Why are the Rams flirting with a Hooker?

[dieterbrock]

Why get a Gibbs before OL is fixed?

Why are the two mutually exclusive? The pick they would use on Gibbs would do that? Silly stuff

 

[dieterbrock]

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.

If a top 5 player at his position slips to your draft spot in the 2nd round, you have to be prepared to evaluate.

 

[Flatlyner]

Many top 5 players at their position will be there at 36. It comes down to which one they think will impact the team more. Personally, I'm hopeful that isn't a QB or a RB.

 

[Memphis Ram]

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?

What you are missing is team needs don't influence player availability.
Most rookies don't make an immediate impact anyway.
And finally, the 2023 Draft is not just for the 2023 season.

 

[Memphis Ram]

If a top 5 player at his position slips to your draft spot in the 2nd round, you have to be prepared to evaluate.

Exactly. And you don't pass on Aaron Donald because you're already set with Kendall Langford and Michael Brockers. Nor do you pass on Steven Jackson, because Marshall Faulk is still with the team.

 

[Rams43]

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.

That’s a bit if an oversimplification, Merlin.

Your hypothetical Faulk or Kupp example can be played by both sides of this issue. It’s neither fair nor realistic.

First of all, even the so called experts are splitting hairs when evaluating the value of many players that are expected to be there at 36. And we’re talking about perhaps 15 potential players here.

Edge
CB
IOL
TE
WR
RB
backup QB

Depends on the specific team needs, don’t you think?

For example, and strictly for the Rams…

Will McDonald or Gibbs fill a bigger hole and provide the bigger upgrade for this 2023 team? Rams have Akers already for 2 more seasons but 3 nobodies at Edge.

To me it just seems obvious.

BTW, the above position list is in my personal order of Rams needs.

Other opinions will obviously vary. Lol.

 

[Merlin]

That’s a bit if an oversimplification, Merlin.

Dig in if you wish 43. But you're smart enough to know that boycotting certain positions at 36 eliminate potential big payoffs if the right guy from either of those groups slides to you. So that rule type in general is a bad idea and it is as it pertains to both WR and RB.

Also I don't think it's some stretch that Gibbs may be a Kamara or Faulk type in the NFL. Bama's OL was not as dominant as usual, I realized that when I made myself watch their offense to get a look at Young. But Gibbs is so talented that he still impacts the games even if the run game isn't there.

WR almost for sure will be picked over by the time we're up so I doubt it's the high value position but if things fall that way you take advantage.

 

[AvengerRam]

There’s always a balance between need and BPA. Given our current roster, though, I’d lean to the BPA side.

I don’t expect Hooker will be the BPA at No. 36. I think someone will grab him before then.

 

[Rams43]

What you are missing is team needs don't influence player availability.
Most rookies don't make an immediate impact anyway.
And finally, the 2023 Draft is not just for the 2023 season.

Several things, Memphis.

First, you have it backwards. Player availability at 36 comes first, THEN Rams must choose the player that they feel helps them most both immediately and down the road. That’s the whole point.

I can gaurandamnedtee you that a player at 36 could start for Rams in 2023 at Edge, CB, OC, or TE. And quite likely at RB, S, or WR. Our starter roster is THAT depleted right now. A non sequitu.

Finally, it goes without saying that the 2023 draft isn’t just for the 2023 season. But that specious argument applies to all other positions, as well. Another non sequitur.

 

[Rams43]

Dig in if you wish 43. But you're smart enough to know that boycotting certain positions at 36 eliminate potential big payoffs if the right guy from either of those groups slides to you. So that rule type in general is a bad idea and it is as it pertains to both WR and RB.

Also I don't think it's some stretch that Gibbs may be a Kamara or Faulk type in the NFL. Bama's OL was not as dominant as usual, I realized that when I made myself watch their offense to get a look at Young. But Gibbs is so talented that he still impacts the games even if the run game isn't there.

WR almost for sure will be picked over by the time we're up so I doubt it's the high value position but if things fall that way you take advantage.

We’re now talking past each other, Merlin.

Best we agree to disagree?

 

[Rams43]

There’s always a balance between need and BPA. Given our current roster, though, I’d lean to the BPA side.

I don’t expect Hooker will be the BPA at No. 36. I think someone will grab him before then.

Would the phrase ‘best player available at a position of need’ be a reasonable one, Avenger?

IOW, extreme need might tip the scales toward need in hairsplitting evals?

 

[Memphis Ram]

Several things, Memphis.

First, you have it backwards. Player availability at 36 comes first, THEN Rams must choose the player that they feel helps them most both immediately and down the road. That’s the whole point.

I can gaurandamnedtee you that a player at 36 could start for Rams in 2023 at Edge, CB, OC, or TE. And quite likely at RB, S, or WR. Our starter roster is THAT depleted right now. A non sequitu.

Finally, it goes without saying that the 2023 draft isn’t just for the 2023 season. But that specious argument applies to all other positions, as well. Another non sequitur.

No. You have it backwards. The whole point is to select the best player available within reason. That player helps the team. Each draft class is different, and team needs and the highest graded players don't always match up.

