OL or WR? Looky here...

  • 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.

Memphis Ram

Legend
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
6,668
You keep bringing up the tight ends yet Givens still got more snaps than them..and I'm not discussing the overall offenseeither, otherwise I'd be more than welcome to discuss Tight end. I'm talking about just receiver (which would open things up more for the Tight end if we actually get a stud and not a dud out there)

exactly my point - there isn't one this roster.

you may have faith that they'll develop into a receiver - but I sure as hell don't from what I've seen out of Givens and Quick. And judging by Quick's snap count, neither is the coaching staff.

I already explained why Givens got more snaps. He was the most experienced outside WR on the roster. BTW, Givens stated in a interview that he got a lot of safety over the top looks the whole year. Unless he was lying, things had to be opened up for the TEs already. TEs who are mentioned because they were an important part of the offensive package unlike a lot of the more WR driven packages on other teams.

Hopefully, he doesn't have many more of the undisclosed injuries Jim Thomas said he played with last year and he keeps his focus which even he admitted he lost last year.

But, yes. I have more faith in the young guys already on the roster developing for next season in this offense and under this coordinator, than any WR in this draft class at the beginning of their learning curve of playing in the NFL.
 
Last edited:

Memphis Ram

Legend
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
6,668
That's how it is? OK.

Antonio Brown - 6th round
Pierre Garcon - 6th round
Alshon Jeffery - 2nd round
Josh Gordon - 2nd round
DeSean Jackson - 2nd round
Jordy Nelson - 2nd round
Brandon Marshall - 4th round
Vincent Jackson - 3rd round
Anquan Boldin - 2nd round
Marques Colston - 7th round
Mike Wallace - 3rd round
Torrey Smith - 2nd round

At worst, you can argue 3-6 of these guys are not "true #1 WRs" depending on your standards. Regardless, that's 12 names. 10 of those 12 names had 1000+ yards in 2013.

So, can anyone give me 10 CURRENT very good/great OGs that were drafted outside the first round?

Gee. Off the top of my head I'm struggling with coming up with 10 very good/great OGs that are in the league now period.:D
 

Alan

Legend
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
9,765
RamFan503 willing to forego the Nimbus 2000 pitchfork:
Actually - I don't agree at all. I'm not responding to the rest of this cuz quite frankly, I'm too lazy to go back and look at the context. But I think you'd get a different answer from many receivers. Touch passes with the speed of the game, are very difficult to come down with. There is a lot more timing, judgment, and reaction involved rather than just catching a ball drilled into your hands.
If you don't agree with me I'm not going to give you one of my brand new super duper pitchforks even if you do bring the beer for everyone. :fighting:
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
What's your definition of great for a WR? Without naming names, throw out some criteria they must meet.
Mainly, I'm looking for that #1 type, who the defense always has to account for and who can pull the strongest coverage off of those other receivers.

And yes, jrry, I saw your list the last time you posted it. I gave an answer to it then. I see no point in repetition. You have your opinion and I have mine.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,211
Name
Tim
If you have a RB who excels when running between the tackles do you try and run him on the outside all the time, or do you adapt your offense to suit his talents? If we have WRs who have trouble catching fast balls do you stubbornly continue to throw them or do you adapt and improvise? Of course you can only adapt if your QB has those skills. As in how we changed our O to compliment Clemens' skill set. I'm not suggesting that all throws need to be change ups, I'm saying that sometimes you need to throw one and that wouold cut down, not eliminate, the drops and improve other aspects of your passing attack. Screen passes, corner of the endzone fade passes, et cetera.

You missed the fact that Les was talking about how our QB play is affecting the WR play. I continued in that vein. I looked at the QB aspect of the problem of dropped passes, and widened it to include how the lack of a change up has other detrimental effects on our passing game.

Sorry about that.

I think if we go back and look the drops we saw last year were rarely contributed to how hard the ball was thrown. Some maybe but then the same guy would catch that same pass in other opportunities no problem. I did notice Sam showing a few more touch passes this year, not what I'd call proficient but better than in past years.

I will also agree with the premise that sometimes it is just as hard to catch those change ups.
 

LesBaker

Mr. Savant
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
17,460
Name
Les
I have a hard time accepting that one. It's definitely A reason but I don't think it's a big one. Danny Amendola had no issues handling Bradford's passes. Neither does Pettis. Heck, weirdly enough, Cook had 2 drops in 7 games with Bradford and 6 drops in 9 games with Clemens.

Some guys can handle a hot potato but not all of them can. Elways receivers always had this problem because he had no touch either and they used to practice together standing fairly close and whipping the ball at each other to get used to it.

