View Poll Results: Who would by your choice at #16 among the listed players?

Voters
68. You may not vote on this poll
  • Chance Warmack, OG, Alabama

    32 47.06%
  • Cordarrelle Patterson, WR, Tennessee

    15 22.06%
  • Tavon Austin, WR, West Virginia

    14 20.59%
  • Jonathan Cooper, OG, North Carolina

    3 4.41%
  • Keenan Allen, WR, California

    1 1.47%
  • Kenny Vaccaro, S, Texas

    0 0%
  • Alec Ogletree, OLB, Georgia

    1 1.47%
  • Sheldon Richardson, DT, Missouri

    2 2.94%
  • Matt Elam, S, Florida

    0 0%
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 53
Like Tree21Likes

Thread: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

  1. #16
    Azul e Oro is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CALIFORNIA
    Posts
    2,290
    Rep Power
    70

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Well for me, with my flair for teams like the '99 Rams, give me Tavon Austin all day, every day!

    Then hope that Cooper is there at 22, if not, Long or Warford in the second or 3rd round. Because contrary to popular belief on this board, that's how we built our only superbowl champion. With superior playmakers, a LT and a bunch of late round linemen that meshed well together.
    Surely Austin compares more to Hakim than Holt. Hakim was taken in the 4th round.


  2. #17
    Dr. Defense's Avatar
    Dr. Defense is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    RI
    Age
    23
    Posts
    495
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    I have to go with the road grader Chance Warmack. To me it boils down to this. Offensive and defensive lines win championships. If you can't get to the opposing quarterback and you can't protect your quarterback you will never win the big game. There will still be wide receiver talent laying around when we pick at #22, but Warmack most certainly will not be. He is an ELITE guard, one that doesn't come around every year. On the other hand almost every year an elite WR emerges. If we truly need an ELITE WR come next year, we have 2 first round picks to get him

  3. #18
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,510
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Azul e Oro View Post
    Surely Austin compares more to Hakim than Holt. Hakim was taken in the 4th round.
    Does that mean we should hope he falls to the 4th?

  4. #19
    r8rh8rmike's Avatar
    r8rh8rmike is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    29 Palms, Ca.
    Age
    54
    Posts
    11,008
    Rep Power
    124

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Warmack. I think he makes the biggest impact.

  5. #20
    berg8309's Avatar
    berg8309 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,853
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    I went with Chance Warmack. Build from the lines out. Everyone on offense will look better with a better Oline.

  6. #21
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,077
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Patterson. Love his size, speed, and just plain natural knack for making crazy things happen when the ball is in his hands.

    Warmack is easily 2nd.

  7. #22
    punahou's Avatar
    punahou is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    HAWAII
    Posts
    584
    Rep Power
    9

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    I chose Patterson, as It's clear that somehow and someway we need to get a #1WR in here. I do like Warmack as well, however, being that we pick at 22 Im thinking Warmack or Cooper will be there, and at this point of player evaluations I think the 2 are interchangeable. Hence I would be happy with Patterson at 16 over Austin soley due to the signing of Cook and the fact that IMO Austin is smallish.

  8. #23
    Azul e Oro is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CALIFORNIA
    Posts
    2,290
    Rep Power
    70

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Does that mean we should hope he falls to the 4th?
    No, it means I don't agree that The GSOT was built by taking a player like Austin in the first round..... unless you believe he is the next Torry Holt which seems like a stretch to me.
    And impactful explosive rookies CAN be found in the 4th or was Hakim a mirage or Givens or Sproles ?

  9. #24
    tomahawk247's Avatar
    tomahawk247 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Essex, England
    Age
    27
    Posts
    4,582
    Rep Power
    57

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    I don't think it's worth spending another first round pick on the DL when we have three guys who are number 1 picks and a very good serviceable player in Langford

    I don't think it's worth drafting a safety at 16 when you don't have any that really stand out too much, and when it's such a deep class this year that you can get a good player at 22 or in the 2nd round

    It's tough to pass on Warmack if he is available at 16, because he is such a good player that will be a 10 year starter, and if you put him next to Long, that's instantly a very, very strong OL. Long, Warmack, Wells, Dahl, Saffold. Pretty good to be honest. But I think you could pass on Warmack

    But then I think about Sam Bradford and how we just need more playmakers for him to use so I want to take a wide receiver. Patterson is an athlete, but he is so raw and I think he doesn't make as much impact in his first season. I just look at what Tavon Austin can do with the ball in his hands, returning, running or receiving, and I think he is too good to pass up
    Fortuninerhater likes this.