The draft is already enough of a crapshoot. So why spend so much money and resources only to potentially select lesser graded players trying to fill needs. You may fill a so-called hole with a body, but you increase your chances of their still being a hole because the player isn't as good.

Brad Holmes said it best about being swayed by needs regarding the draft.

“I just think you can make a lot of mistakes with that,” Holmes said. “I’ve been in regimes in the past that have had a depth chart in the draft room, and I’ve just never been a fan of that.”

Later adding, “When you’re approaching the draft and you’re just looking to fill those question marks, fill those holes, I do think that that can equate to some mistakes.”

It's foolishness. IMO, that's how you end up with Tutu Atwell over an All-Pro Center.

 

[Rams43]

No. You have it backwards. The whole point is to select the best player available within reason. That player helps the team. Each draft class is different, and team needs and the highest graded players don't always match up.

The draft is already enough of a crapshoot. So why spend so much money and resources only to potentially select lesser graded players trying to fill needs. You may fill a so-called hole with a body, but you increase your chances of their still being a hole because the player isn't as good.

Brad Holmes said it best about being swayed by needs regarding the draft.



It's foolishness. IMO, that's how you end up with Tutu Atwell over an All-Pro Center.

Who is to say that a Gibbs is a higher rated player over a given Edge, CB, O lineman, or TE?

The EXPERTS can’t even agree!

The Atwell/ Humphrey example is yet another non sequitur. Snead/McVay ignored all reasonable eval consensus to take Atwell. Ironically, I think McVay (I largely blame him for this fubar) was trying to pursue the very spirit of what you’re advocating, namely going for the ‘elite type’ over the very good and very solid need pick. How did THAT work out?

 

[AvengerRam]

Would the phrase ‘best player available at a position of need’ be a reasonable one, Avenger?

IOW, extreme need might tip the scales toward need in hairsplitting evals?

I think you can factor need into the equation, absolutely.

QB is a unique position, though, as it’s the only position in which there isn’t really a platoon or rotational concept, so “need” is more of an all or nothing concept, at least in the short run.

 

[Memphis Ram]

Who is to say that a Gibbs is a higher rated player over a given Edge, CB, O lineman, or TE?

The EXPERTS can’t even agree!

The Atwell/ Humphrey example is yet another non sequitur. Snead/McVay ignored all reasonable eval consensus to take Atwell. Ironically, I think McVay (I largely blame him for this fubar) was trying to pursue the very spirit of what you’re advocating, namely going for the ‘elite type’ over the very good and very solid need pick. How did THAT work out?

I don't know how the team rates Gibbs. Neither my opinion nor the EXPERTS opinion on him matters in this discussion.

And we should all question McVay's evaluation skills if he thought a WR so tiny could be considered an 'elite type.' If so, he should be banned from the draft room. My guess is he felt the team needed a speed WR and a returner. And voila.

 

[Riverumbbq]

Who is to say that a Gibbs is a higher rated player over a given Edge, CB, O lineman, or TE?

The EXPERTS can’t even agree!

The Atwell/ Humphrey example is yet another non sequitur. Snead/McVay ignored all reasonable eval consensus to take Atwell. Ironically, I think McVay (I largely blame him for this fubar) was trying to pursue the very spirit of what you’re advocating, namely going for the ‘elite type’ over the very good and very solid need pick. How did THAT work out?

LOL.
Ask him how the Bradford over Suh decision worked out for him.

 

[Memphis Ram]

LOL.
Ask him how the Bradford over Suh decision worked out for him.

You lost me on that one.
Did the Rams consider Bradford the BPA on their draft board?
Or did they have a need a QB and refused to pay a DT the kind of money top selections were receiving back then?

 

[Riverumbbq]

You lost me on that one.
Did the Rams consider Bradford the BPA on their draft board?
Or did they have a need a QB and refused to pay a DT the kind of money top selections were receiving back then?

They got what they paid for, a college injury problem who went on to become an overpriced NFL injury risk. You fought tooth & nail for Bradford while Suh went on to have a far, far better career. The fanbase was pretty evenly split which made for some interesting discussions, but few were more vehement than you on Bradford. The Rams had depth problems everywhere, but you and Spag's got your man.

 

[Memphis Ram]

They got what they paid for, a college injury problem who went on to become an overpriced NFL injury risk. You fought tooth & nail for Bradford while Suh went on to have a far, far better career. The fanbase was pretty evenly split which made for some interesting discussions, but few were more vehement than you on Bradford. The Rams had depth problems everywhere, but you and Spag's got your man.

I preferred Gerald McCoy over Suh and the QB over both of them given the importance of position.

But, what does any of that have to do with the conversation being had? That only opinion that matters are in the Rams Organization. They have all the information.

That said, this could show how the focus on need can affect a draft class.

 

[Riverumbbq]

But, what does any of that have to do with the conversation being had? That only opinion that matters are in the Rams Organization. They have all the information.

That said, this could show how the focus on need can affect a draft class.

I was addressing Rams43, you chose to expand on the issue.
I do agree with your 2'nd paragraph.