Jump to content

Rams Extend Ramsey


HTTRDynasty

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, pwny said:

Those jerseys are just going to forever remind me of when the Jaguars posted a jersey leak as an April fools.

the only difference between the two is the sleeve piping and the lack of a name on the front and number border. Otherwise, they’re just a repaint of the same jersey that another team thought was so bad that they could post it as a joke. 

That’s not a gradient though. That looks more like a pro bowl jersey. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BStanRamFan said:

Rams hate is real on this board.

tenor.gif

3 hours ago, BStanRamFan said:

They're crammed down your throats on TV, we have the youngest head coach in the league, and the jerseys are completely different then anything else. The team stands out compared to others in multiple areas and that bothers most people.
 

271.gif

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i get that once they made the trade they had to resign him, but man, theres serious qiestions if this was a net positive move. multiple firsts, 20+ mil yearly and at least very likely directly responsible for peters being traded. then you can ask about other players, like fowler, and wonder if they would have been resigned.

 

all that for a guy who everyone knows has the talent to be the best but very few have him actually in their top 3?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/9/2020 at 6:43 PM, Gmen said:

They have arguably the best defender in the league locked up, and now a top 5 CB talent.  Great duo on defense.

But in a league driven by QBs, it will come down to Goff.  That's not a horse I'm betting on personally.

I've seen a lot of people mention this, but Goff was top 3 in passing yards last year and we still had a winning record. He's 4th in passing yards in the last three seasons. He's had three full seasons, been to the Super Bowl and two Pro Bowls. I can understand that he isn't without limitations, but he's far from holding this team back. He had one of the worst OL in the league last season, with one of the worst rushing teams, but still managed a winning record in the toughest division. When you strip everything back, Greg Zuerlein hits a FG for a walk-off win in week 4 and the Rams finish second and go to the play-offs over the Seahawks. 

If Goff had NO success whatsoever, perhaps a couple of losing seasons then I could totally understand your point, but he's done the exact opposite. If he was anything other than a good QB then the Rams finish last season with a losing record. Aaron Rodgers had a MUCH better situation in 2018 than Goff had in 2019 and Green Bay went 6-9-1. The Rams went 9-7. I'm not comparing the two, but I'm just saying that better QBs have had worse seasons in better circumstances.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DerbyRam said:

I've seen a lot of people mention this, but Goff was top 3 in passing yards last year and we still had a winning record. He's 4th in passing yards in the last three seasons. He's had three full seasons, been to the Super Bowl and two Pro Bowls. I can understand that he isn't without limitations, but he's far from holding this team back. He had one of the worst OL in the league last season, with one of the worst rushing teams, but still managed a winning record in the toughest division. When you strip everything back, Greg Zuerlein hits a FG for a walk-off win in week 4 and the Rams finish second and go to the play-offs over the Seahawks. 

If Goff had NO success whatsoever, perhaps a couple of losing seasons then I could totally understand your point, but he's done the exact opposite. If he was anything other than a good QB then the Rams finish last season with a losing record. Aaron Rodgers had a MUCH better situation in 2018 than Goff had in 2019 and Green Bay went 6-9-1. The Rams went 9-7. I'm not comparing the two, but I'm just saying that better QBs have had worse seasons in better circumstances.

I really wonder what the perception of Goff would be if he had sat his entire rookie year. I swear some people made up their mind about the kid as a rookie and have been looking to justify that opinion since then. Regardless, Goff's play will do the talking. I have complete confidence in him as our guy moving forward.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, pwny said:

Those jerseys are just going to forever remind me of when the Jaguars posted a jersey leak as an April fools.

the only difference between the two is the sleeve piping and the lack of a name on the front and number border. Otherwise, they’re just a repaint of the same jersey that another team thought was so bad that they could post it as a joke. 

Honestly though, i still maintain that aside from the gradient numbers (and weird helmet glow), and some spacing issues...those uniforms absolutely blow the current actual Jaguars uniforms out of the water as a concept.  And are especially better than the previous iteration of the uniform that they were teasing against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jalen is undoubtedly among the top CBs in the league.  But this deal is bonkers to me.  It's why i was arguing that it might be better to trade him, rather than pay him...before all this other disgruntled stuff came to light publicly.

 

I just don't see how you can really win sustainably, while paying a CB more or less QB money.  It's just not that important of a position.  Like, if you have terrible bad CBs you're gonna notice, and you do need good ones and can afford to pay them reasonably.  But it's such a scheme specific position these days.  You can get cheaper guys who do the specific things you need them to do in your system, and can insulate them from a lot of the rest.  Like, it's great that Jalen has the versatility to thrive in any system and probably in multiple DB spots...but when you're just going to play him as a boundary corner all the time, that's kinda pointless versatility.  It's not worth $21M per year.

 

Ultimately, they're barely ever going to touch or even really be near the ball, relative to the key impact positions you should actually be spending on (QB, Pass Rushers, top offensive skill position weapons and probably above most else...OLine who can make everyone else around them look so much better).

 

I just don't see successful teams being built around a CB to that sort of extent.  Good CBs on good teams?  Yeah.  But not eating up that sort of cap room.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

Jalen is undoubtedly among the top CBs in the league.  But this deal is bonkers to me.  It's why i was arguing that it might be better to trade him, rather than pay him...before all this other disgruntled stuff came to light publicly.

 

I just don't see how you can really win sustainably, while paying a CB more or less QB money.  It's just not that important of a position.  Like, if you have terrible bad CBs you're gonna notice, and you do need good ones and can afford to pay them reasonably.  But it's such a scheme specific position these days.  You can get cheaper guys who do the specific things you need them to do in your system, and can insulate them from a lot of the rest.  Like, it's great that Jalen has the versatility to thrive in any system and probably in multiple DB spots...but when you're just going to play him as a boundary corner all the time, that's kinda pointless versatility.  It's not worth $21M per year.

 

Ultimately, they're barely ever going to touch or even really be near the ball, relative to the key impact positions you should actually be spending on (QB, Pass Rushers, top offensive skill position weapons and probably above most else...OLine who can make everyone else around them look so much better).

 

I just don't see successful teams being built around a CB to that sort of extent.  Good CBs on good teams?  Yeah.  But not eating up that sort of cap room.

Granted, the MVP of the Patriots' defense is Belichick, but take a look at how he's more recently assessed the best route to achieving what's been the principal mantra in his defensive strategy: Take away the opposing offenses biggest strength.  Previously, when the league was more run-oriented that meant emphasizing (and paying primo bucks to) big, athletic multi-tool linebackers like Willie McGuinest and Adalius Thomas.  When the offensives trends shifted to more of Peyton's styled read-on-the-drop and get the ball out quick passing attack, he shifted that emphasis to intelligent, mobile, sideline-to-sideline LB's like Jerod Mayo and multi-tool safeties like Patrick Chung and Devin McCourty.  Then when passing attacks made a sharper turn back towards the dominant WR1's (in no small part because of the success New England's offense had with Brady throwing to Moss as a catalyst), Bill made a point to go out and give Stephon Gilmore what was, at the time, one of the top defensive contracts on the market.  That defense in New England has been one of the most consistent in staying up at a top unit year to year aside from Baltimore (and more recently Buffalo; up until recently Seattle).

Can you scheme around average corners with top-tier pass-rush?  Yes.  Can that scheme still be picked apart or just outright wrecked (to the point of a stalemate-at-best outcome) by an elite talent at WR (especially when paired with an even just above average QB)?  Absolutely.  There's no clear-cut one way that absolutely works versus another.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, GSUeagles14 said:

i get that once they made the trade they had to resign him, but man, theres serious qiestions if this was a net positive move. multiple firsts, 20+ mil yearly and at least very likely directly responsible for peters being traded. then you can ask about other players, like fowler, and wonder if they would have been resigned.

 

all that for a guy who everyone knows has the talent to be the best but very few have him actually in their top 3?

It's too much. Whatever way they try and slice it; "we had to do it" - well yes, but you didn't have to be in that situation in the first instance. 

He's a great player, but he's not in the top 2 of CBs, he's not that transcending to justify knee-capping an organisation. He isn't going to win games on his own, due to his role. 

Some will blindly defend it, and I can see their POV, but it will always be too much for both the return and what you have to give up, IMHO.

Edited by Hunter2_1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The LBC said:

Granted, the MVP of the Patriots' defense is Belichick, but take a look at how he's more recently assessed the best route to achieving what's been the principal mantra in his defensive strategy: Take away the opposing offenses biggest strength.  Previously, when the league was more run-oriented that meant emphasizing (and paying primo bucks to) big, athletic multi-tool linebackers like Willie McGuinest and Adalius Thomas.  When the offensives trends shifted to more of Peyton's styled read-on-the-drop and get the ball out quick passing attack, he shifted that emphasis to intelligent, mobile, sideline-to-sideline LB's like Jerod Mayo and multi-tool safeties like Patrick Chung and Devin McCourty.  Then when passing attacks made a sharper turn back towards the dominant WR1's (in no small part because of the success New England's offense had with Brady throwing to Moss as a catalyst), Bill made a point to go out and give Stephon Gilmore what was, at the time, one of the top defensive contracts on the market.  That defense in New England has been one of the most consistent in staying up at a top unit year to year aside from Baltimore (and more recently Buffalo; up until recently Seattle).

