Philosophical Draft Question

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
FRO

FRO

Legend
Joined
Jun 1, 2013
Messages
5,308
Boudreau and Waufle are two of the better position coaches in the league. They have been known to get the most out of their guys. That being said, does that make you want to pick Clowney, Robinson, or Matthews high, because you know they will get the most out of the guy we pick? Or should we get Watkins early because Boudreau and Waufle could do a better job at developing second and third rounders better than Sherman? Or am I just really bored and coming up with stupid philosophical questions?

With the coaches we have I'm really tempted to sit and pick Clowney. I know the brain trust of Waufle, McGinnis, Williams, and Fisher will know how to get the most out of this guy. And the thought of that is scary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RamzFanz and Dagonet
Like you, I have complete faith in our coaches. They (together with our senior players) will drag every modicum of ability from their charges, so it makes sense to take the player with the most to offer.

Quarterbacks of the NFL: be afraid. Be very afraid.
 
I would Clowney because his physical ability is rare and he can be used all over the field.
Matthews because he is a long term answer at probably the second most important position on offense and starts day 1.
Robinson I wouldn't take in the top 5.
If you look at our division it is brutal. The Rams have to able to compete in the trenches. The coaches are good but I don't draft a certain player because of the coach. To me if Houston foolishly passes on Clowney and we are there at two Fisher will grab him.
 
I just don't think you can go wrong with any of them. I think Watkins can step in and contribute immediately but needs to refine his skills to be a #1 WR (but most top WRs drafted need NFL work). I think Clowney would be a stud and my fears about him have lessened significantly. My issue with him is making an already strong unit stronger but at the risk of neglecting a unit of need. I think Mathews is a plug and play OL and Robinson probably has a higher ceiling but if he took to Boo could be a perennial Pro Bowler. Stay in the top 6 and get one of them!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dagonet
I think that's a false dichotomy. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. All you can do is make a nicer looking sow's ear. You might be able to teach technique but you can't teach physical characteristics, vision, drive, intelligence and so many other factors that go into making a great player. I'm not satisfied with having the Barksdale's of the world if I can get a Pace.
 
  • 7Like
Reactions: Ramrocket, RamsOfCastamere, Mojo Ram and 4 others
Alan said:
I think that's a false dichotomy. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. All you can do is make a nicer looking sow's ear. You might be able to teach technique but you can't teach physical characteristics, vision, drive, intelligence and so many other factors that go into making a great player. I'm not satisfied with having the Barksdale's of the world if I can get a Pace.
Click to expand...
Well put, Alan. I think too many of us fall into the false hope that lesser players can be "coached up" to become dominant players. I know that coaching matters, but so does talent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alan
I makes me think about Clowney. It also makes me question Rams WR coach Sherman. He's old enough to be Ram's wide receivers grandfather.
 
It is still very possible to trade with Cleveland and still get Clowney. Cleveland isn't trading up for anything but a QB or Sammy Watkins. And if both Houston and Cleveland draft QBs, Jax is going to feel compelled to grab the last standout QB in many people's eyes. As far as coaching up a player, yes, to a certain extent. Can you coach up a Martin/Yankey/Filo/Moses/Lewan to compare to a Mathews/Robinson? Good question. I think it could be relatively close but what would Mathews/Robinson become with that same coaching? You probably never close the gap. And our coaching is the fixed value in the equation.
 
I know it's a pipe dream but if we could trade down and still land Robinson (who I think is the better fit given a power run game) and then use the #13 to trade back up to get Watkins that is my preference.

Yes, I know it's like winning the lottery but it could happen :)

The more realistic option would be Watkins and then Lewan but given all the legal stuff with him is he a big risk?
 
I think because we have 4 young receivers in Austin, Bailey, Givens and Quick and health concerns at left tackle, center and right guard and no starting left guard, Robinson or Matthews makes the most sense. However I do love Clowney and Watkins so I wouldn't be upset with either of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dagonet
For the record I love Watkins but Robinson or Matthews is the smart choice. Too many ??? on the OL. But I would rather get anyone of them in a trade down, not at #2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rhinobean
These coaches can't have projects all over the place. That would be spreading them too thin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dagonet
Ramhusker said:
Now that depends on how big the hole is and if it's the type of oar that could plug the hole and/or out paddle the leak.
Click to expand...

It also depends on who's manning that 3rd oar.... ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back