Deandre Hopkins

  • 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.

fastcat

Pro Bowler
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
1,197
He looks like he can step into any offense right now and start. Doesnt look like a #1 wr but he will get open and catch the ball. He may not be explosive but he looks like a safe wr pickup! I still like Austin, Hunter, and Patterson over him becuase they are explosive.
 

rams24/7

Pro Bowler
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
1,870
Name
Nick
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #22
libertadrocks said:
rams24/7 said:
You're saying he benefited from having talent around him. So what's your point? Is it his fault he played on a good team? I didn't hear people say that Julio Jones was a guy who played on a team with a great backfield, o-line, and defense when he came out. They game him credit for what he accomplished. Sure Nuke benefited from having Ellington, Boyd, and Watkins (at times), but the tape doesn't lie. He had a great year.

Never said he was Fitz, I was simply making the 40 time comparison

I'm saying when you play on an explosive offense, there are more TDs being scored. So to measure a guy on the basis of TDs isnt the most wise metric.

I'm not going to take anything away from Hopkins. He was a stud last year. But, IMO, you dont take guys like Hopkins in the first. His ceiling isnt high enough. He doesnt have the speed or the size.

Fitz ran a 4.4 and measured 6-3. Both better than Hopkins.

But these aren't just 10 yard TDs he's racking up 30, 40, 50, and 60 yd TDs. Does it help having the Jamarcus Russell armed Taj Boyd throwing to him & Ellington keep Ds honest? Sure. But at some point the WR needs to make plays too.

I think his ceiling may not be as high as a guy like Patterson, but that doesn't mean he won't be a better pro.

<a class="postlink" href="https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=larry+fitzgerald+40+yard+time&oq=larry+fitzgerald+40&gs_l=serp.3.2.0l3.2205.3265.0.5290.3.3.0.0.0.0.89.230.3.3.0.eappsweb..0.0...1.1.11.psy-ab.JYqNAsF3-uc&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=a7c4fb31ba5989b5&biw=1366&bih=667" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=p ... 66&bih=667</a>

Idk where you're getting your 40 times. I remember following Fitz out of Pitt & his 40 time was widely publicized and over-dramatized. He ran a 4.63, which I'd say even today isn't a terrible time for a WR, though 4.4s & 4.5s are preferred.
 

libertadrocks

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
2,224
rams24/7 said:
libertadrocks said:
rams24/7 said:
You're saying he benefited from having talent around him. So what's your point? Is it his fault he played on a good team? I didn't hear people say that Julio Jones was a guy who played on a team with a great backfield, o-line, and defense when he came out. They game him credit for what he accomplished. Sure Nuke benefited from having Ellington, Boyd, and Watkins (at times), but the tape doesn't lie. He had a great year.

Never said he was Fitz, I was simply making the 40 time comparison

I'm saying when you play on an explosive offense, there are more TDs being scored. So to measure a guy on the basis of TDs isnt the most wise metric.

I'm not going to take anything away from Hopkins. He was a stud last year. But, IMO, you dont take guys like Hopkins in the first. His ceiling isnt high enough. He doesnt have the speed or the size.

Fitz ran a 4.4 and measured 6-3. Both better than Hopkins.

But these aren't just 10 yard TDs he's racking up 30, 40, 50, and 60 yd TDs. Does it help having the Jamarcus Russell armed Taj Boyd throwing to him & Ellington keep Ds honest? Sure. But at some point the WR needs to make plays too.

I think his ceiling may not be as high as a guy like Patterson, but that doesn't mean he won't be a better pro.

<a class="postlink" href="https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=psy-ab&q=larry+fitzgerald+40+yard+time&oq=larry+fitzgerald+40&gs_l=serp.3.2.0l3.2205.3265.0.5290.3.3.0.0.0.0.89.230.3.3.0.eappsweb..0.0...1.1.11.psy-ab.JYqNAsF3-uc&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=a7c4fb31ba5989b5&biw=1366&bih=667" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=p ... 66&bih=667</a>

Idk where you're getting your 40 times. I remember following Fitz out of Pitt & his 40 time was widely publicized and over-dramatized. He ran a 4.63, which I'd say even today isn't a terrible time for a WR, though 4.4s & 4.5s are preferred.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=27220&draftyear=2004&genpos=WR

X, I think Pettis is actually a very favorable comparison to Hopkins. I think Hopkins is a bit better at everything. He isnt marketable better tho. Not enough to draft him at 16 or 22.

BTW are you still cool with X as a name. I feel like if a start using Dude then then the comment doesn't necessarily sound like it's directed toward you lol
 

lockdnram21

Legend
Joined
Apr 21, 2013
Messages
5,348
rams24/7 said:
jrry32 said:
rams24/7 said:
-Tavon Austin: Triple threat with the ability to catch, run, and return. Sick open field moves with speed to boot. Size IS a concern for me, but not the main one. Too many people forget or just disregard the fact that Jared Cook played 70% of his PT at TENN in the SLOT. That means the other 30% of the time or the rare occasion of a 4 WR set Austin would be on the field. I'm sorry but that is way too few offensive snaps a game for the #16 pick.

Or the Rams will use Cook and Austin in the slot simultaneously like the Pats did with Welker. Or the Rams will play Austin at Flanker. Or the Rams will use Cook inline at TE or at Flanker. There's not a set spot for either player. Both are versatile and both are capable of playing 3 or 4 different positions on offense.

On top of that, Austin would contribute as a KR and PR. So I'm not buying this argument.

But I guess we'll see. If the Rams pass on Austin, maybe they do.

Using Cook and Austin in the slot would happen very infrequently. We rarely used 4 WR sets in 2012, and even when were in come from behind passing situations we often went with 3 WR.