Bradford doesn't throw a great short pass, watch him throw with that in mind and you'll see what I mean. He throws hard, he doesn't feather it in, not all the time but most of the time. Bulger had the same problem early in his career but Linehan seemed to help him get some loft under a screen pass. Bradford puts some mustard on the ball and it's not always easy to bring it in. Watch on passes where he is leading the WR on a pattern where they are coming across the field, he doesn't drop it in there he fires it in.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
-sigh- so now we're talking about unset positions where guys were being juggled - including for injury.

They never moved Givens around and he led in snap counts for most of the season.

Not to mention givens didnt miss time to injury like saffold did...

I'm surprised to see the unwillingness now to admit he was the #1.

Was he ever subbed in for anyone else? Nope. Was he benched? Nope. Did he consistently lead in snap counts? yep.

^ unless you wanna try to make a comparison to someone who meets that criteria, you're not going to get a fair comparison

They did move Givens around, they did bench him, he didn't lead every game in snap counts and he was subbed out in certain games.

The WR position was unset and did deal with injuries. We did juggle that position quite a bit. It's a fair point.

Gee. Off the top of my head I'm struggling with coming up with 10 very good/great OGs that are in the league now period.:D

Precisely. There's a death of talent there. And people's response is, "Of the top 5 OGs, four were drafted in the mid rounds" and that's great. But when there are 15-20 very good/great WRs and 5-7 very good/great OGs...arguing that a higher percentage of those OGs are mid rounders means nothing. Because you're looking at about the same odds of finding a very good/great one outside the 1st round.

Yea but that's different. It's not like "He fell to the 2nd " - it was who wanted to give up the most draft capital for him

That's the same thing as the normal draft. The team willing to give up the highest pick gets him.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
Some guys can handle a hot potato but not all of them can. Elways receivers always had this problem because he had no touch either and they used to practice together standing fairly close and whipping the ball at each other to get used to it.

Bradford doesn't throw a great short pass, watch him throw with that in mind and you'll see what I mean. He throws hard, he doesn't feather it in, not all the time but most of the time. Bulger had the same problem early in his career but Linehan seemed to help him get some loft under a screen pass. Bradford puts some mustard on the ball and it's not always easy to bring it in. Watch on passes where he is leading the WR on a pattern where they are coming across the field, he doesn't drop it in there he fires it in.

I've seen it, Les. And there is merit to your opinion but at the same time, these guys are NFL WRs. If Danny, Pettis and Cook can handle it...why can't our other WRs?

Mainly, I'm looking for that #1 type, who the defense always has to account for and who can pull the strongest coverage off of those other receivers.

And yes, jrry, I saw your list the last time you posted it. I gave an answer to it then. I see no point in repetition. You have your opinion and I have mine.

Mind reposting your answer because I must have missed it then? Did you address the question and post a list? If not, then you've failed to answer the post.
 

LesBaker

Mr. Savant
Joined
Aug 23, 2012
Messages
17,460
Name
Les
I've seen it, Les. And there is merit to your opinion but at the same time, these guys are NFL WRs. If Danny, Pettis and Cook can handle it...why can't our other WRs?



Mind reposting your answer because I must have missed it then? Did you address the question and post a list? If not, then you've failed to answer the post.

Simple answer is there are varying degrees of skill and catching a hot pass in a short difference is a kind or type of skill. So some guys are going to be better than others just like some guys can putt better than others or hit a curveball better. That's just how it is.

I think it can be learned and I think if they work on it over time it'll get better. Remember Bulger was horrible at it but then he got it down and he and Jackson were killing defenses with that little floater screen to both the left and right side. That year Jackson put up, at the time, a total yards from scrimmage that was 5th best ever and it was his best year catching the ball, and Bulgers best year throwing it.

It is, IMO, Bradfords Achilles heel right now. I know people like to say he doesn't read defenses like he should or other things but how do we as fans actually know that stuff is really accurate. I think his weakness is that he throws frozen ropes and thats all he has.

Anyway, the higher number of drops are going to continue until he gets it down.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
They did move Givens around, they did bench him, he didn't lead every game in snap counts and he was subbed out in certain games.

The WR position was unset and did deal with injuries. We did juggle that position quite a bit. It's a fair point.
They didn't move Givens around - and I never said he led every game in snap counts (as I already said Bailey had *1 more snap* in the Seattle game). however, outside that game and the Arizona one (Tavon led in snaps, but Givens was 2nd), he pretty much lead every other game (unless I missed one).

For someone who was "subbed out" , if he didn't lead in snaps he was always 2nd.

