Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 26 of 26
  1. #16
    RAMarkable is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Age
    59
    Posts
    2,089
    Rep Power
    41

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    However, given the inherent risk of taking WRs early, the Rams probably should not trade up to grab one, and definitely should not reach (i.e. taking a guy like Baldwin at pick #14).
    Agree big time with this. If we can draw any conclusions from this thread its that to draft WRs early in round one is risky enough without expending the additional assets required to move up to get one.

    At the end of the day it appears that if a highly-graded wideout is available when you pick you should consider taking him; but do not go chasing one by trading up. This in all probablilty, has too much risk associated with it.

    WHAT SAY YE?


  2. #17
    sjacksonrules's Avatar
    sjacksonrules is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    southern il
    Posts
    1,450
    Rep Power
    29

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that.

    However, given the inherent risk of taking WRs early, the Rams probably should not trade up to grab one, and definitely should not reach (i.e. taking a guy like Baldwin at pick #14).
    I was more or less saying if green and jones are either there and we pick a defensive player instead I am gonna trust the guys they pick will produce.

    Sam wasn't number one on everyones list last year clausen had a few supporters but despags made the right call.
    Last edited by sjacksonrules; -03-25-2011 at 02:45 PM. Reason: typo

  3. #18
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,546
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Quote Originally Posted by sjacksonrules View Post
    I was more or less saying if green and jones are either there and we pick a defensive player instead I am gonna trust the guys they pick will produce.
    There's no disagreement there. Given that the DL crop is viewed as being very deep, it could be that the best value might be to go with a Cameron Jordan, Ryan Kerrigan or Alson Smith. Spags/Devaney might conclude that one of those guys is more of a "sure thing" than any of the WRs.

    My personal opinion is that WR is a big enough need that if Jones or Green is there at No. 14, you pull the trigger. I would not trade up, nor would I take any other WR at 14.

    Only about a month before we find out if the Rams feel the same way.

  4. #19
    mde8352gorams's Avatar
    mde8352gorams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,701
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    May I remind everyone that in 1999 we selected Torry Holt with the 6th pick in the first round. I think we all know how that worked out. So it's part due diligence to find out how a player projects and a bit of luck as well.

    Go Rams!

  5. #20
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,546
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Quote Originally Posted by mde8352gorams View Post
    May I remind everyone that in 1999 we selected Torry Holt with the 6th pick in the first round. I think we all know how that worked out. So it's part due diligence to find out how a player projects and a bit of luck as well.
    True, but the next WR taken in that draft was David Boston, who never lived up to his billing.

  6. #21
    sjacksonrules's Avatar
    sjacksonrules is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    southern il
    Posts
    1,450
    Rep Power
    29

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    True, but the next WR taken in that draft was David Boston, who never lived up to his billing.
    So deep down you are really thinking we should trade up to get A.J. Green so we can goto the superbowl. Cause Jones is gonna be the next boston. Ok maybe I am over exaggerating lol.

  7. #22
    mde8352gorams's Avatar
    mde8352gorams is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Age
    62
    Posts
    1,701
    Rep Power
    19

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    True, but the next WR taken in that draft was David Boston, who never lived up to his billing.
    True and to my point...."a bit of luck"

  8. #23
    LongBlood's Avatar
    LongBlood is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Visalia, Cali
    Age
    33
    Posts
    157
    Rep Power
    7

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Interesting. First off, in any draft class you have to wait 3 years before you evaluate it, espc when it comes to WR's because it takes them 2-3 years to develop anyway. So if you want to really look at this situation you'd go from '97-'07...then when you factor in Nicks point about where players are rated talent wise alone you add in Randy Moss who EVERYONE viewed as top 10 talent, and also the likes of Torry Holt too. When you view it like that, it starts taking shape to a point I made TWO FREAKING YEARS AGO, on why the Rams should have gotten Crabtree. The only sucker bet here was taking an OT over a freaking elite viewed WR, which YOU JUST DON'T DO...but they did. I know I'll take crap, but Crabtree still should have been the pick and I still stand by it. This team would be a lot farther along with Crabtree entering his 3rd year, a QB in his 2nd year, and now drafting an OT to solidify the line, instead of searching for a WR to develop and waiting another 3 years for that player to develop. Anyhow, they should trade up for Green, but that's a suckers bet because they had the opportunity to get the top WR 2 yrs ago and passed and will now have to pay a ransom for it. Or what they should do, and go defense with the pick. It really is that simple.

    "See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve."
    Last edited by LongBlood; -03-28-2011 at 01:33 AM.

  9. #24
    Goldenfleece's Avatar
    Goldenfleece is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Age
    32
    Posts
    3,586
    Rep Power
    60

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Quote Originally Posted by LongBlood View Post
    Interesting. First off, in any draft class you have to wait 3 years before you evaluate it, espc when it comes to WR's because it takes them 2-3 years to develop anyway. So if you want to really look at this situation you'd go from '97-'07...then when you factor in Nicks point about where players are rated talent wise alone you add in Randy Moss who EVERYONE viewed as top 10 talent, and also the likes of Torry Holt too. When you view it like that, it starts taking shape to a point I made TWO FREAKING YEARS AGO, on why the Rams should have gotten Crabtree. The only sucker bet here was taking an OT over a freaking elite viewed WR, which YOU JUST DON'T DO...but they did. I know I'll take crap, but Crabtree still should have been the pick and I still stand by it. This team would be a lot farther along with Crabtree entering his 3rd year, a QB in his 2nd year, and now drafting an OT to solidify the line, instead of searching for a WR to develop and waiting another 3 years for that player to develop. Anyhow, they should trade up for Green, but that's a suckers bet because they had the opportunity to get the top WR 2 yrs ago and passed and will now have to pay a ransom for it. Or what they should do, and go defense with the pick. It really is that simple.

