Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 63
Like Tree35Likes

Thread: We now have the 5th pick!

  1. #31
    citr92 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,248
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    i just plain old don't buy in to the clowney hype lol


  2. #32
    jjigga3000's Avatar
    jjigga3000 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cali
    Posts
    1,440
    Rep Power
    16

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    I think we should wait and not gloat a lot of things can happen with 5 games left in the season.
    Vinnie25 likes this.

  3. #33
    bruce4life's Avatar
    bruce4life is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Hemet/San Diego CA
    Age
    34
    Posts
    2,856
    Rep Power
    31
    Anything can change regarding Draft position. Redskins could get hot and finish 7-9 and we'd have a 14-16 pick pr they can fall on their face and end up 4-12 and we could have a 3-5pick. It also depends on how bad rhe browns, jags, ans texans do.

  4. #34
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,454
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I agree with you on Matthews, but I wouldn't completely rule out Clowney, and here's why.

    In the next two years, the Rams are going to have to commit some serious money to Robert Quinn. Here are some recent 4-3 DE contracts to consider...


    • July 2011: Panthers extend DE Charles Johnson for $76 million over six years
    • March 2012: Bills sign DE Mario Williams for $96 million over six years
    • July 2012: Rams extend DE Chris Long for $60 million over five years


    Now I don't think Quinn is going to get Super Mario kind of money, but based on the Long and Johnson contracts, Quinn would be stupid to settle for anything less than $12 million a year.

    Can the Rams afford to pay that, when they know they've got Bradford's extension coming up in the same window of time?

    I don't think it's a very likely possibility, but I can envision a scenario where the Rams feel it's better for their team economically to have Clowney under the rookie wage contract and move Quinn for other resources (picks/players), freeing them up to spend the money they'd otherwise use to extend Quinn elsewhere.

    Just some food for thought.
    When all this transpires, I think the Rams would probably unload Chris Long before they get rid of Robert Quinn. Quinn is better in all phases of the game, simply put. With that being said, the unloading of guys like Scott Wells, Harvey Dahl, and potentially Finnegan and Langford, the Rams should have upwards of up to 25 million to play around with.


    THE DREAM TEAM

  5. #35
    NJ Ramsfan1 is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    new jersey
    Posts
    2,242
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by sosa39rams View Post
    When all this transpires, I think the Rams would probably unload Chris Long before they get rid of Robert Quinn.

    You see, and this is another big reason why I am hesitant to trade down. We keep doing this, and the next thing you know guys like Long and Laurinaitis will be long in the tooth. They deserve the opportunity to play for a Rams playoff team before they are considered expendable. And we can certainly bolster our roster without gambling on eyeing late round talent. People have to realize that what Fisher and Snead did, which is obtain good value with several late round picks, is not the norm. To think we'll automatically do that again if we trade down is a mistake.

  6. #36
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,454
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1 View Post
    You see, and this is another big reason why I am hesitant to trade down. We keep doing this, and the next thing you know guys like Long and Laurinaitis will be long in the tooth. They deserve the opportunity to play for a Rams playoff team before they are considered expendable. And we can certainly bolster our roster without gambling on eyeing late round talent. People have to realize that what Fisher and Snead did, which is obtain good value with several late round picks, is not the norm. To think we'll automatically do that again if we trade down is a mistake.
    I agree. I'd rather have 2 superstars than 4 decent players.. (For now) I think we stay put and take 2 players who can have a big impact on our team, but we'll see. I just want great players, I don't care how they come.
    Randart likes this.


    THE DREAM TEAM

  7. #37
    Trevor's Avatar
    Trevor is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vicenza, Italy From Hagerstown, MD
    Age
    24
    Posts
    1,296
    Rep Power
    13

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I agree with you on Matthews, but I wouldn't completely rule out Clowney, and here's why.

    In the next two years, the Rams are going to have to commit some serious money to Robert Quinn. Here are some recent 4-3 DE contracts to consider...


    • July 2011: Panthers extend DE Charles Johnson for $76 million over six years
    • March 2012: Bills sign DE Mario Williams for $96 million over six years
    • July 2012: Rams extend DE Chris Long for $60 million over five years


    Now I don't think Quinn is going to get Super Mario kind of money, but based on the Long and Johnson contracts, Quinn would be stupid to settle for anything less than $12 million a year.

    Can the Rams afford to pay that, when they know they've got Bradford's extension coming up in the same window of time?

    I don't think it's a very likely possibility, but I can envision a scenario where the Rams feel it's better for their team economically to have Clowney under the rookie wage contract and move Quinn for other resources (picks/players), freeing them up to spend the money they'd otherwise use to extend Quinn elsewhere.

    Just some food for thought.
    Are you suggesting that the Rams move on from Robert Quinn? I don't see how any team would get rid of an elite player (Yes he's elite right now) at the beginning of the prime of his career at the age of 23 years old. I'm sure Bradford will restructure his contract and I'm sure the Fo will make it work.
    SWFCRAM likes this.

  8. #38
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,475
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by Trevor View Post
    Are you suggesting that the Rams move on from Robert Quinn?
    No where in that post did I suggest they do that. I merely brought it up as one possible scenario. You can never ignore how the economics of this league impact personnel decisions, which is why I wouldn't completely rule out Clowney.

    But as I said in the original post, I don't think it's a very likely option, because I think they'll find a way to keep Quinn since he's already been successful here, just as they found ways to extend Laurinaitis and Long.

  9. #39
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,129
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by sosa39rams View Post
    I agree. I'd rather have 2 superstars than 4 decent players.. (For now) I think we stay put and take 2 players who can have a big impact on our team, but we'll see. I just want great players, I don't care how they come.
    I get where you guys are coming from BUT is it that simple? By staying lets say at 5 and taking Jake Matthews, which seems like a pick that is highly possible. Would you say he would have a big impact in his rookie year? Would he out play Rodger Saffold or Joe Barksdale by that much? I would say he is a great addition and a safe pick if there ever was one. But a sure superstar? He would be a solid long term answer to a one position. He would most likely be a decent player not a super star. Decent being a starter like JL or C. Long, not a super star like Quinn is now IMO.

    How much does your odds change if you moved back from 5 to 15 to not land an impact player like Brokers. Consider, what 8 player taken before us would be at positions we have no interest in, QB, DE, ect.

    We just did this twice in the last two years and have been very successful. Brockers and Jenkins vs staying and drafting Morris Claiborne position of need. Here is an example of staying and taking the best player ranked on the board. Morris Claiborne is a good player but is he better then Brockers and Jenkins? Is he better then either?

    How about last year moving back and getting Tree? We also got Bailey and part of that move landed Stacy,

    These three player IMO are decent today but all three can be superstars. Getting the talent is what it's about, I think your odds increase by moving back and adding picks. Bottom line is the evaluator of the talent has to be good if you stay or move back. Jason Smith anybody?

  10. #40
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,454
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by Rambos View Post
    I get where you guys are coming from BUT is it that simple? By staying lets say at 5 and taking Jake Matthews, which seems like a pick that is highly possible. Would you say he would have a big impact in his rookie year? Would he out play Rodger Saffold or Joe Barksdale by that much? I would say he is a great addition and a safe pick if there ever was one. But a sure superstar? He would be a solid long term answer to a one position. He would most likely be a decent player not a super star. Decent being a starter like JL or C. Long, not a super star like Quinn is now IMO.

    How much does your odds change if you moved back from 5 to 15 to not land an impact player like Brokers. Consider, what 8 player taken before us would be at positions we have no interest in, QB, DE, ect.

    We just did this twice in the last two years and have been very successful. Brockers and Jenkins vs staying and drafting Morris Claiborne position of need. Here is an example of staying and taking the best player ranked on the board. Morris Claiborne is a good player but is he better then Brockers and Jenkins? Is he better then either?

    How about last year moving back and getting Tree? We also got Bailey and part of that move landed Stacy,

    These three player IMO are decent today but all three can be superstars. Getting the talent is what it's about, I think your odds increase by moving back and adding picks. Bottom line is the evaluator of the talent has to be good if you stay or move back. Jason Smith anybody?
    I think taking a OT at the top of the draft would be an under-utilization of resources. Barksdale is not going anywhere. He is our RT. Saffold has been solid at RG. Either he or Dahl will man that spot next year. Taking an OT and plugging him at LG would just be dumb.

    Now I'm not saying particularly staying put would land us a superstar and moving back 10 spots would get us someone thats only decent. I mean we'd still be picking at #15.. We got Robert Quinn with the 14th pick in 2010. I just don't see a reason to keep moving back. All were doing is adding a lot of players which will make others expendable. I mean, we slid back in 2012 but Quick and Pead look to be huge busts. Janoris is nothing better than decent, Brockers was a great pick.

    I say stay put and take two prospects that are going to impact this team in a positive way. We've got some holes and there are some good prospects.


    THE DREAM TEAM

  11. #41
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,475
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by sosa39rams View Post
    Taking an OT and plugging him at LG would just be dumb.
    Be sure to let Jonathan Ogden know how you feel about that.

  12. #42
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,454
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Be sure to let Jonathan Ogden know how you feel about that.
    It happened once? Why not just take an OG. Long is as prone to getting injured as any other player in the league. Barksdale has been solid at RT. I think I'll spend a pick on a OG before a T that I'd move inside...


    THE DREAM TEAM

  13. #43
    Mikey's Avatar
    Mikey is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    822
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Take Matthews put him at RT, no matter how solid Barksdale has been he isn't as good as Matthews. We know Fisher likes taking the kids of people he played with or coached with, IE Mcdonald. Barksdale is a great 3rd tackle off the bench and is capable of playing at G. You also now have Matthews who in a couple years could slide over to LT when longs deal is up if they don't want to sign him or if he gets hurt. Matthews is one of the best players in the draft to me if he's there with our first pick it's a no brainer.
    Nick, Rammed and RockinRam like this.

  14. #44
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,475
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by sosa39rams View Post
    It happened once? Why not just take an OG. Long is as prone to getting injured as any other player in the league. Barksdale has been solid at RT. I think I'll spend a pick on a OG before a T that I'd move inside...
    Right, I'm sure the Rams put him through that rigorous medical examination prior to signing him for absolutely no reason at all...

    As for the argument at hand, no one is suggesting we draft Jake Matthews and permanently move him inside to guard. The idea is you do that as a way to get Matthews on the field without sitting Barksdale at RT. Then, Matthews eventually replaces Long at left tackle when the time comes.

    It's a great short and long term move at a position of immediate need and a long term position of need as well. Or you could just play Matthews at right tackle, where he's been stellar as a collegiate player, and find another role for Barksdale. But this idea that the Rams can suddenly pass on a top tackle because of Joe Barksdale just leaves me scratching my head.
    Last edited by Nick; -11-30-2013 at 06:19 PM.

  15. #45
    Rambos's Avatar
    Rambos is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Cali
    Age
    50
    Posts
    9,129
    Rep Power
    75

    Re: We now have the 5th pick!

    Quote Originally Posted by sosa39rams View Post
    I think taking a OT at the top of the draft would be an under-utilization of resources. Barksdale is not going anywhere. He is our RT. Saffold has been solid at RG. Either he or Dahl will man that spot next year. Taking an OT and plugging him at LG would just be dumb.

    Now I'm not saying particularly staying put would land us a superstar and moving back 10 spots would get us someone thats only decent. I mean we'd still be picking at #15.. We got Robert Quinn with the 14th pick in 2010. I just don't see a reason to keep moving back. All were doing is adding a lot of players which will make others expendable. I mean, we slid back in 2012 but Quick and Pead look to be huge busts. Janoris is nothing better than decent, Brockers was a great pick.

    I say stay put and take two prospects that are going to impact this team in a positive way. We've got some holes and there are some good prospects.
    Like you say we still can find a super star at 15. So why not hedge your bet buy having two picks. If Brockers was a miss and Jenkins became a super star it would make sense to use the leverage and trade back.

    I mean, we slid back in 2012 but Quick and Pead look to be huge busts. Janoris is nothing better than decent, Brockers was a great pick.

    Quick was our own pick we did not move back, that was the player that the Rams had the highest on their board. So if we stay and take the only one player we just drafted a bust.

    Jenkins was the second from the Skins, by trading back.

    Pead and Rok where from the Cowboys by trading back to 14.

    If we took the best player of need in 2011... Trent Richardsont or Blackmon? That would be it. No Brockers or Jenkins. I'd take Stacy, Brockers and Jenkins over Richardson and or Blackmon. Staying put is no guarantee. Moving back seems to me to give you better odds. If Quick and Pead are bust, what does it matter they where picks created out of thin air. To me it's like your employer matching you on your 401K contributions, its free money take it.

    All were doing is adding a lot of players which will make others expendable.

    At some point soon, like next year our draft picks should have to wait to get some real playing time. The good teams have depth and rookies don't usually play much. Look at the whiners they have 3 rookies starting? No the good teams are deep and that's where we are headed I hope.

    Maybe my math is fuzzy but it seems the more lotto tickets I buy the better chances I have to win.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 5
    Last Post: -03-06-2012, 03:53 PM
  2. Replies: 31
    Last Post: -01-18-2009, 11:32 AM
  3. Rams Pick Alex Barron OT with their first pick
    By RamDez in forum DRAFT & FA
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -07-10-2005, 10:54 PM
  4. Rams pick Centre with 2nd 3 round pick
    By RamDez in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -04-24-2005, 04:58 AM
  5. Rams pick Barten with pick number 2
    By RamDez in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -04-24-2005, 04:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •