Bome's "I'm bored to tears..." Mock

[bomebadeeda]

First off, I did "borrow an idea" here and there but it fell very interesting none the less. (Well....according to my source material...that is...). W/O further adieu....

52. LA Rams Tyler Biadasz Wisconsin OL
57. LA Rams f/HOU Michael Pittman Jr. USC WR
84. LA Rams Malik Harrison Ohio St. LB
104. LA Rams* Darnay Holmes UCLA CB
126. LA Rams Davion Taylor Colorado LB
199. LA Rams Tyler Bass Ga. Southern K
234. LA Rams Quez Watkins So. Miss WR


Now, I have admit, when I found Malik Harrison listed as the 87th ranked player, I thought h probably wouldn't be there....but that's not how mocks are done. Everyone else looked to be in the proper range.

So, I listed them and even explained the biggest question. (That I can see....). What do you think?

 

[den-the-coach]

52. LA Rams Tyler Biadasz Wisconsin OL
57. LA Rams f/HOU Michael Pittman Jr. USC WR
84. LA Rams Malik Harrison Ohio St. LB
104. LA Rams* Darnay Holmes UCLA CB
126. LA Rams Davion Taylor Colorado LB
199. LA Rams Tyler Bass Ga. Southern K
234. LA Rams Quez Watkins So. Miss WR
So, I listed them and even explained the biggest question. (That I can see....). What do you think?

I think you need a Running Back and one less WR.

 

[OldSchool]

Not a huge Pittman fan but I agree with coach. Sub in a RB in there at 57 or 104 and it's a pretty darned nice draft IMO.

 

[Ram_Rally]

Not a huge Pittman fan but I agree with coach. Sub in a RB in there at 57 or 104 and it's a pretty darned nice draft IMO.

Which receivers do you like? I like Pittman, but this is a strange year in that the receiver class is so deep/diverse that I'm paranoid about liking the wrong ones lol

 

[OldSchool]

Which receivers do you like? I like Pittman, but this is a strange year in that the receiver class is so deep/diverse that I'm paranoid about liking the wrong ones lol

Guys likely going in the 2nd I'd prefer Higgins and Shenault. If they aren't there in the 2nd for us that means a Center or RB likely fell to us. I'd rather wait until the 3rd or trade down from 57 and get another pick and go for Van Jefferson in the 3rd maybe even Chase Claypool though I'm one of the few that like him in the 3rd or Bryan Edwards. Tyler Johnson in the 4th wouldn't be bad in my book either.

I'd add Raegor to the list but I think he's gone in the first 5 or so picks in the 2nd.

 

[Ram_Rally]

Guys likely going in the 2nd I'd prefer Higgins and Shenault. If they aren't there in the 2nd for us that means a Center or RB likely fell to us. I'd rather wait until the 3rd or trade down from 57 and get another pick and go for Van Jefferson in the 3rd maybe even Chase Claypool though I'm one of the few that like him in the 3rd or Bryan Edwards. Tyler Johnson in the 4th wouldn't be bad in my book either.

I'd add Raegor to the list but I think he's gone in the first 5 or so picks in the 2nd.

So many options. As Marlo Stanfield would say, "one of Dem good problems".

 

[Malibu]

Not a huge Pittman fan but I agree with coach. Sub in a RB in there at 57 or 104 and it's a pretty darned nice draft IMO.

Why you not a Pittman fan the kid had over 100 catches and almost 1200 yards plus USC had two other great WRs which really shows how good he was.

 

[bomebadeeda]

I think you need a Running Back and one less WR.

Picks 199 and 234 were drafted (in my mock....) based on their speed for special teams.And since we didn't resign Mike Thomas, we needed for his spot filled. RBs, can be filled by castoffs or free agents.

But thanks for the review. It is appreciated.

 

[OldSchool]

Why you not a Pittman fan the kid had over 100 catches and almost 1200 yards plus USC had two other great WRs which really shows how good he was.

Don’t care about his production tbh. Pittman is ok but he doesn’t replace Cooks. There’s no speed to his game he isn’t an over the top or beat anybody with speed. If we were replacing Woods or Cooks then maybe but we don’t need a Pittman especially with Higbee‘s emergence last year. Even then he’s uninspirin.

