[sloramfan]

"why didnt they trade up to #2 to get him"

really? again really??

maybe you need to understand the draft...

if someone is picking ahead of you... they get that player, and you are shit outa luck..

go rams

slo

[Elmgrovegnome]

I don't think teams draft purely for BPA, and not even purely for need. I think it's a combination of fit, and need, and value at the spot (which kind of supercedes BPA as a concept).

For example let's say they take a left OT they like in 2018; next year, even if the highest ranked player in the first round when they pick is another left OT, they're not going to draft a 2nd one in the 1st round in 2019. Besides, the first round grades/ranks on players are usually so close when you're picking in the 20s that it's merely pedantic to say who the best pick is at that point in pure BPA terms. It's your pick, you have a guard graded at 8.1, and a corner graded at 7.9....is that enough of a difference to say you turned down the best player to take one you need more? Yet that's exactly how the grades will usually be when you get to the 2nd half of the first round. More often than not you could pick any one of 5 different players and in each case be viewed as taking the best player (because different people grade differently so micro differences get blurred).

Do you need the position or not.
Is the player a fit for what you do.
Is he good enough to represent value at the spot where he is picked.

As I said "BPA" disappears into that third criteria anyway.


...

Now your changing your position. You said you are taking a left tackle because if Whitworth gets injured, then you won't want to watch the offense falter because you went bpa. You are taking a tackle.... So if you have a tackle rated a 5 but a corner is on the board that you rate an 8.5 you are taking the tackle because need supersedes everything.

As far as how it works, I already know. I have read about the grading system, and the tier system and any other draft strategies that have been written or talked about. You don't need to explain it to me, especially when you are taking need over bpa. You are taking a tackle. I may take a tackle if I have a certain tackle graded higher, than other positions of need but if there is a player (corner, OLB, Safety, Center, DT, Guard) that I felt was worth a top fifteen pick and a tackle was left that I rated in the bottom half off the 20s, then I'd pick the better player, unless it is a QB.

[Elmgrovegnome]

The idea isn't to replace Whitworth.. .it's that he's gonna be 37 next year and time always wins.
Just being prepared for the future at the position that may be most important on the team after QB.

In the meantime, right now the Rams have bigger needs than a back up left tackle. They NEED a starter at corner, Pass rusher, and Run stopper. If need is your thing then starters trump back ups. Whitworth was one of the best tackles in the league last year. He doesn't look like he is on his last leg yet. So, using a first round pick on a backup with big weaknesses at other positions, is bad logic, unless Snead and Kromer think the left tackle is too good to pass up....a la Aaron Rodgers.

The Rams are close. Their window is just opening, but they still have some holes to fill and the window can close fast.

[Elmgrovegnome]

Sometimes it's BPA regardless of need... if that player is that great a value.

I agree. If there is a player that you think can make a bigger impact than what you have, or a guy that is too good to pass up, and you can free up cap by moving on from a good player, and maybe trade him, by all means take the great player with the cheaper cap hit.

[Elmgrovegnome]

IMO it's all arguing about minor differences, really.

The top picks available at pick 23 will not be graded so differently that it will matter much. I mean unless Lawrence Taylor or Bruce Smith falls to 23.

Assuming there are LOT picks worthy of the 23...and there usually are...the Rams could call it a need pick if they wanted or they could call it a BPA if they wanted. It wouldn't matter either way. All Rams picks factor in the usual combo of need plus fit plus value for the spot. It is more than likely that a left OT will meet all those criteria, and no one in the universe except the Rams brass would ever know if he was graded 0.3 points lower or higher than another guy from another position who was available at that pick.

...

This depends on the draft. They are not all the same. Most teams group graded players in tiers. The size of each tier varies from year to year. And, teams don't always have the same values on players. It all depends on who is on the board when they pick. Other than QB most teams will not target a specific need for a position and draft it in round 1 regardless of who else is available.

[Elmgrovegnome]

You misread that. I said they lucked out in free agency because the vast majority of the time there aren't any good starting caliber LOTs available in free agency...and yet the Rams got one.

I wasn't getting into some moribund war about history.

I was just saying that you cannot count on getting a good veteran LOT in free agency. Therefore you cannot count on replacing Whitworth in free agency. They were lucky that Whitworth was available in free agency in 2017.

The point was simply to realistically assess what the valid options are for replacing your aging LOT...and replacing him isn't that far away. Free agency only came up because it's not a valid option...usually, and that's really by far most of the time, you don't find good LOTs in free agency. Teams tend to keep their good LOTs.

If you want to argue against that, you have to prove somehow that no, teams DO find good starting LOTs in free agency every year.

Otherwise...it's not a likely option.

...

