Recent Forum Topics › Forums › The Rams Huddle › Zone versus Man coverage: Shouldn't the Rams have known about Peters?
- This topic has 7 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 1 month ago by
zn.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 17, 2019 at 9:15 am #106831
Billy_TParticipantObvious caveat: I’m just a fan, looking from the outside in. I have no access to coach tapes, film study, interviews, scouting reports, etc. etc. That said, it seems like the Rams were a bit surprised over time that Peters wasn’t so good in Man coverage, and was at his best in zone, with solid help from safeties. His game was taking chances, jumping routes, interceptions, counting on the back-end guys if he got things wrong on his gambles.
Phillips, apparently, wanted two strong Man corners to free up the pass rushers, especially AD, and that never happened. From my limited perspective, Talib doesn’t like contact, and Peters, again, needs the back-end (zone) help, can’t shut down his side all by himself. It’s not his thing.
Which led to the trade for Ramsey, who, by all indications, can do those things — and has elite (size and) athleticism. As in, he’s actually perfect for what Phillips wants to do, and AD is gonna love him back there. Very few teams have a guy like that, and pretty much no team that I can think of has two . . . though New England comes closest. Obviously, if you can lock down receivers close to the line with just your corners, and you don’t let WRs move between zones to find soft spots, the QB isn’t going to be able to quick-pass his way into driving Donald and company crazy with “almosts.” Think about the Super Bowl and Edelman. With Ramsey covering him from the line of scrimmage on, is Brady going to be as effective as he was? I don’t think so.
Anyway, even though I hate giving up two 1sts and a 4th, I understand why they did it. I think they overpaid, by a ton, but they were basically in a box of their own making. It would have lessened the blow considerably if they could have traded Peters, a 1st and a 4th, and I’m betting they tried and failed to do that. But I “get it.” As far as “value for value,” they were burned in two of the three trades. Did well in the Corbett one. It’s just too bad they couldn’t have worked a trade a year sooner.
Oh, and an all too picky sidenote: Pundits need to stop saying Ramsey is 24. Technically, yeah. But he turns 25 later this month.
:>(
October 17, 2019 at 9:19 am #106832Billy_TParticipantAlso, and this suggestion likely shows my advanced age:
If the Rams can sign Ramsey long term, he strikes me as a perfect candidate to switch to safety down the road. He’s a legit 6’1″, 210, give or take. It used to be when bigger corners slow down a tad, they’d make the move to safety — or try to. He was a 4.4 guy coming out of school, with a freakish vert and broad jump, which generally shows explosion, so, to me, he’s a great candidate for free safety in the future.
When he loses a bit of his quickness, which will probably happen as he approaches 30, the Rams would be smart to think of him as their free safety . . . and actually cross-train him starting now.
October 18, 2019 at 6:35 pm #106893
InvaderRamModeratori thought the same thing billy.
my only guess is they thought they could adapt or maybe they thought they could make him something he’s not which wouldn’t be the first time a coach has thought that.
and i agree ramsey would make a good safety candidate down the road.
they better keep this guy long term or that’s 2 first rounders down the toilet.
October 18, 2019 at 6:44 pm #106895
HramParticipantBilly, I agree with your thoughts except the Adelman piece. From what I am read he is better with the outside wide receivers and not as good with those who operate more in the slot. Rest of your points ring true to me
October 18, 2019 at 7:23 pm #106897InvaderRamModeratori quickly read his draft profile, and he played several positions in college including safety.
so he’d make a good safety prospect down the road i would think.
October 19, 2019 at 11:16 am #106926
znModeratorPeters a perfect fit for Ravens.
Don’t be surprised if Marcus Peters regains his swagger and Pro Bowl form now that he’s been traded to the Baltimore Ravens. The Ravens are the perfect cultural fit for Peters, and his game is ideally suited for coordinator Don “Wink” Martindale’s ultra-aggressive scheme.
I know some observers will roll their eyes at that statement based on Peters’ lowlights during his 19 months with the Los Angeles Rams, but I’m not quite ready to dismiss the player who leads the NFL in interceptions since 2015 (24), despite a handful of poor plays that made the Sunday night loop on TV.
