Pro Football Focus grades Rams, rest of NFC West validate Rams’ trades down's

[Riverumbbq]

By: Cameron DaSilva | May 11, 2019 9:00 am ET

It’ll be another four months before a single rookie plays his first NFL snap, but draft grades have become commonplace across the internet. Judging a draft class this early is difficult, but by basing it on value and pre-draft rankings, it’s possible to examine just how well a team did with its picks.

Rotoworld’s Thor Nystrom ranked every draft class – including undrafted free agents – and assigned grades to each one. He does this quantitatively by using a formula that assigns each team a “haul grade” by using pre-draft rankings compared to where a player was picked.

The Los Angeles Rams checked in at No. 6 with a grade of A-minus, despite not making a first-round pick.

Like the Saints, the Rams didn’t have a ton of draft equity to play with. But they made of what they had, snapping up a value pick basically every time they submitted a card.

My favorite pick was Michigan CB David Long at 3.79. A highly-underrated player, Long looks poised to outplay his draft slot.

David Long was Nystrom’s No. 36 overall prospect heading into the draft, so the Rams got a great value by selecting him with the 79th pick. Taylor Rapp, meanwhile, was ranked 56th by Nystrom and wound up going 61st overall after the Rams traded back three times.

The biggest “reach” Los Angeles made was selecting Nick Scott 243rd overall. He was Nystrom’s 372nd-ranked prospect, behind five of the Rams’ undrafted free agents.

https://theramswire.usatoday.com/20...&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=pos1image

 

[Akrasian]

The biggest “reach” Los Angeles made was selecting Nick Scott 243rd overall. He was Nystrom’s 372nd-ranked prospect,

By 243rd, you're picking for role or scheme. It makes zero sense to use a team neutral value at that point (if it ever makes sense)

 

[PressureD41]

YUP we reaches w/ pick # 243 were screwed folks. Dude is "only" helping in sub packages and be an ace on STs. Fuck me how did Jeff Fisher re enter the war room for said pick :sneak:

 

[Liberator]

By 243rd, you're picking for role or scheme. It makes zero sense to use a team neutral value at that point (if it ever makes sense)

Yea I really can't take "his 372nd ranked prospect" seriously lol come on man

 

[LARAMSinFeb.]

selecting Nick Scott 243rd overall. He was Nystrom’s 372nd-ranked prospect

Guess we blew it

 

[Riverumbbq]

Guess we blew it

Though he hasn't yet made the 53 roster, I can only surmise that the author judged Scott as a Safety without regard to his standing as a special teams demon. jmo.

 

[Ramstien]

That is one of the many things that makes the Rams drafting and developmental process so good. They look for special teams value late in the draft.

 

[bubbaramfan]

Yup. GRob, Ty Hill, Jason Smith all over again.alm:

 

[Merlin]

Main thing is they brought in good fits for what they need, filled most of their roster holes, and every one of them until the end are smart, high character types who love the game and will work to improve. From there who knows how these guys are going to develop, but I do like the chances of this draft group to help us down the road and think they're better than last year's haul for example.

Only real issues now are depth and ILB. At ILB they might have enough pieces to mix and mash and get what they need. On the depth we're going to need a few guys to step it up. I'm happy with how things went down overall just hope those vets we added are ready to get to work and if they produce we'll be just fine.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Though he hasn't yet made the 53 roster, I can only surmise that the author judged Scott as a Safety without regard to his standing as a special teams demon. jmo.

Yes that seems likely, and he also ignored that Scott switched from RB to Safety midway through his time in college. He's a great athlete, leader and is smart. So, it's possible for him to have an impact at safety as a backup.

But even if he only plays on Special Teams, at least he has a good chance to contribute and make the roster. Many picks after round 4 don't even get to do that. So I don't know what this guy expects drafting that late.

 

[BonifayRam]

• https://www.turfshowtimes.com/2019/...ster-depth-chart-trade-down-rankings-nfc-west

Pro Football Focus grades for 2019 Los Angeles Rams, rest of NFC West validate Rams’ trades down in 2019 NFL Draft

The Rams didn’t need to add great talent. They already have plenty.

By 3k@3k_ Updated May 15, 2019, 3:46pm CDT


Projected starters for the Rams with 80.0+ grades last year pic.twitter.com/SiDoguvh2O

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
As we headed toward the 2019 NFL Draft, I pointed out the significant deficit the Rams had incurred in the last four offseasons between the numbers of players and draft picks the Los Angeles Rams had sent away and those they had brought in. With a deficit of about 13 players and/or picks, the Rams had a major hole in the middle of their offense (not at the top) that they needed to begin to address substantively. I thought the easiest and best way to do that was to trade down in the draft which is precisely what the Rams did under General Manager Les Snead’s supervision.

