I think I want Ginn in the first

[max]

Given everything I've seen for myself as well as what I've read from others, I'm not confident about taking Ginn @ 13 as a future top receiver for this team. If I'm spending a Top 15 pick on a receiver, then I want a guy who is going to be a true #1 target, someone who can do it all. When I look at Ted Ginn, that's not what I see. I see a guy who, as Rang says, is rather one dimensional in that he makes plays with his speed.

All your points are valid except one. Ginn is not pure speed. He has amazing agility, balance, and the ability to change directions and accelerate instantly.

He may be too fragile to be a #1, but Marvin Harrison hasn't been, so I wouldn't be so sure.

Maybe we are better off with Okoye or Branch, but I'm just not as sure about it as you are.

I'll trust Softli and Linehan to make the right call. And if they take Ginn, I'm happy. But if they take someone else like Nelson or Hall or Brown, I'll be wondering.

[Nick]

All your points are valid except one. Ginn is not pure speed. He has amazing agility, balance, and the ability to change directions and accelerate instantly.

Read what I said again. Obviously I wasn't saying his only attribute is speed alone. He wouldn't be as good of a player in space if he didn't also have great agility. But the point I was making was that Ginn is one dimensional in that he makes his plays with that speed as opposed to crisp routes or a mastery of technique. In that regard, I think that makes him very one dimensional. He doesn't "do it all" and needs quite a bit of work in a number of areas. To me, that's not the kind of thing you want to spend a #13 pick on.

[max]

Read what I said again. Obviously I wasn't saying his only attribute is speed alone. He wouldn't be as good of a player in space if he didn't also have great agility. But the point I was making was that Ginn is one dimensional in that he makes his plays with that speed as opposed to crisp routes or a mastery of technique. In that regard, I think that makes him very one dimensional. He doesn't "do it all" and needs quite a bit of work in a number of areas. To me, that's not the kind of thing you want to spend a #13 pick on.

Oh, please. How many WR come into the NFL from their Junior year with the speed that Ginn has and are also excellent route runners?

The whole idea here is that Ginn will be mentored by Bruce and Holt. This is probably the best place for Ginn to be. Didn't you read what Boylhart said about this issue? I'm not at all worried about him not being a good route runner. I'm worried about him staying on the field. That is my only concern with Ginn. If the Rams draft him and he is durable he will become a major weapon. That's all there is to it, IMHO. But the durability issue is valid.

[Nick]

Oh, please. How many WR come into the NFL from their Junior year with the speed that Ginn has and are also excellent route runners?

I have no idea. But if I'm spending the #13 pick on them, then I expect them to have more depth to their game and display more mastery of the technical aspects of the position than I see in Ginn.

The whole idea here is that Ginn will be mentored by Bruce and Holt. This is probably the best place for Ginn to be. Didn't you read what Boylhart said about this issue?

Of course I read it, you posted it twice so it would have been hard to miss. But I'm scratching my head why you keep bringing it up. I've said multiple times that the positives of this learning environment are not in dispute. Continuing to post it over and over again isn't suddenly going to make it more relevant or important.

The team's current situation acting as a great learning environment is not a very strong reason for drafting someone at that position, IMO. Otherwise, let's go ahead and start considering a QB or LT at 13, because this would be a great opportunity for players at those position to learn as well.

[jkramsfan]

Read what I said again. Obviously I wasn't saying his only attribute is speed alone. He wouldn't be as good of a player in space if he didn't also have great agility. But the point I was making was that Ginn is one dimensional in that he makes his plays with that speed as opposed to crisp routes or a mastery of technique. In that regard, I think that makes him very one dimensional. He doesn't "do it all" and needs quite a bit of work in a number of areas. To me, that's not the kind of thing you want to spend a #13 pick on.

how many players just coming out of college have a mastery of technique for there position, i would think not many, he may very well need work in other areas,but he's pretty damn good at what we want he to do,he can learn as he goes with the rest of it just like everyone else will have to learn the pro game.

[Nick]

how many players just coming out of college have a mastery of technique for there position, i would think not many, he may very well need work in other areas,but he's pretty damn good at what we want he to do,he can learn as he goes with the rest of it just like everyone else will have to learn the pro game.

