Let’s Talk About Lamb

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
12,358
Reaction score
21,040
What's frustrating about the current situation to myself, and probably @DVontel and some others, is the weird sudden perception that the OTs are all busts because there isn't a firm #1, and the people who are desperately worried about next year's WR situation are ignoring that this year and the future on our offensive line is bad.

Any time I bring up actual hard stats, people seem to gloss over them and go on emotion.

- Kyler Murray was top 5 in hurries, but #33 in QB hits, which means he bailed this OL out constantly

This gets ignored because PFF said that half of the sacks (which are just added on to hurries) were his fault.

- We have 5 young WRs under contract for 2020, but no reliable RT, reliable G, tons of question marks at Center, functionally no ILB, and 3 total DE/DTs

This gets ignored because people are scared Larry is going to retire and we couldn't possibly acquire another WR next offseason, compared to how impossible it's going to be to fill those positions. We should be able to reap some benefits somewhere from Kirk, Isabella, Butler, and Johnson.

No team should be taking a 3rd or 4th receiver in the top ten picks unless they have every other position figured out. It's bad football. It would also be bad football to take a clearly bad OL or defensive player, but there aren't any clearly bad players we're talking about. It's more than obvious that this is about going sexy and putting up more points/big plays for some posters. Not all, but some.
What also irritates me is that I think Jeudy is a clearly better prospect than Lamb, so not only I would be pissed about going WR at #8, it would be the lesser WR.
 

GatorAZ

feed hopkins
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Posts
24,257
Reaction score
16,396
Location
The Giant Toaster
I like him and think he’s safe but would prefer him at #12. He’s got great hands and body control.

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,031
Reaction score
37,086
Location
UK
I think the big difference here is the guys who don’t want to draft an OT don’t say they will be pissed if we do or the team will be “stupid” to do that, or that anyone that wants a WR has “no sense”. It seems the “don’t draft WR” folks are militant about it and dismiss anyone else’s opinion as nonsense

The people who don't want an OT at #8 are the same people that have incessantly moaned about our much our O line sucks for 10 years straight. Because there isn't a Cards fan who hasn't.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,031
Reaction score
37,086
Location
UK
You and Solar7 have made your point, over and over and over again in nearly every thread, that you think drafting a WR at 8 is a terrible idea, and extremely unlikely to happen.

This post adds nothing to that stance except the additional claim that anyone who disagrees is an idiot. We could really use a lot less of that on this site (and in the world).

...dbs

If people are going to keep incessantly talking about doing something stupid I can't help but point out how stupid it is.

Many people here have actually started pushing the idea of Lamb at #8 MORE since we traded for Hopkins. As if having a matched pair is more valuable. This isn't antiques roadshow, it's not better to have two the same.

There are just so many reasons it's a bad idea.

1. If they give Nuk even just $18m APY that's $32m in our first 5 WR's. That's more than our starting 5 O linemen and the biggest cap hit of any position group on the roster already. They aren't going to add another $4.5m to it.

2. You can only have one WR1. We now have one. Why would you draft another WR1 with your #8 pick? You trade the 2nd for Nuk so you don't have to take the long shot on a receiver at #8.

3. Why would you draft one who's biggest NFL comp is the guy you just traded for and in doing so add nothing new in skill set to the roster?

4. Why would anyone trade a 2nd round pick for a top 3 WR and then use their #8 on another one that history shows has a 50/50 chance of hitting?

5. Hopkins hasn't had less than 150 targets in 5 years. There's only 1 ball. How do you get Lamb any kind of target share that makes him worth #8?

6. Why would you take targets away from a proven top NFL receiver you are paying $18-$20m a year to give them to the inferior version of the same player?

7. If you were dropped on your head as a child and decided to do that you are then taking targets away from Fitz. And thus stopping him getting the records he is gunning for.

8. You would also be pissing off the top WR you just traded for before he sets foot on the field. You just trade for the guy to make him your star receiver and you draft another receiver at #8 thats going to be competing for a share of the ball?