While Peters didn’t deliver to the level most observers associate with a shutdown corner during his stay in L.A., I believe he was always mislabeled as a lockdown defender. Peters is a playmaker who specializes in creating turnovers on the perimeter. He’s at his best when he’s able to play from distance and “clue” the quarterback (make breaks based off the quarterback’s eyes) while also aggressively playing tendencies off the “hash-split” relationship (receivers run certain routes based on their alignment when the ball is placed on a certain hash or in the middle of the field).
That’s why he’s been able to snag so many interceptions while others are simply registering PBUs (pass breakups) on the perimeter. He has eight more interceptions than the next-closest ballhawk since entering the league in 2015 (Reggie Nelson and Darius Slay are tied for second with 16 picks apiece in that span). Peters’ combination of vision, instincts and a gambler’s mentality leads to turnovers, particularly if he is playing behind an aggressive pass rush that forces quarterbacks to get rid of the ball quickly.
That said, Peters’ playing style will also lead him to give up big plays when he guesses incorrectly or is fooled by a double move from a crafty route runner. That’s part of the risk-reward game that defensive coordinators and front office executives must accept when adding the playmaking cornerback to the lineup.
“To me, he’s one of the top corners in the league,” Ravens coach John Harbaugh told reporters a day after the deal was completed, via PennLive.com. “He plays the way we play. … So I think he fits in real well that way and gives us another weapon back there so we can do the things we want to do defensively. And that’s what I’m excited about. We don’t want to be hamstrung. We want to be able to play the way we want to play, and he’s going to help us do that.”
From a personality standpoint, I believe Peters will fit in nicely with the Ravens. This team has always been defined by its defense and the stars on that side of the ball. Defenders are normally a little edgier than their counterparts and they need to be allowed to be themselves while also being held accountable for their actions.
In Baltimore, the team has traditionally thrived with edgy players like Terrell Suggs, Ray Lewis and Ed Reed. Looking at the current roster, fellow defensive backs Earl Thomas and Jimmy Smith certainly have an edge to them that will enable Peters to easily blend into the fabric of the team. The same could be said for Tony Jefferson, although he’ll have to do any mentoring off the field as he recovers from a season-ending knee injury. Moreover, Peters’ edginess won’t be frowned upon by a coaching staff that understands and embraces the alpha personality that’s needed to play defense at a high level.
“We needed a little more edge on that side of the ball,” a Ravens executive told me. “Peters gives us some more saltiness and playmaking in the secondary. … He should fit in well with our guys.”
Peters’ star has dimmed a bit after being traded twice in less than two years, but a move to a franchise that not only embraces his game but welcomes his character could help him rediscover his form as a top-five corner.
October 19, 2019 at 11:48 am #106930Billy_TParticipantLotsa good responses. Thanks, everyone.
Good article, ZN. Makes sense to me. That’s pretty much my assessment too.
If Peters has really good safety help behind him, he can gamble and not cost his team touchdowns. It’s not going to work 100% of time, but logic tells us that the number of losing gambles can be reduced a great deal, via scheme and the right athletes behind him . . . and in front of him, of course.
Peters needs both a strong rush and very athletic, smart safeties behind him. That frees him up to take chances and break on the ball, etc.
For whatever reason, things didn’t come together with the Rams. That said, I don’t think the FO did its due diligence before getting him, and the recent trade seems like a loss for the Rams — to me. I’m fine with a trade. Just not the one they did. Peters should have garnered more, and given all the draft picks they gave up for Ramsey, they should have demanded picks in return . . . or, as already mentioned, made it clear that Peters would count as a #1 in the deal for Ramsey.
They may have tried all of that and failed. Who knows? But, on balance, I’m not happy with “value” they received in return for Peters, and they likely shouldn’t have trade FOR him in the first place.
I hope this is a learning experience for McVay and company. They can’t afford any more of these, in my view.
October 23, 2019 at 12:52 pm #107200znModeratorSnead says they hit the Jaguars up early in the season about Ramsey. Ramsey requested a trade Week 2. My guess is they never had any interest in extending Marcus Peters. But that begs the Q: Why didn't they move him in the offseason? Would've gotten more than unsalted peanuts. https://t.co/xtyWlOlUEW
— Sosa K (@QBsMVP) October 23, 2019
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
