THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: Hindsight is always 20/20 … but perhaps not so much with the 2009 NFL draft class. If you could go back in time and reselect the Rams No. 2 overall pick, who would you have selected based on the first-half performance of the rookies this season?

JIM THOMAS
I was intrigued by the prospect of LB Aaron Curry, but have no problem with OT Jason Smith. But James Laurinaitis has worked out fine at LB as a second-round pick. And I wonder if Sanchez truly is a franchise-type quarterback.

BERNIE MIKLASZ
Well, I’ll be consistent and stay with what I said at the time: QB Mark Sanchez. I didn’t have a problem with the choice of OT Jason Smith. I believe Smith will be a terrific offensive tackle in the NFL and anchor the offensive line for a long time. But Billy Devaney and Steve Spagnuolo can’t fully implement their program until they install a quarterback who will be their long-term starter. Sanchez was the ideal fit for a West Coast offense. He’s certainly had some struggles during his rookie season, but that doesn’t mean much if you pay attention to history. Many Hall of Fame quarterbacks came out of the gate slowly as young NFL starters. The Rams could have used this season as a way to slowly ease a rookie QB into the offense to get him some work and experience. Instead, if they draft a QB in 2010, which is something we can expect, 2010 will be a developmental season for the rookie QB. In other words, the Rams will have wasted a year in beginning the inevitable process. And for those pining for Keith Null: internally he is not viewed as a long-term answer at QB for the Rams. Sorry.

JEFF GORDON
If the Rams had taken LB Aaron Curry, they probably wouldn’t have taken James Laurinaitis. But Curry’s early returns for Seattle were awesome. He looks like a home-run hitter on the defensive side, a game-changer. The Rams could have landed a tackle in the second round and possibly come out ahead. Mark Sanchez and Matthew Stafford have promise at QB, but both would be losing game after game here — and perhaps developing bad habits.

KATHLEEN NELSON
“Based on first-half performance?” Percy Harvin looks like a good pick. He’s made an immediate impact in the offense and on special teams with the Vikings; two kickoff returns for TDs, 369 receiving yards, 3 TD catches. Maybe it helps to have Brett Favre throwing to you, though. I’m not dissing Jason Smith, though. I think he could grow into an anchor on the offensive line. He just hasn’t been as fast out of the blocks or as visible as Harvin.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: Offensive tackle or linebacker? Linebacker or offensive tackle? The debate rages on about the No. 2 overall pick. But the Rams have many, many needs to address in this draft: offensive and defensive line, wide receiver, linebacker, backup QB and RB, defensive back … the list goes on. Which side of the ball do you think the Rams will have invested in most heavily come the end of next weekend’s NFL draft?

JIM THOMAS
The Rams have so many needs, it really depends on who’s available at each pick that is a good value (highly rated) in each particular round. For example, say the Rams take an offensive tackle in the first round. What they do in the second round might depend on whether wide receiver Hakeem Nicks, defensive tackle Ziggy Hood, edge rusher Larry English or even Ohio State middle linebacker James Laurinaitis is available. But on balance, if the Rams are serious about a drafting a quarterback and a backup running back, there shold be a tilt towards offense.

BRYAN BURWELL
When you end up drafting in the No. 2 slot in the first round in back-to-back seasons that means you have huge holes all over your roster. But despite Steve Spagnuolo’s defensive background, I won’t be surprised if his GM Billy Devaney goes slightly towards filling in the most holes on offense. The Rams need starters on the offensive line, immediate help at WR, a useful RB to spell Steven Jackson, QB for the future … and did I already say how badly they need more big and talented offensive linemen?

JEFF GORDON
Over the course of the draft, the Rams may end up with a bigger offensive investment. They have to add at least one tackle. Receiver is a glaring need. They could use a better No. 2 running back and another quarterback. On defense, they need a middle linebacker, a beefy defensive tackle, depth at cornerback and perhaps a developmental pass-rushing end. But the Rams put the franchise tag on O.J. Atogwe, spent heavily to keep Ron Bartell and filled their safety void in free agency.

BILL COATS
It’ll be close, but I think the Rams’ draft will lean toward offense. They need significant help on the line, at wide receiver and running back, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they took a quarterback in the later rounds.

KATHLEEN NELSON
I think the correct answer is “line,” on both sides of the ball. But since that’s not a choice, I’ll go with offense. The Rams are more likely to use the first pick on an offensive lineman, and there are so many good wide receivers in the draft, one is likely to be the “best player available” by the time they pick in the second round.

QUESTION: Rams general manager Billy Devaney has said the Rams are willing to listen to offers for the team’s No. 2 overall draft pick. Given the many needs of this team, does it make sense to trade down and accumulate more draft picks or is there a difference-maker the Rams should target with the No. 2?

