Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 40
Like Tree15Likes

Thread: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

  1. #1
    general counsel's Avatar
    general counsel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    atlanta, georgia
    Age
    52
    Posts
    5,541
    Rep Power
    81

    Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    Let's assume that Av is correct and that the Rams most likely trade spot is the vikings at #8. That seems as good a bet as any other to me at this point, and while i appreciate that AV is not per se predicting that the Rams will trade with the Vikings, the opinion that the vikings are our most likely trade partner raises some interesting discussion points.

    Let's assume we are picking #8.

    Top 7 (ie what is already gone when we pick)

    3 qb's (Manziel, Bridgewater, Broyles)

    2 tackles- mathews and robinson

    clowney
    Watkins


    Let's look at what is left, keeping in mind that someone could always jump into the top 7, making one of the tackles or watkins available to us at #8.

    Khalil Mack
    Taylor Lewan
    Mike Evans
    Gilbert
    The Rest of the field


    Question, what would you do at #8? Try to trade back again is an option of course, especially with the depth in the draft, but for the purposes of this post, lets assume we are going to make the pick (and lets not debate what we got for moving from 2 to 8, its a safe bet that it would be a lot, maybe even a 2 this year and a 1 next year).

    Personally, i think this depends an awful lot on what fisher and snead think of taylor lewan, and what they think the gap is between him and the other two tackles. If fisher/snead think that lewan is a solid quality starter with real upside and not too far behind the other two tackles, that looks like the pick to me. I however have nowhere near the level of expertise required to have an informed opinion when it comes to this group, and would love to hear what you experts think, especially with all the great publicity that khalil mack is getting (ie mayock has him ahead of clowney).

    Ramming speed to all

    general counsel



  2. #2
    Sauceman's Avatar
    Sauceman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    126
    Rep Power
    2

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    I feel like it's the wrong answer, but I really want to see Mike Evans in the horns. If we nab him at 8 (before the Lions), and we grab the Dennard/Gilbert/Ha'ha/Pryor, I think we're looking pretty good.

    With a pair of second round picks, we can look to upgrade our interior OL or help out our secondary with finding the other piece of the puzzle. Hell, we could even find a falling DT, since I feel like the top 4 prospects are, at best mid-first to mid-second talent.

  3. #3
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,172
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    Lewan and his mustache finger.

    Pretty sweet 1000th post if you ask me lol.

  4. #4
    sosa39rams's Avatar
    sosa39rams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Hamilton, On
    Posts
    5,424
    Rep Power
    43

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    Why would you ever assume AV is right ?

    All jokes aside, there's nothing the Vikings could give me to move down to #8. This draft is loaded at the top and we'd be stupid to move any more than #6. People get way too caught up on more picks, but guess what?

    Quality > Quantity.


    THE DREAM TEAM

  5. #5
    general counsel's Avatar
    general counsel is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    atlanta, georgia
    Age
    52
    Posts
    5,541
    Rep Power
    81

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    I am not sure why you think that quantity necessarily excludes quality, especially when you say that there is "nothing" the vikings could give you. Do you think that 8th pick in the second round is a starting caliber player? I sure do. How much better is Jake Mathews than Lewan? I dont know, but if Fisher thought that the difference was close, you wouldnt rather have another starter (ie the 8th pick in the 2nd round), plus Lewan, plus a high pick next year?

    I agree with your point when people talk about the value of lots of lower round picks, which are generally lottery tickets. But i dont agree when you are talking about picks in the first two rounds in a deep draft and a high pick next year, especially when its not unreasonable to think that the vikings, with a rookie qb, could struggle to a weak season again next year.

    Bottom line. The devil is in the details. The farther you go back in the draft, the more you have to get paid. However, the intersection of quality and quantity, especially for a team like the Rams that certainly could use plenty more talent and depth, is an important consideration.

    Ramming speed to all

    general counsel
    lostsoul likes this.


  6. #6
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,516
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    As an initial matter, I think we should always assume that I'm correct.

    Now, if we end up with the 8th pick, I think you can assume that the following players will be gone: Clowney, Manziel, Bridgewater, Bortles, Mack.

