Tim Barnes why? I don't get the love?

[Angry Ram]

PFF ruins football.

Fact.

 

[Riverumbbq]

While I would agree that on scores or stats or what have you, there were one or two better options through FA. How did grabbing Wells and Brown before him work out in that area? We took a run at Mack but didn't get him. I'm just not so sure that paying a 30 year old that kind of jack is wise even if he scores higher on the PFF system. Would another C coming in with no experience with our system or line mates or QB fair better than Barnes? Maybe. Maybe not. To me, he looks like a pretty good young center that is improving and has upside. Proof is always in the pudding and I too am wanting us to just get it done and challenge for the SB. I'm just not a big fan of paying huge money on a center or guard in FA. I'd rather see what we can build over time. That to me will be the way we stay consistent and in the chase each year.

Actually, I favored the 33 year old, 10 year vet Manual Ramirez. Older guy, kinda like Evan Mathis last season, good career, looking for one more contract. I also want to draft Nick Martin, so a quality vet mentor for the rookie. In case you're curious, Ramirez graded out as # 4 of 39, Mack was 13 of 39, and Wisniewski graded 19 of 39.

 

[Akrasian]

Yes I agree with your synopsis outlining all the variables are not known but this is an aggregate of information that equally applied to all the other centers in the league. Why would Barnes be picked out and unfairly graded or compared to the others based on the same uncertainties.

It's not a case of Barnes being unfairly picked out - they aren't explicitly biased against him - rather it's a case of PFF's analysis is wildly inaccurate, so much that it's worthless or close to it for evaluating the OL.

Let me ask you - since Barnes is so weak, according to PFF - how did Gurley get Offensive ROY, and why did the Rams give up so few sacks? Especially the latter - if he were so weak you would expect the QB to be routinely flushed out of the pocket to be hit by the DEs. Are you claiming that the Rams OTs are so awesome they could withstand a horrible center?

Or perhaps, PFF did not actually understand what the Ram OL calls were, and graded players incorrectly?

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

If Barnes is as good as some of you that claim they know how to watch football, then why wasn't he in any demand from other teams? And why didn't he get a big contract? Surely if he is so good he should be making 10 million a year, right?

Reality is that he is a durable dedicated player that is the best the Rams have and his contract was very good for the cap. How many free agent centers were out there? 2. Barnes is a solid team player. But, center is still not a strength on this team with him starting. Center is a below average position on the Rams. Hopefully they can upgrade with one in the draft.

 

[woofwoofmo]

Rams are investing up to $9M in him the next two years. That's enough to tell me they like what they see. There's a reason we're all talking about this on a board and not GM's.

Bedtime

 

[Akrasian]

If Barnes is as good as some of you that claim they know how to watch football, then why wasn't he in any demand from other teams? And why didn't he get a big contract? Surely if he is so good he should be making 10 million a year, right?

Reality is that he is a durable dedicated player that is the best the Rams have and his contract was very good for the cap. How many free agent centers were out there? 2. Barnes is a solid team player. But, center is still not a strength on this team with him starting. Center is a below average position on the Rams. Hopefully they can upgrade with one in the draft.

I don't think anybody is claiming he couldn't be upgraded. The Rams did explore that, after all.

However, the reality of the NFL is that teams have to balance the player against the cap hit. He's a reasonable center - not a star - playing on an inexpensive contract. The alternatives had negatives of their own, and were many times more expensive, meaning that a hole would be created elsewhere. Saying that Barnes is a worthwhile signing is not saying that he can not be replaced if the right guy comes along at the right price. However, the Rams now have a few years to deal with other issues before it will hopefully be a crisis - which includes the opportunity to pick up somebody else and develop him, as they did Barnes. Or have Rhaney, who they apparently like, force his way into the lineup.

