Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 35
  1. #16
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,666
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    Quote Originally Posted by viper View Post
    Nick, my question is this, are we better off looking for 4-3 DE or a 3-4 DE? I suppose the same question could be asked about a DT/NT. What are your thoughts?
    Well let me just clarify the position you're asking about. Are you talking about a 3-4 player as in Ware or Merriman or Joey Porter of the Steelers who are outside linebackers in the 3-4 scheme but rush the passer quite a bit, or are you talking about actual defensive ends in the 3-4 such as Richard Seymour of the Pats or Luis Castillo of the Chargers?

    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Four
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  2. #17
    MikeB1603 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    231
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I just don't see how you can write off McDonald based on what we've seen, but feel confident in Williams even though we haven't seen anything. Williams has been inconsistent and has never lived up to his potential. He never broke out in college as the elite playmaking receiver many expected him to be. And there's talk about whether he even wants to play receiver at this point.

    I don't have a lot of faith in McDonald as a starter either, but I certainly have more faith in him than Williams as an emergency starter at this point. And I've yet to see any kind of convincing argument made in Williams' favor besides he's athletic and you've compared him to Moss even though there are pretty significant differences.
    I'm writing off McDonald because I think Looker can fill in just as well as Shaun can. It would be a battle between Williams and Looker for the slot role and that emergency #2 if it came to it. Neither McDonald or Looker are viable candidates to play every down, we will need to bring in someone else. You mention that there is talk that he might not even want to play receiver in the NFL but you don't mention the talk that he "could end up being a better pro than college player if the light ever comes on" (Scott Wright-NFL Countdown) My main attraction to Williams is his size, athleticism, and his potential. But you must have skimmed past the other arguments I made for going after the kid. There aren't many, if any, better teams to learn the wide receiver position than the Rams. With Holt and Bruce's veteran guidance and Linehan's deep ball philosophy, which played a part in bringing him in as the head coach for the Rams, will play right into William's hands. Having that size and speed out on the field will also make Holt a bigger threat in the red zone. I don't know how much else I could say to sell a guy for the third round. The fact is he could polish himself at WR and make something of himself or he could bust. But some team is going to take a shot with him around round 3, maybe even 2, I would like to see that team be the Rams. As for the Moss comparison, I wasn't saying that the guy is a Moss clone. He is actually closer to being a Roy Williams or Bryant Johnson but I threw Moss's name out there because of the affiliation with Linehan. I didn't think that 2 inches and a slightly slower 40 would be much of a stretch to draw a comparison.

