What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Countdown To The Top Pick In The 2014 Draft (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
RUNNING UPDATE THROUGH WEEK 17

if ATL loses tomorrow night, the top eight teams all will have lost (JAX leapfrogged OAK due to SOS)... slot nine and ten teams BUF and TEN won, as did fellow six win team NYG (which jumps over BUF due to SOS). since NYJ, PIT and STL all won and move to seven wins (with losing teams DET and GB, at 7-8 and 7-7-1, respectively), NYG are the only new appearance in the top 10 in week 16. ATL could move down two spots and TB and MIN up one spot each if the falcons win the last MNF game of the season.

1 - HOU (2-13) lost, maintained slot (QB) [sOS, 133-106]
2 - STL via WAS (3-12) lost, maintained slot [119-114-2]
3 - JAX (4-11) lost, moved from 1.4 to 1.3 (QB?) [120-119]
4 - OAK (4-11) lost, moved form 1.3 to 1.4 (QB?) [123-116]
5 - CLE (4-11) lost, maintained slot (QB?) [123-114-2]
6 - ATL (4-11) if they lose to SF will maintain slot [131-107-1]
7 - TB (4-11) lost, maintained slot (QB?) [136-100]
8 - MIN (4-10-1) lost, maintained slot (QB?) [121-114-2]
9 - TEN (6-9) won, moved from 1.10 to 1.9 (QB?) [120-119]
10 - NYG (6-9) won, moved from 1.11 to 1.10 [122-113-2]
_________________________________________________________________________

OP BELOW

The Jaguars, Vikings and Falcons all won today.

*IF* the Redskins lose to the Giants Sunday night, I think with tie-breakers (SOS?) the Rams would be in line for the second pick in the draft through the three quarter mark of the season.

*IF* the Texans beat the Jaguars on Thursday night, than it gets interesting. *IF* the Redskins lose again to the Chiefs next Sunday, the Rams could than be in position for the top pick in the 2014 draft with three games remaining.

Through the first 12 games...

1) HOU (2-10)

2) STL via WAS (3-9, current SOS: .521)

3) JAX (3-9, current SOS: .538)

4) ATL (3-9, current SOS: .560)

5) TB (3-9, current SOS: .592)

6) MIN (3-8-1)

Last month schedule...

WAS (loss tonight would be 4 in a row, could lose out, ATL game looms large in this context)

KC @ WAS

WAS @ ATL

DAL @ WAS

WAS @ NYG

JAX (won 3 of last four 4 after losing first 8 - already beat HOU and TEN in past month, 3 home games)

HOU @ JAX

BUF @ JAX

TEN @ JAX

JAX @ IND

TB (before losing today, had won 3 straight after losing first 8)

BUF @ TB

SF @ TB

TB @ STL

TB @ NO

HOU (lost 10 in a row after winning first 2, JAX looms large, three road games)

HOU @ JAC

HOU @ IND

DEN @ HOU

HOU @ TEN

ATL (before beating BUF, had lost 5 straight and 8 of the past 9)

ATL @ GB

WAS @ ATL

ATL @ SF

CAR @ ATL

MIN (a win and tie with two OTs in a row)

MIN @ BAL

PHI @ MIN

MIN @ CIN

DET @ MIN

 
Last edited by a moderator:

mad sweeney

Footballguy
I keep forgetting that the Rams have the Skins' pick. I shoulda been rooting for them this whole time. Go RG3!!!!

 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
I think the Rams are currently at #2 pick (?) as of Sunday night, week 13.

If WAS had won, it may have been #7. A lot can hinge on one game sometimes.

IF HOU beats JAX Thursday night, that could put STL in line for the #1 overall pick (especially if WAS loses out, and they don't have an easy remaining schedule - three of their four remaining opponents, KC, DAL and NYG again away, are fighting for playoff spots... only ATL is out of the hunt).

IF that holds up over the next month, 2014 could be a draft with three coveted players in potential franchise QBs Bridgewater and Mariota (not a given to declare), as well as once-in-a-decade/generation physical specimen, freakish athlete at the DE position, Clowney (will test better than Julius Peppers?).

So while it may not shape up exactly like the 2012 draft (with Bridgewater not a consensus Manning/Elway-type prospect like Luck, and Mariota arguably not as highly graded as RGIII - than again, the Rams didn't have the first overall pick in 2012, but the second overall... we don't really know how much more the rights to Luck might have fetched? :) ), in which Les Snead and Jeff Fisher parlayed the 1.2 pick and rights to RGIII into three first rounders and a second rounder... perhaps STL could once again trade with a team expected to be looking for a QB, like CLE (HOU, JAX, MIN also expected to be in the market - ATL has Ryan, so blue chip player at another impact position like Clowney or LT Matthews could be a good fit)... the Browns have more ammo to move up in 2014 draft capital than some of the other teams noted above.

If the Browns picks ended up around 1.8 and 1.20, along with the 2.8, that might be in the ballpark, approximate value for a top 1-2 pick by the so called "chart". But perhaps even more value could be extracted in a draft with two potential franchise QBs and four or more teams jockeying for position in and around the top five region (and the QBs likely to go 1-2... unless ATL gets a top two pick)?

