Rams not going Oline in round 1?

[iced]

I dont advocate wating untill the later rounds to get help on the oline I just dont think they go Oline in the first round, You can get very good guards in the 2nd and 3rd round and I believe we can get a solid developmental OT in the 2nd. With a trade down and an extra second I think they go OT with one of the 2nds and then a guard with the other second or a 3rd rounder. I dont think the feel they must use a top ten pick Just to have insurance for Jake Long.

^ this

 

[Memphis Ram]

I dont advocate wating untill the later rounds to get help on the oline I just dont think they go Oline in the first round, You can get very good guards in the 2nd and 3rd round and I believe we can get a solid developmental OT in the 2nd. With a trade down and an extra second I think they go OT with one of the 2nds and then a guard with the other second or a 3rd rounder. I dont think the feel they must use a top ten pick Just to have insurance for Jake Long.

I'd argue that any OLine selection wouldn't be made JUST TO have insurance for Jake Long. Said insurance is just one of the pretty good benefits of such a selection.

 

[Angry Ram]

^ this

It's not "insurance", Jake Long won't be around for the long term...and Joe Barksdale is a UFA after this year (and so far no new deal despite a good season).

JM can start at RT and then LT when Jake Long is gone. It's such a perfect scenario.

 

[Alan]

RamsJunkie looking at only one possibility:
I don't think they feel they must use a top ten pick just to have insurance for Jake Long.

So you view drafting a top OT as merely getting insurance for Jake Long? I don't see it that way at all and I doubt the Rams do either. That's true in my mind whether or not they draft one high or not. There are so many, many other reasons to draft one of the top OTs. Insurance for the injury prone Jake Long is merely one of them.

Of course, that doesn't mean it's the best thing to do but I would never make the mistake of thinking it's merely health insurance.

 

[RamsJunkie]

So you view drafting a top OT as merely getting insurance for Jake Long? I don't see it that way at all and I doubt the Rams do either. That's true in my mind whether or not they draft one high or not. There are so many, many other reasons to draft one of the top OTs. Insurance for the injury prone Jake Long is merely one of them.

Of course, that doesn't mean it's the best thing to do but I would never make the mistake of thinking it's merely health insurance.

I understand that long term Jake Long may not be here but right now and for the forseeable future he will be and the rams need to win now. Fisher and Snead are in year 3 of there rebuild and didnt fill any holes in free agency so now your saying they can afford to draft a buck up tackle in the first, he may play at guard for a year or 2 but how do you that high of a draft pick on a guard?? Id much rather use that 2nd pick on a playmaker and draft a good guard in the second and an OT we can groom to take over in the future. too much talent in this draft and to many holes to fill to take a guard/backup tackle with one of our first picks IMO.

 

[Alan]

RamsJunkie dodging the issue:
I understand that long term Jake Long may not be here but right now and for the forseeable future he will be and the rams need to win now. Fisher and Snead are in year 3 of there rebuild and didnt fill any holes in free agency so now your saying they can afford to draft a buck up tackle in the first, he may play at guard for a year or 2 but how do you that high of a draft pick on a guard?? Id much rather use that 2nd pick on a playmaker and draft a good guard in the second and an OT we can groom to take over in the future. too much talent in this draft and to many holes to fill to take a guard/backup tackle with one of our first picks IMO.

I agree with your contention that we have many holes to fill. One of which is at G. Train up an OT that we get somewhere in a lower round? Do you really think that has more than a small chance of providing us with a stud player at one of the most important positions in football? That's like planning your retirement based on winning the lottery IMO.

Need I remind you that a G was drafted #7 and #10 last year? Not only has the thinking in the NFL evolved concerning the O-line in the last 10 years or so do to the rules changes, those picks were actually JUST guards and not players they were grooming to become LTs or even RTs.

You neatly sidestepped discussing all the myriad reasons for drafting a stud LT that have nothing to do with Jake Long. Rather than just listing them myself (again), I'll just ask you some questions that might give you some pause for thought.
Why do you think that OTs were drafted #1, #2, #4, #11 and #19 in the draft last year?
Do you think that the top three OTs in this draft won't go in the top 10 and the top 5 OTs won't go in the 1st round?
Why were 2 Gs drafted in the top 10 and 3 in the top 20 in last years draft?
2011 Whiner draft: #11 Mike Davis OT, #17 Mike Iupati G. 2010 record: 6-10, 2011 record: 13-3.
Or maybe you have an explanation for those things that differs from mine?
Something to think about yes?

