CNN/SI Ram's Draft Rating: C

[Tony Soprano]

CNN/SI, Dr Z.

Rates the Rams a Conditional C (a C if certain conditions work out our way)
We are bringing up the end of the pack, with only two teams doing worse.
According to CNN/SI:

C (CONDITIONAL)

RAMS -- They need an RT to keep that pretty offense running smoothly. Top draft Alex Barron is a finesse guy, an LT, but they have one of those. Fella named Pace. Can Richie Incognito, a third rounder and a former Nebraska roughneck who was advised to seek anger management counseling become the answer? (No joke ... once I had to submit to that. The first thing the guy asked me was, "What are you so mad about, anyway?") Thus the conditional. I'll say this about the Rams, though. Their final selection is my favorite name in the entire draft, North Carolina FB Madison Hedge****. Sounds like a character from Winnie The Pooh. The Redhead's favorite is the wideout drafted by the Chiefs in the fourth round, Craphonso Thorpe, and I'm not taking this one any farther.

[AvengerRam]

Is it me, or does Dr. Z spend a heck of a lot more time talking about himself than about the actual subject matter.


No matter. I've seen ratings of the Rams' draft from A to D. None of these ratings mean a thing. What matters is how these players ultimately fit in with the team.

I like the type of players that the Rams seem to have targeted, and I'm hopeful that they will pan out.

Rating anyone as a conditional anything based on "how things work out" is the ultimate oxymoron of 20-20 hindsight draft analysis. By definition, you dont know how things are going to work out and you wont know for a couple of years. If things work out you get an A, if they dont, you get a lower grade. No different than any other hire that you make in business.

I will tell you what makes no sense, and that is drafting or hiring someone YOU think is inferior to another choice just because it is more popular with the general public.

Courage of your convictions.

ramming speed to all

general counsel

[Scidog68]

This guy sounds like a pus-head. His most astute observation concerns the 3rd grade humor aspect of two draftees names. Way to get down to the meat-n-taters of the issue. Based on this, CNN/SI sucks.

[talkstoangels61]

The way i look at the draft this year, it could have a meaning to it! Let's say the Rams decided that they needed to in a way start rebuilding this year so,this year they put themselves in motion. by addressing the o-line and defensive backfield this year. They probably will address lb,rb and d-line next year.........................If you think about it they really started a few years ago by really concentrating on the d-line!.................Which in my opinion hasn't really worked all of their kinks out yet. I still think that we should have drafted the Shazor or Sensabaugh kids! The latter first though!...............o-line is extremely deep for sometime with this years draft so hopefully MM & company will concentrate else where in the years to come barring any injuries...................PS....I think that Sensabaugh will be all pro in just a short time!

[UtterBlitz]

I see no point in grading the draft. You can assess current needs but it is impossible to grade player potential for the NFL. No one knows how these draft picks are going to perform.

[psycho9985]

Originally Posted by Scidog68

This guy sounds like a pus-head. His most astute observation concerns the 3rd grade humor aspect of two draftees names. Way to get down to the meat-n-taters of the issue. Based on this, CNN/SI sucks.

cnn is so biased that I dont listen to anything they say or report.There opposition to everything not their opinion is criminal.Our draft was very good,but whats going to help us in 2005 is what we aquired in free agency,and I 'm sorry that I've accused the Rams front office for sitting on their hands while good players are getting signed elsewhere.They did a heck of a job this offseason.

[AvengerRam]

As far as I'm concerned, the only reason to give a team a bad grade on draft day is if it failed to fill an obvious need.


For example, if the Rams did not draft a RT or a safety, they would have deserved a bad grade.

To give them a bad grade, despite the fact that they addressed their most pressing needs, simply because of a perceived "flaw" in a player, or a perception that they "reached," is just a lot of meaningless space-filler.

[theodus69]

They got what they felt was needed, like any team should! No one knows for sure how this draft will pan out. like AV said" if you didn't draft your needs , then give them a bad grade"! Did the Rams have any fans at the Draft? I seemed to miss them. But then again I was fading in and out( Long night). I did see Boomer and the boys talk right over our 2nd pick! they did well as far as I'm concerned.

[Nick]

Originally Posted by UtterBlitz

No one knows how these draft picks are going to perform.

Not exactly how they're going to perform, perhaps, but you can make a lot of educated logical conclusions about them based on college performance and physical tests.

[UtterBlitz]

Originally Posted by NickSeiler

Not exactly how they're going to perform, perhaps, but you can make a lot of educated logical conclusions about them based on college performance and physical tests.

It would seem that a logical, scientific method could be used to indicate performance in the NFL, but the intangibles seem more important than the stats for many players.

[HUbison]

Originally Posted by UtterBlitz

It would seem that a logical, scientific method could be used to indicate performance in the NFL, but the intangibles seem more important than the stats for many players.

Utter, I agree. One would think there should be some method to nail down their future performance. However, when you look at past drafts, the success rate lies closer to random than it does scientific.

I guess talent evaluation is just as important a function of winning a super bowl as running fast or hitting hard.