How far is too far for trade down by Rams?/Wagoner

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
uhh what?

In your scenario you're assuming that the Texans want to risk losing getting their guy.. Another team could leap them or just take their guy if they trade down too far(looking at you Jax, Cleveland, or Oakland)

What Risk? A trade with Rams would have no risk with the understanding they wouldn't go QB or trade out again.
 

SierraRam

Recreational User
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Messages
2,254
"While the assembled NFL was on his campus today, Spurrier said he merely meant that Clowney didn’t have a superhuman work ethic like Marcus Lattimore and others.

“I said [Lattimore] was exceptional. I maybe should not have compared [Clowney],” Spurrier said, via Brian Smith of the Houston Chronicle. “I should have said, ‘Jadeveon, with the rest of the team, he was right there doing what they did.’ Maybe that would’ve helped out. I compared him to a guy who went above and beyond what was asked.”"

A "once in a decade" talent doesn't have a year like he had last year. I could be wrong - we'll find out, but I don't want to take that chance when we can get a sure thing that fills an immediate need, and an extra pick to boot..
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
uhh what?

In your scenario you're assuming that the Texans want to risk losing getting their guy.. Another team could leap them or just take their guy if they trade down too far(looking at you Jax, Cleveland, or Oakland)

Also, no one intelligent is drafting for need at #1. It's too valuable. Why would Houston blow the #1 on a number 8 or later player? Not that its never happened, but I just don't see it.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
A "once in a decade" talent doesn't have a year like he had last year. I could be wrong - we'll find out, but I don't want to take that chance when we can get a sure thing that fills an immediate need, and an extra pick to boot..

I won't be mad if you're correct. It would be pretty hard to blow this draft. I just don't see the Rams passing on Clowney lightly.

By the way, while it's true he had a rough season, he was double and tripled teamed a lot. Some teams even used 4 blockers I've heard. His last two years were still better than Quinns.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
What Risk? A trade with Rams would have no risk with the understanding they wouldn't go QB or trade out again.

but we wouldn't trade up - makes no sense, at all. why would we even consider trading up when we're already discussing trading down?

Also, no one intelligent is drafting for need at #1. It's too valuable. Why would Houston blow the #1 on a number 8 or later player? Not that its never happened, but I just don't see it.
And no one intelligent is passing up on a Franchise QB, if they see him as so. Especially if there's 3 qb needy teams within 4 picks of you
 

SierraRam

Recreational User
Joined
Mar 17, 2014
Messages
2,254
No doubt about the double & triple teams.

But hey, there's so many scenarios - and most are very good for us!

I've just heard more than a few "experts" say he takes plays off, blah blah blah...

I trust Fish. If he takes Clowney, I'm sold. Is it May yet?

I won't be mad if you're correct. It would be pretty hard to blow this draft. I just don't see the Rams passing on Clowney lightly.

By the way, while it's true he had a rough season, he was double and tripled teamed a lot. Some teams even used 4 blockers I've heard. His last two years were still better than Quinns.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
but we wouldn't trade up - makes no sense, at all. why would we even consider trading up when we're already discussing trading down?


And no one intelligent is passing up on a Franchise QB, if they see him as so. Especially if there's 3 qb needy teams within 4 picks of you

I know you and I don't agree on the possibility of a trade up.

Why would Rams trade up? For Clowney. Clowney is far better than you give him credit IMHO. I think Snisher dreams Clowney dreams every night.

You're assuming a trade down is a lock. Not me. I see Clowney as the lock unless the trade offer is huge.

IF he is who I think he is, he's not going at be there at 2. If the Rams want him, they will have to trade up. If Houston doesn't want to look like assclowns, they have to trade down. There is no QB worthy of a one this season and even other QB hungry teams may not take QBs. Over drafting for need is a huge mistake.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
No doubt about the double & triple teams.

But hey, there's so many scenarios - and most are very good for us!

I've just heard more than a few "experts" say he takes plays off, blah blah blah...

I trust Fish. If he takes Clowney, I'm sold. Is it May yet?

