snead doubling up on both guys if,for instance Watkins and Evans are gone?
Highly unlikely but it's just a scenario.

Nope. Rams Park would be open for business for the #13 selection.

 

[iced]

That's fine...it is also a totally different subject than what we are discussing.

If you want to dismiss Quick as a big bodied receiver simply because he hasn't developed yet then we might as well dismiss every player in the draft because we have no idea what these guys are going to do once drafted either. Again, with Quick everyone knew he wasn't going to jump in and produce right away. I also believe he needs to show something this season before we can really start to critique what kind of player he is.

"Not counting on a guy" and "Dismissing" a guy are not the same thing, and the bolded part is some seriously flawed logic. Why would you make assumptions about a draft of players based on one individual player from 3 drafts ago? Doesn't make sense.

And with Quick - we didn't expect him to produce right away. But we expected to see a lot more than what we have, especially in his 2nd year, and I think the coaching staff feels the same based on the snap count.

I'm not writing off quick, I just wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket with him... if he develops, great, we have an extra weapon

 

[Sum1]

"Not counting on a guy" and "Dismissing" a guy are not the same thing, and the bolded part is some seriously flawed logic. Why would you make assumptions about a draft of players based on one individual player from 3 drafts ago? Doesn't make sense.

And with Quick - we didn't expect him to produce right away. But we expected to see a lot more than what we have, especially in his 2nd year, and I think the coaching staff feels the same based on the snap count.

I'm not writing off quick, I just wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket with him... if he develops, great, we have an extra weapon

That wasn't what I said nor insinuated.

With Quick, we knew he wouldn't be a prime player early in his career. So to "Not count on a guy" or "Dismiss" (semantics there...) at this stage you shouldn't "count on" a rookie to step in and fill the void being discussed. That's all.

Anyway, it is really straying from the point of the thread. This wasn't meant to be a Quick vs. Evans debate...nor do I think that even if Quick did burst onto the scene do I believe that immediate eliminates the reason to be looking at WR, whether that is Evans, Watkins, Lee, or whoever.

 

[iced]

That wasn't what I said nor insinuated.

With Quick, we knew he wouldn't be a prime player early in his career. So to "Not count on a guy" or "Dismiss" (semantics there...) at this stage you shouldn't "count on" a rookie to step in and fill the void being discussed. That's all.

I don't see how that's semantics - there's a difference between not having confidence in a guy and being confident he'll fail... lord knows I had plenty of examples of this with junior troops lol

Anyway, it is really straying from the point of the thread. This wasn't meant to be a Quick vs. Evans debate...nor do I think that even if Quick did burst onto the scene do I believe that immediate eliminates the reason to be looking at WR, whether that is Evans, Watkins, Lee, or whoever.

I would expect more though the #33rd pick... Then again if he wouldn't have had issues with drops and reading hot routes, I think his production would probably double.

 

[Sum1]

I don't see how that's semantics - there's a difference between not having confidence in a guy and being confident he'll fail... lord knows I had plenty of examples of this with junior troops lol


I would expect more though the #33rd pick... Then again if he wouldn't have had issues with drops and reading hot routes, I think his production would probably double.

Semantics because of what we're discussing. Regrettably this has shifted to a Quick vs Evans...so if we are talking one vs the other then writing someone off and not counting on them is the same thing if we are using that as a basis to draft another big bodied receiver.

And in regard to the draft pick...how is that relevant? Quick can't help that is where he was picked...whether he was drafted in the 2nd round or the 7th round he is still the same guy. Just because he was drafted in the 2nd round doesn't mean he was going to develop any faster...you should blame that on Snead, not on Quick. I mean, if he HAD gotten drafted even a round later there would be people excited about the possibility of Quick's potential if he had this exact same progress...but since he was taken in the 2nd there are plenty (not saying you, though I don't know) of people suggesting he be cut. At some point you have to move on from a players draft position or their contract and just talk about their talent on how it projects.

So there...

 

[RamsFan14]

I would like Bradford to be more aggressive and take some more shots honestly. Weather it's a big physical WR in Evans or the speedster in Watkins, I think both bring there different physical abilities to the table for this team. I would be fine with either, probably because Evans has long arms, he's 6'5, and we see a lot of physical WRs dominating the position as of late. And Watkins because for his size, he seems pretty physical, plus he's got the great great speed. Both have great hands, so thank god if we pick one of them lol... I see your point of view tho Sum1BTRthnU. It's tough to evaluate the whole puzzle... Bradford played well last year, but he certainly has room to improve, such as 3rd down conversions (yes a running game would have helped) and being a bit more aggressive imo down the field. I'm not sure how the Rams feel about Brian Quick... But a lot depends on him pertaining to this draft and how we play. We just gotta keep hoping he'll breakout next year. With that said, I'd go Watkins over Evans (and I like Evans a lot too) because... I want to believe Brian Quick will be a solid WR (ughhhhh!!!).

Idk man, glad I'm not making this decision.

 

[iced]

Semantics because of what we're discussing. Regrettably this has shifted to a Quick vs Evans...so if we are talking one vs the other then writing someone off and not counting on them is the same thing if we are using that as a basis to draft another big bodied receiver.

Actually its about Quick himself, not Evans. I personally don't see Evans getting past buffalo at 9.

And in regard to the draft pick...how is that relevant? Quick can't help that is where he was picked...whether he was drafted in the 2nd round or the 7th round he is still the same guy. Just because he was drafted in the 2nd round doesn't mean he was going to develop any faster...you should blame that on Snead, not on Quick. I mean, if he HAD gotten drafted even a round later there would be people excited about the possibility of Quick's potential if he had this exact same progress...but since he was taken in the 2nd there are plenty (not saying you, though I don't know) of people suggesting he be cut. At some point you have to move on from a players draft position or their contract and just talk about their talent on how it projects.

So there...

lol i think people take my people out of context - i'm rarely on the offensive and i do thoroughly enjoy a good discussion as well others opinion.

as to quick - i'm not saying cut him, keep him for another season or two..atleast he'd depth, but i don't know if i could rely on him as a starter..and thats what we need

 

[iced]

My people lol, I meant my posts*

 

[Sum1]

My people lol, I meant my posts*

What do you mean, YOUR people?!?