Its official... we draft Robinson

[Ramsey]

So he caught 30 passes over the entire season that were 6+ yards down the field.

Why compare it to Kelvin Benjamin? Why not compare it to his closest competition in Mike Evans?

Mike Evans caught 12 passes from 6-10 yards, 10 passes from 11-20 yards, and 17 passes that were 20+ yards down the field. Evans's drop rate was 4.29% and he averaged 7.63 yards after the catch.

So why would we favor Watkins over Evans who dropped less passes while making more difficult catches?

And couldn't someone easily claim that Watkins struggles catching passes 6+ yards down the field because he only caught 30 passes in that range this year despite having over 100 catches? That's the logic a lot of people use when they say Robinson isn't a good pass blocker.

I can't read your mind dude. I'm not a secretary, who is paid to get you the figures you want. Chop chop! I like Mike Evans, and Evans compares well. Let's draft Mike Evans, after we trade back.

You asked why should WE should favor Wakins over Evans. Since you are included in WE, why don't you answer your own question? Why should you favor Watkins over Evans?

 

[jrry32]

I can't read your mind dude. I'm not a secretary, who is paid to get you the figures you want. Chop chop! I like Mike Evans, and Evans compares well. Let's draft Mike Evans, after we trade back.

You asked why should WE should favor Wakins over Evans. Since you are included in WE, why don't you answer your own question? Why should you favor Watkins over Evans?

Well, the comparison didn't make much sense all things considered. Evans is Watkins's direct competition. I could understand the Benjamin comparison if they were similar players but him and Watkins aren't.

Regardless, the point I'm making here is that Robinson seems to be held to a bit of a different standard than Watkins. We assume that Watkins can be a great down the field WR in the NFL because of his skill-set. But that wasn't his role in college. And yet some think it's wrong to assume that Robinson can be a great pass blocker in the NFL because of his skill-set when he wasn't used in that role in college.

Not that either one is particularly wrong. I'm saying the logic can be easily flipped.

 

[VARAMS]

I am convinced we need another 2nd round pick - especially in this deep draft - so we will trade down at 1.2 or 1.13 to pick that up. If we trade down 1.2 - probably to 1.6 or lower - we need to pick best available - Clowney/Watkins/Mack/Robinson/Matthews. Once we get one of these elite players - we can use our 2nd 1st round pick and our 2 2nd round picks for positional needs - which we have many - FS/OG/CB/WR. In this scenario - how does Watkins/Pryor/Verrett/Yankey sound in our 1st 4 picks. Sounds like 4 young, talented starters to kick us up a couple notches over next 2 years to me.

 

[RamzFanz]

Yes we all would love clowney, I would love to have him 2... but too bad we only can pick up one player at number 2.. and i feel were gonna either bang a really good deal for our number 2... or

we draft Greg Robinson.

In football. it all starts with your line. Offensive and Defensive.

Our Defense of line is pretty damn good.. Good enough to where we will look past clowney.
I'm sorry.. i know i've posted that we take him... I've also posted that we will take robinson, and
a month or two ago i probley said we would take Sammy Watkins..

But in all reality, We need to make sure our offensive line is gonna hold up.. and jake long and saffold apparently shown last year and previous years, yes they are good football players, but they have a hard time staying healthy...

on that note, fisher is no dummy ( i hope ) and realizes.. we need to pick up this boy greg robinson..
yes theres other big OL in this draft, but when it comes down to it. Greg Robinson is super fit for our team and the NFL period.

so yes, today my first draft choice in this years NFL draft is Greg Robinson.
Feel free to disagree but you'll only be lying to yourself.

If were going forward with Bradford, We will be investing in protecting the man and keeping him up healthy in this years season. with the said... OL at pick #2... ( if we don't trade down a few picks..)

at #13 is it?.... Pryor will be on our rams team too... He's a beast..
then well continue to build a Dirty Dirty Defense because thats what Fisher is about. and he knows thats what wins games at the end of the day. ( SF and Seahawks for instants )

So enough of the jib jab if its Clowney or Watkins...

Welcome our boy Greg Robinson to the team fella's
Cause we in HERE. Rams nation. Rams on Demand with the Ring on our hand.
2014-2015 , LETS GO!

NEW YORK RAMS FANS STAND UP!

Robinson is not good at pass protection. It's JC for sure if we don't trade down and he's there. If we don't trade down and Texas takes JC, then maybe.

I would love to see Robinson for the run game but number 2? Never gonna happen. What I would LOVE is a trade up from 13 that grabs Robinson or Watkins or Mathews. 2 will be JC though. Quinn/Clowney is too nasty to avoid.

 

[Ramsey]

Well, the comparison didn't make much sense all things considered. Evans is Watkins's direct competition. I could understand the Benjamin comparison if they were similar players but him and Watkins aren't.