I don't think Austin can consistently win on the outside in the NFL due to his size. He has great speed but it will be negated if he can get off the press of divisional corners like Richard Sherman.

Cook at in-line is the scenario that would occur most imo, but I still don't see the Rams doing that much. I have a feeling they'd like to have Kendricks at in-line as much as possible with the blocking skills he possesses.

I just don't think Austin warrants the #16 overall pick. Ace Sanders is a poor man's Austin, and would cost a fraction of the price (rds 3-5).

The Rams need a legit outside presence to pair with Givens, more than they need a slot guy. I understand the unique skill set Austin brings to the table, but I'll respectfully disagree with you.

How do you know they dont want want a outside receiver to pair wit quick. I think givens can be the playmaker that harvin is. The rams should use him like harvin. He can return kicks to if we can find special teams that doesnt get penalties we would be fine. I know every body wants givens to play outside but I think he would be better if you move him around. Back field he use to play running back, slot, and he could go on those deep patterns. If this team gets hopkins , hunter or patterson we would have the play makers.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
lockdnram21 said:
How do you know they dont want want a outside receiver to pair wit quick.

FWIW, when Les Snead was asked about Patterson or one of the bigger receivers, he replied with something along the lines of "We already have one of those (in quick)"
 

DR RAM

Rams Lifer
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
12,111
Name
Rambeau
iced said:
lockdnram21 said:
How do you know they dont want want a outside receiver to pair wit quick.

FWIW, when Les Snead was asked about Patterson or one of the bigger receivers, he replied with something along the lines of "We already have one of those (in quick)"
Yeah, I don't remember hearing this, but really a good point, and one that I have been echoing. Why bring in the same type of guy, when we have other needs? You either bring in a game-changer(Patterson), or bring in a different flavor, or need(Tavon). Now, I personally don't think that Patterson and Quick are the same, but I do think that Hopkins, Rogers, and Allen are similar to Quick. But, Patterson, T. Austin, Hunter, Woods, Williams, Wheaton, Bailey, Patton, Dobson, Stills, Ace Sanders, King, and Goodwin all are like good fits to me, and I am happy that this, IMO, seems like a pretty deep WR class.


It's ALL about change/match-ups.
 

kurtfaulk

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
16,598
iced said:
lockdnram21 said:
How do you know they dont want want a outside receiver to pair wit quick.

FWIW, when Les Snead was asked about Patterson or one of the bigger receivers, he replied with something along the lines of "We already have one of those (in quick)"

he also said something along the lines of "don't believe all the shit that comes out of my mouth before the draft".

if hopkins is their guy so be it, i'm not gonna whine about it.

i'm all in on hunter though.

i'm betting they get their guy at #16 and then trade back the #22 pick to the end of the 1st or beginning of the 2nd and take the wr they like.

.
 

DR RAM

Rams Lifer
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
12,111
Name
Rambeau
kurtfaulk said:
iced said:
lockdnram21 said:
How do you know they dont want want a outside receiver to pair wit quick.

FWIW, when Les Snead was asked about Patterson or one of the bigger receivers, he replied with something along the lines of "We already have one of those (in quick)"

he also said something along the lines of "don't believe all the shit that comes out of my mouth before the draft".

if hopkins is their guy so be it, i'm not gonna whine about it.

i'm all in on hunter though.

i'm betting they get their guy at #16 and then trade back the #22 pick to the end of the 1st or beginning of the 2nd and take the wr they like.

.
And picking Hopkins is fine if they think that Quick can NOT make it. It's good to admit your failures. Too many teams "fuck up" based on their pride.
 

nighttrain

Legend
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
9,216
Hopkins ha been mentioned several times by Wagoner as a player of interest, fwiw
train
 

den-the-coach

Fifty-four Forty or Fight
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
23,002
Name
Dennis
So let me be the first to post I'm not a fan of drafting Hopkins...IMO he's a 2nd round talent. "He's the most ready" But what do you really get? He has pedestrian speed and does not seem to get great separation. He does have great hands, but although the original thread does request to refrain from the rented hotel room, why?

Just seems to me like Hopkins would be the guy you settle for...You could not get the pretty girl so you settle for her friend who has a great personality. I would rather go with Justin Hunter or Robert Woods. IMO Hunter at 22 if Austin is gone or Woods in round two.

I'm hoping Hopkins is a smoke screen and Justin Hunter is the way the Rams go if Austin is gone. Hunter is taller & faster and if the Rams are going to select a WR in the first round I want someone with sub 4.5 speed!
 

Angry Ram

Captain RAmerica Original Rammer
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
18,000
DR RAM said:
kurtfaulk said:
iced said:
lockdnram21 said:
How do you know they dont want want a outside receiver to pair wit quick.

FWIW, when Les Snead was asked about Patterson or one of the bigger receivers, he replied with something along the lines of "We already have one of those (in quick)"

he also said something along the lines of "don't believe all the shit that comes out of my mouth before the draft".

if hopkins is their guy so be it, i'm not gonna whine about it.

i'm all in on hunter though.

i'm betting they get their guy at #16 and then trade back the #22 pick to the end of the 1st or beginning of the 2nd and take the wr they like.

.
And picking Hopkins is fine if they think that Quick can NOT make it. It's good to admit your failures. Too many teams "fuck up" based on their pride.

I don't believe that to be the case.

Losing 2, there's only 3 WRs (real WRs, not TEs). And I'm not so sure about Austin Pettis as an every down outside guy...he's fine for the RZ and being that possession WR.

I think there would be plenty of room for "Nuke" and Brian Quick.