 

[CGI_Ram]

We need a swing player who can play tackle; because I don't want Saffold going down playing out there. That would be hard to stomach.

Keep him inside and see if he can hold up a full season for a change!

 

[BonifayRam]

We need a swing player who can play tackle; because I don't want Saffold going down playing out there. That would be hard to stomach. Keep him inside and see if he can hold up a full season for a change!

For me it hard for me not to think of a swing OT as important as the starting OG. From the past two season whomever we select to be our new swing OT he better be ready to start and start early. That means he need to be off the shelf starter not a developmental type.

I Agree fully here with CGI! Rams played & started three Swing OT's last season. First up was swing OT Barksdale where it took only 5 quarters of the regular season before he was starting! OK #2 was Saffold who was forced from his starting ORG post to replace Jake Long. #3 was starting OLG Chris Williams who replaced Rodger Saffold who had replaced Long. Can we consider the issues that Boudreau went through when the Rams had to use starter from other Ram positions to fill the swing OT demands and he had to do this twice in back to back games.

Why would one think that there is no reason to think that a swing OT is not vital and if one is swing OT is enough why would the Rams have to go through three. Is there a member here that would jump in and say that was not the norm? OK how many Swing OT's did Boudreau go through in 2012, who started after the starting OT was injured? FOUR

So I guess 2013 was a good season for us due to having only gone through three? Now stop and think once again who is our swing OT now? Saffold?

CGI hit a critical point here with Saffold best staying @ his OG post and keep him away from the injury zone @ OT! It would really a good thing to see Saffold have an injury free season since 2010.

 

[tonyl711]

I agree with your contention that we have many holes to fill. One of which is at G. Train up an OT that we get somewhere in a lower round? Do you really think that has more than a small chance of providing us with a stud player at one of the most important positions in football? That's like planning your retirement based on winning the lottery IMO.

Need I remind you that a G was drafted #7 and #10 last year? Not only has the thinking in the NFL evolved concerning the O-line in the last 10 years or so do to the rules changes, those picks were actually JUST guards and not players they were grooming to become LTs or even RTs.

You neatly sidestepped discussing all the myriad reasons for drafting a stud LT that have nothing to do with Jake Long. Rather than just listing them myself (again), I'll just ask you some questions that might give you some pause for thought.
Why do you think that OTs were drafted #1, #2, #4, #11 and #19 in the draft last year?
Do you think that the top three OTs in this draft won't go in the top 10 and the top 5 OTs won't go in the 1st round?
Why were 2 Gs drafted in the top 10 and 3 in the top 20 in last years draft?
2011 Whiner draft: #11 Mike Davis OT, #17 Mike Iupati G. 2010 record: 6-10, 2011 record: 13-3.
Or maybe you have an explanation for those things that differs from mine?
Something to think about yes?

ill answer them for you.
#1, I would guess that the teams taking those picks didn't have solid starters at their positions, what other teams do have done in the past should have no bearing on what the Rams do in this draft.
#2not sure, but I do think there will be some good talent in the second round.
#3, see answer #1, plus in this deep of a draft we can get a good OG in rounds 2 and 3.
#4, really? are you really trying to tell me those 2 players alone were responsible for 7 extra wins?

I respect your opinions on this, and wouldn't be mad if we did go OT with our first pick, but if we don't we will still pick up a very good OT within the first 2 rounds IMO.

 

[Alan]

tonyl711 missing some of my points:
ill answer them for you.
#1, I would guess that the teams taking those picks didn't have solid starters at their positions, what other teams do have done in the past should have no bearing on what the Rams do in this draft.
#2, not sure, but I do think there will be some good talent in the second round.
#3, see answer #1, plus in this deep of a draft we can get a good OG in rounds 2 and 3.
#4, really? are you really trying to tell me those 2 players alone were responsible for 7 extra wins?

I respect your opinions on this, and wouldn't be mad if we did go OT with our first pick, but if we don't we will still pick up a very good OT within the first 2 rounds IMO.

#1 You missed my point there completely. If you can get those "very good OTs" in the second round as you assert, then why did they all feel that you had to get them early?
#2 Your "not sure" dovetails perfectly with your assertion that you can get a "very good OT" in the second round. Did you know that according to PFF, no OT drafted last year below #19 had a positive rating? Where were all those "very good OT's" last year?
#3 see my answer #1. Why did those teams feel they needed to draft one of those "oh so obtainable" Gs so high in the first round if they could be had in the second round or later. You're ignoring part of the post I was responding too where he said this: "You can get very good guards in the 2nd and 3rd round and I believe we can get a solid developmental OT in the 2nd.".
#4 Did I say that? Are you saying they weren't part of the reason?