All I can say is exactly what I told max - if I'm spending the #13 pick on them, then I expect them to have more depth to their game and display more mastery of the technical aspects of the position than I see in Ginn. Obviously no one comes out of college with a perfect expert knowledge about their position, but if you're going to warrant a top pick, you've got to show me something moderately substantial in that regard and I'm not convinced Ginn has. Maybe that's just me, but that's how I feel.

[AvengerRam]

I don't get the fascination with Ginn. At best, he's Santana Moss. At worst, he's just another first round WR bust.

How can we even be talking about this when we have three WRs who have all, at one time or another, been #1 WRs in on their teams in the NFL and a defense that is analogous to Swiss cheese both in pourousness and odor?

[max]

how many players just coming out of college have a mastery of technique for there position, i would think not many, he may very well need work in other areas,but he's pretty damn good at what we want he to do,he can learn as he goes with the rest of it just like everyone else will have to learn the pro game.

Agreed.

More than any other player in this draft, Ginn is a game changer with big play capability. That's what the first round is all about.

But some guys look at negatives and write the guy off.

S Jackson dropped in the draft because his negatives (slow first step, dancing) turned teams away. But his postives far outweighed his negatives and now everyone would love to have him.

If we draft Ginn he will be a game changer for us, that's the way I see it. He will start out transforming out return game into a major weapon and as a 4th WR. He will develop into a major threat at WR and become a starter when Bruce retires.

We probably won't pick him. But, when we play against him and he scores 2 TD's against us and just blows us up, there will be guys here saying why don't we have a guy like that? And I'll be saying yeah, how come?

[Nick]

More than any other player in this draft, Ginn is a game changer

I completely disagree. He's not even the biggest game changer at his position (Calvin Johnson).

But some guys look at negatives and write the guy off.

Just like some guys only look at the upside and refuse to accept the possibility that the guy might not be the next best thing since sliced bread?

See? I can make broad generalizations of the other side's position as well!

[r8rh8rmike]

I'd love to have Ginn, but we just do not have the luxury, period. Any time I think about the mouth watering possibilities of having a Ted Ginn, I bring myself back to reality by thinking about how we get manhandled by opposing offensive lines, how we miss tackles and how we fail to put pressure on the guys picking apart our secondary. Regardless of what has happened in past drafts, we HAVE to make shoring up the defense THE priority. There's just no way around that fact.

[max]

I'd love to have Ginn, but we just do not have the luxury, period. Any time I think about the mouth watering possibilities of having a Ted Ginn, I bring myself back to reality by thinking about how we get manhandled by opposing offensive lines, how we miss tackles and how we fail to put pressure on the guys picking apart our secondary. Regardless of what has happened in past drafts, we HAVE to make shoring up the defense THE priority. There's just no way around that fact.

I know what you mean. You're right. Back to reality for me. It was fun dreaming about it, though. I'm still gonna be miffed watching him lighting it up for another team.

[r8rh8rmike]

I know what you mean. You're right. Back to reality for me. It was fun dreaming about it, though. I'm still gonna be miffed watching him lighting it up for another team.

I felt the same way about Maurice Jones-Drew after watching him do the most amazing things at UCLA, but cold hard facts were cold hard facts and there was no getting around them.

[max]

I felt the same way about Maurice Jones-Drew after watching him do the most amazing things at UCLA, but cold hard facts were cold hard facts and there was no getting around them.

Yes. But resigning to the cold hard facts does not include accepting that Drew isn't that good. Same with Ginn. I accept the cold hard facts that we need defense first, but not that Ginn is not going to do the most amazing things in the NFL. To me that is the "spoiled grapes" approach.

[r8rh8rmike]

Yes. But resigning to the cold hard facts does not include accepting that Drew isn't that good. Same with Ginn. I accept the cold hard facts that we need defense first, but not that Ginn is not going to do the most amazing things in the NFL. To me that is the "spoiled grapes" approach.

I don't know about "spoiled grapes". It doesn't look to me like anyone here is saying Ginn won't be successful at the next level, they're just raising legitimate questions about his perceived strengths and weaknesses.

[Nick]

Yes. But resigning to the cold hard facts does not include accepting that Drew isn't that good. Same with Ginn. I accept the cold hard facts that we need defense first, but not that Ginn is not going to do the most amazing things in the NFL. To me that is the "spoiled grapes" approach.

So wait, are you saying that anyone who doesn't think Ginn is going to do the most amazing things in the NFL has spoiled (sour) grapes? Or that for you to agree that Ginn has flaws and may not succeed would be spoiled (sour) grapes?