Lot of buzz about the Rams and Vernon Gholston

NGSeiler · 03-13-2008, 11:19 AM

Schefter said a few days ago that Gholston may be looked at as the best defensive player in the draft, and that the Rams took him out to dinner the night before his Pro Day workout (source).

Also, according to ESPN's Matt Mosley, "I know for a fact that the Rams are in love with Ohio State DE/LB Vernon Gholston, but not enough to take him here." His latest projection has the Rams taking Jake Long (source).

Frankly, if the Rams view Gholston as the best defender in this class, I don't think second overall is too high to take him.

freebirdsrams02 · 03-13-2008, 02:02 PM

I also think he would be a great selection at #2.

But, with Atlanta needing help on Offense and the Raiders looking at McFadden why not trade back to 5 with the K.C. Chiefs who need a LT and still get Gholston and then they could also pick up another pick.

holtfan92 · 03-13-2008, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freebirdsrams02

I also think he would be a great selection at #2.

But, with Atlanta needing help on Offense and the Raiders looking at McFadden why not trade back to 5 with the K.C. Chiefs who need a LT and still get Gholston and then they could also pick up another pick.

I'd love to do that, but of course its hard to trade down. Gholston has amazing strength so it would work out.

nfrillman · 03-13-2008, 04:20 PM

Well my opinion is that even if you are high on a player it's still not a good pick if you could have gotten him later. Now if a trade doesn't materialize and we are stuck at 2 then just go ahead and take whoever is highest on your board, even if mock's have him going in the 5-10 range. I still think they should take Chris Long over Gholston if he is available.

freebirdsrams02 · 03-13-2008, 06:32 PM

Chris Long should be on top of the board, no doubt. But in a case where he is gone I think Gholston should be 2nd on that list. So we take him at the 2nd pick or trade back and take him later we will see. Trading with K.C. could be a big trade in our favor. Atlanta needs and so does K.C. so if we use that as a barganing chip we could get a lot from K.C. to move ahead of Atlanta. Atlanta took a DE last year a would not take Gholston. The Raiders could but they need more help else where and would not pass on McFadden or Dorsey. Even if we do trade back and Gholston somehow comes off the board along with both Longs and say McFadden, then we take Dorsey at 5 and still get another pick from K.C. But the Jets sitting at 6 also want Gholston so the only trade would come from K.C. or below. But trading with Atlanta would prove anything and I don't see the Raiders moving up for anything.

NGSeiler · 03-14-2008, 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freebirdsrams02

But, with Atlanta needing help on Offense and the Raiders looking at McFadden why not trade back to 5 with the K.C. Chiefs who need a LT and still get Gholston and then they could also pick up another pick.

No guarantee he makes it by Oakland. Kelly is moving inside to tackle and Burgess turns 30 in August. They could use the edge youth and talent.

holt_bruce81 · 03-14-2008, 02:27 AM

The Rams big board should be.......

1. Chris Long
2. Vernon Gholston
3. Glenn Dorsey
4. Jake Long

NGSeiler · 03-14-2008, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by holt_bruce81

The Rams big board should be.......

1. Chris Long
2. Vernon Gholston
3. Glenn Dorsey
4. Jake Long

My take...

1. Chris Long
2a. Vernon Gholston
2b. Jake Long

3. Glenn Dorsey

freebirdsrams02 · 03-14-2008, 05:57 PM

With DE and OT being very deep in this draft would it matter to anyone if we went OT in the first and DE in the second or DE in the first and OT in the second as long as we filled those two needs.

KCJ58 · 03-14-2008, 06:00 PM

my Big Board is

1. Chris Long
2. Vernon Gholston

PossumBoy9 · 03-15-2008, 09:12 AM

C. Long & Gholston are extremely close on my board, but I've been somebody who's been to VG.

If he's not worth the #2 overall in this draft....who is?

ramsfan2005813 · 03-16-2008, 09:02 AM

if they could work out a trade with KC to trade down to five and then take gholston that would be great, but if they can't I wouldn't mind seeing him go at two because he is the best pure passrusher in the draft in my opinion

04-12-2008, 04:12 PM

The Rams need impact players. Lord knows they lack playmakers. Gholston is a high risk or high reward player. Long is a bit undersized, has the heart of a lion though and you have to love that. Long is more polished, but I worry about him getting mauled by NFL sized linemen. Gholston has a very rare combination of size, strength and speed. If your 3-13 and have a defense with ZERO playmakers ( witherspoon might be the lone exception ) in your front seven, you take Gholston and pray he works out.

nfrillman · 04-12-2008, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hessel

The Rams need impact players. Lord knows they lack playmakers. Gholston is a high risk or high reward player. Long is a bit undersized, has the heart of a lion though and you have to love that. Long is more polished, but I worry about him getting mauled by NFL sized linemen. Gholston has a very rare combination of size, strength and speed. If your 3-13 and have a defense with ZERO playmakers ( witherspoon might be the lone exception ) in your front seven, you take Gholston and pray he works out.

