| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
iRaMs
Joined: 05 May 2010
Posts: 2586
Location: Teletran 1
|
 Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 11:35 am Post subject: iRaMs "Do you even Mock?" |
 |
|
|
Free Agents
Chris Ivory
Jared Cook
ReSign
William Hayes
Darian Stewart
Jermelle Cudjo
Danny Amendola
Robert Turner
Cuts/Let Go
Quintin Mikell
Steven Jackson
Brandon Gibson
Craig Dahl
Steve Smith
DRAFT
1. Lane Johnson OT Oklahoma
1. Terrance Williams WR Baylor
2. D.J. Swearinger S South Carolina
3. Stedman Bailey WR West Virginia
4. Everette Dawkins DT FSU
5. Nico Johnson OLB Alabama
6. Micah Hyde CB/S Iowa
7. Zach Line SMU
Now for the explanations, I really think that Steven will test free agency and end up signing with a contender. I do not think we will bring back Gibson or anyone I have us cutting.
Free agents I kept it small because I believe that we won't be that active in it. However I could be wrong, now with bringing in Ivory I love the way he plays football. He just loves to hit people and is an underrated runner. Jared Cook just has way too much potential to pass up on. Him paired with Kendricks and we have a very good # 1 and 2 TE's.
The draft. Some may question the lack of me selecting a guard, but I think Warmack will be gone before our pick and that Rok is more than capable of being our LG(plus we still have Brandon Washington on our roster). I am a huge fan of D.J. Swearinger, he is really good in coverage and he is more than capable of coming down from his safety spot and just dominate any opposing runners. I have us taking Terrance Williams and Stedman Bailey as our receivers because I believe they are what this team needs. Terrance as our #1 and Bailey just because he is so much fun to watch and can instantly improve our Return game. Everettte Dawkins is really one of my favorite prospects in this years draft. He is stout against run and has potential to be a good penetrator in a rotation. Nico Johnson I think is more than capable of becoming our SLB very quick and good in coverage. Micah Hyde I just flat out love, he can play either CB or S for us versatile secondary player. Zach Line when I watch him play I think he could be a very good FB in our system. Some may prefer Lonnie Pryor( who I also like). However I went with Line.
Well ladies and gents I hope you enjoy the mock and please leave me some feedback.
Discussion begins now!
_________________
Robert Quinn
23 Tackles 8.5 sacks 1 Fumble |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ctp2124
Joined: 15 Jan 2011
Posts: 1248
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I still think that 16 is too high for Johnson. I really like everything else though.
I disagree with Steven signing with a contender. I think he believes that we will be a contender and the only way he doesn't resign with us is if we don't want him back (a very realistic option).
_________________
Props to mike23md
Supporter of Mohammed Sanu and Lavonte David to the Rams |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DEE RAWL
Joined: 02 Oct 2007
Posts: 2856
Location: Southern California
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Agreed with Johnson. Im fine with the Johnson pick but its a little too high. Everything else isnt bad
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31530
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I disagree with the people saying the Johnson pick is too high. I really like the mock. My only concern is not addressing the OG position. I think I'd add a mid round OG like Earl Watford or David Quessenberry.
Back to Johnson, he's proving at the Senior Bowl that he has all the measurables, athleticism and work ethic to be a great LT. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he gets picked before #16.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StLunatic88
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 7229
Location: How good is your Good?
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | I disagree with the people saying the Johnson pick is too high. I really like the mock. My only concern is not addressing the OG position. I think I'd add a mid round OG like Earl Watford or David Quessenberry.
Back to Johnson, he's proving at the Senior Bowl that he has all the measurables, athleticism and work ethic to be a great LT. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he gets picked before #16. |
So what do we do with Saffold?
If Johnson had what it takes to be a "Great LT" he would be in conversations with Fisher & Joeckel. He looks like a "Good LT" which is exactly what we have in Saffold, sorry not much of an upgrade to me. Waste of a pick if thats where we go at 16 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
81_80_39_28_10
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: KCMO
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| StLunatic88 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | I disagree with the people saying the Johnson pick is too high. I really like the mock. My only concern is not addressing the OG position. I think I'd add a mid round OG like Earl Watford or David Quessenberry.
