- Joined
- Sep 7, 2011
- Messages
- 6,454
- Name
- Main Hook
And there is where you get me, but I wouldn't just say Pryor, I'd say, top rated secondary player.Assuming we draft Robinson with our first choice, these two are realistic options at 13.
And there is where you get me, but I wouldn't just say Pryor, I'd say, top rated secondary player.
I'm warming up to Evans at that spot. I think he has prototype #1 ability, but the Rams might think a top guy in the secondary is VBPA. I'd like to take either one a little lower if I could, and I like options for both position in the second round, who I view as starting players.
And there is where you get me, but I wouldn't just say Pryor, I'd say, top rated secondary player.
I'm warming up to Evans at that spot. I think he has prototype #1 ability, but the Rams might think a top guy in the secondary is VBPA. I'd like to take either one a little lower if I could, and I like options for both position in the second round, who I view as starting players.
Could be is the operative word. I know that we are checking out almost every player projected in that range. To me that is not a smokescreen, but a legitimate interest in the secondary in the middle of the first round.So you say Gilbert or the other CB could be the choice. I don't know much about them besides they're pretty close in overall talent but one is more athletic. I'm hoping we get Verner so it makes that choice easy.
I'm not even sure Pryor or HHCD for that matter aren't on the same level as some of the 2nd/3rd round options like Jimmie Ward, Deone Buchanon, and Lamarcus Joyner.
I'm not even sure Pryor or HHCD for that matter aren't on the same level as some of the 2nd/3rd round options like Jimmie Ward, Deone Buchanon, and Lamarcus Joyner.
Quick might be close to Evans as far as measurables go, but ball skills and physicality aren't even close. Quick looks like a fish out of water every time he steps onto the field, he's never been able to make the plays a big WR like Evans is able to make consistently, not even when he was going up against Division II competition. Some guys just don't have the instincts for the position, and Quick, unfortunately, looks like one of those guys, imo.Even if Ward has close to the same ball skills, he isn't near as physical.
Quick is very similiar to Evans, physically. Getting a "big" WR is not a necessity.
I definitely would not go that far on the evaluation of Quick he has had a few plays that show his potential. A couple of end zone plays and most memorable for me in 2012 when he threw the SF db to the ground and scored a TD from about 25 or 30 yards out.Quick might be close to Evans as far as measurable go, but ball skills and physicality aren't even close. Quick looks like a fish out of water every time he steps onto the field, he's never been able to make the plays a big WR like Evans is able to make consistently, not even when he was going up against Division II competition. Some guys just don't have the instincts for the position, and Quick, unfortunately, looks like one of those guys, imo.
Quick might be close to Evans as far as measurables go, but ball skills and physicality aren't even close. Quick looks like a fish out of water every time he steps onto the field, he's never been able to make the plays a big WR like Evans is able to make consistently, not even when he was going up against Division II competition. Some guys just don't have the instincts for the position, and Quick, unfortunately, looks like one of those guys, imo.
I have Evans in my top 10 and Pryor between the last quarter of the first and the top of the second, so I can't really agree with you there.I definitely would not go that far on the evaluation of Quick he has had a few plays that show his potential. A couple of end zone plays and most memorable for me in 2012 when he threw the SF db to the ground and scored a TD from about 25 or 30 yards out.
It would be a very difficult choice between Pryor and Evans. I don't think Evans will be there at 13. I think Pryor is at a position of more need. I think they both played above average in college and against similar levels of competition.
I think Pryor brings more benefit to the team as a whole so I guess he would be my choice
I just really haven't liked what I've seen from Quick, it's night and day when I compare him to someone like Stedman Bailey. Bailey didn't get a lot of targets early in the year, but when he did get in the game, he always seemed completely composed, caught everything that came his way, and showed a lot of toughness for not going down on the first hit and getting the extra YAC. One guy seemed like he belongs there, and the other just doesn't, imo. Maybe I'm not being fair to Quick, but he always disappoints in crucial moments and his movements just seem so awkward to me from how he mistimes his jumps, the way he falls, how he sometimes can't locate the ball in the air, and sometimes doesn't even know what play is being run. I can get over the occasional concentration drop that get most fans up in arms, but some of these flaws are just natural instincts that Quick seems to lack and that can't be taught.Quick has had some really good and really bad moments. Most of all he hasnt had many balls go his way. I remember at one point last year I was racking my brain on why we didn't target him more. Heck we all were. Fact of the matter is Schisher didn't target ANY 1 WR in an obvious way. So I guess it stands to reason we should go OL and defense early because we won't utilize the WR'ing weapons we have.
Only player we target for touches is Zac Stacy...
Honestly it kinda ticks me off.
I have Evans in my top 10 and Pryor between the last quarter of the first and the top of the second, so I can't really agree with you there.
I do view S as more of a need, but I think it would be in our best interest to get a veteran at the position and not another inexperienced player. Fisher recently said in an interview that youth and inexperience at S was what held our defense back the most last year.
I'm not sure which part you don't agree with since I said Evans would probably be gone by 13 and you have him in your top ten. And you view S as more a position of need It sounds like we agree on most of the points I made??? What are you splitting hairs about? Taking someone else at 13 since Evans will be gone and Pryor won't be of value yet?? That was not the premise of the OP.
This is what I disagree with.blackbart said:I think Pryor brings more benefit to the team as a whole so I guess he would be my choice
You disagree that that is what I thinkThis is what I disagree with.