Here's My Problem With Robinson

[ChrisW]

So the same argument could be made for Clowney here @ChrisW . Do the Rams not take Clowney at 2nd overall if they think he's a once in a lifetime prospect? They already have 2 great defensive ends.

I get where you're coming from. But, I view the situation with Clowney as different. His effectiveness would come from being moved around the line, and exploiting the O-line weaknesses, and taking double teams to free Long and Quinn.

 

[jrry32]

So, you'd take him on a trade down. Where could you take Robinson to play LG, and not get better value at a different position at the top of this draft? 4-6? That could work, but is still high for a guard, IMO

Is it high for a LT? If the answer is no then you should not oppose the pick. Because Robinson still has his LT skill-set no matter where he starts out.

But regardless, I don't really care if it's high for a Guard. If I think the guy is going to be a dominant player for me, I'll draft him.

As far as better "value" goes, who are these better values? WR? No.

 

[jrry32]

Jake Long is known for his run blocking right? We should move him to RT and draft Matthews to play LT. I'm not sold on Robinson either, boom or bust imo. Off field concerns that nobody is pointing out as well - two older brothers in and out of prison for drugs, owes college teammates $ he borrowed to pay mom and sibs rent, etc etc. Matthews is a much safer pick. Didn't Alex Barron and Jason Smith climb the big board in similar fashion too?

Not sure why nobody else has said these things about Robinson...

Because it's a stretch. And no, Barron didn't climb the board. If anything he fell because he was a top tier talent that just didn't have the desire and teams wisely passed on him.

 

[ChrisW]

Is it high for a LT? If the answer is no then you should not oppose the pick. Because Robinson still has his LT skill-set no matter where he starts out.

But regardless, I don't really care if it's high for a Guard. If I think the guy is going to be a dominant player for me, I'll draft him.

As far as better "value" goes, who are these better values? WR? No.

If Watkins is there and we are picking at 4, yes the value is higher. I'd rather take Watkins at 4, and take a guard in the second. Then take Robinson at 4, to start him at guard for a couple of years.

 

[jrry32]

If Watkins is there and we are picking at 4, yes the value is higher. I'd rather take Watkins at 4, and take a guard in the second. Then take Robinson at 4, to start him at guard for a couple of years.

It's not higher. Would you take Sammy Watkins over Jonathan Ogden?

The WR position value is entirely overrated.

 

[Username]

I get where you're coming from. But, I view the situation with Clowney as different. His effectiveness would come from being moved around the line, and exploiting the O-line weaknesses, and taking double teams to free Long and Quinn.

I agree. There would still be A LOT of value in drafting Clowney. Just as their would be drafting Robinson and putting him at guard for a little while.

If Watkins is there and we are picking at 4, yes the value is higher. I'd rather take Watkins at 4, and take a guard in the second. Then take Robinson at 4, to start him at guard for a couple of years.

Jake Long isn't going to last another 2 years. This is about putting out the most dominate line out there. Coming off the ACL the Rams may even be tempted to start Robinson at tackle until Long gets back to 100%. God knows he'd get plenty of reps in camp.

 

[ChrisW]

It's not higher. Would you take Sammy Watkins over Jonathan Ogden?

The WR position value is entirely overrated.

You can't compare Sammy to Ogden. A rookie who has never played a down vs. a top guy like Ogden.

If we are comparing top talent at the top of a draft like that, it would be Megatron vs. Ogden.

 

[jrry32]

You can't compare Sammy to Ogden. A rookie who has never played a down vs. a top guy like Ogden.

If we are comparing top talent at the top of a draft like that, it would be Megatron vs. Ogden.

No, it wouldn't. Because Sammy isn't Megatron. You're saying a WR is more valuable than a guy who starts his career out at OG. So would you have advocated passing on Ogden because he was starting his career out at OG and just taking an OG in the 2nd? Do you think that would have been a good plan? If no, why do you think it's a good plan now?

 

[ChrisW]

Fair enough, @Username. But if we are going to stick a guy out of position on the line, I'd rather it be a guy like Matthews, who has plenty experience at different positions.

 

[ChrisW]

No, it wouldn't. Because Sammy isn't Megatron. You're saying a WR is more valuable than a guy who starts his career out at OG. So would you have advocated passing on Ogden because he was starting his career out at OG and just taking an OG in the 2nd? Do you think that would have been a good plan? If no, why do you think it's a good plan now?

And you're saying that Robinson is Ogden. I can't go along with that. It's all fine using hindsight, but applying it to this situation when you have no idea what kind of career Robinson will have, and just assuming it will be to the caliber that Ogden is not fair, in the least.

If both were on the board @ number 4, and I had two starting tackles I would take the receiver.

