Mock draft Blackmon off the board

[tomahawk247]

Richardson is certainly a possibility with Blackmon off the board. Likely the BPA at that point.

Stephen Hill has become everyone's favorite WR after the combine, and that's across the board over the multiple fan bases whose conversations I've read. If you're picking between 20-40, Hill seems to be your top WR target. I don't know if he makes it out of the first round, but I just hope Rams fans who want him are prepared for a scenario in which he doesn't really emerge as a capable starter until Year Three or so. We have to keep in mind you're talking about an especially raw player with a whopping 49 career receptions in college. Hill is very talented, but I question how pro ready he is, especially if you plant him in the starting line-up from Day One.

Zach Brown, I'm not a huge fan of high in the second round. I think he's overrated based on his athletic ability.

If i take Hill, I want to grab another 1st/2nd round WR in the draft at the same time. One that is more pro ready. I really would love a Blackmon/Hill combo, providing Hill falls to the top of the second. Of course, we might not be able to afford to do that given the holes on the team. But you know what? It fills a need at WR.

[RockinRam]

I wouldn't say the tall linebacker is necessarily at an advantage to the shorter linebacker. The shorter linebacker has the advantage of a lower centre of gravity, improving his balance. The shorter linebacker also has the advantage in that he is already low into the tackle. Running backs are often 5'10 or shorter, and are taught to run low. As a tackler, you need to get as low to be able to get some drive and knock that RB back. A taller linebacker will struggle with that. No matter how strong or fast you are, it's not easy to push a guy back if he rams his helmet into your stomach.

As for seeing the field, it's not really that important. Linebackers make their reads not based on where the ball is, more on how the offensive line moves. If they fire out of their stance forward, it's a run. Drop back into pass protection, it's likely a pass (could be a draw).

I agree that the majority of running backs are on the short side; however, if a linebacker already is NFL caliber, he most likely has the athletic ability to bend down a couple more inches when tackling to make up for his 6'2+ frame. A taller linebacker packs a bigger punch when tackling than a shorter one. And I'm not speaking out of my ass here, I used to play.

As for your second statement, I'm not talking about just watching the ball. If you are taller, you have a heightened view on what's going around you. As for how the offensive line movement, yes you are right in theory, but as you get to the NFL level it's a lot more complicated than just reading the movement of the o-line.


To add one more thing, a taller linebacker is usually more opposing than a shorter one. Unless you are Ray Lewis or London Fletcher, having a midget linebacker roaming the field isn't quite as frightening as having a bigger, broader player.

[rammiser]

Im not saying I dont like Richardson but why pick someone this year at a position we are fine at? Jackson is a solid performer and next year we have 2 first round picks and would be able to pick up a rb then. To me picking Richardson this year is a wasted pick because we have so many holes to fill. I would rather trade down again stockpile some more picks and draft a player of need. Richardson is not a need for this team, when Jackson is still playing like he is.

[tomahawk247]

I agree that the majority of running backs are on the short side; however, if a linebacker already is NFL caliber, he most likely has the athletic ability to bend down a couple more inches when tackling to make up for his 6'2+ frame. A taller linebacker packs a bigger punch when tackling than a shorter one. And I'm not speaking out of my ass here, I used to play.

As for your second statement, I'm not talking about just watching the ball. If you are taller, you have a heightened view on what's going around you. As for how the offensive line movement, yes you are right in theory, but as you get to the NFL level it's a lot more complicated than just reading the movement of the o-line.


To add one more thing, a taller linebacker is usually more opposing than a shorter one. Unless you are Ray Lewis or London Fletcher, having a midget linebacker roaming the field isn't quite as frightening as having a bigger, broader player.

How do you know a taller guy will pack a bigger punch? Doesn't that depend on weight, explosiveness, strength etc? Just because a guy is taller doesn't make him hit harder.
I'm not quite sure what you having used play has anything to do with this...

So an NFL caliber LB that is 6'2+ can get low in the tackle, but an NFL caliber LB that is short can't tell what is going on because he is too short? Of the top 5 tacklers in the league last season, only one was taller than 6'0. Surprised those guys could get to the ball without being able to see where they were going.

I don't think any NFL player sees an opposition player as opposing based on their size. If someone is going to get scared by the height of someone stepping off the bus, they might as well give up playing now. What scares people is playing the game. You think receivers don't want to go near James Harrison because of his size? Hell no, he is only 6'0. They don't want to go near him because of how he plays. You know he is going to hit you, and hard.

But what my real point is, if 6'2+ linebackers are supposed to have better potential due to their height, then how comes so many under 6'2 do so well? And if being taller is better, surely the Rams should put Kendall Langford at LB because he is 6'6?

