Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 48
  1. #16
    chiguy's Avatar
    chiguy is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,134
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Keep in mind I'm not necessarily advocating the pick. That said...

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    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.
    Really? While I agree that a DE is a greater need by far, what we need without respect to position is a pass rush. I don't see it as that big of a stretch that Dorsey improves our pass rush, particularly if AC is the NT. It doesn't solve the problem, but it probably helps if Dorsey is as advertised.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    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?
    This is the best argument against him as far as I can tell. That said, a good reason for why not to draft him doesn't make a good one go away. It may just muddy the waters.


    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    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?
    I disagree that their view of his ability to play NT is irrelevant, even if it isn't his best position. Most simply, if an interior line of Dorsey and Carricker is better than than an interior line of Carricker and Ryan, then they've improved the team. So as long as you think you can put AC at NT, then the scenario can make reasonable sense, even if it isn't Carricker's best position. Our goal is to get the best players on the field; getting the best players on the field at their best position is nice, but its secondary to get more talent on the field if you ask me.

    But past that, the fact that they believe AC can play NT coming into last year's draft means that he could fill a slot that Dorsey can't. Despite perhaps looking like he has more potential in the 3-technique, there is nothing to believe that he can only play the 3-technique.

    All that said, I'd also probably favor a trade down or different choice there.


  2. #17
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,301
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison View Post
    I mean, the fins can't draft them BOTH, can they?
    I wouldn't rule out anything with Parcells.

    Quote Originally Posted by badmoforamfan View Post
    The guy drafted Bulger.
    And then cut him. :x

    Quote Originally Posted by PHAT-MONEY View Post
    Drafting Glenn Dorsey Would Probably Show We want to try The 3-4.
    Honestly I don't think Dorsey fits well in a 3-4 scheme. I really don't think you'd be playing up to his talent and his attributes by asking him to fill a role on a 3-4 line.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bald_81 View Post
    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.
    Well, a few things. One, I don't think I said we'd be wasting the pick, just that it doesn't make a ton of sense to me when you factor in the current status and personnel of the team, especially when compared to other picks we could make. Two, regardless of what the "experts" had us taking, the reality is we didn't take a corner two years in a row, so I don't really see your point there.

    Quote Originally Posted by chiguy View Post
    Really? While I agree that a DE is a greater need by far, what we need without respect to position is a pass rush. I don't see it as that big of a stretch that Dorsey improves our pass rush, particularly if AC is the NT. It doesn't solve the problem, but it probably helps if Dorsey is as advertised.
    That's a fair point - Dorsey is going to help the pass rush as a whole. The extent to which he will is a debatable issue in my mind. I have to admit that I'm at least in some part underwhelmed by the number of sacks he's accumulated during his career, specifically as a starter. Double teams will do that to you, I suppose, but for a second overall pick, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't expecting better numbers.

    But anyways, I guess the bigger point is that while adding Dorsey would help the pass rush, it doesn't address the depth and need for youth at DE. So yeah, part of the issue is helping the pass rush. Another significant part is improving the personnel on the edge of that line. In that sense, I think position is a factor that has to be considered.

    Quote Originally Posted by chiguy View Post
    Our goal is to get the best players on the field; getting the best players on the field at their best position is nice, but its secondary to get more talent on the field if you ask me.
    I understand what you're saying, and I would agree if we're talking about creating a line-up of players you already have. But when you're building a team, I think putting guys in places where they have the best chance to succeed should be your focus. The Rams drafted Carriker with the intention of playing him at nose tackle, but the emergence of Clifton Ryan allowed Carriker to shift to his more natural position as an under tackle. I guess my point of view is rather than shift Carriker back to a position where he'll have less success, let's keep him where he can be his best and build up the other positions with people that are fits there.

  3. #18
    Bar-bq's Avatar
    Bar-bq is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    2,877
    Rep Power
    94

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    To me, Dorsey, though he may be the best player in the draft, does not make a whole lot of sense as the Rams pick.

    By drafting Dorsey, what you're effectively doing is offsetting the progress that our interior combination has already made. We know that Clifton Ryan is most likely still going to be the starter at NT. There simply aren't many better options. Carriker is better suited to UT, Dorsey would be better suited to UT, and Glover is better suited to UT.

    So what you've done is created an UT rotation with more talent than iit knows how to successfuly utilise. So the question becomes what to do?

    Some will put forward the theory of moving Carriker back to DE. But at 310 lbs, you'd have to question his ability to rush the passer, which in itself would be the primary reason to move him back, as pass rush is the defense's primary need at this point in time. Therefore, not only are you throwing a year's progress out the window at UT, you're plugging in a player who, at his weight, against NFL defenses, is not projected to be a marquee pass rushing end anyway.