9. Who in their right mind with this roster would use both their top 2 picks on WR's? We aren't the Pats or some top tier team that are only a couple of receivers away from glory. We have major holes and depth issues everywhere.

10. Who is Lamb replacing? Kirk still has 2 years left on a rookie deal. Fitz keeps coming back every year. I very much doubt this is his last year. He's going to keep playing while he can and while he enjoys it. He's enjoyed it through a 3-13 season and a 5-10-1 season so I don't see that changing soon. What need is it filling exactly?

11. Kyler has shown that given time he can be a major deep threat ranking 4th last year in deep ball accuracy. Sadly, something we saw little of as he ran around to save his life or threw instant 5 yard checkdowns. You just traded for a superstar WR that you are going to pay big money. Wouldn't you want to ensure you can actually make the best use of him by giving your QB a worth O line?

12. Our current tackle group is oft injured Hump, even more oft injured Gilbert, 13 starts in 3 years Murray, and then some kids that never took a snap in the league.

13. We have 3 young WR's we drafted last year. Drafting a WR at 8 effectively kills all 3 of those guys off right away burning draft capital. We can't keep drafting the same positions over and over. We need to give those guys chance to develop.

I think I'm done now. You can just keep referring back to this.
 
Last edited:

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,680
Location
London UK
In general, I agree with you. But teams don't get better by letting their young QB get exposed to some of the league's best pass rushers in their division.

Are you trying to suggest that in 2020, KM would be better protected by a rookie than the two vets we have at RT?

Since this is an inexact science, there's no way for you to say Lamb (or any WR) is the best player on the board. If you miss on him, or he becomes nothing but another body in our muddled young WR situation, it's a huge swing for the fences that hurts the team and other players.

The "inexact" science applies to all positions. There is nothing in Lamb's body of work that suggests he will not adjust positively to the NFL.

This is what I find frustrating - there's way more downside to this move than up. If Kirk/Isabella/Butler/Johnson outplay him in camp, given that they have more time in this the NFL and this offense, you're trying to completely artificially manufacture a role for him to play. Sit at the end of Kirk's contract and watch him have an awesome year while Lamb has done nothing, and now argue about how it's not feasible to sign Kirk because we invested a top ten pick on a wideout.

Weak sauce! I would expect Kirk to outplay him in year #1 and Isabella's niche has yet to be found. When it comes to Kirk's renewal, cap and money will be found if he's deemed a key piece.

All of that opposed to a situation where we have a pretty good idea we have some productive (or top tier) guys, and then three we were amped about less than 365 days ago...

There are 6 or 7 Wideout jobs: Fitz, Hopkins, Kirk, Isabella (are likely guaranteed) - add: Lamb - let Butler, Johnson, Sherfield and whoever else fight for 1, 2 spots. In a season or two, post-Fitz - Lamb will be top 2.

It's a plan; not to your liking - but a plan nonetheless!


Edit: To be clear, I know Kirk has two more years, but this whole situation is wild with the virus and however Fitz's length of play could go.
 

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,680
Location
London UK
If people are going to keep incessantly talking about doing something stupid I can't help but point out how stupid it is.

Many people here have actually started pushing the idea of Lamb at #8 MORE since we traded for Hopkins. As if having a matched pair is more valuable. This isn't antiques roadshow, it's not better to have two the same.

There are just so many reasons it's a bad idea.

1. If they give Nuk even just $18m APY that's $32m in our first 5 WR's. That's more than our starting 5 O linemen and the biggest cap hit of any position group on the roster already. They aren't going to add another $4.5m to it.

2. You can only have one WR1. We now have one. Why would you draft another WR1 with your #8 pick? You trade the 2nd for Nuk so you don't have to take the long shot on a receiver at #8.

3. Why would you draft one who's biggest NFL comp is the guy you just traded for and in doing so add nothing new in skill set to the roster?