Taller isn't necessarily better when it comes to LBs.

[fliptalianstallion]

Im not saying I dont like Richardson but why pick someone this year at a position we are fine at? Jackson is a solid performer and next year we have 2 first round picks and would be able to pick up a rb then. To me picking Richardson this year is a wasted pick because we have so many holes to fill. I would rather trade down again stockpile some more picks and draft a player of need. Richardson is not a need for this team, when Jackson is still playing like he is.

Same argument goes for drafting Robert Quinn last year. We assumed Long and Hall will be our starting unit for awhile (in hindsight) and we ended up with Hall having a down year and Quinn doing well at the starting lineup. Now I understand RBs in today's league are less valuable but TRich is one of the most complete and elite backs coming into the draft since AP. Jackson may have plenty of tread left in him, but an elite back to compliment him will keep him fresh past the 30 year old wall. It's tiring enough to see S-Jax get support from sub-par RBs, and when he goes down that our offense couldn't move the chains if their lives depended on it.

[punahou]

imo if Blackmon is gone by 6, Id say look for trade down value with someone else like the Bengals as an example and then look for Floyd, Gilmore, Decastro (Ziegler? sp) thereafter.

Hill my have the tangibles that a super-elite WR should posses, but.... I am not sold on him to step in and impact the offense immediately-- which is what we need.

IMO I'd make Hill a safety. He a -- put him in a position that doesnt really need hands (knock the ball down), put him in a position that he is somewhat used to in hitting people ( he's primarily a blocker), and as a former WR (like Claiborne) he knows the feints and subtle movement that WRs are supposed to use to sell their routes.

I may be a heretic in saying that, but Im sure it would work well in Madden =)

[sosa39rams]

How do you know a taller guy will pack a bigger punch? Doesn't that depend on weight, explosiveness, strength etc? Just because a guy is taller doesn't make him hit harder.
I'm not quite sure what you having used play has anything to do with this...

So an NFL caliber LB that is 6'2+ can get low in the tackle, but an NFL caliber LB that is short can't tell what is going on because he is too short? Of the top 5 tacklers in the league last season, only one was taller than 6'0. Surprised those guys could get to the ball without being able to see where they were going.

I don't think any NFL player sees an opposition player as opposing based on their size. If someone is going to get scared by the height of someone stepping off the bus, they might as well give up playing now. What scares people is playing the game. You think receivers don't want to go near James Harrison because of his size? Hell no, he is only 6'0. They don't want to go near him because of how he plays. You know he is going to hit you, and hard.

But what my real point is, if 6'2+ linebackers are supposed to have better potential due to their height, then how comes so many under 6'2 do so well? And if being taller is better, surely the Rams should put Kendall Langford at LB because he is 6'6?

Taller isn't necessarily better when it comes to LBs.

He played in the NFL, trust him. He is correct.

[rammiser]

Same argument goes for drafting Robert Quinn last year. We assumed Long and Hall will be our starting unit for awhile (in hindsight) and we ended up with Hall having a down year and Quinn doing well at the starting lineup. Now I understand RBs in today's league are less valuable but TRich is one of the most complete and elite backs coming into the draft since AP. Jackson may have plenty of tread left in him, but an elite back to compliment him will keep him fresh past the 30 year old wall. It's tiring enough to see S-Jax get support from sub-par RBs, and when he goes down that our offense couldn't move the chains if their lives depended on it.

I understand your arguement but how do we know Richardson is the most complete back since AP? Do we know this because Mel Kiper and Mike Mayock think so? I hear this about a lot of players every year and we just dont know. I have no problem waiting another year to draft a rb when we have the luxury of 2 first round draft picks. As much as I love Steven Jackson not only because he's on my Rams but also played for my High School here in Vegas, I just dont see us keeping him much longer with Richardson also in the backfield. We have so many holes to fill drafting a rb right now with the 6th over all pick in my opinion would be a mistake.

[RockinRam]

How do you know a taller guy will pack a bigger punch? Doesn't that depend on weight, explosiveness, strength etc? Just because a guy is taller doesn't make him hit harder.
I'm not quite sure what you having used play has anything to do with this...

So an NFL caliber LB that is 6'2+ can get low in the tackle, but an NFL caliber LB that is short can't tell what is going on because he is too short? Of the top 5 tacklers in the league last season, only one was taller than 6'0. Surprised those guys could get to the ball without being able to see where they were going.

I don't think any NFL player sees an opposition player as opposing based on their size. If someone is going to get scared by the height of someone stepping off the bus, they might as well give up playing now. What scares people is playing the game. You think receivers don't want to go near James Harrison because of his size? Hell no, he is only 6'0. They don't want to go near him because of how he plays. You know he is going to hit you, and hard.