 

[Riverumbbq]

This horse has been beaten in numerous threads the last few months.:deadhorse:

For those of you who think PFF is gospel, there's no changing your minds. For those of us, which includes players and coaches, who believe PFF ratings are far from perfect and often paint a very inaccurate picture almost to the point of being laughable, they are pretty much disregarded. PFF's ratings especially when it comes to OL are almost totally subjective. They are making judgments without any knowledge of what the line call was, if the QB made a bad read, receiver ran a wrong route leading to a sack, RB hit the wrong hole, any number of variables that impact the OL. They don't take into any account the necessary cohesion in a line that leads to better play by all. When the analysis is likely done by someone who never played the game and is guessing what they think should have been done, you can understand why it's not highly regarded by players and coaches, and yes I've had those discussions with them. The Rams line all year was beaten up by PFF, yet they almost set a record for fewest sacks allowed and graded the road for the Offensive Rookie of the Year.

To me the much better indicator of a players worth and value is if a team is willing to invest and keep reinvesting in a player. The Front Office and Coaches certainly know much better what is going on than a rating service based in the UK. (No Offense @UKram ):rolllaugh:

First, accusing me of using PFF as gospel is a lie which i'm happy to reject. I do find it a useful tool, but I rely on my eyes and other available analysis. You can beat your horse and laugh all you want, but few really use PFF to support all of their arguments, ... it's a reliable service which offers an outline which doesn't discriminate by school, age, height/weight, past years performance, etc. It's only a guideline, no more, no less, and every team in the league uses it and knows what its positives and negatives are. It's no substitute for film, and no-one is suggesting it is. I have found it to be quite reasonable, and since I can't watch every single player and game the league offers each year, I read it knowing the shortcomings.

While you attack PFF for not praising the Rams OL, imagine if Gurley had been running behind those guys if they were all experienced fully developed vets, or been healthy for most of the season, … who knows what he might have accomplished. And if you track week to week, you can find inconsistencies in play, or how they all develop over time. If you watched Barnes this season, he got off to a very rough start and settled down and played better in the second half of the season, all that was reflected by PFF whether you like it or not.

 

[Riverumbbq]

It's not a case of Barnes being unfairly picked out - they aren't explicitly biased against him - rather it's a case of PFF's analysis is wildly inaccurate, so much that it's worthless or close to it for evaluating the OL.

Let me ask you - since Barnes is so weak, according to PFF - how did Gurley get Offensive ROY, and why did the Rams give up so few sacks? Especially the latter - if he were so weak you would expect the QB to be routinely flushed out of the pocket to be hit by the DEs. Are you claiming that the Rams OTs are so awesome they could withstand a horrible center?

Or perhaps, PFF did not actually understand what the Ram OL calls were, and graded players incorrectly?

Avoiding sacks is not all on the OL, having a somewhat mobile QB, a good blocking RB or TE also affects these stats. And the Rams OL may have not allowed many sacks, but they registered plenty of QB hurries.

 

[OldSchool]

I find it very funny that people use individual rankings for players that are a part of a unit. It isn't Barnes vs one guy. It's the Rams 5blibemen, a TE or 2 and a RB or two block g the defense. Breaking it down the way PFF attempts is foolish.

 

[bluecoconuts]

If the 10 shoots you down, it's better to go home with the 6 than with nobody at all.

 

[Riverumbbq]

Rams re-sign center Tim Barnes
4:54 p.m. ET, Wed., March 9

According to Sam Farmer, the Rams are bringing back starting center Tim Barnes (45.6 overall grade in 2015). In his first year as a starter, he played in all but five snaps over the course of the season, but graded below average in both pass-blocking and run-blocking. Barnes did have two games against the Seahawks and Lions where he looked like one of the better centers in the league, but in more games than not, he wasn’t helping the team. Outside of right tackle Rob Havenstein (76.3), the Rams’ offensive line is a weak point for the team, and bringing back Barnes isn’t going to help their situation. – Nathan Jahnke

 

[jrry32]

He's serviceable. Can hold down the fort until someone better comes along via the draft. Brings continuity and knowledge of the scheme.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Second, PFF doesn't look at the overall experience standing next to him.

