True. It is funny how draft picks are gold until they get used. They can be great, but chances are they won't hit on all of them, so it'd be nice for a change to see some actual analysis, i.e. Titans are likely to get 2-3 good players with those picks. They might get more if they are lucky/good at evaluations or they might get squadoosh if they aren't good.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Rams acquire #1 pick, Massive haul for Titans (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter massraider
- Start date
massraider
Footballguy
There is a load of actual analysis out there, and it ALL says, 'more draft picks are better than fewer draft picks'.
History also says selling the farm for one player=not good.
I agree with what you are saying, but 10 new cheap players/potential starters isn't taking into account the fact that many of them will turn out to have little or no impact just based on historical draft results. It just seems more optimistic for the Titans than reality. I agree 100% that the Rams have little room for error and the QB has to be the franchise QB they traded all that for, otherwise they are pretty much guaranteed to not be in the playoffs the next 5 years as they won't get any influx of new premium picks until 2018.
massraider
Footballguy
It is taking it into account.
Not hitting on 100% of picks doesn't lessen the value of the picks. No one expects to hit on all picks. Hitting on 50% of 10 picks means you added 5 new good cheap players, that is a big deal.
You aren't going to get a disagreement from me on that. I just don't like when the articles say Rams get 1 impact player and the Titans get 6 starters/impact players. The Titans should be able to get a few from that haul, but it is a little disingenuous to just equate the extra picks to starters when history tells us many premium picks flame out.
By what metric? Certainly not Super Bowl wins
(I actually like Rivers better as an NFL QB too.) However, I was talking about how they were looked at as prospects coming out of college, not their NFL completion % or fantasy football stats, etc.I don't think anyone disagrees with that. I know as a Houston fan, I am not happy with the Rams giving up that giant package to one our division rivals.
Edit: I will say that I do prefer the method that Houston went though, paying a bunch of money to Brock. It may be equally (or even slightly more) likely he flops, but at least Houston will still have all its draft picks to shore up the rest of the team or to rebuild if he does. Plus Houston has one major piece that sets it apart/above the Rams plan IMO and his name is DeAndre Hopkins.
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, I don't think we disagree on who won the trade. I'd much rather be in the Titans position. My point was the article saying 6 starting caliber players from 6 picks. It isn't that easy. The picks have value until they are used. I will not even come close to saying I think the Rams did well.
spider321
Footballguy
So was I. Rivers was the better prospect. Give him Eli's last name, and Rivers is the #1 pick. Let Philip play with those Giants' defenses and he has at least 2 rings(probably more).By what metric? Certainly not Super Bowl wins
It's not Rivers' fault that Tomlinson always forgot how to play football in the playoffs.
...and the Giants won Eli's first Super Bowl despite his play, not because of it.
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear
Footballguy
E.Manning's stats in the playoffs and Super Bowl go all the way to...7.07 YPA, 61.5% completions. His QB rating goes to 89.3. He's been mediocre both in the regular season and in the playoffs. He's not the worst QB to win a Super Bowl, but he's in the large group of mediocre QBs who won.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
That is the first thing I thought of. 2 weeks of potential for something strange to happen.
I guess they figured that risk was outweighed by the risk of someone else moving up for their guy. They must have been pretty convinced the Titans would have made a deal otherwise.
But, in a worst case scenario their guy goes to jail or something, I guess they just take their next guy in line or even trade down and recoup some losses.
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
In the old days (pre-merger), before the draft, teams used to have their scouts and team reps squat on players in hotel rooms [PHRASING!], wait, what, I mean, basically quasi-kidnap them and prevent access from other teams until the draft was over.
I will be seriously bummed if Wentz is popped for bank robbery in the next two weeks. Incurable scurvy?
Last edited by a moderator:
Yenrub
Footballguy
Giants don't get to that Super Bowl without Eli playing so well in the playoffs that year.
Last edited by a moderator:
FUBAR
Footballguy
I would have gone with JJ Watt, but Nuk is good too.By what metric? Certainly not Super Bowl wins
I don't think anyone disagrees with that. I know as a Houston fan, I am not happy with the Rams giving up that giant package to one our division rivals.
Edit: I will say that I do prefer the method that Houston went though, paying a bunch of money to Brock. It may be equally (or even slightly more) likely he flops, but at least Houston will still have all its draft picks to shore up the rest of the team or to rebuild if he does. Plus Houston has one major piece that sets it apart/above the Rams plan IMO and his name is DeAndre Hopkins.
I think Buckna is thinking that Hopkins is a piece of the QB plan, i.e. the risk of Brock is a little offset by the fact that he has Hopkins to throw to as opposed to umm, well, no one special for the Rams QB.I would have gone with JJ Watt, but Nuk is good too.By what metric? Certainly not Super Bowl wins
I don't think anyone disagrees with that. I know as a Houston fan, I am not happy with the Rams giving up that giant package to one our division rivals.