A lot of that talk came from one game where he had the stomach flu.

I don't find people saying that when they do in depth analysis. I see them saying it's not true.

I'm with you though, I trust Snisher to see the truth.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
but we wouldn't trade up - makes no sense, at all. why would we even consider trading up when we're already discussing trading down?


And no one intelligent is passing up on a Franchise QB, if they see him as so. Especially if there's 3 qb needy teams within 4 picks of you

Assuming Houston is ABSOLUTELY taking a QB, do they take him at 1 or take the very same QB at 2 and get another late round pick or two?

You're the coach. Which do you do?

On the other side you're Snisher. Assuming they ABSOLUTELY want Clowney and would take him gladly at 2, do they stay at 2 and hope Houston doesn't take him or trade out with someone else or do you throw in a 5th and 7th round surplus pick to lock up your player?

it's a win win. Everyone gets what they want and Rams pay next to nothing for a potential superstar who can start game one.
 

Memphis Ram

Legend
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
6,668
According to ESPN draft analyst Mel Kiper Jr., if the Rams want to walk out of the first night of the draft with an elite talent, they'll need to ensure that any move down still garners one of seven players. Those seven players are Clowney, Auburn offensive tackle Greg Robinson, Buffalo linebacker Khalil Mack, Clemson receiver Sammy Watkins, Texas A&M offensive tackle Jake Matthews, Texas A&M receiver Mike Evans and Michigan offensive tackle Taylor Lewan.

"That’s your super seven," Kiper said. "After that, I don’t see anybody that belongs in that group right now. I don’t think any of the quarterbacks do and I don’t see any other players jumped up that far. So that’s your sensational seven, if you want to say that. Then you’re getting into the range where the eighth guy could be the 18th guy on some boards. To me, the seven are the consensus seven."

Just a couple years ago, the Rams could supposedly do no wrong with one of 6 players:
Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III, Trent Richardson, Matt Kalil, Justin Blackmon, Morris Claiborne.

The Rams disagreed, moved down and selected Brockers.

This year, depending upon the trade value in return, I'd have no problem whatsoever with the Rams moving to #8 or #9 and selecting CB Darqueze Dennard. He might just turn out to be the Luke Kuechly (#9 overall) steal in this draft class, IMO.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
I know you and I don't agree on the possibility of a trade up.

Why would Rams trade up? For Clowney. Clowney is far better than you give him credit IMHO. I think Snisher dreams Clowney dreams every night.

You're assuming a trade down is a lock. Not me. I see Clowney as the lock unless the trade offer is huge.

IF he is who I think he is, he's not going at be there at 2. If the Rams want him, they will have to trade up. If Houston doesn't want to look like assclowns, they have to trade down. There is no QB worthy of a one this season and even other QB hungry teams may not take QBs. Over drafting for need is a huge mistake.

It has nothing to do with my view on Clowney as a prospect as it has to do with Fisher and Snead's. The Pick is open for business, and it has been noted they don't know if they should stay and take him at 2 or trade the pick. That's my point. They don't love him enough that they're absolutely sure what they're gonna do there, then I don't see them giving up more picks to move up and grab him.

And why would they need to? Every one close to the Texans have been saying they're going QB and there's no question about it.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
Just a couple years ago, the Rams could supposedly do no wrong with one of 6 players:
Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III, Trent Richardson, Matt Kalil, Justin Blackmon, Morris Claiborne.

The Rams disagreed, moved down and selected Brockers.

This year, depending upon the trade value in return, I'd have no problem whatsoever with the Rams moving to #8 or #9 and selecting CB Darqueze Dennard. He might just turn out to be the Luke Kuechly (#9 overall) steal in this draft class, IMO.

I agree it's possible. It would have to be a great offer though.