    Once again though I am going to go back to Holt and Bruce's age. I would like to know how long you think Bruce will remain productive for us. I myself believe that we could possibly see a dropoff from him as early as next year, but given his production this year and in the past I will say that asking another 2 years of good play from Isaac is a fair assessment. So given that timetable I would say that come the 2009 draft (this is the 2007 draft coming up for those that may be getting lost with all the numbers being thrown out) we would have WR as a round 1 or 2 priority. History has proved in the NFL that rookie WR's don't produce very well, in fact it isn't until around their third year in the pros that receivers begin to make good of themselves. So going by the NFL trend, going after a WR now would mean that in 2-3 years when Bruce's time is coming to an end, Williams will be adjusted to the pro game and hopefully step in as a go-to receiver.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Or we could waste it on a player who has never lived up to his potential and has had major consistency issues when we could be addressing bigger needs on this team where we not only have little depth but inadequate starters. IMO, when wide receiver becomes more of a priority need, then we should address it on Day One. Right now, it's not a priority need - we have bigger needs at MLB/SLB, DT, DE, S, OG/C. Some of those positions will be addressed in free agency, but some will not. I don't view this Rams team as having the luxury right now to spend Day One picks on things that will be needs 2-3 years down the road.
    Well, I have MLB being addressed in round 1 with Willis. I don't think I mentioned it here in this thread but I am pretty certain that with Steinbach, Dielman, and a few other top notch guards becoming available through free agency along with the cap room we will be given, it is very likely that we will be bringing in a nice filler on the O-line. And with Incognito, Romberg, and Setterstorm all looking pretty damn good, I don't think that we really need to bring in another youngster. At the safety position, I think that we could upgrade through free agency but I don't see anybody being a better option than Chavous and Atogwe besides Landry and Nelson. Chavous is getting old, but I see him being around longer than I do Bruce. And Atogwe has been exceptional with the time he has been given, I'm not as worried about him as I was at the beginning of the year. As for DE/DT, Carriker fits the mold to play both positions, I think he stands a better shot at becoming the end for our D-Line though. So that leaves the dreaded DT. Kennedy has got to go, we're better off without him. Glover has still got some fire and I would love to see him stay as a starter. Wroten has played well enough for me to give him the backup role. The other starter has to come via free agency in my mind for our defense to turn things around. Two rookies on the D-line is not what I see as the answer to our problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I have him listed as 4.41 from his campus agility tests, and I'd be pretty shocked if he runs faster than a 4.35 at the combine. If you got that number from Draft Countdown, it's usually better to wait until after the combine before looking at the 40 times Scott Wright has listed, as it's my understanding that he basically just averages times he's seen elsewhere at this point in the season.
    Yes, I did get the number from Countdown. From what I read on those forums Scott averages three times from trusted draft sites as his 40 times before the combine. 4.41 is his fastest recorded time I can find, although he was said to have hit 4.35 unofficially a few weeks before Fresno's first game according to the team website http://gobulldogs.cstv.com/sports/m-...ms_paul00.html. Until the combine numbers are revealed though I guess he will be listed as a 4.40.

  3. #18
    mcpeepants232003's Avatar
    mcpeepants232003 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    741
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    I don't want a player that we have to "turn the light on". If he can't find a reason to turn in out in college with all eyes on him what is he going to do when he gets that fat paycheck. To me although character isn't the biggest factor it is a large one. Look at the Bengals they have made to many questionable picks involving character. A team can handle it if they have one or two such players but when you get 6 or 7 then it becomes to much of a distraction for the team. Their is plenty of good receivers in this draft and we shouldn't spend a pick on one who doesn't even want to play receiver.

  4. #19
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,666
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeB1603 View Post
    You mention that there is talk that he might not even want to play receiver in the NFL but you don't mention the talk that he "could end up being a better pro than college player if the light ever comes on" (Scott Wright-NFL Countdown)
    We could go back and forth quoting random comments from scouting reports. But the suggestion that he could be better at the pro level if the light ever comes on doesn't strike me as an incredibly convincing argument in favor of the guy. However, the idea that he's not even sure if he wants to play on offense strikes me as a VERY important red flag about whether or not I'd want to draft him on the first day. Thus, a big difference between the two comments.


    Quote Originally Posted by MikeB1603 View Post
    But you must have skimmed past the other arguments I made for going after the kid.
    No I didn't skim past them. I just don't find them very convincing.

    1) Because we have a great learning environment with two veteran receivers and an offensive minded head coach, we should spend a Day One pick at receiver? There are good learning environments at QB and LT as well, why not draft players there while we're at it? While I don't dispute that this environment at receiver would be beneficial to a young rookie, I don't see why we have to spend a Day One pick this year to take advantage of it. Could we not spend an early to mid second day pick and groom that player, thus minimizing the risk while also addressing other bigger needs? Could we not simply draft someone in April of 2008, seeing as how Holt and Bruce will still both be here to serve as mentors? I believe we could, so again I don't see the urgency or necessity.

    2) Williams' size and speed will only make Holt a bigger threat in the red zone? I'm not so sure. I don't think speed is as important in the red zone as route running. In the red zone, the field is shorter and there's less room to run and gain separation by blazing by the defender. Gaining separation through precise routes and cuts strikes me as a bigger advantage in the red zone, and these are not Williams' strengths. As for his size, we'll see where he comes in at the combine. I'm not exactly sure that a guy around 6"1"-6'2" is such a red zone monster that he's going to free up a 6'0" Torry Holt all that much.


