OL or WR? Looky here...

[jrry32]

Yet these stats PROVE otherwise?

They're technically not stats nor do they make an argument for Watkins.

Cardinals
Leading WR - 1041 yards(1st round #13)

Seahawks
Leading WR - 898 yards(2nd round #60)

Colts
Leading WR - 1083 yards(3rd round #92)

Chiefs
Leading Receiver - 693 yards(3rd round #73 HB)

So only two of the four teams you named had 1000+ yard WRs. One of the four had a HB lead them in receiving yards. None of the four had a WR record 1100+ yards. None of the four had a WR drafted in the top 10 lead the team in receiving yards. Only one of the four had a WR drafted in the 1st round lead the team in receiving yards.

 

[MerlinJones]

Glue?

Unnecessarily large and smelly doorstop?

 

[Alan]

Thanks but I've got one of those already. Good thought though.

 

[iced]

They're technically not stats nor do they make an argument for Watkins.

Cardinals
Leading WR - 1041 yards(1st round #13)

Seahawks
Leading WR - 898 yards(2nd round #60)

Colts
Leading WR - 1083 yards(3rd round #92)

Chiefs
Leading Receiver - 693 yards(3rd round #73 HB)

So only two of the four teams you named had 1000+ yard WRs. One of the four had a HB lead them in receiving yards. None of the four had a WR record 1100+ yards. None of the four had a WR drafted in the top 10 lead the team in receiving yards. Only one of the four had a WR drafted in the 1st round lead the team in receiving yards.

And yet all these receivers still had more yards than any Ram receiver, despite suspect and shoddy o-lines. (Colts/Cards/Hawks)

 

[jrry32]

And yet all these receivers still had more yards than any Ram receiver, despite suspect and shoddy o-lines. (Colts/Cards/Hawks)

And? That's a pretty low bar to set. Plus, those WRs didn't have Kellen Clemens throwing them the ball for over half the year.

Using those teams to argue for Sammy Watkins is a terrible argument. Want to argue the ineptitude of the Rams WRs...have at it. Just don't tell me that OL isn't important while the #1 WR is by using a bunch of teams without #1 WRs as examples.

Regardless, I happen to think a lot of Tavon Austin and Stedman Bailey. And I don't believe they should be given up on because they didn't light the world on fire as rookies. But I am also not against drafting Sammy Watkins. I just don't think it's necessary (or correct) to marginalize our talent on the WR corp or attack the importance of the OL to make an argument for Watkins.

 

[iced]

And? That's a pretty low bar to set. Plus, those WRs didn't have Kellen Clemens throwing them the ball for over half the year.

Which is my point - it seems to me people have the bar set pretty low for this team's wide receivers with 6+ years of sub 800 yard seasons

Using those teams to argue for Sammy Watkins is a terrible argument.

Actually I was just pointing out something you were trying to use them as a counter argument for..

and its not just Watkins - as I have said countless times, I'm also pro evans. I don't care which one it is all that much because both are extremely talented - and light years better than what we have at outside receiver. It does not matter to me which one they address it with, as long as they address it.

 

[jrry32]

Which is my point - it seems to me people have the bar set pretty low for this team's wide receivers with 6+ years of sub 800 yard seasons

So...?

Actually I was just pointing out something you were trying to use them as a counter argument for..

and its not just Watkins - as I have said countless times, I'm also pro evans. I don't care which one it is all that much because both are extremely talented - and light years better than what we have at outside receiver. It does not matter to me which one they address it with, as long as they address it.

So then it was a red herring. Because I was countering a specific argument based on those teams. What the Rams WRs did or didn't do is irrelevant. The point of the thread was to show that those teams succeeded without a good or great OL to use as an argument for drafting Sammy Watkins. I pointed out that the evidence in that argument for Watkins made no sense because those teams did not have #1 WRs either.

That was the extent of the point.

 

[iced]

I pointed out that the evidence in that argument for Watkins made no sense because those teams did not have #1 WRs either.

That was the extent of the point.

I know you're not implying that Larry Fitzgerald is not a #1 WR nor ignoring how that effects the covering Michael Floyd gets..

same thing with Reggie wayne and the huge impact that had on Andrew luck.