RG3 wasn't a need and the Rams were desperate for a wide range of talent. It's a different draft. Rams are desperate for immediate impact players IMHO much more than number of bodies. I wouldn't be shocked if they peddle away most of their picks to get elite talent. If the Rams could get 5-6 players in the 1st and 2nd round, I might be willing to trade all the rest of the picks away that you're allowed to trade.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
It has nothing to do with my view on Clowney as a prospect as it has to do with Fisher and Snead's. The Pick is open for business, and it has been noted they don't know if they should stay and take him at 2 or trade the pick. That's my point. They don't love him enough that they're absolutely sure what they're gonna do there, then I don't see them giving up more picks to move up and grab him.

And why would they need to? Every one close to the Texans have been saying they're going QB and there's no question about it.

Of course they would consider a trade. My point is, if they don't get a trade they can't walk away from, they will take Clowney if they can get him.

Why would they need to trade up? Because if they said no, Houston could make a blockbuster trade elsewhere or take Clowney. It makes no difference what Houston says, they could do either and then the #2 spot loses a lot of value.
 

iced

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2013
Messages
6,620
Of course they would consider a trade. My point is, if they don't get a trade they can't walk away from, they will take Clowney if they can get him.

Why would they need to trade up? Because if they said no, Houston could make a blockbuster trade elsewhere or take Clowney. It makes no difference what Houston says, they could do either and then the #2 spot loses a lot of value.

lol lets just agree to disagree... i think you're the only one who truly believes trading up is on the table
 

Yamahopper

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jul 31, 2010
Messages
3,838
The risk of trading down and projecting who other teams will pick is a invalid premise do to those teams can trade down themselves with teams targeting the same players the Rams are. Anymore than 4th it gets risky.
 

blackbart

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
6,211
Name
Tim
Of course they would consider a trade. My point is, if they don't get a trade they can't walk away from, they will take Clowney if they can get him.

Why would they need to trade up? Because if they said no, Houston could make a blockbuster trade elsewhere or take Clowney. It makes no difference what Houston says, they could do either and then the #2 spot loses a lot of value.
I don't believe trading up is in the realm of possibility and I don't see Clowney as the only pick to make if he is there at #2. Matthews has at least the same value at #2 and some (RFIP) would include Watkins in that group, and others would say Robinson and his upside are there too.

Matthews is still the safest pick with the best talent and immediate impact at #2 for me.

As for the trade down I would think 6 is as low as is safe and presumably brings a compensation package desirable enough to temp the Rams into the possibility of missing their guy
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,896
Name
mojo
I hope we don't draft Clowney but i wont go all RFIP on you guys if we do. :LOL:

Ideally(for me) we trade down to #6 and pick Robinson/Matthews. Then we get A.Donald at #13.

Then we'll have a couple 2nd rd picks to shore up DB and OG and/or BPA.
 

Elmgrovegnome

Legend
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
21,604
"While the assembled NFL was on his campus today, Spurrier said he merely meant that Clowney didn’t have a superhuman work ethic like Marcus Lattimore and others.

“I said [Lattimore] was exceptional. I maybe should not have compared [Clowney],” Spurrier said, via Brian Smith of the Houston Chronicle. “I should have said, ‘Jadeveon, with the rest of the team, he was right there doing what they did.’ Maybe that would’ve helped out. I compared him to a guy who went above and beyond what was asked.”"


I prefer a top two pick have superhuman work ethic. Faulk, Bruce, Holt were the heart and soul Of the GSOT and they all had excellent work ethic. Rey Lewis, Peyton Manning, Roger Staubach, Jack Youngblood, Jackie Slater, etc...all had great work ethic. Just doing what is expected keeps a player from reaching his full potential.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
I don't believe trading up is in the realm of possibility and I don't see Clowney as the only pick to make if he is there at #2. Matthews has at least the same value at #2 and some (RFIP) would include Watkins in that group, and others would say Robinson and his upside are there too.

Matthews is still the safest pick with the best talent and immediate impact at #2 for me.

As for the trade down I would think 6 is as low as is safe and presumably brings a compensation package desirable enough to temp the Rams into the possibility of missing their guy

Can't wait to see who's right. I see it as Clowney by himself than a group of studs after.

Fisher is a D guy. He's not a "play it safe" guy. I don't think he could pass on Clowney. With Geg Williams there to get the most out of that line? It's Fishers nature.