    Quote Originally Posted by MikeB1603 View Post
    I didn't think that 2 inches and a slightly slower 40 would be much of a stretch to draw a comparison.
    When you say a guy has the "striking similarity in size and speed" to Moss, yet he's not as tall and is not as fast as Moss, then yeah, it strikes me as somewhat of a stretch to draw the comparison between the two.


    Quote Originally Posted by MikeB1603 View Post
    I would like to know how long you think Bruce will remain productive for us.
    I think Bruce will remain productive for the remainder of his contract, which extends through 2008 I believe. He's shown no signs of slowing down, IMO, and certainly isn't going to suddenly become useless and ineffective any time soon. I'm not sure how many more 1,000 yard season he's going to have, but we don't need to have two 1,000 yard receivers for this offense to work. Klopfenstein is going to continue to develop in this offense, Jackson remains a big threat as a receiver in the open field, and in limited time we've seen brief flashes from Byrd to suggest there's a chance he can contribute as a receiver.

    Bruce excels not because of elite physical skills that will erode but rather because of his intelligence, his ability to gain separation through his route running, and his knack for finding soft spots in zone coverage. I'm not convinced those abilities are going to see major drop offs as he continues to age. But if they do, then we can address it.


    Quote Originally Posted by mcpeepants232003 View Post
    I don't want a player that we have to "turn the light on". If he can't find a reason to turn in out in college with all eyes on him what is he going to do when he gets that fat paycheck.
    This is a very good point. Our quarterback spoke out this season about players in the locker room just showing up for a paycheck and not caring about what happens. So we're going to turn around and draft a guy who has been an underachiever through his college career and doesn't always give great effort? No thanks. Good luck trying to get Bulger to sign an extension if that's how the Rams respond to his comments.
    Last edited by Nick; -12-30-2006 at 03:21 PM.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Four
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  5. #20
    MikeB1603 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    231
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    Nick, you make very fair arguments against the drafting of Paul Williams and your outlook of drafting another defender with that third pick surely bodes at the least some improvement for the defensive side of our team. Therefore, I will concede that the smarter or better move would be to go after perhaps a safety or DT.

    But, I ask you to look at this pick from a different angle. Say Williams pans out in the pros right away, would his abilities as a slot man over what McDonald offers us not be a huge leap to becoming a Super Bowl contender, while the drafting of that third defender only pushes us slightly closer to becoming that contender? I see his pick as a high risk with a high-very high reward. I would not argue for taking a low risk receiver in this draft because it isn't priority at this time like you said. As for waiting until next year's draft, well, I don't think that Williams is going to be in that draft too. I get the feel that you only know what you have heard about Williams while you have not seen him play yourself. I myself haven't seen any Fresno games this year but I did see some of the Boise State game and the USC game last year and I was really impressed with Williams athleticism. Here is a small highlight film of his too, interesting to note the special teams highlights involved in this clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOyYVnN4bTs

    By the way, the reasoning behind Holt becoming more of a threat in the red zone is that having the threat of Williams size in the corner (he may only be two inches taller than Holt but the guy can jump as well, and plus you made two inches seem rather a big difference in the comparison to Moss than you did for Holt ) will take the coverage off of Torry and Isaac just enough that their precise route running will be rewarded. I can recall a few instances this year off the top of my head in which Holt was just mere inches away from a touchdown grab but the ball was just within the reach of a nearby defender. IMO, A big reason for our red zone problems is that the coverage is overly focused on our big two. Does the opposing defense become just a little bit more spread out giving Bulger that extra tiny gap needed to hook up with Holt or Bruce?

    Also, I don't think that Bulger would be too upset with trying to give him another target to throw to. If he doesn't extend based on the team going after an underachiever then see you Marc, good luck starting for a team in this league without these types of guys.

