Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 48
  1. #1
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,341
    Rep Power
    153

    Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    I see people making it in mocks across the net, and I see some Rams fans contending he should be right up there on our list. But I think it would be pretty hard for this team to justify spending back-to-back first round picks on defensive tackles when there are so many other areas that need to be addressed.

    If the Rams select Dorsey, where does he fit? Does Carriker stick at nose tackle even though he's a better fit as a three-technique? Or does Carriker move outside even though he's really not much of an edge rusher? I don't think either makes much sense, which is why the Dorsey selection frustrates me a bit.

    Yes, there's a definite argument to go BPA with such a high pick, but again, can you really do that when you just spent a first rounder on a player of the same position?

    To me, if Chris Long is off the board, the Rams have three options (subject to change given the potential rise and fall of prospects over the next three months) - Jake Long, Vernon Gholston, or a trade down. I'm simply not sold on back-to-back first round DTs.


  2. #2
    chiguy's Avatar
    chiguy is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,135
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    I'm generally in agreement with what you're saying Nick, but I don't think the pick itself is as illogical as you seem to think. First, Carricker may in fact be a better UT, but they drafted him thinking he could play NT. And while he wasn't as good there, he wasn't bad either. If Dorsey is in fact the next coming of Warren Sapp, then it doesn't seem like a huge stretch to move AC back to NT and pair him with Dorsey on passing downs. Afterall, Glover and AC were on the field plenty together last year with generally good results (given that one was a rookie and the other is an aging vet).

    Second, it does give the defensive staff a lot of rotational flexibility on the defensive line. For example, if they want to move to a 3-4, it might be possible to run out a Dorsey-Ryan-Carricker line. On running downs, you could move to an Adeyanju-Ryan-Dorsey-Carricker line. On passing downs, you could run Little - Hall at end, with Dorsey and Carricker on the inside.

    Third, even if you move AC permanently to end, is that really the worst possible scenario? He's never going to be a speed rusher, but its not as if he has not DE pass rushing skills either. He ran a decent 40 at the combine if I remember and had decent quickness times. He's very strong, could lose some weight, and can be taught some pass rush moves. In that sense, would he be that far off from a Grant Wistrom kind of end, who was a valuable player for us?

    Again, I think we'd probably start looking OT if we C. Long is gone or consider moving, but if we get a guy like Dorsey or Ellis it doesn't seem like a wasted pick to me either. It just seems sub-optimal. But that is presumably made up for by the fact that you're getting an especially talented player. But keep in mind that I'm a guy who wouldn't cry about us adding McFadden either (and not trading Jackson).

  3. #3
    txramsfan's Avatar
    txramsfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Poplar Bluff, MO
    Age
    50
    Posts
    7,266
    Rep Power
    65

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Dorsey is a special DT, he can rush the passer and is solid against the run. Most DT's are run stuffers but not pass rushers. Teams have been doubling Leonard Little when healthy, but won't be able to if Carriker and Dorsey are on the front.

    I think it makes perfect sense to draft Dorsey if Chris Long is off the board. That would give us two very solid DT's in the rotation. I think sometimes people get way too hung up on what technique is best for players. To me, players just want to play no matter what technique it is.

  4. #4
    badmoforamfan's Avatar
    badmoforamfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    CO
    Age
    40
    Posts
    498
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    You know if the Rams are going to draft a DL in the draft (which seems their current course) then I fully trust hasletts evaluation of talent. He (IMO) has been pretty good at his assesments in the past. Just look at his past draft picks with the Saints, Charles Grant, Will Smith. If he thinks the pick should be Long or Ellis or Dorsey, then I'm cool with it. The DT postion is the shortest path to the QB.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Maybe not now, but soon.

  5. #5
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,564
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    If the Rams select Dorsey, where does he fit?
    He fits at UT of course. Glover is a situational guy at this point; and Wroten appears to be a whack-a-do.

    Obligatory Disclaimer: Chris Long is my top pick.

    With that out of the way, I could entertain the idea of Dorsey for two reasons.

    1. DT is the greatest position to have depth. Yes, Carriker and Ryan appear to be solid starters for some time to come, but adding Dorsey to that mix would be a beautiful thing. Not to mention, passing downs with AC and Dorsey in the middle would be a great interior rush.

    2. At this point, he would be the BPA on the board. A ton of money is going to go to our top pick, and I'd hate to slide down the talent ladder to get a position of "need".

    Again, he's not my first choice (maybe not even my 2nd choice), nor is DT our first position of need......however, I wouldn't pull a full on Jets-draft-Brady revolt either.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  6. #6
    viper's Avatar
    viper is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Vancouver, Washington
    Age
    53
    Posts
    1,675
    Rep Power
    26

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    I think there have been some good points made by everyone in this thread so far. Chris Long would be my first choice as well. But, as we found out last year with the O-line, solid depth is very important. If Ryan or Carriker get injured, or both, we're up a creek with out a paddle. Plus, Glover won't be here much longer and Wroten may not be either if he doesn't get his act together.

