2020 Draft Thread

[StLunatic88]

16 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

4. Henderson isn't just a change of pace back. Him and Akers can create a committee approach (which is what McVay said he preferred). We drafted Henderson last year for a reason. 

How great is it going to be to have the full playbook to use regardless of which RB is out there. They have small differences to their game, but are close enough that we won’t be tipping our hand. 
 

And maybe even some creative sets with both in the backfield 

[StLunatic88]

1 hour ago, The LBC said:

So far other UDFA are:

San Jose State QB Josh Love

Ooooooh I really like that pickup

[jrry32]

13 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

1. Rapp played ALOT of snaps last year. He played more than 50% of the starting snaps so yes, that's a starter.

2. sure

3. Samson flirted with starting minutes before CLay came, got a backseat once he did and now is back to starting minutes, IDK how to classify it, but will compete with Oko next year. Our OLB spots are up for grabs and Lewis could earn a starting spot which is the point of this post.

4. What you said is 100% right, but we needed a back to compliment Henderson. Either is a starting back.  Your original topic was who could be a starting player and Akers could would should be one.

5.Cooks is gone. OUr 3rd WR plays significant snaps. Jefferson will. Classify it how you wish. 

 

6. Starting on a  depth chart is one thing, but playing significant snaps is another. Akers, Burgess, Lewis, and Jefferson will all play 50% of the snaps next year.

1. Rapp wasn't supposed to start. John Johnson got injured. Until then, Rapp was a subpackage player. He was drafted to replace Weddle and play in 3-safety sets.

3. I feel fairly confident that Lewis won't begin the year as a starter, barring a bunch of injuries. He's not ready to handle rushing downs. Samson will start (unless he's beaten out by another vet). Lewis will rotate in on passing downs and give our starters a breather.

4. Agreed. We drafted Henderson to split reps with Gurley, but he wasn't ready. Now that Gurley is gone, Henderson should step up as the 1a HB with Akers stepping into Henderson's intended role as the 1b. However, it's also possible that Akers wins the job outright if he's not a liability on passing downs. My original point was that good teams don't typically draft a bunch of starters and that holds true for us as well. Akers may end up starting, but we already drafted a guy last year who was expected to take Gurley's role as lead back when he left.

5. Cooks is gone. Reynolds has started in the past and could start for us again. Jefferson might prove the better WR. He's pro ready. But a guy like Denzel Mims, for example, would not be starting. If Jefferson starts, it's because of Jefferson's ability, not because we lacked a starter to replace Cooks.

6. I'm not at all sold that Burgess and Lewis will play over 50% of our offensive/defensive snaps. With Akers and Jefferson, it's possible they do. It's also possible they don't. 

Quote

To me, that is a starter and a contributor. That is more important than an irrelevant label.

That's fine. But this discussion didn't start with a comment you made. It started with a comment I made. You can't disagree with my comment, redefine the terms, and then say it's irrelevant what the terms mean to me. I didn't say we weren't going to draft contributors. I said the odds of us drafting more than two STARTERS weren't great to start because we're a winning team. It's semantics, and I think we'd both rather not argue semantics, but I picked that specific term for a reason. I could have said contributors. But I meant guys who would be lining up Week 1 and starting on our depth chart.

Edited April 26, 2020 by jrry32

[BStanRamFan]

3 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

1. Rapp wasn't supposed to start. John Johnson got injured. Until then, Rapp was a subpackage player. He was drafted to replace Weddle and play in 3-safety sets.

3. I feel fairly confident that Lewis won't begin the year as a starter, barring a bunch of injuries. He's not ready to handle rushing downs. Samson will start (unless he's beaten out by another vet). Lewis will rotate in on passing downs and give our starters a breather.

4. Agreed. We drafted Henderson to split reps with Gurley, but he wasn't ready. Now that Gurley is gone, Henderson should step up as the 1a HB with Akers stepping into Henderson's intended role as the 1b. However, it's also possible that Akers wins the job outright if he's not a liability on passing downs. My original point was that good teams don't typically draft a bunch of starters and that holds true for us as well. Akers may end up starting, but we already drafted a guy last year who was expected to take Gurley's role as lead back when he left.

5. Cooks is gone. Reynolds has started in the past and could start for us again. Jefferson might prove the better WR. He's pro ready. But a guy like Denzel Mims, for example, would not be starting. If Jefferson starts, it's because of Jefferson's ability, not because we lacked a starter to replace Cooks.

6. I'm not at all sold that Burgess and Lewis will play over 50% of our offensive/defensive snaps. With Akers and Jefferson, it's possible they do. It's also possible they don't. 

That's fine. But this discussion didn't start with a comment you made. It started with a comment I made. You can't disagree with my comment, redefine the terms, and then say it's irrelevant what the terms mean to me. I didn't say we weren't going to draft contributors. I said the odds of us drafting more than two STARTERS weren't great to start because we're a winning team. It's semantics, and I think we'd both rather not argue semantics, but I picked that specific term for a reason. I could have said contributors. But I meant guys who would be lining up Week 1 and starting on our depth chart.

From this draft class...

 

Akers will start week 1.

Burgess will start week 1 in the Nickel/3rd safety role.

Lewis will start week 1. That's my gamble.

3 starters week 1 from this class. 

[jrry32]

21 minutes ago, BStanRamFan said:

From this draft class...

 

Akers will start week 1.

Burgess will start week 1 in the Nickel/3rd safety role.

Lewis will start week 1. That's my gamble.

3 starters week 1 from this class. 