I also won't be mad if we don't pick a LT with our first pick. As long as we pick one of the top 5 (which means in the first round) I'll be OK with taking a different stud with our first pick. However, that doesn't mean I agree with RamsJunkie's post. I still don't.

Lots of different ways to go in this draft but claiming that you can get a very good OT (or a G in the third round) later in the draft with any degree of confidence is wishful thinking IMO.

 

[NJRamsFan]

#1 You missed my point there completely. If you can get those "very good OTs" in the second round as you assert, then why did they all feel that had to get them early?
#2 Your "not sure" dovetails perfectly with your assertion that you can get a "very good OT" in the second round. Did you know that according to PFF, no OT drafted last year below #19 had a positive rating? Where were all those "very good OT's" last year?
#3 see my answer #1. Why did those teams feel they needed to draft one of those "oh so obtainable" Gs so high in the first round if they could be had in the second round or later. You're ignoring part of the post I was responding too where he said this: "You can get very good guards in the 2nd and 3rd round and I believe we can get a solid developmental OT in the 2nd.".
#4 Did I say that? Are you saying they weren't part of the reason?

I also won't be mad if we don't pick a LT with our first pick. As long as we pick one of the top 5 (which means in the first round) I'll be OK with taking a different stud with our first pick. However, that doesn't mean I agree with RamsJunkie's post. I still don't.

Lots of different ways to go in this draft but claiming that you can get a very good OT (or a G in the third round) later in the draft with any degree of confidence is wishful thinking IMO.

Welcome back Alan, board wasn't the same in your absence! Out of curiosity, how would you feel about Clowney/Lewan in the first round?

 

[Alan]

NJRamsFan with a question:
Welcome back Alan, board wasn't the same in your absence! Out of curiosity, how would you feel about Clowney/Lewan in the first round?

Thanks NJ! Good to be back.

While my preference is Matthews (after a trade down) and Ha-Ha, I'd be OK with Watkins/Lewan, Clowney/Lewan or Evans/Lewan. If we trade down to #10 I'd also be OK with Donald/Lewan. My main problem with drafting Clowney, Watkins, Evans or Donald in the first round is that we'll probably end up missing out on Pryor/Ha-Ha and Dennard/Gilbert. I'd sure like to have one of those 4 but they won't be there in the second round.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I don't want Lewan. He is overrated because of the combine. His technique is terrible. Plus he doesn't project well as a Guard. So if you take him round1 then he unseats Long or Barksdale. Kind of a waste as a pick for the future.

 

[Alan]

I'd like to mention something that I've said before but I am still reading on this site. Below is a list of the top 96 players in the draft by position, which would take in the first 3 rounds:
Bolded players are rated as fourth round picks. Nuff said.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/FS