    That means that at least one of these players will be available at No. 8: Matthews, Robinson, Watkins.

    I'd be fine with any of those three players at No. 8.

  7. #7
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,516
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    Quote Originally Posted by sosa39rams View Post
    All jokes aside, there's nothing the Vikings could give me to move down to #8. This draft is loaded at the top and we'd be stupid to move any more than #6. People get way too caught up on more picks, but guess what?

    Quality > Quantity.
    Really?

    So if the Vikings offered their first and second round picks in 2014, and their first round pick in 2015 (which could easily be a Top 10-15 pick), you'd say no?

    I wouldn't.

  8. #8
    richtree's Avatar
    richtree is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,122
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    As an initial matter, I think we should always assume that I'm correct.

    Now, if we end up with the 8th pick, I think you can assume that the following players will be gone: Clowney, Manziel, Bridgewater, Bortles, Mack.

    That means that at least one of these players will be available at No. 8: Matthews, Robinson, Watkins.

    I'd be fine with any of those three players at No. 8.
    There is no way you can assume Mack is gone before Matthews and Robinson.....

  9. #9
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,516
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    Quote Originally Posted by richtree View Post
    There is no way you can assume Mack is gone before Matthews and Robinson.....
    I'm not assuming that. I'm simply assuming that he will go in the Top 7 selections.

    If that were to prove to be wrong, and all of the three players I listed as targets for the Rams (Matthews, Robinson and Watkins) are gone, I'd still take Lewan, Evans or Gilbert + a 2014 2nd round pick and a 2015 1st round pick in exchange for the No. 2 pick.
    Randart likes this.

  10. #10
    richtree's Avatar
    richtree is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,122
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    I'm not assuming that. I'm simply assuming that he will go in the Top 7 selections.

    If that were to prove to be wrong, and all of the three players I listed as targets for the Rams (Matthews, Robinson and Watkins) are gone, I'd still take Lewan, Evans or Gilbert + a 2014 2nd round pick and a 2015 1st round pick in exchange for the No. 2 pick.
    I guess the big question is how much of a drop off is Lewan from the Top 2 guys....I haven't watched him enough, nor heard enough to know what his deal is.....

    I DO KNOW THAT @ PICK #8 GILBERT IS A STEAL AND SOLVES HUGE NEED...BUT THEN WE HAVE TO BE OK WITH OUR OLINE SITUATION OR GETTING A GUY LATER IN ROUND 1.....

    Gonna test patience of Rams fans if we trade down and have to wait for picks down the road while the NFC West is so dominate..

  11. #11
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,516
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    With the 8th and 13th picks, the Rams would be able to select two of the following players: Lewan, Gilbert, Evans, Martin, Dennard, Donald, Clinton-Dix, Pryor.

    Hard to go wrong there, and if moving meant another 2 premium picks over the 2014/15 drafts, I'd make that deal.

  12. #12
    Barry Waller is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Alton, Il. USA
    Age
    63
    Posts
    909
    Rep Power
    25

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    I see little chance the Viking trade what they would nee to trade to get from 8 to 2.

    That's a 1200 point move, meaning the Vikings would have to give up their #1 pick next year, plus a second or third this year.

    I don't see that happening with a new GM, who has said publicly that their aim is to add MORE picks in this great draft. They reached for Ponder, and aren't gonna make that error again. Plus, some drfats have a top three QB dropping to 8th anyway.

    The Vikings can wait and see if a QB goes first and third, and then try to make a shorter move, but I see them standing pat, because of the enormous talent depth in t his draft. #2 picks this year are worth #1 picks in more years, because of the value there.

    I don't see any team paying EXTRA to get one of these QBs, and it's only 50/50 that a team will pay that premium to get Clowney.

    Atlanta will look at Cllowney, and then see that they can get Mathews or Robinson to fill an equal need with a stud, and they would still have that valuable #2 and the pick next year it would cost to move up to #2.

    If BOTH tackles are gone, Atlanta still knows there is value with Lewan or Mack.

    I'm beginning to think more and more that unless the Rams trade cheaply, those teams aren't biting this year.

