Robinson over Matthews, and why

[RamsOfCastamere]

Both of these guys are great, and I would be thrilled if we get any of them (though I prefer Watkins, but that's another discussion). However, I believe Robinson is a better fit for this team and here is why:

1) We are not looking for a starter for all 16 games. We have Jake Long, and he's going to be the starter when healthy (by Week 1, IMO). If we did not have Long, then yea I want Matthews, but since we have Long, one of the two will have to play OG, which leads to point #2...

2) We are a RUN first team (60/40 or 55/45 run-pass ratio). And as a result, it makes more sense to have the best run blocker at guard. I say guard because both players can play RT, but I don't expect Barksdale to be as good at guard, and since we want this person to eventually take over LT, lining up at LG allows you to play on the same side. Of the following, (1) is best for our scheme-- definitely. Some may say slide Long to RT, but you can't expect someone to learn new technique and be as effective.

1. Long, Robinson, Wells, Saffold, Barksdale
2. Long, Matthews, Wells, Saffold, Barksdale
3. Long, Barksdale/whoever, Wellls, Saffold, Robinson
4. Long, Barksdale/whoever, Wells, Saffold, Matthews

3) We have Boudreau. I see this a lot in reference to young talent: "Boudreau will coach him up." If he can coach someone raw into a solid player, then why can't he coach someone as athletically talented as Robinson into an elite lineman? They are going to play guard, so a full year or so before taking over LT is enough time for Robinson to refine his game. If Long isn't ready or hurt, Robinson can take over until healthy-- Saffold if he flat-out sucks, which I don't think will be the case. Unless Long is out for the whole year, but you should not draft a guy as a contingency for something as fortuitous as that.

Summary: Matthews would be best if we need a Day 1 starter at LT, but we are not looking for that. Robinson is best for our run game, and a year of coaching and experience should be enough for him to take over in the future.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Both of these guys are great, and I would be thrilled if we get any of them (though I prefer Watkins, but that's another discussion). However, I believe Robinson is a better fit for this team and here is why:

1) We are not looking for a starter for all 16 games. We have Jake Long, and he's going to be the starter when healthy (by Week 1, IMO). If we did not have Long, then yea I want Matthews, but since we have Long, one of the two will have to play OG, which leads to point #2...

2) We are a RUN first team (60/40 or 55/45 run-pass ratio). And as a result, it makes more sense to have the best run blocker at guard. I say guard because both players can play RT, but I don't expect Barksdale to be as good at guard, and since we want this person to eventually take over LT, lining up at LG allows you to play on the same side. Of the following, (1) is best for our scheme-- definitely. Some may say slide Long to RT, but you can't expect someone to learn new technique and be as effective.

1. Long, Robinson, Wells, Saffold, Barksdale
2. Long, Matthews, Wells, Saffold, Barksdale
3. Long, Barksdale/whoever, Wellls, Saffold, Robinson
4. Long, Barksdale/whoever, Wells, Saffold, Matthews

3) We have Boudreau. I see this a lot in reference to young talent: "Boudreau will coach him up." If he can coach someone raw into a solid player, then why can't he coach someone as athletically talented as Robinson into an elite lineman? They are going to play guard, so a full year or so before taking over LT is enough time for Robinson to refine his game. If Long isn't ready or hurt, Robinson can take over until healthy-- Saffold if he flat-out sucks, which I don't think will be the case. Unless Long is out for the whole year, but you should not draft a guy as a contingency for something as fortuitous as that.

Summary: Matthews would be best if we need a Day 1 starter at LT, but we are not looking for that. Robinson is best for our run game, and a year of coaching and experience should be enough for him to take over in the future.

Agree 99.9%
I'm not a big fan of drafting Watkins in the top 5. As for the rest of your takes i'm right there with ya.

 

[jjab360]

Yes on all accounts.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Long, Robinson, Wells, Saffold, Barksdale

Just the thought of this OLine manhandling our division rivals' DLines off the line of scrimmage for 5 yards/rush gives me a hard on.

 

[PowayRamFan]

Agree with everything here.

 

[Barrison]

Honestly if Watkins goes before the 2nd OL that's my next best dream scenario. Take both OLers with our picks and make an unstoppable line in Long-Saffold-Wells/Jones-Robinson-Matthews and Barksdale as our swing tackle.

