Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I watched a video of what seemed like all of Tutu's receptions in 2020 on YouTube. I wanted to get hyped because I hate the pick, but I didn't come away from it very impressed. He never ever got yards after contact, and that was at the college level. So he's going to go down as soon as defenders get a touch on him, and I didn't see too many plays of him just burning past defenders before they could catch him.

He does have good speed, he seems like a reliable catcher of the ball and like a solid technically sound receiver. 

But ultimately his ceiling seems like a reliable possession receiver with an occasional big gain, and as a rookie I feel like the most we can expect is for him to be a gadget player that adds an occasional wrinkle to the play calling. 

Still not what you want out of a 2nd round pick. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

In this article from NFL.com, they list the 3 best picks from each round. DT Bobby Brown made the list for the 4th round:

https://www.nfl.com/news/2021-nfl-draft-lance-zierlein-s-three-favorite-picks-by-round

Exciting to see. If there's anybody he can learn from as a role model, it's Aaron Donald so hopefully he pans out and turns out to be a steal in the 4th round. Would be awesome if he could effectively replace Michael Brockers.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I look at our draft, the more I realize that if we could have gotten a better player at 57, it would have changed my outlook on the entire draft. If you swap out Tutu for Creed Humphrey or even Dyami Brown if it was absolutely going to be a WR either way, this looks like a great draft class. But instead they really reached on a player I have a hard time seeing make a significant impact. It’s been almost a week and I still just can’t wrap my head around picking him. I’ve been wrong before and I’d gladly be wrong here but i haven’t hated a pick this much in years

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2021 at 9:02 PM, FrantikRam said:

 

How do you figure we were need based drafting? We got extremely good value with all our day three picks and they came out and said they were taking Ernest Jones no matter what - none of that seems like drafting for need to me - I see this as a draft where their first two picks were players that they wanted and then the rest of the draft they let come to them and got great value.

Needs can be roles not just positions.  You get that, right?  All offseason long we heard people harp and harp and harp about how we had to get a field stretcher - to the extent where when one was brought in via free agency it still wasn't good enough because the guy hasn't got the best recent injury history.

If you accept that the front office doesn't have to agree with us the fans as to how pressing certain positions are "needed" it's not that difficult to see where we were filling holes created by departed free agents or free agents we can likely expect to leave in the near-future because we're not going to pay higher-market value on them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Rrrrrrrams said:

can't wait to see tutu breaking flippers record.
helping stafford to break the dutchman's record.

The more people hate on Tutu the more I love him and root hard for him to succeed. He is in the right hands too with McVay. It’s a crime to mention Tutu in the same sentence as Donnie Avery and Tavon Austin because of one simple reason. McVay wasn’t the coach so we don’t know if he would’ve picked them. At the time we had coaches who had no idea what they was doing on offense. McVay has a clue and he choose Tutu in the same way he choose Akers last year. McVay has a vision for his offense and it’s definitely not scoring 23ppg like last season. He want to get back to scoring at least 30ppg and lighting up defenses with big plays. He has that with the likes of DJax and Tutu especially now with Stafford who has a big arm and won’t be afraid to sling it all over the field. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Dr LBC said:

Needs can be roles not just positions.  You get that, right?  All offseason long we heard people harp and harp and harp about how we had to get a field stretcher - to the extent where when one was brought in via free agency it still wasn't good enough because the guy hasn't got the best recent injury history.

If you accept that the front office doesn't have to agree with us the fans as to how pressing certain positions are "needed" it's not that difficult to see where we were filling holes created by departed free agents or free agents we can likely expect to leave in the near-future because we're not going to pay higher-market value on them.

 

I absolutely get that roles can play more of a part than position.

I just think you're perception of how the Rams drafted is being colored by your opinions of the players.

They told Atwell they may not let him get out of the second round. They said they wanted Ernest Jones.

Let's stop there for a second - because these are the two picks that most Rams fans seem to have an issue with. Those are BPA picks. The Rams wanted both players and wanted to trade down and collect more picks, per Jourdan with the Athletic (on the trade) - so day two went exactly how the Rams wanted it to go. They didn't want to risk losing Atwell, hence why they didn't trade down.

On day three we got excellent value at almost every pick, so that's more like BPA too.

 

Now, I may have misinterpreted your comment - I assumed you meant drafting for need as in lining up a list of players who fit a role and then drafting whichever one is available regardless of value. Ironically, we now know for sure the Rams did NOT do this because there were some offensive linemen that they liked but were taken before our pick (also per Jourdan).

However, if you meant "let's make sure we have a role that this kid can fit" - that's what every team does, or should do. The Cardinals got PRAISED for drafting Simmons last year but didn't have a role defined for him and he was largely ineffective. Now, that may change in the future and the draft is for the future, but an example of what can happen when you don't have a role lined up for a player.

McVay wanted Atwell and Snead wanted Jones. Fans are just going to have to come to terms with the fact that the Rams rated these guys around where we drafted them.

 

Finding players who fit desired roles and filling future needs - giving guys at least a year to develop first - has worked out well so far. But you know the Rams don't do that exclusively, because if we did, offensive linemen would have been the priority with  multiple starters potentially leaving next year.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Dr LBC said:

Needs can be roles not just positions.  You get that, right?  All offseason long we heard people harp and harp and harp about how we had to get a field stretcher - to the extent where when one was brought in via free agency it still wasn't good enough because the guy hasn't got the best recent injury history.

If you accept that the front office doesn't have to agree with us the fans as to how pressing certain positions are "needed" it's not that difficult to see where we were filling holes created by departed free agents or free agents we can likely expect to leave in the near-future because we're not going to pay higher-market value on them.

We were def filling holes of Brockers, Hill, Fox, but outside of Earnest Jones, I don't think any rookie has a chance to start. We were drafting developmental guys that may have a rotational role next year. And That's sort of been "the plan", so I'm completely fine with them staying on script by taking guys a year or two ahead of need.

I'm sure if we went BPA we could of picked up another RB or safety, but with all the attention we've given to those positions in prior drafts, what good would that have done?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

If it makes you guys feel better, I had the Chiefs taking Tutu at 63 in my final mock. Had him graded as a Late 3rd Rounder but the Chiefs love reaching on speed at the end of R2. 
 

To be fair, your WR Core did need speed pretty badly. There is no one to take the top off from my knowledge. 

Edited by BayRaider
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BayRaider said:

If it makes you guys feel better, I had the Chiefs taking Tutu at 63 in my final mock. Had him graded as a Late 3rd Rounder but the Chiefs love reaching on speed at the end of R2. 
 

To be fair, your WR Core did need speed pretty badly. There is no one to take the top off from my knowledge. 

Desean Jackson? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my least favorite draft since McVay took over. 
 

if the picks don’t pan out well, Les has got to go. With all the bad contracts, all he had going for him was his drafting. this looks like a blunder of a draft to be honest. 
 

I hope I’m wrong though 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/5/2021 at 7:55 PM, FrantikRam said:

 

I absolutely get that roles can play more of a part than position.

I just think you're perception of how the Rams drafted is being colored by your opinions of the players.

They told Atwell they may not let him get out of the second round. They said they wanted Ernest Jones.

Let's stop there for a second - because these are the two picks that most Rams fans seem to have an issue with. Those are BPA picks. The Rams wanted both players and wanted to trade down and collect more picks, per Jourdan with the Athletic (on the trade) - so day two went exactly how the Rams wanted it to go. They didn't want to risk losing Atwell, hence why they didn't trade down.

On day three we got excellent value at almost every pick, so that's more like BPA too.

 

Now, I may have misinterpreted your comment - I assumed you meant drafting for need as in lining up a list of players who fit a role and then drafting whichever one is available regardless of value. Ironically, we now know for sure the Rams did NOT do this because there were some offensive linemen that they liked but were taken before our pick (also per Jourdan).

However, if you meant "let's make sure we have a role that this kid can fit" - that's what every team does, or should do. The Cardinals got PRAISED for drafting Simmons last year but didn't have a role defined for him and he was largely ineffective. Now, that may change in the future and the draft is for the future, but an example of what can happen when you don't have a role lined up for a player.

McVay wanted Atwell and Snead wanted Jones. Fans are just going to have to come to terms with the fact that the Rams rated these guys around where we drafted them.

 

Finding players who fit desired roles and filling future needs - giving guys at least a year to develop first - has worked out well so far. But you know the Rams don't do that exclusively, because if we did, offensive linemen would have been the priority with  multiple starters potentially leaving next year.

 

Just because they rated them there doesn’t mean they are good picks 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, BayRaider said:

If it makes you guys feel better, I had the Chiefs taking Tutu at 63 in my final mock. Had him graded as a Late 3rd Rounder but the Chiefs love reaching on speed at the end of R2. 
 

To be fair, your WR Core did need speed pretty badly. There is no one to take the top off from my knowledge. 

I’m not so much upset with taking a WR that early, I’m more upset with which one they took and how much of a reach it seemed. Guys like Terrace Marshall and Dyami Brown were still on the board. I’d have loved to see us draft Brown. I just don’t see Atwell having a lot of success in the NFL aside from a few gimmick plays here and there. I hope I’m wrong—I really do. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, rocky_rams said:

Just because they rated them there doesn’t mean they are good picks 

 

Doesn't mean they're bad either.

Which brings us back to waiting 2-3 years to evaluate a draft class.

This is one of my favorite draft classes and I wouldn't swap any GM for Snead.

  • Like 1
Link to post
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...