    I'll end on that note and wait until after free agency to reflect on this mock, but I am interested to hear your thoughts on where this team would rank against others if the risk panned out and he was able to reach his potential?

  6. #21
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is online now Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    32
    Posts
    19,666
    Rep Power
    154

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeB1603 View Post
    Say Williams pans out in the pros right away, would his abilities as a slot man over what McDonald offers us not be a huge leap to becoming a Super Bowl contender, while the drafting of that third defender only pushes us slightly closer to becoming that contender?
    We already have a very good slot man in Curtis and last I checked we're not in the Super Bowl at present, so I really don't think having Williams in the slot is going to be a huge leap towards the Super Bowl. If we turn into contenders, it'll be because we finally address our defense and fix that side of the ball, not because we upgrade our third WR.

    Furthermore, I have no idea why you automatically assume that the defender we'd draft in the third round would only serve to push us "slightly closer" towards becoming a contender.

    Maybe I misunderstood your question though.


    Quote Originally Posted by MikeB1603 View Post
    As for waiting until next year's draft, well, I don't think that Williams is going to be in that draft too.
    Obviously Williams isn't going to be in next year's draft, but that doesn't mean there won't be other promising prospects we could look at if we feel it's an area we need to address. I have no idea what your point is with this comment - our WR-of-the-future situation is not Paul Williams or nothing.


    Quote Originally Posted by MikeB1603 View Post
    I get the feel that you only know what you have heard about Williams while you have not seen him play yourself. I myself haven't seen any Fresno games this year but I did see some of the Boise State game and the USC game last year and I was really impressed with Williams athleticism. Here is a small highlight film of his too, interesting to note the special teams highlights involved in this clip. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOyYVnN4bTs
    No one's disputing his athleticism or that he had a good season in 2005, but even though that was his best year, he was still disappeared quite a bit. Through his first seven games of 2005, Williams had a mere 13 catches for 192 yards and two touchdowns. He came on late in the year, got a lot of people's hopes up about his potential, and then laid an egg this season with inconsistency and injuries. A highlight video from a year ago with some nice plays primarily against teams like San Jose State, Boise State, and Toledo with a handful of nice plays against Oregon and USC doesn't change that situation, IMO.


    Quote Originally Posted by MikeB1603 View Post
    If he doesn't extend based on the team going after an underachiever then see you Marc, good luck starting for a team in this league without these types of guys.
    So you'd rather draft an underachiever at the risk of it alienating our Pro Bowl quarterback instead of looking at another receiver prospect with a higher work ethic or another position altogether?

    Bulger uncharacteristically spoke up this season about having players on this team that didn't seem to care and lacked desire. I really don't see how it's wise to respond to those comments by drafting a prospect who underachieved in college, has concentration concerns, and may want to change positions at the next level.
    ClanRam ModCast: Episode Four
    Rams Discussion Right at Your Fingertips!



  7. #22
    bigredman's Avatar
    bigredman is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    El Paso, Texas
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,815
    Rep Power
    61

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    Oh, my....the season hasn't ended and here is all this in depth draft talk when we don't even know where we will be drafting, or who will remain with the team. Seems like a lot of wasted energy, but this has never been my wheelhouse anyway. Enjoy!
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  8. #23
    MikeB1603 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    231
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    Actually yes, you did misunderstand my question but I think it was more to do with me being in a rush to get to work and not forming it in the way I wanted you to interpret it. You actually misinterpreted quite a few things from my last post, I'll have to take some time in a few days when I get the chance to clearly put down my thoughts on what is to happen this offseason to make the Rams the contenders I see them being next year.

  9. #24
    snowbozo21's Avatar
    snowbozo21 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    73
    Rep Power
    0

    Thumbs up Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    we must draft willis in the first round if he is available or I will freak out.