4. Why would anyone trade a 2nd round pick for a top 3 WR and then use their #8 on another one that history shows has a 50/50 chance of hitting?

5. Hopkins hasn't had less than 150 targets in 5 years. There's only 1 ball. How do you get Lamb any kind of target share that makes him worth #8?

6. Why would you take targets away from a proven top NFL receiver you are paying $18-$20m a year to give them to the inferior version of the same player?

7. If you were dropped on your head as a child and decided to do that you are then taking targets away from Fitz. And thus stopping him getting the records he is gunning for.

8. You would also be pissing off the top WR you just traded for before he sets foot on the field. You just trade for the guy to make him your star receiver and you draft another receiver at #8 thats going to be competing for a share of the ball?

9. Who in their right mind with this roster would use both their top 2 picks on WR's? We aren't the Pats or some top tier team that are only a couple of receivers away from glory. We have major holes and depth issues everywhere.

10. Who is Lamb replacing? Kirk still has 2 years left on a rookie deal. Fitz keeps coming back every year. I very much doubt this is his last year. He's going to keep playing while he can and while he enjoys it. He's enjoyed it through a 3-13 season and a 5-10-1 season so I don't see that changing soon. What need is it filling exactly?

11. Kyler has shown that given time he can be a major deep threat ranking 4th last year in deep ball accuracy. Sadly, something we saw little of as he ran around to save his life or threw instant 5 yard checkdowns. You just traded for a superstar WR that you are going to pay big money. Wouldn't you want to ensure you can actually make the best use of him by giving your QB a worth O line?

12. Our current tackle group is oft injured Hump, even more oft injured Gilbert, 13 starts in 3 years Murray, and then some kids that never took a snap in the league.

13. We have 3 young WR's we drafted last year. Drafting a WR at 8 effectively kills all 3 of those guys off right away burning draft capital. We can't keep drafting the same positions over and over. We need to give those guys chance to develop.

I think I'm done now. You can just keep referring back to this.


True. If need be, and I doubt there will, we can refer back to your usual "linear" thinking.

The argument that the choice at #8 is an O-lineman or we are “criminally” neglecting KM’s security is both spurious and laughable.

In this draft, it seems to me, that two positions are being pushed up into top 10 consideration based on need – Quarterbacks, per usual - and Offensive lineman.

It seems likely that three QBs will be off the board in the top 10, leaving 7 position players.

My list:

Chase Young DE - Jeff Okudah CB - Isiah Simmons LB – Derrick Brown – CeeDee Lamb WR – Jerry Jeudy WR are clearly top 10 talent. This leaves one hole to be filled by the likes of Javon Kinlaw, Henry Ruggs, Jedrick Wills, Becton, Wirfs, Thomas.

I doubt that Young, Okudah or Simmons will drop to #8. Based on this, my hope would be Brown, but fear that he too will be off the board. In my estimation, every O-line prospect is a backup in 2020, so I’d rather go with a playmaker at #8.

CeeDee Lamb has the potential to become our 1a / 1b with Hopkins – think Fitz & Boldin

I would then use some draft capital in the 3rd or 4th rounds to invest in the O-line’s future: some O-tackle possibilities may include, Niang, Wanogho, Cleveland and guards such as Simpson, Lewis, Lemieux.
 
Last edited:

TaylorSwift

Hall of Famer
Joined
Sep 20, 2019
Posts
1,406
Reaction score
1,240
Location
Phoenix
I wish there was a premium tackle in this draft. But I think Lamb will be the best player on their board at 8

Another ps
 

Garthshort

ASFN Addict
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Posts
9,001
Reaction score
4,860
Location
Scarsdale, NY
My Holy Cow are we going to cheer when they pick Lamb
Probably not. Because it won't happen. I'll be happy with our WR's if get one in the first, but will, in time, realize that we missed a chance to improve our OL or our defense. My hope is to trade back and pick an OT in the 12-15 range. The Draft can't get here soon enough.
 