Hasean Clinton-Dix Overall rank: 17 Position rank: 1

Calvin Pryor Overall rank: 20 Position rank: 2

Terrence Brooks Overall rank: 72 Position rank: 3

Ed Reynolds Overall rank: 103 Position rank: 4

Dion Bailey Overall rank: 124 Position rank: 5


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/CB

Justin Gilbert Overall rank: 10 Position rank: 1

Darqueze Dennard Overall rank: 16 Position rank: 2

Kyle Fuller Overall rank: 27 Position rank: 3

Jason Verrett Overall rank: 31 Position rank: 4

Bradley Roby Overall rank: 33 Position rank: 5

Marcus Roberson Overall rank: 49 Position rank: 6

Lamarcus Joyner Overall rank: 55 Position rank: 7

Jaylen Watkins Overall rank: 67 Position rank: 8

Pierre Desir Overall rank: 74 Position rank: 9

Bashaud Breeland Overall rank: 84 Position rank: 10

Stanley Jean-Baptiste Overall rank: 87 Position rank: 11

Keith McGill Overall rank: 95 Position rank: 12

Phillip Gaines Overall rank: 99 Position rank: 13

Louchiez Purifoy Overall rank: 101 Position rank: 14

Victor Hampton Overall rank: 112 Position rank: 15

E.J. Gaines Overall rank: 115 Position rank: 16

Rashaad Reynolds Overall rank: 120 Position rank: 17

Chris Davis Overall rank: 121 Position rank: 18


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/OLB

Khalil Mack Overall rank: 6 Position rank: 1

Anthony Barr Overall rank: 8 Position rank: 2

Ryan Shazier Overall rank: 29 Position rank: 3

Kyle Van Noy Overall rank: 39 Position rank: 4

Jeremiah Attaochu Overall rank: 51 Position rank: 5

Trevor Reilly Overall rank: 64 Position rank: 6

Carl Bradford Overall rank: 68 Position rank: 7

Telvin Smith Overall rank: 85 Position rank: 8

Jordan Tripp Overall rank: 94 Position rank: 9

Jordan Zumwalt Overall rank: 106 Position rank: 10

Christian Kirksey Overall rank: 116 Position rank: 11


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/WR

Sammy Watkins Overall rank: 4 Position rank: 1

Mike Evans Overall rank: 13 Position rank: 2

Odell Beckham Overall rank: 19 Position rank: 3

Brandin Cooks Overall rank: 21 Position rank: 4

Marqise Lee Overall rank: 28 Position rank: 5

Kelvin Benjamin Overall rank: 32 Position rank: 6

Allen Robinson Overall rank: 34 Position rank: 7

Davante Adams Overall rank: 44 Position rank: 8

Martavis Bryant Overall rank: 47 Position rank: 9

Donte Moncrief Overall rank: 52 Position rank: 10

Paul Richardson Overall rank: 65 Position rank: 11

Jordan Matthews Overall rank: 69 Position rank: 12

Bruce Ellington Overall rank: 77 Position rank: 13

Jarvis Landry Overall rank: 91 Position rank: 14

Robert Herron Overall rank: 97 Position rank: 15

Jered Abbrederis Overall rank: 105 Position rank: 16

Dri Archer Overall rank: 109 Position rank: 17

Josh Huff Overall rank: 115 Position rank: 18

Mike Davis Overall rank: 125 Position rank: 19


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/OT

Greg Robinson Overall rank: 2 Position rank: 1

Jake Matthews Overall rank: 5 Position rank: 2

Taylor Lewan Overall rank: 12 Position rank: 3

Zack Martin Overall rank: 15 Position rank: 4

Cyrus Kouandjio Overall rank: 36 Position rank: 5

Morgan Moses Overall rank: 48 Position rank: 6

Joel Bitonio Overall rank: 58 Position rank: 7

Jack Mewhort Overall rank: 62 Position rank: 8

Antonio Richardson Overall rank: 80 Position rank: 9

Billy Turner Overall rank: 98 Position rank: 10

JaWuan James Overall rank: 111 Position rank: 11

Cameron Fleming Overall rank: 126 Position rank: 12


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/OG

Xavier Su'a-Filo Overall rank: 25 Position rank: 1

David Yankey Overall rank: 37 Position rank: 2

Gabe Jackson Overall rank: 50 Position rank: 3

Dakota Dozier Overall rank: 70 Position rank: 4

Cyril Richardson Overall rank: 86 Position rank: 5

Brandon Thomas Overall rank: 119 Position rank: 6


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/DT

Aaron Donald Overall rank: 14 Position rank: 1

Timmy Jernigan Overall rank: 18 Position rank: 2

Louis Nix Overall rank: 24 Position rank: 3

RaShede Hageman Overall rank: 35 Position rank: 4

Stephan Tuitt Overall rank: 40 Position rank: 5

Dominique Easley Overall rank: 59 Position rank: 6

Will Sutton Overall rank: 66 Position rank: 7

Kelcy Quarles Overall rank: 73 Position rank: 8

Ego Ferguson Overall rank: 79 Position rank: 9

Daquan Jones Overall rank: 83 Position rank: 10

Anthony Johnson Overall rank: 96 Position rank: 11

Juastin Ellis Overall rank: 102 Position rank: 12

Daniel McCullers Overall rank: 127 Position rank: 13


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/DE

Don't care.


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/C

Don't care.


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings/2014/QB

Don't care.

So what does it tell us about this "deep" draft? To me it says that it's deep at some positions. It is not deep at all at the purple positions so no one should just throw that "deep draft" comment around without some context.

14 WRs in the top 96 players.

12 CBs in the top 96 players.

11 DTs in the top 96 players.

9 DEs in the top 96 players.

9 OTs in the top 96 players.

9 OLBs in the top 96 players.

6 Qbs in the top 96 players.

5 OGs in the top 96 players.

3 FS in the top 96 players.

2 OCs in top 96 players.

 

[Yamahopper]

I can see the Rams not going Oline in the first. But that's them, not me.
They have their OT's and a Swing OT ( Saffold) so a Guard in the 2nd and another later on for depth then they may feel they're set.

