St. L is a team I'm having a real hard time with as I think about the draft next year. What are their needs exactly? I look at this team and see a lot of talent, particularly on the defensive side. Maybe they could use a S. On offense I keep coming back to the conclusion that they need a QB. Many Ram homers like Bradford, though. I suppose they could beef up the oline. If they end up with a top 2 pick that seems like a waste to me. Then again, Clowney would be in a rotation with 2 other studs. If I'm the Rams I really think hard about going with a QB at that first pick. If a guy isn't there that you love then trade down. I'm sure so done will come up for Clowney or a QB.
the team has said bradford is their QB. this tends to lead to contentious debates which have begun to bore me, and i don't want to pursue it in this thread. there are other rams and bradford threads. suffice it to say, fisher himself said the two main reasons he came was the presence of bradford, and the 1.2 pick in the 2012 draft (an unsaid reason may be that he coveted more control over operations and personnel than he was promised in MIA?). bradford advocates point to seeming improvement in his six full games. but this too is predictably split, and some detractors heatedly say you are stupid to think that. which is why i don't want to get in the muck and predictably drag the thread through the mud. if the rams extend bradford, it is another way to make his contract more cap friendly. contracts like finnegan's are clearly worse yet they aren't talked about as much. in a carefully orchestrated and meticulously planned and organized multi-year rebuild, i don't see fisher doing what would amount to yanking on the emergency brake going full speed on the freeway. what if they get a manziel, and he bombs. OOPS. that sets the team back 2-3 years. than they can try again, but maybe the replacement bombs. OOPS. other people are down on him, but there is nothing to suggest fisher and snead are, and in fact there is plenty of evidence to the contrary, where they have very vocally and publicly supported him, saying he is the guy next year (with no qualifiers like - if he takes a pay cut). of course, if he is hurt again, all bets are off, which is why i do endorse an upgraded depth/developmental prospect at the position (see below).
if they finish the season at #2, i think they would look to trade down to about 1.4-1.6 (maybe add a 2nd plus a third or another pick next year, not a first). imo the positional value lines up best at LT and WR (matthews or watkins).
a quick note about trading down. NE and belichick have long been praised for flipping picks to stockpile second rounders (when they have used occasional high firsts, they have nailed them with defensive stalwarts like richard seymour and jerod mayo). that is a sweet spot value wise. WRs like desean jackson and alshon jeffery have been among the best WRs in their classes, but came at a reduced price. third round QB russell wilson is a poster boy for this kind of value, but kaepernick was also a second. gronk was a second. rookie RBs bernard, bell, ball and lacy went in the second. randall cobb was a second. the importance of this, is that with the changed landscape with the new CBA, there has been a shift in paying top end rookies to paying top end free agents (this was intended). so it is almost essential to hit on some good non-first round picks, which makes for a healthier cap situation. those that consistently do this best (and the rams don't have a lot to show for three second rounders in 2012 (jenkins may just be an average CB, quick may be a bust, and pead defeinitely is a bust - though on balance, they have more good picks than bad, and i like the 2013 draft a lot more), will be at an advantage and positioned to be players in the free agent market. or in the case of SEA, with so many cheap stars (also sherman, earl thomas, bobby wagner, marshawn lynch only cost a fifth rounder), they were able to trade a first round pick for pro bowl caliber WR percy harvin, and extend him to a top 5 WR contract. he didn't pay off this year, but he is still only like 25? bradford is expected to be extended at some point, though there is debate on what terms and the timing. finnegan is the worst contract on the team by far and needs to be off the books. i think chris long and laurinaitis at $10 million each are questionable, long didn't seem to play as well this year. he is only 28, and may have been dealing with a hip injury.
by trading down from the original RGIII pick, and continuing to do so, they are following this template. i think they are building the team the right way. they cut off a lot of flab from underperforming players, gutted it, and have had the youngest team in the league a few years in a row (hard to remember, but just a few years ago, the rams were one of the oldest teams in the league, besides being 15-65 from 2005-2009, that was a pretty dire and hopeless predicament that fisher and snead had to extricate the team from). there are growing pains, like dumb penalties, assignment mistakes, drops, etc. and they can still be maddeningly inconsistent (easily throttling IND, CHI and NO, nearly beating SEA, but getting thumped by DAL and SF twice). but they seem to be heading in the right direction. there was no such feeling of hope when martz nosedived a super bowl juggernaut straight into the ground, or with the regimes of linehan and spagnuolo. certainly the RGIII trade has been a windfall. perhaps a less established and secure HC would be more impatient, but i think he had a three year plan and is on target (bradford's torn ACL was setback, but hopefully a temporary one). of course, it is a challenge playing in the NFC West, the best division in the NFL, so they have to have a good plan to excel with such withering, relentless competition.
but i digress.
the case for LT jake matthews - saffold expected to get too rich an offer in free agency to be retained, barksdale has played well at RT, but he could be a swing tackle (or maybe they could try him at guard like saffold?). matthews has played RT (when 2012 1.2 pick luke joeckle was LT at texas A&M) and LT, so he could start on the right side, and be the eventual successor for jake long, who is nearing 30, and was hurt a few times in MIA. he is a good run blocker. fisher coached his father for many years. fisher inherited chris long, but added rookie SS TJ mcdonald with the earlier of two thirds, who has great NFL bloodlines. the matthews family has unbelievable, off-the-charts bloodlines and football character. he would protect their investment in the QB, and enhance the value of first rounder austin, etc. there is a school of thought that fisher has a rigid rule against taking OL in the first round. it is true he hasn't in 18 years (between HOU, TEN and STL), but just this year, he reportedly would have taken guard larry warford if ogletree had been off the board at 1.30. michael roos was a high second rounder. and the three times he had a top 10 pick, he had other more pressing needs (took mcnair, VY and pacman - not sure if he had final decision, it may have been floyd reese?). he also had OL like matthews and munchak that were hall of famers and played for a decade or two, so he didn't have the need to draft OL like most teams with mere mortal OL. in other words, i think the pattern which looks good at first could be more flukey than anything else, the result of other factors and a case of some reading too much into this.
the case for sammy watkins - the rams hope in year three of the fisher/snead rebuild blueprint, some good things are going to start coming together. if they get the 1.2 pick, that was a complete gift and totally unexpected at the time. the point being, they might not be in a position to add a blue chip, elite talent at an impact position (like LT or WR, possibly DE?) again for a while. if you look at the rosters of SEA and SF in the division, they both have multiple pro bowlers. the rams probably have one pro bowl caliber talent, in robert quinn, who won't get the publicity to win defensive player of the year, but is having the kind of season to merit more consideration than he is probably getting. tavon austin may have future pro bowl ability as a returner? with so many holes in 2012, they repeatedly traded down. in 2013, they employed a mix (up for austin and stacy, down for ogletree). this year, with a 1.2 and currently around 1.14 (?), they could maneuver a little (again, at the top, down to about 1.4-1.6), and potentially emerge with multiple blue chip players. it is time they start adding quality, and not just quantity. watkins has an interesting resume. for whatever reason, the rams haven't demonstrated an aptitude for developing young WRs (see brian quick, chris givens, austin started slow, bailey is just beginning to make an impact). watkins was arguably the most collegiate ready prep WR EVER. he is the only WR to ever earn AP first team All American as a true freshman (and just fourth at any position - others were luminaries herschel walker, marshall faulk and adrian peterson). he looks like he could hit the ground running. while he isn't in julio jones class as a prospect, and has good but lacks great size at about 6'1" 205, he has sprinter speed, runs good routes, has good hands and is an explosive RAC weapon. STL doesn't have a alpha dog WR1-type on their roster. quick is that physically, but imo is lacking something, and they can't wait around for years to see if the light comes on. pettis is a plodder that lacks explosion and struggles to get open (how many would want him starting for their team?). givens has regressed, and doesn't have a well rounded skill set, may always be best as a situational deep threat. austin is promising, but watkins could bring things to the table as a boundary and red zone weapon that austin can't, so they could be complementary. bailey has starter talent, and reminds me of a love child between hines ward and derrick mason, but he can't match watkins as a prospect. receiving weapons of watkins and bailey on the outside, austin on the inside or coming out of the backfield and TE cook would put tremendous pressure on defenses. mike evans and watkins are my two favorite WRs in the draft, and evans could be avail later. i'll return to him.
if they don't trade down, and he is sitting there at 1.2, clowney could be tempting (i just don't think as tempting as trade down if the phone is ringing - in the old CBA, with a weak class, they were forced to draft jason smith, but it is cheaper to trade up, and there are a few QB prospects and needy teams that should be conducive to a trade). fisher drafted jevon kearse, another physical specimen and athletic phenom capable of running a legit 4.4, who terrorized QBs and seemed destined for the hall of fame until chronic foot injuries sadly derailed his career (he could have been an all time great). i have concerns about his motor, and fisher already had a bad experience with DT haynesworth. but there is some appeal. i myself said it didn't make sense with quinn and long already on the roster. but quinn is signed through 2014. and i think long's contract wouldn't present a problem to make a move after 2014? i do think they value his leadership, but his play has seemed to slip this year, and he makes a lot of money. this in't as exciting an option as LT or WR to me for reasons outlined above. BUT, if clowney realized his potential (maybe by fisher lighting a fire under him), with quinn, that would be easily the top set of DE bookends in the league (and potentially one of the best ever, just looking at them athletically). i think it is important to balance BPA (look what happens with positional reaches such as ponder) with team need (just because QB BPA in first, you don't take one a decade straight). but increasingly, i've been thinking, why not strip away all the clutter, and just make the move you think best helps you get to the super bowl. after at first being vocally against this, increasingly i am warming to the idea, and more open and receptive to the possibility that it could improve the overall team's fortunes the most?
if the rams had lost to NO, and lost out, there might have been a chance they could have had a 1.2 and 1.8 pick. than they may not have had to choose, and maybe could have traded down from 1.2 to 1-4, gotten matthews, and still gotten watkins with the second pick. now that the second pick is more in the 1.13-1.14 range, they may have to choose between LT and WR. UNLESS, mike evans were to drop, and they could add him with the earlier matthews pick. another possible permutation would be to take watkins in the 1.4-1.6 range, and there should be some good LT prospects left with the second pick... lewan, LTs from alabama, auburn, florida state? if matthews isn't compellingly better than them (i think he is more technically sound than the later trio, but they may have physical and athletic upside and could be coached up), i think watkins is a better prospect and safer projection than evans (struggled to separate last few games, though he certainly had some high profile star making performances, for instance against alabama).
what other positions? a safety like clinton-dix or interior OL like cyril richardson would be attractive, but maybe not good value there, so possibly in a trade down scenario. in fact, if they were to add a second and a third with a trade down from the 1.2, maybe they could package one of them with their own mid-second to move back into the first (sort of like MIN having three firsts this year). i don't think clinton-dix drops into the second (1.20-1.25?)... he may fall between vaccaro/reid and elam/cyprien as a prospect. richardson could go anywhere from 1.20 to the second (?), though also not sure he falls that far. the stanford guard yankey could be another interior OL target. richardson has positional flexibility, having played both OT and guard (everything but center?), so could be a starter on the inside but also a swing guard/tackle if needed (guard likely his best pro position, but maybe he could fill in on the outside in a pinch). as noted above, the rams were prepared to take guard larry warford with their 1.30 pick if ogletree had been gone. the rams did use a high fourth rounder on former alabama OL and outland trophy winner barrett jones with the expectation he is the future at center or guard. but as mentioned, saffold, who was a revelation at guard, has probably priced himself out of the rams budget. vet interior OL scott wells and harvey dahl are solid, but make a lot of money, wells has missed significant time both seasons (dahl has also missed time in 2013) and may soon be expendable due to their age. so they probably need some new blood on the inside.
another attractive and appealing thought about trading down from the 1.2 and getting an extra second and maybe a third, is they might be able to add a RB. richardson and pead don't cut it. stacy has been a revelation, but he has a very physical, punishing style (sometimes to himself) without a lot of wiggle - one reason i wasn't that high on him when he was in college - much to the detriment of my fantasy teams, but i was happily wrong in terms of real football. i think they need a complement. with the RB position increasingly viewed as commoditized and fungible, we are seeing good backs drop to the second or further (see 2013 class noted above). if they were to add a LT AND a WR like watkins or evans, it is tantalizing to think of a 1-2 RB punch with stacy and a complement like seastrunk or gordon, or double down with a hard charging bruiser like carlos hyde (eddie george, who starred for fisher, and is an ohio state alum like hyde will soon be, stated he thought he could be a super star at the next level).
between OL, WR and RB, that would have offense pretty well covered. most rams observers (people like jim thomas, bernie miklasz, jeff wagoner, etc.) would be shocked if they don't take a QB, given bradford missing large parts of two seasons, and clemens being a below average emergency starter. i'd like to see maybe a low day two or high day three pick like an aaron murray or mettenberg (could be value picks after ACL injuries). maybe the alabama QB if he falls to the third?