    That's why I believe that drafting Dorsey, and moving Carriker to DE defeats the purpose of obtaining an end to find a pass rush. Physically, Carriker's not suited to be a dominant pass-rusher at the defensive end position. You're placing him in a position that makes him less likely to be effective as a defensive player. Plus, he's learning a whole new position and becoming acclimated to the level off OL play in the NFL.

    What we're still lacking is any form of pass-rush behind Leonard Little. And though I won't complain if we take Dorsey, BDPA on my board, I will find it very interesting to see how he finds the field, or to see who doesn't to make room for him.

  4. #19
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,301
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Bar-bq View Post
    And though I won't complain if we take Dorsey, BDPA on my board, I will find it very interesting to see how he finds the field, or to see who doesn't to make room for him.
    This is basically how I see it. Dorsey is a great prospect and the Rams could certainly do a lot worse than him. Adding Dorsey likely means shifting Carriker back to the nose, and though that's not where his best potential lies, the Rams would find themselves with two young, talented tackles at the center of their defensive front. There are certainly advantages to be had by taking Dorsey.

    But when I look at our current personnel and the areas we need to improve in order to succeed as a team, I don't think Dorsey makes as much sense for the Rams as 2-3 other guys we could go with in that spot (namely the two Longs and potentially Gholston). Chris Long is a no-brainer; he's a great left defensive end prospect who is equally capable against both the run and the pass. Jake Long is widely considered a Top Five prospect but remains under appreciated by many Rams fans; he could compete for immediate playing time at guard before eventually shifting outside when the time comes.

    And while I'm still not convinced Gholston's stock is where it needs to be to be selected second overall, a great performance at the combine could cause him to rise up draft boards and allow a team like the Rams to kill two birds with one stone - help their pass rush while adding a future starter at DE.

    I suppose the title of the thread is a bit misleading in that the implication is that the Dorsey pick doesn't make sense at all. I think there are valid points there about why taking Dorsey makes sense, but at this point, there are a couple other directions I'd rather see the Rams go with that selection.

  5. #20
    chiguy's Avatar
    chiguy is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Age
    42
    Posts
    1,134
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    But anyways, I guess the bigger point is that while adding Dorsey would help the pass rush, it doesn't address the depth and need for youth at DE. So yeah, part of the issue is helping the pass rush. Another significant part is improving the personnel on the edge of that line. In that sense, I think position is a factor that has to be considered.
    Agreed, which is why my preference would still be for a DE in the first round. But, at least here, we're only talking about taking Dorsey if C. Long is gone. #2 seems to high for Gholston at this point in time (and maybe for J. Long too) and trading down won't be that easy either. If any of those things weren't true, there would be a whole lot less sense in picking Dorsey there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    I understand what you're saying, and I would agree if we're talking about creating a line-up of players you already have. But when you're building a team, I think putting guys in places where they have the best chance to succeed should be your focus. The Rams drafted Carriker with the intention of playing him at nose tackle, but the emergence of Clifton Ryan allowed Carriker to shift to his more natural position as an under tackle. I guess my point of view is rather than shift Carriker back to a position where he'll have less success, let's keep him where he can be his best and build up the other positions with people that are fits there.
    I more or less agree, but would say that we don't really know what kind of success Carricker could have as the full time NT at this point in time. At a minimum, I'd say the book is still out.

  6. #21
    Dominator's Avatar
    Dominator is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    the old country
    Posts
    66
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    I thought Haslett was installing the 3-4? Carricker is a prototypical 3-4 DE. I was suprised that the Jets still moved up after he was gone. I thought they were looking for Carricker instead of Revis. 3-4 NT is a tough spot to fill, but I'm not sure that Dorsey fits the bill.

  7. #22
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,301
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Dominator View Post
    I thought Haslett was installing the 3-4?
    There's been nothing official to suggest that.

  8. #23
    evil disco man's Avatar
    evil disco man is offline Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Age
    29
    Posts
    2,024
    Rep Power
    55

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    I'm not convinced that we even need the NT position as long as we have two good run stoppers at DT. Both Dorsey and Carriker fit that mold and it's not like they're the typical undersized UTs (i.e. D'Marco Farr at 285) - they both weigh 300+ pounds, more than enough to handle the big O-linemen in the middle.

    If Carriker didn't work out at NT, the Rams were considering running a defense with "left" and "right" tackle positions instead of the traditional NT-UT combo, but Clifton Ryan stepped up and solved that problem. So if the Rams believe Dorsey is too talented to pass up, they probably wouldn't mind tinkering with their defensive philosophy to best fit his skills and get our top 4 linemen on the field. For the record, I am firmly against moving Carriker to DE in the 4-3. He'd basically be like Adeyanju - a good run stopper but zero pass rush.

    That said, I'd take Chris Long and Vernon Gholston over Dorsey.

    :l

    -jake-
    Last edited by evil disco man; -02-03-2008 at 01:39 AM.