Precisely. There's a death of talent there. And people's response is, "Of the top 5 OGs, four were drafted in the mid rounds" and that's great. But when there are 15-20 very good/great WRs and 5-7 very good/great OGs...arguing that a higher percentage of those OGs are mid rounders means nothing. Because you're looking at about the same odds of finding a very good/great one outside the 1st round.

Problem is people don't take into consideration the differences between drafts - like people keep heralding this one for its depth at Wide receiver, while lasts years was extremely deep in lineman.


That's the same thing as the normal draft. The team willing to give up the highest pick gets him.
No it's not. There's a pretty big difference between how the two work - the supplemental is more of an auction - type.
 

Alan

Legend
Joined
Oct 22, 2013
Messages
9,765
blackbart with his observations:
I think if we go back and look the drops we saw last year were rarely contributed to how hard the ball was thrown. Some maybe but then the same guy would catch that same pass in other opportunities no problem. I did notice Sam showing a few more touch passes this year, not what I'd call proficient but better than in past years.

I will also agree with the premise that sometimes it is just as hard to catch those change ups.
I don't disagree with any of that. Work harder. ;)
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
They didn't move Givens around - and I never said he led every game in snap counts (as I already said Bailey had *1 more snap* in the Seattle game). however, outside that game and the Arizona one (Tavon led in snaps, but Givens was 2nd), he pretty much lead every other game (unless I missed one).

For someone who was "subbed out" , if he didn't lead in snaps he was always 2nd.

Rams WR Snap Leader by Game:
1. Cook(if we count him as a WR)
2. Pettis
3. Pettis
4. Pettis
5. Givens
6. Givens
7. Givens
8. Givens
9. Givens
10. Cook
11. Givens
12. Austin/Cook
13. Cook
14. Cook
15. Givens
16. Bailey/Cook

It seems to me that it was pretty variable throughout the year.

No it's not. There's a pretty big difference between how the two work - the supplemental is more of an auction - type.

Which is irrelevant. Because the idea remains the same. The team willing to use the highest pick on the player, gets him. That's how the normal draft works too. Gordon was drafted with a 2nd round pick.
 

Ram_of_Old

Guest
I think the Rams will daft down and stock up some more picks, but it would seem that with Saffold back on board, they would go for a WR with the first pick. Hard to tell at this point.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
Rams WR Snap Leader by Game:
1. Cook(if we count him as a WR)
2. Pettis
3. Pettis
4. Pettis
5. Givens
6. Givens
7. Givens
8. Givens
9. Givens
10. Cook
11. Givens
12. Austin/Cook
13. Cook
14. Cook
15. Givens
16. Bailey/Cook

It seems to me that it was pretty variable throughout the year.

Got a link?

And since you're listing Cook, are these for Cook being Lined up in a WR spot? If not then he's not really a "wide receiver" now is he? Either way, it's not his head that's going to be on the chopping block when we upgrade the Wide Receiver spot.

I stand by what I said about Givens - He led the team in WR snap counts, and was no worst than 2nd if he didn't.

You can't say "Wide Receiver Snap counts" and then list a tight end that occasionally lines up out wide (which I bet those numbers at best are 1/3 of his snaps)

Which is irrelevant. Because the idea remains the same. The team willing to use the highest pick on the player, gets him. That's how the normal draft works too. Gordon was drafted with a 2nd round pick.

Gonna have to agree to disagree - I think the supplemental draft is way different than the regular draft, both on prospects and how it works
 

Boffo97

Still legal in 17 states!
Joined
Feb 10, 2014
Messages
5,278
Name
Dave
Mind reposting your answer because I must have missed it then? Did you address the question and post a list? If not, then you've failed to answer the post.
Did I post a list? No. I explained why. You can go look it up yourself. And then add to that the idea that the only way anyone could respond is nitpicking just who is and who isn't a #1 WR on the list, which will obviously lead nowhere but "Yuh huh!" "Nuh uh!"

I still feel the implied idea that great guards are more rare and sought after than great wide receivers defies common sense. (And before responding, please keep in mind that I am well aware that the plan is to hopefully move the guard to tackle sometime in the future.) If you feel differently, great. You have that right.

I'm actually pretty surprised you picked Watkins in your mock draft given how vehement you've been about this topic.

And iced, I've seen reports here and there that this draft is deep in linemen too. I wouldn't swear as to their veracity, but they're out there.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
And iced, I've seen reports here and there that this draft is deep in linemen too. I wouldn't swear as to their veracity, but they're out there.