But if they hypothetically took the CLE offer, that could yield, with their own picks, three firsts and two seconds. If they didn't flip a pick into the 2015 draft (could be an option with so many high picks in the same draft), they could have three of the first 20-25 picks (depending on the Colts final standing, for the Brown's second first rounder), and five of the first 45-50 picks (depending on the Rams final standing, for their second rounder). Five top 50 picks could equal five immediate/future starters (nearly one quarter of the requisite 22 on offense/defense combined), if they don't burn some more of them like they may have with Pead and Quick. But DT Brockers, LB Ogletree and whatever the 2014 WAS first turns out to be look like nice compensation for the RGIII trade, regardless of how Pead and Jenkins turn out (and I think we will put Stedman Bailey on the plus side of the ledger when the final tally and eventual reckoning comes - in addition, one of the two sixth round picks packaged for the fifth round pick used on RB revelation Stacy, came from the 1.22 to 1.30 trade down with ATL for Ogletree, so also stemming from the original WAS pick, and should be partially counted towards the trade bounty).

Back to a potential CLE draft pick windfall, STL could conceivably take blue chip WR prospect Sammy Watkins with a pick in the 1.8 range, use their own in the 1.12-1.16 range on consensus top safety Ha Ha Clinton-Dix... and still have a top 20-25 pick in the first, and two of the top 10-15 picks in the second... three more which could be used on the OL, CB, LB, RB, DL, etc.

Another scenario would be to not trade down as far as CLE projects to be, instead maybe about the 1.5-1.6 neighborhood, including a first in 2015 (maybe more?), if STL prefers a blue chip LT prospect like Jake Matthews, not as likely to fall to the 1.8 area as Watkins.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Deranged Hermit

Not cool & Pissed
Interesting stuff, Bob. The WAS situation really shows how dangerous it is to mortgage your future in the NFL for one player. Years from now we might be analyzing this trade like we did with the Herchel Walker one as one on of the most lopsided in history.

 

FUBAR

Footballguy
Interesting stuff, Bob. The WAS situation really shows how dangerous it is to mortgage your future in the NFL for one player. Years from now we might be analyzing this trade like we did with the Herchel Walker one as one on of the most lopsided in history.
It's funny in a way, after last year many people thought RG3 was one of the best players in the league to build a franchise around. Don't write him off yet.

 

FUBAR

Footballguy
I like your thought process Bob, but if I'm Cleveland, I stay put and draft either Derek Carr, Tajh Boyd or the best OT available.

Maybe trade up a couple spots for Mariota if he declares, but I wouldn't give up that package.

If the Rams walk away with Watkins or Matthews with the Redskins pick, Fisher and Bradford should be thrilled.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Andy Dufresne

Footballguy
If the Rams stay put (assuming tge #2 pick) I think they should/would take Clowney. Paired with Brockers they could potentially form a better duo than Suh/Fairley.

Plus, I always go back to the fact that no Fisher-led team has ever taken an o-lineman in the first round. Ever. So projecting as such usually doesn't fit.

 

Deranged Hermit

Not cool & Pissed
FUBAR said:
Deranged Hermit said:
Interesting stuff, Bob. The WAS situation really shows how dangerous it is to mortgage your future in the NFL for one player. Years from now we might be analyzing this trade like we did with the Herchel Walker one as one on of the most lopsided in history.
It's funny in a way, after last year many people thought RG3 was one of the best players in the league to build a franchise around. Don't write him off yet.
In no way have I written Griffin off, but it's just a bad idea to mortgage your future the way the Skins did. You never want to think about an injury, but you would also be foolish to totally throw it out of the equation. 90% of the time I'll want to be on the side of the deal to stockpile picks.

 

Andy Dufresne

Footballguy
FUBAR said:
Deranged Hermit said:
Interesting stuff, Bob. The WAS situation really shows how dangerous it is to mortgage your future in the NFL for one player. Years from now we might be analyzing this trade like we did with the Herchel Walker one as one on of the most lopsided in history.
It's funny in a way, after last year many people thought RG3 was one of the best players in the league to build a franchise around. Don't write him off yet.
In no way have I written Griffin off, but it's just a bad idea to mortgage your future the way the Skins did. You never want to think about an injury, but you would also be foolish to totally throw it out of the equation. 90% of the time I'll want to be on the side of the deal to stockpile picks.
At least to the extent that the Skins did, I agree. You have to have a QB to win in the NFL but having just a QB isn't the way to go either.

Washington sacrificed too much depth and talent at other positions in that deal.

 

JaxBill

Footballguy
FUBAR said:
Deranged Hermit said:
Interesting stuff, Bob. The WAS situation really shows how dangerous it is to mortgage your future in the NFL for one player. Years from now we might be analyzing this trade like we did with the Herchel Walker one as one on of the most lopsided in history.
It's funny in a way, after last year many people thought RG3 was one of the best players in the league to build a franchise around. Don't write him off yet.
In no way have I written Griffin off, but it's just a bad idea to mortgage your future the way the Skins did. You never want to think about an injury, but you would also be foolish to totally throw it out of the equation. 90% of the time I'll want to be on the side of the deal to stockpile picks.
At least to the extent that the Skins did, I agree. You have to have a QB to win in the NFL but having just a QB isn't the way to go either.

Washington sacrificed too much depth and talent at other positions in that deal.
Redskins have also been hamstrung by the cap penalties, too.

 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
If you look at total SOS (all 16 games instead of just games played so far), the logjam at 2 looks like Jags, Rams, Falcons, Bucs.

http://stevielovesthejaguars.com/draftorder/
Thanks, JaxBill...

When I clicked on the link on my ipad, i saw the following screen...

1) HOU .550

2) JAX .503

3) STL/WAS .516

4) ATL .553

5 )TB .582

These are the full season SOS calculations.

IF HOU loses Thur., JAX gets bounced from this cluster (they will have four wins)... making STL #2 (if WAS loses out, and HOU goes winless last three games).

IF HOU wins, JAX would be #1 on SOS (if they don't win last three games), STL #2 (WAS loses out) and HOU #3 (if they are winless last three games).

so it looks like STL is positioned to be #2 no matter what happens Thur night (even accounting for the full season, SOS numbers).

If HOU loses Thur but wins just one of the three remaining games, STL would be in position for #1 with the same record but on the SOS tiebreaker.

If JAX loses Thur, but wins just one of the three remaining games, STL would be in position for #1 with worse record relative to JAX.

Every game is big in the last month, but the only other instance in which two from this group face each other, besides HOU/JAX Thur...

The ATL/WAS game in a few weeks. Obviously ATL MUST win for STL to remain in position for no worse than the #2 pick (if WAS also loses to KC, DAL & NYG again)... with upside for #1 if the LOSING team Thur night (doesn't matter which) wins one more of the remaining three.

One reason ATL has fallen so hard is injuries to star WR tandem Roddy White and Julio Jones. The latter of course on IR, but White returned Sunday and had a season high 10 catches for a season high 143 yards (on 14 targets), so he is talented enough to be the difference in the game by his presence when the Falcons face the Redskins. He has been dealing with a high ankle sprain (and hamstring) suffered in preseason (being shut down in weeks 7-9 were the first three missed games of his career?). His 10 catches were four more than his previous three games COMBINED, so hopefully he is getting healthy at the right time (for STL purposes).

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Quez

Footballguy
Unlike in recent years this is turning out to be a pretty tight race. There doesn't really seem to be a consensus #1 or even top 3 picks this year, so I could really care less if the Bucs are picking #1 or #10. FWIW, the Bucs have 2 more winnable games in STL & Buffalo. So their best possible record will be 5-11.

 

Andy Dufresne

Footballguy
Seems to me that the Bucs are not as bad as their record suggests.

Not even close really. Get a better pass rush and another offensive threat (better #2 wr or a playmaking TE) and they're right back in the hunt, I think.

 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
the full 16 game SOS can be projected for opponents records and winning percentage AS OF TODAY... but they could change in the next month... some of the gaps are small (JAX at .503 and STL/WAS at .516... also HOU at .550 and ATL at .553)... so perhaps this could get shuffled some more in the coming weeks, but with things increasingly getting locked in if the numbers hold up, as we approach the last game?

 

snogger

Footballguy
Andy Dufresne said:
BeTheMatch said:
The Vikings just can't help themselves. They really don't want a QB, do they?
They've gone and screwed it all up. Now they've got Cleveland and Oakland in their neighborhood that could leapfrog them in the draft (obviously, especially the latter).
I'm going back to my :tinfoilhat: ... The Packers and the Bears did all they could to make sure they don't have to face Bridgewater twice over the next few years ;)

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
anyone think the lambs are gonna take a qb?

is bradford the answer?
No.No.
they will take a QB, but expected to be developmental, upgraded depth-type (my best guess is round 3-4?).*

i'm going to have to stop answering questions of the second-type, as it tends to hi-jack/derail the thread. :)

no shortage of opinions on that question, though, in several rams/bradford threads, for those that are genuinely interested.

* maybe AJ mccarron or aaron murray-type? murray just tore his ACL, so could be available later.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

bulger2holt

Footballguy
With as bad as Clemens played yesterday, the Rams actual pick will probably be top 10 too. They may come away with the #2 and #10 picks in the draft. They should go OT Mathews and WR Evans. Bradford needs a big WR and a real go-to guy. Tavon would thrive too.

 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
Deranged Hermit said:
Interesting stuff, Bob. The WAS situation really shows how dangerous it is to mortgage your future in the NFL for one player. Years from now we might be analyzing this trade like we did with the Herchel Walker one as one on of the most lopsided in history.
Agreed, DH...First of all, I do like RGIII. Some said the Rams should have drafted him and traded Bradford, but his contact (last prior to the new labor agreement) wouldn't allow that.

I just thought it was interesting that it was such a blockbuster trade (extremely rare for three firsts and a second to change hands for the rights to one player... Ricky Williams didn't fetch that... I think Ollie Matson may have been traded for most of a roster? :) )... and as it appeared to be approaching its conclusion... with WAS unexpectedly doing far worse than expected after making the playoffs in 2012, STL could improbably be in position to get ANOTHER 1.2 (if not 1.1) two years later, in what may be another draft with two blue chip QB prospects (if Mariota declares and joins Bridgewater)... with another situation in which multiple teams in need of a franchise QB just outside the top 1-2 picks could create a parallel scenario to the 2012 draft, in which the price in draft picks might be competitively bid up due to franchise QB demand exceeding supply.

Adding a second windfall (even if not as massive as the first one) would be déjà vu all over again, and could really put a cherry on top of the epic, blockbuster trade for Snead and Fisher.

* BTW, I don't wish any ill will on WAS. I can't go as far as saying I'm rooting for them to win, but my attitude is whatever is going to happen is going to happen. Looking at their remaining schedule, it IS tough, there may be some unwanted intrigue with the constant RGIII/Shanahan drama and soap opera and attendant extra pressure with Shanahan possibly fighting for his job. Just stating the obvious that IF they lose out, a gift will have fallen into the Rams laps... and it would be interesting to see what Snead and Fisher could parlay it into, given another opportunity just two short years later.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
I could see the Rams trading with Cleveland
atlanta makes more sense.
CLE's approx. 1.8, 2.20-2.25 & 2.8 would about line up with the cost of moving up to 1.1-1.2.Or they may prefer a QB they can get later, and the advantage of three players over one, even if a potential franchise QB.

CEO Banner and GM Lombardi have Eagles backgrounds, where they built around McNabb (though Lombardi there for a few years before McNabb was drafted), himself a second overall pick... though I don't think they needed to trade up to get him.

We don't know, but it is possible Richardson was traded to provide the ammo and leverage to move up in the draft for a franchise QB if they chose to go in that direction. It has definitely created options for them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

MAC_32

Footballguy
I could see the Rams trading with Cleveland
atlanta makes more sense.
CLE's approx. 1.8, 2.20-2.25 & 2.8 would about line up with the cost of moving up to 1.1-1.2.

Or they may prefer a QB they can get later, and the advantage of three players over one, even if a potential franchise QB.

CEO Banner and GM Lombardi have Eagles backgrounds, where they built around McNabb (though Lombardi there for a few years before McNabb was drafted).
eight right now, only realistic chance at another win is at New York though. I think cleveland is picking top,five when all is said and done.
 

ConnSKINS26

Footballguy
I like your thought process Bob, but if I'm Cleveland, I stay put and draft either Derek Carr, Tajh Boyd or the best OT available.

Maybe trade up a couple spots for Mariota if he declares, but I wouldn't give up that package.

If the Rams walk away with Watkins or Matthews with the Redskins pick, Fisher and Bradford should be thrilled.
Mathews the WR? He won't be a top-10 pick. Watkins might be, and he might be a good pick for the Rams. Although a top-10 WR two years in a row would be pushing it. They might need to take a swing on a QB they like.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
I could see the Rams trading with Cleveland
atlanta makes more sense.
CLE's approx. 1.8, 2.20-2.25 & 2.8 would about line up with the cost of moving up to 1.1-1.2.Or they may prefer a QB they can get later, and the advantage of three players over one, even if a potential franchise QB.

CEO Banner and GM Lombardi have Eagles backgrounds, where they built around McNabb (though Lombardi there for a few years before McNabb was drafted).
eight right now, only realistic chance at another win is at New York though. I think cleveland is picking top,five when all is said and done.
Glad you brought this up. CLE one of three teams with four wins (also BUF and OAK).If JAX wins Thursday night, they have four wins, and ATL plays WAS in a few weeks... unless there is a freak tie like MIN, the winner of that game will emerge with four wins. Than it goes back to the tie breaker formula.

Just a month ago, it was assumed by many TB and JAX would still be winless, so clearly a lot could happen in the last month of the season.

My guess is, if CLE wanted to move up, say from 1.5 or 1.6. (where WAS traded up from in 2012) to 1.2, it wouldn't be as costly this time.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

FUBAR

Footballguy
I like your thought process Bob, but if I'm Cleveland, I stay put and draft either Derek Carr, Tajh Boyd or the best OT available.

Maybe trade up a couple spots for Mariota if he declares, but I wouldn't give up that package.

If the Rams walk away with Watkins or Matthews with the Redskins pick, Fisher and Bradford should be thrilled.
Mathews the WR? He won't be a top-10 pick. Watkins might be, and he might be a good pick for the Rams. Although a top-10 WR two years in a row would be pushing it. They might need to take a swing on a QB they like.
:no: the OT.

 

Houston turmOiler

Footballguy
I could see the Rams trading with Cleveland
atlanta makes more sense.
CLE's approx. 1.8, 2.20-2.25 & 2.8 would about line up with the cost of moving up to 1.1-1.2.Or they may prefer a QB they can get later, and the advantage of three players over one, even if a potential franchise QB.

CEO Banner and GM Lombardi have Eagles backgrounds, where they built around McNabb (though Lombardi there for a few years before McNabb was drafted), himself a second overall pick... though I don't think they needed to trade up to get him.

We don't know, but it is possible Richardson was traded to provide the ammo and leverage to move up in the draft for a franchise QB if they chose to go in that direction. It has definitely created options for them.
Yeah I kinda had the Richardson trade in mind when I posted that. I think Cleveland is ready to make getting their QB a priority. Maybe they are high enough to get the guy they like but have the ammo to make sure just in case. You wouldn't think the Rams would need a guy like Clowney with Long and Quinn, and they seem committed to Bradford. IMO a trade back and getting a guy like Watkins or Evans would be great for them...
 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
I like your thought process Bob, but if I'm Cleveland, I stay put and draft either Derek Carr, Tajh Boyd or the best OT available.

Maybe trade up a couple spots for Mariota if he declares, but I wouldn't give up that package.

If the Rams walk away with Watkins or Matthews with the Redskins pick, Fisher and Bradford should be thrilled.
Mathews the WR? He won't be a top-10 pick. Watkins might be, and he might be a good pick for the Rams. Although a top-10 WR two years in a row would be pushing it. They might need to take a swing on a QB they like.
FUBAR was referring to the consensus (at this stage) top LT prospect from Texas A&M, Jake, son of first ballot Hall of Famer Bruce... 10 X All Pro and 14 X Pro Bowler (latter tied for most ever, with former Ram Merlin Olsen). He also has the record for most games played by an NFL OL. Nice bloodlines. :) Andy is understandably skeptical (an admittedly not insignificant 18 year precedent of Fisher never having drafted a first round OL as an NFL HC), but after looking at all the Oilers/Titans first rounds in Fisher's 16 years there, I'm not convinced an inherent aversion to first round OL is the only possible explanation for this pattern, and think there may be an element of coincidence.

But that is another post.

* I see FUBAR beat me to the Matthews response, so additional detail.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

ConnSKINS26

Footballguy
Thanks guys for clarifying. I do know who Matthews is, but the context of the post with another WR mentioned threw me off.

 

FUBAR

Footballguy
I like your thought process Bob, but if I'm Cleveland, I stay put and draft either Derek Carr, Tajh Boyd or the best OT available.

Maybe trade up a couple spots for Mariota if he declares, but I wouldn't give up that package.

If the Rams walk away with Watkins or Matthews with the Redskins pick, Fisher and Bradford should be thrilled.
Mathews the WR? He won't be a top-10 pick. Watkins might be, and he might be a good pick for the Rams. Although a top-10 WR two years in a row would be pushing it. They might need to take a swing on a QB they like.
FUBAR was referring to the consensus (at this stage) top LT prospect from Texas A&M, Jake, son of first ballot Hall of Famer Bruce... 10 X All Pro and 14 X Pro Bowler (latter tied for most ever, with former Ram Merlin Olsen). He also has the record for most games played by an NFL OL. Nice bloodlines. :) Andy is understandably skeptical (an admittedly not insignificant 18 year precedent of Fisher never having drafted a first round OL as an NFL HC), but after looking at all the Oilers/Titans first rounds in Fisher's 16 years there, I'm not convinced an inherent aversion to first round OL is the only possible explanation for this pattern, and think there may be an element of coincidence.

But that is another post.

* I see FUBAR beat me to the Matthews response, so additional detail.
Coincidentally, who did Bruce play for?

 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
BeTheMatch said:
The Vikings just can't help themselves. They really don't want a QB, do they?
This brings up imo another good point in this context.I think Mike Smith and ATL GM are safe (owner recently confirmed his belief in the job they have done together - clearly they will be better with a healthy Julio Jones and Roddy White). I also think HCs in CLE and JAX are safe, being in year one in cases where they took over teams with serious problems (BUF HC also falls into this category).

But in HOU, TB, MIN, OAK (and WAS), there is a powerful disincentive to lose for the HCs.

They could get fired if they are too non-competitive. Guys like Kubiak, Schiano, Frazier, etc., don't want to lose out, much as their fans may wish they would at this point in obviously lost seasons. Guess that would be a textbook example of being at cross-purposes, where what is good for one side is bad for the other, and vice verce.

What holds for them, could for players, too. Rookie WRs Hopkins and Patterson, and vet CB Revis aren't going anywhere, but some players could be held accountable if it looks like they are phoning it in the last month.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bracie Smathers

Footballguy
FUBAR said:
Deranged Hermit said:
Interesting stuff, Bob. The WAS situation really shows how dangerous it is to mortgage your future in the NFL for one player. Years from now we might be analyzing this trade like we did with the Herchel Walker one as one on of the most lopsided in history.
It's funny in a way, after last year many people thought RG3 was one of the best players in the league to build a franchise around. Don't write him off yet.
In no way have I written Griffin off, but it's just a bad idea to mortgage your future the way the Skins did. You never want to think about an injury, but you would also be foolish to totally throw it out of the equation. 90% of the time I'll want to be on the side of the deal to stockpile picks.
At least to the extent that the Skins did, I agree. You have to have a QB to win in the NFL but having just a QB isn't the way to go either.

Washington sacrificed too much depth and talent at other positions in that deal.
That is why the Rams just might wind up taking a quarterback if they wind up holding a top-two pick in the draft.

 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
FUBAR said:
Bob Magaw said:
ConnSKINS26 said:
I like your thought process Bob, but if I'm Cleveland, I stay put and draft either Derek Carr, Tajh Boyd or the best OT available.

Maybe trade up a couple spots for Mariota if he declares, but I wouldn't give up that package.

If the Rams walk away with Watkins or Matthews with the Redskins pick, Fisher and Bradford should be thrilled.
Mathews the WR? He won't be a top-10 pick. Watkins might be, and he might be a good pick for the Rams. Although a top-10 WR two years in a row would be pushing it. They might need to take a swing on a QB they like.
FUBAR was referring to the consensus (at this stage) top LT prospect from Texas A&M, Jake, son of first ballot Hall of Famer Bruce... 10 X All Pro and 14 X Pro Bowler (latter tied for most ever, with former Ram Merlin Olsen). He also has the record for most games played by an NFL OL. Nice bloodlines. :) Andy is understandably skeptical (an admittedly not insignificant 18 year precedent of Fisher never having drafted a first round OL as an NFL HC), but after looking at all the Oilers/Titans first rounds in Fisher's 16 years there, I'm not convinced an inherent aversion to first round OL is the only possible explanation for this pattern, and think there may be an element of coincidence.

But that is another post.

* I see FUBAR beat me to the Matthews response, so additional detail.
Coincidentally, who did Bruce play for?
Exactly, FUBAR.Maybe I will answer Andy's point here.

It helps to not have to draft as many OL when you have players that are Hall of Fame caliber... and that play something like two decades (Reagan was the President when he got drafted :) ).

It is very possible that Fisher has a philosophy that OL are slow to develop, and he prefers vets... or, thinks that physical maturation and technical improvement are key, and if you have some lower pedigree prospects in the pipeline for a few years, they can do a comparable job to the more expensive high pedigree options.

But when I looked at his drafts, in only three did he have a top 10 pick.

The interesting thing about FIsher, is that while he never won a Super Bowl (losing to the Rams in their only Super Bowl victory in franchise history in '99, in one of the most spectacular finishes in Super Bowl history), he wasn't terrible in too many seasons, either (4-12 worst finish, and that was rare, with a few really good seasons, and a lot of middling seasons).

In 1995 and 2006, GM Floyd Reese and Fisher drafted QBs with third overall picks (Steve McNair and Vince Young), and in 2005, they took troubled CB Adam "Pacman" Jones with the sixth overall pick (and that wasn't a great year for first round OL - Jammal Brown and former Ram bust Alex Barron were the only first round OTs taken that year). So one observation is that he didn't have a lot of high picks where an elite, blue chip LT might have been the BPA at that pick (in a few instances where he did, they needed a QB... first McNair, than his replacement Young). I do get where Andy's point with interior OL might be well taken, because good ones can generally be found later than top LTs, in the middle of and even late in the first round (if not later). Junctures in the first round where Fisher (and Reese - not sure who had command override on personnel decisions related to the draft?), repeatedly, in every case opted for other positions. BUT, we are talking about a potential elite, blue chip LT prospect in Bruce's son Jake... and the Oilers/Titans, if not consistently great, also weren't consistently bad enough to have many shots at one.

I didn't look beyond round one, but I did look up LT Michael Roos, as I remembered him as being relatively high pedigree. He went in about the first ten picks of round two. Roos is a 3 X Pro Bowler. I'm guessing if they knew how good he was going to be, and the year he came out things lined up where their pick was late in the first instead of early in the second, they may well have taken him, and not ruled the pick out categorically on the grounds of position and coaching philosophy?

Probably the best way to look at who the Rams might take, is who the BPA might be at 1.3, 1.5, 1.8, variously, depending on if they trade down or not... along with some preliminary positional process of elimination work Andy has already started.

I agree QB is not expected to be an option (I realize some disagree, but I have no interest in debating it for the thousandth time). No RB. No TE. No interior OL. But Watkins (and maybe Evans) could fit. So could Matthews. That is about it on offense, for non-QBs (of course subject to change between now and April).

How about defense? On the DL, Clowney the most obvious possibility as top 3 pick, but if STL trades down, that would seem to presuppose passing on him. Not sure about any others. LB? Barr either a 3-4 OLB, or a DE (where they have Quinn and Long, who are relatively young - Long was extended a year or so ago, and Quinn will need to be in the next year or so). Don't see Mosley, Mack, Shazier or Van Noy being worthy of a top 3-5 pick (and does it make sense to spend a high pick on what would project as a two down player?). DB? No obvious ones. I do hope Clinton-Dix is taken, but later. He isn't a rare, elite, blue chip, Eric Berry-type, top 5-10 safety prospect (not many are).

The above thought process is what has led me to think Watkins and Matthews could present the most viable intersections of BPA and team need in the 1.3, 1.5, 1.8 range (depending on if STL trades down or not). Kind of like Sherlock Holmes famous quote about the process of elimination.

* One reason Matthews might make sense, he could play RT for a few years, and be the heir apparent for LT Jake Long, who missed time the past few years. It might not be a factor, no doubt he will be graded on his own merits, but Fisher did coach his father (he was in position to know the family and their character well), and as far as football genes, Matthews was one of the greatest OL in NFL history, both on talent and longevity/durability. So Matthews may not represent a typical, or routine prospect, even be elite, blue chip LT standards for those reasons.

On the other hand, Barksdale has been playing well at RT, so that definitely reduces the need for an OT. Interior OL is more unsettled. Center Wells was arguably underperforming his contract already, is on the wrong side of 30, missed time last year and was just placed on IR today with a broken leg. It is thought that early fourth round interior OL Barrett Jones is being groomed as a future starter at center or guard, so that timetable could be accelerated next year. RG Dahl is also 30+, like Wells. RT Saffold had a checkered performance and injury history (mostly at LT), but has been a revelation at guard (Lyon was right, it looks like his natural and best position). But he could move on in free agency, if a team wants to pay him more as an OT (or guard, for that matter). So the team might want to draft an interior OL, if the need is greater there. And if they are going to spend a relatively high pick on one (round two or three - reportedly if Ogletree had been gone after the trade down from 1.22 to 1.30, they were set to take guard Warford, so that in itself could have been a contra-indicator to the "Fisher doesn't take OL in the first round" this year... correlation doesn't always mean causation), that may increase the chance they don't draft another OL earlier at the OT position.

All that said, Matthews isn't necessarily an exciting pick, though he could be great eventually. His value might be greatest as insurance for Jake Long. If Long is healthy the next three years or more, than he wouldn't have been as needed. If Long blows up next year, Matthews would be great to have. Since the business of predicting injury is murky, and I don't want to assume Long can't play at a high level for a few more years (said to be grading out well this season), Watkins represents for me a more exciting pick. A seemingly can't miss difference maker who's impact won't be contingent on who else is playing where in his position group. He would immediately become the team's best WR (maybe one of the best in franchise history some day). Watkins is the only WR in NCAA history to be an AP All-American as a true freshman (only three RBs have, and they were all historically good collegiate as well as pro players - Herschel Walker, Marshall Faulk and Adrian Peterson). Evans could also be a good fit as a potential alpha dog WR (which they haven't had since Holt and Bruce - alpha alpha dogs). Watkins or Evans would complement Tavon Austin, take pressure off him and facilitate his development, as well as punish teams for stacking the defense against Zac Stacy. Other NFC West teams have Larry Fitzgerald and Michael Floyd, Percy Harvin and Michael Crabtree (not to mention Vernon Davis).

It is true Austin was taken with a top 10 pick last year... but he was the first 1st round WR taken since Holt in '99, so maybe taking Watkins or Evans could be a case of making up for lost time? Also, Austin isn't a prototypical go to WR. Watkins and Evans are more versatile and flexible situationally, and could be deep threats, possession WRs and boundary/red zone weapons. The bottom line is, whatever player (not position) Fisher and Snead think will make the Rams better in the near term and future, will be the pick. I think a strong case can be made for both WRs Watkins (and maybe Evans) and LT Matthews.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
FUBAR said:
Deranged Hermit said:
Interesting stuff, Bob. The WAS situation really shows how dangerous it is to mortgage your future in the NFL for one player. Years from now we might be analyzing this trade like we did with the Herchel Walker one as one on of the most lopsided in history.
It's funny in a way, after last year many people thought RG3 was one of the best players in the league to build a franchise around. Don't write him off yet.
In no way have I written Griffin off, but it's just a bad idea to mortgage your future the way the Skins did. You never want to think about an injury, but you would also be foolish to totally throw it out of the equation. 90% of the time I'll want to be on the side of the deal to stockpile picks.
At least to the extent that the Skins did, I agree. You have to have a QB to win in the NFL but having just a QB isn't the way to go either. Washington sacrificed too much depth and talent at other positions in that deal.
Redskins have also been hamstrung by the cap penalties, too.
Absolutely. Their challenges this season are a complex issue, and they aren't alone. Who would have thought in August that four playoff teams in HOU, ATL, WAS and MIN would be a combined 11-36-1 through 12 weeks, and all with realistic shots at a top 3 pick?

 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
Unlike in recent years this is turning out to be a pretty tight race. There doesn't really seem to be a consensus #1 or even top 3 picks this year, so I could really care less if the Bucs are picking #1 or #10. FWIW, the Bucs have 2 more winnable games in STL & Buffalo. So their best possible record will be 5-11.
I think Bridgewater, Mariota (if he declares) and Clowney will be coveted (latter is going to blow up the combine).A top two pick could fetch several high picks (if not the Rams 2012 RGIII bounty) from a team that desires a franchise QB in the top 6-8 picks (that could describe JAX, HOU, MIN, CLE, OAK - not ATL or BUF).

There seems to be some separation between the top two QB prospects and the rest of the class, with potentially a few teams jockeying for their rights, which was a recipe for a bidding war and a few picks changing hands in the 2012 draft.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Quez

Footballguy
Unlike in recent years this is turning out to be a pretty tight race. There doesn't really seem to be a consensus #1 or even top 3 picks this year, so I could really care less if the Bucs are picking #1 or #10. FWIW, the Bucs have 2 more winnable games in STL & Buffalo. So their best possible record will be 5-11.
I think Bridgewater, Mariota (if he declares) and Clowney will be coveted (latter is going to blow up the combine).
I think Bridgewater is the consensus top QB, but I'm not sure about Mariotta. 3-4 weeks ago when he was still in Heisman contention people had him at the top, and some even had him over Teddy. Recently the second QB has become a little more cloudy. I wouldn't be surprised if one of the QBs from California shot up as the draft approaches. I also wouldn't count out Manziel shooting up boards due to the recent success of shorter QBs like Wilson, and people love him. This appears to be the deepest QB class in years, so we could also see teams that don't appear to need a QB draft one. AZ, CHI, CIN, CLE, DET, HOU, JAX KC, MIN, NYG, OAK, PHI, PIT, STL, TB, TEN could all go QB.

I think you are right on Clowny. The buzz on him has kind of fizzled compared to the end of last season, but I think he could be the #1 pick by the time the draft rolls around.

I also wouldn't put it past one of the top drafting teams to make a "safe pick" and go OT like Jax, KC, and Philly did last year. at first glance all of the teams vying for the top spot could use OL help.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Andy Dufresne

Footballguy
The Rams have Jake Long signed for 4/$34m with $16m guaranteed.

They're not going to take an interior lineman or even a right tackle with a first rounder.

 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
The Rams have Jake Long signed for 4/$34m with $16m guaranteed.

They're not going to take an interior lineman or even a right tackle with a first rounder.
If they didn't draft an OL in the first round, it would more likely be due to your earlier observation that Fisher hasn't yet. I doubt it would be for salary cap reasons.

This was a good article looking ahead at the Rams 2014 salary cap breakdown...

http://jeffunderscore.tumblr.com/post/68101070209/2014-st-louis-rams-cap-situation

Long is only fifth on the list. His salary is fairly reasonable for a multiple Pro Bowl LT signed in free agency.

The Rams could about save Long's entire cap number ($9 million) by cutting Cortland Finnegan. His play deteriorated badly this year, and he is expected to either be cut or restructured drastically.

Elsewhere on the OL, the guard position is a question mark. RG Harvey Dahl has a $4 million cap number next year, he isn't a lock to be back (STL could save the whole amount by releasing him). Since he went down with an injury, LT/RT Roger Saffold has been a revelation on the inside. He may move on in free agency, though. If the Rams make a push to extend Saffold (unknown what he could command, before Long he was an average LT that was hurt a lot), that could reduce the chance of using a first round pick on an OL more than Long's contract. Wells cap number is $6.5 million (they could save $4.5 million by cutting him). Wells missed the first nine games last year, and will miss the last four of this season (broken leg). He will have almost missed the equivalent of a season in just two years. Dahl and Wells turn 33 in 2014. Long will only be 29, and Saffold 26.

Not sure Wells, Dahl and Saffold will all be gone (or two or one or none?), but just for perspective, trimming Finnegan, Wells and Dahl would free up $17.5 million in 2014.

How much was the contract of the 1.6 player in the 2013 draft (OLB Barkevious Mingo), and what are his forward cap numbers? The 1.6 was chosen as this might be an intersection of where a team like the Browns could finish, and in the neigborhood of where Matthews has gone in mocks. Mingo's cap numbers in 2013-2016 are roughly $3, $4, $4 and $5 million. Some scouts think Matthews is a better prospect than 2013 1.2 pick of the Jaguars, former Texas A&M teammate Luke Joeckel. His cap number in the next four years ranges from $4-$7 million, which could make Matthews at 1.6 a relative bargain.

It is also possible the long range plan would not be for Long and Matthews to overlap beyond the rookie's first contract (Long would be 33 in 2017). Long showed signs of breaking down in recent years with the Dolphins, otherwise he might have been able to negotiate an even bigger contract in free agency (think of what Joe Thomas or Ryan Clady would make on the open market).

Demoff has done a good job with the salary cap. There are teams with dire issues, but they aren't one of them. An expected Bradford extension in 2014-2015 would afford salary cap relief. They do need to extend Quinn in 2014. Those are the two biggest priority extensions on the horizon.

But I don't think the decision of who Fisher and Snead decide to take in the first round will be influenced by positional salary cap constraints along the lines you are suggesting.

Again, your first point is a more compelling one. You may well be right on those grounds.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Andy Dufresne

Footballguy
I'm not arguing it on salary cap reasons. I'm saying that they already bought a left tackle. They don't need to buy another one.

You're waaaay overcomplicating/overthinking/overtyping this thing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

FUBAR

Footballguy
I'm not arguing it on salary cap reasons. I'm saying that they already bought a left tackle. They don't need to buy another one.

You're waaaay overcomplicating/overthinking/overtyping this thing.
No reason they couldn't put Matthews on the right side and have their future LT. It's not a positional need, but it's BPA and long term planning.

I'm really not predicting it, but I do like the idea. The Rams are average in pass protection. With Matthews they could be among the upper tier.

 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
- How would you project the top 5 (including QBs likely to declare)? Who do you think STL would pick at 1.3-1.5-1.8 (accounting for possible trade down)?

I thought you brought up salary cap to make the point it wouldn't make financial sense.

The Long contract wasn't a prohibitively expensive contract. Matthews could be a bargain at 1.6.

Matthews could be a RT in the interim until he takes over (not the first time this strategy has been empoyed), insurance against Long breaking down again (he broke down not once but several times in Miami?) and the heir apparent for Long.

Your waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay dismissive/underthinking this.

* is that simple enough? :)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top