 

[tonyl711]

#1 You missed my point there completely. If you can get those "very good OTs" in the second round as you assert, then why did they all feel that you had to get them early?
#2 Your "not sure" dovetails perfectly with your assertion that you can get a "very good OT" in the second round. Did you know that according to PFF, no OT drafted last year below #19 had a positive rating? Where were all those "very good OT's" last year?
#3 see my answer #1. Why did those teams feel they needed to draft one of those "oh so obtainable" Gs so high in the first round if they could be had in the second round or later. You're ignoring part of the post I was responding too where he said this: "You can get very good guards in the 2nd and 3rd round and I believe we can get a solid developmental OT in the 2nd.".
#4 Did I say that? Are you saying they weren't part of the reason?

I also won't be mad if we don't pick a LT with our first pick. As long as we pick one of the top 5 (which means in the first round) I'll be OK with taking a different stud with our first pick. However, that doesn't mean I agree with RamsJunkie's post. I still don't.

Lots of different ways to go in this draft but claiming that you can get a very good OT (or a G in the third round) later in the draft with any degree of confidence is wishful thinking IMO.

#1 probably because they didn't have starters at those positions that they felt were good enough, the Rams have 2 pretty damn good OTs right now, not a need for a starter right now.
#2, by that way of thinking you are saying that no OT taken after the first will be any good ever? I would bet my last dollar that there will be plenty of them drafted after the first that will start eventually.
#3, once again, those teams had a big need for those players and it just so happened that last year there were a couple OGs that graded out that high. I know you aren't saying you cant get a very good OG in the second round are you?
#4, you kind of did say that, you mentioned them getting the Olinemen as a reason they went from 6 and 9 to 13 and 3. there were a lot more moves made than just on the Oline.

last years draft was last year, some years more QBS get drafted in the first round, some years it WRs, some years DE. you don't draft by looking at what teams did last year.

 

[Alan]

Elmgrovegnome disliking Lewan:
I don't want Lewan. He is overrated because of the combine. His technique is terrible. Plus he doesn't project well as a Guard. So if you take him round1 then he unseats Long or Barksdale. Kind of a waste as a pick for the future.

I'm on the fence about him and that's mainly because I like Moses and Martin too. I might lean towards the one who can run block the best. I don't know which one that is though.

Yamahopper with dire warnings:
I can see the Rams not going Oline in the first. But that's them, not me.
They have their OT's and a Swing OT ( Saffold) so a Guard in the 2nd and another later on for depth then they may feel they're set.

Let's hope not. What a horrible thought Yama.

 

[DR RAM]

I'm on the fence about him and that's mainly because I like Moses and Martin too. I might lean towards the one who can run block the best. I don't know which one that is though.


Let's hope not. What a horrible thought Yama.

Martin and Moses are completely different prospects. Moses is a massive man, but he's slow footed, and won't IMO, be able to play Guard, or LOT. He gets stood up too much for a man his size, but is a good run blocker. Z. Martin is an all around player, skill wise, not huge and imposing, but possesses great feet, technique, and tenacity. I could see him being able to play all 5 position, one of the few guys in this draft that are able to at a high level, but he is a better Tackle than a Guard, currently, the Senior Bowl proved that to me. That being said, I think his future is at Guard, but he needs to add some strength and explosion.

 

[BonifayRam]

Martin and Moses are completely different prospects. Moses is a massive man, but he's slow footed, and won't IMO, be able to play Guard, or LOT. He gets stood up too much for a man his size, but is a good run blocker. Z. Martin is an all around player, skill wise, not huge and imposing, but possesses great feet, technique, and tenacity. I could see him being able to play all 5 position, one of the few guys in this draft that are able to at a high level, but he is a better Tackle than a Guard, currently, the Senior Bowl proved that to me. That being said, I think his future is at Guard, but he needs to add some strength and explosion.

Hey DR.....does Martin really fit this Ram OL scheme? Might be better suited for the Zoners? Like Shelley Smith was just not a good fit here much better in zone blocking OL's?? I would prefer Joel Bitonio over the higher praise Martin myself

 

[DR RAM]

Hey DR.....does martin really fit this Ram OL scheme? Might be better suited for Zoners? Like Shelley Smith was just not a good fit here??

He's not at the top of my list, but I like his versatility. I think he could fit any scheme, but he IS Shelley Smith right now, I just think he has more potential. A similar player that I listed earlier, before Mayock talked to all the GM's, lol, Bitonio, I like better. He's physically better, and plays meaner, but you know that. I've had Bitonio rated higher than Martin for a long time. I'd just as soon have Ju'Wan James for our team, than Martin, for what it's worth, and he wouldn't cost near as much. What do you think?