But one point I wanted to make that I never got around to was a second reason the Rams could afford to, and thus should, trade down.

They had as much top-tier talent if not more than anyone.

In the 2018 NFL Top 100 as voted on by the players themselves, the Rams were one of two teams (along with the Minnesota Vikings) to have seven players selected. Perhaps more relevant at this point is that six of those seven players are returning. And it’s not just that the Rams have a legitimately wide top tier. It’s that it’s wider at the top than anyone. While the Rams had two players in the top 10, the Vikings had none. And the Steelers had two in the top 10 but six in the top 100 overall.

Suffice to say, the Rams have as much top talent and as much at the top as anyone in the NFL. While I meant to make that point heading into the draft as motivation to trade down and fill in spots that likely populate a hypothetical list from 101-250, Pro Football Focus tweeted out their ratings for projected starters across the NFC West that they have rated 80 or higher on their 100-point scale while noting honorable mentions over 75.

Not surprisingly, the Rams lead the way. By a large margin.

The Rams have eight starters (three on defense, five on offense) rated higher than 80: DL Aaron Donald (95.0), LT Andrew Whitworth (86.1), QB Jared Goff (85.9), WR Robert Woods (85.9), S John Johnson III (83.7), S Eric Weddle (83.7), RT Rob Havenstein (81.8) and WR Brandin Cooks (81.2).

Looking across the division, the Seattle Seahawks have six players over 80, the San Francisco 49ers four and the Arizona Cardinals with just two.

But widening the gap is the number of players rated 75 or higher but less than 80 that made PFF’s honorable mention cut.

The Seahawks didn’t have one such player. The Cardinals and Niners each had one apiece.

The Rams have five.

CB Nickell Robey-Coleman (79.8), WR Cooper Kupp (77.4), RB Todd Gurley (77.4), TE Gerald Everett (76.6) and CB Aqib Talib (76.6) all come in at that second tier.

Projected starters for the Rams with 80.0+ grades last year pic.twitter.com/SiDoguvh2O

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
Projected Seahawks starters with 80.0+ PFF grades last year pic.twitter.com/fZBx6NKVl3

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
Projected starters for the 49ers with 80.0+ PFF grades in 2018 pic.twitter.com/7pJ7M9RQbC

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
Projected starters in Arizona with 80.0+ PFF grades from a season ago pic.twitter.com/RQ8TpAzui5

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
The combined totals from both tiers?

The Cardinals had three. The Niners had five. The Seahawks had six. The Rams had 13.

And that’s just stark, quantified evidence of why the Rams didn’t need to hold pat at #31. We’ve got plenty of talent that lines up with the caliber of prospect you can get at that point in the draft. And not only do we have plenty of it, we have significantly more of it than our competitors especially, as PFF’s ratings show, within our own division.

We don’t need top talents anywhere near as much as other teams across the NFL.

We have tons of it already.

 

[kurtfaulk]

• https://www.turfshowtimes.com/2019/...ster-depth-chart-trade-down-rankings-nfc-west

Pro Football Focus grades for 2019 Los Angeles Rams, rest of NFC West validate Rams’ trades down in 2019 NFL Draft

The Rams didn’t need to add great talent. They already have plenty.

By 3k@3k_ Updated May 15, 2019, 3:46pm CDT


Projected starters for the Rams with 80.0+ grades last year pic.twitter.com/SiDoguvh2O

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
As we headed toward the 2019 NFL Draft, I pointed out the significant deficit the Rams had incurred in the last four offseasons between the numbers of players and draft picks the Los Angeles Rams had sent away and those they had brought in. With a deficit of about 13 players and/or picks, the Rams had a major hole in the middle of their offense (not at the top) that they needed to begin to address substantively. I thought the easiest and best way to do that was to trade down in the draft which is precisely what the Rams did under General Manager Les Snead’s supervision.

But one point I wanted to make that I never got around to was a second reason the Rams could afford to, and thus should, trade down.

They had as much top-tier talent if not more than anyone.

In the 2018 NFL Top 100 as voted on by the players themselves, the Rams were one of two teams (along with the Minnesota Vikings) to have seven players selected. Perhaps more relevant at this point is that six of those seven players are returning. And it’s not just that the Rams have a legitimately wide top tier. It’s that it’s wider at the top than anyone. While the Rams had two players in the top 10, the Vikings had none. And the Steelers had two in the top 10 but six in the top 100 overall.

Suffice to say, the Rams have as much top talent and as much at the top as anyone in the NFL. While I meant to make that point heading into the draft as motivation to trade down and fill in spots that likely populate a hypothetical list from 101-250, Pro Football Focus tweeted out their ratings for projected starters across the NFC West that they have rated 80 or higher on their 100-point scale while noting honorable mentions over 75.

