MSNBC Draft Grade

[evil disco man]

Originally Posted by Nick

...I wasn't even aware MSNBC covered sports?

MSNBC still exists?

Maybe they should move Olbermann to the sports section where he belongs.

[AvengerRam]

Originally Posted by txramsfan

Now how ironic is this.....coming from the founder of SLOP.

Yeah, that was pretty ironic, wasn't it?

Keep doing what you do, my friend!

[laram0]

D+ no matter how you analyze or re-analyze each pick is absolutely positively ridiculous!

[moloch41]

Originally Posted by cfh128

I knew it was going to be a bad grade before I even read this once I saw that Moloch posted it.

Ha ha- I would have posted it even if it had been an A+!!! My prediction that after the draft was over, most of these writers that grade would give us a C-, so I was close. This was the lowest one I have seen- I think the higest was a C.

[moloch41]

Originally Posted by evil disco man

Maybe they should move Olbermann to the sports section where he belongs.

Oh god no. I can't stand that poor man's Groucho Marx. I wish him and Berman would just do the world a favor and retire.

[ram1906]

I tend to agree with MSNBC...but not as low as D+. But I will say if you remove C Long from the draft, which was a no brainer, then the D+ is accurate. the Rams were so locked in on their board and the ascertion of how they thought the draft would fall that they missed an opportunity to get an A. If Avery was "their guy" they could have gotten him later...maybe not round 3, but later. Lofton , the LB from OU was sitting there, and with Culberson as our WLB no one can deny that immediate need. With any draft savy we could have jumped back in and still got Avery. Yes this is pretty far fetched, but so wa taking Avery as the 1st wide reciever in the draft. Most draft experts have us attacking that lb need in 09...we could have been a yr ahead and still came out with a"speed" wr. Then we pass on Connor in round 3. It was noted that he was not a fit at our need at outside LB....hummm isnt that WW natural position. Didnt Connor play inside LB at LB University...and again, if Grecco was our 3rd round goal we could have used some later round bait to go get him....IMO, it seems when the draft room folks were golfing on Friday before draft day, they made their minds up on who they were going to draft in round 2 and 3. They knew Avery would be sitting there and so would Grecco. The didnt evolve as the draft unfolded and that gets a C- from me.

[Goldenfleece]

Originally Posted by ram1906

I tend to agree with MSNBC...but not as low as D+. But I will say if you remove C Long from the draft, which was a no brainer, then the D+ is accurate. the Rams were so locked in on their board and the ascertion of how they thought the draft would fall that they missed an opportunity to get an A. If Avery was "their guy" they could have gotten him later...maybe not round 3, but later. Lofton , the LB from OU was sitting there, and with Culberson as our WLB no one can deny that immediate need.

I'll deny it. First of all, Tinoisamoa starts on the weakside. Culberson would more likely be strongside. Chris Draft was arguably better than Tinoisamoa when he was in last season, and he's big enough to play strongside linebacker if need be. We need/needed depth at linebacker but not necessarily a starter.

Originally Posted by ram1906

With any draft savy we could have jumped back in and still got Avery. Yes this is pretty far fetched, but so wa taking Avery as the 1st wide reciever in the draft. Most draft experts have us attacking that lb need in 09...we could have been a yr ahead and still came out with a"speed" wr....

I think Avery would have been off the board by pick 11 of round 2 at latest--when the Broncos took a not quite as speedy, not quite as productive Eddie Royal. For that matter, the Packers took Jordy Nelson at pick 5 of round 2, and he's another player I wouldn't expect most teams to rate higher than Avery. Jerome Simpson of little old Coastal Carolina went ahead of most the players pundits said would go at the top.

[tomahawk247]

i think calling Avery a project is a bit too far
every rookie is raw and needs work

a project would be someone either like king, who has measurables but needs more experience and knowledge, or someone who has moved positions upon entering the NFL, like Matt Jones

[HUbison]

Originally Posted by ram1906

If Avery was "their guy" they could have gotten him later...maybe not round 3, but later.

The problem of course being, the Rams didn't have a pick between 33 and 65.

But HUb, they could have traded down and still got Avery!

Really? Could they? Who's looking to give up picks to trade up to 33? How far down do we go and keep assurance that Avery, who is reported to be the top receiver on 8-10 team boards across the league, would be available in a round in which 1/3rd of the picks were wideouts?

Yes this is pretty far fetched, but so wa taking Avery as the 1st wide reciever in the draft.

According to who? To broadcast talking heads? Or professional football talent evaluators?

[TekeRam]

When I first looked at it, I, too, was shocked that we took Avery when we could ahve had any of the receivers in the draft, but there's one thing that caught my eye the more I looked at it. We weren't drafting a guy who would be starting on the outside from day one. We wanted a guy who would tear up the middle from the slot and who could then move outside after a few seasons. That's what we got in Avery. A team oriented, experienced guy who'll do what we need of him. Overall, I think he's a great pick, because he's what we wanted and needed. He fits the system. And that, as shown by the Colts and the Pats, is most important.

[Chris58]

It's ironic that so many posters wanted the Rams to take a WR in the early rounds. Now that they did, whoa! That's too high!!! Just because some talking head didn't think Avery was worthy, we start a second guessing game. If these so called NFL draft experts in the media had any sack, they'd be employed by some NFL team doing their talent scouting. We hired Devaney and Saunders to help turn us around. I put a lot more stock in their opinion than some hack who can't do anything but follow the crowd.

[moloch41]

"Talking Head" seems like the word of the day around here. Do you get a free Tupperware set if you use it in a sentence correctly?

[Chris58]

Originally Posted by moloch41

"Talking Head" seems like the word of the day around here. Do you get a free Tupperware set if you use it in a sentence correctly?

Maybe, but I prefer glass storage containers.

[TekeRam]

Chris, I don't think the issue is that we took a WR too early, it's the idea that we took THAT receiver too early. We all knew that the #33 pick was ours, and although I'd have loved to trade down and pick up a 4th rounder or something next year(assuming we didn't drop that far down), that was where we were going to pick. The issue people are having is that we didn't take one of the flashy #1 receivers when instead we took an experienced guy who fits our system that was rated by the "talking heads(I want my tupperware now, thank you!)" lower than the guys who would not fit in as our slot guy as well.

Me, I was shocked too, when I saw it, but once I looked at him more closely, I completely agree with the pick. He should work out great in the slot for a couple years before Holt's contract is up, and as Torry himself has said, we'll go on from there.

[Chris58]

TR, I probably didn't make my point very well due to my frustration with all the hand-wringing over the Avery pick. Again, my point is, that just because the "talking heads" (please, give my tupperware to Goodwill), didn't think Avery was worthy of the #33 pick, doesn't mean it was a whiff. First, after examining his on-field performance, character, and our needs, he made perfect sense to our talent evaluators. Second, as has been shown in other posts, the draft is a very imprecise science with as many hits as misses in early rounds. Who's to say what Avery turns out to be or anyone else for that matter.

I don't understand why many here are willing to run off the cliff as they follow the logic (or lack of it) of some so called experts who said Avery was a reach or project. Like Hub says, a project, yes. Aren't all draftees? A reach? Not to us. In the draft aftermath, the experts are trying to save face (and justify their jobs) from having missed what they could have seen but didn't. Go Avery; Go Rams.