BTW I may be alone in this but I think it's a joke when a Team's Running back has more yards than any receiver on our Team... he also had more receiving touchdowns than any receiver on our team... Charles had receiving 7 td's... Between Quick, givens, and pettis, they only accounted for 6 td's total...

maybe i'm setting the bar too high

 

[jrry32]

I know you're not implying that Larry Fitzgerald is not a #1 WR nor ignoring how that effects the covering Michael Floyd gets...

I love Fitz but I'm not sure he is a true #1 anymore. Seems to be declining. Still a quality WR though. Would love to have him on the Rams and he could put up big numbers on the right team.

same thing with Reggie wayne and the huge impact that had on Andrew luck.

Reggie Wayne spent most of the year on IR.

BTW I may be alone in this but I think it's a joke when a Team's Running back has more yards than any receiver on our Team... he also had more receiving touchdowns than any receiver on our team..

maybe i'm setting the bar too high

I can't say it really bothers me. All I care about is the Rams getting the "W". If that means being a team that runs the ball a lot, spreads it out a lot to the WRs and doesn't have a single target that has great stats...so be it.

But I think a lot of people underestimate the learning curve for NFL WRs. Adding another rookie gives us no guarantee that he'll produce a lot in 2014. May take the kid a few(2-3) years even if he does pan out.

 

[iced]

Reggie Wayne spent most of the year on IR.

He played 7 games - and the effect that had on their offense was monumental. Especially for Luck. Not surprisingly, the before and after numbers for Luck changed too

I can't say it really bothers me. All I care about is the Rams getting the "W". If that means being a team that runs the ball a lot, spreads it out a lot to the WRs and doesn't have a single target that has great stats...so be it.

Works for me - provided they get receivers that can get open so they can spread the ball... and of course, actually catch it....

But I think a lot of people underestimate the learning curve for NFL WRs. Adding another rookie gives us no guarantee that he'll produce a lot in 2014. May take the kid a few(2-3) years even if he does pan out.

No one's disputing the learning curve. But I don't see a threat on this team nor do I imagine one developing into one. Just like many on here believe that Jake Long is going to get injured again next season, I don't believe there's a receiver on this roster (outside Tavon) that's going to be the answer to the wide receiver question.

The numbers speak for themselves - No Receiver has eclipsed 700 yards since Torry Holt. Not hitting an 1000 yards? Okay, that's understandable...but not a single receiver, cracking 700? Since 2008?

Yea - that's called a lack of talent. Especially when your current "#1" has one touchdown in the last 22 games

 

[Mojo Ram]

It's like the Debate club in here after midnight. :coffee:
http://idebate.org/about/debate/clubs

 

[iced]

It's like the Debate club in here after midnight. :coffee:
http://idebate.org/about/debate/clubs

No it's not!

 

[Mojo Ram]

No it's not!

 

[Memphis Ram]

And yet all these receivers still had more yards than any Ram receiver, despite suspect and shoddy o-lines. (Colts/Cards/Hawks)

Seahawks, Chiefs, & Indy - 3 WRs/TEs with 30+ receptions
Cardinals - 4 WRs/TEs with 30+ receptions

Rams - 5 WR/TEs with 30+ receptions.

So the Rams are penalized for spreading the ball out more and having far fewer passing attempts than every team listed except Seattle.

 

[iced]

Seahawks, Chiefs, & Indy - 3 WRs/TEs with 30+ receptions
Cardinals - 4 WRs/TEs with 30+ receptions

Rams - 5 WR/TEs with 30+ receptions.


So the Rams are penalized for spreading the ball out more and having far fewer passing attempts than every team listed except Seattle.

Not sure why you bring up Tight ends when we're discussing the receiver position.

Cards - almost (2) 1,000 yards receivers.. Floyd 1041, Fitzie 954
Chiefs - Charles (693), Donnie Avery (596), Dwayne Bowe (673)
Seattle - Tate (898), Baldwin (778)
Colts - Reggie Wayne (in 7 games) (503), Hilton (1,083)

Rams - Givens (569), Tavon (418), Pettis (399)

You know what I see? it takes 3 receivers combined to crack 1,000 yard season, all of whom which were out produced by the Chiefs receivers in their run dominant/heavy rb focus offense... reggie wayne in less than half a season almost matched givens production - probably would have exceeded it had he played one more game. Donnie Avery, the 3rd option in Chief's passing game, still out produced all Ram receivers.