    "See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve."
    Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Conventional wisdom says offensive tackle is the higher priority in the first round.

    Players Taken in First Round by Position
    2010: 4 OTs, 2 WRs
    2009: 4 OTs, 5 WRs
    2008: 7 OTs, 0 WRs
    2007: 3 OTs, 5 WRs
    2006: 1 OT, 1 WR

    Total Over 5 Years: 19 OTs, 13 WRs

    First Off the Board by Position:
    2010: Trent Williams OT (4th), Demaryius Thomas WR (22nd)
    2009: Jason Smith OT (2nd), Darius Heyward-Bey WR (7th)
    2008: Jake Long OT (1st), Donnie Avery WR (33rd)
    2007: Joe Thomas OT (3rd), Calvin Johnson WR (2nd)
    2006: D'Brickashaw Ferguson (4th), Santonio Holmes (25th)

    First Off the Board 5 Year Average: OT=2.8, WR=17.8

    Apparently, you don't just take an offensive tackle over an elite receiver, but three NFL GMs took offensive tackles over Crabtree and the Raiders took a different receiver over him (yeah, I know that didn't turn out too well). Every year for the last 5 years, at least one offensive tackle has been taken in the top 5 and usually 2-3 tackles come off the board within the top 12 picks or so.

    Now in hindsight, the success of a 2nd round pick, Rodger Saffold, means that if we had taken Crabtree the year before, we might be in better shape now...but there's no way we could have known that then. If we had drafted Crabtree and Bradford and weren't able to land a blindside protector, I think it's safe to say we wouldn't have won as many games as we did last season and we would not be in as good of shape as a team at this point.

  10. #25
    sjacksonrules's Avatar
    sjacksonrules is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    southern il
    Posts
    1,450
    Rep Power
    29

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Quote Originally Posted by LongBlood View Post
    Interesting. First off, in any draft class you have to wait 3 years before you evaluate it, espc when it comes to WR's because it takes them 2-3 years to develop anyway. So if you want to really look at this situation you'd go from '97-'07...then when you factor in Nicks point about where players are rated talent wise alone you add in Randy Moss who EVERYONE viewed as top 10 talent, and also the likes of Torry Holt too. When you view it like that, it starts taking shape to a point I made TWO FREAKING YEARS AGO, on why the Rams should have gotten Crabtree. The only sucker bet here was taking an OT over a freaking elite viewed WR, which YOU JUST DON'T DO...but they did. I know I'll take crap, but Crabtree still should have been the pick and I still stand by it. This team would be a lot farther along with Crabtree entering his 3rd year, a QB in his 2nd year, and now drafting an OT to solidify the line, instead of searching for a WR to develop and waiting another 3 years for that player to develop. Anyhow, they should trade up for Green, but that's a suckers bet because they had the opportunity to get the top WR 2 yrs ago and passed and will now have to pay a ransom for it. Or what they should do, and go defense with the pick. It really is that simple.

    "See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve."
    I know they say everyone is entitled to their opinion but some people should be told what to think.

    What makes you think crabtree is a top WR? I would say Smith is a good a tackle as Crabtree is a WR. Crabtree to me isn't impressive AT ALL. I can respect a player if he is good but he is just overhyped. He couldn't even sniff Andre Johnson or Larry Fitzgeralds jock strap. We needed a tackle at the time so we took Smith.

    Ahead of the curve? It looks like you went straight on a curved road...... Spags and any coach knows you build from the inside out. I am glad you don't run this team cause we could be in the whiners situation. Its kinda funny they draft a guard and a tackle in the first round the very next year because they relized they messed up getting crabtree first. Did you forget who left that year big ole orlando pace. Of course holt left too. But that was when we thought avery could handle the number one spot after his decent rookie year. So we had a more glaring need at the time at tackle. In hindsight its easy to judge things. Spags did what was best for the team at the time. You know who we drafted before 2 years before we drafted Holt? PACE!!! OMG you mean we drafted a tackle 2 years before we took wr and then won the superbowl woah I guess that must be a pretty good formula.... We should not trade up for green he is not that much better and what if it just bites us in the butt to lose draft picks and to have a bust draft pick.

  11. #26
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,546
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: WRs in the Top 15: A Sucker's Bet?

    Quote Originally Posted by LongBlood View Post
    When you view it like that, it starts taking shape to a point I made TWO FREAKING YEARS AGO, on why the Rams should have gotten Crabtree. The only sucker bet here was taking an OT over a freaking elite viewed WR, which YOU JUST DON'T DO...but they did.
    I don't buy that at all. First of all, Crabtree has underperformed for a top 10 pick so far, and there's no guarantee he'll ever reach his potential. Second, there is always a high premium on OTs. Guys like Rodger Saffod, who lasted until the second round and became a very solid starting LT, are the exception, not the rule.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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
  •