on defense, we already touched on safety. CB is a big need, but ideally one that could be filled in the second if not third (again, adding extra picks could fill more needs), if this is viewed as higher priority than interior OL, safety or backup RB. finnegan looks done, his play fell off a cliff despite being just 29, and he carries more than a $10 million cap figure if he is still on the roster past june. even if they restructure and he gets a severe salary haircut, it would be reckless to count on him. jenkins and trumaine johnson flash promise, but intermittently and sporadically. i think there is a good possibility this could be partly scheme-related, and the DC may in fact be on the hot seat (runblings that fisher is taking a more active role in the defensive play calling). if you break down the raw pass defense stats, they aren't pretty. they are giving up an unacceptable completion percentage to opposing QBs. they likely need a starter, not just depth (trumaine johnson could be an excellent nickel, but questionable starter). it wouldn't surprise me if they use the second first on one (maybe with another trade down scenario). i don't think there is an elite, joe haden-type prospect worthy of a top 5-10 overall pick, so we can probably safely rule that out (using the higher first on that position).
LB pops up a lot in discussions about possible draft targets of the rams, value-wise, there are some good ones (notably mack, mosley, shazier, van noy). my question is, with laurinaitis and former safety ogletree seemingly firmly entrenched in the nickel, why spend a high first rounder on an effectively two down player? a player like mack is a terror in the pass rush, so would they remove him from the field in precisely the situation he could shine in? it doesn't add up. ogletree and mack would be a nasty set of nickel LBs (like quinn and clowney would be at DE). but than do they sit laurinaitis in the nickel? he is like chris long, in that he is thought of as a cornerstone defender and overall player, as well as a respected team leader - but he may not be an elite talent, which he is being paid as. within the NFC West division, he isn't as good as wagner in SEA, and SF (willis/bowman) and ARI (washington/dansby - though karlos turns 33 this year) each have TWO ILBs better. so a player like mosley might make sense like clowney could, as an eventual successor, if he plays a situaional role initially, but is groomed to start in the middle in a year or two. i just think that very good LB prospects can be found later in the draft in future years (see ogletree - end of first), while blue chip LT and WR prospects as good as matthews and watkins are rarer, and would make more sense as investments of a high pick. free agent OLB dunbar is expected to move on, but if this is to be a two down position (again, unless they want to draft a mosley-type as heir apparent to laurinaitis), maybe the hole can be filled the same way it was with dunbar in the first place, with a competent but not bank breaking vet free agent. maybe with a lower draft pick. BTW, it has been pointed out that ogletree started outside (actually, may even have started at safety, explaining his great athleticism, coverage ability and ball skills - eerily similar resume to karlos dansby at auburn) at georgia before moving inside, so maybe HE could be the heir apparent for laurinaitis (meaning it might make more sense to add a mack or mosley-type, the latter himself could be jon beason-like and able to play inside or outside). the down side is, some scouts thought that tangling with and getting off blocks (which he would have to do as MLB) is not his strong suit, and his best fit is as a WLB-type (though STL employs left/right designations, not strong/weak side, as fisher did in TEN) where he can roam sideline-to-sideline chasing ball carriers, and best leverage his formidable speed and athleticism. the upside is, with physical maturation (already about 240-245?), coaching up and technical refinement, he could be a daryl washington-like beast as an inside presence?
while the rams are building a core of young talent, they still have a lot of holes, if not at starter, when depth is included. i don't think there is an elite DT prospect that would warrant a pick as high as the 1.2 (or 1.4-1.6 in trade down). but maybe with the second first (notre dame DT nix would make an impressive size and power tandem with brockers), or in a trade down, or possibly a day two or even three pick. i used to think kendall langford wasn't playing up to his contract, but he is solid, and i think his contract is structured in a way it will be better to keep him at least one more year, and if he continues to improve (last year he was dealing with the conversion from a 3-4 DE to 4-3 DT), maybe longer.
yet the organization has suffered through substandard WRs for years. some blame the QB, but it was going on before the incumbent. and many WRs aren't on NFL rosters (like gilyard and salas).
if they take Blake Bortles
towards Spielman and his reaches.. He took Ponder WAY too early, and the rest of the league 
and the need for a young signal caller that you can build around, the top quarterbacks in this upcoming draft and which will be the most ready to go on day one, Braxton Miller’s future and whether he’s NFL-ready, what is keeping Miller from reaching his potential right now, Johnny Manziel’s progression over the last year and the two most likely teams to make this year’s Super Bowl.