Edit: I will say that I do prefer the method that Houston went though, paying a bunch of money to Brock. It may be equally (or even slightly more) likely he flops, but at least Houston will still have all its draft picks to shore up the rest of the team or to rebuild if he does. Plus Houston has one major piece that sets it apart/above the Rams plan IMO and his name is DeAndre Hopkins.
FUBAR
Footballguy
This isn't true.
I don't remember if it was Goff. At the combine, Mularkey was asked his opinion of quarterbacks and said that he did not like any of the QBs that did not celebrate TDs with the team. It's not the first time he has discussed it. Mett told a story about something similar. It's fine if after a bad drive and all, you "get it done" and score a TD, then walk off like it's all business no need to celebrate. ONCE. The rest of the time, you better be there. Mett mentioned Brady doing this.
On ESPN, when they were discussing this (totally in disagreement with Mularkey) they had one of these draft picks getting passed by for sideline high fives from the D. I was wwwwwait a second as I watched and saw the background. That video was on twitter a bunch, it's out there.
So it was not running 10? yards and jumping up and down high fiving with the O, then on the sideline others ignoring the QB.
Mularkey didn't say he wouldn't draft the guy or hated him or anything but that he didn't care for that. In this regard, I gotta say I totally agree with him for a change.
I think it's necessary. Probably need a bigger name to say as such but if that's some new trend, cut it out-you look like a jerk, not someone cool.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
I take it someone didn't see the movie.......................
Hooper31
Footballguy
Hitting on 50% of your picks means you should be a lock for GM of the year (Unless you're name is John Schneider. Criminal IMO that he hasn't won several awards.) Just take a look at drafthistory.com and see how many of those guys are "new good cheap players". Its much lower than 50%.
LOL. I did a post from that movie in another thread a few days ago. Amazing how quick people caught up with it, but Bri the poor guy completely missed it. I really hope he isn't surfing videos and combine reports to find out about Goff.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
I don't think they are going QB
TheFanatic
Footballguy
First of all, I saw like Bob that the picks were almost equal. ESPN has an article where they ought to redo the draft calculator then but on the radio they were saying the Rams and Titans even discussed the draft calculator and it was prevalent in the discussions so I gotta figure both sides thought it fair.
As far as team building, what people miss is the difference between good and bad teams. A good college player is likely not making the Pats or Seahawks but could make the Browns. A great college player could make it on any of those teams. The championship caliber teams are already stacked. There is a gigantic difference in how you build at that point.
The Browns, Titans, and Chargers (although some won't admit they fit here) are expansion teams. You go look at the Panthers, Jags, Texans, Browns expansion building and...it's very similar.
The Browns wrecked their team with their current house-cleaning. The Titans continued with their interim coach so they are probably two years ahead of the Browns. I don't know CLE well enough. In TEN, they have to win and/or be competitive. There is big fan backlash with more saying it's coming. It's like carolina's and hoops, or texas and college football- if they put a good product out there the fans will come and be plentiful but they simply haven't.
The Titans have some very key pieces, the Browns don't. QB, two OLBs, name DL, COULD have one or two top WRs in Wright, DGB, Hunter but safer to say one, top TE, former top RB with a who knows designation for 2016, good young T with loads of potential.
The Browns don't have their QB(likely) they've struck out so often their all world T is now old. Their WRs are a busted Bowe and Gordon who is always suspended. They found their TE. They have their stud CB but will they build a quality team before he is old? I think they might have their RBs and with a fixed line they might be OK.
I can go on and on here-like expansion teams, the Browns and Titans need lots of pieces. One piece becomes a wager, will he develop before player X gets old or wants too much $?
The Titans have depth. You wanna talk backups, they probably have as good backups as any team in the league. Their prob is these hungry UDFA hustlers aren't really supposed to be starting or key components. They're fillers when building a team. The former Gm was one of the best at hunting UDFAs, gotta give him credit for that.
The Rams (I don't think so but they do) are built with just a few missing components. Many think they only need a top QB to win. Many hinge on some wins against Seattle as a barometer. If they don't need a ton of pieces but focus upon one, I don't see why they were wrong here. I like the gusto of a QB going and getting the guy he wants. I still think they're a few years away. I think some good QB play (they only really had bad QB play to look at on film) will expose some things and the D will see different offenses than "we have the lead, let's slow it down and control the clock."
Sidenote- despite years apart from Fish, the Titans and Rams combine to be the almost perfect team. For many positions, what one team has the other doesn't, and vice versa. It'll definitely raise your eyebrows if you imagine a combined team and what positions would and wouldn't have competition in this fictitious scenario.
