Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Rams Huddle › Miklasz: Rams still too short of talent
- This topic has 3 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 8 months ago by wv.
-
AuthorPosts
-
March 4, 2015 at 5:54 pm #19453znModerator
Bernie: Rams still too short of talentBy Bernie Miklasz
Greetings. One of my favorite and essential football sites, Pro Football Focus, is out with its annual review of the Rams’ personnel.
Not that anyone should be surprised — after all the team went 6-10 last season — but according to PFF the Rams are loaded with “average” starters and key backups.
Moreover, the Rams have more starters and key backups in the “below-average” or “poor” starters categories (combined) than they do at the “elite,” “very good” and “good” categories combined.
Of course, this is only PFF’s assessment. (Click here to see the chart.) The Rams internally may have different (and better) grades on their players. The same could be said of other independent evaluators — as is always the instance in subjective analyses.
As much as I respect the crew at Pro Football Focus for their excellent and diligent work, I don’t agree with all of their opinions. Two quickie examples: I think defensive end Robert Quinn is an elite player — not a “very good” player. I don’t see how QB Sam Bradford can receive an “average” grade when he’s missed the last 25 regular-season games. Bradford hasn’t played in a real game since Oct. 20 of the 2013 season. So how do we know?
Let’s take a look at the Pro Football Focus breakdown of Rams’ personnel in each category. And I won’t relay the names of individual players — and there are 21 of them — on PFF’s “unknown” list. They haven’t played enough to warrant a legit grade from PFF. Also, PFF did not put grades on players that are eligible for unrestricted free agency such as offensive tackle Joe Barksdale. (And I wish they would have, with the notation by each player that is up for UFA.)
Anyway…
Elite: Defensive tackle Aaron Donald, Punter Johnny Hekker.
Very Good: Defensive end Robert Quinn, long snapper Jake McQuade.
Good: Defensive end Chris Long, DE William Hayes, offensive tackle Jake Long.
Average (Offense): quarterback Sam Bradford, running back Tre Mason, tight end Cory Harkey, tight end Jared Cook, wide receiver Stedman Bailey, WR Brian Quick, offensive lineman Rodger Saffold, running back Benny Cunningham, running back Zac Stacy, center Tim Barnes. Also, kicker Greg Zuerlein.
Average (Defense): Defensive tackle Michael Brockers, middle linebacker James Laurinaitis, cornerback E.J. Gaines, cornerback Janoris Jenkins, cornerback Trumaine Johnson, safety T.J. McDonald, safety Rodney McLeod.
Below Average (Offense): wide receiver Tavon Austin, wide receiver Chris Givens.
Below Average (Defense): outside linebacker Alec Ogletree, outside linebacker Jo-Lonn Dunbar, safety Mark Barron, defensive end Eugene Sims.
Poor: Offensive tackle Greg Robinson, center Scott Wells.
According to PFF the Rams have seven players listed as elite, very good, or good. But they have many more, 28, listed as average, below average or poor. And that’s disappointing.
OK, some comments from me:
• What stings about this from a Rams/STL standpoint is the shortage of above-average to elite players considering the abundance of premium draft picks possessed by GM Les Snead and head coach Jeff Fisher in their three drafts in charge. Between 2012 and 2014 the Rams made five first-round picks, four second-round picks, and four third-round picks.
• In the NFL, only Minnesota had more first-rounders (7) over the past three drafts. But among NFL teams the Rams drafted the most players in the first two rounds (9) and first three rounds (13.)
• Nearly half of the Rams’ 28 selections — 13 — over the past three drafts were made in the first three rounds.
• The five first-rounders were Brockers, Ogletree, Austin, Robinson and Donald. Of the five, only Donald is rated above average. And three — Ogletree, Austin and Robinson — are rated below average or worse. That could change for the better as the players gain experience, but for now that’s really, really bad.
• Of the 13 Rams chosen in the first three rounds, all are classified as no better than average except for Donald.
• Not that anyone should wonder why the Rams labor to score points, but just in case … there’s only one “good” category player (Jake Long) on the Rams offense. And even that’s debatable. The others are average or lower.
• PFF noted that Greg Robinson — the No. 2 overall draft pick in 2014 — was “solid” at left guard but struggled after he was shifted to left tackle. And I think we’d all agree that Robinson will improve. That said, it’s never encouraging to see the No. 2 overall pick in the “poor” category, even as a rookie.
• So why is Alec Ogletree rated “below average” here? Let’s go to PFF’s explanation: “We had Ogletree as below average last year and plenty of people disagreed and I suspect that might be the case again this year. He struggles too much in coverage, though, and for as much as he makes plenty of tackles, he missed 20 this year, the second year in a row he has been in the bottom three for missed tackle amongst 4-3 outside linebackers.”
You can quibble over these PFF rankings _ or throw them out completely. It doesn’t matter to me. But if you put much stock in these independent Pro Football Focus evaluations, then you’d have to conclude that Snead-Fisher have missed a chance to fully exploit the bonanza of draft picks they had at their disposal over the past three years. There’s no doubt that Snead-Fisher have upgraded the Rams roster. They just didn’t improve it as much as they should have.
Thanks for reading …
March 4, 2015 at 6:07 pm #19454wvParticipantQuinn is elite, not ‘very good.’
Tre Mason is good, not ‘average.