    I do think there is a case to be made for Ellis or Gholston also. Ellis would be a consideration due to Dorsey's injury history and Gholston because we desperately need a pass rush off the edge. Little isn't getting an younger. Now, if we can trade down and get one of those two that wouldn't hurt my feelings either.

  7. #7
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,341
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by chiguy View Post
    I'm generally in agreement with what you're saying Nick, but I don't think the pick itself is as illogical as you seem to think.
    Perhaps not, and I do think Dorsey playing UT and Carriker playing nose is the best of the solutions I've heard in terms of how the Rams would use both of them. I'm just not convinced that drafting Dorsey - and investing mega bucks in him as the second overall pick - helps us in the areas where we really need help. And money is a factor that really hasn't been talked about that much. Do we really want to go out and spend $60 million at a position where for the first time in a while we seem to have some promise already on the roster?

    Quote Originally Posted by chiguy View Post
    First, Carricker may in fact be a better UT, but they drafted him thinking he could play NT.
    Drafting him with the mindset that he'd play NT seems irrelevant to me. Haslett said back in October, "We played him mostly at training camp at the nose because we didn't know what Cliff was... Adam, in the long run, will be a better three-technique."

    It sounds like regardless of where they drafted him, they envision him as a better three technique. So do you draft a three-technique of the future when you already have one on your roster?

    Quote Originally Posted by txramsfan View Post
    Teams have been doubling Leonard Little when healthy, but won't be able to if Carriker and Dorsey are on the front.
    Teams may not fear Leonard Little anymore. He wasn't exactly tearing the field up before becoming injured this season, and I doubt that was because he was constantly doubled.

    You're right in that Dorsey/Carriker gives us a very promising interior pair, but by drafting Dorsey, you shift Carriker away from his best position and you do nothing to address our lack of edge rush. And when compared to DT, the DE position has (1) worse depth and (2) no future starters to take over for Little or Hall.

    Quote Originally Posted by badmoforamfan View Post
    You know if the Rams are going to draft a DL in the draft (which seems their current course) then I fully trust hasletts evaluation of talent. He (IMO) has been pretty good at his assesments in the past. Just look at his past draft picks with the Saints, Charles Grant, Will Smith.
    I'm not sure Haslett's drafts are as strong as some seem to think. Yes, you can point to guys like Grant or Smith. You can also point to guys like Sullivan (a complete bust) and Stallworth (solid receiver but no way in the Top 15 which is where he was picked). When you look at his drafts as a whole, I generally don't see more than two or three quality players per year.

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    2. At this point, he would be the BPA on the board. A ton of money is going to go to our top pick, and I'd hate to slide down the talent ladder to get a position of "need".
    The question becomes how far are you really sliding down the talent ladder, and I think that's a legitimate debate that could be had. If the Rams have Dorsey #2 on their board and Jake Long #3 (fwiw, both Mel Kiper and Scott Wright currently have that as their ranking), is that too much of a slide? It's not like we're talking about spending the second overall pick on a guy ranked 17th because of need.

    And just to be clear, I wouldn't be pulling a Jets-draft-Brady revolt either should we draft Dorsey. I'm just not sold that doing so really helps us get better where we really need to get better. And if I'm going to drop $60 million on a guy, I don't want it to be at a position that's towards the bottom of the priority list. I'm not a pure "draft for need" guy, but I do think you have to draft with some sense of need in the back of your mind.

    Quote Originally Posted by viper View Post
    Chris Long would be my first choice as well. But, as we found out last year with the O-line, solid depth is very important. If Ryan or Carriker get injured, or both, we're up a creek with out a paddle.
    Then let's go out and get some depth behind them. You don't do that using the second overall pick, though.

  8. #8
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,564
    Rep Power
    145

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick
    The question becomes how far are you really sliding down the talent ladder, and I think that's a legitimate debate that could be had.
    Nick, IMO, if Chris Long goes #1, then your question becomes the question, and I mean THE question, of this draft. CL is the perfect fit of value and need, but after that it's all about balancing that equation of value (Dorsey) vs. need (J. Long).

    I just don't know. Maybe your boy, Vern G., blows up and becomes a viable option at #2. You know, the more I think about it, maybe that's what I'm really hoping for here. Solid combines and workouts for BOTH Chris Long and Vern Gholston. I mean, the fins can't draft them BOTH, can they?
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  9. #9
    badmoforamfan's Avatar
    badmoforamfan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    CO
    Age
    40
    Posts
    498
    Rep Power
    10

