How Many Wrs In This Draft Are Potentially Better Than Rams Wrs?

[iced]

Yup. We are all hoping that at least one of our WRs will step up big time this year. Sure, there's a decent chance that it happens. But, that doesn't it isn't a good idea to add a high quality WR to the mix.

My belief is that when a potentially great WR is staring you in the face in the draft, it's very hard to pass on him. But if you think you can get a WR that is better than what you have on your team with your next pick, then maybe you wait and take a more pressing need if the need position has a guy rated comparably to the WR.

And this is the premise behind my original post.

To me, the WR position is a NEED position...and at the top of the draft this year with the talent available, the biggest need.

 

[max]

To me, the WR position is a NEED position...and at the top of the draft this year with the talent available, the biggest need.

Not sure WR is the biggest need. We need a FS, for sure. And the OL has a lot of question marks now.

 

[iced]

Not sure WR is the biggest need. We need a FS, for sure. And the OL has a lot of question marks now.

only question mark at OL is the other guard spot.

I don't think I've ever seen a guard go in the top 5 before...usually that's cause you can get them later in the draft and they've never been the premium pick like an LT.

Rams allowed 36 sacks this season, thats 7th best. Zac stacy almost hit 1k yards in 12 games...

^ there's no franchise lows there.. in fact that's pretty good..

Boudreau makes it work despite what talent he gets; can't say the same for richard sherman.

We had a TOP 5 LT before injury - we don't even have a top 50 WR.

 

[max]

only question mark at OL is the other guard spot.

I don't think I've ever seen a guard go in the top 5 before...usually that's cause you can get them later in the draft and they've never been the premium pick like an LT.

Rams allowed 36 sacks this season, thats 7th best. Zac stacy almost hit 1k yards in 12 games...

^ there's no franchise lows there.. in fact that's pretty good..

Boudreau makes it work despite what talent he gets; can't say the same for richard sherman.

We had a TOP 5 LT before injury - we don't even have a top 50 WR.

Well, there is a question whether we sign Saffold. And there's another question regarding an OT coming off ACL surgery who has been injured every year the last 3 years.

 

[rdlkgliders]

No question the WR position needs to Improve, The VJ comparisons are certainly based on optimism and somewhat on size and speed both are large and fast 6'3 quick
6'5 Jackson. Really Quick is basically the exact size of Fitzgerald. Just to be clear Yes Max our WR position is subpar Givens, is not physical enough Pettis has trouble getting open, Quick has been discussed and Bailey's sample size to small. I stand by my prediction that we will have at least one new face next year.

 

[iced]

Well, there is a question whether we sign Saffold. And there's another question regarding an OT coming off ACL surgery who has been injured every year the last 3 years.

"You don't draft a player because of injury"

We do want to resign saffold.

http://www.rotoworld.com/teams/nfl/stl/st-louis-rams

Rams GM Les Snead acknowledged he'd like to re-sign impending free agent G/T Rodger Saffold.

The Rams seem to favor Saffold as a guard, while he might see himself as a tackle. He started six games at right guard and drew rave reviews from Pro Football Focus' game charters. Saffold showed truly elite run-blocking skills in those starts. Coach Jeff Fisher pinpointed Saffold's ability to "pull" from the guard spot. The Rams are expected to release RG Harvey Dahl, so Saffold could be re-signed and plugged in there. He may choose to test the market first.

 

[Rams and Gators]

"You don't draft a player because of injury"

We do want to resign saffold.

http://www.rotoworld.com/teams/nfl/stl/st-louis-rams

To be fair that quote could mean anything, it could mean "we weren't going to draft a LT before Long got injured, and we aren't now" or it could mean "When we draft a LT it won't be because Long got injured, it will be because he's a very good player and we believe he will have a big impact on the team"

 

[iced]

To be fair that quote could mean anything, it could mean "we weren't going to draft a LT before Long got injured, and we aren't now" or it could mean "When we draft a LT it won't be because Long got injured, it will be because he's a very good player and we believe he will have a big impact on the team"

it was in response to a question about long...

 

[RamFan503]

I'm just looking at his ceiling. He's 5'10" and not all that fast. I really like him, but he was a 3rd round pick for a reason. He's a tough little guy, but he's physically limited. The guys I listed could all go in the first round or second round.

And Cooks is.....

 

[Rams and Gators]

it was in response to a question about long...

I don't see what question would lead to that response meaning we're opening Sam up to get sacked every time he drops back, which is what we're doing if we don't draft an OT.

 

[RamFan503]

Yeah, now Bailey is Isaac Bruce. Here we go.

Nice.

 

[CoachO]

From one angle I can agree with you about the stats. Although saying things like "you lose all credibility" is why they invented the word "hyperbole". But lets just move past that and get to the meat. As I read and understand your post (and maybe I don't understand it) you seem to be saying that you can't use stats in this discussion. When you say that you lose all credibility (see how that sounds? :wink: I'm not serious of course) because without stats what non subjective criteria can you use for judging potential? Apparently if you have a back up QB or a different but similar factor you are forbidden to evaluate these players. Do you just just put them in limbo? Until YOU feel the various other conditions are equal. It's my belief that you look at the stats, consider the other factors like having a backup QB and weigh those 100 catches differently than the 100 the other WR got with a good QB throwing to him.