 

[laramsoriginal]

I'm fine with Robinson or Mathews

 

[jrry32]

Both of these guys are great, and I would be thrilled if we get any of them (though I prefer Watkins, but that's another discussion). However, I believe Robinson is a better fit for this team and here is why:

1) We are not looking for a starter for all 16 games. We have Jake Long, and he's going to be the starter when healthy (by Week 1, IMO). If we did not have Long, then yea I want Matthews, but since we have Long, one of the two will have to play OG, which leads to point #2...

2) We are a RUN first team (60/40 or 55/45 run-pass ratio). And as a result, it makes more sense to have the best run blocker at guard. I say guard because both players can play RT, but I don't expect Barksdale to be as good at guard, and since we want this person to eventually take over LT, lining up at LG allows you to play on the same side. Of the following, (1) is best for our scheme-- definitely. Some may say slide Long to RT, but you can't expect someone to learn new technique and be as effective.

1. Long, Robinson, Wells, Saffold, Barksdale
2. Long, Matthews, Wells, Saffold, Barksdale
3. Long, Barksdale/whoever, Wellls, Saffold, Robinson
4. Long, Barksdale/whoever, Wells, Saffold, Matthews

3) We have Boudreau. I see this a lot in reference to young talent: "Boudreau will coach him up." If he can coach someone raw into a solid player, then why can't he coach someone as athletically talented as Robinson into an elite lineman? They are going to play guard, so a full year or so before taking over LT is enough time for Robinson to refine his game. If Long isn't ready or hurt, Robinson can take over until healthy-- Saffold if he flat-out sucks, which I don't think will be the case. Unless Long is out for the whole year, but you should not draft a guy as a contingency for something as fortuitous as that.

Summary: Matthews would be best if we need a Day 1 starter at LT, but we are not looking for that. Robinson is best for our run game, and a year of coaching and experience should be enough for him to take over in the future.

1) I would hope we are...maybe not at LT but they need to be ready to start all 16 games somewhere on the OL.
2) Yea, I don't believe this. I'll call BS. At best, we'll be around 50/50 in run-pass ratio. IMO, it'll likely be around 54-46 pass to run. What we did with a limited QB like Clemens won't be what we do with Bradford.
3) We do have Boudreau but you can't just assume it's automatic that the guy will be coached up. Sometimes, a guy just doesn't have the ability to take what he learned and put it to use on the field even with a great coach. Some guys just don't care to.

IMO, even at OG, Matthews is a head and shoulders better pass protector at the moment...and is still an effective run blocker. I still prefer him. We have two blue chip prospects staring at us in the face, I can understand why someone might want upside. But me? I'll take the guy who both has a high ceiling and is a safe, polished, pro ready player.

 

[Mojo Ram]

1) I would hope we are...maybe not at LT but they need to be ready to start all 16 games somewhere on the OL.
2) Yea, I don't believe this. I'll call BS. At best, we'll be around 50/50 in run-pass ratio. IMO, it'll likely be around 54-46 pass to run. What we did with a limited QB like Clemens won't be what we do with Bradford.
3) We do have Boudreau but you can't just assume it's automatic that the guy will be coached up. Sometimes, a guy just doesn't have the ability to take what he learned and put it to use on the field even with a great coach. Some guys just don't care to.

IMO, even at OG, Matthews is a head and shoulders better pass protector at the moment...and is still an effective run blocker. I still prefer him. We have two blue chip prospects staring at us in the face, I can understand why someone might want upside. But me? I'll take the guy who both has a high ceiling and is a safe, polished, pro ready player.

"Yeah but...." j.k.
I think there's every indication that we'll be a run-heavy offense this season. When has a Jeff Fisher team ever not been? (Besides early last season before he hit the "reset" button i mean).

 

[jrry32]

"Yeah but...." j.k.
I think there's every indication that we'll be a run-heavy offense this season. When has a Jeff Fisher team ever not been? (Besides early last season before he hit the "reset" button i mean).

Jeff Fisher
2013 Rams - 56.0% Pass to 44.0% Run
2012 Rams - 59.1% Pass to 40.9% Run
2010 Titans - 55.2% Pass to 44.8% Run
2009 Titans - 49.6% Pass to 50.4% Run
2008 Titans - 47.8% Pass to 52.2% Run

Over the 3 game period(Carolina, Houston and Jacksonville) after we switched our offense from the ineffective spread to the traditional power I with Bradford, our pass to run ratio was 52.3% Pass to 47.7% Run.

So yea, I have a hard time believing we're going to be any worse than a 50-50 split. And I think it's more likely we'll be in the 53-55% range in terms of passing plays.