  9. #24
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    great points disco. Everyone is expecting Gholston to come up big at the combine, but what if he doesn't what doesn't interview well. You really have to consider where you go from then. I think there is only two ways you can go (without trading down). Take Sedrick Ellis better as a NT than Dorsey or take Dorsey and mix up your scheme to have your best tackles on the field in Carriker and Dorsey. I think Ellis has be thrown somewhere in the conversation who knows he might end up being the better player

  10. #25
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,301
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by 39thebeast View Post
    I think there is only two ways you can go (without trading down). Take Sedrick Ellis better as a NT than Dorsey or take Dorsey and mix up your scheme to have your best tackles on the field in Carriker and Dorsey. I think Ellis has be thrown somewhere in the conversation who knows he might end up being the better player
    Personally I think it's a mistake to not even include Jake Long in the discussion. There's a viable chance the Rams can find a good offensive tackle later, but if Chris Long is gone, do you really gamble on that? I can envision any number of situations where Long, Clady, Williams, Otah, Baker, and Cherilus go in round one. The Dolphins could come back and take a tackle above us at pick 33. Meanwhile, if the Rams can take Jake Long in round one and then come back in round two and take a Lawrence Jackson or Phillip Merling, I think that's a successful first two rounds as well.

  11. #26
    RamsSB99's Avatar
    RamsSB99 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Mo
    Posts
    1,131
    Rep Power
    23

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by bigredman View Post
    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.
    I would not be against this at all if Chris Long is not there. IMO draft picks often bring greater value when you trade them for proven players. Proven players in the NFL may come with a higher price tag but the benefit is they have proven themselves. I could see a scenario where a team may want to trade a proven player and maybe another day 1 pick for a shot at McFadden or some of the other glitzy pick names. Alot of times these draft picks are annointed ProBowlers and never make it. There are also several times you can trade a top 5 pick for a person that has made it to the ProBowl already.

  12. #27
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    I think Tex and Avenger kind of hit it on the head: the argument hinges on the idea that he is some kind of "special talent" at his position. Sure, we invested a lot in a defensive tackle last season, but you don't pass up the kind of guy an opponent is going to have to gameplan around. At least that's the theory. The problem is, of course, that predicting success in the NFL is notoriously difficult to do.

  13. #28
    harrydog's Avatar
    harrydog is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    428
    Rep Power
    12

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post

    And while I'm still not convinced Gholston's stock is where it needs to be to be selected second overall, a great performance at the combine could cause him to rise up draft boards and allow a team like the Rams to kill two birds with one stone - help their pass rush while adding a future starter at DE.

    I suppose the title of the thread is a bit misleading in that the implication is that the Dorsey pick doesn't make sense at all. I think there are valid points there about why taking Dorsey makes sense, but at this point, there are a couple other directions I'd rather see the Rams go with that selection.
    Assuming that Chris Long is gone, wouldn't it make perfect sense to trade down if there is a team in the top 10 that would want Dorsey bad enough. Oakland, NY, Cinci, and NO all have a need at DT. We could draft Gholston and get additional picks this year and maybe next year too. Whatever, we would have added picks, still get a pass rushing DE and not have the added expense of what the 2nd overall pick will likely command. We could still get a top OT also.
    It just seems that if Chris Long is gone, trading down makes the most sense if we can find a trading partner and I think quite a few teams covet him.
    I think we're in a great situation here. I just hope the Rams staff is savvy enough to make the most of it.

  14. #29
    Fargo Ram Fan's Avatar
    Fargo Ram Fan is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Fargo,ND
    Age
    50
    Posts
    715
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by harrydog View Post
    I think we're in a great situation here. I just hope the Rams staff is savvy enough to make the most of it.
    ...GULP...
    "You people point your 'f'in' finger and say theres the bad guy....what that make you....good?" Tony Montana

  15. #30
    39thebeast's Avatar
    39thebeast is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    conecticut
    Posts
    2,740
    Rep Power
    38

    Re: Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick

    Quote Originally Posted by Nick View Post
    Personally I think it's a mistake to not even include Jake Long in the discussion. There's a viable chance the Rams can find a good offensive tackle later, but if Chris Long is gone, do you really gamble on that? I can envision any number of situations where Long, Clady, Williams, Otah, Baker, and Cherilus go in round one. The Dolphins could come back and take a tackle above us at pick 33. Meanwhile, if the Rams can take Jake Long in round one and then come back in round two and take a Lawrence Jackson or Phillip Merling, I think that's a successful first two rounds as well.
    Six offensive tackles in round 1 that would be a record, i don't think that is very likely. Many are saying Merling is a first rounder Jackson is a very good player, but I would rather take advantage of this deep OT class thats all im saying. If you think you can get Merling in the second by all means take Jake Long if you think you can't I wouldn't take long

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 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
  •