I did see it but guess it wasn't that memorable. I liked it, remember people here didn't and nitpicked it to death. That's about all I remember.
I'm a long time Ram fan and hate the trade. The only way this makes any sense is if a can't miss QB prospect coming out like i.e A Luck. Neither Goff and Wentz come close. In reviewing the stats of both, Wentz had very under whelming stats against 2nd tier competition. This to me is the primary basis to evaluate a player not the combine. Goff at least has very good stats so I'm predicting Goff.... Either way, our WR corps and TE are below average so I can't see either one having much success....
Rehashing something brought up a few times- Bradford was an about perfect QB prospect once his shoulder was proven to be healed. Some still say his pro day was best ever type. Top college program, super likeable personality with the whole aww shucks thing. Height, arm, ...you'd have to name someone like Peyton to find a better prospect. The Rams had no idea his knees would be wrecked, twice. That's not on them. He was ROY wasn't he? Bradford was more like the prototype than this questionable guy with issues. The Rams could have done a better job building the line, retaining coaches, and giving him competent WRs, but...he's not on them. They did fine. Every team in their shoes would have drafted Bradford.
A questionable QB would be Vince Young. 800 mechanical problems but wow could he lead and get it done when he needed to. His rookie year, he did just that. Looked like garbage, then took over somewhere in the second half and was like 7-1. His ego would not allow him to be coached and/or alter his technique, the battle within led to mental probs and..Titans should have gone with a more traditional QB. He WAS as advertised though and still to this day one of the best leaders I've ever seen as a rookie QB.
Headscratcher for me is Eli and Shaun King-
Shaun King leads a team to the NFCC game his rookie year and that's the highlight? That's it? He didn't play all that much after. I'd have never guessed that. Eli was the worst rookie I've ever seen. I will forever find the Ravens stories of messing with him as some of the best funny NFL stories ever. Having a big brother, I also love that he and Peyton had a who could throw more competition- Peyton TDs or Eli INTs that year. Peyton was on fire with like 4,5,6 TDs somewhat regularly. Being Peyton's little brother and "not as good" probably prepared him some but I give gigantic kudos to Eli for overcoming his rookie year and becoming the player he is.
Ramble ramble, sorry...Bradford was not a questionable high risk prospect with issues.
A questionable QB would be Vince Young. 800 mechanical problems but wow could he lead and get it done when he needed to. His rookie year, he did just that. Looked like garbage, then took over somewhere in the second half and was like 7-1. His ego would not allow him to be coached and/or alter his technique, the battle within led to mental probs and..Titans should have gone with a more traditional QB. He WAS as advertised though and still to this day one of the best leaders I've ever seen as a rookie QB.
Headscratcher for me is Eli and Shaun King-
Shaun King leads a team to the NFCC game his rookie year and that's the highlight? That's it? He didn't play all that much after. I'd have never guessed that. Eli was the worst rookie I've ever seen. I will forever find the Ravens stories of messing with him as some of the best funny NFL stories ever. Having a big brother, I also love that he and Peyton had a who could throw more competition- Peyton TDs or Eli INTs that year. Peyton was on fire with like 4,5,6 TDs somewhat regularly. Being Peyton's little brother and "not as good" probably prepared him some but I give gigantic kudos to Eli for overcoming his rookie year and becoming the player he is.
Ramble ramble, sorry...Bradford was not a questionable high risk prospect with issues.
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
That is an interesting way to break it down and largely fair.
There might be some mitigating factors, in this case:
1) Where are the picks within rounds? Are we talking #1 overall? Or mid-firsts, seconds, thirds? If the Rams finish middle of the pack in 2016 (they did in 2012-2015 with UFAs like Hill, Keenum, Davis, the incredible imploding Foles - and this trade seems geared more to 2017 & 2018, so either an indication Fisher/Snead are confident in their job security, think it buys them a season or two, or just did what they thought was best for the team), the 2017 first and third could also be mid-round. Aren't next year's picks conventionally, historically discounted a round? If so, would that make them more like a mid-second and mid-fourth? I get TEN can still take a first and third round caliber player next year with them (as did the Rams in 2013 and 2014 with their first round picks), but meant in the sense, if OAK calls TEN and says, Hey, Mr. Robinson, can I have your 1.15 for a mid-first next draft, he would probably decline. Viewed that way, spread over time in today's value, more like:
2016 mid first
2 X 2016 mid seconds (PLUS 2017 mid-first? discounted for waiting a year, Rams get Wentz into their system and can start developing him immediately)
2016 mid third
2017 mid third (? discounted to a fourth in today's value)
2) To me, the most key pieces of the puzzle are the first two lines (four premium picks, three at 1.15, #43 & #45 in 2016 and the 2017 mid-first?), not so much the mid thirds (2016 & 2017). At what point is it too much, where would you cut it off and say, no more, that is a deal breaker? Would you do it with one less third rounder? Two less third rounders? One less second rounder? Two less second rounders? One less first rounder? Two less first rounders? The last two options would probably be unrealistic for acquiring the #1 overall, so that would effectively be tantamount to saying, no possible deal for #1. But if that WASN'T the case, and you did consider it, what was most problematic, one too many seconds, a second and a third, would you have done it then? If the latter, and let's say Carson Wentz becomes a franchise QB, it is likely in the future the Rams will be glad they didn't scuttle the trade over something like a day two pick or two?