But what my real point is, if 6'2+ linebackers are supposed to have better potential due to their height, then how comes so many under 6'2 do so well? And if being taller is better, surely the Rams should put Kendall Langford at LB because he is 6'6?

Taller isn't necessarily better when it comes to LBs.

Well see, now we are arguing the same thing. I've been waiting for someone to say what you're saying, and had to "slither my way" into getting someone else to back what I've been saying up.


A lot of the arguments I was using against you wasn't correct, I just had to get someone else to state the reasons I am stating for why I support Lavonte David.

Trust me, I know I was pulling crap out of my butt...


This is why I have been, and still am advocating we draft Lavonte David instead of the "bigger, taller" Zach Brown.

[rammiser]

I agree that the majority of running backs are on the short side; however, if a linebacker already is NFL caliber, he most likely has the athletic ability to bend down a couple more inches when tackling to make up for his 6'2+ frame. A taller linebacker packs a bigger punch when tackling than a shorter one. And I'm not speaking out of my ass here, I used to play.

As for your second statement, I'm not talking about just watching the ball. If you are taller, you have a heightened view on what's going around you. As for how the offensive line movement, yes you are right in theory, but as you get to the NFL level it's a lot more complicated than just reading the movement of the o-line.


To add one more thing, a taller linebacker is usually more opposing than a shorter one. Unless you are Ray Lewis or London Fletcher, having a midget linebacker roaming the field isn't quite as frightening as having a bigger, broader player.

Sam Mills might also take offense to this, just saying.

[Rambos]

Richardson is certainly a possibility with Blackmon off the board. Likely the BPA at that point.

Stephen Hill has become everyone's favorite WR after the combine, and that's across the board over the multiple fan bases whose conversations I've read. If you're picking between 20-40, Hill seems to be your top WR target. I don't know if he makes it out of the first round, but I just hope Rams fans who want him are prepared for a scenario in which he doesn't really emerge as a capable starter until Year Three or so. We have to keep in mind you're talking about an especially raw player with a whopping 49 career receptions in college. Hill is very talented, but I question how pro ready he is, especially if you plant him in the starting line-up from Day One.

Zach Brown, I'm not a huge fan of high in the second round. I think he's overrated based on his athletic ability.

I'm guilty as charged when it comes to falling in love with Hills speed and size.. but who hasn't. Not sure about your three year time line in his development you could be right. I'm fine with that.. as he running the 9 route CB's and FS are going to have to run with this kid.. and that should open things up underneath for sure. We could add him this year and come back next year and use on of our two first RD picks and add a more NFL ready WR.

Again you can't teach speed... for me I want playmakers on both sides of the ball... our new coaching staff can coach up Brown.

[fliptalianstallion]

I understand your arguement but how do we know Richardson is the most complete back since AP? Do we know this because Mel Kiper and Mike Mayock think so? I hear this about a lot of players every year and we just dont know. I have no problem waiting another year to draft a rb when we have the luxury of 2 first round draft picks. As much as I love Steven Jackson not only because he's on my Rams but also played for my High School here in Vegas, I just dont see us keeping him much longer with Richardson also in the backfield. We have so many holes to fill drafting a rb right now with the 6th over all pick in my opinion would be a mistake.

My reason to believe that TRich is on the same level as AP or better is because of his physical attributes, the conference he played in college (which is obviously defensive driven), how tends to take more than 3 guys to tackle him down, and how he carried that entire 'Bama offense.

AP had better numbers in college than TRich was because of the conference he played in (I can only imagine the numbers he'd put on the table if he played in the Big 12). I understand we should try going for other positional needs so I'm absolutely fine with that too but I'd be just as happy to have TRich as the #6 overall because of the talent he's shown to be worth it despite other needs we have to address.

[tomahawk247]

Well see, now we are arguing the same thing. I've been waiting for someone to say what you're saying, and had to "slither my way" into getting someone else to back what I've been saying up.


A lot of the arguments I was using against you wasn't correct, I just had to get someone else to state the reasons I am stating for why I support Lavonte David.

Trust me, I know I was pulling crap out of my butt...


This is why I have been, and still am advocating we draft Lavonte David instead of the "bigger, taller" Zach Brown.

Then why argue the point i made in the first place that smaller linebackers have an advantage?

[RockinRam]

Then why argue the point i made in the first place that smaller linebackers have an advantage?

Because you didn't state all the that needed to be stated to make a definite convincing argument that David > Brown.

[tomahawk247]

Because you didn't state all the that needed to be stated to make a definite convincing argument that David > Brown.

Neither have you. If the argument was convincing, there wouldn't be any more discussions over it.