Why are the Rams flirting with a Hooker?

[den-the-coach]

I don't think adding Hooker would be bad. I'd like to see him on our depth chart but not for a second round pick. Use that 4th rounder you get in a trade down for the backup QB, or the 5th rounder. He'll be off the board by then though.

I think if you can trade down in the 2nd round, pick up a 4th and then draft Hooker I would be all for it. The Rams need to address the most important position in the NFL, it is either now or 2024.

For example trade with the Bears from 36 to 61, draft Hooker and pick up a 4th round pick even if you throw in a 5th to even out the points.

 

[Malibu]

Hooker is expected to potentially drop into the second half of the first round. I have long felt that the Rams should approach Holmes offering him a third round this year and 2 first round picks (24 &25) for their #18 pick if a targeted QB drops that far. Hooker is a one or two year developmental prospect which is why he might drop. It would be a mistake to force him to be a first year starter. As such, he would be a fit in terms of the Rams expecting Stafford to retire after 2024 or 2025 seasons if he lasts that long. They could be looking at a two year span to develop Hooker who is not without flaws.

What makes him a fit for McVay's offense is his arm & deep accuracy. That is a must for Sean's offense. Hooker is looked upon as being a high character guy. As a first round pick even if he is a backup for 2 years they still control his rights for 3 more. Tune is more pro-ready, but Hooker has a higher ceiling. Would they trade up for Tune? They might if his workout impressed him, especially with his deep throws, and if he maintains his accuracy on those throws.

McKee is the most likey QB to drop to them at 36 and he definitely had the arm and accuracy for McVay's offense. More than that McKee has experience in reading defenses lacking in both Hooker and Tune. I've said it before when I said McKee is probably the biggest QB sleeper in this draft.

Bottom line is that I wouldn't be disappointed in any of the three.

Are you seriously high? He is projected to be the 5th QB taken. Like another poster said he is 26 and had a bad ACL tear. You don't trade that draft capital for a player that old with no elite pedigree in the NFL.

 

[snackdaddy]

I'd be shocked if they took a quarterback with their first pick. They don't have a backup so I would think they will draft one. But I don't see a backup being picked that early.

 

[Psycho_X]

I wouldn't trade up for him but would be ok with grabbing a QB they view as "the guy" in a year or two if he is there at a pick we have. Maybe a small trade up if a guy they love gets close to them and they want to make sure they get him.

 

[Neil039]

Picking a QB with their first 3 picks seems like a definite way to leave plug and play talent on the board that can produce in 2023 and beyond. There will be camp cuts and FAs who they can bring in at QB.

If 2023 is going to be such a crap show, use the high end draft capital next draft to get their future QB. IMO Snead will likely not draft the next starting QB for the Rams, he will trade for that QB.

 

[Dodgersrf]

A QB with our 1st pick wouldn't surprise me.
We're going to need 2 anyway.

Life without Stafford, has to be on McVays mind and finding good QBs isn't an easy process, as we all know.
We may have to draft a few before we find one.

 

[thirteen28]

Why are they flirting with a Hooker? Because Pimp-Daddy McVay is gonna get that Hooker's assets a-humpin' real good and he'll take over for Stafford and make the NFC West his bitch, that's why.

 

[Rams43]

For me, there are 3 positions Rams should NOT draft on Day 2.

They are the following and I’m getting nervous while reading articles and posts recommending that very thing:

RB
QB
WR

Why get a Gibbs before OL is fixed? Not to mention sacrificing the precious opportunity to acquire a quality player at any of several positions of clear and present need? Seems like a cart-before-the-horse thing to me.

Why get a backup QB this year that’s never gonna see the field barring a serious Stafford injury, in which case we’re screwed anyway? Better QB’s will be available in the 2024 draft where Rams will have more ammo for a trade up. Wasted premium pick.

Yeah, AR is gone. So what? Rams still have a decent WR room, this WR class is relatively weak whereas 2024 is reportedly gonna be better, and we have at least 6 screaming needs that should have higher priority than WR for this year. This is kinda like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, strategy wise, imo. For example, a good TE could help Stafford more than a Day 2 WR in this O, I think.

Or, what am I missing?

 

[Merlin]

I think if you can trade down in the 2nd round, pick up a 4th and then draft Hooker I would be all for it. The Rams need to address the most important position in the NFL, it is either now or 2024.

For example trade with the Bears from 36 to 61, draft Hooker and pick up a 4th round pick even if you throw in a 5th to even out the points.

I would rather reach for Hall or whoever else they like later. Hall, Tune, Haener, all those guys are probably gonna be backups but that's ok as it is the need. And then there is that chance one of them is more than that. So pick one and use the high pick for an impact player who helps us quickly.

 

[Flatlyner]

Hooker is expected to potentially drop into the second half of the first round. I have long felt that the Rams should approach Holmes offering him a third round this year and 2 first round picks (24 &25) for their #18 pick if a targeted QB drops that far. Hooker is a one or two year developmental prospect which is why he might drop. It would be a mistake to force him to be a first year starter. As such, he would be a fit in terms of the Rams expecting Stafford to retire after 2024 or 2025 seasons if he lasts that long. They could be looking at a two year span to develop Hooker who is not without flaws.