3) They did kind of have to "overpay" (though if you look at the principal picks, the four 2016/2017 picks in the first two rounds with the #1 overall, the trade chart is nearly a dead heat and aligns almost perfectly book value-wise), if at least PHI was also gunning for the pick. They could offer a trade down to just #8, whereas LA could only offer the 1.15. Noted elsewhere, but the third furthest bungee jump from #1 since the merger (NE went up from 16 for Fryar, HOU from 17 for Earl Campbell), and as far as I can tell, the biggest move up for a QB since the merger. Most are rightfully focused on the sheer volume of day one and day two picks acquired, but LA was asking a lot of TEN, too.
4) Also noted, the deal doesn't get done without #43 acquired in the Bradford trade (ironically by ex-PHI HC Kelly, who otherwise might have considered a QB at #7, Goff slipping to #7 may now be precluded by events he set in motion), so it contributed directly to replacing a former #1 overall who was derailed with consecutive torn ACLs, with a chance at a do over about a half decade later with another #1 overall pick. They could have used the pick, but because they had what was sort of found money, so to speak, that enabled them to not have to include additional picks of their own in the blockbuster, historic trade.
5) Characterizations of the drafting acumen of Snead and Fisher in general, and the aftermath of the RG3 trade are mixed. The principals to me are the three first rounders, DT Brockers, LB Ogletree and LT Robinson, as well as second rounder Janoris Jenkins. RB Pead was an unmitigated disaster (reportedly dunderheadedly miscalculated a trade down of a few picks and lost out on first two choices, LBs Mychal Kendricks and Bobby Wagner, Pead was probably a distant plan C, they should never have traded down further than where they risked losing their target/s, DUH
, in fairness, Snead was a recent hire and didn't have his fully scouting apparatus installed yet). Bailey has had setbacks (two substance-related suspensions and two bullets in the head last year, it is a miracle he lived, he is working out, highly uncertain at this point if he ever plays another down). He had a third most TDs (25 in 2012) in FBS history, and I thought was a promising third round pick at the time. Brockers is on a fifth year option contract and they reportedly would like to extend him (one corollary of the monster trade is they have a ton of looming free agents from all the extra RG3 picks in the next few years, with four less premium draft picks in the next few years [[first or second in 2016/2017]], that could enable LA to use some of that saved cap money that otherwise would have been earmarked for the rookies, to sign their own - they could also have more money to attract skill position free agents at WR or TE in 2017 and 2018, once Wentz has his rookie year behind him, and pointing towards the move to Kroenke World in the QBs fourth season). He doesn't play a glamorous position or stat-friendly role, but by absorbing blocks, occupying lanes, pushing the pocket, that enables stars Donald, Quinn and Ogletree to make more plays. Tree is the new MLB expected to be the 2017 fifth year option player, and he will bring an element and dimension of speed, athleticism and playmaking ability Laurinaitis didn't have (a positional disadvantage intra-divisionally since the inception of the Snead-Fish regime, relative to the likes of All-Pros/Pro Bowl Willis & Bowman, Wagner, pre-suspension Washington). He was around top 10 in solo tackles as a rookie and soph (missed more than half of 2015 with broken leg, a huge blow to the Rams defense), and had the most combined FFs in 2013/2014 with 10 at any position - for perspective, Laurinaitis just had his first FF in 2015. IMO, he has Pro Bowl potential in the middle (played inside and outside at Georgia, recruited as safety, similar career/positional arc and trajectory to Karlos Dansby and Jamie Collins). Robinson has underwhelmed and disappointed, especially for a #2 overall (Brockers #14, Tree #30). They could have taken Watkins. They do sometimes seemingly draft on athletic upside to a fault (he may have had historically good speed for his size coming out of Snead's alma mater). At this point, recent HOF inductee LT Orlando Pace (one of greatest of his era, with Ogden and Jones) played four years at Ohio State, in a more NFL relevant system where he learned pass pro, and even he didn't instantly dominate. So Robinson is behind the curve, and if the light doesn't come on, he will have been a grave, severe mistake. In Pace terms, he would be an NFL rookie and still is playing technical catch up. Physically, athletically he is a beast. His biggest issue seems to be conceptual, recognition, concentration, getting out of position, missing