Can you scheme around average corners with top-tier pass-rush?  Yes.  Can that scheme still be picked apart or just outright wrecked (to the point of a stalemate-at-best outcome) by an elite talent at WR (especially when paired with an even just above average QB)?  Absolutely.  There's no clear-cut one way that absolutely works versus another.

This is totally fair, and the Gilmore deal is really the one stick in the mud when it comes to what i was saying.  The thing though, is that to do this...you have to have the Belitrix foresight constantly stay on top of, or ahead of trends...but the contract situations to constantly remain flexible.  Which, Gilmore's deal is up after next year, and that's made it a bargain through the end years.  There's flexibility to pivot at that point, and i'd be shocked if Belichick didn't (if he's still running things).  Ramsey's new deal sets a new "CB salary standard" like Gilmore...but you're doing it years later.  That essentially pushes the commitment for half a dozen years, starting a number of years after Bill identified that as a strategy.  You commit $21M to a strategy that late in the game...you'd better be hoping it's not a reality where Bill is right, and it's always constantly circling around making entirely different sorts of players at completely different positions more/less valuable.

 

Like...you nailed it.  The only constant in Bill's valuation of talent and where to spend money, has been that it's constantly shifting.  And even then, as important as Gilmore is...i don't think you can attribute the bulk of the Patriots winning over that span strictly to him.  There have been a huge number of moving parts around that.

 

Defensive evolution is always linked with offensive evolution.  And at this point, we've entered the era of the "scrambling improvisational QB" apparently.  How the defensive side responds is...pending.  But i don't believe it's going to be "$21M lockdown corners" who cost more than the QBs they're defending against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

This is totally fair, and the Gilmore deal is really the one stick in the mud when it comes to what i was saying.  The thing though, is that to do this...you have to have the Belitrix foresight constantly stay on top of, or ahead of trends...but the contract situations to constantly remain flexible.  Which, Gilmore's deal is up after next year, and that's made it a bargain through the end years.  There's flexibility to pivot at that point, and i'd be shocked if Belichick didn't (if he's still running things).  Ramsey's new deal sets a new "CB salary standard" like Gilmore...but you're doing it years later.  That essentially pushes the commitment for half a dozen years, starting a number of years after Bill identified that as a strategy.  You commit $21M to a strategy that late in the game...you'd better be hoping it's not a reality where Bill is right, and it's always constantly circling around making entirely different sorts of players at completely different positions more/less valuable.

 

Like...you nailed it.  The only constant in Bill's valuation of talent and where to spend money, has been that it's constantly shifting.  And even then, as important as Gilmore is...i don't think you can attribute the bulk of the Patriots winning over that span strictly to him.  There have been a huge number of moving parts around that.

 

Defensive evolution is always linked with offensive evolution.  And at this point, we've entered the era of the "scrambling improvisational QB" apparently.  How the defensive side responds is...pending.  But i don't believe it's going to be "$21M lockdown corners" who cost more than the QBs they're defending against.

The reason that unit works so well is not just because Gilmore is elite, the other parts are higher than average too. This is reflected in multiple stats or grading publications having JC Jackson, McCourty and Jones very high for #2,3,4 etc. In PFF's case, they had JC Jackson a top 10 CB for a lot of the season. Gilmore eats up most money in that unit yes, but the other parts are well resourced, and strength in depth there is a massive part of why the secondary is so stingy. 

LAR probably can't do that. Ramsey is elite, but what about the supporting cast? One CB is not transcending, but a very strong overall corps is.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jrry32 said:

I really wonder what the perception of Goff would be if he had sat his entire rookie year. I swear some people made up their mind about the kid as a rookie and have been looking to justify that opinion since then. Regardless, Goff's play will do the talking. I have complete confidence in him as our guy moving forward.

JjzdGf6.png

I'm not sure how familiar you are with advanced analytics, but completion percentage over expectation (CPOE) and expected points added (EPA) are two of the more popular measures of QB efficiency in the analytics community.  Even in his best season, Goff was below league average in terms of CPOE.   Meaning, he's not a particularly accurate passer.   The fact that's he's managed to have an above average EPA despite that, IMO is a testament to McVay and WR talent.

The Rams can absolutely win with Goff.  They just need to continue to build a good team around him.  He's not going to carry them.

EDIT: And the nflfastR CPOE model is actually being kind to Goff.  The Next Gen Stats model had him at -3.6 CPOE in 2019. 34th out of 40 qualifying QBs

Edited by Gmen
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...