PDA

View Full Version : Someone help me make sense of the Dorsey pick


NGSeiler
02-01-2008, 12:27 AM
I see people making it in mocks, and I see some Rams fans contending he should be right up there on our list. But I think it would be pretty hard for this team to justify spending back-to-back first round picks on defensive tackles when there are so many other areas that need to be addressed.

If the Rams select Dorsey, where does he fit? Does Carriker stick at nose tackle even though he's a better fit as a three-technique? Or does Carriker move outside even though he's really not much of an edge rusher? I don't think either makes much sense, which is why the Dorsey selection frustrates me a bit.

Yes, there's a definite argument to go BPA with such a high pick, but again, can you really do that when you just spent a first rounder on a player of the same position?

To me, if Chris Long is off the board, the Rams have three options (subject to change given the potential rise and fall of prospects over the next three months) - Jake Long, Vernon Gholston, or a trade down. I'm simply not sold on back-to-back first round DTs.

holt_bruce81
02-01-2008, 01:42 AM
Well you do need a NT and a UT, and while Clifton Ryan showed promise last coming in when Glover was out, I don't know how good he would be as a starter. Adam Carriker at NT and Glenn Dorsey at UT would be nasty, you can't really handle both those guys one on one.

I for one have Chris Long at the top of my board.

NGSeiler
02-01-2008, 10:38 AM
Well you do need a NT and a UT, and while Clifton Ryan showed promise last coming in when Glover was out, I don't know how good he would be as a starter. Adam Carriker at NT and Glenn Dorsey at UT would be nasty, you can't really handle both those guys one on one.

I agree the combination of Carriker/Dorsey would be tough to handle, but the Rams have already acknowledged that Carriker's best position is going to be UT. Do you really move him somewhere else where he won't be as good just so you can add Dorsey to a position that honestly the Rams have already taken care of? It just does not seem ideal at all to me.

rockio42
02-03-2008, 07:08 PM
why not take a beast of an edge-rusher in the first round in vernon gholston and then in the second take like pat sims to play NT

NGSeiler
02-04-2008, 11:34 PM
why not take a beast of an edge-rusher in the first round in vernon gholston and then in the second take like pat sims to play NT

Provided he has a good combine, Gholston should certainly be an option if Chris Long is not available. In the second round, I'd rather address OT or WR.

KCJ58
02-04-2008, 11:41 PM
i say we either draft Chris Long or Vernon Gholston with the #2 pick

nfrillman
02-05-2008, 06:52 PM
I don't know a whole lot about Gholston, but not drafting Dorsey because we already have Ryan could look very foolish in a few years. I know that ideally Ryan will continue to develop and he and Carriker will hold down the line for years to come. Chris Long is definitely number one on my Rams board because DE is definitely more of a need than DT, but I don't think I could agree with taking Gholston because he is a DE if they feel Dorsey is a significantly better player, not that the Rams have been good recently at drafting.

NGSeiler
02-05-2008, 09:21 PM
I don't know a whole lot about Gholston, but not drafting Dorsey because we already have Ryan could look very foolish in a few years.

The point isn't that you're skipping Dorsey because of Ryan but rather because of Carriker, who seems to be the future three-technique on this team. Yes, you could move Carriker back to NT to make room for Dorsey at UT, but it would seem to me that's not an ideal use of the first-round player we already have.

etk
02-06-2008, 04:28 PM
It would make no sense for the Rams to draft Dorsey, and it just won't happen. The Rams will probably go BPA at DE where the value and need is greater. Gholston/Long would both be great. NT can be targeted later with Pat Sims, Marcus Harrison, Okam, Bryant, etc.

nfrillman
02-06-2008, 05:29 PM
It would make no sense for the Rams to draft Dorsey, and it just won't happen. The Rams will probably go BPA at DE where the value and need is greater. Gholston/Long would both be great. NT can be targeted later with Pat Sims, Marcus Harrison, Okam, Bryant, etc.

I am starting to think that if Chris Long is not available the Rams might trade down because DE is supposed to have a lot of depth this year. If they trade down in the first and pick up another 2nd or 3rd they could possibly draft a safety (Chavous is lousy), take a DE with the 2nd pick in the 2nd round, and then maybe OT with the extra 2nd rounder.

Thread Killer
02-06-2008, 09:51 PM
1. Long
2. Gholston
3. Ellis

freebirdsrams02
02-08-2008, 08:14 PM
I would love to see the Rams trade back and get an extra #2 pick. Then we could still get either a DE or S and then with the two #2 picks take a WR and OL. It looks like there is a lot of depth at DL in the top half of the 1st round so if they trade back they can still get a big DE prospect.