Regardless, the point I'm making here is that Robinson seems to be held to a bit of a different standard than Watkins. We assume that Watkins can be a great down the field WR in the NFL because of his skill-set. But that wasn't his role in college. And yet some think it's wrong to assume that Robinson can be a great pass blocker in the NFL because of his skill-set when he wasn't used in that role in college.

Not that either one is particularly wrong. I'm saying the logic can be easily flipped.

I never said Robinson couldn't a great pass blocker, yet Mathews is Robinson's direct competition. And Mathews is a better pass blocker as of today. And Robinson's passed blocked in college, just not as much as Mathews.

 

[iced]

Well, you are also glossing over a few things:
1. This assumes that Robinson does struggle in pass pro...there are some out there that would disagree
2. This assumes that Robinson would struggle at pass pro at OG...which is a horse of a different color when compared to LT
3. This assumes that Robinson won't significantly improve with Paul Boudreau

I actually do favor Matthews...but I'm just saying those are all fair arguments a person could make.

Some of his struggles with pass pro wouldn't matter if he was playing Guard or Tackle - being over aggressive,letting a guy underneath your pads, or using bad technique can happen at any spot on the line..and these are things he does struggle with.

Then you get into things like scheme, etc.

And your logic could be flipped if someone wanted to by saying that why should we draft a WR that seemed to only catch screens and short passes in college? Just saying.

No that would be irrelevant because I never brought up watkins... hence why i mentioned matthews

Btw I love how people treat the short passes thing as a knock - that would be a knock for a QB, not a receiver.

So it's a bad thing the guy did more with the ball? Pretty sure there are tons of people who want to get a playmaker the ball in space, which is exactly what they did..

 

[nighttrain]

The safest pick is Matthews but neither Fisher nor Snead is known as playing it "safe." If I were to build an NFL team from the ground up I would choose the best players for the O and D lines first. That being said, I will be shocked if we don't trade that #2 pick for more picks later in the draft.

Best of all possible worlds, Rams trade our #2, and get Matthews and Picks
train
PS Huge connection between Matthews and Fisher, do not forget this

 

[nighttrain]

I think if we take a WR early in will be Evans, he neutralizes CB's in our division with size alone
train

 

[jrry32]

Some of his struggles with pass pro wouldn't matter if he was playing Guard or Tackle - being over aggressive,letting a guy underneath your pads, or using bad technique can happen at any spot on the line..and these are things he does struggle with.

Then you get into things like scheme, etc.

Being over-aggressive isn't nearly as much of a problem at OG if you have quick feet...which Robinson does. And it's not hard to coach him out of that habit.

Letting guys underneath his pads isn't a major problem for Robinson with his anchor, arm length, and natural bend. Boudreau will just have to work with him on his hand use and punch timing. Again, things that aren't that difficult to fix. Using bad technique is pretty vague.

As far as scheme goes, that's a universal problem. Watkins or Matthews(well...probably not) could struggle learning the scheme just as much as Robinson could. You run that risk with any draft pick.

Btw I love how people treat the short passes thing as a knock - that would be a knock for a QB, not a receiver.

No, they're just as much a knock for a WR because they mean a more limited route tree and easier catches.

So it's a bad thing the guy did more with the ball? Pretty sure there are tons of people who want to get a playmaker the ball in space, which is exactly what they did..

It's not a good thing for evaluating how he translates.

 

[jrry32]

I never said Robinson couldn't a great pass blocker, yet Mathews is Robinson's direct competition. And Mathews is a better pass blocker as of today. And Robinson's passed blocked in college, just not as much as Mathews.

Matthews is. Matthews is the better player imo. Which is why I favor Matthews.

But there are very legitimate reasons why a person might favor Robinson. He has some skills that are better than Matthews's.

 

[Ramsey]

...And so the story goes. One player is the better athlete, the other has the greatest pedigree since the Manning's.

 

[iced]

Being over-aggressive isn't nearly as much of a problem at OG if you have quick feet...which Robinson does. And it's not hard to coach him out of that habit.

Letting guys underneath his pads isn't a major problem for Robinson with his anchor, arm length, and natural bend. Boudreau will just have to work with him on his hand use and punch timing. Again, things that aren't that difficult to fix. Using bad technique is pretty vague.

As far as scheme goes, that's a universal problem. Watkins or Matthews(well...probably not) could struggle learning the scheme just as much as Robinson could. You run that risk with any draft pick.

I was talking about their scheme - one can argue the different types that kept running didn't expose him in pass pro as much (which he scares me the most).. its akin to Charlie Weiss's scheme that masked Jimmy Clausen's weaknesses, which were later exposed

No, they're just as much a knock for a WR because they mean a more limited route tree and easier catches.