Not surprisingly, the Rams lead the way. By a large margin.

The Rams have eight starters (three on defense, five on offense) rated higher than 80: DL Aaron Donald (95.0), LT Andrew Whitworth (86.1), QB Jared Goff (85.9), WR Robert Woods (85.9), S John Johnson III (83.7), S Eric Weddle (83.7), RT Rob Havenstein (81.8) and WR Brandin Cooks (81.2).

Looking across the division, the Seattle Seahawks have six players over 80, the San Francisco 49ers four and the Arizona Cardinals with just two.

But widening the gap is the number of players rated 75 or higher but less than 80 that made PFF’s honorable mention cut.

The Seahawks didn’t have one such player. The Cardinals and Niners each had one apiece.

The Rams have five.

CB Nickell Robey-Coleman (79.8), WR Cooper Kupp (77.4), RB Todd Gurley (77.4), TE Gerald Everett (76.6) and CB Aqib Talib (76.6) all come in at that second tier.

Projected starters for the Rams with 80.0+ grades last year pic.twitter.com/SiDoguvh2O

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
Projected Seahawks starters with 80.0+ PFF grades last year pic.twitter.com/fZBx6NKVl3

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
Projected starters for the 49ers with 80.0+ PFF grades in 2018 pic.twitter.com/7pJ7M9RQbC

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
Projected starters in Arizona with 80.0+ PFF grades from a season ago pic.twitter.com/RQ8TpAzui5

— Pro Football Focus (@PFF) May 15, 2019
The combined totals from both tiers?

The Cardinals had three. The Niners had five. The Seahawks had six. The Rams had 13.

And that’s just stark, quantified evidence of why the Rams didn’t need to hold pat at #31. We’ve got plenty of talent that lines up with the caliber of prospect you can get at that point in the draft. And not only do we have plenty of it, we have significantly more of it than our competitors especially, as PFF’s ratings show, within our own division.

We don’t need top talents anywhere near as much as other teams across the NFL.

We have tons of it already.

I'm shocked. A nice article by 3k. How long has it been?

.

 

[CGI_Ram]

Cool read, for Rams fans.

 

[…..]

Boy you guys will get offended by anything.

 

[RamFan503]

Boy you guys will get offended by anything.

Well I DO personally find it funny for anyone to consider a pick in the 200s a "reach" for any team.

I realize many of these guys think they're smarter than actual NFL guys, and a few of them very well may be. But it's already a crap shoot beyond the top 20, let alone 243. As a team, you are more likely going after traits that have ZERO to do with a player's supposed overall ranking.

I think he could have qualified that paragraph a little better by offering a couple words as a disclaimer. As it stood, it came off as the Rams should have waited until FA because the ranking system they like to use said so.

But are we overly sensitive to it? Of course. We're fans.

 

[Akrasian]

Well I DO personally find it funny for anyone to consider a pick in the 200s a "reach" for any team.

I realize many of these guys think they're smarter than actual NFL guys, and a few of them very well may be. But it's already a crap shoot beyond the top 20, let alone 243. As a team, you are more likely going after traits that have ZERO to do with a player's supposed overall ranking.

I think he could have qualified that paragraph a little better by offering a couple words as a disclaimer. As it stood, it came off as the Rams should have waited until FA because the ranking system they like to use said so.

But are we overly sensitive to it? Of course. We're fans.

Yeah, at #243 you're basically locking up a priority UDFA who fits your system and team-specific needs. An "expert" acting like that's a mistake by analyzing on a system free basis is laughable.

 

[…..]

Well I DO personally find it funny for anyone to consider a pick in the 200s a "reach" for any team.

I realize many of these guys think they're smarter than actual NFL guys, and a few of them very well may be. But it's already a crap shoot beyond the top 20, let alone 243. As a team, you are more likely going after traits that have ZERO to do with a player's supposed overall ranking.

I think he could have qualified that paragraph a little better by offering a couple words as a disclaimer. As it stood, it came off as the Rams should have waited until FA because the ranking system they like to use said so.

But are we overly sensitive to it? Of course. We're fans.

Oh yeah man I get it. It’s just that I elevated myself above that dumbass as soon as I read it lol we all know 243 wasn’t our shiniest moment and it was funny to me that he would even mention it.

My bad, Carry on!

 

[…..]

Anyone gonna remember this when Nick Scott makes the Pro Bowl?

 

[OldSchool]

By 243rd, you're picking for role or scheme. It makes zero sense to use a team neutral value at that point (if it ever makes sense)

Yeah gotta love somebody taking a rotoworld writer's rankings serious. Best part is the next line that 5 UDFA were ranked higher, but if a 6th round pick is a big reach that's an A+ draft IMO.