=================================
alyoshamucci

I have to say that last year, I was on the fence about taking an OT. I wanted Sammy Watkins of course, but I was on the fence on whether or not Fisher would consider taking an O lineman in round one since he’d never done it.

But when I look at it now, as I looked at it then, he was NOT taking an O lineman. He was taking a FREAK. G Rob was 330 and ran a 4.9 and had how many reps? Also, Boudreau LOVED him.
He may be the most athletic tackle prospect to come out since Pace and he had the full confidence of our staff.

All of that led to our moving toward him instead of the freakish Sammy Watkins. This year we have another shot at a top WR, and next year likely too. Also it turned out to really matter that we went that direction because Jake went down.

But let’s not forget that he had NEVER done that before, and let’s not forget that G Robinson is an absolute MONSTER.

So, my point? We’re not going O line at 10. I’m going to call it. Scherff is an average athlete, Peat and Flowers are really second round prospects with upside but huge holes in their game … and possibly their attitudes, which is even worse. Are they really that much better than Donovan Smith, or even Jamal Brown for that matter?

So while some may have an O lineman worthy of a pick at ten, would you say that Fisher would take a GUARD at 10? I can’t. I just can’t.

Whether we take a WR, Gurley, or a high end DE I really don’t care. But I am going on record to say that I believe there is ZERO chance they take an average athlete at 10 overall.

Agamemnon wrote:

On all but a few players, I find opinions to vary widely, even among the experts, on the value of the players in this draft. It is going to be a wild ride Thursday.

Yup. Exciting draft.

How would you Mock
the top four, Ag?

w
v
Tampa Bay
Tennessee
Jacksonville
Oakland

Washington
New York Jets
Chicago
Atlanta
New York Giants
St. Louis

I remember many many years the
LA Rams played a cupcake schedule
in the “Mild Mild West”
and they never seemed quite as
battle-hardened as the other teams,
to me.

Then again the GSOT played a cupcake
schedule in 99 and won it all.
So, I dunno.

w
v

Demoff Sure sounded to me like a guy
who is headed for LA.

w
v

Agamemnon wrote:

>I do something like that.
1. Prototype
2. Pro bowl
3. Plus player = near all pro
4. Above average starter
5. Starter
6. Spot filler
7. Roster filler
You have one more than I do

What category would Incognito
be in?

w
v

I see the rams have ten days
to get ready for the game in Seattle.

w
v

Hram wrote:

I think he is probably somewhere in the top 20 or so right tackles in the league. Maybe top 25 but he does know our scheme coaches and players. Good enough to not be a hindrance if the rest of the law line is solid.

I’d give him 4 million a year if I was a billionaire and had that much pocket change and Space.

I dunno what they are thinking about the OLine,
but I am dying to know.

This can be a very dangerous team if they figure it out;
or it could be another .500 team if they dont.
To state the obvious.

I’ve seen a lot of posts lately that argue
they dont need to draft Olinemen in the early rounds
cause they can get solid players in the later rounds.
It will be interesting to see if Snisher follows
that course or if they invest high pick(s)
on young Olinemen.

I’m gettin excited about the draft.

The only thing that bothers me
is other teams get to draft too.
I dont like that part.

w
v

Herzog wrote:

wv wrote:

Zooey wrote:

There is just no such thing as unimportant football information.

I wanna know what happened to the under-inflated-balls story.

Or was it over-inflated balls. I forget.

w
v

It was the patriots, so …naturally it gets swept under the rug

Swept under the rug?

Well they must have been under-inflated then.

How come we havent had any
equipment manager news this year?
Are they keeping the same equipment system
or are they installing a new system
again?

w
v

• This reply was modified 10 years, 11 months ago by wv.
• This reply was modified 10 years, 11 months ago by wv.

zn wrote:

wv wrote:

you can judge an OT
without regard to the Guard next to him.

I don’t do the “guard next to him” argument. It was the entire line.

Ok, but i dunno. I’m just not sure how much the rest
of the line affects a Tackle. Just seemed like he was
getting physically beat too much. But I’m not sure.

Again though — if he’s a good solid Tackle,
why aint they signed him?

w
v

Man. Itz almost like Kroenke doesn’t want St.Louis
fans to buy tickets.

Practicing in Oxnard. Geez.

w
v

Interesting thots.
w
v

=================
Alyoshamucci

This is my first time doing this. I figure I’ll have to give a couple strategies to make sense of things.

What I’m seeing.

1) Unless we are head over heels in love with a specific OG, there is no need to take one until the 3rd or 4th round. There are that many. Like 10-15. And it is likely that we will get quality in the 6th if we decide to wait that long as the average amount of OGs taken in a draft is 13.6 (can’t remember where I saw that stat, but it was pretty cool). A kid like Feliciano could come in and likely start and he may be there in the 6th.

2) The top of the draft has some truly physically gifted kids, and ignoring that to pursue a need would be a serious mistake IMO.

3) The second round could have some truly gifted kids also, but they will need more attention and coaching, so if we feel like we can coach a player up, we will likely wan to take a freak there also.

4) The OTs in this draft are primarily ORTs that are going to need some coaching. One we like may be worth trading up for from the 41 spot if he begins sliding.

5) The demand for the 10 pick vs. the quality of the athlete available is likely going to determine our draft.

6) Using picks next year to move up and snag someone, or trading down for picks next year … both seem to be good ideas.

7) If we like Garrett Reynolds, there are about 3-4 developmental OTs that should be there in the 6th.

8) There is never going to be a spot in this draft where taking a QB makes sense.

So I have two routes.

1) We take the best Athlete at 10, or
2) Someone offers us a TON to move down, where we would take the best of the position of need.

1) Cooper, White, Dupree, Gurley, Parker, Ray. One will be there if not 4. Then in round 2 if another athlete slides (DGB, Perriman) we wait and snag him. If an athlete doesn’t slide we can always trade up as an OT gets close.

2) Pittsburgh slings us a 2 this year and a 3 next year to move up for Dupree/Ray. Then we draft Clemmings or Flowers for the right side. And at 41 we take the best athlete.

Either way we don’t address OG until round 3 or 4.

I think scenario 1 is more likely.

My mock right now as it stands.

1) Gurley
2) Clemmings (possibly in a trade up for a pick next year)
3) Marcus Hardison/Z Smith DE One should be there.
4) Ali Marpet/Reese Dismukes OC One should be there. I was worried a bit about Dismukes being gone until Cann started working at OC.
6) Feliciano OG
7) Damien Wilson ILB (odds are this will be the pick that never changes)

Note: I’d probably take DGB over Clemmings.

Doing the fanspeak mock draft was a real eye opener, as it gives you the option to choose from many big boards. After going through all of them I saw some really interesting patterns, mainly with the OGs.

Chip Kelly is certainly doing things
his way.

w
v

Fisher said. “I think he’s learning to anticipate things, blocking combinations and those things. He’s had a good solid year.”
———————

Seemed like kindof an up and down year to me,
but I’m glad to hear Fisher thinks he was solid.

w
v

The world is one big camera
now.

w
v
“The test of a man or woman’s breeding is how they behave in a quarrel.”
GB Shaw