Can you compare stats compiled in college to those achieved in the NFL? Not directly but in the context of judging potential then I'd say sure. How do you judge potential? You can look at things like did he catch the ball at it's apex or did he not, thus allowing it to be contested. If he caught it in both instances then the stats tell you nothing but the fact that he did catch it is important. So a very thorough eyeball evaluation is critical when evaluating potential. But stats do tell a huge part of the story. What was his catch/drop rate? How many targets did he get? Does he get lots of YAC? If his YAC is small but his yardage is large then it probably means he's able to get open deep very often versus taking a short pass and getting huge amounts of YAC. Stats play a huge part in every evaluation. Without them the whole enterprise becomes purely subjective and whose subjective opinion is right?

Stats certainly aren't the be all end all of the evaluation but they play a huge part in it. IMO of course.

I am not saying that STATS are not useful, as long as they are comparable situations. In the case of the Rams, and their passing game, raw numbers just don't tell the story. That's MY point. Trying to compare the Rams WRs in terms of catches, TDs, total Yards just doesn't depict an accurate measuring stick. Then add in the fact that it changed DRAMATICALLY when they lost their starting QB, it only makes the comparison even more skewed.

I have said this too many times to count. Take Brian Quick for example. If you are ONLY looking at his raw numbers in the categories mentioned above, then you are left with no there outcome. He is severely lacking when compared to others around the league. But if you take into account, that by no fault of his own, he just was not targeted once Bradford went down.

Everyone is now on the Stedman Bailey bandwagon. Why? Because he caught 2-3 passes a game I the final month of the season? If you strictly go by the raw numbers, this would say he isn't very good either. But if you compared his "production" to that of the other WRs on THIS TEAM, it seems to jump out at you. Why is that? I would like to see the number of targets Bailey and Pettis had, compared to the other WRs on the Rams once Clemens took over. Not catches, but TARGETS. To me, those are the STATS that need to be examined when you are trying to "evaluate" these guys.

That doesn't even begin to suggest comparing these to the likes of A. Jeffrey. Look at the pure number of targets he got, and compare that to the number of targets the rest of his teammates got. Throw in the variable of having someone like B. Marshall on the field and you can see how SUBJECTIVE these comparisons become. Simply cannot just go by the raw numbers.

 

[DeweyCheatem-n-Howe]

There's potential on the team already. I'm not of the opinion that you need a Megatron to be a successful passing team, you need multiple guys who are all capable and who fill different, complementary roles.

Austin: Shifty, speedy guy who is dangerous in space
Pettis: Reliable hands, sticks-mover, good route runner, great size
Bailey: See Pettis, but with better hands and better speed, not as good size
Quick: Size/speed combo, can attack multiple levels of the field
Givens: Deep threat. Little more, just pure speed for "go" and slant routes
Cook: Size/speed combo, can attack multiple levels of the field, more experienced than Quick

All of these guys are either pretty good or getting better at what they do. If you add a Sammy Watkins, you're overall improved, but I personally don't see it as necessary. Lee would probably fill the role Givens inhabits. Not a big fan of Evans - he'd hypothetically be somewhere between Pettis and Quick in terms of role.

The one I'd see as real value is Matthews from Vandy - big, fast, SEC competition, could step in for Pettis or Quick (or rotate with them). He'd also probably be available if you trade down towards the end of the 1st... possibly even at our pick in the 2nd (or if we trade down with someone like Oakland and end up with their 2nd).

 

[iced]

I don't see what question would lead to that response meaning we're opening Sam up to get sacked every time he drops back, which is what we're doing if we don't draft an OT.

rams were 7th in sacks allowed this year with 35

 

[Rams and Gators]

rams were 7th in sacks allowed this year with 35

With Long as LT not with Hooey (is it Hooey? I'm sure someone said Hooey )

 

[iced]

With Long as LT not with Hooey (is it Hooey? I'm sure someone said Hooey )

lol Chris williams filled in for at LT after saffold went down

 

[max]

"You don't draft a player because of injury"

We do want to resign saffold.

http://www.rotoworld.com/teams/nfl/stl/st-louis-rams

I can understand not drafting because of AN injury. But we are talking about a guy who has a long history of INJURIES, plural. And I think that's different. This is Long's 3 straight year with a major injury. The indications are there that he is breaking down. As Gil Brandt said, when a player gets a couple of major injuries the odds are very high that more will come soon.

So I think it's careless not to be prepared for when Jake goes down again.

 

[Rams and Gators]

lol Chris williams filled in for at LT after saffold went down

Isn't he a free agent though, and a horrible OT?

 

[DeweyCheatem-n-Howe]

Isn't he a free agent though, and a horrible OT?

Yes and yes. Also a horrible guard.

 

[iced]

I can understand not drafting because of AN injury. But we are talking about a guy who has a long history of INJURIES, plural. And I think that's different. This is Long's 3 straight year with a major injury. The indications are there that he is breaking down. As Gil Brandt said, when a player gets a couple of major injuries the odds are very high that more will come soon.

So I think it's careless not to be prepared for when Jake goes down again.

I'd share your concern if it were multiple injuries to the same place, like a danario alexander..

but that's not the case - it's not a reinjury of the same spot.