 

[jrry32]

Why you not a Pittman fan the kid had over 100 catches and almost 1200 yards plus USC had two other great WRs which really shows how good he was.

Speaking for myself, while Pittman is big, physical, and impressive in jump-ball situations, I think he's too tightly wound to run our route tree. He's a linear athlete who will be at his best on a scheme that keeps him outside the numbers and lets him work vertical routes (and routes that play off his ability to get vertical).

 

[bomebadeeda]

Speaking for myself, while Pittman is big, physical, and impressive in jump-ball situations, I think he's too tightly wound to run our route tree. He's a linear athlete who will be at his best on a scheme that keeps him outside the numbers and lets him work vertical routes (and routes that play off his ability to get vertical).

I was looking at him being Reynolds replacement next year, hoping he'd advance given a year in system. (Ok....hoping....) Thanks for the review though....

 

[bomebadeeda]

Don’t care about his production tbh. Pittman is ok but he doesn’t replace Cooks. There’s no speed to his game he isn’t an over the top or beat anybody with speed. If we were replacing Woods or Cooks then maybe but we don’t need a Pittman especially with Higbee‘s emergence last year. Even then he’s uninspirin.

Pittman wouldn't be replacing Cooks. I think that scenario has been talked about ad naseum in the Josh Reynolds thread. In my view (this mock...) he'd replace Reynolds when someone would outbid us next offseason.

 

[bomebadeeda]

For the record I know most (if not all....) would prefer Higgins, He went (in the mock....) off the board the first pick of 2nd round. Or he would have been my selection.

 

[OldSchool]

Pittman wouldn't be replacing Cooks. I think that scenario has been talked about ad naseum in the Josh Reynolds thread. In my view (this mock...) he'd replace Reynolds when someone would outbid us next offseason.

Don’t think he could or should be considered as a 4th WR. We’re drafting a WR this year to replace the departing Cooks, who was replaced by Reynold when injured. Just curious how you would want somebody to replace Reynolds who replaced Cooks but the draft pick can’t replace Cooks.

 

[bomebadeeda]

Don’t think he could or should be considered as a 4th WR. We’re drafting a WR this year to replace the departing Cooks, who was replaced by Reynold when injured. Just curious how you would want somebody to replace Reynolds who replaced Cooks but the draft pick can’t replace Cooks.

Because as mentioned in the Josh Reynolds thread. Reynolds wouldn't be replacing Cooks.....Everett is much more likely to get Cooks snaps w/ the evolution of our offense down the stretch. No more 20 yd INs. We're in new territory. We will not be an "attack" offense. We will work on consuming the clock. And our 1 problem area...... Deep red zone. While I won't pretend to understand how picks fit as well as some of our more experienced draft posters, I did at least think this out. other than darts on a dart board... (only reason I'm defending the mock. I'm not "pulling" for anyone to get pick .....other than the center from Wisconsin.....). No I'm not mad. I just want to get my thoughts across from my view.

 

[OldSchool]

Because as mentioned in the Josh Reynolds thread. Reynolds wouldn't be replacing Cooks.....Everett is much more likely to get Cooks snaps w/ the evolution of our offense down the stretch. No more 20 yd INs. We're in new territory. We will not be an "attack" offense. We will work on consuming the clock. And our 1 problem area...... Deep red zone. While I won't pretend to understand how picks fit as well as some of our more experienced draft posters, I did at least think this out. other than darts on a dart board... (only reason I'm defending the mock. I'm not "pulling" for anyone to get pick .....other than the center from Wisconsin.....). No I'm not mad. I just want to get my thoughts across from my view.

That plan leaves us without a WR to take the top off the defense which weakens the defense. I get the thought of him replacing eventually Everett and/or Woods if we don't resign or trade them but we need a guy with speed. Pittman is not that Higgins is better and guys like Mims who we've met with is even faster. McVay's offense is better when there is the threat of a deep ball and our QB throws a pretty damned good one too. Pittman is more of a contested ball/red zone target guy. When I think Pittman I think more of a Anquan Boldin type a big body strong guy though Pittman has issues with with press and tight coverage and needs to work on that.