I don't know if its deep or not - I'm only quoting Memphis Ram when he said many have claimed this to be on one of the deepest WR drafts in years.

but i do believe we will have multiple chances to take a quality guard with 4 picks in the top 75 - that's before any trade downs
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
Did I post a list? No. I explained why. You can go look it up yourself. And then add to that the idea that the only way anyone could respond is nitpicking just who is and who isn't a #1 WR on the list, which will obviously lead nowhere but "Yuh huh!" "Nuh uh!"

I still feel the implied idea that great guards are more rare and sought after than great wide receivers defies common sense. (And before responding, please keep in mind that I am well aware that the plan is to hopefully move the guard to tackle sometime in the future.) If you feel differently, great. You have that right.

I'm actually pretty surprised you picked Watkins in your mock draft given how vehement you've been about this topic.

And iced, I've seen reports here and there that this draft is deep in linemen too. I wouldn't swear as to their veracity, but they're out there.

I only seem vehement because I tend to argue when I disagree strongly. You'll see me argue against Robinson too but I would be quite happy with him. Heck, I'd argue against Matthews or Clowney if I didn't agree with what someone is saying but people tend to be pretty much in agreement on who Matthews is(not a lot of misconceptions) and you rarely see misconceptions in support of Clowney, haha.

Sought after? I wouldn't go that far. More rare right now? Absolutely.

While an explanation is great(and I'm not sure if I saw it or not...nor do I have any interest in checking back for it), the point was to show the misconception here. Without a list, you're really not giving my point a fair shake.

Maybe you don't care to and that's up to you. But what I am trying to show is that the WR position in the NFL is quite DEEP right now while the OG position is NOT. So the idea that you have to be extraordinarily lucky to find a WR but not to find an OG is a flawed one. Because while OGs don't get drafted as highly, there aren't a lot of great OGs in the NFL right now.

So you need to get extraordinarily lucky to find one of those too. Off the top of my head, the only players that I'd call "great" at the OG position are:
1. Josh Sitton
2. Jahri Evans
3. Evan Mathis
4. Andy Levitre
5. Mike Iupati

And in all honesty, you could argue that Levitre is only very good. Iupati is coming off a year where he was merely average. And Jahri Evans might be starting to decline(is about to turn 31).

There are guys like Chance Warmack, Kevin Zeitler, Larry Warford, David DeCastro and Jonathan Cooper that are recent high picks(except Warford but he was very good as a rookie) and could become great OGs. But they're still ascending.

I wouldn't say there's a single elite OG in the NFL right now, though.

However, right now, I'd call all of the below "great" or "elite" WRs:
1. Calvin Johnson
2. Andre Johnson
3. AJ Green
4. Julio Jones
5. Brandon Marshall
6. DeMaryius Thomas
7. Dez Bryant
8. Vincent Jackson
9. Alshon Jeffery
10. Antonio Brown
11. Josh Gordon
12. Jordy Nelson
13. Victor Cruz

Boffo, I would agree, this draft is deep in OLs.
 

jrry32

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
29,790
I don't know if its deep or not - I'm only quoting Memphis Ram when he said many have claimed this to be on one of the deepest WR drafts in years.

but i do believe we will have multiple chances to take a quality guard with 4 picks in the top 75 - that's before any trade downs

Could have just as many chances at a quality receiver too. ;)
2. Sammy Watkins
13. Mike Evans
44. Jordan Matthews/Brandin Cooks
75. Jared Abbrederis/Robert Herron/Donte Moncrief

Got a link?

And since you're listing Cook, are these for Cook being Lined up in a WR spot? If not then he's not really a "wide receiver" now is he? Either way, it's not his head that's going to be on the chopping block when we upgrade the Wide Receiver spot.

I stand by what I said about Givens - He led the team in WR snap counts, and was no worst than 2nd if he didn't.

You can't say "Wide Receiver Snap counts" and then list a tight end that occasionally lines up out wide (which I bet those numbers at best are 1/3 of his snaps)

Information came from PFF.

Removing Cook doesn't change it much.

Givens leading the team in snap counts doesn't make him the #1 WR. I don't think there's a soul on this board that considers him the #1 WR going into 2014. So it's a blatant misrepresentation to claim him as such.

Gonna have to agree to disagree - I think the supplemental draft is way different than the regular draft, both on prospects and how it works

Of course it's different, you have 5 guys in the draft instead of 1000+. The point is that the logic behind the picks REMAINS THE SAME. The team that uses the highest pick on the player gets him. That's true in any draft. If the Browns uses #4 in the regular draft and the Rams use #2, the Rams get the player. If the Rams use #2 in the Supplemental Draft and the Browns use #4, the Rams get the player. That doesn't change. Gordon was a second round pick in the Supplemental Draft. That's a fact and that's exactly what I said.
 
Last edited: