Carriker and the upcoming draft ..

[Goldenfleece]

This one I don't agree with. I really don't think Carriker brings enough pass rush ability and production to be an effective 4-3 defensive end. He's a capable, every down defender as a defensive tackle. As a defensive end, he's a situational guy because you're going to at times need to sub in someone with more speed to challenge the edge.

So I think the difference between a guy like Chris Long or Vernon Gholston and Adam Carriker as a DE is pretty significant, moreso than the difference between Dorsey and Carriker as UT.

My mind still isn't fully made up here either. I do think Carriker is a good enough player that he could play defensive end in a 4-3, but I don't know if he could provide a comparable pass rush to Long or Ghoulston.

I was going to put together a list of defensive tackles drafted over the last few years to strengthen the argument about how Dorsey really would be significantly better than recent options, but it actually brought me to an unexpected conclusion. Here's the list of DTs taken in the first four rounds of the draft since 2003:

Round 1:
Adam Carriker
Amobe Okoye
Justin Harrell
Broderick Bunkley
Haloti Ngata
John McCargo
Mike Patterson
Trevor Johnson
Tommie Harris
Marcus Tubbs
Dewayne Robertson
Jimmy Kennedy
William Joseph

Round 2:
Alan Branch
Tank Tyler
Brandon Mebane
Quinn Pitcock
Junior Siavii
Dwan Edwards
Anthony Adams

Round 3:
Claude Wroten
Dusty Dvoracek
Sione Pouha
Atiyyah Ellison
Randy Starks
Donnell Washington
Tim Anderson

Round 4:
Paul Soliai
Marcus Thomas
Kareem Brown
Joe Cohen
Gabe Watson
Domata Peko
Barry Cofield
Orien Harris
Isaac Sopoaga
Matthias Askew
Anthony Maddox
Ian Scott
Dan Klecko
Rien Long


Looking through that list, I'd think Dorsey will be expected to have a better career than most of those guys...but I also think that Carriker is already looking like a better pro defensive tackle than most of them. I'm tempted to say that we shouldn't mess with success, but that is assuming that this year was just the beginning for Carriker and he will continue to grow into that defensive tackle position.

I guess at this point, I'm open to the idea of taking Dorsey but by no means sold on it.

[Rambos]

Rams On NT

“Clifton Ryan is a true nose guard which, since I have been here, we haven’t had a true nose guard,” Rams coach Scott Linehan said. “When it comes to a guy who just plays it because that is what he knows. I think he showed up and had an excellent day as far anchoring and playing nose guard. He gives us a guy that when people try and run the ball at us, he is a guy that we would be able to insert in the game and really holds up.”

That being say, if we take Dorsey the only place for AC is DE? I think he would be just ok, great against the run and maybe 5 sacks. I think Chris Long would be a bit more active but is not going to be a guy teams have to plan to stop.

Little
Ryan
Dorsey
AC-Groves

Really have not thought about this one too much...I guess I will have to think it over. If the Rams moved back to 5 and still got Dorsey that would take some risk out. If we got another pick out of it.

[chiguy]

I thought I already explained this to you Nick. I've always prefered a DE, but this doesn't seem like doom and gloom to me either.

I think you just hate Dorsey. And really, if he's the next coming of Warren Sapp who doesn't?

We should have a board rule that changes "Jimmy Kennedy" to "I've erased this part of my memory because it is just too painful to recall." Kind of like what we do with Niners.

[Drummerman1011]

man a 4.58 forty and a 42 inch vertical leap, this guy is a beast. Gholston is the man, if Chris Long is gone I vouch for getting Gholston.

[STLunatic]

How long is Carriker out for? and I dont think Sedrick Ellis is even an option for the Rams right now. In my opinion I think its down to Dorsey,Gholston, and Long (If he is there)

[chiguy]

Well, as long as you vouch for him.

[viper]

I guess my thinking on taking Dorsey and moving AC to DE, is that I don't really see that much difference between Chris Long and Carriker. Both were superstar defensive ends in college. Neither seems to have that quick burst to get around the edge. Both seem to have more of a power rush, shedding blockers type of game than anything else. I see them as pretty close to the same player. Maybe I am wrong about that. What seperates the two?

[harrydog]

So you're left benching a promising young guy in Ryan and playing someone else out of their best position. All this for an incredible talent at a position that isn't really that big of a need to begin with and who could be saddled with long term injury issues.

Which is why I see there being a couple of better options on the table.

I'm assuming that the better options you have in mind are Gholston and Jake Long? If that's the case, (and maybe it's not) wouldn't taking Jake Long put us in a similar situation as taking Dorsey? Our injured offensive linemen will be back this season plus we've added some help through free agency, so the OL should be better. And it's usually easier to find good O linemen in later rounds, so why not take that route to add more depth?

[Nick]

I thought I already explained this to you Nick. I've always prefered a DE, but this doesn't seem like doom and gloom to me either.

I'm not saying picking Dorsey would be doom and gloom, just not among my top preferences on how we use that pick.

I think you just hate Dorsey. And really, if he's the next coming of Warren Sapp who doesn't?

Heh, all kidding aside, I'm just not sold on the hype that seems to surround him when he's labeled the best DT prospect in the last decade.

I guess my thinking on taking Dorsey and moving AC to DE, is that I don't really see that much difference between Chris Long and Carriker. Both were superstar defensive ends in college. Neither seems to have that quick burst to get around the edge. Both seem to have more of a power rush, shedding blockers type of game than anything else. I see them as pretty close to the same player. Maybe I am wrong about that. What seperates the two?

Long, IMO, doesn't have elite explosion off the edge either, but I believe he's quicker off the line than Carriker is in terms of challenging the outside of the pocket. He redirects well as a pass rusher - when the edge doesn't work, he can take an inside angle quickly and shed a guy. Long has an array of pass rush moves and excellent instincts and technique to go along with that. I view Carriker as a guy who is going to challenge the opposition with a strong hand punch and good strength and leverage, which is why he's a better fit inside working against a guard as a defensive tackle. IMO, Chris Long is your prototype strong side defensive end, whereas Carriker would probably be in a position to best utilize all his attributes inside as a tackle.

If that's the case, (and maybe it's not) wouldn't taking Jake Long put us in a similar situation as taking Dorsey?

We don't have the youth, talent, or depth at the OT position that we have at DT. After three years, we basically know what we have in Barron, yet I don't think we can say the same about Ryan or even Carriker. Plus, if Incognito shifts back inside to center, then we have an immediate hole at RG that Long could fill while he waits to shift outside.

[harrydog]

Nick,
Would you prefer us to take Gholson and an OT in round two, or Jake Long and a DE in round two?

[Nick]

Nick,
Would you prefer us to take Gholson and an OT in round two, or Jake Long and a DE in round two?

After signing Bell and cutting Hall, I'd probably go Gholston and an OT in round two or even three. It might be tempting to go Gholston, best WR available in round two, and then OL in round three. In the third round, the Rams would probably have a shot at someone like Oniel Cousins, John Greco, Heath Benedict, or even Tony Hills.

[harrydog]

After signing Bell and cutting Hall, I'd probably go Gholston and an OT in round two or even three. It might be tempting to go Gholston, best WR available in round two, and then OL in round three.

I like that scenario.

[Bald_81]

I think that it might come down to the fact of whether the Rams feel Gholston is worth #2 money. He is obviously not the second best prospect in this draft while Dorsey is in the top three. If the Rams can't find a way to trade down and snab Gholston later, which is probably what they want, I would not be shocked to watch them sit and grab Dorsey then go DE in round two. That's what it is going to come down to IMO, I don't even consider Jake Long an option at this point.

[Nick]

He is obviously not the second best prospect in this draft while Dorsey is in the top three.

Except Dorsey is not a top three lock in terms of value at this point either. It's very conceivable that some could include both Longs and McFadden in their top three - both Scott Wright and Scouts Inc have that as their top three. I think both Dorsey and Gholston are top five players, so differences in value could be minimal if they're ranked, say, fourth and fifth respectively.

[Bald_81]

Except Dorsey is not a top three lock in terms of value at this point either. It's very conceivable that some could include both Longs and McFadden in their top three - both Scott Wright and Scouts Inc have that as their top three. I think both Dorsey and Gholston are top five players, so differences in value could be minimal if they're ranked, say, fourth and fifth respectively.

Yes, of course not in value, but in terms of BPA he is top three. Plus, the Rams obviously have him near if not at top of their board. Devaney gushed over Dorsey and Wagoner said they considered him the best defender in the draft (maybe not anymore, that remains to be seen). I think it will all come down to how he performs on his pro day and checks out. He moved down Scott Wright's, Scouts Inc and Mayocks board because of him sitting out at the combine and not performing. Before hand, they all had him in the top three and Kiper still has him #1.

Draft day is going to be very interesting to say the least, probably one of the more suspenseful and unpredictable top tens in recent memory.