Rams need a quality wideout in the first round

[jrry32]

Speaking solely for myself, that's not really the disconnect I'm having. [hil]I just don't believe that they're as rigid on roles as some here think.[/hil]

Cook can be on the field at the same time as another slot WR. Austin isn't a guy who is limited to the slot. Amendola played Flanker and Slot for us in 2012.(Flanker in 2 WR sets and Slot in 3+ WR sets) Austin is less limited than Amendola because he has the speed to challenge teams deep.

So for me, saying Cook will be used as a slot WR doesn't preclude them from taking a guy like Austin in my mind. As I said before, the Patriots managed to use both Hernandez and Welker in the slot quite effectively.

Here you see that Cook is in the slot with another WR:
<a class="postlink" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDb79EAePss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDb79EAePss</a>

For me, the question isn't Cook...it's Kendricks. He'd be the one leaving the field for the slot WR likely.

I think it's give us a lot more flexibility and makes our passing game tough to match-up to. You put Cook, Austin, Givens and Quick(or another WR) out on the field at the same time...how many teams have the athletes to match-up with all those bodies in man coverage?

[hil]I agree with that.[/hil]

For the record, I don't think they're going to take Austin, and I don't think they're going to pass on him.
I have no idea how they're going to attack the draft, or how they're going to round out/shape the offense.
For all we know, they're not even thinking about Austin. OR. They're salivating at the idea of him falling to 16.

:idk:

I also have no idea. But we need something to talk about to fill the time until next season. :cheese:

 

[-X-]

Speaking solely for myself, that's not really the disconnect I'm having. [hil]I just don't believe that they're as rigid on roles as some here think.[/hil]

Cook can be on the field at the same time as another slot WR. Austin isn't a guy who is limited to the slot. Amendola played Flanker and Slot for us in 2012.(Flanker in 2 WR sets and Slot in 3+ WR sets) Austin is less limited than Amendola because he has the speed to challenge teams deep.

So for me, saying Cook will be used as a slot WR doesn't preclude them from taking a guy like Austin in my mind. As I said before, the Patriots managed to use both Hernandez and Welker in the slot quite effectively.

Here you see that Cook is in the slot with another WR:
<a class="postlink" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDb79EAePss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDb79EAePss</a>

For me, the question isn't Cook...it's Kendricks. He'd be the one leaving the field for the slot WR likely.

I think it's give us a lot more flexibility and makes our passing game tough to match-up to. You put Cook, Austin, Givens and Quick(or another WR) out on the field at the same time...how many teams have the athletes to match-up with all those bodies in man coverage?

[hil]I agree with that.[/hil]

For the record, I don't think they're going to take Austin, and I don't think they're going to pass on him.
I have no idea how they're going to attack the draft, or how they're going to round out/shape the offense.
For all we know, they're not even thinking about Austin. OR. They're salivating at the idea of him falling to 16.

:idk:

I also have no idea. But we need something to talk about to fill the time until next season. :cheese:

Well, then, do you think there are any distinct disadvantages to being that small? Obviously it puts more pressure on Bradford to hit a tighter window moving at a faster rate, so you must not be concerned about that so much. I've seen you break down the ways that Austin would actually be *safe* out there amongst a sea of giant would-be tacklers, so you can't be worried about that.

Anything concern you at all with Austin? Or do you think he's destined to be enshrined?

 

[jrry32]

Speaking solely for myself, that's not really the disconnect I'm having. [hil]I just don't believe that they're as rigid on roles as some here think.[/hil]

Cook can be on the field at the same time as another slot WR. Austin isn't a guy who is limited to the slot. Amendola played Flanker and Slot for us in 2012.(Flanker in 2 WR sets and Slot in 3+ WR sets) Austin is less limited than Amendola because he has the speed to challenge teams deep.

So for me, saying Cook will be used as a slot WR doesn't preclude them from taking a guy like Austin in my mind. As I said before, the Patriots managed to use both Hernandez and Welker in the slot quite effectively.