JIM THOMAS

If ever there was a year to trade down, this is it for the Rams. They need bodies, lots of bodies, to fill starting spots and build up depth on the roster. The ideal situation might be if they could trade down, yet stay in the top 10 and pick up another pick or two along the way.

BERNIE MIKLASZ

It makes great sense to do so, because the Rams have so many holes to fill. But the chance of this happening is highly unlikely, because teams don’t want to move up into a much higher money slot. It costs a lot of jack to get the No. 2 overall pick signed, and there simply isn’t that much difference (this year) in the 2nd pick and, say, the 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th picks. But sure, there would be some terrific players available if the Rams moved down. Too many to list here. Finding a trade partner is the issue. And I wouldn’t want the Rams to drop out of the first 10 or 12 slots in the draft.

JEFF GORDON

I’d like to see the team take Aaron Curry second overall. But the Rams could deal down and still get an offensive tackle. So, sure, that would make all the sense in the world. The Rams could get a tackle for less money, then add an additional player or two in the later rounds. Since this team needs so many things, dealing out of the No. 2 slot could be a great idea. Detroit is thinking the same thing about the No. 1 overall pick — but are there teams really looking to move up?

BRYAN BURWELL

If the Rams draft board evaluates the talent available at the top of the draft as non-Pro Bowl caliber starters not worth the price of a No.2 pick, then by all means trade down and accumulate picks. At this stage it is all about valuing potential.

ROGER HENSLEY

Yes, the Rams have many, many needs. Frankly, they have more needs than what can be fulfilled in one draft, so I’m not sure the stockpiling philosophy works here. Every year teams take chances on high draft picks and invariably many of those don’t work out. For that reason, I think when you see a surefire stud sitting there and you have a chance to nab him, you do so. I believe there is one of those in this year’s draft, and his name is Aaron Curry. It’s a new day, Rams fans, time to put the Greatest Show to bed and get back to the basics of what consistently brings the most success in the NFL – defense. And at the heart of any defense is a middle linebacker that strikes fear in the other team and serves as the glue for an entire unit. Again, I think Curry is that player. Mining a gem at offensive tackle can be a tricky business and it seems there are as many misses as hits in drafting at that position. This draft is deep there … the Rams have the talent evaluators now to do the research and find someone later in the draft who can help at offensive tackle. Start on the defensive side of the ball. Start with Curry.

THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: The Show-Me state got its second new NFL general manager this week when Scott Pioli, longtime vice president of player personnel for the New England Patriots, was hired by the Kansas City Chiefs. This comes on the heels of Billy Devaney being elevated recently to the same post with the St. Louis Rams. Both GMs inherit teams that went 2-14 last year and neither has his head coach locked in for next season. Which of the two do you think will be first to lead their team back to the playoffs?

JIM THOMAS
There’s a lot of hype surrounding Pioli, but a once-in-a-generation type of quarterback like Tom Brady makes a lot of people look like genuises. Even with Denver hiring a new coach and LaDainian Tomlinson showing signs of wearing down in San Diego, the AFC West remains a tougher division than the NFC West. So we’ll go with Devaney and the Rams, barely.

BERNIE MIKLASZ
The Chiefs have an edge with Pioli, who is the No. 1 “catch” of the offseason. There is less work and rebuilding to do in Kansas City, and fewer questions about ownership stability.

BILL COATS
Devaney has a slight edge here. The Rams’ roster, while badly in need of an overhaul, actually is a bit stronger than the Chiefs’ roster. Plus, the NFC West is arguably the weakest division in the NFL — not that the AFC West is filled with juggernauts. So if the right buttons are pushed, the Rams could make a move up pretty quickly.

KATHLEEN NELSON
I’ll give the edge to the Chiefs because the Hunt family seems to have a better football sense than Chip and Lucia. Scott Pioli also comes from a recent winning tradition with the Patriots, the closest thing the NFL has had to a dynasty in the last decade.

****

MIDDAY NEWS AND THOUGHTS

STILL GLAD TO BE A CUBBIE? When Aaron Miles signed with the Chicago Cubs on Dec. 31, most folks thought he would be penciled into the starting second base job with Mark DeRosa leaving Chicago. Well not so fast. According to the Chicago Tribune, Cubs general manager Jim Hendry said this week that Miles will compete with Mike Fontenot for the job during spring training.

Fontenot hit .360 after the All-Star break last year and showed he can play at a high level. “I think when we all got done, and all the things that got batted around in the last couple of months, we forget how good a player he was last year,” Hendry told the Tribune.