Back to Johnson, he's proving at the Senior Bowl that he has all the measurables, athleticism and work ethic to be a great LT. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he gets picked before #16. |
So what do we do with Saffold?
If Johnson had what it takes to be a "Great LT" he would be in conversations with Fisher & Joeckel. He looks like a "Good LT" which is exactly what we have in Saffold, sorry not much of an upgrade to me. Waste of a pick if thats where we go at 16 |
Not necessarily. He isn't as polished as them because he hasn't been playing the position as long. That's why he isn't in the conversation with them. He does have the upside to be a Great LT.
Menelik Watson is another example of a guy who could be a really good OT but he is even less polished than Lane Johnson.
_________________
Thanks Lionsmack for the sig! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
STLRamsFan99
Joined: 17 Aug 2012
Posts: 866
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I don't like the idea of taking Johnson at #16, he is still somewhat raw and needs to add about 20 lbs. He seems more like a LT than a RT in my opinion. Not a fan of taking Williams at #22 at this point either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ctp2124
Joined: 15 Jan 2011
Posts: 1248
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 81_80_39_28_10 wrote: | | StLunatic88 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | I disagree with the people saying the Johnson pick is too high. I really like the mock. My only concern is not addressing the OG position. I think I'd add a mid round OG like Earl Watford or David Quessenberry.
Back to Johnson, he's proving at the Senior Bowl that he has all the measurables, athleticism and work ethic to be a great LT. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he gets picked before #16. |
So what do we do with Saffold?
If Johnson had what it takes to be a "Great LT" he would be in conversations with Fisher & Joeckel. He looks like a "Good LT" which is exactly what we have in Saffold, sorry not much of an upgrade to me. Waste of a pick if thats where we go at 16 |
Not necessarily. He isn't as polished as them because he hasn't been playing the position as long. That's why he isn't in the conversation with them. He does have the upside to be a Great LT.
Menelik Watson is another example of a guy who could be a really good OT but he is even less polished than Lane Johnson. |
If we are taking a tackle at 16 I'd want him to be already polished and not have the caveat that he needs to get stronger. It's not a guarantee that he will just put on 20 pounds of muscle.
_________________
Props to mike23md
Supporter of Mohammed Sanu and Lavonte David to the Rams |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jjab360
Joined: 31 Dec 2008
Posts: 3366
Location: On Top
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Great mock... my favorite one yet actually.
Just wish we would've gotten an interior lineman in there somewhere.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31530
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ctp2124 wrote: | | 81_80_39_28_10 wrote: | | StLunatic88 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | I disagree with the people saying the Johnson pick is too high. I really like the mock. My only concern is not addressing the OG position. I think I'd add a mid round OG like Earl Watford or David Quessenberry.
Back to Johnson, he's proving at the Senior Bowl that he has all the measurables, athleticism and work ethic to be a great LT. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he gets picked before #16. |
So what do we do with Saffold?
If Johnson had what it takes to be a "Great LT" he would be in conversations with Fisher & Joeckel. He looks like a "Good LT" which is exactly what we have in Saffold, sorry not much of an upgrade to me. Waste of a pick if thats where we go at 16 |
Not necessarily. He isn't as polished as them because he hasn't been playing the position as long. That's why he isn't in the conversation with them. He does have the upside to be a Great LT.
Menelik Watson is another example of a guy who could be a really good OT but he is even less polished than Lane Johnson. |
If we are taking a tackle at 16 I'd want him to be already polished and not have the caveat that he needs to get stronger. It's not a guarantee that he will just put on 20 pounds of muscle. |
If you're talking a LT with his length, athleticism and upside...you're not getting him if he's polished with a filled out frame. That type of player goes top 5.
It's not a guarantee he puts on that weight but that would be more of an indictment of either his work ethic or our S&C staff if anything. He has plenty of growth potential on his frame and is far from maxed out. He's only been at OT for two years. This is a kid that can be unbelievable with the right coaching.