Here you see that Cook is in the slot with another WR:
<a class="postlink" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDb79EAePss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDb79EAePss</a>

For me, the question isn't Cook...it's Kendricks. He'd be the one leaving the field for the slot WR likely.

I think it's give us a lot more flexibility and makes our passing game tough to match-up to. You put Cook, Austin, Givens and Quick(or another WR) out on the field at the same time...how many teams have the athletes to match-up with all those bodies in man coverage?

[hil]I agree with that.[/hil]

For the record, I don't think they're going to take Austin, and I don't think they're going to pass on him.
I have no idea how they're going to attack the draft, or how they're going to round out/shape the offense.
For all we know, they're not even thinking about Austin. OR. They're salivating at the idea of him falling to 16.

:idk:

I also have no idea. But we need something to talk about to fill the time until next season. :cheese:

Well, then, do you think there are any distinct disadvantages to being that small? Obviously it puts more pressure on Bradford to hit a tighter window moving at a faster rate, so you must not be concerned about that so much. I've seen you break down the ways that Austin would actually be *safe* out there amongst a sea of giant would-be tacklers, so you can't be worried about that.

Anything concern you at all with Austin? Or do you think he's destined to be enshrined?

Yep, there are disadvantages. Obviously, he has a smaller catch radius which makes Bradford's job a little harder in that regard. Having a smaller frame means that it's harder for him to use his body to keep defenders from getting a hand on the ball in tight coverage. Lacking length means it will be a bit harder to disengage if the CB does get a good jam on him.

I have reservations about every player...there are just guys that I am very confident in their ability and my belief that they'll pan out on the next level. In my history, I have a few misses but I have hit on the majority. I've done a lot worse in projecting guys that I didn't like. What I mean by that is that the guys that I expect to "boom" and want to draft have a hit rate of like 75%(made up number) whereas the guys that I didn't want to draft and thought they wouldn't pan out that well, my hit rate is like 50%(made up number).

So I'd put more stock in positive feelings from me than negative ones. :bg:

 

[-X-]

Yep, there are disadvantages. Obviously, he has a smaller catch radius which makes Bradford's job a little harder in that regard. Having a smaller frame means that it's harder for him to use his body to keep defenders from getting a hand on the ball in tight coverage. Lacking length means it will be a bit harder to disengage if the CB does get a good jam on him.

I have reservations about every player...there are just guys that I am very confident in their ability and my belief that they'll pan out on the next level. In my history, I have a few misses but I have hit on the majority. I've done a lot worse in projecting guys that I didn't like. What I mean by that is that the guys that I expect to "boom" and want to draft have a hit rate of like 75%(made up number) whereas the guys that I didn't want to draft and thought they wouldn't pan out that well, my hit rate is like 50%(made up number).

So I'd put more stock in positive feelings from me than negative ones. :bg:

How did you feel about Mardy Gilyard when he was drafted? As a player, and not so much his life story.

 

[nighttrain]

Nick's Mailbag, Stlouisrams.com
nick's opinion,
Just my opinion but I'd go: Warmack Patterson Cooper Austin Lacy Vaccaro Hopkins Allen

jmo, but Warmack Patterson Cooper very easily gone by pick 16, kinda leaves Austin by default..We would find ways to use him, and i don't really believe all the talk as Cook used primarily at slot..He fits extremely well in a two tight end set, and has the size and speed to lineup outside..I could see Kendricks used as an H Back often..Blocking for SB and safety valve sort deal..i've seen him mention Hopkins more that once, he could fall into the third with a bit of luck. Bus as is, that would be Austin at 16, Vaccaro at 22, and Hopkins at 46. i really dont see Lacy for us the first, and probalby gone in the 2nd
train

 

[jap]

The whole point of having or getting versatile receivers like Jared Cook and Tavon Austin is to create mismatches. Trying to tight cast them as simply a slot receiver or an outside-the-hashmarks receiver would allow a defensive coordinator to align his defense to minimize their effectiveness, However, by moving them around, including before-snap shifts, you can drive a DC bonkers by trying to account for their speed, size, sheer athleticism, etc.

 

[nighttrain]

The whole point of having or getting versatile receivers like Jared Cook and Tavon Austin is to create mismatches. Trying to tight cast them as simply a slot receiver or an outside-the-hashmarks receiver would allow a defensive coordinator to align his defense to minimize their effectiveness, However, by moving them around, including before-snap shifts, you can drive a DC bonkers by trying to account for their speed, size, sheer athleticism, etc.

EXACTLY! misdirection and confusion on the enemy's side of the ball..
train

 

[jrry32]

Yep, there are disadvantages. Obviously, he has a smaller catch radius which makes Bradford's job a little harder in that regard. Having a smaller frame means that it's harder for him to use his body to keep defenders from getting a hand on the ball in tight coverage. Lacking length means it will be a bit harder to disengage if the CB does get a good jam on him.

I have reservations about every player...there are just guys that I am very confident in their ability and my belief that they'll pan out on the next level. In my history, I have a few misses but I have hit on the majority. I've done a lot worse in projecting guys that I didn't like. What I mean by that is that the guys that I expect to "boom" and want to draft have a hit rate of like 75%(made up number) whereas the guys that I didn't want to draft and thought they wouldn't pan out that well, my hit rate is like 50%(made up number).

So I'd put more stock in positive feelings from me than negative ones. :bg:

How did you feel about Mardy Gilyard when he was drafted? As a player, and not so much his life story.

I didn't mind the pick. I usually end up talking myself into liking the pick after a few minutes of anger but I wanted the Rams to draft Aaron Hernandez, Jon Dwyer or Everson Griffen at that spot so I was disappointed.

Not counting Sam Bradford, the 2012 NFL Draft was the first time the Rams took the guy that I stated I wanted before the pick...it happened twice...Chris Givens and Janoris Jenkins. Then again, I wanted DeCastro at #14 so I'm glad they made the pick they did at that spot. Brockers has worked out fabulously.

 

[shaunpinney]

I like Tavon Austin, I've sung his praises plenty, but I've been subjective and I just don't think Austin is a Fisher kinda player. Look at the guys he's drafted or picked up n FA - BIG, physical players on BOTH sides of the ball.

I don't believe Tavon Austin, although he looks like an interesting package, doesn't fit into the NEW Ram style - I think if we drafted him, he'd end up being our PR / KR guy and I think THAT would be a travesty for use of a round 1 draft pick for a team with so many needs.

The WR class of 2013 has 5-6 players all with talent, with better physical attributes for a bruising season than Tavon Austin - Many guys class him in a similar vein to Danny Amendola - his injury sheet is almost the same height as him. Being smaller, he's going to have to push / throw / stretch his body for that catch - THAT's when you get injuries...

 

[jrry32]

I like Tavon Austin, I've sung his praises plenty, but I've been subjective and I just don't think Austin is a Fisher kinda player. Look at the guys he's drafted or picked up n FA - BIG, physical players on BOTH sides of the ball.

I don't believe Tavon Austin, although he looks like an interesting package, doesn't fit into the NEW Ram style - I think if we drafted him, he'd end up being our PR / KR guy and I think THAT would be a travesty for use of a round 1 draft pick for a team with so many needs.

The WR class of 2013 has 5-6 players all with talent, with better physical attributes for a bruising season than Tavon Austin - Many guys class him in a similar vein to Danny Amendola - his injury sheet is almost the same height as him. Being smaller, he's going to have to push / throw / stretch his body for that catch - THAT's when you get injuries...

Doesn't matter what size you are, you're going to be doing that from time to time. Tavon's injury sheet is non-existent.