stunts, twists and DL games. If his technique catches up with his formidable athleticism, he can still be a very good LT, and that has value. Those three players are 26, 25 and 24, respectively, and could help the Rams for the next half decade. CB Jenkins left, but was the highest paid CB in the 2016 free agency cycle (and second most after Revis in guaranteed money through 2017). He is expected to generate a 2017 third comp pick. In their first draft, they added UFA S McLeod who I think became the highest paid S in this free agent cycle, and is expected to yield a 2017 fourth comp pick - they can be traded for the first time. So Jenkins goes to the positive side of the RG3 aftermath ledger, and they should get credit for scouting, developing McLeod. And this is important, imo, instead of having a second and fourth in 2017, and a second straight blowed up draft, they are expected to have a second, third and two fourths. Lastly, they added former #7 overall former safety Barron in 2014 (for 2015 fourth and sixth round picks). He was probably overdrafted AS A SAFETY, if not as shocking as earlier BUF top 10 pick of Whitner, but after subbing at WLB for the sidelined Tree, in the last 2/3 of the season, he was projecting for about 100 solo tackles, and top three-ish in the league, with Telvin Smith, for example (WLB Lavonte David had 85 last year, but has consistently been a tackle machine among the league leaders). They just signed him to a 5/45 deal (David signed for 5/50 in 2015?). So if he plays like the Pro Bowl caliber WLB he looked like last year, they get credit for manufacturing a star with merely two day three picks. 6) So why did they need to get to #1? If they zeroed in on Wentz would be one reason. They needed to prevent another team like PHI beating them to the punch. Maybe CLE wasn't an option, if they hoped for their choice of QBs. They may not have liked lesser options like Lynch and Cook. Until yesterday morning, I thought they could be in play, but I can see how they could fall in love with Wentz. I think (DJ mentioned it also yesterday) an obvious comparison, small school (Alcorn State), big, fast, athletic, mobile, arm talent, charismatic, leader - Air McNair. Who Fisher can hope for lightning to strike twice (finishing what he started in the TEN Super Bowl lost to the Rams, maybe the closest ever), pairing his blue chip, McNair doppleganger QB with a faster, more explosive and talented Eddie George in Gurley.
7) What were the alternatives? I agree they should have done more, earlier in prior drafts, and they may not have gotten to this point, where they had to mortgage the future. But that said, and given where they were in the life cycle of the rebuild, what if they didn't like the QB class in 2017? So maybe 2018? But what if there record would have been good enough to put them in a similar position, too far to take one of the top QB prospects. And they might not have the extra second round ammo to move up in 2016. So what about 2019. Great. And it takes a year or two to develop. So 2020-20121? And they are moving into Kroenke World in 2019. I think they did what they felt they had to do. If Wentz delivers on his promise, he addresses THE key missing piece of the puzzle that could FINALLY complete the roster. What would that be worth? And maybe it isn't so black and white and overly simplistic as Manning/Brady/Roethlisberger Leaf/Carr/Jamarcbust, as some have portrayed it. If they have been below the level of minimum functionality (offense 29th, passing 32?), Wentz may not necessarily even need to be a top 3-5 QB to propel, catapult them to the next level and playoffs. Last year, their PPG averages were 17.5 offense (#29) and 20.6 on defense (#13). So they were AVERAGING a FG in the hole on a weekly basis. If they move up to a top quarter defense (19.6), that is only a 1 point difference. If they can get to even middling and average on offense (22.8), that yields a 5+ point increase, and now they are UP by a FG on a weekly basis. They have a lot further to go on offense. In this light, I can see them thinking it was a trade they HAD to make. It hurts not being able to draft the likes of TE Henry or WRs Shepard/Boyd with those #43 & #45 picks (though no guarantee they would be there, but in a deep second and third round, SOME prospects would have been). But with no QB, it is moot point. QB is the hard part. I don't know what "It" is, but whatever it is, imo Wentz has it. If he is the Truth and the answer (like the O'Bannon brothers were for the last UCLA hoops championship), they can always add WRs and TEs in free agency and future drafts, likely starting as early as next year. They might even get potential day three prospects at need positions like WR Rashard Higgins, TEs Cajuste, Higbee, Adams, etc., THIS year.