Ummm, allow me to say, "What???" I agree that Gholston is a high risk high reward player. That is about the point where you lose me. Long is undersized? He is listed at 6'3" 270 lbs. Gholston is listed at 6'3" 266 lbs. I think I know who I would nominate as a potential candidate to be mauled by NFL linemen between those two, and it's not Long. Gholston does have a great combination of size, strength, and speed, but so does Long. Gholston ran a 4.67 and Long ran a 4.75, that isn't much of a difference. Long is good against the pass and the run, while Gholston has been knocked for his run stopping inability. I can't find individual defensive stats anywhere, but I am also pretty sure that most of Gholston's sacks came in 3 or 4 games, meaning he just beat the crap out of a few people, while the others stopped him. I would also contend that Atogwe qualifies as a playmaker. Basically I think if they take Gholston at #2 they are reaching for him. He was never even considered an option that high until after the combine, so I just want to know what he did there that wasn't visable on his tapes that warrants him moving up that high. With that being said, if Chris Long is gone, I think Gholston is probably the best pick at 2, possibly Jake Long, and I'm not liking the idea of Dorsey because we would have 5 DT's.

holt_bruce81 · 04-13-2008, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nfrillman

Ummm, allow me to say, "What???" I agree that Gholston is a high risk high reward player. That is about the point where you lose me. Long is undersized? He is listed at 6'3" 270 lbs. Gholston is listed at 6'3" 266 lbs. I think I know who I would nominate as a potential candidate to be mauled by NFL linemen between those two, and it's not Long. Gholston does have a great combination of size, strength, and speed, but so does Long. Gholston ran a 4.67 and Long ran a 4.75, that isn't much of a difference. Long is good against the pass and the run, while Gholston has been knocked for his run stopping inability. I can't find individual defensive stats anywhere, but I am also pretty sure that most of Gholston's sacks came in 3 or 4 games, meaning he just beat the crap out of a few people, while the others stopped him. I would also contend that Atogwe qualifies as a playmaker. Basically I think if they take Gholston at #2 they are reaching for him. He was never even considered an option that high until after the combine, so I just want to know what he did there that wasn't visable on his tapes that warrants him moving up that high. With that being said, if Chris Long is gone, I think Gholston is probably the best pick at 2, possibly Jake Long, and I'm not liking the idea of Dorsey because we would have 5 DT's.

If Chris Long is gone, I want Jake Long or Glenn Dorsey. I don't want Gholston unless we trade down to 5 or 6.

When you watch a DE at the combine the most important drills for a DE are 10 yard splits, bench, 20-yard shuttle and 3-cone drill.

10 yard splits:
Gholston: 1.53
Long: 1.53

Bench:
Gholston: 37
Long: did not participate

20-yard shuttle:
Gholston: 4.40
Long: 4.21

3-cone drill:
Gholston: 7.12
Long: 7.02

Chris Long had a better shuttle, 10 yard split and 3-cone than Mario Williams. Long had a Better shuttle and better 10 yard than Kearse. And Long had the same 10-yard split a better 3-cone and better shuttle then Patrick Willis.

Chris Long is a great athlete, gives you 110% every snap, and has the best technique for a defensive end.

nfrillman · 04-13-2008, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by holt_bruce81

If Chris Long is gone, I want Jake Long or Glenn Dorsey. I don't want Gholston unless we trade down to 5 or 6.

When you watch a DE at the combine the most important drills for a DE are 10 yard splits, bench, 20-yard shuttle and 3-cone drill.

10 yard splits:
Gholston: 1.53
Long: 1.53

Bench:
Gholston: 37
Long: did not participate

20-yard shuttle:
Gholston: 4.40
Long: 4.21

3-cone drill:
Gholston: 7.12
Long: 7.02

Chris Long had a better shuttle, 10 yard split and 3-cone than Mario Williams. Long had a Better shuttle and better 10 yard than Kearse. And Long had the same 10-yard split a better 3-cone and better shuttle then Patrick Willis.