  10. #25
    GROUND DOG 39's Avatar
    GROUND DOG 39 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MANCHESTER, U.K.
    Posts
    1,483
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    I'd take Warmack in a heartbeat. The player with the least question marks, a perfect fit for the offense.!

  11. #26
    Randart's Avatar
    Randart is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    449
    Rep Power
    6

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Go figure I choose Patterson, simply because I think he gives us the most bang for the buck... So many great choices it was not a snap decision. But in the end you get a guy who could be great not just good, yes Warmack could be too and many of the other prospects in the poll. But a guy who could make a huge play on offense and special teams. Another big target for Sam, someone he can grow with. It could be really special, and I just think CP is the best overall offensive playmaker in the draft yes better than Tavon even. But I really think he will be gone earlier than we draft and I hope we trade back on our second pick so doubt we trade up for him. Better to try to grow more picks than trade ours away for one guy imho.

  12. #27
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,510
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Azul e Oro View Post
    No, it means I don't agree that The GSOT was built by taking a player like Austin in the first round..... unless you believe he is the next Torry Holt which seems like a stretch to me.
    And impactful explosive rookies CAN be found in the 4th or was Hakim a mirage or Givens or Sproles ?
    Actually, Austin's resume is far more impressive than Hakim's was coming out of college or else he wouldn't have a 1st round projection.

    So I would actually liken him to a much better version of Hakim with some sprinkles of Marshall Faulk. Plus no injury history and no fumble-itas.

    And by the way, if you actually read my post, you would know that an entire O-line can be built in the late rounds, save for the LT.

    We built one of the greatest offenses (IMO, the greatest) in the history of the sport, using an O-line made up of a stud LT and not another player taken higher than the 5th round.

    That should speak volumes to Ram fans here who remember the 80's Rams. Some of the greatest O-lines in the history of the sport, yet no Superbowl and why, because beyond Dickerson and Ellard the cupboard was dry. Meanwhile the fully-loaded Fortuniners who had weapons of mass destruction (forgive the blasphemy) were taking our lunch money everyday.

    There is no one here nor a professional line coach anywhere, who can dispute the '99 Rams. And for so many insightful Ram fans here to ignore that, is beyond belief to me. You can have your own opinion, but you certainly can't deny nor dispute history in this case.

    Warmack is a wonderful prospect, but even if he becomes the best ever to play the game, the Rams simply don't need him. Hopefully Jeff Fisher realizes that.

    There's no doubt the smart move for the Rams to make at 16 if available is Tavon Austin, followed by Cordarelle Patterson IMO.
    Last edited by Fortuninerhater; -03-29-2013 at 12:49 PM.

  13. #28
    mde8352gorams's Avatar
    mde8352gorams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,538
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    I went with Cooper. As I've posted many times, I feel as many of those here do that we need to build from the lines out and the O-Line is essential. To explain my choice I feel Cooper has a bit more athleticism than Warmack and he offers position versatility being able to play guard and center, so there's a long-range component to my thinking. Wells will not be our center for more than another few years. Having said all this I revert to my post a few days back where I said if Warmack fits our scheme better than he's the pick. Either way I don't feel we lose.

    Now as for those who want the playmaker, we have another pick at #22. Cooper and Warmack will not be there, so we better get the best O-line player we need at #16. If you believe that we can draft a top tier O-line player in later rounds prepare to be disappointed because the odds are against it. Now I agree not every great O-line player is drafted in the first round, but from the info I have about this draft Warmack and Cooper are the best guards and we're looking to give Sam protection so he can improve our scoring performance. I think it's also worth mentioning that better O-linemen are more disciplined and can avoid the motion & holding penalties we seemed to get regularly last season. Drive killers in my mind.

    I hear all the talk about Patterson and Austin and agree they will be good players. With Patterson you have a developmental player because he's played so little at the position with Tennessee. Austin I feel will struggle with NFL press coverage and I cannot let go of the injury concern due to size and weight. Plus, Jeff Fisher likes 'em big, ergo Jared Cook. Bottom line for me is that we can draft a solid playmaker(s) at #22 or in round 2. I will be watching Keenan Allen's private workout closely and if he's not the one, then I say Robert Woods would be a good pick for us in round 2.

    Go Rams!

  14. #29
    Fortuninerhater's Avatar
    Fortuninerhater is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    L.A., Ca.
    Posts
    2,510
    Rep Power
    37

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by mde8352gorams View Post
    Austin I feel will struggle with NFL press coverage and I cannot let go of the injury concern due to size and weight. Plus, Jeff Fisher likes 'em big, ergo Jared Cook.
    Slot receivers don't generally face press coverage, so that won't be an issue.