I'm glad that he needs to add weight and needs polish because it might just give us a shot at him.
| StLunatic88 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | I disagree with the people saying the Johnson pick is too high. I really like the mock. My only concern is not addressing the OG position. I think I'd add a mid round OG like Earl Watford or David Quessenberry.
Back to Johnson, he's proving at the Senior Bowl that he has all the measurables, athleticism and work ethic to be a great LT. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he gets picked before #16. |
So what do we do with Saffold?
If Johnson had what it takes to be a "Great LT" he would be in conversations with Fisher & Joeckel. He looks like a "Good LT" which is exactly what we have in Saffold, sorry not much of an upgrade to me. Waste of a pick if thats where we go at 16 |
Well, we have him put on his pads and walk out on the field to the LT position. Johnson has starting experience at both LT and RT. Has even played both at times this year. He's versatile. He needs development. Develop him as a starter at RT in 2013 and if we deem Saffold not worth an extension, flip him to LT in 2014.
No, he wouldn't be in that conversation. He's far more raw and he needs to add weight/functional strength.
Your logic is complete crap. Duane Brown went late 1st round for the many of the same reasons a few years ago despite having potential to be a dominant LT...guess what...he's one of the NFL's best LTs.
Waste of a pick? I don't see how getting a guy who can be a great OT is ever a waste of a pick. We do need a RT...
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StLunatic88
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 7229
Location: How good is your Good?
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | | StLunatic88 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | I disagree with the people saying the Johnson pick is too high. I really like the mock. My only concern is not addressing the OG position. I think I'd add a mid round OG like Earl Watford or David Quessenberry.
Back to Johnson, he's proving at the Senior Bowl that he has all the measurables, athleticism and work ethic to be a great LT. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he gets picked before #16. |
So what do we do with Saffold?
If Johnson had what it takes to be a "Great LT" he would be in conversations with Fisher & Joeckel. He looks like a "Good LT" which is exactly what we have in Saffold, sorry not much of an upgrade to me. Waste of a pick if thats where we go at 16 |
Well, we have him put on his pads and walk out on the field to the LT position. Johnson has starting experience at both LT and RT. Has even played both at times this year. He's versatile. He needs development. Develop him as a starter at RT in 2013 and if we deem Saffold not worth an extension, flip him to LT in 2014.
No, he wouldn't be in that conversation. He's far more raw and he needs to add weight/functional strength.
Your logic is complete crap. Duane Brown went late 1st round for the many of the same reasons a few years ago despite having potential to be a dominant LT...guess what...he's one of the NFL's best LTs.
Waste of a pick? I don't see how getting a guy who can be a great OT is ever a waste of a pick. We do need a RT... |
Everything that has been said about Johnson this week is that he looks good, but there is just about no way he is playing RT in the NFL.
And what if Saffold comes out this year as is damn good, is the LT that he has already shown he is, you just let him walk for a guy you Hope can be that good on the left side? No you dont, you re-sign him and make him your Blind Side protector. And then you have a light weight RT with suspect power, thats not what we want over there
Your logic is that we take a fail-safe with our 16th pick, and if we dont need him for LT then we fit a square peg into a round hole. Thats flawed logic. Now if you think Saffold cant be our LT that is a different discussion completely.
Your Duane Brown argument is very flawed, because I am agreeing that is the type of guy Johnson is. Potentially a Very Good LT in a Zone Blocking Scheme. You honestly think that Brown would be thought of as this good had he been thrown into a Power scheme even as a LT? Not at all, he took a while to get to even this level in the ZBS. Not to mention the Texans didnt have a LT in place already, and were at #26 so you can take that chance. There are only 2 OTs that you can argue Brown should have been taken in front of (out of 6) and even on that day he was thought to be a reach. You are nit picking of how Borwn turned out in the best system possible, not the scenario under which he was drafted.
I actually like Johnson as a prospect, but in the 20s, If I need a LT, and only if Im running a ZBS not a power scheme. None of those fit us. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The J.R.S.