Chris Long is a great athlete, gives you 110% every snap, and has the best technique for a defensive end.

Yeah, the more I think about it the more I think I would like Jake Long over Gholston. Gholston is just starting to worry me because of how high everyone got on him after the combine.......workout warrior. I don't know what to think about taking Dorsey. My main hang up is having 5 DT's. None of them would have high trade value either, so that basically just means we carry 5 DT's on the roster or risk putting a quality player on the practice squad where another team can sign them. I do rank Dorsey above Gholston, I just have a hard time seeing the need at DT. Having 5 DT's would be like having 8 good WR's, it just doesn't make sense. As far as a trade down goes, it is extremely unlikely that someone would want to move up to #2, but Gholston would be the target if we did trade down. I couldn't really complain about that move either, if it got us another 2nd rounder.

holtfan92 · 04-13-2008, 06:27 PM

I don't think Jake is falling to us.. so Gholston or Long would be my choice.

freebirdsrams02 · 04-13-2008, 06:34 PM

Has there been any thought about Carriker playing DE. If we do take Dorsey, only if Chris Long is gone, at #2. Would that be a better fit for him or should he he stay inside. I too am not seeing Gholston as a #2 pick and would rather only see him in a trade back. But it seems there are other players moving up the boards like DE Harvey and OG Alberts and Gholston is moving backwards. Even if we trade back I don't know if Gholston is still our pick.

holt_bruce81 · 04-13-2008, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freebirdsrams02

Has there been any thought about Carriker playing DE. If we do take Dorsey, only if Chris Long is gone, at #2. Would that be a better fit for him or should he he stay inside. I too am not seeing Gholston as a #2 pick and would rather only see him in a trade back. But it seems there are other players moving up the boards like DE Harvey and OG Alberts and Gholston is moving backwards. Even if we trade back I don't know if Gholston is still our pick.

If we take Dorsey, Carriker will stay at the NT and thats where I want him. Carriker and Dorsey would be insane, it would free up our Defensive Ends. Maybe take a guy like Quentin Groves in the 2nd.

freebirdsrams02 · 04-13-2008, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by holt_bruce81

If we take Dorsey, Carriker will stay at the NT and thats where I want him. Carriker and Dorsey would be insane, it would free up our Defensive Ends. Maybe take a guy like Quentin Groves in the 2nd.

Phillip Merling might also be in the 2nd round. So Dorsey and Merling or Groves would make an impact up front. But I doubt they go DL in the first 2 rounds.

toonsterwu · 04-13-2008, 09:41 PM

The late buzz seems to be on Dorsey right now. If he does, I think Carriker goes to end, but will slide inside on passing downs. That said, Carriker offers versatility, so he may be shifted in and out.

I wouldn't hold my breath on hoping for Merling or Groves in the early 2nd. It's possible, but I think the chances are slim.

I think if you go DL in the first, I don't think OL is going to be a strong consideration in the early 2nd. I think BPA is possible, but I'd guess WR there, depending on the board. Although I'm a bit perplexed on type of WR. Pre-Saunders, the talk was for a bigger guy. But Saunders typically likes those smaller and quicker guys.

Personally, I'd wait till the 3rd for a WR if Saunders gets final say on type of player. There should be some solid, shifty, quick guys in the early 3rd.

d34ng3l021 · 04-13-2008, 10:00 PM

Serious? I would be really pissed if Jake Long and Glenn Dorsey go number 1 and 2. Those are my top 2 guys.

NGSeiler · 04-13-2008, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freebirdsrams02

Has there been any thought about Carriker playing DE.

Jim Thomas: "If the Rams drafted Dorsey, Dorsey and Carriker would be the starting DTs in the base defense."

freebirdsrams02 · 04-13-2008, 11:03 PM

If we take Dorsey that would give us 5 DT. I don't think the Rams are going to carry 5. So who would be out and could they trade one for a draft pick.

holt_bruce81 · 04-13-2008, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freebirdsrams02

If we take Dorsey that would give us 5 DT. I don't think the Rams are going to carry 5. So who would be out and could they trade one for a draft pick.

If Wroten shows something at camp, I'm all for cutting Laroi Glover.

Carriker, Wroten, Ryan, Dorsey