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I'm not sure Haslett's drafts are as strong as some seem to think. Yes, you can point to guys like Grant or Smith. You can also point to guys like Sullivan (a complete bust) and Stallworth (solid receiver but no way in the Top 15 which is where he was picked). When you look at his drafts as a whole, I generally don't see more than two or three quality players per year.
    The guy drafted Bulger. First Round picks 2001-2005: Duece Mcallister (injury prone, but heck of a back when healthy), Donte Stallworth (Speedy #2WR), Charles Grant (wish the Rams would have gotten him instead of James Hall last year), Jonathan Sullivan (agreed bust), Will Smith (solid pass rusher) and Jammal Brown ( I sure wish the Rams would have gotten him in that draft instead of Barron). I will agree that you don't see more than 2 or 3 quality players/year, but the same can be said for about 80% of the franchises out there including this one. I'm not saying he's the best, but he's the best the Rams have on the coaching staff. 3 out of 4 DL is not bad when you consider this franchises record with drafting DL@#1. I'm sure Carriker had Jim's approval stamp and the concensus is that he's going to be a decent player.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]Maybe not now, but soon.

  10. #10
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,543
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    The only way Dorsey makes sense is if you think he's such a special talent that you have to take him notwithstanding the fact that he's clearly not the top "need" position.

    Therefore, if Chris Long is gone, taking Dorsey would mean he is head and shoulders above the next best prospect (at any position). Of course, that kind of logic could also support taking Darren McFadden.

    In my mind, the Rams have such a glaring need for a top pass rusher. If C.Long is gone, I'm still thinking Gholston.

  11. #11
    PHAT-MONEY Guest

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Drafting Glenn Dorsey Would Probably Show We want to try The 3-4. Leonard Little would Probably Have To Move Back to Linebacker for this to work. adam Carriker would have to move back to DE and james hall would probably fill the other DE spot.. Maybe Im wrong, but that might be an Idea.

  12. #12
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,543
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    I don't think anybody projects Dorsey as a NT in a 3-4. He is a 4-3 UT.

    No matter how I slice it, I keep coming back to the Rams' biggest need being a DE who can rush the passer.

  13. #13
    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: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    They say defense wins championships. There are plenty of examples where teams with dominate defenses and marginal offenses have in fact won championships. However, those marginal offenses had at least good to very good offensive lines that let their marginal "skill" players do enough to keep them in the game. Sure, we could go out and polish off our defense and maybe make it into a very good to great defense by going predominately defense again, but our skill players on offense will get KILLED. We have very good skill position players (a couple are even great), and with an offensive line to protect and execute, we can be a force again and legitimate Super Bowl contender. The Ram's focus MUST be on strengthening our offensive line FIRST. Trade the first round draft pick for a proven player or players with a package deal. If we simply go "lazy" and take the best athlete available regardless of position, I will be very disappointed.
    Last edited by bigredman; -02-01-2008 at 06:09 PM.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

  14. #14
    MauiRam's Avatar
    MauiRam is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Maui, Hi.
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,863
    Rep Power
    79

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    The only way Dorsey makes sense is if you think he's such a special talent that you have to take him notwithstanding the fact that he's clearly not the top "need" position.
    Bingo!! That is the only scenario in which we should take him. According to Jim Thomas, there are some in the Rams organization who consider him to be the best player in the draft. I think most of us prefer Chirs Long, but there is a good chance he might not be there. What would really make for some heated discussions would be this scenario: Dallas works out a swap with Miami, and selects McFadden thus leaving both C. Long and G. Dorsey available when we pick. If the Rams took Dorsey over C.Long I imagine there would be quite an uproar ...

  15. #15
    Bald_81's Avatar
    Bald_81 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Age
    25
    Posts
    887
    Rep Power
    22

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I see people making it in mocks across the net, and I see some Rams fans contending he should be right up there on our list. But I think it would be pretty hard for this team to justify spending back-to-back first round picks on defensive tackles when there are so many other areas that need to be addressed.
    Alot of experts had us taking Darrelle Revis last year after taking Hill in '06 and alot of people on here weren't overly mad at that pick. Just because we take the same position two seasons in a row does not mean it is going to waste by any means. Dorsey is a DT prospect that the NFL hasn't seen in quite sometime.

    I equate this pick to the Calvin Johnson selection last year. He was easily the best player in the draft but no one had the Lions selecting him because of their failure with prior WR selections in the draft. Instead, they made the right choice because he was the BPA and a can't miss prospect at WR which the NFL hadn't seen in quite some time. Now, if we had picked where the Lions did last season, already having Holt, Bruce and Bennett, would we take Johnson or select Gaines Adams? I believe we would have taken Calvin, just like if we were to take Dorsey over Gholston or Long this year.
    Last edited by Bald_81; -02-01-2008 at 10:40 PM.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Rookie DTs Make a Difference
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: -10-19-2007, 02:16 PM
  2. FIRST PICK in the DRAFT
    By Tony Soprano in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: -10-18-2007, 02:33 AM
  3. Overview from ESPN
    By RamWraith in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: -06-11-2007, 07:34 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: -09-28-2004, 10:40 AM
  5. ESPN Scouts Inc: Rams Team Summary
    By Nick in forum RAM TALK
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: -07-26-2004, 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
  •