What makes him a fit for McVay's offense is his arm & deep accuracy. That is a must for Sean's offense. Hooker is looked upon as being a high character guy. As a first round pick even if he is a backup for 2 years they still control his rights for 3 more. Tune is more pro-ready, but Hooker has a higher ceiling. Would they trade up for Tune? They might if his workout impressed him, especially with his deep throws, and if he maintains his accuracy on those throws.

McKee is the most likey QB to drop to them at 36 and he definitely had the arm and accuracy for McVay's offense. More than that McKee has experience in reading defenses lacking in both Hooker and Tune. I've said it before when I said McKee is probably the biggest QB sleeper in this draft.

Bottom line is that I wouldn't be disappointed in any of the three.

Dude, if we traded to 18 while giving away our next TWO years 1st rounders for an older currently injured QB who potentially could fall to where we are actually picking, we are finished. So is Snead.

 

[Flatlyner]

I would rather reach for Hall or whoever else they like later. Hall, Tune, Haener, all those guys are probably gonna be backups but that's ok as it is the need. And then there is that chance one of them is more than that. So pick one and use the high pick for an impact player who helps us quickly.

Realistically, they could have similar or as good of careers as Hooker. We simply have no idea what Hooker will be in the NFL, even moreso then most prospects. I'd much rather risk that level of draft capital on one of them, rather then use our best asset for a guy who, hopefully, will be sitting on the bench the next 2-3 years.

 

[PARAM]

I'd be shocked if they took a quarterback with their first pick. They don't have a backup so I would think they will draft one. But I don't see a backup being picked that early.

For me, the only way that makes sense is if they trade up to get one of the top 4. I don't think that's gonna happen.

 

[Merlin]

Or, what am I missing?

QB agreed because it is a futures pick. We have a QB in place let's put pieces around him.

But RB or WR could be big time difference makers with instant impact for us. So your rule of not picking them is rooted in poor logic. It is about the player in that regard, and the clear upgrades need to be in play if they fall to 36.

 

[Flatlyner]

For me, the only way that makes sense is if they trade up to get one of the top 4. I don't think that's gonna happen.

Hell, I'd even limit it to one of the top 3; Young (0% chance), Stroud (similarly low), Richardson (similarly low). Richardson would be a great but impossible get in my eyes.

 

[Rams43]

QB agreed because it is a futures pick. We have a QB in place let's put pieces around him.

But RB or WR could be big time difference makers with instant impact for us. So your rule of not picking them is rooted in poor logic. It is about the player in that regard, and the clear upgrades need to be in play if they fall to 36.

From my view at 10,000 feet I simply see more bang opportunities for the buck on Day 2 than QB, RB (ANY RB), or WR.

Edge
CB
OC

All have the necessary value where we would pick and heaven knows the need is greater at all 3.

No brainer for me. Sorry.

 

[WestCoastRam]

For me, there are 3 positions Rams should NOT draft on Day 2.

They are the following and I’m getting nervous while reading articles and posts recommending that very thing:

RB
QB
WR

Why get a Gibbs before OL is fixed? Not to mention sacrificing the precious opportunity to acquire a quality player at any of several positions of clear and present need? Seems like a cart-before-the-horse thing to me.

Why get a backup QB this year that’s never gonna see the field barring a serious Stafford injury, in which case we’re screwed anyway? Better QB’s will be available in the 2024 draft where Rams will have more ammo for a trade up. Wasted premium pick.

Yeah, AR is gone. So what? Rams still have a decent WR room, this WR class is relatively weak whereas 2024 is reportedly gonna be better, and we have at least 6 screaming needs that should have higher priority than WR for this year. This is kinda like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, strategy wise, imo. For example, a good TE could help Stafford more than a Day 2 WR in this O, I think.

Or, what am I missing?

Well... we do need a backup QB, we literally don't have one. Now where they grab one is the question. I'm not in favor of using anything before the 4th round on one in this years draft. As far as WR and RB, Rams are looking for pass catchers, I'd be fine with a WR or RB (good pass catcher) high but I'd prefer a top edge. Too your point though, there are some great pass catchers at TE and our need is more "screaming" there so my guess is that we'll most likely grab a pass catcher from the TE group.

 

[El Chapo Jr]

I think the Rams are simply showing interest to get other teams to maybe pick him earlier so the real players they want fall further in the draft. Smart to play bluffs when you pick later in the draft. I doubt we pick Hooker when we have some many hoes to fill in the draft lol

 

[AvengerRam]

I think I’d describe it this way…

Assuming the Rams are going to draft a QB, are they drafting a backup or a backup/heir apparent to Stafford?

I’ve been presuming it’s the former, but the flirtation with Hooker suggests it could be the latter.

 

[Allen2McVay]

… I doubt we pick Hooker when we have some many hoes to fill in the draft lol

You and @AvengerRam have a twisted, childish, sophomoric sense of humor.

I love you guys.

 

[Merlin]

No brainer for me. Sorry

What you are saying is "ignore these positions because we have bigger needs elsewhere" but the draft offers value in unforeseen ways sometimes. If those players you ignore end up being Faulk or Kupp you are missing opportunities to dramatically improve your roster.