Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Rep Power

    A common statement I've read about Bradford that makes no sense to me.

    I've lost track of how many times I've read comments from commentators and fans that have expressed the idea that Bradford is worth the 4th or 5th pick in the draft, but not the 1st.


    How does that make sense?

    From the Rams perspective, if they want to take Bradford, obviously it would be advantageous to trade down, get more picks, and still get him.

    But what if that option simply is not available? I find it hard to hard to comprehend how anyone can say his combination of size/skill/college production/medical reports/interviews make him good enough to merit the 4th pick, but not the 1st.

    When I say this, I'm not talking about his value in comparison to other prospects. I have no beef with someone simply saying "he's worth the 4th pick because he's the 4th best player in the draft." That's not the analysis I'm talking about. I'm talking about those who say "he'd be a reach at No. 1" and then turn around and say "he's a good selection at No. 4."

    Again... huh?

    A QB selected with the 4th pick in the draft is expected to become the starter no later than his second or third season, and to become a successful starting QB for a decade. If you think QB prospect is good enough to do that, how is he not good enough to warrant the first pick. Isn't a 10 year successful starting QB worth the first pick in the draft?

    To me, when the Rams look at Bradford, the quesiton should be is he (1) someone they envision as being a "franchise" QB, or (2) not.

    If the answer is (1), he's worth the first pick (that's not to say he'd necessarily be the best BPA, but he would be a worthy first pick). If the answer is (2), he shouldn't be taken with the first, the third, the fifth or the eleventh pick.
    Last edited by AvengerRam; -02-25-2010 at 10:01 PM.

  2. #2
    Varg6's Avatar
    Varg6 is online now Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Rep Power

    Re: A common statement I've read about Bradford that makes no sense to me.

    I think because of his injury, it's scary to take him at #1 and have question marks about something like that when your also high on not one but two exceptionally talented DTs (which is also a need for the Rams), who weren't plagued with injuries (which is another thing I'm sure anyone associated with the Rams would be relieved to hear). However, if both of those DTs are gone at #3 or #4, it would justify us taking him a lot more because we're filling a big need without ever having to say "what if" about the other top prospects who seem like a sure-thing.
    Always and Forever a fan of the St. Louis Rams

  3. #3
    BarronWade's Avatar
    BarronWade is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    New Jersey
    Rep Power

    Re: A common statement I've read about Bradford that makes no sense to me.

    I know why people say that.

    There draft boards probably a little different then others. They give different grades.

    And if they say that the drop from the 3rd best to the 4th must be a huge drop

    Suh: 99
    McCoy: 98
    Eric Berry: 98
    Bradford: 91

  4. #4
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Morgantown, WV
    Rep Power

    Re: A common statement I've read about Bradford that makes no sense to me.

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    When I say this, I'm not talking about his value in comparison to other prospects.
    But that's probably EXACTLY what they're talking about. I know that's heavy on my mind when I think about drafting a quarterback first overall versus drafting one, say, third overall. It's going to depend on where you've graded the guy and where he falls on your board.

    If the Rams view Bradford as one of the top 3-5 players in this class when it's all said and done, they probably feel they can justify passing on other players to take him because of the positional value of quarterbacks. That being said, if Bradford ends up in, say, the 8-12 range on their board, maybe it's not worth reaching that far down to draft a guy, even though you think he can be a successful player at the next level.

    I mean, if you're giving a guy a first round grade, you probably think he's going to be successful at the next level. But there's nuance to those grades, and it's just a matter of where the guy is valued and, if applicable, how far a team is willing to reach.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 48
    Last Post: -02-08-2010, 04:22 PM
  2. Thomas Chat--Jan 6
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -01-07-2009, 08:38 AM
  3. Dealing James for Surtain makes sense
    By Nick in forum NFL TALK
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: -02-14-2005, 09:32 PM
  4. Picking the Rams makes good sense
    By RamDez in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: -01-08-2005, 06:18 AM
  5. Defense Makes Statement
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: -10-05-2004, 04:38 PM


Posting Permissions

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