People are getting far too hung up on "he COULD get hurt". He's never missed a game in his career. Sure, he could get hurt. So could the 6'3" 220 pound WR. Look at Kenny Britt, Mike Sims-Walker, Laurent Robinson, Michael Irvin and David Boston. All were bigger WRs that had their careers essentially ended by injuries...except Britt but his has taken quite the beating.

If Austin has proven anything, it's that he's not a guy who is especially susceptible to soft tissue and nagging injuries. He's not an injury prone player. He could suffer a freak injury or more than one freak injury. But so could every other player in the draft. Marcus Lattimore is 6'0" 220 and has suffered terrible freak injuries in back to back years. It's football, injuries happen.

There's no way to predict them. The best you can do is make sure you get tough guys with work ethic that aren't going to have issues with the small, nagging injuries. I think Austin has proven that he's one of those guys.

I don't disagree that he may not fit Fisher's vision for the team. We'll see on that. However, if we pick Austin, we're not drafting him to be just a KR/PR. If we pick him, it's because we're going to use him as a major piece of our offense.

 

[-X-]

Yep, there are disadvantages. Obviously, he has a smaller catch radius which makes Bradford's job a little harder in that regard. Having a smaller frame means that it's harder for him to use his body to keep defenders from getting a hand on the ball in tight coverage. Lacking length means it will be a bit harder to disengage if the CB does get a good jam on him.

I have reservations about every player...there are just guys that I am very confident in their ability and my belief that they'll pan out on the next level. In my history, I have a few misses but I have hit on the majority. I've done a lot worse in projecting guys that I didn't like. What I mean by that is that the guys that I expect to "boom" and want to draft have a hit rate of like 75%(made up number) whereas the guys that I didn't want to draft and thought they wouldn't pan out that well, my hit rate is like 50%(made up number).

So I'd put more stock in positive feelings from me than negative ones. :bg:

How did you feel about Mardy Gilyard when he was drafted? As a player, and not so much his life story.

I didn't mind the pick. I usually end up talking myself into liking the pick after a few minutes of anger but I wanted the Rams to draft Aaron Hernandez, Jon Dwyer or Everson Griffen at that spot so I was disappointed.

Not counting Sam Bradford, the 2012 NFL Draft was the first time the Rams took the guy that I stated I wanted before the pick...it happened twice...Chris Givens and Janoris Jenkins. Then again, I wanted DeCastro at #14 so I'm glad they made the pick they did at that spot. Brockers has worked out fabulously.

That's pretty much how I am too. Once I'm over being perplexed at why they picked a guy, I tend to rationalize it by finding out how it fits within the vision or philosophy of the coaches at the time. Of course there were sometimes where it was impossible to justify a pick, but I won't enumerate those instances.

By the time we took Gilyard, I was already a bit pissed off that Jimmy Graham didn't slip a few more notches into the 4th round, and subsequently, into our lap. He just needed to drop FOUR SPOTS, MAN! FOUR! :amped: :amped: :amped:

 

[duckhunter]

For me, it doesn't specifically have to be Austin. He has special qualities that you don't see often and adds multiple elements that the team doesn't have enough of. Where you slot the guy, hell I don't know, but he's an anomaly. Bullit Bob was too but that didn't stop experts from criticizing him unmercifully because he was a track guy. There are three questions about Austin (1) can he play outside the hash marks (2) can he get off the chuck and (3) can he run the entire route tree. The size thing is not as relevant as most make it.

I said before that Cook's plays stats last year were: 85% from the slot, 15% inline and 10% outside the the hash marks. Now if Schotty can't figure out how to use Cook and Austin in the same set, fire him. It's that simple.

However, the one thing that I don't want is another big guy that can't chew gum and walk at the same time.

You take Givens out of this offense and we are where we were 3 or 4 years ago. They sit on every short route and Sam will be trying to thread a needle through a constipated ant's ass. We still will be saying get Sam some weapons.

If Fisher wants to play smash mouth football, that's fine. I'm all for that. But I believe the best thing to complement that is with hands, speed, quickness, COD, and route running at WR.

If it is not Austin then Hopkins, Wheaton, Woods, Bailey or Patton in the 2nd or 3rd. These guys have the hands and can get separation on their own without running picks to get them open.

 

[jrry32]

That's pretty much how I am too. Once I'm over being perplexed at why they picked a guy, I tend to rationalize it by finding out how it fits within the vision or philosophy of the coaches at the time. Of course there were sometimes where it was impossible to justify a pick, but I won't enumerate those instances.

By the time we took Gilyard, I was already a bit pissed off that Jimmy Graham didn't slip a few more notches into the 4th round, and subsequently, into our lap. He just needed to drop FOUR SPOTS, MAN! FOUR! :amped: :amped: :amped:

To be fair, I think you would have been more angry when we chose not to take Graham for some unexplainable reason.

And yea, I know what you mean. I was really mad when they passed on Alshon Jeffery for Quick. I also was seething when we took Carriker over Darrelle Revis. And don't get me started on Donnie Avery. :lol:

 

[-X-]

That's pretty much how I am too. Once I'm over being perplexed at why they picked a guy, I tend to rationalize it by finding out how it fits within the vision or philosophy of the coaches at the time. Of course there were sometimes where it was impossible to justify a pick, but I won't enumerate those instances.

By the time we took Gilyard, I was already a bit pissed off that Jimmy Graham didn't slip a few more notches into the 4th round, and subsequently, into our lap. He just needed to drop FOUR SPOTS, MAN! FOUR! :amped: :amped: :amped:

To be fair, I think you would have been more angry when we chose not to take Graham for some unexplainable reason.

And yea, I know what you mean. I was really mad when they passed on Alshon Jeffery for Quick. I also was seething when we took Carriker over Darrelle Revis. And don't get me started on Donnie Avery. :lol:

Well, I would hope that they had Graham ranked higher than Hoomanawanui, but you're probably right.
I might have flipped my lid if and when they made a different determination.

 

[PressureD41]

Speaking solely for myself, that's not really the disconnect I'm having. I just don't believe that they're as rigid on roles as some here think.

Cook can be on the field at the same time as another slot WR. Austin isn't a guy who is limited to the slot. Amendola played Flanker and Slot for us in 2012.(Flanker in 2 WR sets and Slot in 3+ WR sets) Austin is less limited than Amendola because he has the speed to challenge teams deep.

So for me, saying Cook will be used as a slot WR doesn't preclude them from taking a guy like Austin in my mind. As I said before, the Patriots managed to use both Hernandez and Welker in the slot quite effectively.

Here you see that Cook is in the slot with another WR:
<a class="postlink" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDb79EAePss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDb79EAePss</a>

For me, the question isn't Cook...it's Kendricks. He'd be the one leaving the field for the slot WR likely.

I think it's give us a lot more flexibility and makes our passing game tough to match-up to. You put Cook, Austin, Givens and Quick(or another WR) out on the field at the same time...how many teams have the athletes to match-up with all those bodies in man coverage?

----------

IMHO if we take Kendrick's off the field then your allowing teams to go nickel or dime d... Cook is an average blocker at best and I think it's safe to say Austin isn't going to be asked to block.

I think (IMHO) the Rams want both TEs on the field most of the time. 2TE will be our base O... And from that your not predictable in Tipping your hand to your opponent.
This is my main point as too why I think we will past on T. Austin. Not in Fisher DNA to have the Jitter bug type of wide receiver.

I think taking DT/OG at 16 then I foresee us trading down from 22 and drafting a FS. Then they will target a WR in the rd 2 w/ the extra pick.
Edit: my reason is we need a S to start sooner than the WR. Assuming Quick & Givens are the starters


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bwdenverram]

Cook.plays in the slot... basically eliminates the place Austin would line-up.

People in the Austin camp need to realize this. Cook is our slot WR!
I say take DT or OG or FS @ 16 then trade down w/ a QB needy team and target a wr perhaps Justin Hunter!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not going to argue with you or Selassie. Cook is a hybrid WR/TE. If you want to call him a slot receiver at his size that's fine. You could say Patterson is similar to Cook, size and speed wise. But answer this, how many times has Cook (the slot receiver) taken a pass 80 yards for a TD? How many punt or kickoff returns has Cook had?
The point I'm trying to make is Austin is not the same type of player. He does all of those things. We need dynamic players that create mismatches.

 

[CGI_Ram]

The whole point of having or getting versatile receivers like Jared Cook and Tavon Austin is to create mismatches. Trying to tight cast them as simply a slot receiver or an outside-the-hashmarks receiver would allow a defensive coordinator to align his defense to minimize their effectiveness, However, by moving them around, including before-snap shifts, you can drive a DC bonkers by trying to account for their speed, size, sheer athleticism, etc.

I'm with jap.

 

[Selassie I]

Cook.plays in the slot... basically eliminates the place Austin would line-up.

People in the Austin camp need to realize this. Cook is our slot WR!
I say take DT or OG or FS @ 16 then trade down w/ a QB needy team and target a wr perhaps Justin Hunter!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not going to argue with you or Selassie. Cook is a hybrid WR/TE. If you want to call him a slot receiver at his size that's fine. You could say Patterson is similar to Cook, size and speed wise. But answer this, how many times has Cook (the slot receiver) taken a pass 80 yards for a TD? How many punt or kickoff returns has Cook had?
The point I'm trying to make is Austin is not the same type of player. He does all of those things. We need dynamic players that create mismatches.

Well at least tell me this Denver...

How do you like my incredible punctuation in my original quoted post here Brudda?



Not gonna tell you that I don't like what Austin is going to bring to the table. I'm a fan,,, no doubt. He's got some serious wheels, and speed kills. Nobody thinks that our team needs to add seriously to the receiving corp as much as I do. Nobody.

:7up:

 

[jrry32]

IMHO if we take Kendrick's off the field then your allowing teams to go nickel or dime d... Cook is an average blocker at best and I think it's safe to say Austin isn't going to be asked to block.

Austin blocks in college. If they go to nickel and dime defense, sounds good to me. Spreading them out gives us bigger running lanes for our speedy HBs.

 

[shaunpinney]

For me, it doesn't specifically have to be Austin. He has special qualities that you don't see often and adds multiple elements that the team doesn't have enough of. Where you slot the guy, hell I don't know, but he's an anomaly. Bullit Bob was too but that didn't stop experts from criticizing him unmercifully because he was a track guy. There are three questions about Austin (1) can he play outside the hash marks (2) can he get off the chuck and (3) can he run the entire route tree. The size thing is not as relevant as most make it.

I said before that Cook's plays stats last year were: 85% from the slot, 15% inline and 10% outside the the hash marks. Now if Schotty can't figure out how to use Cook and Austin in the same set, fire him. It's that simple.

However, the one thing that I don't want is another big guy that can't chew gum and walk at the same time.

You take Givens out of this offense and we are where we were 3 or 4 years ago. They sit on every short route and Sam will be trying to thread a needle through a constipated ant's ass. We still will be saying get Sam some weapons.

If Fisher wants to play smash mouth football, that's fine. I'm all for that. But I believe the best thing to complement that is with hands, speed, quickness, COD, and route running at WR.

If it is not Austin then Hopkins, Wheaton, Woods, Bailey or Patton in the 2nd or 3rd. These guys have the hands and can get separation on their own without running picks to get them open.

If you're looking for a WR with a football brain then Woods is your man, his football understanding and route tree knowledge was commented on a few times at the combine from various scouts. He also has the sweetest catching action