    And I agree inially there is a concern over injury for a player of his stature. But after 8 years of football and there's still no injury history, your concern is more like paranoia.

    I reiterate, all players who play for an extended period can expect to be injured at some point. And as in the case of Tavon Austin, a smaller size does not determine it.

    And finally, I'd say Jeff Fisher likes a mixed bag. Chris Johnson is certainly not a big back and Jared Cook is a smallish TE.
    Last edited by Fortuninerhater; -03-29-2013 at 04:02 PM.

  15. #30
    Azul e Oro is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    CALIFORNIA
    Posts
    2,290
    Rep Power
    70

    Re: If the following players were on the board at #16, who would you take.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fortuninerhater View Post
    Actually, Austin's resume is far more impressive than Hakim's was coming out of college or else he wouldn't have a 1st round projection.

    So I would actually liken him to a much better version of Hakim with some sprinkles of Marshall Faulk. Plus no injury history and no fumble-itas.

    And by the way, if you actually read my post, you would know that an entire O-line can be built in the late rounds, save for the LT.

    We built one of the greatest offenses (IMO, the greatest) in the history of the sport, using an O-line made up of a stud LT and not another player taken higher than the 5th round.

    That should speak volumes to Ram fans here who remember the 80's Rams. Some of the greatest O-lines in the history of the sport, yet no Superbowl and why, because beyond Dickerson and Ellard the cupboard was dry. Meanwhile the fully-loaded Fortuniners who had weapons of mass destruction (forgive the blasphemy) were taking our lunch money everyday.

    There is no one here nor a professional line coach anywhere, who can dispute the '99 Rams. And for so many insightful Ram fans here to ignore that, is beyond belief to me. You can have your own opinion, but you certainly can't deny nor dispute history in this case.

    Warmack is a wonderful prospect, but even if he becomes the best ever to play the game, the Rams simply don't need him. Hopefully Jeff Fisher realizes that.

    There's no doubt the smart move for the Rams to make at 16 if available is Tavon Austin, followed by Cordarelle Patterson IMO.

    It depends on which part of his resume/profile you weight more heavily when judging whether he will be successful at the NFL level and the team situation he finds himself in. I think you need to look up that word "projection" before you use it as proof that he's better than anyone who has actually produced in the NFL. One stat jumps out at me though, when comparing Hakim & Austin that you don't mention; the huge difference in average per catch. Iirc, TA's is around 11.6 per. Hakim's was 17.8.

    Hmmmmm...so now this zippy munchkin has a touch of Faulk about him, does he ?! Wow....the legend grows....at least in minds like yours that seem to obsess over one player at a time as THE answer to all ills.

    No idea what you're talking about regarding The 80s Rams OL. OK,they were pretty much all 1-3 rounders except for Doug C Smith & all the long term guards were either 1st or 2nd rounders. Heck, The Rams took guards in the first AND second round one year, didn't they (Schad & Newberry).But they were a dominant run team through that decade. Blame the D, blame the inconsistent QB play but at least The Rams OL kept them stable enough to be in the hunt most years.

    In any case, I'll take the level of consistent success The Rams had after triple-dipping for OLers in the mid 70s over the also-ran status of the 80s.And it was when they really lowballed the OL in the 90s that things went sideways, no ?

    And while the Donut Bros of the GSOT were an exceptional bunch, for sure, in their humble beginnings they were all young-ish vets who'd been trained up with other teams & in their prime when they came to The Rams, not cast-off old guys or green projects. The guy you called "old", Timmerman, was 28 & going into his 5th year, after starting 3 for GB.

    The idea that the Rams don't "need" a pedigree OG is a bit silly,imo, when you consider what happened with The mightless Quinn last year and the age/injury cloud hanging over Harvey Dahl, not to mention Wells.

    Having said all that, I'm in favor of taking a worthy skill player at #16 over an equally worthy guard now that J. Long is on board. I just disagree that Austin is likely to be worthy compared to Keenan Allen, pending his health report/workout.
    Last edited by Azul e Oro; -03-29-2013 at 04:27 PM.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. New to the board...
    By BayArea408Niner in forum Welcome to the ClanRam
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: -09-13-2007, 12:44 AM
  2. Another Old Ram fan has come on board!
    By RAMFANRAIDERHATER in forum Welcome to the ClanRam
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: -08-11-2006, 09:13 PM
  3. Hey Board!
    By LARamHead in forum Welcome to the ClanRam
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: -04-09-2006, 04:35 PM
  4. Replies: 23
    Last Post: -02-18-2006, 09:27 PM
  5. Smart Players, According to the Players
    By AvengerRam in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -11-05-2004, 02:10 PM

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
  •