 

[laramsoriginal]

I would like Robinson or Watkins but not at #2. Trading down is a must imo then If Mathews, Robinson, or Watkins are available, take one of them.

 

[jrry32]

And you're saying that Robinson is Ogden. I can't go along with that. It's all fine using hindsight, but applying it to this situation when you have no idea what kind of career Robinson will have, and just assuming it will be to the caliber that Ogden is not fair, in the least.

If both were on the board @ number 4, and I had two starting tackles I would take the receiver.

I'm not saying Robinson is Ogden. I'm pointing out a flaw in your logic with a proven player.

Do you think it would have been a good idea to pass on Ogden because they could have gotten an OG in the 2nd?

It doesn't matter if we HAVE two starting tackles. We're not drafting for today. People get too hung up on instant gratification. Joseph Barksdale is a FA after 2014. Jake Long is coming off of 3 straight years of major season ending injuries and we don't know how long he'll be with us. It's planning for the future. It's a whole hell of a lot harder to find a starting LT than it is a starting WR. We can grab a starting WR later on in the draft...whether that's at #13 or in later rounds, if we want to, a whole lot easier than finding a guy that can play at a high level at OG from day 1 with the potential to start at LT.

And getting past the LT position, the LG position is pretty damn important. Especially to us. Sam can do big things with average or worse WRs. He does not do well when he's not protected. His game is much more reliant on the offensive line than the WR corp.

 

[ChrisW]

@jrry32 . I don't think I have a flaw with my logic. Everything I do, I calculate the odds in my head. The odds say that taking Robinson that high to play guard isn't as good of a use of resources as taking a guy like Watkins to play his natural position.

I agree that we should draft to solidify the future. And if I'm taking a guy to play out of position, I'm banking on Matthews who has more experience at different positions. He may be a little on the small side for guard, though.

I agree that LG is very important. And more so for us, because that position is open for anyone to take. I just think that we can fill that position later in the draft, and perform just as well.

Having said all that, if we did take Robinson, and he ends up going to the pro-bowl at LG. I will make a thread, a point out to you that I was wrong.

 

[rams24/7]

My reply would be, How often do coaches use first round picks on the chance that someone will get hurt? and....First round picks are most always meant to be instant contributors, correct? Are we picking Robinson to be used down the road when Long retires? Again, a waste of a pick.

First off a top LT prospect that can start immediately at LG or LT is a great pick imo. Long's long-term health is a concern, plus even if he stayed healthy in 2014, Robinson would be a cheaper, healthier, more athletic LT in 2015. Imo you draft for the future. Not all top prospects contribute in a major way year 1, see Quinn.

Let me ask you a question. Was Aaron Rogers a bad pick because he sat behind Farve for a few years? IMO Robinson can be a top LT in the NFL, so the investment will pay off in the long run

 

[LosAngelesRams]

Matthews has significant time at both Right and Left tackle. He's got the versatility that Fisher loves.

yea I agree, he's much more polished. Which is why id much rather see him in horns regardless of the combine results.

 

[DR RAM]

yea I agree, he's much more polished. Which is why id much rather see him in horns regardless of the combine results.

I thought his combine was great.

 

[jrry32]

@jrry32 . I don't think I have a flaw with my logic. Everything I do, I calculate the odds in my head. The odds say that taking Robinson that high to play guard isn't as good of a use of resources as taking a guy like Watkins to play his natural position.

Well, that's flaw #1. The assumption of a singular "natural position". Robinson played Guard in high school. He was recruited as a Guard to Auburn before moving to Left Tackle. Robinson's "natural positions" are both OG and OT.

I agree that we should draft to solidify the future. And if I'm taking a guy to play out of position, I'm banking on Matthews who has more experience at different positions. He may be a little on the small side for guard, though.

I prefer Matthews too but Robinson has more experience at Guard. And I don't really consider either Tackle or Guard spot to be "out of position" for Matthews or Robinson. It would be akin to me arguing that if Watkins plays the Z instead of the X, he's out of position.

I agree that LG is very important. And more so for us, because that position is open for anyone to take. I just think that we can fill that position later in the draft, and perform just as well.

So could the Ravens. But guys like Robinson and Ogden go higher for a very good reason.(you can add Matthews to that list too)

Having said all that, if we did take Robinson, and he ends up going to the pro-bowl at LG. I will make a thread, a point out to you that I was wrong.

Fair enough.

 

[jrry32]

I thought his combine was great.

Agreed.

 

[LosAngelesRams]

I thought his combine was great.

it was. but he scored lower then Robinson and Lewman in some areas. Right?

 

[jrry32]

it was. but he scored lower then Robinson and Lewman in some areas. Right?

Yea but those are also the least important part of the combine.