Thank about this
Jamaal Charles - 7 receiving TD's, 693 yards receiving.
Givens + quick + Pettis = 6 receiving td's

What's one common theme though?

Receivers with more than 600 yards -
Cards - 2
Chiefs - 3
Seattle - 2
Colts - 1 (would have been 2)
Rams - 0 .

 

[RamzFanz]

IMHO, Rams will not be drafting a receiver in the 1st.

The Rams can field a winning team this season and they won't pass on that for future talent.

1) They take too long to develop.
2) They spent their receiver draft capital last draft and spent it well. This season Austin/Bailey/Givens/Kendricks/Cook should be dominant with Bradford, an O line, and Stacy leading the way.
3) We can win starting game one with a devastating pass rush (Quinn/Clowney) and an O line that can open up the run game AND protect Bradford.

I would put drafting a receiver in the 1st round at 100-1 against.

 

[Prime Time]

Lack of separation plus dropping passes by our WR's has been killing our offensive drives, putting more pressure on the O-line leading to more sacks. Originally I was on board for getting Clowney, due to wanting to terrorize opponent's QB's even more than we have been but I'm getting to see the point in drafting Sammy Watkins.

 

[jrry32]

Not sure why you bring up Tight ends when we're discussing the receiver position.

Cards - almost (2) 1,000 yards receivers.. Floyd 1041, Fitzie 954
Chiefs - Charles (693), Donnie Avery (596), Dwayne Bowe (673)
Seattle - Tate (898), Baldwin (778)
Colts - Reggie Wayne (in 7 games) (503), Hilton (1,083)

Rams - Givens (569), Tavon (418), Pettis (399)

You know what I see? it takes 3 receivers combined to crack 1,000 yard season, all of whom which were out produced by the Chiefs receivers in their run dominant/heavy rb focus offense... reggie wayne in less than half a season almost matched givens production - probably would have exceeded it had he played one more game. Donnie Avery, the 3rd option in Chief's passing game, still out produced all Ram receivers.

Thank about this
Jamaal Charles - 7 receiving TD's, 693 yards receiving.
Givens + quick + Pettis = 6 receiving td's

What's one common theme though?

Receivers with more than 600 yards -
Cards - 2
Chiefs - 3
Seattle - 2
Colts - 1 (would have been 2)
Rams - 0 .

The 2012 Rams with a healthy Sam Bradford had THREE WRs with 600+ yards. So...

Also, 596 yards =/= 600 yards.

 

[jrry32]

Lack of separation plus dropping passes by our WR's has been killing our offensive drives, putting more pressure on the O-line leading to more sacks. Originally I was on board for getting Clowney, due to wanting to terrorize opponent's QB's even more than we have been but I'm getting to see the point in drafting Sammy Watkins.

Yea, I don't recall this. In 2013, Sam Bradford had the THIRD quickest time to sack behind Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. Basically, when Bradford was sacked in 2013, it happened extremely quickly relative to the rest of the league. He wasn't taking a bunch of coverage sacks because our WRs couldn't get open.

Dropped passes are an issue. They do kill drives. I agree with you there. Although, I think that'll improve as Tavon was one of the main culprits with Sam and that was, imo, due to him not being ready to play and thinking too much because he didn't drop a pass after Week 5.

Still, we can't be top 3 in the league again in drops. So Cook, Givens and Quick need to be more consistent with their hands. I trust Pettis, Stedman and Tavon but we'll see if they live up to my trust. That all said, rookie WRs tend to drop passes...even ones with sure hands because they're still in the phase were the game hasn't slowed down and they're thinking too much. So drafting Watkins might not immediately fix that problem. But if we do draft him, I hope it does.

 

[Prime Time]

Fair enough but are you saying that our WR's were good at creating separation last season because that's not the impression I came away with? Maybe that was not the prime cause of sacks and hurried throws but would you not agree that was a problem which could be rectified by drafting Watkins?