Yet he still put up tons of points and yards. That rings play maker to me, if anything thats a positive - that tells you he has vision , moves , and can be a threat in space. not a knock

 

[jrry32]

I was talking about their scheme - one can argue the different types that kept running didn't expose him in pass pro as much (which he scares me the most).. its akin to Charlie Weiss's scheme that masked Jimmy Clausen's weaknesses, which were later exposed

Yet he still put up tons of points and yards. That rings play maker to me, if anything thats a positive - that tells you he has vision , moves , and can be a threat in space. not a knock

You're contradicting yourself here. You're holding Robinson to a different standard than Watkins.

You claim that not being exposed to pass protecting as much due to the scheme he was in might have masked his weaknesses then you use a similarly problematic scheme that had Watkins catching a ridiculously high number of screen and underneath passes to try and boast about what Watkins offers.

You're focusing on the negative for Robinson instead of the positive(his power and run blocking) while focusing on the positive for Watkins instead of the negative. That's exactly what I mean by people using selective logic.

 

[nighttrain]

Matthews is. Matthews is the better player imo. Which is why I favor Matthews.

But there are very legitimate reasons why a person might favor Robinson. He has some skills that are better than Matthews's.

BUT, Robinson's dad didn't play for Fisher, I think it happens to mean something
train

 

[jrry32]

BUT, Robinson's dad didn't play for Fisher, I think it happens to mean something
train

Eh, Robinson played with Fisher's son on Auburn. So I'm not really sure in the end, it'll all mean much. They have plenty of insight on both.

 

[iced]

You're contradicting yourself here. You're holding Robinson to a different standard than Watkins.

You claim that not being exposed to pass protecting as much due to the scheme he was in might have masked his weaknesses then you use a similarly problematic scheme that had Watkins catching a ridiculously high number of screen and underneath passes to try and boast about what Watkins offers.

You're focusing on the negative for Robinson instead of the positive(his power and run blocking) while focusing on the positive for Watkins instead of the negative. That's exactly what I mean by people using selective logic.

I'm not contradicting myself here because I don't feel watkins has any issues in his game outside some concentration drops.

Robinson has made huge whiffs and he legitimately scares me at #2 overall.

Just because I disagree with you doesn't make it a contradiction. You think its a knock on watkins that he caught a bunch of short passes - I don't. I've seen him get open deep plenty of times - and I'm not gonna knock a guy when he turns whats supposed to be a small gain into a big one

 

[jrry32]

I'm not contradicting myself here because I don't feel watkins has any issues in his game outside some concentration drops.

Robinson has made huge whiffs and he legitimately scares me at #2 overall.

Just because I disagree with you doesn't make it a contradiction. You think its a knock on watkins that he caught a bunch of short passes - I don't. I've seen him get open deep plenty of times - and I'm not gonna knock a guy when he turns whats supposed to be a small gain into a big one

You're choosing to make assumptions about Robinson's capabilities due to him not pass blocking a lot in Auburn's offense and assuming the worst. You choose not to assume the worst with Watkins under similar circumstances. You ignore that he's a high cut player that doesn't possess loose hips which could hinder his route running ability in the pros. You choose to ignore that his route tree at Clemson wasn't diverse nor reminiscent of a NFL style route tree. You choose to ignore that Watkins wasn't forced to make a lot of contested catches and bring down passes in traffic often. You choose to ignore that the majority of his catches were easy dump offs or screens.

Watkins has gotten open deep. Just like Robinson has pass blocked successfully. But there isn't nearly as much game film on either one doing that as one would like. We both know that both players have the requisite physical skill-set to excel at it...but the issue is that you assume the worst with Robinson and assume the best with Watkins.

 

[iced]

You're choosing to make assumptions about Robinson's capabilities due to him not pass blocking a lot in Auburn's offense and assuming the worst.

Uhm, no. They're not assumptions. From what I've read plus some of the tape I've watched, he scares the hell out of me.

I'm not picking and choosing - these are my observations.

Robinson is the only pick that truly scares me - I'd much rather have Matthews. Although it does tickle me how much you want to make this about watkins, despite how many times i've said matthews is a much better prospect

 

[jrry32]

Uhm, no. They're not assumptions. From what I've read plus some of the tape I've watched, he scares the hell out of me.

I'm not picking and choosing - these are my observations.

Robinson is the only pick that truly scares me - I'd much rather have Matthews. Although it does tickle me how much you want to make this about watkins, despite how many times i've said matthews is a much better prospect

I'm making this about Watkins to point out flawed logic. You're certainly entitled to be worried about Robinson. I don't fault anyone for that. I'm just pointing out that the same logic could be applied to Watkins.

 

[iced]

I'm making this about Watkins to point out flawed logic. You're certainly entitled to be worried about Robinson. I don't fault anyone for that. I'm just pointing out that the same logic could be applied to Watkins.

if you're "flawed logic" is too point out watkins ability to take a short gain and make it a big one, well then you're on the opposite spectrum of logic my friend...