So, much of what you say is the opposite of your old OLine arguments that good Oline play is more about continuity than anything else. But, that aside, Kromer has put together some very good Olines without many highly drafted players. Remember he was not around when Darryl Williams was brought in. He will help target a back up OLT and I trust his ability to do so. I also trust that he doesn't agree with the idea that you need to take a tackle in round 1 to have success.

[Elmgrovegnome]

And yet, of the 27 OTs drafted in the first two rounds the last 4 years, 15 aren't starting at LT, including 4 who aren't starting anywhere. The latter is 1 in 7. The former is more than half. I think there is less an emphasis on drafting that LT high like KC Joyner and others believed a few years back. It's an important position but there are a variety of ways to find them.

Three of the 32 LTs in the NFL were UDFA's. 9 others went in the 2nd or lower. And of the 32 starting LT's in the NFL, 8 were obtained via free agency or trade (5 this season alone). There comes a time when teams have their LT and have to pay their RT almost as much. So the theory might evolve into developing a guy to take over cheaper at RT or moving the RT to LT, creating a pool of players in free agency capable of playing LT. Maybe that's why the number of OT's taken in the first two rounds has dropped the last couple of seasons.

Plus pass rushing strategy has changed in recent years. Teams no longer look at DTs as run stoppers only. They have relied heavily on inside pass rush to collapse the pocket and keep QBs from stepping up to make the throw. This started with the shift to pass happy offenses. So Guards suddenly weren't a draft after thought and we see them valued as much as tackles. Good guards are being picked in the top half of the draft ahead of some good tackles.

[/zn/]

So, much of what you say is the opposite of your old OLine arguments that good Oline play is more about continuity than anything else. But, that aside, Kromer has put together some very good Olines without many highly drafted players. Remember he was not around when Darryl Williams was brought in. He will help target a back up OLT and I trust his ability to do so. I also trust that he doesn't agree with the idea that you need to take a tackle in round 1 to have success.

Well I don't recall ever saying that OL play is more about continuity than ANYTHING else though obviously continuity is important.

You also need good players. Fortunately you don't need 5 top players. But you can't play with several inexperienced and subpar replacements or subpar starters.

And one of the things you need, absolutely, is an at least solid LOT. That;s so obvious that it felt all captain obvious to type it up. We all recognize the night/day difference between Whitworth and Robinson, for example.

Kromer--and I bragged about the Rams signing him the minute they did it--has a good history, but making a good player out of Williams will depend on how good Williams is as a talent. Because not even Kromer makes a solid LOT out of just anyone. Heck he couldn't even make a RIGHT OT out of Robinson. It's like saying that because the Rams have McVay and Olson, they didn't need Goff--they could turn any ole qb you threw at them into an effective starter.

We don't know how good Williams is or can be and that's compounded by the fact that assessing college OL for the pros has gotten iffier and iffier over the last few years. With the spread of the spread, it's just harder to evaluate linemen. OL used to be the safest position to draft in the first round, but over the last few years that has fallen off. The popularity of different versions of the spread has made it harder to determine if a lineman can transition to the pros. For example in 97, 4 good to great immediate first-year starters were taken in the 1st round (Pace, Jones, Glenn, and Verba). In 2015, 4 OTs were taken in the 1st round and it's just nothing remotely like 97 (Flowers, Peat, Ogbuehi, Humphries). Drafting OTs in round 1 used to be a much safer bet, and now, it;s more like 2015. That also means that the lower picks are iffier too along with UDFAs like Williams. So just having a guy (Williams) guarantees very little, and certainly guarantees less than before.

BTW, also, in his career, Kromer has mostly inherited good LOTs. He has very rarely come up with one on his own (not saying he can't...but part of his record comes from maximizing pre-established talent, most of which was already there when he got there. Whitworth was a veteran free agent, before that he inherited Cody Glenn in Buffalo, before that he inherited Bushrod in New Orleans and brought Bushrod with him to Chicago. He wasn't there when NO drafted Armstead in 2013. BTW as a side note, Kromer has a rep for developing top guards... a good example, look at how some people are talking about Jamon Brown now).

Short version: you can't count on Williams. In fact if Williams makes it as an even just decently solid backup or starting LOT, it would defy the odds.

But then it's hard to say...yes the odds are against it but still we don't really know yet...maybe Wms. is an exception?



...

[dieterbrock]

Who knows what kind of deal Cleveland was offering? They sure got a lot out of the Eagles to move back only 6 spots.

PR-wise, 1 is at least somewhat better than 2.

On pretty much every trade value chart that's out there, the Titans got better value so i think the need argument is pretty reasonable...

Cleveland traded out of #2 because Goff was off the board

[JackPMiller]

Cleveland traded out of #2 because Goff was off the board

Hue Jackson wanted Carson Wentz, but Sashi Brown felt it was better to trade down.