PossumBoy9
02-10-2008, 02:14 PM
why not take a beast of an edge-rusher in the first round in vernon gholston and then in the second take like pat sims to play NT

It may be just me, but I think Pat Sims will go higher.

KCJ58
02-12-2008, 01:12 AM
The point isn't that you're skipping Dorsey because of Ryan but rather because of Carriker, who seems to be the future three-technique on this team. Yes, you could move Carriker back to NT to make room for Dorsey at UT, but it would seem to me that's not an ideal use of the first-round player we already have.

yea you see what happened when we use two 1st round picks on DT last time (Damion Lewis & Ryan Pickett) and look how that turned out for us

nfrillman
02-12-2008, 02:51 PM
yea you see what happened when we use two 1st round picks on DT last time (Damion Lewis & Ryan Pickett) and look how that turned out for us

Yeah, exactly, it was straight gold. I still think they should have kept Pickett though, he is really good, unfortunately all the other DT's we drafted sucked.

ramsfan2005813
02-13-2008, 06:32 PM
chris long would be better fit because carriker would have to shed some weight to get some speed to move outside if dorsey would take over his inside spot
if dorsey was the pick the line would be:
LE: Little
NT: Ryan
UT: Dorsey
RE: Carriker
the line would be great against the run, but again would be lacking a consistent pass rush, so long would be better because he would add another more pass rush oriented player
also i think carriker should have a full year at DT before he is moved outside because i think he is a better fit inside

NFLCommander
02-17-2008, 06:41 PM
The number 1 concern here IS the defensive line. I can't remember the last time the defensive line was good, heck even average. DeMarco Farr was still on the team with Kevin Carter and Grant Wistrom. Atogwe stepped up at FS and Chavous could last another season or two to keep the Safety situation at bay for a while. The corner situation is probably better than it has been for a while too. The linebackers are pretty solid although someone opposite Tinoisamoa on the opposite side would be nice, but not that big of an issure. The d-line helps out the secondary and linebackers by putting up pressure and taking up blockers. Dorsey, Long or Gholston should be up there on the Ram's board. Dorsey is probably the best DT in the draft, and Dt is still a concern because if Ryan can't improve or even maintain his play from last season, Dorsey would have looked to have been the best choice.

yodabear
02-17-2008, 09:31 PM
Our team sucks and there is no way to imnprove it with Scott color crayon Linehan coaching.

nfrillman
02-17-2008, 11:45 PM
The number 1 concern here IS the defensive line. I can't remember the last time the defensive line was good, heck even average. DeMarco Farr was still on the team with Kevin Carter and Grant Wistrom. Atogwe stepped up at FS and Chavous could last another season or two to keep the Safety situation at bay for a while. The corner situation is probably better than it has been for a while too. The linebackers are pretty solid although someone opposite Tinoisamoa on the opposite side would be nice, but not that big of an issure. The d-line helps out the secondary and linebackers by putting up pressure and taking up blockers. Dorsey, Long or Gholston should be up there on the Ram's board. Dorsey is probably the best DT in the draft, and Dt is still a concern because if Ryan can't improve or even maintain his play from last season, Dorsey would have looked to have been the best choice.

Honestly I like Chillar better than Pisa. I personally think Pisa is a tad overrated because he was highly hyped and has a cool name, may sound dumb but that does effect things. With that being said, I still think Pisa is fine, LBing is not the problem, though if a stud became available they should definitely try to obtain him. I definitely agree that the D-line is the main problem on the defense. The secondary gets bashed a little bit, but the D-line had next to zero pass rush. I also wouldn't be opposed to finding someone to start of Chavous, because Chavous was utterly atrocious this year, I don't remember what site I found it on, but he was THE league leader or towards the very top in missed tackles.

Crickett
02-17-2008, 11:50 PM
Funny thing, probably the main reason I haven't written a mock draft at all is because if I were the Rams, I'd draft Gholston. He's the person most likely to provide immediate return on investment. If Pace comes back, it means Jake Long is either a guard or on the bench. As for Dorsey, at 308, I doubt Carriker is going to move outside unless he drops a lot of weight. But that would be me admitting that Gholston isn't going to be there when the Jets draft and I'm not willing to do that. :(

Also because I think the Gholston is the only person who would fill a need for the Jets and not be a huge reach.