* Like I said, a lot of divided opinions about what they did with the RG3 trade specifically, and some general criticism leveled on that basis. But any fair, overall evaluation of Fisher and Snead's drafting acumen (or lack thereof) would be remiss to gloss over that they drafted two consecutive ROYs in Donald (defense) and Gurley. They also inherited a 15-65 record in the prior half decade from their predecessors that was not only the worst in league history, but maybe in the history of North American professional sports. They suffer in the comparison with SEA and ARI (and SF with three straight NFC Championship games helmed by since fired Harbaugh in 2011-2013), made worse by being in close proximity in the same division. What they have done isn't easy and shouldn't be taken for granted, hitting the reset button, starting almost complete over with a clean roster sweep and being among the best teams in the league within 2-3 years. If EVERY/ALL NFL teams were held up to that same Draconian, withering standard, most of the league's front offices, coaching staffs and scouting departments would be cast aside like the bridge troll in Monty Python and the Holy Grail (what kind of swallow?).
Not a Fisher apologist. He is a handful of losses away from losingest HC in NFL history. If you also look at the top 50 winningest list (he is #13), he is sixth worst by WINNING PERCENTAGE, so call it barely better than the bottom 10%. But I think they are close and would like to see him finish what he started, the roster is vastly more talented than the one he inherited in 2012. And not sure Kroenke wants to have a new HC working out of a trailer for the next three years.
** On a closing note, the Rams could be close. They started 4-3, finished 3-1 = 7-4, which if they could have sustained was playoff caliber. The big problem was the 0-5 Kurt Warner-like donut at the mid-point of their season. It was emblematic of all four seasons, flashes of promise, beating SEA, ARI and SF, but ultimately too inconsistent to string together whole seasons, let alone multiple seasons. They have been "the youngest team in the league" probably every year, maybe still are (though not sure by how much, if the averages of many other teams are just a few months apart, not a critically important and maybe even misleading stat). They have many pieces in place. Defense (including potentially one of the best front sevens in the league with Donald, Quinn, Tree and Barron - secondary could be solid with CBs T. Johnson & Gaines, S McDonald, Joyner undersized but similar to All-Pro Honey Badger, played much faster at nickel CB in 2015 and was an All-American S at Florida St.). Lot of OL picks in 2014-2105. Gurley. Just need a QB to get them over the hump. Obviously that is the most singularly important aspect of this trade. If they make the playoffs, and Wentz looks good doing it (third straight ROY?
), the trade post-mortem will take on a completely different complexion and tenor in a few years.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Winning is great PR. Don't get too caught up in the drama. I don't think Fisher does.TheFanatic said:
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
Wentz File (Scouting Report/Highlight Aggregation)
NFL.com scouting profile - Zierlein
[www.nfl.com]
SI Top 50 - #7 comped with Roethlisberger by Farrar
[www.si.com]
NFL Draft Report - Dave-Te' Thomas
[nfldraftreport.sportsblog.com]
Waldman Film Room (VIDEO 1 hour), breaks down FCS Championship Game between NDSU and Illinois State - Matt is a fan of his game
[mattwaldmanrsp.com]
Highlights - NDSU
[www.youtube.com]
Senior Bowl prospect analysis - DJ and Brooks
[www.youtube.com]
Wentz is the real deal - on and off the field (DJ NFL.com)
[www.nfl.com]
"Not many evaluators have questions about Carson Wentz on the field, with the biggest concern being the North Dakota State product's ability to adjust to the jump in competition level. And as teams continue to dig on him off the field, they've been blown away by his intangibles. In fact, off the field, he's very similar to Andrew Luck in terms of intelligence, preparation and character. That his leadership abilities, smarts and toughness are all off the charts is helping give evaluators confidence that, though it might take some time, he'll eventually figure it out and succeed at the NFL level.
I've had Wentz as my top quarterback throughout the whole process, and I think he'll make a smooth transition."
Pro day one of best Gil Brandt has ever seen (I think he also said this about Bradford and Aikman, so one out of two), comped him with Flacco
[www.nfl.com]
Casserly of NFL.com polls 15 league execs, of those that didn't need a QB or vote tie, Wentz preferred by 2-1 ratio (8-4-3 ties)
[www.nfl.com]
Wentz similar upside to Luck, character off the charts reported by everybody at Senior bowl - Mayock
[www.nfl.com]
* Who is the best QB in the 2016 Draft? Move The Sticks
DJ and Bucky Brooks - NFL.com (VIDEO Wentz vs. Goff segment starts at 1:53), DJ preferred Wentz, situational analysis revealed Wentz to be clutch in pressure situations, clearly best Senior Bowl prospect, moment not too big for him, had swagger, Brooks noted Wentz could have red zone edge as runner
[www.youtube.com]
Wentz Combine interview (VIDEO 5+ minutes)
[www.youtube.com]
NFL.com scouting profile - Zierlein
[www.nfl.com]
SI Top 50 - #7 comped with Roethlisberger by Farrar
[www.si.com]
NFL Draft Report - Dave-Te' Thomas
[nfldraftreport.sportsblog.com]
Waldman Film Room (VIDEO 1 hour), breaks down FCS Championship Game between NDSU and Illinois State - Matt is a fan of his game
[mattwaldmanrsp.com]
Highlights - NDSU
[www.youtube.com]
Senior Bowl prospect analysis - DJ and Brooks
[www.youtube.com]
Wentz is the real deal - on and off the field (DJ NFL.com)
[www.nfl.com]
"Not many evaluators have questions about Carson Wentz on the field, with the biggest concern being the North Dakota State product's ability to adjust to the jump in competition level. And as teams continue to dig on him off the field, they've been blown away by his intangibles. In fact, off the field, he's very similar to Andrew Luck in terms of intelligence, preparation and character. That his leadership abilities, smarts and toughness are all off the charts is helping give evaluators confidence that, though it might take some time, he'll eventually figure it out and succeed at the NFL level.