Corey Harkey is good and inspirational, not ‘average’
TJ McDonald is good, not average.
Ogletree is ‘good and sometimes outstanding’, not below average.
Mark Barron is ‘good-in-this-scheme’, not ‘below average’
Eugene Sims is a ‘good back-up’, not ‘below average’Greg Robinson was a ‘confused rookie’; he was not ‘poor.’
Saffold, and Bradford are ‘good-when-they-are-healthy’
Tavon is ‘sui generis’
Just my opinion
The team has talent to be a ten-win team. If Bradford
had stayed healthy, and the Oline had stayed healthy,
they could have been pushing nine or even ten wins.Its not an elite team by any means — its not in Seattle/New England territory,
but the nine or ten win level? Sure.w
v- This reply was modified 9 years, 8 months ago by wv.
March 5, 2015 at 7:03 pm #19507rflParticipantHmmmmmmmmmm.
I think I agree with the sentiment expressed in the headline.
But I disagree with the approach. Granted–it isn’t Bernie’s approach–he is reporting on PFF and is skeptical on some levels.
I think that it’s a mistake to look at the roster, player by player, and add up the scores to see if the talent level is high. There are too many variables at play. 1 example. Did Barksdale regress? Was he exposed as a poor player when playing next to a stiff? Or was his game distorted downwards playing next to a stiff? Playing on a sound OL, would he be likely to be at least average? I think that’s a damn hard question to answer.
So, to me, it isn’t really about individual players. And I think it’s fair to at least IMAGINE that a number of guys would look better under better circumstances. One more example. I think JJ looks bad playing back, off the WRs. His player personality thrives when he is playing aggressively, in the WR’s pocket. Playing off, he goes passive and is actually encouraged to gamble, hoping to make something happen. In a more aggressive scheme, I would bet he’d make fewer blunders and more plays. But that’s just me.
But this does not lead me to a generally optimistic assessment of the roster’s talent level. I think the headline is correct. The roster remains “short of talent.” But I am thinking of units, not individuals. And to me, the problem is that we still have major problems at key units.
No roster can claim to be solid with the mess we have on the OL. We have 1 proven, solid vet, and Saffold gets hurt a lot. Robbie will PROBABLY be OK, but he is our LOT and he hasn’t done it yet. We have another working man’s tackle, but we don’t know if Barksdale will sign with us. So, even with the 3 guys we might be optimistic about, we have serious question marks.
That leaves 2 key positions with no decent answer on the roster. And it leaves a bunch of back ups who have shown us very little. AND, we have a 10 year history of erratic, often horrendous OL play. Sure, a lot of that is due to injury. Which makes our reliance on Saffold even more questionable. And we have ALSO run a lot of lousy OL out there.
WV is right. Without a solid OL, we ain’t going anywhere this year. But we are AT LEAST 2 significant moves away from having a solid OL. After 3 years of roster building, with draft picks and 2 major FA signings, this ain’t good. You can’t claim to have a solid roster with such a crucial unit this far off track.
Then there is QB. What can I say? We have a very good starter who hasn’t played in nearly 2 years and whose knees are highly suspect. We don’t have ANYONE else on the roster, with the 2 guys from last year unsigned and unimpressive. Apparently, the FA market is piss poor, and the draft promises no better than a developmental project. This is the freaking QB we are talking about. With no real Plan B after a vet FA who can’t be trusted to remain healthy.
On offense, that leaves TE and RB, where we are very good (I believe that Tre M behind a quality OL would be in the Pro Bowl) and WR, where we are improved … but not proven to be even average. Maybe, MAYBE if we solidfy the OL and Bradford stays healthy, the O will come together. Maybe not. And what are the odds, really, of Sam remaining healthy the OL being solid?
On the other, the D is really good, right? Well, the DL is unquestionably good and the DBs have stepped up. But how far? And LB? I dunno? How much is talent limits? How much is scheme? Who knows?
I think we CAN say that, apart from Aaron, Robert, Brockers, and, perhaps, McDonald, we cannot really say we are overflowing with talent. There’s promise there, indeed. And limits and question marks … and who knows?
We’re pretty good on STs. They can make a difference, but a limited one. And Legatron has proven to be suspect in the clutch.
All in all, I think it IS justifiable to say what Bernie said. Our talent is not unquestionably enough to lift us over the hump. After using a lot of draft picks. It is better, not bad, but not enough in itself to get us anywhere. And there is a 3-4 man anchor dragging us down in the OL.
Even without worrying about the lame duck year, it actually may STILL be at least a year of rebuilding early to expect a break through. Year 4 may still be too soon.
Think about that. Or, don’t, if you don’t fancy a really depressing mindset.
By virtue of the absurd ...
March 5, 2015 at 7:13 pm #19508wvParticipantWell, lets see how the offseason unfolds, rfl.
Lets see what they do about the Oline.I think i remember some teams that looked
pretty bad all around, and then they fixed
their Olines in One Year, and they looked
like totally different teams. Giants, and
Arizona come to mind.I think ive become the “Old Hacker” of this
board (wv hacker?)
But damn, the Oline is the engine. Everything —
i mean everything starts with the OLine.Fixing the Oline gets them to ten and six, i think.
Then, in year FIVE, maybe they learn how to stop the run 🙂
w
v -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.