Miles, 32, averaged 134 games played and batted .263, .290 and .317 over the last three years with the Cardinals. But he sure sounded like he thought his future was bright when leaving town. Who can forget the following comments he made to Chicago beat writers: “I’m excited to be a Cubbie. Being a Cardinal was great, and that part is over now. Now I’m ready to be a Cubbie and play the game the right way.”

Well, it looks like the right way might be another stint as a utility player … but this time for the Lovable Losers, not the 10-time world champs. I’m just sayin’.

To be fair, Miles didn’t totally slam the Cardinals on his way out of town. In fact, he told P-D writer Derrick Goold the following: “It was still the toughest decision I’ve had to make because St. Louis was the greatest experience I’ve ever had in baseball. Being with the Cardinals made my career happen. I started in Colorado, but I made a name for myself in St. Louis.”

If you missed it the first time around, you can check Goold’s interview with Miles in the Birdland blog.

THE END OF AN ERROR? Say it ain’t so. Chemistry problems in the Dallas Cowboys locker room? Nah, can’t be. Surely the Cowboys had to be convinced they could control Terrell Owens when they signed him … after he had already worn out his welcome in Philadelphia and San Francisco. What convinced them otherwise? Perhaps it was T.O. calling out golden boy quarterback Tony Romo late this season. But that’s just history repeating itself, as we all know T.O. trashed his QBs in Philly and San Fran — Donovan McNabb and Jeff Garcia, respectively.

But Owens may not be the only problem, reports ESPN’s Ed Werder. He says improving locker room chemistry is the highest priority for the Cowboys this offseason. “I think we all know that chemistry is the problem with this team more than the schemes or anything else,” a Cowboys source told Werder. “Are we going to continue to allow talent to outweigh everything else in the decisions we make with players and putting the roster together? … There’s more to it than talent. It has to be more about the team. … “The big one [Owens] didn’t get discussed yet, but I’m sure it will and real hard.”

This one is about as surprising to me as “Dog bites man.”

****

SOMETHING TO PONDER

THE DEVILS MADE HIM DO IT: So the Brendan Shanahan “sweepstakes” are over as the three-time Stanley Cup champion has finalized a contract to play out this season with the New Jersey Devils, the team that selected him No. 2 overall in the 1987 draft. This may prick at the hearts of some Blues fans — the Blues had expressed interest in Shanahan returning to St. Louis — but I think the Blues benefitted by Shanahan’s desire to finish out his career on the East coast.

There’s no denying the impact of Shanahan’s career. He has tallied 650 goals and 1,340 points in 1,490 NHL games. He ranks 11th on the career goal list and 24th in points. Again, unmistakably a star.

Now for the flip side: First, Shanahan turns 40 next week. He’s clearly nearing the end of the road. This is not the same guy who the Blues signed in 1991 in a trade that sent defenseman Scott Stevens to the Devils (where Stevens helped lead New Jersey to three Cup titles.) No, this Shanahan is coming off a 23-goal, 46-point season with the Rangers in 2007 — the lowest total since his rookie season. Shanahan’s last truly great year came in 2005 with the Red Wings, when he put up 40 goals and 81 points. That’s three years ago, or 21 in dog years (and since Shanahan has played 21 seasons, I think the comparison works.)

For my ticket money, give me the Baby Blues and the future on the ice rather than Shanahan and the past. Sorry, Shanny, but I just would hate to see you taking ice time away from the guys that are going to lead this team for years to come.

****

STAT OF THE DAY

102 — Points Shanahan put up for the Blues in 1993. 52 goals and 50 assists. Wow!

Leave it to the Rams to make some big moves on Christmas Eve with John Shaw stepping down and the promotion of Billy Devaney. Maybe Christmas Day will be a little quieter at Rams Park although it looks like San Francisco 49ers interim coach Mike Singletary is having a better holiday than Rams interim Jim Haslett. The Sacramento Bee is reporting that Singletary will be retained although his offensive coordinator Mike Martz will not return. And in respect to the holiday, we’ll refrain from comment on Charlie Weis managing to get Notre Dame past Hawaii in the Sheraton Hawaii Bowl on Christmas Eve.

The Water Cooler
An abbreviated version today as we continue to look at Post-Dispatch reporters and their thoughts on some of the top stories of the year:

Tom Timmermann
The top story of the year was anything to do with the Rams, whose dreadfulness was worse than the Blues and more noteworthy than the surprising legs the Cardinals showed. The owner died, setting the stage for a sale — and possible departure — of the franchise and the team stunk, leading to the firing of the coach and the overhauling of the front office. In a year, we may not recognize the Rams. And in a few more, they might not be here.

Jeff Gordon
The demise of A-B. This will have a huge and unfortunate impact on local sports. Combine the adverse impact on the economy and the potential loss of long-term sponsorship and you have a catastrophe.