Thank you. Evaluating individual OLinemen is with numbers is silly.

 

[RamsOfCastamere]

The PFF is not accurate but let's not get carried away - we all know Tim Barnes is average, and if we did not resign him, how many teams do you think would have picked him up to start?

Can we draft an upgrade? Yea, but at the cost of other pressing needs. We don't have the cap to have 5 pro browl caliber lineman so we have to pick and choose which players/positions are more important and where our money goes. Barnes is cheap and knows the system, so we can save money and use it on Gurley, Donald, Brockers, and TA.

 

[Mojo Ram]

This horse has been beaten in numerous threads the last few months.:deadhorse:

For those of you who think PFF is gospel, there's no changing your minds. For those of us, which includes players and coaches, who believe PFF ratings are far from perfect and often paint a very inaccurate picture almost to the point of being laughable, they are pretty much disregarded. PFF's ratings especially when it comes to OL are almost totally subjective. They are making judgments without any knowledge of what the line call was, if the QB made a bad read, receiver ran a wrong route leading to a sack, RB hit the wrong hole, any number of variables that impact the OL. They don't take into any account the necessary cohesion in a line that leads to better play by all. When the analysis is likely done by someone who never played the game and is guessing what they think should have been done, you can understand why it's not highly regarded by players and coaches, and yes I've had those discussions with them. The Rams line all year was beaten up by PFF, yet they almost set a record for fewest sacks allowed and graded the road for the Offensive Rookie of the Year.

To me the much better indicator of a players worth and value is if a team is willing to invest and keep reinvesting in a player. The Front Office and Coaches certainly know much better what is going on than a rating service based in the UK. (No Offense @UKram ):rolllaugh:

 

[shaunpinney]

I'm glad we re-signed Barnes. I think a lot of people forget that the o-line is a unit, and our unit is full of young guys, who are developing together.

Barnes seems to be a level headed kinda guy that can help our younger o-line guys. Is he the best centre out there, no. But Wells was a pro bowler and you know what, he stank in the Rams o-line. We can't have too many holes to fill with the draft and the centres available in FA would have cost us an arm and a leg.

I think we have more pressing needs than a centre.

 

[den-the-coach]

He's serviceable. Can hold down the fort until someone better comes along via the draft. Brings continuity and knowledge of the scheme.

 

[12intheBox]

Our entire O Line is now returning - right?

 

[ausmurp]

I agree with you totally although he is "the best we have". Strong DTs bullrushed him all year like he was a curtain.

This. Watch the tape pff haters. He was terrible on passing downs. So what if he didn't give up many sacks, our whole team was 2nd best in sacks given up. But we were 1 pass attmept per game away from being1st in least passes attempted too. They correlate. Watch the tape and more often than not, Barnes just doidnt have the strength on passing downs. We have to pass sometimes,hate to break it to y'all. Can't run 80% of the time and expect to win...

 

[CoachO]

If Barnes is as good as some of you that claim they know how to watch football, then why wasn't he in any demand from other teams? And why didn't he get a big contract? Surely if he is so good he should be making 10 million a year, right?

Reality is that he is a durable dedicated player that is the best the Rams have and his contract was very good for the cap. How many free agent centers were out there? 2. Barnes is a solid team player. But, center is still not a strength on this team with him starting. Center is a below average position on the Rams. Hopefully they can upgrade with one in the draft.

And you somehow know that he hadn't garnered any interest from others teams?

I'll make two quick points regarding that issue:

Since the Rams tied him up on THE DAY that free agency kicked in there were no "reports" of any other teams being interested.

Secondly, I know for a fact that he had garnered interest from no less than FOUR other teams, including the one who eventually signed Mack.

So maybe you should avoid making assumptions when you don't have all the information.