I've had Wentz as my top quarterback throughout the whole process, and I think he'll make a smooth transition."
Pro day one of best Gil Brandt has ever seen (I think he also said this about Bradford and Aikman, so one out of two), comped him with Flacco
[www.nfl.com]
Casserly of NFL.com polls 15 league execs, of those that didn't need a QB or vote tie, Wentz preferred by 2-1 ratio (8-4-3 ties)
[www.nfl.com]
Wentz similar upside to Luck, character off the charts reported by everybody at Senior bowl - Mayock
[www.nfl.com]
* Who is the best QB in the 2016 Draft? Move The Sticks
DJ and Bucky Brooks - NFL.com (VIDEO Wentz vs. Goff segment starts at 1:53), DJ preferred Wentz, situational analysis revealed Wentz to be clutch in pressure situations, clearly best Senior Bowl prospect, moment not too big for him, had swagger, Brooks noted Wentz could have red zone edge as runner
[www.youtube.com]
Wentz Combine interview (VIDEO 5+ minutes)
[www.youtube.com]
Last edited by a moderator:
I actually figured out how to do it, after getting annoyed with the new UI dropping nested quotes. Use your mouse to select the entire quote of someone else like you would in any Windows app (not sure how to do it on a phone) and then a "Quote this" pop-up comes up and when you click on it, everything you selected appears in the reply box.
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
Because SF, SEA and ARI have been so successful (SF had a head start, ARI is coming on strong, SEA has been a constant in the Snead-Fish era), there could be a perception it is easy. It isn't. Also maybe a confluence of not appreciating how bad the state of the team was they inherited. I hear never had a winning season a lot. Well, from 15-65 and worst in NFL history, 7-9 (or 6-8-1 in first or second year?) in 2012 was bordering on a heroic achievement. And Bradford tore his ACL two straight seasons starting in 2013. Last year they tried Foles who had a HOF type 2013 season, and he imploded. I don't think it is black and white, and certainly don't think "bad luck" explains everything, but neither ineptness on their part. So, imo, if some are attributing 100% to ineptitude, that could be a case of conflating legit instances of that with, also legit instances of bad luck.
Think of an NFL team rebuild, with rebuilding a vintage Shelby Cobra. You have an engine. Transmission. Body. Interior. Shocks. Steering. Exhaust. Many components. Teams like SEA, ARI and SF, did a great job of bringing the part together at the same time (between developing and coaching up internal talent, draft, free agency, trade), again, not an easy thing to do just on a timing level. The Rams have fallen short. Maybe they have one or two key components (defense, Gurley) ready to be assembled, but their is a strike where some other Cobra component is manufactured, and receiving is delayed a season. Than when they get that part, some other breaks down and falls off. They just haven't been able to synch things and mesh them together to work as a whole at the same time. Shoot, to simplify the metaphor, you could have a very complex modern engine, but it might not run at all, or very poorly, with just one catastrophically missing key component, maybe a chip that has to do with the ignition. Or a rocket filled with fuel and waiting to blast off, but missing only a key communication, life support or computer component and therefore stranded on the launch pad and effectively useless. If Wentz can turn the ignition switch on the Shelby Cobra, or get the rocket off the launch pad, the trade could look a lot better in the near future.