  10. #25
    RamsDynasty's Avatar
    RamsDynasty is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    20
    Rep Power
    0

    If we get Patrick Willis

    If we get Patrick Willis in the first round I will be a very happy man. Though we might have to trade up to get him thanks to our 3 game winning streak at the end of the season. Only however IF we address the D Line heavily in free agency. We need a pass rushing DE monster, Freeny or Smith, AND we need a run blocking NT as well. Then get a DT that specializes in the 2nd round as well. Dream line up
    Def Line: Little, Glover, Sands, Freeny
    Linebackers: Witherspoon, Willis, Pisa
    DB's: Hill, Atogwe, Chavous, Brown

    I guess we need someone to push Chavous, and a KR/PR and a big possession WR

  11. #26
    jsramer's Avatar
    jsramer is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Mississippi
    Age
    46
    Posts
    23
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: If we get Patrick Willis

    Quote Originally Posted by RamsDynasty View Post
    If we get Patrick Willis in the first round I will be a very happy man. Though we might have to trade up to get him thanks to our 3 game winning streak at the end of the season. Only however IF we address the D Line heavily in free agency. We need a pass rushing DE monster, Freeny or Smith, AND we need a run blocking NT as well. Then get a DT that specializes in the 2nd round as well. Dream line up
    Def Line: Little, Glover, Sands, Freeny
    Linebackers: Witherspoon, Willis, Pisa
    DB's: Hill, Atogwe, Chavous, Brown

    I guess we need someone to push Chavous, and a KR/PR and a big possession WR
    With Willis in middle, who is playing Strongside LB, Pisa or Spoon? Don't think either of them are strongside LB's.:\

  12. #27
    RamsDynasty's Avatar
    RamsDynasty is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    20
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: If we get Patrick Willis

    Quote Originally Posted by jsramer View Post
    With Willis in middle, who is playing Strongside LB, Pisa or Spoon? Don't think either of them are strongside LB's.:\
    Spoon would be the SLB per se. He has the versatility and is our best linebacker even if we get Willis. Pisa we are stuck w/ not that he is a bad player but the extension means that he starts. Spoon is better at the outside and we have a big contract w/ him so our best option getting a superior MLB and move Spoon to SLB. Spoon seems to have much better shot at succeeding at SLB than Pisa who would break down in that position.

  13. #28
    jsramer's Avatar
    jsramer is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Mississippi
    Age
    46
    Posts
    23
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: If we get Patrick Willis

    Quote Originally Posted by RamsDynasty View Post
    Spoon would be the SLB per se. He has the versatility and is our best linebacker even if we get Willis. Pisa we are stuck w/ not that he is a bad player but the extension means that he starts. Spoon is better at the outside and we have a big contract w/ him so our best option getting a superior MLB and move Spoon to SLB. Spoon seems to have much better shot at succeeding at SLB than Pisa who would break down in that position.
    Maybe, I personally don't like the idea of trying to make Spoon a SLB, when he is a natural WSLB. Don't get me wrong I think Willis is a top notch player just not sure how we make him work with our current people. Maybe Willis has potential as a SLB?

  14. #29
    rampete is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Southern Cal
    Posts
    654
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    i would not be shocked if linehan goes after demarcus russell QB of LSU...he'll need to sit and learn for 2 or 3 seasons but he is reminiscent of daunte culpepper with a better arm...

    bulger is a player but he is one hit from going down for the count and we really don't have anyone to pick up the torch except fitzpatrick...ferotte is not getting any younger either...

  15. #30
    Dr. Defense's Avatar
    Dr. Defense is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    RI
    Age
    24
    Posts
    498
    Rep Power
    11

    Re: Rams Day 1 Mock Draft 12/28

    I have a question for you nick. Why did you say that we should pursue a DE in the second. I understand the need for a DE but do you think that it would be worth a second pick when we could pick a DT/NT instead. In my mind I think it might be better if we went with

    Patrick Willis
    DT/NT
    DE

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

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
  •