What if we threw the house at skill positions?

[FrantikRam]

Last year we drafted Havenstein, Brown, Wichman, Donnal, and Battle.

Before the draft last year, OL was such a huge concern that us fans were basically freaking out. We let go some veterans and did nothing to replace them in FA.

This year has been similar with our skill positions. We've "lost" Cook. Harkey and BC remain unsigned. We've done nothing to add to this issue. Stedman's status is up in the air. We have Quick, Britt and Austin - none of which proved to be able to reliably catch the ball last year.

Could we see a similar "throw the house" mentality to WR/TE? We could draft two WRs and a TE with our first three picks and it could make sense.

Or maybe like last year we take BPA in the first round and then attack those need areas with our next three picks.

I guess what I'm really wondering is....with QB seeming more and more out of reach, does it make sense to load up the rest of our roster and use the Broncos as an example for what we could be?

 

[woofwoofmo]

A small update to your post:

http://www.ramsondemand.com/threads/rams-re-sign-harkey.43602/#post-721258

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I don't think it will be enough. I love listening to the Herd radio. Today he got on the QB subject. He related not having a good QB to driving an unreliable beater. Having a reliable car in this day and age is a necessity. If you don't have a good reliable QB that can do everything that is needed from the position then you have a beater.

He brought up Belichick. Drives to work every day for the last 12 years never having to worry about a QB. The single most difficult position to fill. Pete Carroll was 7-9 and 7-9 until he found Russell Wilson. So what is a top QB worth? How many picks? He says 5 first rounders in his opinion. I think if the Rams want to move up for Wentz they will need to give up equivalent of 3 first round picks. It will suck for a few years, but having the QB would be worth it. It would allow every other part of the team to fall into place. Other positions can be plugged with mid round picks and UDFAs and FAs. The Skins survived it. The Rams would too. And they have had good drafts throughout so they could keep their core in place and keep plugging holes here and there. One hole they cannot plug in any other way is QB.

Trade up to #1 and get it over with. Have mercy on us fans please.

 

[DR RAM]

Last year we drafted Havenstein, Brown, Wichman, Donnal, and Battle.

Before the draft last year, OL was such a huge concern that us fans were basically freaking out. We let go some veterans and did nothing to replace them in FA.

This year has been similar with our skill positions. We've "lost" Cook. Harkey and BC remain unsigned. We've done nothing to add to this issue. Stedman's status is up in the air. We have Quick, Britt and Austin - none of which proved to be able to reliably catch the ball last year.

Could we see a similar "throw the house" mentality to WR/TE? We could draft two WRs and a TE with our first three picks and it could make sense.

Or maybe like last year we take BPA in the first round and then attack those need areas with our next three picks.

I guess what I'm really wondering is....with QB seeming more and more out of reach, does it make sense to load up the rest of our roster and use the Broncos as an example for what we could be?

My only problem with that is that this is a weak draft at those positions.

 

[DaveFan'51]

Last year we drafted Havenstein, Brown, Wichman, Donnal, and Battle.

Before the draft last year, OL was such a huge concern that us fans were basically freaking out. We let go some veterans and did nothing to replace them in FA.

This year has been similar with our skill positions. We've "lost" Cook. Harkey and BC remain unsigned. We've done nothing to add to this issue. Stedman's status is up in the air. We have Quick, Britt and Austin - none of which proved to be able to reliably catch the ball last year.

Could we see a similar "throw the house" mentality to WR/TE? We could draft two WRs and a TE with our first three picks and it could make sense.

Or maybe like last year we take BPA in the first round and then attack those need areas with our next three picks.

I guess what I'm really wondering is....with QB seeming more and more out of reach, does it make sense to load up the rest of our roster and use the Broncos as an example for what we could be?

We also lost a lot of "D" players because we either cut them, or failed to re-sign them! So, to me it wouldn't make sense to go all-in on so called "Skill Players" to me!

 

[Rams43]

My only problem with that is that this is a weak draft at those positions.

Not sure that it's a weak draft at WR, DR.

Not a '14 type WR draft with multiple elites at the top, of course.

But I suspect that the Rams could find a couple of WR's that could really help them after the 1st round in this draft.

Problem with throwing the sink at WR is that we also need QB, DE (starter type), and TE, as well. Maybe CB and FS, too.

And if a blockbuster trade up to #6 for Goff is negotiated, we'll lose a 2nd, as well.

Given that a WR needs lots of snaps and a year or two, probably just as well that we only take one, anyway.

I was hoping for a FA or two, but it now looks like we're running out of cap dollars, doesn't it?

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Last year we drafted Havenstein, Brown, Wichman, Donnal, and Battle.

Before the draft last year, OL was such a huge concern that us fans were basically freaking out. We let go some veterans and did nothing to replace them in FA.

This year has been similar with our skill positions. We've "lost" Cook. Harkey and BC remain unsigned. We've done nothing to add to this issue. Stedman's status is up in the air. We have Quick, Britt and Austin - none of which proved to be able to reliably catch the ball last year.

Could we see a similar "throw the house" mentality to WR/TE? We could draft two WRs and a TE with our first three picks and it could make sense.

Or maybe like last year we take BPA in the first round and then attack those need areas with our next three picks.

I guess what I'm really wondering is....with QB seeming more and more out of reach, does it make sense to load up the rest of our roster and use the Broncos as an example for what we could be?

At first this strategy of drafting in groups sounded like a good one. But just this season we saw Tru and JJ both up for free agency at the same time. What happens if, all 3 of those Olinemen pan out? One year GRob is a free agent and the next year two guards and the ORT are free agents. The Rams are not likely to sign them all and if they lose 2 out of the 4 they are halfway to where they were before drafting them altogether. In otherwords it can hurt a position group in 4-5 years or stress the cap at one position on the field.

 

[Merlin]

The Rams could trade up for Wentz/Goff and still get all crazy with WR in this draft because the value at the position extends well into mid-rounds. They move up to one overall for example with this year's 1 & 2 and next year's 1 & 2 and they still have rounds 2, 3, 4 picks to take a couple passing game weapons plus an ILB or DT, CB, etc.

I'm with @Elmgrovegnome and it's really simple stuff we're talking about here. Rams need to fill the position. Get up there and address it.

 

[OldSchool]

Only things aside from qb, WR and TE I can think of would be kicker and possibly free safety.

 

[DR RAM]

Not sure that it's a weak draft at WR, DR.

Not a '14 type WR draft with multiple elites at the top, of course.

But I suspect that the Rams could find a couple of WR's that could really help them after the 1st round in this draft.

Problem with throwing the sink at WR is that we also need QB, DE (starter type), and TE, as well. Maybe CB and FS, too.

And if a blockbuster trade up to #6 for Goff is negotiated, we'll lose a 2nd, as well.

Given that a WR needs lots of snaps and a year or two, probably just as well that we only take one, anyway.

I was hoping for a FA or two, but it now looks like we're running out of cap dollars, doesn't it?

It's just OK at the top, and not very deep. There are a lot of WR's that can catch the ball, but don't run very well. I think the class is below par.

 

[FrantikRam]

If it fell this way...

1. Treadwell
2. Boyd
2. Hunter Henry
3. Braxton Miller

This would be the only type of draft where I would be okay with not getting a QB. Miller plays behind Tavon in the "offensive weapon" role, and provides insurance in case Tavon's 10 TD season has him seeing too many $$$$$ signs. Treadwell, Boyd and Henry are ready to contribute day 1.

4th round pick you can get depth for C or FS.

 

[Yamahopper]

Depends how many picks they have if they trade up. Best WR or TE with first pick in 2nd and not a slot guy. He has to start game 1. After that a lot of it is can they contribute this year or will it be awhile.
All they really have is Britt and TA, that's 2. The rest are really questionable.

If not going to trade up this would be the time to trade down get extra picks and rebuild some depth.

 

[OldSchool]

Depends how many picks they have if they trade up. Best WR or TE with first pick in 2nd and not a slot guy. He has to start game 1. After that a lot of it is can they contribute this year or will it be awhile.
All they really have is Britt and TA, that's 2. The rest are really questionable.

If not going to trade up this would be the time to trade down get extra picks and rebuild some depth.

I disagree we don't need to rebuild depth, we're fine there but if we trade down get picks next year. If we don't go qb this year but we build up picks next year we can add those to our picks and comp picks to move up next year.

 

[Yamahopper]

I disagree we don't need to rebuild depth, we're fine there but if we trade down get picks next year. If we don't go qb this year but we build up picks next year we can add those to our picks and comp picks to move up next year.

Who's the back up LB's that can play stretches of games. Safety, move Alexander who backs up TJ ? Or Davis to FS who then Bryant but who fills his role.
Gurley and ?
It's not just having bodies it's improving the units.

 

[Merlin]

Problem with throwing the sink at WR is that we also need QB, DE (starter type), and TE, as well. Maybe CB and FS, too.

Rams do not need a starter type at DE. They also do not need a CB and FS. Those are all depth type fills which are not things that factor in when you are considering true needs. This regime is excellent at identifying DBs and will find depth and ST types through late round picks and UDFA. DE they can take, sure, if one is there that they don't want to pass up, but barring that they are not going to be working it as a need where they position for a value group to ensure they can address it.

Needs right now are looking much better for us 43. Here's our current depth chart and I'm thinking the following are the true needs remaining:

1. QB
2. WR (x2)
3. TE (pass catcher)
4. K
5. DT (rotation)

All teams are going to have positions where they'd like to upgrade, and the Rams are no different with Center and for now LT being areas of concern. But that's ok. And it's not like they don't have depth with some upside at both those positions, as well. So IMO if the Rams can address those positions above they're gonna be in business.

 

[dieterbrock]

I guess what I'm really wondering is....with QB seeming more and more out of reach, does it make sense to load up the rest of our roster and use the Broncos as an example for what we could be?

I must have missed the part where we got a HOF and possibly GOAT QB like Denver had....

I like the parallel to last year O-line. Definitely feels similar. I just have a hard time thinking we go in to next year without drafting a QB this year at #1.

 

[jrry32]

If it fell this way...

1. Treadwell
2. Boyd
2. Hunter Henry
3. Braxton Miller

This would be the only type of draft where I would be okay with not getting a QB. Miller plays behind Tavon in the "offensive weapon" role, and provides insurance in case Tavon's 10 TD season has him seeing too many $$$$$ signs. Treadwell, Boyd and Henry are ready to contribute day 1.

4th round pick you can get depth for C or FS.

I'm sorry, Franktik, but this is a nightmare of a draft. Case Keenum is Case Keenum. Surrounding him with weapons won't change who he is.

And I don't know why you'd draft Braxton Miller to backup Tavon in a role that isn't large enough for two players.

Grabbing a bunch of WRs/TEs won't fix our QB spot.

 

[FrantikRam]

I'm sorry, Franktik, but this is a nightmare of a draft. Case Keenum is Case Keenum. Surrounding him with weapons won't change who he is.

And I don't know why you'd draft Braxton Miller to backup Tavon in a role that isn't large enough for two players.

Grabbing a bunch of WRs/TEs won't fix our QB spot.

I'm with you...I want a QB above all else.

But I just have a feeling they aren't going to get one. I will be depressed if Case Keenum is the starter next year, so I really posted this in an effort to make myself feel better about something I can see coming...

My Braxton pick would be for the future though...no guarantee that we can re-sign Tavon, he has gotten nicked up and missed time before (not for a few years now though), and I just would want as many play makers as possible around a crappy QB if that's the route they're going to go.

 

[jrry32]

I'm with you...I want a QB above all else.

But I just have a feeling they aren't going to get one. I will be depressed if Case Keenum is the starter next year, so I really posted this in an effort to make myself feel better about something I can see coming...

My Braxton pick would be for the future though...no guarantee that we can re-sign Tavon, he has gotten nicked up and missed time before (not for a few years now though), and I just would want as many play makers as possible around a crappy QB if that's the route they're going to go.

I mean...if we're ruining our optimism with realism, you forgot the HB, DE, and CB.

 

[FrantikRam]

I mean...if we're ruining our optimism with realism, you forgot the HB, DE, and CB.

I feel good about DE and CB now. RB will be good too after the draft (even if it's an UDFA).