I think you're being unnecessarily argumentative here especially when on part of my point, I was agreeing with you. I said it's hard to dispute your research. That's me agreeing with the validity of that particular point. I wasn't saying that no one is disputing that. In fact, that's me saying that anyone who disputes it is likely wrong.

It feels like semantics on your "better than just average starting LOT" versus "above-average" LOT. I'm not seeing the difference. To me, if something is better than average, it's above average. I consider "better than" and "above" as interchangeable.

I also see difference between an average player and a JAG. I consider JAG's as subpar - i.e. below average - players. I feel they can go with an average player and that may be the most realistic option. I don't think they would stand for a below average LOT though.

I understand from your response here that you don't believe in going with an average player at LOT. But whether you believe in it or not is kind of immaterial. The questions are: what do the Rams believe and what can they realistically accomplish? I stand by my assessment that they may have to go with an average player at LOT. I'm pretty sure they're not going to allow themselves to be forced into trading up in search of a better than average LOT. That's an option but not the only option.