And Bradford tore his ACL two straight seasons starting in 2013. Last year they tried Foles who had a HOF type 2013 season, and he imploded. I don't think it is black and white, and certainly don't think "bad luck" explains everything, but neither ineptness on their part. So, imo, if some are attributing 100% to ineptitude, that could be a case of conflating legit instances of that with, also legit instances of bad luck.Think of an NFL team rebuild, with rebuilding a vintage Shelby Cobra. You have an engine. Transmission. Body. Interior. Shocks. Steering. Exhaust. Many components. Teams like SEA, ARI and SF, did a great job of bringing the part together at the same time (between developing and coaching up internal talent, draft, free agency, trade), again, not an easy thing to do just on a timing level. The Rams have fallen short. Maybe they have one or two key components (defense, Gurley) ready to be assembled, but their is a strike where some other Cobra component is manufactured, and receiving is delayed a season. Than when they get that part, some other breaks down and falls off. They just haven't been able to synch things and mesh them together to work as a whole at the same time. Shoot, to simplify the metaphor, you could have a very complex modern engine, but it might not run at all, or very poorly, with just one catastrophically missing key component, maybe a chip that has to do with the ignition. Or a rocket filled with fuel and waiting to blast off, but missing only a key communication, life support or computer component and therefore stranded on the launch pad and effectively useless. If Wentz can turn the ignition switch on the Shelby Cobra, or get the rocket off the launch pad, the trade could look a lot better in the near future.
Last edited by a moderator:
FUBAR
Footballguy
Yeah sorry, should have written that more clearly. Watt is a one man phenomenon, but I meant in terms of offensive help for a new franchise QB. Houston has Hopkins, signed Miller and most people think they are adding another high pick at WR in this draft. Unless the Rams can unearth a gem or pay a solid FA next year, their new QB will have no one to throw to at all. At least Houston has picks to try to add potential weapons (even if they don't pan out.)FUBAR said:
CR69
Footballguy
On mobile just hit the + next to quote on each post you want and then tap the little box that appears at the bottom right showing how many posts you've quoted.
massraider
Footballguy
Another good point.stlrams said:
Funny, that Paxton Lynch is getting run down for playing poorly against Auburn and Temple end of the year, and Wentz has never played any defense as good as either his entire career. Anyone have a problem with that? Apparently not.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
The more strange part is that someone said people didn't go to his birthday party, and your first reaction was THAT post rather than simply wondering why someone would even bother to post about that, and to just ignore it.Bri said:
ghostguy123
Footballguy
So really how good does the QB the Rams take have to be to justify this trade? Obviously we can no see into the future, but lets say for example they made this trade anywhere from 5-15 years ago.
Which current QBs would warrant that pick assortment? I do not personally think it has to be a brady, Manning, Rodgers type to justify it. There are probably a dozen Qbs who would have been worth it.
The problem is, I don't think either of these QBs had that top tier stuff potential, so I personally think at best you are gonna get one of those guys in the 5-15 range, with the obvious potential that the guy is simply a bust and does more harm than good to your team.
But let's say the guy does pan out, who are some of the QBs who would be towards the bottom of the "he was worth it" barrel? Guys like Matt Ryan? Dalton?
Which current QBs would warrant that pick assortment? I do not personally think it has to be a brady, Manning, Rodgers type to justify it. There are probably a dozen Qbs who would have been worth it.
The problem is, I don't think either of these QBs had that top tier stuff potential, so I personally think at best you are gonna get one of those guys in the 5-15 range, with the obvious potential that the guy is simply a bust and does more harm than good to your team.
But let's say the guy does pan out, who are some of the QBs who would be towards the bottom of the "he was worth it" barrel? Guys like Matt Ryan? Dalton?
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
Interesting question for sure. I think more importantly they need to get their guy at the position and start winning games. Wins will justify the pick really. If you have a Dalton-type guy that leads you to the playoffs every year I think it worth the investment as it gives you a shot at the ring anyhow. Of course his comes from a sad sack Lions fan.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Well I would think a good QB is certainly worth those picks. Question is, is it easier to build up the players around a QB when you hamstring yourself a bit like this, or is it easier to use all your high picks on NON QBs and figure out QB elsewhere.
There is no one way to do it. Well, unless you are the Titans. This was an absolutely PERFECT trade for their team. Simply perfect.
massraider
Footballguy
Everyone else got their QB by using a single pick, or spending dollars. For the most part.
I keep reading that top QBs are worth all the picks. We don't have a good example of a trade for 6 picks for a player ever working out, so are we sure about that?
King of the Jungle
Footballguy
I think the Rams are pretty well stocked and certainly feel pressure to land a QB. I would not be thrilled using the picks to move up like they did. If I were able to play GM I would have went after Fitzpatrick without losing e picks and hope to find someone to groom (eg Cardale Jones)
You are not kidding. They have their franchise QB and land the stock up trade of the century. Exciting time for Titan fans.
Last edited by a moderator:
I wouldn't even think about trading that pick haul for Dalton today. Probably not Ryan, either.
But I can see the case for trading it for five years of a young, cost-controlled Ryan or Dalton. Because on top of getting your QB, you're saving a minimum of $16-18 mil a year for a minimum of three years. That's the kind of money you can fill an awful lot of other holes with.
Last edited by a moderator:
