Re: disagree with the disagreement

Quote
dzrams

Quote
zn

Quote
dzrams

Quote
zn

Quote
ferragamo79
If Gurley goes out you work around it.

he's heart and soul of offense......best receiver, play action is all based on him not Malcom Brown and entire run game

I do think Rams draft a back up in the 4th

And with a good coach and good contributing players you work around it.

For example put in a nice solid short ball control passing game and find the productive strengths of your remaining backs. Any coach worth a damm can do that.

On the other hand, lose Whitworth, and neither the current offense with Gurley nor the hypothetical offense without him I just described works anywhere near as well.

...

I think they can work around Whit going down just as easily as Gurley missing. And when I say just as easily I mean both would be challenging.

IMO, they would slide Saffold to LT, and Austin Blythe would move to LG. The offense would still work with Saffold.

That's my vote, I get that yours if different.

Yeah my vote IS different. To me, if they lose Whitworth, they should just hire a couple of bad guys to take tire irons to Goff, and injure him. That way they just get it over with.

That's me in dark humor mode.

I see the dark humor mode and I think the kernel of truth I'm extracting is that you don't believe Saffold has the ability to do the job at all. Right?

I guess I'm thinking he'd be between Whit and GRob level of bad but adequate for a short period of time.

FWIW, I agree that they need someone to start developing. I've got my eye on Tyrell Crosby (3rd - 4th), Jamarco Jones (3rd - 4th), and Geron Christian (2nd - 4th).

I'm very underwhelmed with the supposed 1st round OTs besides McGlinchey who I think will be gone by #23.

No I was avoiding a real discussion and just wrapping it up with humor because this is one of those that sounds like endless minor disagreement.

But I'll bite.

First, on the whole "what the draft pubs teach me about OTs at 23" motif...if there's no one there there;s no one there. I think that or its equivalent is the most frequently typed phrase on the board today. You seem in your head to be arguing with someone who said take a tackle no matter what. (That's one reason I have doubts about this conversation.) You also said if my vote was different that was fine, but now you're into "let's duke it out." But as I said, I will bite.

Well there may not be a tackle at 23 but that will not decrease the need for one. BTW on getting a good LOT after round 2--the odds of that are less that 5%. So I don't put hopes in that. If there is no tackle they like at 23, unless they trade down and take one in round 2, then, odds are, they are not coming out of this draft with a left OT.

#2. I assume Saffold would be okay as a tackle though not like Whitworth--even an aging Whitworth. You then lose the great combo of him at guard, where he is superlative, and AW at tackle. Blythe is a back-up. IMO physically he's not equipped to be an every down, consecutive games type starter. He would be nowhere near the guard Saffold is, which puts it lightly. So if they take any kind of G/ROT type in this draft (and I assume they draft those lower, which you can do--the odds are better with that than finding a left OT) then....that rookie would have to start over Blythe, who I do not see being a game to game starter, even as an injury replacement. Plus if you go with Blythe then of course your back-up OC is green--either a guy from last year or a rookie.

IMO a Rams OL with AW at LOT and RS at LOG is above average. Unless they end up with some surprisingly very good rookie OR a "ronin" pick-up who is ready to up his game (which happens, see Barksdale), an OL that does not feature that combo will be less than average.

Plus with Saffold at LOT and who knows at LOG, you are 1 more replacement at the other 3 positions from reaching the kind of "OLs that are too injured become far less effective" territory that we know all too well from Rams history.That would be a "3 replacements OL" which usually gets you into the bad territory.

It would just be better overall to be in the Eagles situation last year, where they had someone behind the LOT who could handle the spot in the starters absence. Less disruption to the rest of the OL (assuming no more injuries). (They had a hit in Halapoulivaati Vaitai, one of the rare human beings taken lower than round 2 who could play effectively at LOT: [www.mcall.com]

Those are my thotz though sometimes, if "a different vote is fine with me," it's just easier to end on a joke.







....



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2018 01:59PM by zn.