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 2777
Location: Next to Waldo
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | I disagree with the people saying the Johnson pick is too high. I really like the mock. My only concern is not addressing the OG position. I think I'd add a mid round OG like Earl Watford or David Quessenberry.
Back to Johnson, he's proving at the Senior Bowl that he has all the measurables, athleticism and work ethic to be a great LT. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if he gets picked before #16. |
You should, the first four picks looks like it is copied and pasted from one or more of your recent drafts. 
_________________
Real sports fans do not condone ESPN. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31530
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| StLunatic88 wrote: | | Everything that has been said about Johnson this week is that he looks good, but there is just about no way he is playing RT in the NFL. |
I might care if I actually put stock in what the media thinks. I've seen Johnson at RT. He's more than capable of playing it...especially after he gets in a NFL S&C program.
| Quote: | | And what if Saffold comes out this year as is damn good, is the LT that he has already shown he is, you just let him walk for a guy you Hope can be that good on the left side? No you dont, you re-sign him and make him your Blind Side protector. And then you have a light weight RT with suspect power, thats not what we want over there |
Well, that might not be what you want but personally, I'm fine with it. If Saffold is damn good and we extend him, it sounds like a great dilemma to be in. We'd have two great pass protecting OTs. I'll sacrifice some power in the run game for that. But frankly, Johnson is a better run blocker than he's given credit for. Very physical, finishes blocks, plays through the whistle and is an excellent drive blocker. Really churns his legs once he locks on. This kid will have no issues on either side of the OL.
| Quote: | | Your logic is that we take a fail-safe with our 16th pick, and if we dont need him for LT then we fit a square peg into a round hole. Thats flawed logic. Now if you think Saffold cant be our LT that is a different discussion completely. |
No. My logic is to take a player who can play either OT spot at #16 with the physical talent of a top 5 pick.
| Quote: | | Your Duane Brown argument is very flawed, because I am agreeing that is the type of guy Johnson is. Potentially a Very Good LT in a Zone Blocking Scheme. You honestly think that Brown would be thought of as this good had he been thrown into a Power scheme even as a LT? Not at all, he took a while to get to even this level in the ZBS. Not to mention the Texans didnt have a LT in place already, and were at #26 so you can take that chance. There are only 2 OTs that you can argue Brown should have been taken in front of (out of 6) and even on that day he was thought to be a reach. You are nit picking of how Borwn turned out in the best system possible, not the scenario under which he was drafted. |
Yes. He would be. Brown is seen as an elite LT because he's an unbelievable pass blocker. Please explain to me how his pass blocking would suffer in a move from the ZBS to PBS.
Oh and Lane Johnson isn't "potentially very good". You're full of it if you're trying to argue that. His potential is through the roof.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
StLunatic88
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 7229
Location: How good is your Good?
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | | Oh and Lane Johnson isn't "potentially very good". You're full of it if you're trying to argue that. His potential is through the roof. |
How in the world is there anything wrong with saying he is "Potentially very good"? You have just stated that your ranking of him is based Majorily on his Potential as a LT. How is that anything other than "Potentially Very good"?
The top half of NFL LTs are Good (sometimes Top 20), the Top 10-12 is Very good, and depending on the gap the Top 3-5 are Elite. You are going to fault me for not putting Lane's potential in the Top echelon of NFL LTs? Thats a joke. Just because I dont have him in the Joe Thomas, Ryan Clady, Duane Brown level doesnt mean he is some bust |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ctp2124
Joined: 15 Jan 2011
Posts: 1248
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| jrry32 wrote: | | I might care if I actually put stock in what the media thinks. I've seen Johnson at RT. He's more than capable of playing it...especially after he gets in a NFL S&C program. |
This keeps being said but I don't get it. Every player is going to get into a NFL S&C program. Why would Johnson's gains in strength not be offset by everyone else's gains?
_________________
Props to mike23md
Supporter of Mohammed Sanu and Lavonte David to the Rams |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