    If a team does, I think it will be Cleveland, because they have that extra #1 and a high #2 and #3.

    They may want to get ahead of Jacksonville to get the #1 or #2 passer, depending on Houston.

    If the Rams are willing to take the Browns #3 and a pick in 2015 for that small move, it could get done.

    Cleveland was willing to deal a #1 and more for a COACH . The owner is HUNGRY to make a splash, which makes a deal more possible. He is Daniel Snyder lite, if you will.

    The GM is a rookie, so the owner will be calling these shots.

    I can't wait to see how this all develops, and the way I see it:

    The Rams will not trade down so far they don't get a top two OT.

    They won't trade down from 13 if Gilbert or Evans is there, but could move a bit if they aren't

    A trade UP from high round two could be something Snead may do if he acquires more high picks .

    Snead may look and see that where he wants to be is 4th to 6th, then 13-15, then 20-25 with the first three picks, to maximize value, and bundle some picks to get there.

    I could see Snead really going nuts with deals all through this draft if he has people calling. Hopefiully it all works perfectly. It's gonna make a great story on draft day, thats for sure, and i bet Peter King is in the war room again to do just that for Rams fans to enjoy and learn from.

    It won't surprise me if . when the dust clears, Snead has again banked a high pick for 2015.
    Barry Waller

  13. #13
    mde8352gorams's Avatar
    mde8352gorams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,698
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    GC, I believe a big part of the answer to your question about the #8 pick from the Vikings rests on the outcome of our negotiations with Rodger Saffold. If we re-sign him I don't think the Rams will pick an OT. Let me say first, this has nothing to do with Jeff Fisher's history concerning O-Lineman in the 1st round. I believe with Saffold in the fold, the Rams have the OT position secured for next season and beyond with very capable players. That's not to say we won't select an OT in later rounds or UDFA.

    With a top 10 pick you must take a player who will make difference immediately, which is why I'm leaning toward Justin Gilbert or Sammy Watkins/Mike Evans if we stay at #8. A more unlikely but possible pick might be CJ Mosely, but he will have to have an exceptional Pro Day since his Combine performance was mostly absent. K. Mack is better suited for a 3-4 defense making him an unlikely pick.

    To get back to the question, it appears although things may change as we approach the draft that if the Rams trade with the Vikings they trade down further simply because they may not be enamored with what's available at #8. As this draft appears to be so loaded with talent getting additional picks in rounds 2-4 may not be the worst thing and we'd still have 2 picks in round 1.

    Go Rams!

  14. #14
    Vinnie25's Avatar
    Vinnie25 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    824
    Rep Power
    4

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    Quote Originally Posted by mde8352gorams View Post
    GC, I believe a big part of the answer to your question about the #8 pick from the Vikings rests on the outcome of our negotiations with Rodger Saffold. If we re-sign him I don't think the Rams will pick an OT. Let me say first, this has nothing to do with Jeff Fisher's history concerning O-Lineman in the 1st round. I believe with Saffold in the fold, the Rams have the OT position secured for next season and beyond with very capable players. That's not to say we won't select an OT in later rounds or UDFA.
    I think that also. IMO Barksdale performed pretty well last year, and he was actually rated the 13th best RT in the NFL last year. Seems like a waste to keep such a productive player on the sideline when their are much bigger needs on our team.

  15. #15
    richtree's Avatar
    richtree is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,122
    Rep Power
    17

    Re: Let's assume that Av is correct and.......

    Ideally we would like 3 First Round Picks.....something like this:

    Lewan,
    Gilbert,
    B.Coleman

    Is there any OT prospect that also projects really well at the Guard spot ? ?? ?

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. *Rep points for the first correct answer*
    By Ramblin` Ram in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: -10-17-2009, 04:33 PM
  2. Rep points for correct answer...
    By Ramblin` Ram in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: -10-02-2009, 10:02 AM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: -06-03-2009, 01:43 PM
  4. Warner in the correct forum
    By WisRamsFan in forum NFL TALK
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: -06-04-2004, 11:26 AM
  5. Martz correct ??
    By RamDez in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: -08-30-2001, 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
  •