 

[bomebadeeda]

That plan leaves us without a WR to take the top off the defense which weakens the defense. I get the thought of him replacing eventually Everett and/or Woods if we don't resign or trade them but we need a guy with speed. Pittman is not that Higgins is better and guys like Mims who we've met with is even faster. McVay's offense is better when there is the threat of a deep ball and our QB throws a pretty damned good one too. Pittman is more of a contested ball/red zone target guy. When I think Pittman I think more of a Anquan Boldin type a big body strong guy though Pittman has issues with with press and tight coverage and needs to work on that.

I understand the concept.....except Belichek changed our offense. We do not have the protections in place to throw a 50 yard pass. And as we saw last year, everybody and their dog went to the 6 man front and used at least 1 extra rusher when we didn't run the ball. That made Cooks expendable. (Yes I thought he was a good candidate for somewhere else, when you tallied up the ledger at the midway point of last year. He can still be an effective player.....but not within our offense...).His concussions reinforced the idea. I know...everyone wants the same success. But now we have to do it other ways. and adjust our personnel accordingly. Was Pittman the right guy? I have no earthly idea. But he brings something to the table others don't possess and it might fit within the "real" McVay offense (the one he ran at Washington......).

 

[OldSchool]

I understand the concept.....except Belichek changed our offense. We do not have the protections in place to throw a 50 yard pass. And as we saw last year, everybody and their dog went to the 6 man front and used at least 1 extra rusher when we didn't run the ball. That made Cooks expendable. (Yes I thought he was a good candidate for somewhere else, when you tallied up the ledger at the midway point of last year. He can still be an effective player.....but not within our offense...).His concussions reinforced the idea. I know...everyone wants the same success. But now we have to do it other ways. and adjust our personnel accordingly. Was Pittman the right guy? I have no earthly idea. But he brings something to the table others don't possess and it might fit within the "real" McVay offense (the one he ran at Washington......).

So McVay is going to change his offense and you're directing that change? You're going to adjust it to the offense his last year he was with the Redskins with a lot of TE action. An offense that had DeSean Jackson a one trick pony for deep balls Also as for not having the protections needed your first pick was a center the weakest link going forward on the OLine to improve that protection.

 

[bomebadeeda]

So McVay is going to change his offense and you're directing that change? You're going to adjust it to the offense his last year he was with the Redskins with a lot of TE action. An offense that had DeSean Jackson a one trick pony for deep balls Also as for not having the protections needed your first pick was a center the weakest link going forward on the OLine to improve that protection.

So, You are not acknowledging what defenses did to us. You are playing blackboard football where every play works. Every time! Protections don't work if defenses are able to hit it quickly and the 6 man front did that. You are right. DeSean Jackson had a couple of great years.....but in none of the games did they see a 6 man front. The key to that is utilize the tight ends hitting quick passes.....um.... kind of like we saw of Higbee down the stretch. McVay adapted not by butting his head against the wall like the the first part of the season. He realized a ball control offense using the defenses own tendencies against itself. And while Jackson had success, you'd been hard pressed to say the tight ends weren't highlighted. (DeSean led the league in yards per catch. Jordan Reed led the
Redskins in catches). But as your nickname states, It's not going to be something you embrace until it's established over a long time frame. We both will stay with our points. Have a good evening.

 

[OldSchool]

So, You are not acknowledging what defenses did to us. You are playing blackboard football where every play works. Every time! Protections don't work if defenses are able to hit it quickly and the 6 man front did that. You are right. DeSean Jackson had a couple of great years.....but in none of the games did they see a 6 man front. The key to that is utilize the tight ends hitting quick passes.....um.... kind of like we saw of Higbee down the stretch. McVay adapted not by butting his head against the wall like the the first part of the season. He realized a ball control offense using the defenses own tendencies against itself. And while Jackson had success, you'd been hard pressed to say the tight ends weren't highlighted. (DeSean led the league in yards per catch. Jordan Reed led the
Redskins in catches). But as your nickname states, It's not going to be something you embrace until it's established over a long time frame. We both will stay with our points. Have a good evening.

The offense has been ball control run oriented under McVay from day one. And as for TE he used Kupp and Woods here like he used Davis and Reed in Washington. Sorry we've gone far afield here this started out with me saying I think there are WR's who are better for what our offense is lacking than Pittman.

And your comments about my nickname and me not being happy are honestly silly. I don't give 2 shits how the offense is executed. Based off what McVay has done on offense he wants a guy who can take the top off the defense. And again I don't think Pittman is the best option for us to get that in this draft.