Interestingly enough, as you see over those last 5 years, the passing percentages trended up before peaking in 2012 with the Rams.

 

[iced]

"Yeah but...." j.k.
I think there's every indication that we'll be a run-heavy offense this season. When has a Jeff Fisher team ever not been? (Besides early last season before he hit the "reset" button i mean).

Where do people keep coming up with stuff?

This isn't even Remotely true - AFTER the Reset... Even in blow outs, the Rams still passed more than ran it until it was time to milk clock...

The closest the Rams came to a balanced run/pass ratio was against the texans - and even with a 3 possession lead, they still came out and threw it.

 

[NJRamsFan]

Im too drunk for this

 

[Rams and Gators]

Meh, I'm happy with either.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Jeff Fisher
2013 Rams - 56.0% Pass to 44.0% Run
2012 Rams - 59.1% Pass to 40.9% Run
2010 Titans - 55.2% Pass to 44.8% Run
2009 Titans - 49.6% Pass to 50.4% Run
2008 Titans - 47.8% Pass to 52.2% Run

Over the 3 game period(Carolina, Houston and Jacksonville) after we switched our offense from the ineffective spread to the traditional power I with Bradford, our pass to run ratio was 52.3% Pass to 47.7% Run.

So yea, I have a hard time believing we're going to be any worse than a 50-50 split. And I think it's more likely we'll be in the 53-55% range in terms of passing plays.

Interestingly enough, as you see over those last 5 years, the passing percentages trended up before peaking in 2012 with the Rams.

Those are very balanced numbers,i'm surprised. I wonder if those numbers were as balanced when he had McNair/E.George.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Where do people keep coming up with stuff?

This isn't even Remotely true - AFTER the Reset... Even in blow outs, the Rams still passed more than ran it until it was time to milk clock...

The closest the Rams came to a balanced run/pass ratio was against the texans - and even with a 3 possession lead, they still came out and threw it.

Fisher has been coaching a long time dude. I'm too lazy to look up the numbers pre 2008 like Jrry did...maybe you've got the time? Fisher likes to run the ball. Don't act like it ain't so.

 

[iced]

Fisher has been coaching a long time dude. I'm too lazy to look up the numbers pre 2008 like Jrry did...maybe you've got the time? Fisher likes to run the ball. Don't act like it ain't so.

I've already looked at the numbers - from last season, w/ bradford as qb, and commented on this multiple times.

They changed the offensive scheme because of the QB change...can't run a passing offense with an inaccurate quarterback.

Stacy averaged 16 carries a game with Bradford as QB, which would be good for middle of the pack... the first 3 games with Clemens he averaged 22'ish or somethin'.

 

[Mojo Ram]

I've already looked at the numbers - from last season, w/ bradford as qb, and commented on this multiple times.

They changed the offensive scheme because of the QB change...can't run a passing offense with an inaccurate quarterback.

Stacy averaged 16 carries a game with Bradford as QB, which would be good for middle of the pack... the first 3 games with Clemens he averaged 22'ish or somethin'.

Somewhere along the line of conversation you started debating solely on last seasons numbers.

 

[Mojo Ram]

Im too drunk for this

Are you drinking the spiked kool-aid?

 

[iced]

Somewhere along the line of conversation you started debating solely on last seasons numbers.

Last season's numbers are more indicative of the future than Fisher's past 5 years given that:
-Different teams with different personnel (like quarterbacks for example)
-Schotty calls the plays, not Fisher

You're also expecting the Rams to run the Clemens offense when Bradford is back at QB - which they haven't. People cited the "philosophy change" , but when you actually look at the offense after said change, its not the picture people are trying to paint. They continued to throw more than pass, even in lop sided game situations...

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I go with the best Pass Protector.

Pass protection is the Exact reason why OLTs are so coveted in the draft. Protecting the QBs blindside is their primary task. I have seen zero evidence that Robinson can be even a good OT when it comes to pass protection. The little I have seen from him in that regard actually looked bad.

I don't buy the media hype that Robinson is ahead of Jake Matthews on the big boards. We see this stuff every year only find to out that it was just media driven hype.

Remember this. Draft talkers in the news Love Upside. If it comes to fruition then they beat their chests about being right. If it doesn't then nobody remembers. GMs like job security and most dont want to gamble on upside over an already good prospect when they are spending a very valuable pick and hoping to get their team into the playoffs.