Okay. We shall see. But the 3rd safety isn't a starter. If he's the starting nickel CB, then, I agree he's a starter. But I have a feeling David Long Jr. will be starting at nickel CB with Hill and Ramsey outside. Burgess will be used in subpackages.

[BStanRamFan]

4 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Okay. We shall see. But the 3rd safety isn't a starter. If he's the starting nickel CB, then, I agree he's a starter. But I have a feeling David Long Jr. will be starting at nickel CB with Hill and Ramsey outside. Burgess will be used in subpackages.

ohhhh thats where we disagree then, To me, the 3rd safety is the starter, That;s how the NFL is played today. If you do not view it as that then sure, but I see it differently.

[Dr LBC]

We don't even know what our base formation on defense is going to be under Staley.  So I don't see how anyone can definitively state what is a starter and what isn't.

[Flounch]

7 hours ago, StLunatic88 said:

How great is it going to be to have the full playbook to use regardless of which RB is out there. They have small differences to their game, but are close enough that we won’t be tipping our hand. 
 

And maybe even some creative sets with both in the backfield 

And that's why drafting Akers was so bad. If Henderson is a RB like Akers why would you double that ? Doesn't make any sense...

 

Edited April 26, 2020 by Flounch

[Rrrrrrrams]

big van jefferson fan. the one thing that always translate to the pros is elite route running.
hopkins is a perfect scheme fit and great value.

the one pick i don't get is fuller. why?
are you trying to turn him into a jack?
are we playing with a 3s base?
his athletic numbers are worse than scott, gervase or howard's. i don't get it.

love and the arizona state c and the smu rb are great udfas.

[LARams91]

1 hour ago, Rrrrrrrams said:

big van jefferson fan. the one thing that always translate to the pros is elite route running.
hopkins is a perfect scheme fit and great value.

the one pick i don't get is fuller. why?
are you trying to turn him into a jack?
are we playing with a 3s base?
his athletic numbers are worse than scott, gervase or howard's. i don't get it.

love and the arizona state c and the smu rb are great udfas.

I think Fuller is depth and special teams.

[Dr LBC]

8 hours ago, Flounch said:

And that's why drafting Akers was so bad. If Henderson is a RB like Akers why would you double that ? Doesn't make any sense...

 

You're right, we clearly should have gone into the same lab they used to clone the Scottish sheep and done that to Henderson.

[stl4life07]

43 minutes ago, The LBC said:

You're right, we clearly should have gone into the same lab they used to clone the Scottish sheep and done that to Henderson.

If @Flounch was a Niners fan he would be mad as hell because the past two years they had Breida, Wilson, signed Juszczyk to a good amount of money for a fullback then went back to back offsesons paying McKinnon and Coleman good money. The thing is though, Kyle knows what he is doing and that led to the Niners literally being 7 minutes away from winning the Superbowl. Nobody is complaining about having all those backs because Kyle has so many weapons to work with and he dont have to change a thing he can just put out fresh body after fresh body and be creative and even go with the hot hand. Now I know they traded Brieda but still they have great depth. McVay is doing the same thing by having Henderson and having Brown and still having Kelly then drafting Akers. Its not like McVay is clueless at what he is doing. He isnt Matt Millen when he was with the Lions and he kept drafting receiver after receiver and just getting it wrong until he was fortunate to draft Calvin Johnson and finally getting it right. Heck McVay isnt even the Browns when they have went through QB after QB after QB and still hope that Mayfield can finally solve that position. The only bad luck McVay has had is Gurley knee condition. Even in Washington when McVay was there in 2016 he had Jones, Kelley, and Thompson. So he had multiple backs and the Redskins kept drafting them. 

I think we will see what McVay plan is for both Henderson and Akers and I believe in his system and how he wants to use his players so the last thing Im ever going to say especially about an offensive player is it was a wasted pick or a bad pick. If this was Jeff Fisher drafting for offense I might go there. Someone mentioned about Isaiah Pead well that was on Fisher watch and not McVay.

Edited April 26, 2020 by stl4life07

[holt_bruce81]

9 hours ago, Flounch said:

And that's why drafting Akers was so bad. If Henderson is a RB like Akers why would you double that ? Doesn't make any sense...

 

Akers is better than Henderson. The Rams have added a really good player to their roster. How anyone can complain about that is mind boggling. 

[stl4life07]

8 minutes ago, holt_bruce81 said:

Akers is better than Henderson. The Rams have added a really good player to their roster. How anyone can complain about that is mind boggling. 

I think those who are complaining are those who are complaining about taking a back high again after the Rams took Henderson last year. I have no issue with it. The Lions draft Johnson a few years ago high then took Swift high this year. The Colts drafted Mack years ago and took Taylor high this year. So I will say it again. People value picks too much. They also take mock drafts too serious when it comes to when a player should get drafted. If McVay feels like Akers will be great for his system then he did the right thing. He felt like Henderson would be right for his system so he traded up to get him last year. The only thing nobody envisioned (maybe McVay did but just didnt say anything) and that was moving on from Gurley this soon. But all in all to have two backs in Akers and Henderson to fit the system great and both are great elusive backs that dont need much blocking and they are great pass catchers like how can anyone think thats a bad thing? McVay is probably going to be having wet dreams of how to scheme up ways to use these two backs. Opposing teams will have nightmares on how to stop these two backs from killing them on any given play when the ball is in their hands. 

Edited April 26, 2020 by stl4life07

[Rrrrrrrams]

can he beat out smart for the 6th spot?

according to ian rap, hoecht runs a 4.6 on 40 with 290lbs