TheCardFan

Things have changed.
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
12,028
Reaction score
14,549
Location
Charlotte
I guess the same could be said for the Redskins.

They don't "need" a DE and they just picked one in the first round last year.
They also have a "QBOF" they drafted in first round of last year who needs to be protected.
What they clearly "need" is a LT.

However, it seems as though they will take the best player - DE - Chase Young.

Same could also be said for the 49ers last year. They drafted DL 4 out of the 5 last years with #1 pick.
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
12,358
Reaction score
21,040
I guess the same could be said for the Redskins.

They don't "need" a DE and they just picked one in the first round last year.
They also have a "QBOF" they drafted in first round of last year who needs to be protected.
What they clearly "need" is a LT.

However, it seems as though they will take the best player - DE - Chase Young.

Same could also be said for the 49ers last year. They drafted DL 4 out of the 5 last years with #1 pick.
That’s cool & all until it comes to realization that the impact of a WR is not even in the same ball-park as a pass-rusher/DE’s impact.


49ers actually needed a pass-rusher. None of their pass-rushers had 6 sacks in 2019.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,031
Reaction score
37,086
Location
UK
I guess the same could be said for the Redskins.

They don't "need" a DE and they just picked one in the first round last year.
They also have a "QBOF" they drafted in first round of last year who needs to be protected.
What they clearly "need" is a LT.

However, it seems as though they will take the best player - DE - Chase Young.

Same could also be said for the 49ers last year. They drafted DL 4 out of the 5 last years with #1 pick.

You got it backwards though.

In this scenario Hopkins is Chase Young and Lamb is Montez Sweat. If they drafted Young last year, they wouldn't be taking Sweat this year.

And I've said before, I'm not convinced the Skins will take Young. He's BPA because he's the best player in the whole draft, but they have a lot of needs. A haul in a trade back suits them much better.

Also the problem with this analogy is that you have 2 starting DE's, plus a 3rd that usually plays 30% of snaps. You have 2 or 3 starting iDL and 2 or 3 more that play a chunk of snaps.

You only have one WR1, and he plays 98% of snaps.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,031
Reaction score
37,086
Location
UK
For most teams I might agree but not for the Cards. First round WRs are scary, but this is a very unusual scenario.

I'd argue the opposite. Ruggs or Jeudy offer something they don't currently have. Lamb is doubling up on what you just gained with Nuk.

Teams normally want guys that can come on the field and offer something different, not do the same thing the guy thats on the field 98% of the time is already doing.
 

TheCardFan

Things have changed.
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
12,028
Reaction score
14,549
Location
Charlotte
That’s cool & all until it comes to realization that the impact of a WR is not even in the same ball-park as a pass-rusher/DE’s impact.

49ers actually needed a pass-rusher. None of their pass-rushers had 6 sacks in 2019.

I am not advocating for a WR specifically. My position is (outside of QB this year)...we should take the best player.

When you take a less talented player at a position of need vs the best player...it usually hurts your team. We should know this by now.
 

DVontel

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 28, 2015
Posts
12,358
Reaction score
21,040
I am not advocating for a WR specifically. My position is (outside of QB this year)...we should take the best player.

When you take a less talented player at a position of need vs the best player...it usually hurts your team. We should know this by now.
I know this. It’s not rocket science, but for some reason, folks here are acting like it’s immune to think that Wills or Wirfs would also be BPA over Lamb.
 

TheCardFan

Things have changed.
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
12,028
Reaction score
14,549
Location
Charlotte
Like I wish you guys would stop reiterating that “Always take BPA over Need” as if Lamb is levels above Wills as a prospect.

The bottom line is nobody knows which of these prospects will have the better career. None of us on this board truly knows and most NFL teams don't know (or there wouldn't be so many busts each year with high picks).

If Lamb and Wills will have the same great career - 10 year starters and some pro bowls mixed in. I would take Wills.

If Wills/Becton/Wirfs/Thomas is the next Levi Brown and Lamb is the next DHop (and there isn't another player on that level when you draft)...you take Lamb.

The fun part of this is we all get to debate and promote our favorite player or potential strategy.
The frustrating part of this is people act like they know with 100% certainty that this player is going to better than that player and tell other people they are wrong.

Let's have fun.
 

overseascardfan

ASFN Addict
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Posts
8,807
Reaction score
2,094
Location
Phoenix
So I feel if ARZ goes WR (Jeudy and Lamb are equals) then that has to mean that Larry won't be back after next year as you can't keep paying him $11M when Lamb / Jeudy & Hopkins will be getting most of the targets.

After Keim's revelation that premium FA positions influence his drafting strategy you have to believe either Okudah or an OT who could eventually take over for Humphries at LT would be the direction ARZ will take. Keim unlike BA doesn't flat out lie. Keim may lack in talent evaluation but I will credit him for thinking ahead. He tries to maintain constant cap flexibility and build for the future. He knows Humphries could regress or continue to have issues with injuries so a replacement could be necessary soon. Also, Peterson will most likely be re-signed but if Okudah is there, a CB tandem of Peterson and Okudah with Murphy in slot would solidify the CB position that has been in flux for years.
 

Zeno

Ancient
Joined
Sep 24, 2002
Posts
15,513
Reaction score
5,219
Location
Fort Myers
Like I wish you guys would stop reiterating that “Always take BPA over Need” as if Lamb is levels above Wills as a prospect.

Only a few people have said this. I am not even sure Lamb is the best WR in the draft personally. There are too many "draft OT" no matter what posts going on-- I also don't agree with the "draft WR" no matter what takes (although those guys seem to be more civil about it).

People just act like no matter what player at position X should be the pick no matter how the players are graded.
 

Dr. Jones

Has No Time For Love
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
24,797
Reaction score
13,532
Taking Lamb excites me...... Taking Ruggs makes me giddy.

Not sure how that truly makes me feel though.

Nuk - Isabella XXOXX Fitz - Kirk - Ruggs

With K1 & KD in the backfield. Oooooof
 

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,680
Location
London UK
So I feel if ARZ goes WR (Jeudy and Lamb are equals) then that has to mean that Larry won't be back after next year as you can't keep paying him $11M when Lamb / Jeudy & Hopkins will be getting most of the targets.

After Keim's revelation that premium FA positions influence his drafting strategy you have to believe either Okudah or an OT who could eventually take over for Humphries at LT would be the direction ARZ will take. Keim unlike BA doesn't flat out lie. Keim may lack in talent evaluation but I will credit him for thinking ahead. He tries to maintain constant cap flexibility and build for the future. He knows Humphries could regress or continue to have issues with injuries so a replacement could be necessary soon. Also, Peterson will most likely be re-signed but if Okudah is there, a CB tandem of Peterson and Okudah with Murphy in slot would solidify the CB position that has been in flux for years.

The cap keeps going up and up, and there's a new TV deal on the way.

Bidwill will pay Fitz $11m for as long as he wants to play and can produce.
 

overseascardfan

ASFN Addict
Joined
Apr 9, 2005
Posts
8,807
Reaction score
2,094
Location
Phoenix
The cap keeps going up and up, and there's a new TV deal on the way.

Bidwill will pay Fitz $11m for as long as he wants to play and can produce.
Doesn't matter if cap goes up, the money would be put to better use on another key position. Fitzgerald is overpaid compared to his production as is so if we take a WR then his production would continue to go down making him even more overpaid.
 

GuernseyCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
10,123
Reaction score
5,680
Location
London UK
Doesn't matter if cap goes up, the money would be put to better use on another key position. Fitzgerald is overpaid compared to his production as is so if we take a WR then his production would continue to go down making him even more overpaid.

So you say, and I repeat.... Mike Bidwill, the guy with the cheque book, disagrees.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
534,847
Posts
5,246,879
Members
6,274
Latest member
G-PA
Top